MP 7,1 AMD RDNA 2, 6800, 6800 XT, 6900 XT MPX Modules

[Theophilos]

Glad to hear your setup is working well for you. I’m pretty stuck on Premiere and not willing to transition to FCP or Resolve. So I just sold my 7,1 after only 4 months. I blame Adobe’s crappy software for not taking advantage of the hardware and also the pandemic for wiping out most of my work.

So sorry to hear that. God willing, things will hopefully pick up after the election and the coronavirus vaccine becomes available.

I don’t use Premiere, but I recently heard it finally uses ProRes RAW using Apple’s Metal technology. It might be a good option in the future if you have a compatible setup.

 

[OkiRun]

So sorry to hear that. God willing, things will hopefully pick up after the election and the coronavirus vaccine becomes available.

I don’t use Premiere, but I recently heard it finally uses ProRes RAW using Apple’s Metal technology. It might be a good option in the future if you have a compatible setup.

Pro Res files work fine in Premier Pro on my office 7,1. I think its getting people to remember that the 7,1 is optimized for Pro Res.

 

[bsbeamer]

This may put a dent in the MPX module hopes:

Apple Working on Redesigned Mac Pro With Smaller Form Factor and Apple Silicon Chip

As part of the transition to Apple Silicon, Apple is designing a new Mac Pro that has a smaller form factor, reports Bloomberg. The new Mac Pro is said to have a design that looks like the current design, but in a more compact enclosure that's "about half the size." It is not known if the new...

forums.macrumors.com

 

[IA64]

This may put a dent in the MPX module hopes:

Apple Working on Redesigned Mac Pro With Smaller Form Factor and Apple Silicon Chip

As part of the transition to Apple Silicon, Apple is designing a new Mac Pro that has a smaller form factor, reports Bloomberg. The new Mac Pro is said to have a design that looks like the current design, but in a more compact enclosure that's "about half the size." It is not known if the new...

forums.macrumors.com

Won't expect it before 18 months at least

 

[LeonPro]

It does if it will replace the current line up and Apple stops development of peripherals for it. But if it's to supplement the PRO and add this for consumers, then that's another story.

 

[giggles]

So Big Sur has drivers for these, great.
Gonna put one in an eGPU enclosure for a Mini.

 

[ArPe]

So Big Sur has drivers for these, great.
Gonna put one in an eGPU enclosure for a Mini.

No evidence they are complete and fully functional drivers. A couple of the features of Navi 2 cards the smart memory and over clocking mode require a software control panel to enable them.

In 4K gaming the 3080 and 3090 perform like a 2070/2080 in eGPU because the TB3 bandwidth isn’t enough for the current generation of GPUs and highest quality graphics. So expect the same for Navi 2. For professional video/ rendering apps the bandwidth might be enough though.

 

[deconstruct60]

This may put a dent in the MPX module hopes:

Apple Working on Redesigned Mac Pro With Smaller Form Factor and Apple Silicon Chip

As part of the transition to Apple Silicon, Apple is designing a new Mac Pro that has a smaller form factor, reports Bloomberg. The new Mac Pro is said to have a design that looks like the current design, but in a more compact enclosure that's "about half the size." It is not known if the new...

forums.macrumors.com

Shouldn't have much impact one way or the other. Especially, if Apple just shrinks the height to get to "half the size".

Going to just one MPX Bay would still fix in "half" of the Mac Pro height. Pretty likely it is the other slots; 6-7 or 5-7 that would get extracted as they are partially covered by the middle fan of the full sized Mac Pro that would get tossed along with the second MPX bay to say height. Tossing that second (middle) MPX Bay would get rid of about 1/3" of the height if driving toward "about half the size". Could drop slot 8 also if put those I/O sockets on the logic board.

Getting rid of the MPX connector in Bay 1 would likely mean the new system to solely using the integrated GPU to drive the system Thunderbolt 3 (or 4) needs. That would be a useful entry level configuration but probably not one they'd want to be stuck with in all configurations. Dropping MPX connector also means more cables internally. Apple is into more cables inside of an even smaller system? Probably not.

IMHO, it is likely loosing slots in this "half sized" Mac Pro because the Apple Silicon SoC is relatively much lower on PCI-e lane provisioning capabilities than the Xeon W 3000 series. Might be looking at something as low as 32-36 lanes total. The slots are disappearing because there is less to feed them with ( without deeply thinning out the aggregate bandwidth. )

Decent chance they are just looping the 'iMac class" SoC package infrastructure to cover this system also. ( core count and some other features may different but the same physical packaging. ). This is go get to a cheaper Mac Pro in terms of SoC costs for Apple also ( as well as being more affordable Mac Pro for customers ).

Whatever is on the GPU MPX module would probably work in the Mac Pro 2019 also if proper drivers are put into the x86-64 version of macOS 11.


P.S. If Apple cuts the "Depth" ( currently 8.58 inches) [ 'width' of Mac Pro if looking head-on at the holes in the front ] or width ( currently 17.7 ) [ 'depth' when look head-on. ] then that would blow up the MPX modules. But that would also blow up a large quantity other add-in card slot solutions too. Kind of pointless after the back-track from the MP 2013 to one again go back to only Apple custom cards.

They can extremely easily avoid that by taking most (if not all ) of the half by just reducing the height of the tower. ( can shrink the feet and handles if aiming for more literal desktop placement of the system. ) . Dropping all that high grade aluminum will also reduce the weight. ( very little need for wheels and shipping costs and lower environment footprint in shipping. )

Also if did a rack version could get two side by side. So not as much bloat if new multiple phsyical systems. Shrinking on multiple dimensions probably doesn't buy as much ( the rack is stll just as deep as it was and still not going to compete with 1U-2U optimized enclosures is shrink to 3U. ). RAM/SSD module upgrades would be a bit less awkward if get rid of much of the "backside" ( "bottom side in rack model) infrastructure. could shave incremental amount on "rack height" there that probably doesn't matter much in the big picture.

 

[IA64]

Shouldn't have much impact one way or the other. Especially, if Apple just shrinks the height to get to "half the size".

Going to just one MPX Bay would still fix in "half" of the Mac Pro height. Pretty likely it is the other slots; 6-7 or 5-7 that would get extracted as they are partially covered by the middle fan of the full sized Mac Pro that would get tossed along with the second MPX bay to say height. Tossing that second (middle) MPX Bay would get rid of about 1/3" of the height if driving toward "about half the size". Could drop slot 8 also if put those I/O sockets on the logic board.

Getting rid of the MPX connector in Bay 1 would likely mean the new system to solely using the integrated GPU to drive the system Thunderbolt 3 (or 4) needs. That would be a useful entry level configuration but probably not one they'd want to be stuck with in all configurations. Dropping MPX connector also means more cables internally. Apple is into more cables inside of an even smaller system? Probably not.

IMHO, it is likely loosing slots in this "half sized" Mac Pro because the Apple Silicon SoC is relatively much lower on PCI-e lane provisioning capabilities than the Xeon W 3000 series. Might be looking at something as low as 32-36 lanes total. The slots are disappearing because there is less to feed them with ( without deeply thinning out the aggregate bandwidth. )

Decent chance they are just looping the 'iMac class" SoC package infrastructure to cover this system also. ( core count and some other features may different but the same physical packaging. ). This is go get to a cheaper Mac Pro in terms of SoC costs for Apple also ( as well as being more affordable Mac Pro for customers ).

Whatever is on the GPU MPX module would probably work in the Mac Pro 2019 also if proper drivers are put into the x86-64 version of macOS 11.


P.S. If Apple cuts the "Depth" ( currently 8.58 inches) [ 'width' of Mac Pro if looking head-on at the holes in the front ] or width ( currently 17.7 ) [ 'depth' when look head-on. ] then that would blow up the MPX modules. But that would also blow up a large quantity other add-in card slot solutions too. Kind of pointless after the back-track from the MP 2013 to one again go back to only Apple custom cards.

They can extremely easily avoid that by taking most (if not all ) of the half by just reducing the height of the tower. ( can shrink the feet and handles if aiming for more literal desktop placement of the system. ) . Dropping all that high grade aluminum will also reduce the weight. ( very little need for wheels and shipping costs and lower environment footprint in shipping. )

Also if did a rack version could get two side by side. So not as much bloat if new multiple phsyical systems. Shrinking on multiple dimensions probably doesn't buy as much ( the rack is stll just as deep as it was and still not going to compete with 1U-2U optimized enclosures is shrink to 3U. ). RAM/SSD module upgrades would be a bit less awkward if get rid of much of the "backside" ( "bottom side in rack model) infrastructure. could shave incremental amount on "rack height" there that probably doesn't matter much in the big picture.

You are assuming that it's going to be a modular Mac Pro. IMO it's going to be a trashcan 2.0

 

[deconstruct60]

You are assuming that it's going to be a modular Mac Pro. IMO it's going to be a trashcan 2.0

It is 3x as bing as the Mac Pro 2013 ( "transcan" ) if it is "about half the size". Why would it need to be 3 times as big if it wasn't modular?

If it was going to be 1/4 or 1/5 the size of the current Mac Pro then there would be a creditable window for it going back to MP 2013 design constraints. This is 3x as big. No way it is the same thing with the same design constraints.

The CPU SoC is probably going to be less "modular" as it is likely it is soldered on. But most of the space left even if downside the Mac Pro 2019 by approximately 50% isn't about the CPU aspect of the design.


The bigger presumption is that Apple is going to come up with something "magical" in the GPU solution space in the mid-top end of the GPU performance range. That is not an assumption I'm making. They probably are going to still need to work with 3rd party cards to be competitive.

 

[OkiRun]

It is 3x as bing as the Mac Pro 2013 ( "transcan" ) if it is "about half the size". Why would it need to be 3 times as big if it wasn't modular?

If it was going to be 1/4 or 1/5 the size of the current Mac Pro then there would be a creditable window for it going back to MP 2013 design constraints. This is 3x as big. No way it is the same thing with the same design constraints.

The CPU SoC is probably going to be less "modular" as it is likely it is soldered on. But most of the space left even if downside the Mac Pro 2019 by approximately 50% isn't about the CPU aspect of the design.


The bigger presumption is that Apple is going to come up with something "magical" in the GPU solution space in the mid-top end of the GPU performance range. That is not an assumption I'm making. They probably are going to still need to work with 3rd party cards to be competitive.

So it looks like Apple is giving consumers the original basic mac pro tower they screamed about wanting when the 7,1 was released...? But will they be happy if it is not as expandable as the 7,1?

 

[bsbeamer]

No Intel i9 or AMD processor, that’s at least the short term wildcard. Lot remains to be seen how it truly performs for “pro” tasks and limitations by software that isn’t fully ported. I wouldn’t put faith in keynote demo hype on this transition.

 

[AidenShaw]

I wouldn’t put faith in keynote demo hype on this transition.

On the surface it seems to be mainly raising the garden walls higher.

 

[th0masp]

You are assuming that it's going to be a modular Mac Pro. IMO it's going to be a trashcan 2.0

My thoughts exactly.

They are all about compact and quiet designs, perhaps this time the approach will turn out a bit less radical though. Might even have some room for limited expansion with the cheesegrater 2.0 lessions learned and all. Would not surprise me one bit if they took their cues for the pricing from the current model though.

 

[Grumply]

You are assuming that it's going to be a modular Mac Pro. IMO it's going to be a trashcan 2.0

That seems highly unlikely to me. Apple know very well, how much of a flop the trashcan was, and they know how excited everyone was for the 7,1.

They’ll also be keenly aware of how many people are grumbling about being priced out of the 7,1. So a smaller Mac “Midi” tower, with something like four PCIe slots (just like the original Mac Pros) makes far more sense.

They get to trade off the hype of the 7,1 (with a mini cheesegrater design), minimise development costs (by using the same MPX modules as the 7,1), and make a whole bunch of sales by giving people what they actually want, a normal, modern, expandable tower that runs OSX.

It surely has to be a no-brainer strategy-wise.

 

[IA64]

That seems highly unlikely to me. Apple know very well, how much of a flop the trashcan was, and they know how excited everyone was for the 7,1.

They’ll also be keenly aware of how many people are grumbling about being priced out of the 7,1. So a smaller Mac “Midi” tower, with something like four PCIe slots (just like the original Mac Pros) makes far more sense.

They get to trade off the hype of the 7,1 (with a mini cheesegrater design), minimise development costs (by using the same MPX modules as the 7,1), and make a whole bunch of sales by giving people what they actually want, a normal, modern, expandable tower that runs OSX.

It surely has to be a no-brainer strategy-wise.

I find it hard to digest the whole story. Even if they go with the mini cheese grater design and limited PCIE slots, do you think the price would be drop significantly?

I mean a Xeon W-3225 ( 8 core ) is being sold for almost $1500 a that's for the CPU alone. Adding the that an MPX module, 32GB of RAM, 256GB SSD, a motherboard and a nice aluminum case, we're already in the 4000 USD range.

I bet it's much more cost effective to cut the 7.1 price down instead of going through all the R&D to make an exact identical performing machine for 20% less.

I even find it strange that they're willing to introduce a mini mac pro when their focus is now on ARM.

In my understanding, a Pro is a flagship. Apple spent too much money and effort on developing the 7,1, a successor of the 7.1 should be better spec'ed and I'm not sure what Intel has to offer until then but if they happen to ship it with faster CPUs, that would be the next Mac Pro. So it's either a MP8,1 or a Mac something but definitely not PRO.

IMO, the main issue is that the XDR is only compatible with a MP 7,1 a MBP or an iMac 2019-2020.

For graphic designers and CAD users, a Mac tower with built-in powerful dual graphic cards and a decent CPU is more than enough to drive the display and get the job done. iMac users aren't really interested in a second display that cost 3 times their AIO AFAIK.

Time will tell...

 

[OkiRun]

I find it hard to digest the whole story. Even if they go with the mini cheese grater design and limited PCIE slots, do you think the price would be drop significantly?

I mean a Xeon W-3225 ( 8 core ) is being sold for almost $1500 a that's for the CPU alone. Adding the that an MPX module, 32GB of RAM, 256GB SSD, a motherboard and a nice aluminum case, we're already in the 4000 USD range.

I bet it's much more cost effective to cut the 7.1 price down instead of going through all the R&D to make an exact identical performing machine for 20% less.

I even find it strange that they're willing to introduce a mini mac pro when their focus is now on ARM.

In my understanding, a Pro is a flagship. Apple spent too much money and effort on developing the 7,1, a successor of the 7.1 should be better spec'ed and I'm not sure what Intel has to offer until then but if they happen to ship it with faster CPUs, that would be the next Mac Pro. So it's either a MP8,1 or a Mac something but definitely not PRO.

IMO, the main issue is that the XDR is only compatible with a MP 7,1 a MBP or an iMac 2019-2020.

For graphic designers and CAD users, a Mac tower with built-in powerful dual graphic cards and a decent CPU is more than enough to drive the display and get the job done. iMac users aren't really interested in a second display that cost 3 times their AIO AFAIK.

Time will tell...

I don't think the 8,1 is meant to replace the 7,1. It's meant for the Apple hobbyist and mid-level business entrepaneur; a smaller and less powerful model - a midi ~
The machine to lure all the 1.1, 2.1, 3.1, 4.1, and 5.1 users over to a new machine.

 

[Grumply]

I find it hard to digest the whole story. Even if they go with the mini cheese grater design and limited PCIE slots, do you think the price would be drop significantly?

I mean a Xeon W-3225 ( 8 core ) is being sold for almost $1500 a that's for the CPU alone. Adding the that an MPX module, 32GB of RAM, 256GB SSD, a motherboard and a nice aluminum case, we're already in the 4000 USD range.

I bet it's much more cost effective to cut the 7.1 price down instead of going through all the R&D to make an exact identical performing machine for 20% less.

I even find it strange that they're willing to introduce a mini mac pro when their focus is now on ARM.

In my understanding, a Pro is a flagship. Apple spent too much money and effort on developing the 7,1, a successor of the 7.1 should be better spec'ed and I'm not sure what Intel has to offer until then but if they happen to ship it with faster CPUs, that would be the next Mac Pro. So it's either a MP8,1 or a Mac something but definitely not PRO.

IMO, the main issue is that the XDR is only compatible with a MP 7,1 a MBP or an iMac 2019-2020.

For graphic designers and CAD users, a Mac tower with built-in powerful dual graphic cards and a decent CPU is more than enough to drive the display and get the job done. iMac users aren't really interested in a second display that cost 3 times their AIO AFAIK.

Time will tell...

I thought the rumours were that the new “Midi” tower would be Apple Silicon (rather than Xeons)?

The 7,1 doesn’t actually appear to have much of an Apple Tax on it, so much as a Xeon Tax. So take the hefty prices of intel’s server components out of the build, and I’d assume prices can drop considerably.

 

[IA64]

I thought the rumours were that the new “Midi” tower would be Apple Silicon (rather than Xeons)?

The 7,1 doesn’t actually appear to have much of an Apple Tax on it, so much as a Xeon Tax. So take the hefty prices of intel’s server components out of the build, and I’d assume prices can drop considerably.

Well if it's going to be a AS one, I don't think it's going to share anything with the 7,1 ( MPX whatsoever)

What kind of PCIE card work with ARM? As far as I know AS will not even support non Apple GPU so I don't understand the need of expandability

I don't think the 8,1 is meant to replace the 7,1. It's meant for the Apple hobbyist and mid-level business entrepaneur; a smaller and less powerful model - a midi ~
The machine to lure all the 1.1, 2.1, 3.1, 4.1, and 5.1 users over to a new machine.

Yes but the rumors are about a resized Mac Pro and since it's a Pro, It suggest a flagship so I really doubt it's going to perform lower than the 7,1

 

[th0masp]

That seems highly unlikely to me. Apple know very well, how much of a flop the trashcan was, and they know how excited everyone was for the 7,1.

They’ll also be keenly aware of how many people are grumbling about being priced out of the 7,1. So a smaller Mac “Midi” tower, with something like four PCIe slots (just like the original Mac Pros) makes far more sense.

They get to trade off the hype of the 7,1 (with a mini cheesegrater design), minimise development costs (by using the same MPX modules as the 7,1), and make a whole bunch of sales by giving people what they actually want, a normal, modern, expandable tower that runs OSX.

It surely has to be a no-brainer strategy-wise.

Only a no-brainer from the POV of an Apple-PC mindset.

I don't think they see themselves as a PC competitor anymore. And would the world's foremost - or only (IMO anyway) high tech luxury brand really want to release a particularly affordable 'high end' machine? A desktop computer for the masses doesn't sound very Apple to me. Not when you are supposed to ditch desktops for most things in favour of a tablet anyway.

 

[Flint Ironstag]

Only a no-brainer from the POV of an Apple-PC mindset.

I don't think they see themselves as a PC competitor anymore. And would the world's foremost - or only (IMO anyway) high tech luxury brand really want to release a particularly affordable 'high end' machine? A desktop computer for the masses doesn't sound very Apple to me. Not when you are supposed to ditch desktops for most things in favour of a tablet anyway.

Apple BEGAN to bring desktop computing to the masses. They've finally heard the outcry and are releasing some products the masses, the tinkerers, anybody with a few $k can customize their ideal Mac workstation. They drifted away from this for too long, and the backlash was real.

I think it's going to turn out exactly as predicted in the other thread - including a very attractive starting price.

First Mac to get excited about in ages. Also looking forward to seeing how far they push the mini form factor.

 

[bsbeamer]

Two things to pay attention to: price and expandability options from base. That will determine everything on how it embraced outside of the Apple ecosystem of apps.

 

[Flint Ironstag]

Two things to pay attention to: price and expandability options from base. That will determine everything on how it embraced outside of the Apple ecosystem of apps.

I have a feeling they nail it this time.

 

[Grumply]

Well if it's going to be a AS one, I don't think it's going to share anything with the 7,1 ( MPX whatsoever)

What kind of PCIE card work with ARM? As far as I know AS will not even support non Apple GPU so I don't understand the need of expandability

Does switching to Apple Silicon processors do anything to change the actual underlying architecture? I'd have thought a computer is a computer (regardless of who's manufacturing the CPUs), so I'd expect PCIe slots to remain (and therefore the MPX modules/technology developed for the 7,1, to still be relevant).

 

[OkiRun]

Does switching to Apple Silicon processors do anything to change the actual underlying architecture? I'd have thought a computer is a computer (regardless of who's manufacturing the CPUs), so I'd expect PCIe slots to remain (and therefore the MPX modules/technology developed for the 7,1, to still be relevant).

Another thread where we talk about possible layouts for 8,1

Introducing... The Mac?

I'm shocked there's no thread speculating on the smaller Mac Pro that's in development. I'm betting it won't have Intel inside. Glad they finally listened.

forums.macrumors.com