Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
2016 nMP
- Thread starter ManuelGomes
- Start date
-
- Tags
- nmp
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Sorry, you posted it already... ;-)
[doublepost=1463177425][/doublepost]I'm not sure you can tell for sure that those are Polaris based.
They could be rebrands, although it doesn't seem like it.
[doublepost=1463177425][/doublepost]I'm not sure you can tell for sure that those are Polaris based.
They could be rebrands, although it doesn't seem like it.
These are interesting days for graphics chips and cards!
I won't try to read all the tea leaves myself, but here's one thing I know: We won't get anything in the nnMP that won't fit into roughly the same power envelope as the existing D700's. No liquid cooling (my old liquid-cooled G5 rig gave me quite enough of that experience anyway!), no "full fat" plus overclocked chips (under-clocked larger chips may work out), etc. HBM2 is probably also premature.
So, given the existing power envelope, what do the tea leaves suggest?
I won't try to read all the tea leaves myself, but here's one thing I know: We won't get anything in the nnMP that won't fit into roughly the same power envelope as the existing D700's. No liquid cooling (my old liquid-cooled G5 rig gave me quite enough of that experience anyway!), no "full fat" plus overclocked chips (under-clocked larger chips may work out), etc. HBM2 is probably also premature.
So, given the existing power envelope, what do the tea leaves suggest?
Last edited:
The GPUs are rebranded. Those are NOT Polaris chips at all
.I would say, that both Polaris 10, and Vega 10 are equally possible. It would be possible to declock it just like HD 7970/D700 to 125W TDP, without loosing a lot of performance.
Secondly, Nvidia. After all it would not be that bad idea, especially for CUDA environment, however it depends how much it would have to be declocked to 125W. Renaming GTX1070 as a Quadro D300 would be quite possible, however. Mobile GTX 1080M will be based on GTX 1070 and will have 1300 MHz core clock.
But I don't think that Apple will go Nvidia route. After Nvidia's attempt to sue Apple...
Last edited:
What I See Clear, is u-nMP only possible GPU candidates are Polaris 10 at 5.5 Tflop or nVidia GTX1070 (asuming could fit the 100-130W Max TDP on the MP).
Still need to know: nVidia GTX1070 TDP & FP64 performance
Full Range Polaris 10 FP64/FP32 Performance & TDP some leaks suggest 3:1 FP32:FP64, hard to believe.
Given AMD is going forward with VEGA11, also should be good to know its TDP, asuming it Will Outperform GP100 at same TDP, also its FP64 should be 1:2.
Still need to know: nVidia GTX1070 TDP & FP64 performance
Full Range Polaris 10 FP64/FP32 Performance & TDP some leaks suggest 3:1 FP32:FP64, hard to believe.
Given AMD is going forward with VEGA11, also should be good to know its TDP, asuming it Will Outperform GP100 at same TDP, also its FP64 should be 1:2.
I think Vega could be a start of new kind of product. Perhaps a Premium Virtual Reality hub for homes.
It seems that Vega is out of nMP's' thermal design, but if CPU is changed to 65W Core version, maybe it's getting close..
It seems that Vega is out of nMP's' thermal design, but if CPU is changed to 65W Core version, maybe it's getting close..
Vega 10 is midrange chip, not high end...
It is like HD7970, not Hawaii.
What I am most interested is if AMD would announce their coherent fabric, that is possible to bring to market already. That alone would be GIGANTIC reason for wait to October for update for Mac Pro.
It is like HD7970, not Hawaii.
What I am most interested is if AMD would announce their coherent fabric, that is possible to bring to market already. That alone would be GIGANTIC reason for wait to October for update for Mac Pro.
I don't believe none Vega will Fit the Mac Pro TDP restrictions, unless Apple Expands it either with bigge/copper based thermal core and its respective PSU upgrade.
People thought that the silicon design win that AMD has announced a while ago, but waited for their partner to show it, was supposed to be Nintendo NX, yes?
