We could start a petition
We tried it for the construction of a death star and it didn't work.
What you are asking is WAY, WAY more difficult
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.
Continue Mac Pro Classic alongside the new Mac Pro
- Thread starter zephonic
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
We tried it for the construction of a death star and it didn't work.
What you are asking is WAY, WAY more difficult
I dunno. I think it would be cool when TB2 -> PCIe enclosures get down around $100 to $150 to start adding GTX 580 to 680 cards in large quantities - as GPGPU devices. I can see the 670's being about $150 in a very short time. Sixteen (16) of those would only be about $3k (including such enclosures), and still probably under the bandwidth limits most of the time. I want to use them as for real-time video rendering and maybe write a plug-in for LW3D to use them as Final Render Engine renders.
New "Classic" Mac Pro?
What are the chances of Apple releasing a "Classic" Mac Pro alongside the iTube? Have a great intro for the new one and then a "Oh and for those that still need something more traditional...here ya go..." just with current processors and IO, maybe minus Thunderbolt.
I guess we can dream right? I would welcome it but at the same time it would be pretty annoying since I just went balls out on a new 2012 system to hold me down the next few years.
What are the chances of Apple releasing a "Classic" Mac Pro alongside the iTube? Have a great intro for the new one and then a "Oh and for those that still need something more traditional...here ya go..." just with current processors and IO, maybe minus Thunderbolt.
I guess we can dream right? I would welcome it but at the same time it would be pretty annoying since I just went balls out on a new 2012 system to hold me down the next few years.
Zero chance because they do not want any potential product stealing sales away from their new Mac Pro. It makes zero sense for apple to promote a Mac Pro with no internal expansion, stating the TB is the wave of the future and you don't need internal expansion, then to offer a classic MP with internal expansion.
The classic MBP was discontinued way before the Retina MBP even existed. THe MBPs that exist today are the unibody and unibody retina. Neither of those are the classic MBP.
Laptops are a much bigger market.
The Mac Pro is already in a small niche that is getting smaller. When this new Mac Pro doesn't sell well, and I don't think it will long term, Apple will discontinue the "Mac Pro" altogether and state there isn't a market for "desktops". They will totally discount the real reasons WHY there is no longer a market for it - the entry price continuing to rise, no significant updates for 4 years and now a most likely high priced model without the internal expansion and storage options and upgradability many "Pros" wanted.
I think Apple IS trying to reinvent that market and I'll give them some credit for that, but IMO unless the new Mac Pro starts in the $1500-$1750 range (where their tower systems USED TO START) it isn't going to work.
/rant
They may. When the G5 came out, they sold the non-Firewire 800 MDD G4 for a while. They also kept the iMac G3 steaming right along after the iMac G4 was introduced. It has happened before, but that was when Apple was a computer company.
Apple didn't kill it the EU did. Some sort of issue with the fans that didn't meet the new EU standards. Rather than reengineer a machine about to be replaced, Apple decided to let the current reseller stock of machines be sold off, but not import any new machines.
Lou
I'd probably buy one in a heartbeat (price/specs dependent, of course). Like many of you, the last thing I want is external expansion all over my desk. I have four HDDs and one Blu-ray drive at the moment and I don't see that decreasing!
They only did that for the sake of bootable OS 9. Sure, the price was lower, but that was likely just a side effect.
Maybe its semantics but EU didn't discontinue the Mac Pro. They told apple to stop selling the current design and fix the issue. Apple chose instead to stop the Mac Pro outright instead of fixing it.
This is probably the most telling reason why no one will see a "classic" Mac Pro. They chose not to fix an issue but stop selling it, therefore its highly unlikely they would start putting $$ to sell it now especially when the new Mac Pro is their main focus.
ust an idea...
This is slightly off-topic, but addresses the main issue. Would it be possible for some tech savvy and enterprising folks to:
1. View the iBarrel as what it is, a core computer.
2. Pull the computer innards out of cheesegrater cases.
3. Re-configure the case as a big quiet expansion module (with potentially even more expansion room).
4. Maybe create an aggregated six input/output thunderbolt cable (Yeah it would be expensive, like everything TB). Sort of like a live music snake cable) so there's only one cable from the iBarrel to the cheesegrater expansion case). Guess there'd also need to be adapters in the cheesegrater case (need them anyway, so that doesn't change anything). But that might solve the tangle of cables issue. Maybe same idea with USB3.
5. Then the outboard system could remain stable, quiet and easily upgradable. And the core computer could be upgraded simply by pulling the snake connectors and reattaching them to a newer iBarrel.
Just an idea. I'm not tech savvy enough to know the issues.
This is slightly off-topic, but addresses the main issue. Would it be possible for some tech savvy and enterprising folks to:
1. View the iBarrel as what it is, a core computer.
2. Pull the computer innards out of cheesegrater cases.
3. Re-configure the case as a big quiet expansion module (with potentially even more expansion room).
4. Maybe create an aggregated six input/output thunderbolt cable (Yeah it would be expensive, like everything TB). Sort of like a live music snake cable) so there's only one cable from the iBarrel to the cheesegrater expansion case). Guess there'd also need to be adapters in the cheesegrater case (need them anyway, so that doesn't change anything). But that might solve the tangle of cables issue. Maybe same idea with USB3.
5. Then the outboard system could remain stable, quiet and easily upgradable. And the core computer could be upgraded simply by pulling the snake connectors and reattaching them to a newer iBarrel.
Just an idea. I'm not tech savvy enough to know the issues.
What's so great about the new processors?
From what I've seen, the new Ivy Bridge E5 CPU's are maybe 5% faster than the previous SB which are perhaps 10% faster clock for clock than what's in the 2012. The CPUs all seem like incremental improvements over the last couple of generations.
The lure of the new Mac Pro (to most) is in the overall "system" with dual GPU's, PCIe SSD and thunderbolt. Together with the latest CPUs that's a compelling upgrade. Otherwise, it's just more of the same.
I know a lot of people wish for an updated classic, but when it came time to pay, would you buy a classic with updated CPUs for the same or slightly less than the new Mac Pro?
Would you seriously be happy with another Classic Mac Pro for another 3-5 years with the possibility that many vendors might abandon PCIe in favour of TB?
The Intel tick/tock updates normally come every year. ( It is over a year in the E5 zone but the underlying micro-architecture improvements are roughly of that period cycle). Since they come regularly and often, why would they not be incremental?
What is Intel going to do with a single 12-24 design cycle that is going to generally improve things 40-50%? If there was alot of fat and ineffeciencies in the design perhaps but this is an over two decades old instruction set (even x86-64/amd64 is almost 14 years old at this point. )
The stark reality is that most users in this class don't upgrade every year. Most users jump multiple generations. So at 10% per year increments ....
year n+1 1.1x ( 10% )
year n+2 1.1 ( 1.1x ) ( 21% )
year n+3 1.1( 1.1 ( 1.1 x)) ( 31% )
Year n+4 1.1( 1.1 ( 1.1 ( 1.1x))) ( 46% )
Folks updating every 4-5 years would see 45+% jumps per core. Throw in some increased core count for possibly more money and can blow away 3-4 year old stuff on performance.
If make it less then are going to drag in the xMac folks. Doesn't really say much about the Mac Pro.
If Apple kept a "classic" box, if possible, it likely would be more so a dedicated dual processor box which would push the entry price for that variant up, not down.
Intel's been focusing on "performance per watt" more than outright performance since around when the first gen Core iX/Nehalem processors came out. (See http://www.intel.com/content/www/xr...1200-small-business-performance-per-watt.html).
Where the new Mac Pro wins out is all-out efficiency. In the same TDP that used to be required for A 3.46GHz (3.73GHz Turbo Boost v1) 6-core Xeon W3690, you can now get a Xeon E5-2697 v2 2.7GHz (3.5GHz Turbo Boost v2) 12-core. 12-cores in the physical and thermal place as 6 cores of the previous gen. The new Ivy Bridge E5 v2 may be roughly the same speed, or slightly faster than a set of dual 3.46GHz Westmeres, but it's just a much more efficient processor that includes new instructions for better video encoding, and other instructions and enhancements that the Westmeres do not - many of them leading to the further efficiency. Assuming all performance figures being equal, Intel squeezed what once was potentially 240w of heat dissipation requirements during regular use, into 120w. And Apple never shipped the 3.46GHz chips in single or dual CPU form to begin with.
That being said, I don't think the GPUs used will be W9000s, else they will be highly underclocked/defeatured (or as some have said, just a plain consumer chip) since they EACH have a TDP of 274w, and it's unlikely that the little machine will sustain that level of heat.
So, Kudos to Apple for using an off-the-shelf chip that's modern and enables a smaller form factor. Thumbs down (from me) for making a form factor that abuses that gain to make a system unnecessarily small, eliminating internal storage/high speed PCIe-based upgradeability. However, I'm not their target market anymore.
The 12-core 2.7GHz CPU Apple is featuring is their new top-of-the-line, and the GPUs they're featuring are likely close to top-of-the-line (vs. their PC counterparts). The more pedestrian configurations (6/8-core?) will necessarily be on par/slightly better than a six-core from the previous generation. Since the CPUs aren't significantly faster, Apple is of course marketing memory bandwidth numbers, PCIe 3.0 vs 2.0 numbers, and combined GPU FLOPS, when in the real-world, ultimate bandwidth isn't the sole measure of a system's performance...but the Prosumers that Apple is intelligently aiming for will eat it up.
Sure, you can't expect Apple to completely leapfrog and destroy a 12-core system they never shipped, or outpace the innovation of the industry, which is moving towards lower and lower power CPUs, with performance as a secondary concern, and integrating GPUs into all low-end and midrange solutions as another area of investment. Rather than integrate the GPU into the CPU, Apple's shipping with 2 GPUs and it looks like they're hoping to leverage OpenCL and lure in a mix of Prosumers who want a nice looking statement-making black cylinder, and legitimate low-to-mid-level video pros, who are used to and fine with external storage.
As BMW likes to say, "An entry-level M-car is a used M-car" - And I managed to pick up a bare bones 2009 Mac Pro for $300 after I sold off its parts, and turned it into a 6-core 3.46/24GB/Sata 6G SSD RAID/GeForce 680GTX/USB 3.0 system for a little over $2400. The "Classic" Mac Pro is a used Mac Pro.
And like the E46 M3 vs the E92 M3, neither is completely "better" and they both have their plusses and minuses. Thanks to the used market and folks like MacVidCards/Netkas, as well as folks who post useful info in these forums, we can build Mac Pros that can still hang with Apple's latest, performance-wise, with the benefit to some of more internal storage/expandability. We'll have to wait and see whether Apple is able to pull a minor miracle on price to make upgrading an older system non-economical for do-it-yourself-ers, however. I'm skeptical.
Fact is, they've stopped marketing to folks like (most of) us who want to open their systems, swap CPUs, video cards, and put in whatever drives we want, and I don't see that changing....but from what I can tell from talking to my less-technical peers and friends who are drooling over it, part of the new target demographic, it will sell just fine.
Where the new Mac Pro wins out is all-out efficiency. In the same TDP that used to be required for A 3.46GHz (3.73GHz Turbo Boost v1) 6-core Xeon W3690, you can now get a Xeon E5-2697 v2 2.7GHz (3.5GHz Turbo Boost v2) 12-core. 12-cores in the physical and thermal place as 6 cores of the previous gen. The new Ivy Bridge E5 v2 may be roughly the same speed, or slightly faster than a set of dual 3.46GHz Westmeres, but it's just a much more efficient processor that includes new instructions for better video encoding, and other instructions and enhancements that the Westmeres do not - many of them leading to the further efficiency. Assuming all performance figures being equal, Intel squeezed what once was potentially 240w of heat dissipation requirements during regular use, into 120w. And Apple never shipped the 3.46GHz chips in single or dual CPU form to begin with.
That being said, I don't think the GPUs used will be W9000s, else they will be highly underclocked/defeatured (or as some have said, just a plain consumer chip) since they EACH have a TDP of 274w, and it's unlikely that the little machine will sustain that level of heat.
So, Kudos to Apple for using an off-the-shelf chip that's modern and enables a smaller form factor. Thumbs down (from me) for making a form factor that abuses that gain to make a system unnecessarily small, eliminating internal storage/high speed PCIe-based upgradeability. However, I'm not their target market anymore.
The 12-core 2.7GHz CPU Apple is featuring is their new top-of-the-line, and the GPUs they're featuring are likely close to top-of-the-line (vs. their PC counterparts). The more pedestrian configurations (6/8-core?) will necessarily be on par/slightly better than a six-core from the previous generation. Since the CPUs aren't significantly faster, Apple is of course marketing memory bandwidth numbers, PCIe 3.0 vs 2.0 numbers, and combined GPU FLOPS, when in the real-world, ultimate bandwidth isn't the sole measure of a system's performance...but the Prosumers that Apple is intelligently aiming for will eat it up.
Sure, you can't expect Apple to completely leapfrog and destroy a 12-core system they never shipped, or outpace the innovation of the industry, which is moving towards lower and lower power CPUs, with performance as a secondary concern, and integrating GPUs into all low-end and midrange solutions as another area of investment. Rather than integrate the GPU into the CPU, Apple's shipping with 2 GPUs and it looks like they're hoping to leverage OpenCL and lure in a mix of Prosumers who want a nice looking statement-making black cylinder, and legitimate low-to-mid-level video pros, who are used to and fine with external storage.
As BMW likes to say, "An entry-level M-car is a used M-car" - And I managed to pick up a bare bones 2009 Mac Pro for $300 after I sold off its parts, and turned it into a 6-core 3.46/24GB/Sata 6G SSD RAID/GeForce 680GTX/USB 3.0 system for a little over $2400. The "Classic" Mac Pro is a used Mac Pro.
And like the E46 M3 vs the E92 M3, neither is completely "better" and they both have their plusses and minuses. Thanks to the used market and folks like MacVidCards/Netkas, as well as folks who post useful info in these forums, we can build Mac Pros that can still hang with Apple's latest, performance-wise, with the benefit to some of more internal storage/expandability. We'll have to wait and see whether Apple is able to pull a minor miracle on price to make upgrading an older system non-economical for do-it-yourself-ers, however. I'm skeptical.
Fact is, they've stopped marketing to folks like (most of) us who want to open their systems, swap CPUs, video cards, and put in whatever drives we want, and I don't see that changing....but from what I can tell from talking to my less-technical peers and friends who are drooling over it, part of the new target demographic, it will sell just fine.
Last edited:
No.....
chance for me. For the reasons another posters had said. Make more sense for me, a fire sale for burning out the remaining inventory and let the new Pro have a "created need"....
chance for me. For the reasons another posters had said. Make more sense for me, a fire sale for burning out the remaining inventory and let the new Pro have a "created need"....
I genuinely think that this is one of the classic Apple situations where they generally believe that the compromises they made with the new machine (mostly internal expandability) are greatly worth it for direction that they're going in.
I think that they really took their time with the new Pro and had to make some hard choices. But in a few years down the road, these choices will probably be recognized as the right ones.
I think that they really took their time with the new Pro and had to make some hard choices. But in a few years down the road, these choices will probably be recognized as the right ones.