2013 Mac Pro timeframe

[DisMyMac]

A "Mac mini Pro" would be just as unnecessarily cannibalistic of the iMac line up as a "xMac; Mac Pro half portioned" would be. Neither one is very likely to be released. There is no significant growth gap there at all.

Wish they'd drop the iMac then, with all its display/manufacturing issues. Not likely, but perhaps their TV and 4K considerations will change things.

My bigger concern is this division between creators and consumers as illustrated by the shift toward portables. Programmers could all be licensed soon, and users turned into slaves. This may cause speciation to occur... not to mention computers themselves evolving.

 

[KaraH]

Wish they'd drop the iMac then, with all its display/manufacturing issues. Not likely, but perhaps their TV and 4K considerations will change things.

My bigger concern is this division between creators and consumers as illustrated by the shift toward portables. Programmers could all be licensed soon, and users turned into slaves. This may cause speciation to occur... not to mention computers themselves evolving.

So which are the Eloi and which become Morlocks?

I doubt the iMac will be dropped. It is typically Apple nowadays in making everything a consumer device. A good direction for a modern company (ok, I own their stock) but bad for hackers and pros.

 

[Lesser Evets]

Everyone crying for FEBRUARY or MARCH, just take it easy. There's no definitive release and no one can tell when it will come along. I still bet it will be August-November. This expectation-dance is typical every year and it never pays off.

Wish they'd drop the iMac then, with all its display/manufacturing issues.

That Xi5 computer being readied for release is what the Mini should have always been. It even looks like a MacPro-mini. Apple blew it by not creating something more dynamic with the mini.

The iMac will always have a place in the market due to the cheapness of all-in-one and better processors. It's too-good a design for the neophyte.

 

[deconstruct60]

Everyone crying for FEBRUARY or MARCH, just take it easy.

Releasing something sooner rather than later, if possible, is significantly better for the Mac Pro as a long term prospect. The longer Apple waits to refresh the Mac Pro the more they implode the Mac Pro segment. There is a steady stream of folks who are due for and have an increasingly urgent need for a replacement. A large fraction of those folks are going to bolt because there are reasonable alternatives.

There is nothing magical about future Ivy Bridge options versus the currently available Sandy Bridge ones that offset shrinking the market for Mac Pro's even smaller. Likewise for customers waiting for Ivy if transitioning from older current equipment at the terminal end of its lifecycle likely isn't worth it in many cases.

There's no definitive release and no one can tell when it will come along.

As time progresses you can tell certain things. It would spectacularly asinine for Apple to have a "ready to go" Mac Pro and not ship it in the Jan-March time frame.

New Mac Pro Model id numbers have been popping up in incremental 10.8.x updates.

".... The file includes mention of the existing Mac Mini and MacBook Air, but also mentions iMac 13,0 and MacPro 6,0 models -- machines that don't currently exist. ... "
https://www.macrumors.com/2012/08/09/boot-camp-files-hint-at-new-mac-pro-and-imac-models/

The aforementioned 7000 series updates.

https://www.macrumors.com/2012/11/2...rs-for-amd-radeon-7000-series-graphics-cards/

I still bet it will be August-November.

If Apple intends to ship the Mac Pro during the domain of OS X 10.9 why are there placeholders in the domain of 10.8 ?

You can bet on August-November but it isn't more likely than the Jan-early March timeframe. They are close, but there are more actual breadcrumbs pointing at the "Sandy Bridge" leveraged upgrade than at a "has to arrive late for Ivy Bridge" leveraged upgrade (or a "Apple didn't start working on it until 2012" upgrade).


[ This expectation-dance is typical every year and it never pays off.

That Xi5 computer being readied for release is what the Mini should have always been. It even looks like a MacPro-mini.

Xi5 where ?

Apple blew it by not creating something more dynamic with the mini.

Because the Mac market share (revenues and profits ) has be stumbling very badly in the years since the introduction of the mini, right ?

