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

[IA64]

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).

Apple silicon Mac documentation suggests third-party GPU support in danger | AppleInsider

Some Apple support documentation seems to suggest that Mac shift to Apple silicon will drop support for non-Apple GPUs.

appleinsider.com

 

[deconstruct60]

So it looks like Apple is giving consumers the original basic mac pro tower they screamed about wanting when the 7,1 was released...?

Not really. Maybe three slots here (possibly two Just an MPX bay worth ). That is less slots than the Mac Pro 2009-2012 ( which had four)

It is going back to the more expected entry price range (probably back to $2,999 +/- $300 ) . it isn't going back to the enclosure. ( "Just slap a new motherboard in the old cheese-grader enclosure).

Depending on just how close to "half" the size it is getting the space for the add-in 3.5" SATA drive frame might get left behind on this "half sized" variant too. To some extent the SATA lane provisioning Apple gets for "free" with the Intel Xeon W3000 series required PCH I/O controller chip. No Intel I/O controller chip ... just how how keen is Apple going to be be about provisioning SATA ??? [ they could use a 3rd party discrete controller. But are they interested in doing the PCI-e lane provision for that and the driver(s) upkeep ? ]

In Full scale Mac Pro 2019 Apple has "left over" space down stream of the hot CPU cooler for heated air where they nominally put nothing. If Apple wants to put something there that they want to now that it isn't substantively heated air zone. ( e.g. move the DIMMs or NAND daughter cards to the front side since loosing so much backside area ) is there going to be "empty , vacated" room for the aftermarket bolt on SATA drive caddy anymore.

But if Apple is trying to cater to the small scale tinker folks then room for the add in SATA bracket would make them happier . [ if the CPU isn't quite so hot on the bottom of the board then 4 DIMM could move to zone beneath the CPU mount point. (which is actually closer). Smaller backside blower (for 700W (or less) Power supply) and NAND cards could fit in the reduced backside area. )

But will they be happy if it is not as expandable as the 7,1?

The screams that came mainly from expense magnitude. ( from entry price going up 100% ). Yeah, a reasonably high fraction of those folks will be happy. xMac folks looking for "box with slot" pricing equivalent to the rest of the classic WinPC low-to-mid range market. Nope.

If go back to Mac Pro slot survey of folks on 2009-2010 models a large block of folks had (or 2-3 out of these four).

one Apple supported boot GPU
one more recent GPU
one SSD caddy add-in-card
one USB updated I/O card ( USB 2.0 was down rate ancient by the second half of the model 5,1 service lifetime).

USB 4 / Thunderbolt blunts the deep need for the last. (and if mimic MP 2019 with replaceable semi-custom I/O card then even less need ). If there is a Apple GPU integrated into the SoC that obviates the need for the first (can "fall back" to using Apple iGPU if need full features for some diagnostics reason) . With just two slots can make more than a few folks happy. Don't solder the RAM and or the NAND for the system SSD and will be in a pretty good zone where upgrades can be done in the future. Two general slots can be provisions out of a single MPX bay.

Two slots means could move up to a newer GPU card later and avoid the "T2 SSD". Being stuck with a fixed GPU of Apple's choosing and only to Apple's SSD both draw a decent amount of griping about in these forums. Just two slots lets folks put their month where their mouth is on the bickering aspect.

[ There is a presumption above that Apple isn't going to kill off all 3rd party GPU cards. Personally I think they are just de-prioritizing them to year 2 of the transition. ( or at least macOS 11.1 (next Fall ) ). ]


If long term don't take away the full size Mac Pro than can make both halves of the old Mac Pro camp happy. Folks who do have lots more add-in-card needs would go full size.


One MPX bay. one x16 single width bus powered slot , and one semi-custom half length x4 PCI-e v3 I/O card slot would work even better on both sides. Apple could squeeze in some Afterburner configs. Users would have some more card variety in the low end machine (e.g., someone who is still hooked to Firewire for so odd reason could swap in a card ... if ASi macOS still has drivers for that. ) . That would probably slide to being a bit over half as tall.

 

[deconstruct60]

Apple silicon Mac documentation suggests third-party GPU support in danger | AppleInsider

Some Apple support documentation seems to suggest that Mac shift to Apple silicon will drop support for non-Apple GPUs.

appleinsider.com

That really has about little to do actually do with Apple Silicon hardware ability to support 3rd party GPUs whatever.

What that primarily says is that macOS 11.0 ( Catalina) doesn't support 3rd party GPUs. That makes lots of sense if looking at the Developer Transition Kit and some 13" laptops to drive what are going to be the primary GPUs that macOS is going to interact with from June 2020 to June 2021.

If Apple's 13" laptops launch without Thunderbolt then there aren't going to be any eGPUs any more than there were eGPUs with the DTK (which had no Thunderbolt ports either). If on Tuesday don't see any Thunderbolt on the Apple Silicon systems that completely explains that graph. If it is just "USB 4" ( and doesn't match the completeness of Thunderbolt 4 of requiring all the optional USB 4 stuff) then again will very much explain that Apple is leaving stuff off in the early transition. They didn't for the DTK so they are willing not to put the work in. Apple may cut some corners on these first iteration systems to get them out the door faster.

Apple might do a complete Thunderbolt implementation on this first system(s). This could easily be a "we'll get to it later" explanation that could dribble out later. To get Thunderbolt out the door pragmatically Apple probably needs Intel TB controlers to get it done.

Early on, the first Macs shipped keyboards with no Control keys in part to blunt quick ports of programs that used lots of control key sequences to do things. Mac team wanted more "native" Mac GUI apps so only had key modifiers for what GUI menus appeared on the screen (with command/apple key).

This is likely similar in that Apple wants the ARM ports to focus on Apple GPU optimizations first and foremost. if there are no other other GPUs to port to then everyone doing a port has to focus on just one. After folks have laid the groundwork for the Apple GPU in all of their apps.... then open it up to more "distractions" (from Apple's perspective) of doing more GPUs.

Right now the large bulk of GPU deployments on Macs is to Intel GPUs ( it isn't about AMD or Nvidia. ). Erasing Intel iGPU is Apple's primary focus. The others are likely just collateral damage coupled to targeting systems that only have Intel iGPUs now. Code that at its heart wants to treat the Apple GPU like a Nvidia GPU isn't going to be as well rounded performance and battery efficiency wise as one that is optimized to the Apple GPU. ( Apple's GPUs don't 'brute force" their way to higher performance ).


Some folks have taken a WWDC 2020 chart and claimed that was an sweeping Apple declaration for the state of the world for eternality moving forward. Quite often in WWDC 20xx Apple is not giving the total complete picture of the entire state of macOS in WWDC 20xx+1 ( or + 2 ). Most often they are talking about "right now and the macOS version that is going to release that Fall". If there is some kind of "doom and gloom" forward warning they say so explicitly. This was more along the lines of "macOS 11.0 supports x, y, z".

Apple is very likely going to put a Apple iGPU into every SoC. That means that every Apple Silicon Mac will have an Apple GPU. That doesn't necessarily follow there there are no other GPUs. Just that Apple GPU will eventually be ubiquitous ( so better do optimizations for it as part of every app. )


P.S. the notion that Apple is going to 'squash' the AMD 6900 ( and RTX 3090 ) in the next 12-24 months is a huge stretch . Apple's GPUs don't play in that zip code at all. Apple is out to kick discrete GPUs out of more Mac systems. ,but all Mac systems isn't particularly creditable at this point. It is also a bit of a bust of Thunderbolt certification requirements to skip eGPUs. Apple wants to kick "everybody" out of the kernel but banning 3rd party GPUs isn't technically necessary.

 

[ondioline]

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).

no, pcie is its own standard distinct from the processor architecture. not sure why they think that lol

 

[IA64]

no, pcie is its own standard distinct from the processor architecture. not sure why they think that lol

Because you need drivers? Not every PCIe card works on Mac X64 OS so you can assume the majority of the PCIE cards won't be supported unless the driver has been compiled for ARM64...

 

[bsbeamer]

The path forward entirely relies on how this ARM GPU/eGPU support is handled, unless Apple did something crazy like somehow embrace Linux drivers within the OS. We’ll likely have minor updates in the next 2-3 years, but that could have an expiration date if it is entirely closed system with Apple-based GPU options only for ARM.

Already hearing from business partners they won’t go ARM for 3+ years (if ever) until Apple proves the update cycle and expectations. They refuse to be first generation purchasers, partially because cost/benefit and long term value is too hard to determine right now.

 

[OkiRun]

The path forward entirely relies on how this ARM GPU/eGPU support is handled, unless Apple did something crazy like somehow embrace Linux drivers within the OS. We’ll likely have minor updates in the next 2-3 years, but that could have an expiration date if it is entirely closed system with Apple-based GPU options only for ARM.

Already hearing from business partners they won’t go ARM for 3+ years (if ever) until Apple proves the update cycle and expectations. They refuse to be first generation purchasers, partially because cost/benefit and long term value is too hard to determine right now.

I think the AS Mac Pro initial sales will be from those waiting on the xMac and those (if lucky) who see the asking price managable and worth ditching their 1.1-5.1 machines and hackintoshes. Or simply, just adding the 8,1 to their other computers.