Well. The deal is done, already. There will be another console with semi-custom AMD chip. But it will not be Nintendo NX. Nintendo NX will use... Nvidia Tegra.
And AMD provided custom APUs for Apple some time ago, and Apple is supposedly working on Apple TV with much more robust cooling system than currently there is.
Well, seems like balls are dropping. Apple might be bringing VR to living room.
Well. The deal is done, already. There will be another console with semi-custom AMD chip. But it will not be Nintendo NX. Nintendo NX will use... Nvidia Tegra
.And AMD provided custom APUs for Apple some time ago, and Apple is supposedly working on Apple TV with much more robust cooling system than currently there is.
Well, seems like balls are dropping
. Apple might be bringing VR to living room.
Well..i can't wait for WWDC...waiting to see if Tim Cook will smirk again.
He ain't going home with his full teeth if he doesn't mention mac pro.
He ain't going home with his full teeth if he doesn't mention mac pro.
What if he mentions that it's been end-of-lifed ?
I don't think he would want to be in the same situation like Justin Bieber.
That would be an act of mercy, then we could all just move on.What if he mentions that it's been end-of-lifed ?
You mean no more discussions about which new GPUs could be downclocked to fit into the small power budget of the tube?
Still think that the best solution would be for Apple to formally announce that OS X would be available on a select range of HP or Dell workstations, with options selected from an Apple-supported set.
Imagine a range of Macs from small form factor i7 quads to 44 cores, 1 TiB of RAM and 10 internal drive slots... Get a "Z840 Mac Edition" now!
Last edited:
This would be ideal. What sort of steps could apple take to protect OS X from being easily ported to all PC machines (or at least no easier than currently)?
The other option would be that they allow HP to make a more limited mac edition. Probably not as ideal for people around here but I could see Apple being more open to that than the alternative of just letting HP put OS X on any of their workstations.
It's becoming more and more clear that Apple's idea of their ecosystem is out of step with the needs and desires of higher end users.
You are claiming that the Mac Pro using the same components as the HP is more efficient.P.S. Yes, I want powerful machine. I want dual GPUs, lots of RAM and lots of CPU cores. But I also want it be efficient. Is it impossible?
Some evidence to back that up? (Be sure to include the mess of power bricks for external expansion in your claim.)
I would suggest that if you only need a single GPU, the HP probably uses less power. I find that my Dell T1650 (same hex core as the MP6,1) drops down to the 40 watt range when idle. (Single Quadro card.)
MP6,1 "efficiency" is an urban legend that is often said, but not supported.
[doublepost=1463252873][/doublepost]
TPM could provide a hardware secure token for license locking.
I think that most people would understand that Apple doesn't need that for Apple manufactured machines, but for "Mac Edition" systems some form of activation is necessary.
[doublepost=1463253362][/doublepost]
Apple could put whatever controls in place that they want. Not even a need to have the OS preinstalled - ship the "Mac Edition" with a blank disk, and either install from the network or get a thumb drive from Apple.
Forget the "clone wars". Apple wouldn't lose any hardware sales if the MP6,1 is EOL'd before this program. If Apple has amortized the fixed costs for the MP6,1 development, they could continue to sell it for the people who want "pretty".
Apple could price "Apple OSX for the Mac Edition" at a hefty price - similar to Apple's margin on an entry MP6,1. (Or they could follow the lead of the rest of the industry and have tiered pricing - lower price for single socket, limited RAM, limited cores - higher price for multiple sockets, huge RAM, many cores.)
Last edited:
Are you sure HP workstation would be able to get into 439W power draw with dual GPU setup, and 8 core, 130/140W CPU?
Ignore TFLOPs performance. Focus just on probability of dual GPU setup and 8 core, 130/140W CPU. Would it be able to get to 439W? With Polaris 10 - For sure. With GTX 1070 - on the boarder of 450-500W. With GTX 1080 - no chances.
That is what I call efficiency. I am not saying that HP workstations are not efficient.
- Status