In this case I won't buy a new MacPro.
I really hope they will return to the 2009-2012 Tower Models and make an improved version of it.
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.
How much do you think the 2018 Mac Pro is gonna cost?
- Thread starter Mr. Dee
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In this case I won't buy a new MacPro.
I really hope they will return to the 2009-2012 Tower Models and make an improved version of it.
I don't think Apple is in this particular sector to make massive money, directly. The point is not to lose people & prestige, which might trickle down to lose people in sectors that matter more.
I think there is a place for an entry level tower for persons who don't want an All in One. In fact, they would prefer to buy a Core i9 based Mac Pro + a 5k Apple Display. I don't understand how Phil Schiller doesn't see this. That would come out to near 3,500 plus accessories. We all know how OCD many of us are will just want to complete our purchases.
More then the average Joe can afford that is for sure.
And the threads will start saying who should be really buying them soon enough just like the IMAC Pro threads.
And the threads will start saying who should be really buying them soon enough just like the IMAC Pro threads.
The alternate phrase for "Gaming Computer" in PC-land, is "VR Workstation" - VR is all driven within game engines now, and rapid upgradability of bleeding edge GPUs is the Minimum Viable Product for someone who wants to develop VR. To expect that industry to make do with a Vega, or AMD-Only GPUs, when they can put a Titan in their PC system, is like expecting iPhone developers to have an iPhone SE a their fastest test device.
That’s not what the posters above are talking about. People building computers for gaming, not game development, don’t care about ECC RAM and lower clocked Xeons. They want unlocked processors and fewer faster cores. The GPU needs might coincide with certain Pro segments but that doesn’t make them a segment Apple will specifically target.
A computer built for gaming, is the same thing as a computer built for working in a VR environment. This isn't just about developing for VR, it's about VR being the place where non-development work is done.
Last edited:
I know...but look how many gaming thread are here and the money paid to professional gamers
[doublepost=1515411398][/doublepost]
Let’s be honest. Any powerful gaming hardware covers the needs of 99% of creative workstation users too. Hardly anyone even thinks about ECC memory or dual CPUs. Most professional animators and 3D modellers render on a server farm.
But what does Apple have to lose by making Macs more accessible for all possible users ?
There is no major benefit for anyone, now that Macs use mainstream components and a Unix based OS .
To put you in a golden cage (ok, space gray), to compel yourself to buy a new machine again and again.
No benefit for the user, but only for Apple.
The "Pro" model pricing has always increased over the years. My first Mac was a 2001 PowerMac "Digital Audio" 466Mhz(single CPU) and it was $1700.
Later I got a 2002 PowerMac Dual 1Ghz "Mirror Drive Door" and it was $2500, although the base model also started at $1700.
I now have a 2009 Mac Pro that originally came with quad-core 2.93 Xeon. It sold for $3000, although the base model at the time was $2500.
The 2013 Mac Pro which I never wanted started (and still starts) at $3000 and has out-of-date components.
I expect they'll do another price creep. If you take the iMac Pro base at $5000, subtract $1500 for the 5K display you come up to $3500, which would be a reasonable price creep. But I can also see them jumping up to $4000.
We'll have to wait and see what they decide to create. They can justify a higher price if this is more than just a plain old "tower". Hopefully they'll at least be announcing something at WWDC 2018.
Later I got a 2002 PowerMac Dual 1Ghz "Mirror Drive Door" and it was $2500, although the base model also started at $1700.
I now have a 2009 Mac Pro that originally came with quad-core 2.93 Xeon. It sold for $3000, although the base model at the time was $2500.
The 2013 Mac Pro which I never wanted started (and still starts) at $3000 and has out-of-date components.
I expect they'll do another price creep. If you take the iMac Pro base at $5000, subtract $1500 for the 5K display you come up to $3500, which would be a reasonable price creep. But I can also see them jumping up to $4000.
We'll have to wait and see what they decide to create. They can justify a higher price if this is more than just a plain old "tower". Hopefully they'll at least be announcing something at WWDC 2018.
It's a shame, because they could at least make their iOS gaming experience more enjoyable—the abandonment of Game Center is an example of where it's clear they didn't have anyone who really cared much about games at a high level.
This seems to work with iPhones, but has it ever worked for selling computers ?
You can fool all gadget buyers most of the time , but can you fool most of us studly MP buyers at any time ?
Wait, I can get it in space gray?This seems to work with iPhones, but has it ever worked for selling computers ?
You can fool all gadget buyers most of the time , but can you fool most of us studly MP buyers at any time ?
Well, the space gray is definitely a must for the finish, along with the accessories like mouse/keyboard.
I ultimately believe the form factor will be just like the G5 cheese grater, but a bit smaller and thinner, but not too small. Probably 2x bigger than a BTX form factor. It doesn't need to be extremely big and heavy like the old generation Mac Pro's since it will likely use the proprietary SSDs like those in the iMac Pro. There wasn't nothing wrong with the cheese grater, the handles were nice for easily lifting and moving the unit. The objective is to make modular, so, video cards, memory will probably be your options to upgrade include the processor to some degree.
I ultimately believe the form factor will be just like the G5 cheese grater, but a bit smaller and thinner, but not too small. Probably 2x bigger than a BTX form factor. It doesn't need to be extremely big and heavy like the old generation Mac Pro's since it will likely use the proprietary SSDs like those in the iMac Pro. There wasn't nothing wrong with the cheese grater, the handles were nice for easily lifting and moving the unit. The objective is to make modular, so, video cards, memory will probably be your options to upgrade include the processor to some degree.
Doubtful it will be thinner due to card heights and fan diameter(s). Shorter (e.g., no 5.25" bays ) as the driver of "smaller" , yes.