 

[mattspace]

The path forward entirely relies on how this ARM GPU/eGPU support is handled, unless Apple did something crazy like somehow embrace Linux drivers within the OS. We’ll likely have minor updates in the next 2-3 years, but that could have an expiration date if it is entirely closed system with Apple-based GPU options only for ARM.

Already hearing from business partners they won’t go ARM for 3+ years (if ever) until Apple proves the update cycle and expectations. They refuse to be first generation purchasers, partially because cost/benefit and long term value is too hard to determine right now.

What I can't get my head around is why anyone would want their graphics card drivers, or indeed any peripheral driver, to be built-in to the OS, and therefore bound to operating system updates.

 

[bsbeamer]

What I can't get my head around is why anyone would want their graphics card drivers, or indeed any peripheral driver, to be built-in to the OS, and therefore bound to operating system updates.

For the non-technical or users who don’t know difference between dGPU/eGPU/GPU, it kind of makes sense. For “power” users who want to squeeze performance and actually know the difference, having a “web driver” option like NVIDIA would be nice.

Can’t see that happening with Apple products again. All signs pointing to them wanting to control the METAL experience everywhere. When software vendors stop playing ball, or it becomes too much of a burden to update, things might change. Would take a lot of big players like Avid, Adobe, Maxon, and maybe even Autodesk to start that ball rolling.

 

[mattspace]

For the non-technical or users who don’t know difference between dGPU/eGPU/GPU, it kind of makes sense. For “power” users who want to squeeze performance and actually know the difference, having a “web driver” option like NVIDIA would be nice.

Can’t see that happening with Apple products again. All signs pointing to them wanting to control the METAL experience everywhere. When software vendors stop playing ball, or it becomes too much of a burden to update, things might change. Would take a lot of big players like Avid, Adobe, Maxon, and maybe even Autodesk to start that ball rolling.

Well yeah, but also, for people who have a stable system, and just want a fix to a graphics bug, rather than having to install a whole new operating system. Again, I hae trouble getting my head around the idea that to use a new GPU, I have to give up iTunes.

That's where things come back to the Nvidia thing - Nvidia has customers, THEIR customers, for which Apple's computers were just a commodified dumb pipe to their chosen GPU. Apple's Metal strategy has been explicitly about commodifying GPUs into being transparent & replaceable.

Nvidia reacted the same way you'd expect Apple to react if they were told to commodify their Mac business, by making macOS available for non-Apple hardware.

 

[deconstruct60]

What I can't get my head around is why anyone would want their graphics card drivers, or indeed any peripheral driver, to be built-in to the OS, and therefore bound to operating system updates.

Apple is moving all of the peripheral drivers out of the kernel into System Extensions. System Extensions can be distributed through the Mac App store. Apple more tightening drivers to the operating system distribution? Apple is on the completely opposite tract. They are trying to turn it into mainstream app distribution system.

It isn't the easiest path but the GPU could be moved out over time also. If they go they'd be the last to go. GPU drivers don't need complete unfettered access to the whole kernel address to get done what they should be doing. There is a narrow access area needed.

 

[deconstruct60]

The path forward entirely relies on how this ARM GPU/eGPU support is handled, unless Apple did something crazy like somehow embrace Linux drivers within the OS.

Trying to jam Linux drivers into the macOS kernel space is one of the contributing reasons why Apple is on path to kicking 3rd parties out of the kernel space.

 

[ArPe]

All I need is 4 slots. 1 or 2 for GPU, 1 for a bunch of m.2 drives and 1 more in case I want to add more USB ports.

 

[ssgbryan]

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.

It is probably too late for that. It certainly is for me. Apple isn't interested in the hobbyist market anymore. We are more trouble than we are worth to apple.

If a base 8,1 is half of the price of a 7,1 - it will still be outperformed (at a lower cost) by what is available now.

You aren't just replacing the hardware - you are also replacing all of the software - That will take a couple of years, and assumes that all of the software you need will be ported.

 

[bsbeamer]

This talk of the M1 chip with integrated GPU is not exactly promising, though it does have integrated Thunderbolt 4 so eGPU theoretically would be possible.

 

[ondioline]

Because you need drivers? Not every PCIe card works on Mac X64 OS so you can assume the majority of the PCIE cards won't be supported unless the driver has been compiled for ARM64...

arm64e is already a compiler target for kexts. not to mention theres an entire driverkit framework literally dedicated to PCIE:

PCIDriverKit | Apple Developer Documentation

Develop device drivers for Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI) accessories.

developer.apple.com

 

[IA64]

Well yeah, but also, for people who have a stable system, and just want a fix to a graphics bug, rather than having to install a whole new operating system. Again, I hae trouble getting my head around the idea that to use a new GPU, I have to give up iTunes.