The iMac will always have a place in the market due to the cheapness of all-in-one and better processors. It's too-good a design for the neophyte.

It is a good design for most people: neophyte or not. It is best selling desktop model. Probably sells more than the both of the other two combined. "Cheap" isn't even part of the metric is starts at about $300-400 over the average PC selling price point.

 

[scottrichardson]

My take on this whole Mac Pro thing is this...

The current Mac Pro, namely the 2009/2010/2012 model, is fast enough. I doubt they really even meant for the 2012 model to be released until they saw all the excitement and hope for a new model prior to the keynote last year. I bet they threw in the 'slightly' updated just to attempt to appease the masses.

I feel that Apple decided to skip the Sandy Bridge E series because the advantages really were not that great, with marginal performance increases.

I think sometime late this year, as in after June/July, we'll see the new model based around Ivy Bridge - and decent performance increases - enough to warrant the upgrade in the first place!

 

[goMac]

The current Mac Pro, namely the 2009/2010/2012 model, is fast enough. I doubt they really even meant for the 2012 model to be released until they saw all the excitement and hope for a new model prior to the keynote last year. I bet they threw in the 'slightly' updated just to attempt to appease the masses.

My feeling was there was actually a 2012 new Mac Pro, for some reason (*coughThunderboltcought*) it was canceled at some point before release, and they needed something as a quick substitute for the upgrade.

This explains the lead up in things such as GPU drivers.

 

[deconstruct60]

The current Mac Pro, namely the 2009/2010/2012 model, is fast enough.

And yet every single market competitor to the Mac Pro came out with a new versions with native SATA III, USB 3.0 (discrete controller) , and PCI-e v3.0 support (along with Sandy Bridge upgrades).

I doubt they really even meant for the 2012 model to be released until they saw all the excitement and hope for a new model prior to the keynote last year.

Apple has a policy about talking about future products. Unless they released a Mac Pro they really can't talk about the Mac Pro. The 2012 release was far more a statement that the Mac Pro was not dead. That was the for more pressing communications gap at the time. This still lingers even after statements they are working on something.

The hysteria about sweeping all new Mac line-up before WWDC just because there wasn't going to be an iPhone? As long as folks were whipped up that all Apple cared about.... weaving a Mac Pro into that was a non issue. There wasn't even a press release. After a pitch fork mob erupted over the release they even took the "new" sticker off of it in the Online store.

There is no good reason not to have released a Sandy Bridge upgrade. Absolutely no sane rational reason to leave the video card trapped in a time if this was a long term planned release.

I feel that Apple decided to skip the Sandy Bridge E series because the advantages really were not that great, with marginal performance increases.

In the era of 6.0 Gbps SSDs it is extremely competitive to be stuck with a 3.0Gps SATA implementation.... not. Even the Mac Mini isn't that blocked with legacy infrastructure.

Apple didn't release anything because they did not (and still don't) have anything. It isn't the new technology isn't incrementally better in a significant way; it is. It is likely because there is nothing to ship.

I think sometime late this year, as in after June/July, we'll see the new model based around Ivy Bridge - and decent performance increases - enough to warrant the upgrade in the first place!

The substantive improvement in terms of x86 cores performance between Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge is marginal. In most contexts, most performance boost will come from simply higher nominal clock speeds. The IOHub support chips for the Xeon E5 class offerings is very likely to be exactly the same ( meaning exact same board with firmware bump can be used for both .... just like last 2-3 Mac Pro class tick-tock iterations. )

There deep confusion between Ivy Bridge the microarchitecture and the content of the product packaging done with on-die intergration.