The T-series based SSDs don't lend themselves to plural SSDs. T-series SSDs are only going to be one since they have other functions that shouldn't be duplicated in them also.
Apple could try to stuff the M.2 deviant socket (which pragmatically predates M.2 a bit) from the laptops and MP 2013 into the new Mac Pro as a secondary (and 3rd ?) SSD expansion path but that won't buy them much if they are winding down that old SSD controller (and highly customized 3rd party ones). It would make far more sense just to validate and buy some 3rd party SSDs for those BTO options; just like the RAM. Secondary ( and typically capacity expanding) SSDs aren't going to be particularly different from those attached via Thunderbolt in terms of driver and "trimforce" aspects. Apple shows all the signs of going into the default secure boot SSD business, not the general SSD business.
If the dogma is so strong that it can only be Apple labeled SSDs then probably just won't get extra, non-primary boot SSD expansion options. Wrapped in the dogma of if Apple doesn't make it themselves then it doesn't exist then the other storage slots would disappear. I don't think Apple is really going to drink the kool-aid that deeply for the next Mac Pro.
PCI-e based M.2 has gotten alot more mature at this point. So there isn't a good reason for Apple to ignore it. If there is any amount design priority placed on $/GB capacity then 2.5" SATA drive may make the cut also. ( apple is is on a "internal HDDs are over" train though. Disappeared from Mac Mini and entry costs just went up).
The handles are a bit rack hostile. If Apple is still manically focused on the Mac Pro being a literal desktop system then the handles aren't particularly literal desktop friendly either. Height + feet + upper handles was more so the combined issue.
The handles were also to be symmetric with keeping the system off of the floor also.
[doublepost=1545939977][/doublepost]
Game Center is/was to a large extent a "social media" endeavor; not really a gaming thing. It ended up with the rest of Apple social media embeds that Apple has done .... not really used that much. It isn't that Apple abandoned it as much as most folks didn't pick it up. ( both sides. The devs would typically like to own that because it is a more data to mine (and perhaps make money on) and the users have other social media 'drug' fixes to drift off into. )
yeah I stand for my first stance :
19 inch at most to be rackable
3 or 4u width
airflow from front to back
dual or single cpu by daughter board
4 pcie slot with at least 2 double width slot
xeon scalable
ECC memory
starting at 2990€
proprietary expension port with pcie x16
19 inch at most to be rackable
3 or 4u width
airflow from front to back
dual or single cpu by daughter board
4 pcie slot with at least 2 double width slot
xeon scalable
ECC memory
starting at 2990€
proprietary expension port with pcie x16
Last edited:
What about width? 7in is 4U but I assume that doesn't include tolerances for actually fitting stuff in the racks.
(I really have no idea if they'd bother making a more rack-friendly design but considering you could still make it smaller than the old one in the process it's at least possible.)
1U rack spacing is 1.75 inches, 1U equipment is at least 1/32 of an inch less than that.
I don't think Apple is going to go out of their way to make rack a primary target. The Mac Pro 2013 was generally dramatically smaller so something less than the 2010 model but more than the 2013 model would just happen to be less rack hostile. It may even be not uniformly rectangle shaped (if they are still fixated on a literal desktop targeted solution. ). If Apple tossing the volume occupied by the two 5.25" bays out the window then don't need that same 2009-2010 height. [ Highly unlikely there will be just vast empty space with dangling SATA cables in the next system waiting for somewhat random sized devices to be stuff into the space. Part of that could be assigned to a longer, shorter power supply and the height drops. ]
I don't think they'll necessarily be trying to minimize the 'U' number either. It a tad over 4U fits their system then they would do it. Rack oriented would probably try to avoid 5U space requirement with gaps in between. I doubt Apple would be shooting to minimize gaps. A Mac Pro plus a couple of other units in a reasonable amount of U space would be sufficient.
Some folks are going to rack them as part of a larger system solution. Sonnet rack enclosures for Mac Mini and MP 2013 indicate that there is some substantive subset that will. I strongly suspect you'd still need some 3rd party "pieces" attached to the new Mac Pro to securely fasten the systems to a standard rack. The size and complexity of the 3rd party container/adapter could/should be of a different balance than those mini and MP 2013 solutions. Some more could be inside (e.g., an open x16 PCI-e slot and a SSD slot/bay ) , but not "everything".
This is exactly the kinds of context where the iMac Pro won't work. Put into a container/adapter and put into a rack/cart/etc. and need something more "hefty" computationally than a Mac Mini. Even Apple can't be drinking kool-aid so deeply to think that the 2018 can fill up the entirety of the rack solution space possible for Macs. ( some Mac cloud hosting providers have racked up rows of MP 2013's that probably could be replaced over time with new Mac Pros. The new minis are more capable than the past but can't do all of that workload. ). Similarly folks have stuffed 2009-2012 models into carts and mobile/transportable racks. Not the primary deploy but big enough as to not make new one overtly hostile to the solution space. They don't have to optimize for but don't push it away either ( as with the Mini. ) .
if some folks want hot swap HDDs/SDDs then assign that to the 3rd party wrap arounds and Apple just does the core piece that has a more primary target of free standing deskside (and under desk ). 3rd party solutions can wrap around to expand the solution space.
Oh, I forgot to comment on this....
The width is 19" (or more accurately 17.5"). A 4U is 7" *high*. The depth of the rack is typically .5m to .75m - although many components (e.g. network switches) are not that deep.
4U is nice for rack-mounting a tower computer, since a 3.5" disk drive is 3.3U long and a GPU like
is 3.13U high.
Last edited: