I would go with a single Vega II for now. I ran that setup for one year now and it was wonderful, just now slapped a second one in because Amazon had it 1000€ discounted and I wanted the machine in the shape how it was originally intended and couldn’t swallow this cost upfront. It’s noticeable here and there, feels a bit snappier during export in premiere and resolve huuuuuugely faster (almost twice) but not during actual CC work. I still can’t playback the same projects that were choppy before in resolve, still don’t reach 25fps, which is super frustrating. So I would for now also just get the single and wait and observe.
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.
MP 7,1 Does it make sense to purchase a 7,1 Mac Pro today?
- Thread starter ghostwind
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Just like cars you also need to consider resale value.
A 3 year old MP is still worth quite a bit of money, esp. if it's not a low-end one.
There's quite some demand on 2nd hand sites for older high performance macs and they do sell easily.
A 3 year old "PC" ... much less so - in fact I doubt they sell well at all.
IT investments typically have a horizon beyond which you cannot see reliably.
- For slow changing devices with very mature products: 5 years really is pushing it in the IT world.
- For things like computers in general 3 years is more than hard enough to predict things.
- With Apple having started their transition from Intel to Apple Silicon: for macs it's now much, much harder to predict what will happen in the future, esp. if you're looking at an Intel based machine.
On that latter point: the M1, as impressive as it is, seems to be the lowest entry Apple is going to make over the next year or two. Apple has not shown their cards in any way what they'll do for their high-end machines. Trying to predict that even for the next year is thus extremely tricky.
Hence: look at it like a business investment, not like an emotional thing.
You have needs (now).
You also have wishes (now)
You have options (now) that can fulfill those needs, they come at a cost.
Look at all the hidden costs too. Essentially the "tocal cost of ownership" Esp. the support you need and the level it comes at is important not to forget if you're looking at different brands.
Don't try to write off the costs of machines beyond the earlier entioned horizon, it's too tricky and you'll never get it right. Write it off within the horizon and do take into account a resale value at the end of that horizon period. If you keep it longer or not at the end of the horizon period is a decision for then, not one for now.
That way: the decision becomes easy - an economics one - not an emotional one as those cloud everything.
- For slow changing devices with very mature products: 5 years really is pushing it in the IT world.
- For things like computers in general 3 years is more than hard enough to predict things.
- With Apple having started their transition from Intel to Apple Silicon: for macs it's now much, much harder to predict what will happen in the future, esp. if you're looking at an Intel based machine.
On that latter point: the M1, as impressive as it is, seems to be the lowest entry Apple is going to make over the next year or two. Apple has not shown their cards in any way what they'll do for their high-end machines. Trying to predict that even for the next year is thus extremely tricky.
Hence: look at it like a business investment, not like an emotional thing.
You have needs (now).
You also have wishes (now)
You have options (now) that can fulfill those needs, they come at a cost.
Look at all the hidden costs too. Essentially the "tocal cost of ownership" Esp. the support you need and the level it comes at is important not to forget if you're looking at different brands.
Don't try to write off the costs of machines beyond the earlier entioned horizon, it's too tricky and you'll never get it right. Write it off within the horizon and do take into account a resale value at the end of that horizon period. If you keep it longer or not at the end of the horizon period is a decision for then, not one for now.
That way: the decision becomes easy - an economics one - not an emotional one as those cloud everything.
I bought 2 7.1 Mac Pro's recently. 1 for $1000. another for $1400.
I LOVE them. The design. the quietness The easy access to upgrading the ram and the processor.
Not too easy to find 700 series video cards but possible.
So easy to disassemble the whole trash can Mac and clean and put back together.
GO FOR IT!
M1 Macs are non upgradable and throw away Macs. a glorified iPad Pro with a keyboard.
Never going that route. WHY?? I can buy an M1 iPad Pro and and keyboard and end up with same thing.
The Future for creative Pros and Computer horsepower now belongs to Windows OS and Intel and AMD.
Apple took the eco friendly route with ARM.
I LOVE them. The design. the quietness The easy access to upgrading the ram and the processor.
Not too easy to find 700 series video cards but possible.
So easy to disassemble the whole trash can Mac and clean and put back together.