Here are the Ivy Bridge deltas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_Bridge_(microarchitecture)#Ivy.C2.A0Bridge_processor_features

1. PCI Express 3.0 support.

[ Buzzz not really accurate because Sandy Bridge Xeon E5 class has this. No advantage Ivy Bridge. ]

2. Max CPU multiplier of 63 (57 for Sandy Bridge)

[ likely not of much significant in Xeon E5 class processors with more
conservatively fixed multipliers. ]

3. RAM support up to 2800 MT/s in 200 MHz increments

[ 1600 MHz DDR3 RAM ... buzz again already present in Sandy Bridge Xeon E5 class products. ]

4. The built-in GPU ...

[ buzz no built-in GPU hardware in Sandy or Ivy Bridge Xeon E5 class products. A complete non system issue if just use embedded discrete GPU solution. ]

5. DDR3L and Configurable TDP for mobile processors.

[ Yep that is going to make a significant difference in a desktop workstation context .... NOT ! ]

6. Multiple 4K video playback.

[ Buzz see number 4 , same issue. ]

7. Intel Quick Sync Video

[ Buzz see number 4 , same issue ]

8. PCIe implementation incompatible with most SAS 6G and USB3 cards,

[ Not sure how this would be benefit. As Apple has stopped selling SAS solutions. None issue. ]

9. Up to three displays are supported

[ Buzz see number 4 , same issue]

Ivy Bridge Xeon E5 will top out at 10 x86 cores instead of 8 in a dual package set up (using 2600 series). That has zero impact except at the upper range $5,000+ offering. Ivy Bridge Xeon E5 1600 may start out at 6 cores. (doubtful. likely the same 4 , 6 , 6 set of offerings in the price zone Apple is likely to go with if used Sandy Bridge offerings. There may be an 8 core E5 1600 v2 but it likely will carry a hefty price premium to pad Intel's margins. )

Ivy Bridge will be clocked incrementally higher so it would be an improvement but there is absolutely nothing indicating there Sandy Bridge is hugely deficient in some way. At the desktop offering level the vast majority of the improvement was allotted to graphics not x86 improvements. There was also a new IOHub update. Neither of those things are coming to the likely Mac Pro class options.

 

[goMac]

There is no good reason not to have released a Sandy Bridge upgrade. Absolutely no sane rational reason to leave the video card trapped in a time if this was a long term planned release.

There is no sane reason, but since when has any of this been sane?

 

[deconstruct60]

There is no sane reason, but since when has any of this been sane?

In terms of sending an implicit message "this is not what we have been working on for 2 years", yes leaving the video card stagnant made sense. It is relatively obvious the 2012 Mac Pro was a stopgap measure. A placeholder until they could actually do a real, substantive upgrade.

It isn't with respect to the notion that this was all part of a consistent strategic plan Apple has been following for 2010-2012.

There likely was a plan. A substantially different one where the Mac Pro was terminated. For the better of the Mac Pro, Apple cancelled that plan instead of the Mac Pro. However, that puts them a year (or more ) behind their competitors. Apple can afford to catch up and the Mac Pro isn't necessarily doomed, but it isn't particularly sane to perpetrate they aren't down 14 points with only 3:50 left in the game and that by waiting until it there is only 1:50 left in the game they would be better off.

As the author pointed out there are a subset of Mac Pro users who aren't pressed about performance. So yes considering an option to terminate the Mac Pro at some point is a sane choice. As that group grows larger and the flexibility of the MBP, iMac, and Mac mini improve at some point the Mac Pro will likely terminate.

As for Mac Pro video drivers constantly trailing in terms of bleeding edge hardware, that too is quite sane. Given the division of the work between Apple and the vendors and the overall PC markets glacial foot dragging in switching over to EFI boot processes. It is going to lag behind. When the market stops foot dragging the process will go faster.

----------

My feeling was there was actually a 2012 new Mac Pro, for some reason (*coughThunderboltcought*) it was canceled at some point before release,

A implementation screw up would not take a year to fix.

Thunderbolt isn't that hard. The rest of the Mac line up got it. It is just as easy to do on a Mac Pro. The difficulty level is no higher necessarily. Unless, they had clueless Bubba trying to implement some Rube Goldberg solution. That really doesn't sound like anyone Apple would hire.