That's where things come back to the Nvidia thing - Nvidia has customers, THEIR customers, for which Apple's computers were just a commodified dumb pipe to their chosen GPU. Apple's Metal strategy has been explicitly about commodifying GPUs into being transparent & replaceable.

Nvidia reacted the same way you'd expect Apple to react if they were told to commodify their Mac business, by making macOS available for non-Apple hardware.

arm64e is already a compiler target for kexts. not to mention theres an entire driverkit framework literally dedicated to PCIE:

PCIDriverKit | Apple Developer Documentation

Develop device drivers for Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI) accessories.

developer.apple.com

I did not say it wasn't possible. I said it won't be available right away. It might take time and I don't think manufacturers will immediately release a compatible one, that's if anyone is interested.

 

[bsbeamer]

Not good news for Apple ARM eGPU, might have trickle down impact for PCIe GPU:

M1 MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and Mac Mini Not Compatible With eGPUs

Apple's new M1-equipped MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and Mac mini do not appear to be compatible with eGPUs, including the Blackmagic eGPU that...

www.macrumors.com

 

[mattspace]

Not good news for Apple ARM eGPU, might have trickle down impact for PCIe GPU:

M1 MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and Mac Mini Not Compatible With eGPUs

Apple's new M1-equipped MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and Mac mini do not appear to be compatible with eGPUs, including the Blackmagic eGPU that...

www.macrumors.com

So, less RAM than the Intel versions, you can't boot to windows, so you have to virtualise non-natively in that limited ram capacity, you only get half the TB ports, and their functionality is a step backwards to TB1/2 times, losing a thing that was one of the original selling points of Light Peak when first demonstrated.

*sarcastic 80s movie clap*

 

[IA64]

So, less RAM than the Intel versions, you can't boot to windows, so you have to virtualise non-natively in that limited ram capacity, you only get half the TB ports, and their functionality is a step backwards to TB1/2 times, losing the one thing that was one of the original selling points of Light Peak when first demonstrated.

*sarcastic 80s movie clap*

That's very expected and that's why as I mentioned last month, the Mac Pro will be the last Apple computer I'm buying in the next 5 years if ever.

 

[mattspace]

That's very expected and that's why as I mentioned last month, the Mac Pro will be the last Apple computer I'm buying in the next 5 years if ever.

I was actually giving serious thought to whether I could work with a laptop in a Brydge vertical dock, plugged into an eGU running my screens. Big nope on that, it would seem.

 

[bsbeamer]

Seems across the board for M1. Maybe an M1Pro/M1X or M2/3 model would be different? Hard to know until they say something or release.

This is not the initial roadmap many wanted to see. Explains a lot about the concerns pro video developers were having about lack of GPU insight for Apple ARM moving forward.

 

[ArPe]

So, less RAM than the Intel versions, you can't boot to windows, so you have to virtualise non-natively in that limited ram capacity, you only get half the TB ports, and their functionality is a step backwards to TB1/2 times, losing a thing that was one of the original selling points of Light Peak when first demonstrated.

*sarcastic 80s movie clap*

The new Macs are entry models for the new generation. When the more Pro oriented machines come out there will be support for more ram, more ports, etc. They first have to get the basics right and get all developers porting their apps.

 

[deconstruct60]

Not good news for Apple ARM eGPU, might have trickle down impact for PCIe GPU:

M1 MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and Mac Mini Not Compatible With eGPUs

Apple's new M1-equipped MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and Mac mini do not appear to be compatible with eGPUs, including the Blackmagic eGPU that...

www.macrumors.com

Really should be zero surprises here given the macOS on "Apple Silicon" support for GPUs chart from WWDC .
An eGPU still needs a GPU driver. The chart had zero non Apple GPU support. Apple isn't building a discrete GPU so there are zero cards to go into a eGPU enclosure that has driver support. Hence......

no eGPU support. That was a basically an implicitly known quantity months back ... this just consistent with that. ( so status quo hasn't changed. ) .

Given the DTK didn't even have Thunderbolt not sure what the other 3rd party GPU driver devs would work with to make progress on anyway. If don't give folks systems to do work on then shouldn't be surprising that no work gets done. Was 3rd party GPU driver development in a "chicken or the egg" situation? Finally, not having some non "super secret" systems to do work with could help uncork that loop.

 

[deconstruct60]

This talk of the M1 chip with integrated GPU is not exactly promising, though it does have integrated Thunderbolt 4 so eGPU theoretically would be possible.

eGPU was largely mostly a OS support and driver issue. ( hot plug PCI-e driver support and interactions with GPU drivers). The other complication here is that Apple is overhauling the driver model for both Intel and ARM macos instances. ( probably a bigger deal on the new macOS on ARM work. )