Fair enough. But do you understand the message at all, or not? Did you read that post at all?
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
HP workstations updated with new xeons, http://www.marketwired.com/press-re...-of-desktop-workstations-nyse-hpq-2110850.htm
Yes I did. I'll still wait to see how the actual hardware performs in real life instead of believing every single AMD transcript as gospel. AMD as quite a history of over promising and under performing when the actual products is finally released.
"reduced clock speeds" ? More like reduced base clock speeds in some point. If keep core count constant there doesn't look like much. Shrinking from 22nm to 14nm isn't going to help much if increase the core count 2+ .
Pragmatically they do have IPC improvements, just localized for heterogeneous loads. For example,
http://anandtech.com/show/10158/the-intel-xeon-e5-v4-review/3
AVX workload won't pull scalar loads backwards. Effectively, that will result in higher IPC on those scalar workloads.
Sure, if primarily evaluating this as to whether it drag races on circa 2008-2010 single threaded binaries faster... it is not impressive. What is being worked on is where at in the mix of the range between 'base' and 'turbo' rather than fixating on a single mode clock speed.
Similar, the virtualization is wider and in some places substantially faster. Gobs of time not spent in VMExit is lots more cycles can actually get some user work done.
The top end 18+ cores single packages are NUMA. Don't have to go multiple package sockets to have NUMA. I don't think OS X will be effective at getting most efficient usage of out of those time end ones.
It is likely not the only tech they have been waiting on. ( TB 3 , and some GPU shift are probably in the mix too ).
What do they promised about performance? Nothing. They discuss only on paper the technology what will be in future architectures. Nothing else. It is only forum members that spin it in both ways: optimistic, and pessimistic.
What I do not believe what Mahigan wrote in that post is the performance of that Polaris GPU. If it is 2560 GCN4 core GPU clocked at 1150 MHz it will be around GTX 980 Ti performance levels. Nothing more. That is all what we can expect from the new architecture.
One another thing, that AMD employee said on linux forum was that from software side Polaris "looks" to be like GCN1.2/GCN3, but architecture is different.
Intel is squeezing Nvidia out of more Mac design wins than AMD is. If want to narrow solely down to the Mac Pro they aren't a player but Nvidia's design win drop off isn't limited to the Mac Pro either. Multiple suppliers for a shrinking subset of the Mac product line up isn't going to be a pressing issue.
Looks like they're only 2000-series updates. The Z440s are still BTO with 16XXv3.
Anandtech's SKUs though do list the 2697v4 which should be the high-end replacement for the current 12 core model. Assuming you're willing to shell out it's a nice core bump over Ivy Bridge.
Not only that. Nvidia is scared what Intel can do, that is why they launched 75W GTX 950 with 768 CUDA cores to counter Intel HD 580 integrated GPU.
There is absolutely no point in buying anything under GTX 950/R7 370 if you have HD 580. That is the scale of technological milestone that Intel did lately.
P.S. After some thinking I have two ideas for next MP. Either there will be 4 CPU offerings: two from 16XXv4 and two from 26XXv4, or there will be 5th offering.
If the first case: Core counts will look like this: 6 core, 8 core, 14 core, 18 core.
If the second: to all this we have to add 4 core CPU.
Which one is more likely, what do you guys think?
I would love to get 8 core CPU, 16 GB of RAM, 512 GB SSD, and Dual Fury level performance GPUs for 3999$. That would be great offer from Apple for new Mac Pro.
Last edited:
What sort of impact does AVX and mixed workloads have on tasks like video/photo editing?
Yeah, I am sure they have been waiting on TB3.
They could make a big splash if they released a redesigned macbook pro, an updated mac pro and a retina display.
Hmm.. Interestering. Never knew much of the history it.
Why couldn't intel "choke" AMD too?
[doublepost=1459456548][/doublepost]
If i'm not mistaken...the latest usb is 3.1, yes? Would we expect that as well?"reduced clock speeds" ? More like reduced base clock speeds in some point. If keep core count constant there doesn't look like much. Shrinking from 22nm to 14nm isn't going to help much if increase the core count 2+ .
Pragmatically they do have IPC improvements, just localized for heterogeneous loads. For example,
http://anandtech.com/show/10158/the-intel-xeon-e5-v4-review/3
AVX workload won't pull scalar loads backwards. Effectively, that will result in higher IPC on those scalar workloads.
Sure, if primarily evaluating this as to whether it drag races on circa 2008-2010 single threaded binaries faster... it is not impressive. What is being worked on is where at in the mix of the range between 'base' and 'turbo' rather than fixating on a single mode clock speed.
Similar, the virtualization is wider and in some places substantially faster. Gobs of time not spent in VMExit is lots more cycles can actually get some user work done.
The top end 18+ cores single packages are NUMA. Don't have to go multiple package sockets to have NUMA. I don't think OS X will be effective at getting most efficient usage of out of those time end ones.
It is likely not the only tech they have been waiting on. ( TB 3 , and some GPU shift are probably in the mix too ).
[doublepost=1459456724][/doublepost]
Not only that. Nvidia is scared what Intel can do, that is why they launched 75W GTX 950 with 768 CUDA cores to counter Intel HD 580 integrated GPU.
There is absolutely no point in buying anything under GTX 950/R7 370 if you have HD 580. That is the scale of technological milestone that Intel did lately.
P.S. After some thinking I have two ideas for next MP. Either there will be 4 CPU offerings: two from 16XXv4 and two from 26XXv4, or there will be 5th offering.
If the first case: Core counts will look like this: 6 core, 8 core, 14 core, 18 core.
If the second: to all this we have to add 4 core CPU.
Which one is more likely, what do you guys think?
I would love to get 8 core CPU, 16 GB of RAM, 512 GB SSD, and Dual Fury level performance GPUs for 3999$. That would be great offer from Apple for new Mac Pro.
I hope so to.I thought fury gpu was the inferior...I think I'm mis-understanding. I know there's...polaris 10 and 11.
That didn't take long. Now the MP6,1 is two generations out-of-date.
Staged upgrades are often the case - nothing to be alarmed about. As production ramps on 16XXv4 chips the single socket systems will be added to the mix.
HPI doesn't want to announce upgrades with a long lead time. The higher-volume systems will come soon.
It doesn't seem, recently, that Apple cares much about "making a big splash". There's always hope though, as I'd like to see a Gen2 MacBook Retina with a decent CPU. I'd almost spend the $900 now on Gen1 but I can't live with that 1.1Ghz CPU!
Something like the Dell P2715Q.... A 27" monitor that isn't using five year old mirror technology in its panels.
Last edited:
Yes indeed!
I suppose Apple will drop Macbook Air before WWDC and introduces 14" Macbook along with updated 12". It is just a web update with a video narrated by sir John Ivy.
In WWDC, AMD will have their momentum, Lisa will be on the platform, and Polaris is the star of the next gen Macs.
New monitors: matte 16:10 - 22" 4k and matte 16:10 28" 5260x3200, DP 1.3 through usb type-c. Adaptive sync.
Mac Mini: Better model: Skylake with Polaris 11, will be demoed, that games run butter smooth V-sync on with 22" retina display with native resolution. Thanks to adaptive sync. "World smallest game console" is a Mac computer.
Macbook Pro: Both 14" 2880x1800 and 16" 4k comes with Polaris 11. And adaptive sync.
iMac: Polaris 10 runs games smoothly with native 5k. Again with adaptive sync. 21.5" comes with optional Polaris 11.
Mac Pro: With dual Polaris 10 it will crush all known test in 4k editing, computing and VR design (new app, FCP VR). With Broadwell which is around 20% better that previous model. Comes surprisingly with DP 1.4 through USB type-c.
OS X 10.12 = MacOS 11. Including new file system (finally), Metal v2 (SM 6.0, new computing language, Nvidia goes legacy state/web driver only) and openGL 4.3 is running on top of Metal. TrueAudio DSP support. Siri, works better with TrueAudio but works with any Mac. Plus a new background of Lancelot carousel at Disneyland. ;-)
MacOS Apps: Garageband, imovie..etc will support TrueAudio and Metal v2. All iApps will be renamed.
New tools for VR content creation. Beta versions, works only with new Mac OS 11 beta.
One more thing: 8k monitor 30" 16:9, DP 1.4 usb type-c. Only for nMP v2. With support from all Apple Pro apps. And a promise that Adobe & others will use it too very soon (next year).
Last edited:
The thinking in the industry is that Nvidia's long term position is not good without some sort of x86 core (or maybe if ARM really takes off.) More and more of computers are shifting to integrated GPUs, as are consoles. As it stands, Nvidia has no strategy to get themselves back in the console market. Without a GPU/CPU in a single package they're locked out of industries.
They're pushing hard into HPC because it's really all they've got left that they're not actively threatened in. Even HPC may eventually fall to single package solutions, but Nvidia will use a CUDA lockout to stall that.
Well that's a nice wishlist. I'd also like a Pony.
You're not getting solid 5K gaming with any card in the iMac this gen, in particular, when even current top-of-the-line enthusiast cards can't do it.
Do they want to be in that market with it's bottom feeder margins,
mediocre graphics stigma and 7 year upgrade cycles?
Apparently not the last time around.
Not that there's a good chance of the other predictions coming true, but you really lost me on this one.
The risk for Nvidia is as people buy less and less dGPUs, where will they go? Sure, there is a stigma, but when you get can PS4 quality graphics on an integrated GPU, eventually people are going to stop caring bit by bit.
Integrated GPUs are also kicking a lot of ass at compute. Which again Nvidia is trying to cut off with CUDA.
New file system? You'd hope, but I doubt that is high on Apple's priority list.
I see no value in TrueAudio, personally, and I don't think it has a place in OSX/iOS. CoreAudio and AudioUnits cover most of that already, it is another proprietary format and uses DSP. To me it just screams 'stillborn'.
Can you cover this how this works? Because i can not find this info and have not heard it before.
That would be nice to so Nvidia back in the office. Or at least, that we could have a choice. But what about their OpenCL only vision?
I personlay dont think NVidia is in any trouble. If you are building a good (gaming) machine, its an Nvidia that fills up the case. Check out any new builds on youtube, check out any recommended builds on the internet, its Nvidia all over. They are also working with the chips to build into cars..
Also valid for workstations GPUs. All the big OEMs have quadro cards as their first option... probably because of the better written drivers and of course CUDA.
- Status