It likely got Steve'd just like a long list of other former Apple products.

This explains the lead up in things such as GPU drivers.

The GPU drivers have to be incrementally updated anyway. Again the rest of the Mac line up is not sitting still and the same technology that goes into a Mac Pro's GPU is also used eventually in the rest of the line up.

 

[goMac]

In terms of sending an implicit message "this is not what we have been working on for 2 years", yes leaving the video card stagnant made sense. It is relatively obvious the 2012 Mac Pro was a stopgap measure. A placeholder until they could actually do a real, substantive upgrade.

From everything I'm hearing, don't bet on sanity.

 

[deconstruct60]

I think sometime late this year, as in after June/July, we'll see the new model based around Ivy Bridge - and decent performance increases - enough to warrant the upgrade in the first place!

The transition for Ivy Bridge from Sandy Bridge for the Xeon E3 class brought +100MHz clock bumps and somewhat low TDP drops. See "improvements table" at the bottom of this page:

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2012/2012010301_Details_of_Xeon_E3-1200_v2_CPUs.html

It is likely to be largely the same for the Xeon E5 Sandy to Ivy transition. Perhaps 200MHz bumps with zero TDP changes but incremental none-the-less.

The L3 cache size is likely bumped also.

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2012/2012072301_Some_details_of_Ivy_Bridge-EP_and_-EN_Xeon_CPUs.html

So instead of the nominal 2.5MB per core of Sandy Bridge there is a 3MB per core for Ivy Bridge. While the article mentions dramatically lower than 95W and 135W (2600 and 1600 respectively) there have always been GHz gutted entries in the Xeon line up for lowest power contexts.

So the difference in 1600 series would not be surprising to shift from current options:

E5 1620 4 cores 3.6 (through 3.8 max ) 10MB PCI-e v3.0 130W $249
E5 1650 6 cores 3.2 (through 3.8 max ) 12MB PCI-e v3.0 130W $583
E5 1660 6 cores 3.3 (through 3.9 max) 15MB PCI-e v3.0 130W $1080

transition to ( 200MHz bumps and shave 20W off TDP. Maybe closer to only 15W drop. ).


E5 1620 v2 4 cores 3.8 (through 4.0 max ) 12MB PCI-e v3.0 110W $250
E5 1650 v2 6 cores 3.4 (through 4.0 max ) 18MB PCI-e v3.0 110W $585
E5 1660 v2 6 cores 3.6 (through 4.2 max) 18MB PCI-e v3.0 110W $999
E5 1680 v2 8 cores 2.8(through 3.5 max ) 24MB PCI-e v3.0 110W $1200

In that context, Apple will pick the same initial first 3 options. There will be more 1600 options than the limited 3 of the initial 1600 series but those are likely to be aimed at different contexts ( lower power servers where can toss some performance and GHz for even lower TDP. )

It is an increase, but not a revolutionary increase. I think folks are drifting on illusions that 2 more cores will pop-in throughout the entire Mac Pro line up and/or there is some drop to desktop level of TDP ranges. I don't think either one is likely.

E5 products have twice as many PCI-e lanes to process, twice as many memory controllers, higher internal bandwidth, and 3x as much cache that partially offset dropping the integrated GPU overhead. If crank the clocks a bit higher because x86 througput is an issue and likely will see similar deltas in E5 as saw with E3. it is same process transition along the same microarchitectures.

 

[deconstruct60]

From everything I'm hearing, don't bet on sanity.

Like introducing an update that is still Westmere based but with 7000 video cards this time and again claiming it is "new" ? Yeah, that would be surprising.

I wouldn't be surprised if there is still an internal death match going on as to whether the Mac Pro continues on or not. The leaks from that would look not so sane, but given the broad context make sense.

Or something like Apple jumping to a tock to tock release schedule would be unconventional but be sane. (e.g., Westmere -> Ivy Bridge -> Broadwell ). Probably won't be very successful but it would be sane.

 

[Washuu]

I am desperate, incredibly desperate.

My Macbook Pro just terminated itself in its sleep and my MacPro1,1 has begun a slow performance decline. Some chip in there is dying. All I want early this year is a new Mac Pro machine that is not based on 2010 technology. This is the customer that is sitting here thinking it might okay to endure the horrors of Windows 8 just to have a fast and recent technology work environment again.

 

[Lesser Evets]

There is a steady stream of folks who are due for and have an increasingly urgent need for a replacement.

So they say. Dollars to donuts they will be back when a new MacPro is released.

Also, saying Apple has to release now, that Apple is asinine to not release now, that Apple has tags in OS 10.8, etc., doesn't mean a new MacPro will materialize when you expect it. You'll be lucky to see it earlier than May, but probably in Aug-Nov.

 

[goMac]

Like introducing an update that is still Westmere based but with 7000 video cards this time and again claiming it is "new" ? Yeah, that would be surprising.

I wouldn't be surprised if there is still an internal death match going on as to whether the Mac Pro continues on or not. The leaks from that would look not so sane, but given the broad context make sense.

I've heard things about new video cards being ready but not being released, and there were a few threads here on actual hardware with EFI firmware that were leaked. It seems like Apple intentionally passed on new cards.

It all comes down to Thunderbolt IMHO. What likely happened was that there was to be a 2012 Mac Pro with no Thunderbolt, and it was killed by an "everything must have Thunderbolt" edict from the top. And that fits well with everything we've seen.

 

[ThisIsNotMe]

I would say that the recent reports of the Thunderbolt display drying up in resale channels is a pretty good indication that new MPs are on the horizon.

 

[derbothaus]

I would say that the recent reports of the Thunderbolt display drying up in resale channels is a pretty good indication that new MPs are on the horizon.

Why? Apple display's are built with the laptops in mind. Look at the length of the cable and battery charger. Ever try and set up a Mini-dp Cinema and a Mac Pro that sits under the desk? You need an extension cable. Apple is hostile to their Pro customers. They could have given a couple more inches on it. I hate their display's. No control of any kind. Like the 1 button mice they just treat the customer base like morons. So I avoid.

 

[KaraH]

It will probably be like the iMac release was done last year: the 2012 iMac was announced in October with the low-end coming out in November (at the very end though) and the high-end in December. I would look for something like that with the pro: for people to be able to make plans at the announcement (and know enough information for doing so) but not able to actually have the toys for months.

If we are talking about when the announcement would be I would look at how they have been handled in the past. In other words, the summer for WWDC.

 

[goMac]

Why? Apple display's are built with the laptops in mind. Look at the length of the cable and battery charger. Ever try and set up a Mini-dp Cinema and a Mac Pro that sits under the desk? You need an extension cable. Apple is hostile to their Pro customers. They could have given a couple more inches on it. I hate their display's. No control of any kind. Like the 1 button mice they just treat the customer base like morons. So I avoid.

I actually rather like the Magic Mouse for pro work. Multiple virtual buttons is enough for me, and the scroll is better than any mechanical mouse.

Wouldn't touch it for gaming though.

 

[pertusis1]

Mac Pros priced like similar PCs

Whatever they release, it will be overpriced and underwhelming compared to what is available for self builders of PCs and manufacturers.

I mean honestly people.. for all the expectations and talk about the 2013 models, you must realize that even if apple managed to put out a top of the line product, they would end up charging over $4,000.00 dollars for the thing.

Frustrated with the slow Mac Pro update, I have priced specs on a hackintosh, or even on Xeon based PCs. If you spec out a similar PC, they aren't much different than the Mac prices. If you're looking for an i7 desktop PC with upgradeable components (an option not available from Apple), sure you can find a cheaper PC. If you shop for a Xeon, the prices aren't lower at all.

