2013 Mac Pro timeframe

[goMac]

Conceptually not too much different than support Crossfire/SLI and yet they haven't done that.

Depends. It wouldn't be a surprising OS X 10.10 or 10.11 feature, but short term it really isn't necessary. Having the embedded GPU is the core elements of the solution.

It got added (with some sample code) in 10.6, I don't know why it hasn't been adopted for CrossFire sort of things yet. That's exactly what the demo does manually on an app level.

If you think about it, it's really more basic than that. It's exactly what VNC is doing. Copy the frame output from a card, display it as an image on another.

Given that FCPX freaks out if split the OpenCL work and the windows over multiple graphics cards I don't think this is something they can do sooner rather than later.

OpenCL would only still run on the external card. Multiple GPU support wouldn't be involved.

 

[deconstruct60]

It got added (with some sample code) in 10.6, I don't know why it hasn't been adopted for CrossFire sort of things yet. That's exactly what the demo does manually on an app level.

If the app is doing it then the work is being done on the "wrong" side of the abstraction barrier. The application layer can be cleaner than the kernel layer given the straitjacketing the APIs enforce.

If you think about it, it's really more basic than that. It's exactly what VNC is doing. Copy the frame output from a card, display it as an image on another.

The high level details are simple, but there tends to be lots of 'clever' code at kernel levels that is cock full of assumptions. VNC pulls the buffer and then does 'diffs' to propagate changes. It is a slower, more resource intensive effort than most are going to tolerate.

It also doesn't work so hot at high framebuffer refresh rates.

OpenCL would only still run on the external card. Multiple GPU support wouldn't be involved.

I was more so getting at how FCPX has a set of built in assumptions about "how things should work" that pragmatically constrain it. There is a reason why LucidLogix's VGU manages things like vsync.

Apple has dropped new APIs but when there is little or limited leveraging of the new API it likely isn't mature. CoreStorage showed up with 10.7 but "Fusion Drive" didn't appear till 10.8. If just an example showed up in 10.8 Apple isn't even at the stage of doing something simple. That's why I have the expectation that it will take longer than 10.9 for something stable and mature to appear.

In the mean time an embedded GPU and a GPU PCI-e card could function as independent GPUs just like two cards would now. Two independent GPUs now have utility. Same is true if just one is embedded. The virtual shunted output thing is just a bonus in a limit set of contexts.

 

[goMac]

The high level details are simple, but there tends to be lots of 'clever' code at kernel levels that is cock full of assumptions. VNC pulls the buffer and then does 'diffs' to propagate changes. It is a slower, more resource intensive effort than most are going to tolerate.

It also doesn't work so hot at high framebuffer refresh rates.

Sure, but a lot of that is the LAN connection. All this would be doing is pulling the output across the system bus, and then sending it out over another card. There is way way more than enough bandwidth to do that at full quality for the full frame size every single frame. You're going to have a tiny but of latency on top, but it's probably not going to be anywhere near noticeable.

In the mean time an embedded GPU and a GPU PCI-e card could function as independent GPUs just like two cards would now. Two independent GPUs now have utility. Same is true if just one is embedded. The virtual shunted output thing is just a bonus in a limit set of contexts.

Except for connecting to a Thunderbolt display. That's what Apple's going to want, and it's going to break down with the external GPU.

Mirroring the output of one card onto another fixes that problem entirely.

 

[deconstruct60]

Except for connecting to a Thunderbolt display. That's what Apple's going to want, and it's going to break down with the external GPU.

External GPU? The thunderbolt display has no GPU. As an LCD panel it is exactly same as the context of hooking to one GPU card or the other. The Thunderbolt display is merely only has the option of being hooked to the GPU connected to the Thunderbolt controller. Largely like as if it was a proprietary ADP connectors.

Embedded is not External. And external GPU bottlenecked by Thunderbolt isn't going to work well in high performance contexts. There is already a drop across the significantly reduced number of PCI-e lanes. Restriction to PCI-e v2.0 is more and even a higher amount of bi-directional traffic even more. I'm sure Microsoft Office would run fine, if not better than a 1GbE VNC connection, but that would be a narrowing of the operating window at the higher end.

I don't really see the significantly large use case here. An external GPU would most likely be incorporated into some sort of docking station set up. In that static context it makes far more sense to connect the monitor to the GPU card itself.

If try to jam the GPU into the docking station then not particularly using Thunderbolts "reserved" DisplayPort lanes for video traffic since no hauling raw video data back and forth over the PCI-e channels. All that does is reduce the bandwidth for raw SATA , USB , etc traffic those other controllers are going to want to send up/down the PCI-e "reserved" channels.

In the context of a Mac Pro it doesn't make any sense at all since the GPU should be inside the box. There are no tight space constraints and plenty of PCI-e lanes inside the box. It can embedded easily and effetively inside the box.

 

[goMac]

External GPU? The thunderbolt display has no GPU. As an LCD panel it is exactly same as the context of hooking to one GPU card or the other. The Thunderbolt display is merely only has the option of being hooked to the GPU connected to the Thunderbolt controller. Largely like as if it was a proprietary ADP connectors.

Embedded is not External. And external GPU bottlenecked by Thunderbolt isn't going to work well in high performance contexts. There is already a drop across the significantly reduced number of PCI-e lanes. Restriction to PCI-e v2.0 is more and even a higher amount of bi-directional traffic even more. I'm sure Microsoft Office would run fine, if not better than a 1GbE VNC connection, but that would be a narrowing of the operating window at the higher end.

I don't really see the significantly large use case here. An external GPU would most likely be incorporated into some sort of docking station set up. In that static context it makes far more sense to connect the monitor to the GPU card itself.

If try to jam the GPU into the docking station then not particularly using Thunderbolts "reserved" DisplayPort lanes for video traffic since no hauling raw video data back and forth over the PCI-e channels. All that does is reduce the bandwidth for raw SATA , USB , etc traffic those other controllers are going to want to send up/down the PCI-e "reserved" channels.

In the context of a Mac Pro it doesn't make any sense at all since the GPU should be inside the box. There are no tight space constraints and plenty of PCI-e lanes inside the box. It can embedded easily and effetively inside the box.

By external GPU I meant external to the mainboard. I'm still talking PCIe.

The solution I proposed is:
PCIe GPU -> PCIe GPU Framebuffer -> Integrated GPU framebuffer -> Thunderbolt -> Thunderbolt Display

It's an entirely software solution that would let the Mac Pro use a discrete replaceable GPU with onboard Thunderbolt ports to a Thunderbolt display.

 

[deconstruct60]

By external GPU I meant external to the mainboard. I'm still talking PCIe.

The solution I proposed is:
PCIe GPU -> PCIe GPU Framebuffer -> Integrated GPU framebuffer -> Thunderbolt -> Thunderbolt Display

versus

PCIe GPU -> PCIe GPU Framebuffer -> DisplayPort/HDMI/DVI Display

Yeah, I can see how that much longer and protracted path would be highly desirable by many. Not.

There are some corner cases that are value added (e.g., Mac Pro in a closet 10 ft away from display where that "Thunderbolt" traversal is over fiber), but as the nominal configuration it is rather unmotivated as to value proposition.

It's an entirely software solution that would let the Mac Pro use a discrete replaceable GPU with onboard Thunderbolt ports to a Thunderbolt display.

It still begs the question of why? It is certainly nifty. The value proposition is sorely lacking. If there are limited development resources and it is a question of more low level GPU coverage sooner rather than later for latest AMD/Nvidia offerings and nifty corner case solution.... I'd vote for the first as a higher priority item.

 

[goMac]

versus

PCIe GPU -> PCIe GPU Framebuffer -> DisplayPort/HDMI/DVI Display

Yeah, I can see how that much longer and protracted path would be highly desirable by many. Not.

I don't think Apple is going to release a new Mac Pro unless the primary display use case is Thunderbolt. Even if people keep using DisplayPort or DVI, Apple will not stand for Thunderbolt being a second class citizen.

I've heard this is likely what the delay was over.

There are some corner cases that are value added (e.g., Mac Pro in a closet 10 ft away from display where that "Thunderbolt" traversal is over fiber), but as the nominal configuration it is rather unmotivated as to value proposition.

Apple only wants to sell one sort of display. They want to sell only Thunderbolt displays.

It still begs the question of why? It is certainly nifty. The value proposition is sorely lacking. If there are limited development resources and it is a question of more low level GPU coverage sooner rather than later for latest AMD/Nvidia offerings and nifty corner case solution.... I'd vote for the first as a higher priority item.

It makes Apple look bad.

Seriously, it's corporate Apple saying all new products must be paired with their own Thunderbolt display. Yes, there are third party displays. But Apple execs want the Mac Pro to be able to be purchased and advertised with Apple displays, and they don't want to continue making MDP displays for a small audience.

It also puts more weight behind the Thunderbolt standard being universal.

So it's not technical. It's politics.

As far as the delay over moving a framebuffer between cards, it shouldn't be noticeable. It might use a few more megabytes of RAM, but moving data on and off a card is a super common operation.

 

[deconstruct60]

...

reordering a bit.

...
It makes Apple look bad.
....
So it's not technical. It's politics.

Mutating products for petty internal politics makes Apple look bad too.
As I said there is still no customer value proposition here. None zip. Politics is not a value proposition.

Apple being dumb and making bozo decisions is a reason for folks to go elsewhere.

This isn't even a trade-off call with different backers ( drop the DVD and do something else with the space or not). It is a "just because" thing that isn't coupled to delivering customer value.

As far as the delay over moving a framebuffer between cards, it shouldn't be noticeable. It might use a few more megabytes of RAM, but moving data on and off a card is a super common operation.

Synchronization has much more to do with timing than the amount of megabytes. I'm not going to be suprised if this turns into yet another one of those inattention to detail because locked in a morass of politically motivated nonsense.

I don't think Apple is going to release a new Mac Pro unless the primary display use case is Thunderbolt. Even if people keep using DisplayPort or DVI, Apple will not stand for Thunderbolt being a second class citizen.

If they don't 100% nail the sync issue at high frame rates it is still going to be second class. Thunderbolt being "first class" is not a customer value proposition.

I've heard this is likely what the delay was over.

I suspect this is more their cover story as to why they sat around doing nothing for a long time.

Seriously, it's corporate Apple saying all new products must be paired with their own Thunderbolt display.

They only sell one now. They are going to sell two (or more) Thunderbolt Displays? That actually might be nice since the extended fiber to display example doesn't work with their docking station posing as a display and its fixed in place, relatively short copper based TB cable.

The Mac mini is getting a funky specialized display too ? Or just same docking station different size (e.g., 21.5" so pump more panels of that size) ?

I bet we get multi-sized dockings stations. This would be spun as though each product gets a display but everything they are done so far with the display line up over the last 2-3 years perfectly aligns with that. If radically changing direction that will be interesting.

But Apple execs want the Mac Pro to be able to be purchased and advertised with Apple displays, and they don't want to continue making MDP displays for a small audience.

The Mac Pro can be photographed with the Thunderbolt display hooked to the embedded GPU no problem. That is a non issue.

If Apple offers in BTO or as the default config an embedded GPU only Mac Pro at $300-400 lower prices I bet it would be their best selling options. Open up a viable 3rd party card market and the execs can continue to live in blissful TB kool-aid land and still pocket their bonus checks with a successful selling product.

Lots of Mac Pros are going to be sold without monitors because a very large fraction of the buyers already have them. They can get some marginal incremental sales of laptop oriented docking stations out of a few but there is nothing in their current product mix that is remotely indicative they really want to engage the display market in any significant way.

Apple only wants to sell one sort of display. They want to sell only Thunderbolt displays.

They only sell one model now. If this is their corporate objective the seem to be failing at it pretty significantly at the moment. It is far more a docking station than a display. Or do they indent to continue to sell devices with vestigial power cables to Mac Pro users? That is just silliness not a strategy.

Over time a vGPU shunting option has value. As the embedded GPU gets older more users will want to supplement with a discrete card later in their Mac Pro service lifetime. A significant fraction of them may have bought into Thunderbolt displays. I'm not saying never do it. But if the Mac Pro is being held up primarily based on this shunting it is a purely bozo move. It is short sighted and deeply decoupled from providing better customer value.

 

[goMac]

It's pretty simple. Apple management has likely decided two things:

a) All new Macs must ship with Thunderbolt.
b) All new Macs must work with the Thunderbolt display.

Technical arguments have nothing to do with it. Politically, Thunderbolt must be on the Mac Pro. The Thunderbolt display must work on the Mac Pro just as well as any third party monitor.

Apple isn't going to sell a Mac Pro, and then send users to the Dell website to buy a display. Yes, people may do that anyway. But that's the sort of thing that makes the execs at Apple's brains explode.

Honestly, making the Thunderbolt display only work with integrated graphics would be technically a dumb ass move.

 

[Beardy man]

Apple isn't going to sell a Mac Pro, and then send users to the Dell website to buy a display./QUOTE]

...but if my ACD30 (matte display) dies, what else do Apple expect me to do? Drop to a shiny 27"? Not a chance. After many years of monitors (and especially TV's) getting bigger by the year I was expecting Apple to bring out something special after they EOL'd the ACD30 ( bit like we're all hanging on Tim's vaguest of hints about the MacPro), but nothing has happened. In fact all the major players have cut out the 30".

I'd like 2013 to be the year I upgrade my 2008 MacPro/ACD30 for new kit but I'm also hoping it will all hang together until Apple pull their collective fingers out.

 

[goMac]

...but if my ACD30 (matte display) dies, what else do Apple expect me to do? Drop to a shiny 27"? Not a chance. After many years of monitors (and especially TV's) getting bigger by the year I was expecting Apple to bring out something special after they EOL'd the ACD30 ( bit like we're all hanging on Tim's vaguest of hints about the MacPro), but nothing has happened. In fact all the major players have cut out the 30".

I'd like 2013 to be the year I upgrade my 2008 MacPro/ACD30 for new kit but I'm also hoping it will all hang together until Apple pull their collective fingers out.

Heh. Well, I know it's not what you are likely to do, but if you're an Apple exec, they'd like you to buy a new Mac Pro with a new Thunderbolt display. And yes, they don't care about a 30" display.

Actually, the 27"ers are pretty nice in my opinion. I've been looking at them and haven't felt like I miss that 30". But that's just my opinion.

Apple's not going to cut DVI/MDP support, for people like you, but the idea that Apple would build a machine that works subpar with their own display would be crazy.

 

[JesterJJZ]

I just hope we start hearing some rumblings soon. Maybe someone will find a new Pro in a bar somewhere?

 

[deconstruct60]

I just hope we start hearing some rumblings soon. Maybe someone will find a new Pro in a bar somewhere?

Not likely.

The Mac Pro ships in relatively low volumes which means

1. they don't need to start production months in advance. ( no need to expose very large numbers of low skilled workers to the product. )

2. there is a very small and limited set of highly skilled part suppliers. They know Apple will drop their contracts if they are blabber mouths.


Throw on top that it doesn't need to be tested in random public places and that folks like GPU and a limited set of bigger component suppliers can also be held to tight NDA contexts.

Finally a decent subset of the parts are generic. HDDs , SSDs can likely be same components being used for Mac mini's (SSDs) and iMacs (27" 1TB drives.). Similar for wifi/bluetooth , thunderbolt dongles , etc.

Most of the iOS leaks are from custom component suppliers in foreign countries. If production is being moved to the USA it isn't even necessarily foreign, blabbermouth workers anymore. Apple is likely to get far more effective secrecy out of their manufacturing partners based in the USA.

False or deceptive rumors will get their bubble popped but other than ids and updated drivers popping up in 10.8 updates and upcoming 10.9 drops not much new until they are a couple weeks from shipping.

 

[JesterJJZ]

Ok...well how about people just making stuff up? I'll honestly take that for excitement's sake!

 

[deconstruct60]

Ok...well how about people just making stuff up? I'll honestly take that for excitement's sake!

When does macrumors not have posts with folks making stuff up? Folks will get excited about something that happens almost every day?

 

[goMac]

I think in the next few months things will start to leak. We'll see drivers, and Apple may drop a few leaks in the usual places.

 

[skyline r34]

I hope soon because my 12-Core Mac Pro is going to be 3yrs old in a few months time to get a new Mac

 

[JesterJJZ]

I hope soon because my 12-Core Mac Pro is going to be 3yrs old in a few months time to get a new Mac

Poor you...

 

[Macsonic]

I hope soon because my 12-Core Mac Pro is going to be 3yrs old in a few months time to get a new Mac

We still have to know the specs of the new 2013 Mac Pro and how does it compare to the previous model. Hoping the new specs will be a big difference to the 5,1 model. My friend has an old 2006 Mac Pro and he does not seem bothered with his aging machine as he said it still helps him bring in income.

 

[zephonic]

If production is being moved to the USA it isn't even necessarily foreign, blabbermouth workers anymore. Apple is likely to get far more effective secrecy out of their manufacturing partners based in the USA.

Prejudiced much?

 

[bsbeamer]

We still have to know the specs of the new 2013 Mac Pro and how does it compare to the previous model. Hoping the new specs will be a big difference to the 5,1 model. My friend has an old 2006 Mac Pro and he does not seem bothered with his aging machine as he said it still helps him bring in income.

Many are concerned about the upgrade-ability of a new machine. We'll see how it pans out. But the current 5,1 may just end up being a hot item depending on what happens...

The current 12-core 5,1 models are still great machines. One of my biggest issues is the lack of native USB 3.0 and MAYBE lack of Thunderbolt (easily could deal without Thunderbolt for awhile though). With limited PCIe expansion slots as it is, and everything already being tied up, adding in a USB 3.0 card isn't really an option.

 

[deconstruct60]

Prejudiced much?

If an US Apple worker leaked they'd be fired.
It is likely no different is that was a contractor leaking pre-release parts. Note how Apple dropped NDA devices on for initial iPad, iPhone US based companies and/or their subsideries and leaks to the point here are pictures don't generally happen there.

Or if Apple had suppliers in the USA that violated slave labor or child labor laws. It is highly doubtful they' just get "labor practice counseling."

US workers and partners are held to a different, higher standard it is me that is prejudiced? Yeah sure.

 

[JesterJJZ]

Anyone still have any hope for a March release?

 

[KaraH]

Anyone still have any hope for a March release?

My ideal is to officially know what the new MP is now then the release at WWDC. I want to make my plans but my bank accounts are still recovering from xmass [I will get the best deal on my CC anyway in the fall ].

 

[Macsonic]

Hard to tell when though I am anticipating/hoping the release of the new MP will be mid June. We don't have ideas as to what stage is Apple right now with the new model if Apple started with the prototype since last year or they will just start this month.