GO FOR IT!
M1 Macs are non upgradable and throw away Macs. a glorified iPad Pro with a keyboard.
Never going that route. WHY?? I can buy an M1 iPad Pro and and keyboard and end up with same thing.
The Future for creative Pros and Computer horsepower now belongs to Windows OS and Intel and AMD.
Apple took the eco friendly route with ARM.
Huh? the 7,1 is a (huge) tower - I'm not sure which country's dollars those are, but if it's USD: they are worth a lot more than that.
The 6,1 is the "trashcan" design - the good ones still go for a lot more than that amount AFAIK (I sold ours for a lot more)
An M1 mac is for sure not an iPad with a keyboard. There is simply no comparison in what you can do with them.
And you are hugely mistaken as to the performance of the M1. Yes it's using a lot less power - but it is also more powerful than what Intel churns out by a serious margin. (esp at the same power consumption, intel nor AMD have anything that comes even remotely close). Even our beefy Xenon MP7,1s pale in some aspects to the low-end M1 while they use a ton more energy to do less than what the M1 can do.
Same: the "AMD" story is a part of the story as that's just an instruction set of the CPU cores. The M1 is far more than a few CPU cores. It also sports an impressive GPU, a neural engine, a image signal processor, and much more integrated hardware beyond anything designed at AMD.
Last edited:
Prores 4444 4K not in general but with heavy noise reduction and several grading nodes + grain.
Actually it's longer but independent route that happens to be eco friendly yet very promising.
At your own convenience, and with no particular time frame in mind, would you consider running my little "benchmark" here:
DaVinci Resolve: Rocket Science ?
It's a smallish (265MB) download and a pre-made project with various grades that get increasingly heavier for the computer. They aren't beauty grades, but standardised grades used in this kind of test for many years.
It's not a normal benchmark that runs by itself and spits out a number, but you just play back the clips and note the fps you get on the Color page.
Everyone else is equally invited to run it. I'm trying to collect UHD data in this test that was previously based on a HD clip. Also, for more assistance or questions, just post in the benchmark thread and I'll be happy to help there. Thanks!
I would absolutely do everything I could to avoid buying a 7, 1. Last few paragraphs of this article indicate where Apple's high-end desktops are heading:
www.bloomberg.com
"For higher-end desktop computers, planned for later in 2021 and a new half-sized Mac Pro planned to launch by 2022, Apple is testing a chip design with as many as 32 high-performance cores.
With today’s Intel systems, Apple’s highest-end laptops offer a maximum of eight cores, a high-end iMac Pro is available with as many as 18 and the priciest Mac Pro desktop features as much as a 28-core system. Though architecturally different, Apple and Intel’s chips rely on the segmentation of workloads into smaller, serialized tasks that several processing cores can work on at once.
Apple engineers are also developing more ambitious graphics processors. Today’s M1 processors are offered with a custom Apple graphics engine that comes in either 7- or 8-core variations. For its future high-end laptops and mid-range desktops, Apple is testing 16-core and 32-core graphics parts.
For later in 2021 or potentially 2022, Apple is working on pricier graphics upgrades with 64 and 128 dedicated cores aimed at its highest-end machines, the people said. Those graphics chips would be several times faster than the current graphics modules Apple uses from Nvidia and AMD in its Intel-powered hardware."
Just get yourself a Mac or PC to get through the next 12 months. Don't spend silly money on a dead end like the 7, 1. That machine is over.
Apple Preps Next Mac Chips With Aim to Outclass Top-End PCs
Apple Inc. is planning a series of new Mac processors for introduction as early as 2021 that are aimed at outperforming Intel Corp.’s fastest.
www.bloomberg.com
"For higher-end desktop computers, planned for later in 2021 and a new half-sized Mac Pro planned to launch by 2022, Apple is testing a chip design with as many as 32 high-performance cores.
With today’s Intel systems, Apple’s highest-end laptops offer a maximum of eight cores, a high-end iMac Pro is available with as many as 18 and the priciest Mac Pro desktop features as much as a 28-core system. Though architecturally different, Apple and Intel’s chips rely on the segmentation of workloads into smaller, serialized tasks that several processing cores can work on at once.