 

[PowerPCMacMan]

But it all boils down to this: Does having a Xeon really make a difference using video editing and rendering at the end of the day? Can't an i7 or i5 do the same thing without having special ECC memory?

Honestly, if no new Mac Pro comes out at all this year.. we can assume that the Mac Pro might be in serious trouble.. so far nothing but theories assumptions as to what the new 2013 Mac Pro will look like. For what I use my 6-core with, I don't see the need for a 2013 model.

My only hope is that it will continue the same path of being very upgradable like the previous models, and not some dead end machine.

Frustrated with the slow Mac Pro update, I have priced specs on a hackintosh, or even on Xeon based PCs. If you spec out a similar PC, they aren't much different than the Mac prices. If you're looking for an i7 desktop PC with upgradeable components (an option not available from Apple), sure you can find a cheaper PC. If you shop for a Xeon, the prices aren't lower at all.

 

[Solomani]

I would say that the recent reports of the Thunderbolt display drying up in resale channels is a pretty good indication that new MPs are on the horizon.

Hmm, good observation. The fact that Apple (along with Intel) is re-newing their push for Thunderbolt products, and also the inevitable/upcoming Thunderbolt display refresh.... could mean a new commitment to Mac Pros.

I predict nothing will be mentioned of MacPros or any other Macs until at least summer WWDC. Sounds like Apple is spending the early months of 2013 trying to focus on staying competitive in the mobile arena (iPads, iPad Mini, next iPhone design etc)... because it's a do-or-die competition against the all-powerful Samsung Hype Machine.

----------

Honestly, if no new Mac Pro comes out at all this year.. we can assume that the Mac Pro might be in serious trouble.. so far nothing but theories assumptions as to what the new 2013 Mac Pro will look like.

.... or instead of rampant speculation, you could just fire off an email to CEO Tim Cook. There is a small chance he might respond directly. He has done so in the past. Like the fact that he replied directly to iMac-enthusiasts.... many months before Apple (FINALLY) refreshed the iMacs in late 2012.

At the very least, he might respond with something vague like: "Thanks for your interest in Apple products. Rest assured Apple is still committed to the Mac Pros. I can't give you more details at this time, but we hope to have something to show you later this year."

 

[Lesser Evets]

The fact that Apple (along with Intel) is re-newing their push for Thunderbolt products, and also the inevitable/upcoming Thunderbolt display refresh.... could mean a new commitment to Mac Pros.

Assuming Tim Cook is indeed leading Apple, the company is committed to the Mac Pro. It will be evident by the end of 2013, or it will be a signal for the decline of "pro" use within Apple's product range.

I think it is clear that they have left professionals to drift quite a bit over 3 years, but it doesn't mean they are forgotten. With all the video needs arising in the HD era, Apple can grab a huge market share if they refocus. Never forget that Jobs said all their support was going to slough into the iDevices from 2007 until 5-or-so years in the future. Assuming Apple is following the Jobs roadmap, they will be coming back to the desktops again, reworking them to meet connectivity and service for the iDevices, and to work better in the changing market.

In 5 years there will be very few people using desktops as main computers. The tablets are going to take over function for 90% of computer users. Yet the powerful desktops will be just as necessary for feeding media and programs into those non-desktops. Apple would be cutting off their legs to ditch the Pros before circa 2020.

 

[fastlanephil]

Is there even a remote chance that Apple could go with AMD processors for the 2013 Pro Mac?

I remember when AMD was kicking Intel's rear end.

 

[DisMyMac]

The tablets are going to take over function for 90% of computer users. Yet the powerful desktops will be just as necessary for feeding media and programs into those non-desktops.

That's just the worry I mentioned. Portables and social media haven't equalized anything, they've only created control mechanisms.

Maybe that's good though... A future Pro in the wrong hands could be dangerous.