Apple engineers are also developing more ambitious graphics processors. Today’s M1 processors are offered with a custom Apple graphics engine that comes in either 7- or 8-core variations. For its future high-end laptops and mid-range desktops, Apple is testing 16-core and 32-core graphics parts.
For later in 2021 or potentially 2022, Apple is working on pricier graphics upgrades with 64 and 128 dedicated cores aimed at its highest-end machines, the people said. Those graphics chips would be several times faster than the current graphics modules Apple uses from Nvidia and AMD in its Intel-powered hardware."
Just get yourself a Mac or PC to get through the next 12 months. Don't spend silly money on a dead end like the 7, 1. That machine is over.
Having recently picked up a used 7.1, I still say: these changes in the article can't come soon enough. It's exactly where I want Apple to be.
It's only positive if Apple can turn their workstation role from a glorified case maker to an actual computer maker again. That will in turn increase their real interest in workstation. The 7.1 design is extremely nice (subjective) but its legs are tied loosely together by its reliance on 3rd party components.
I have absolutely zero angst that Apple will pull this out of their hat at a "much faster than expected pace", thereby making my 7.1 age prematurely. We will of course see hardware outperforming the M1 next year already. And just like the M1, these MacBook Pros and iMacs will be amazing in selected benchmarks. But as a complete solution, taking both hardware and software into account, I think we'll have to wait for the new Mac Pro Mini before seeing the real potential of Apples new CPU and GPU grunt.
As a generalist, I'm really hoping that all of this solves the tiresome dependency on CUDA processing in 3D apps. We will have to wait and see what software developers get on board with moving to native Apple Silicon. But I think those that do will be rewarded when their software runs circles around the competition.
Nothing about the previous rumor circus around the 7.1 was fast. It was glacial. Wasn't it at least 3 years between first leaks to actual launch?
All in all, very happy to see some new, credible rumours on the future and what's to come.
I think this announcement makes it a good time to reflect on what the OP asked in his initial post. The "unknowns" are no longer that. The M-series Mac Pro is coming. And next year's iMac probably will run circles around the current MP.
If it wasn't for the outcry from pro customers, it's questionable if Apple would have even bothered with the 7,1. Apple has been working on these chips for several years now but they clearly weren't ready. Now they almost are. A 32-core Apple Silicon Mac Pro is going to lay waste to the current lineup and destroy any resale value in the Intel machines.
This is not going to be a "glacial" transition. Apple clearly wants this done as quick as possible. The Intel support countdown clock is now well and truly ticking.
For once with Apple, the roadmap is clear. Let's look at the title of this thread again: Does it make sense to purchase a 7,1 Mac Pro today?
No. It does not.
Running circles: yes. If they can't do that, they failed.
Resale value: nope. the crowds that want bootcamp or virtual windows machines need the intel machines.
Yeah, so after more thinking last night, I decided not to get the Mac Pro or any PC for now. I will milk my MBP for the next 6-9 months, add an eGPU, transcode if I need to, use proxies, etc., and my stop-gap might be an ARM iMac or 16" MBP until the ARM Mac Pro is out, as the ARM iMacs and ARM MBPs will have great resale value after 1 year or so, when hopefully the ARM Mac Pro is out.
I also feel that Apple will make this transition faster than advertised, which is why I worry about support as well. They did that with the Intel transition, and they weren't even in control of those chips. So it's a very likely possibility. But even if not, again, an ARM iMac or ARM 16" MBP in 6-9 months would be my stop-gaps for what looks like about 1 year.
I also feel that Apple will make this transition faster than advertised, which is why I worry about support as well. They did that with the Intel transition, and they weren't even in control of those chips. So it's a very likely possibility. But even if not, again, an ARM iMac or ARM 16" MBP in 6-9 months would be my stop-gaps for what looks like about 1 year.
Last edited:
Just read that myself....... ?I would absolutely do everything I could to avoid buying a 7, 1. Last few paragraphs of this article indicate where Apple's high-end desktops are heading:
Apple Preps Next Mac Chips With Aim to Outclass Top-End PCs
Apple Inc. is planning a series of new Mac processors for introduction as early as 2021 that are aimed at outperforming Intel Corp.’s fastest.
"For higher-end desktop computers, planned for later in 2021 and a new half-sized Mac Pro planned to launch by 2022, Apple is testing a chip design with as many as 32 high-performance cores.
With today’s Intel systems, Apple’s highest-end laptops offer a maximum of eight cores, a high-end iMac Pro is available with as many as 18 and the priciest Mac Pro desktop features as much as a 28-core system. Though architecturally different, Apple and Intel’s chips rely on the segmentation of workloads into smaller, serialized tasks that several processing cores can work on at once.
Apple engineers are also developing more ambitious graphics processors. Today’s M1 processors are offered with a custom Apple graphics engine that comes in either 7- or 8-core variations. For its future high-end laptops and mid-range desktops, Apple is testing 16-core and 32-core graphics parts.
For later in 2021 or potentially 2022, Apple is working on pricier graphics upgrades with 64 and 128 dedicated cores aimed at its highest-end machines, the people said. Those graphics chips would be several times faster than the current graphics modules Apple uses from Nvidia and AMD in its Intel-powered hardware."
Just get yourself a Mac or PC to get through the next 12 months. Don't spend silly money on a dead end like the 7, 1. That machine is over.
I really do hope they don’t knock out any ‘upgrade ability’ on the Mac Pro or mini Mac Pro.
Even with 32 cpu cores / 128 gpu cores, ram and storage still need to be addable.
Wait until the next iPad Pro arrives. There is probably not boing to be a huge gap between M1 and A14X performance wise.
Some features off on one and on in the other ? Yes. Base clock differences ? Yes But huge gap.... probably not if it is the exact same die.
The OS and set of available applications will differ too.
The backsliding on max RAM capacity. The display output backslide. The die size being approximately the same as the previous A10X and A12X (A12Z is same die as A12X). Same package size.
The M1 is probably not the whole M-series. There probably is a much more Mac focused. Not constrained by iPad Pro package physical size ( and die size) . etc.
The performance of an M1 on a 32GB working set workload is what?
Some of the performance gains Apple got is because they made trade-offs and throwing some overboard and under the bus. As long as narrow your workload and context down to the scope they targeted it is nice. Outside of that scope and it isn't the 'slam dunk' the hype portrays it out to be. Re-boot and run another OS live on the raw hardware? Gone.
This.
I'm really tired of all the hype around the M1 processor... yes the concept is nice but it's not a breakthrough... And as if AMD and Intel are sitting there watching only.. By the time Apple is done with the transition let me see them against AMD and Intel 5nm CPUs... We'll have a good laugh....
Below says it all....
Last edited:
You have got to be kidding. When do you think Intel is going to even get close to 5nm? You don’t think it’s a breakthrough because it can’t currently beat 4th Gen Ryzen in multicore? These M1’s are the entry level. They replace the i3 in the Mac Mini and get close to the i9 in the MacBook Pro 16”, all with an 18-20h battery life. Of course they’re a breakthrough.
What The_Interloper said..... ?
The crrent M1 is only 8core (4+4), it’s obviously not gonna be close to a top Ryzen in multicore.
The proposed M generation for next year sounds leaps and bounds above any AMD/intel multicore, when there talking about 32 core, that’s 4x the current M1, so who can even guess the multicore score.
As far as the original question, I am up in the air until I see what upgrade options are available (if any) on the AS Mac Pro. Benchmarks aside, if there are no end user upgrade options I will need a 7.1.
The crrent M1 is only 8core (4+4), it’s obviously not gonna be close to a top Ryzen in multicore.
The proposed M generation for next year sounds leaps and bounds above any AMD/intel multicore, when there talking about 32 core, that’s 4x the current M1, so who can even guess the multicore score.
As far as the original question, I am up in the air until I see what upgrade options are available (if any) on the AS Mac Pro. Benchmarks aside, if there are no end user upgrade options I will need a 7.1.
It's not because the CPU/GPU etc. are the same or similar that the end machine is comparable in what you can do with it.
Sure those macs can do a lot of what the iPads can but they can do much more. And true: most of the consumption of content by others will work on both of them equally well. But there are also things an iPad can do that a mac cannot as good as well.
Having the same or similar PCU/GPU/Machine Learning/image processing capabilities doesn't make the end rersult similar.
E.g.:
- Freehand drawing without an external digitiser: iPad wins no contest.
- Coding iOS apps: macOS is your only option.
It's like a tank and a truck having the same engine: what you can do with them is completely different.
Just so is it completely different what an iPad and a mac (even an entry level one) are good for.
Wait for more than the entry level machines to get more RAM. The M1s for sale now are just in the most basic macs. For the MBP and the Mini Apple stills offers the Intel machines if you need more RAM in them anyway.
Of course they did, but those users exist, and they are far more numerous than the rest of us.
The current M1 is for sure not the one for our MP8,1. But it does make those machines it is inside of run circles around the i3 machines it replaced both in performance and in power requirements. And yes: that's a huge achievement in itself.
How that translates to the MP's performance levels: Apple will not show their cards yet, there's a lot of room for them to pick and chose what they give us in the end. But they have _far_ more options open to them to pick from and balance it all to what they believe we need, than they ever had with Intel Xenons and AMD GPUs to chose from.
Good: it frees up the hardware choices to not be limited to have to be able to boot wintendo.
It is good that it will not be a PC-clone made by Apple, and that it's designed to just run macOS in the best possible way without having to be compatible with the PC world anymore. For those needing some windows: that'll fix itself in a virtual machine eventually. Just give it some time.
Last edited:
The 7,1 was always a niche computer for creatives - and was obviously a closed system from the start with little possibility of future upgrades; look at the CPU die. It was for those whose trashcans were burning out from massive workflows and needed a fix, NOW! As the demand for a new Mac Pro Tower echoed out into the ether of the space. A stop>gap computer was created to silence the echo reverberating. Apple was successful in getting out a product that worked. Those who needed it NOW, bought it and made money from its production. Its shouldn't be difficult to see that it was/is a one-off niche computer. The XDR will live on. The 7,1 will live on for years in studios. There is no advancement coming in FCPX or Logic X to result in the 7,1 not being able to pull the load for years to come. If there are new MPX modules available in the future, then good. If not, a company upgrade in 4 years is normal anyway. For my company, that is now three years. And the 7,1 has already paid back in product for its all-in cost. I could replace it next year - but won't - without losing financially. Big difference between gotta-have and want.
Yeah, niche products for creatives are fine. I think in my case, the NOW, is a few months out in reality anyway. So the smart thing is to wait and milk my current machine as I was saying. I'm cautiously optimistic about Apple and the pro market in the future. They just haven't done enough in the past decade really is the truth, and I hope they can start fresh with the ARMs. We shall see.
You're doing the right thing, @ghostwind. A lot of here are in the same situation, dragging out the last drops of performance from our maxed 5, 1 cheesegraters, often running High Sierra for driver compatibility with Nvidia GPUs. It's doable and in my case, running Adobe CC, C4D, Zbrush and Substance, perfectly viable.
Its not even just the money with the 7, 1. The performance gains just aren't there unless you're working with very specific apps and processes. Even in the case of scrubbing a 4k timeline, the M1 is smoother than the 7, 1 which is just crazy but there it is. Switching my workflow to the 7, 1 just didn't make sense, but the M1 will completely revolutionise not just my workflow, but my approach to creative work.
Its not even just the money with the 7, 1. The performance gains just aren't there unless you're working with very specific apps and processes. Even in the case of scrubbing a 4k timeline, the M1 is smoother than the 7, 1 which is just crazy but there it is. Switching my workflow to the 7, 1 just didn't make sense, but the M1 will completely revolutionise not just my workflow, but my approach to creative work.
Clip 1, versions descending:
9B: 59 fps
18B: 36fps
30B: 24fps
66B: 12 fps
1TNR: 50fps
2TNR: 28fps
4TNR: 16fps
6TNR: 11fps
Clip 2:
9B: 59 fps
18B: 37fps
30B: 24fps
66B: 12 fps
1TNR: 50fps
2TNR: 30fps
4TNR: 17fps
6TNR: 11fps
for Clip 3, similar results.
Does this shed any light for you? I saw both Vegas maxing out throughout the benchmark.
Last edited: