MP 7,1 Humiliated 7.1

[TobiasT]

Well, we all know what happened: Apple humiliated Mac Pro 7.1.

A "cheap" Mac Studio is more powerful than the ultra expensive Mac Pro 7.1. And this is happening only two years after the release of Mac Pro 7.1.

One must be crazy to buy a Mac Pro 7.1 now.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Im sure the studio is quite a performer, but a bunch of their claims on the 2021 16" MBP didnt pan out. Sure, for some very narrow use cases the video was faster than a discrete card, but for most uses, not so much.

I suspect a bunch of their statistics will be a bit cherry picked sunshine bs. Particularly regarding competing against discrete graphics cards.

But, no doubt, it's likely to be a very powerful machine. And, if you happen to use the use cases they optimized for, and that will likely include FCP, then yes, the MP7,1 will be looking really tired.

That said, I can run an 8k HDMI based TV/monitor on my 7,1, and dont think you can with the studio.

 

[arock]

Lol, my Mac Pro is just fine thanks. I have a 128 audio channel Dante pcie card in there. There is no equivalent M1 solution. Also have 384GB ram, 10TB nvme storage, 6800X MPX module, etc. Hopefully a future Mac Pro offers such things but in the meantime the Studio isn’t humiliating any specs that matter to me.

 

[impulse462]

It's a powerful soc for sure, but theres no modularity on it at all.

I'm running a 7,1 dual booting with macOS and linux and using nvidia GPUs and have upgraded internal NVME storage using a nvme pcie card. can't do any modifications with the mac studio and its obvious the target consumer is not someone who wants standardized modularity.

im very curious about the updated mac pro and actually hope the rumors of an intel refresh alongside an apple silicon one pan out because no modular tower design for any apple product would be a terrible thing

 

[MisterAndrew]

This Studio focused thread belongs in the Studio forum. Please don't pollute the Mac Pro forum. Also, based on what you (the OP) said you clearly don't understand the Mac Pro product or the difference between market segments. The Studio is literally a mobile SoC with a heatsink inside an unimaginative cube that will become e-waste far sooner than the Mac Pro, which is an actual desktop computer with almost limitless expansion. The Mac Pro is also assembled in the USA. So when you purchase a Mac Pro you are supporting American labor.

 

[bernuli]

Well, we all know what happened: Apple humiliated Mac Pro 7.1.

A "cheap" Mac Studio is more powerful than the ultra expensive Mac Pro 7.1. And this is happening only two years after the release of Mac Pro 7.1.

One must be crazy to buy a Mac Pro 7.1 now.

I don't think it was humiliated at all. I am ordering another 7,1 now while I still can. Because:

• ECC RAM and lots of it.
• Intel compatibility until rest of world moves to ARM...if they ever even do.
• Internal storage that can be easily replaced or added on to.
• Rock solid performance between the system itself and the above bullet points.

Those are just my reasons. Other use cases will have more requirements the 7,1 handle.

A spec bump for the 7,1 would have been nice but I am very glad it was not discontinued on this round.

 

[profdraper]

No, the studio has NO Pcie slots & looks more like a replacement for the awful trashcan .... Without PCIE, my studio would not be able to function & that includes pro audio cards (like Avid or UAD), video (Blackmagic) and NVMe (Sonnet x4). An no, am not willing to buy an expansion chassis and then hook up a bizzilion cables to the back of a revised G4 cube. My 7,1 mac pro is maxxed with cards and works perfectly all day long. Finally, this overpriced studio is not advertised as a pro machine. Perhaps the next mac pro /silicon replacement 'may' do better, but still, my 7,1 has many years of life in it yet and I see zero reason to change up. Even my 'retired' 5,1 2010 mac pro still functions perfectly for music production tasks (just a bit too slow for video).

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

So let's do a little summary:

No 8k HDMI based TV/monitors
No large capacity internal storage (I have a 15.36TB U.2 NVME drive in my Mac Pro, and 20TB internal spinner for time machine, you cannot have either in a studio)
No cards necessary for audio pros and many other pros
No memory over 128GB ram
No ability to ever upgrade your RAM
No ability to ever upgrade your internal storage
No ECC memory, which is needed for large amounts of ram
No dual booting
No ability to put in higher end video cards that will destroy the video of the studio in 3..2...

So everyone here that thought the trashcan was a loser, most real pros and enthusiasts, thinks this is even more of a loser. At least the trashcan would let you update internal storage and ram. This is even more limited than the trashcan, ie it's worse.

As a Mac mini pro, this mostly rocks. As a Mac Pro mini, this is an utter loser.

 

[deconstruct60]

Well, we all know what happened: Apple humiliated Mac Pro 7.1.

Wrong adjective. More like committed fratricide on the Mac Pro 2019 (7,1). A substantive chunk of legacy Mac Pro buyers will be pulled out from the " Mac Pro 2019" potential market. ( cannibalization of that sub-market. ) However, the Mac Pro 7,1 also left a huge chunk of legacy Mac Pro buyer on the curb ( or under the bus if really needed to upgrade) by increasing the entry MP price by 100%. The Mac Pro did nothing for those folks in the 2.5-4K price zone. The Studio at least does something for them.

This isn't really new. The MBP 16" has enough horsepower for many folks who would have been in the "Mac Pro computational requirements" space in 2006-2012 era.


Apple did carefully tap dance around any claims that the Ultra 'crushes" a duo W6800X or quad W6800X performance. Apple said in the keynote that the 16 core and W5700 were the most popular CPU and GPU for the Mac Pro 7,1. So there is very high overlap in target market coverage for those who just have CPU and/or GPU computational primary issues.

There is a narrower subsegment they have left "on the floor" for an upgraded Mac Pro to cover. That is mostly not in CPU/GPU benchmark scores.

The MacBook Air, MacBook Pro 13" two port , Mini , iMac 24" all overlap in M1 usage.
The MBP 14 and 16 and Studio Max overlap in M1 Max usage.

The Studio and upgraded Mac Pro will very likely overlap in "Ultra" class. What probably will see in a next gen Ultra that enables some PCI-e slots provisioning but next to zero CPU/GPU performance gap from the Studio. The Mac Pro and Studio will share that.

The stratification between Mac products isn't going to be as high as it was under Intel CPU either. Intel had an order of magnitude more CPUs to pick from than anything Apple is going to create.



Finally it is a 2018-19 era system foundation. Kicking sand in the face of an 3 year tech really isn't much of humiliation. More avoiding real competitive contemporaries. Pulled in some cherry picked 3090 benchmark that had to be a cross platform comparison since doesn't support Nvidia drivers anymore. They didn't go out and get a BoXX W-3300 workstation and a dual 3090 can compare notes on top end render times.


The baseline of all of Apple comparisons made were against the top end BTO configuration of the iMac (and again multiple years ago since update) , not the Mac Pro.

A "cheap" Mac Studio is more powerful than the ultra expensive Mac Pro 7.1. And this is happening only two years after the release of Mac Pro 7.1.

19 + 2 = 21 . It is 22. And the 2019 was not full of bleeding edge tech when launched. ( W-3300 was super late. The base graphics was a 580X, relatively old PCI-e v3 , etc. )

 

[OS6-OSX]

 

[impulse462]

So everyone here that thought the trashcan was a loser, most real pros and enthusiasts, thinks this is even more of a loser. At least the trashcan would let you update internal storage and ram. This is even more limited than the trashcan, ie it's worse.

As a Mac mini pro, this mostly rocks. As a Mac Pro mini, this is an utter loser.

I think with the tease that the mac pro update is yet to come this suggests the mac studio is a mac mini pro.

I do think these cherry picked comparisons apple is showing of their soc vs a 3090 etc (as @deconstruct60 alluded to) are a larger story and borderline deceptive. It seems to be a trend of these chip design teams to add these custom accelerators for video encoding, ML (although you cant really train any real DL models on a mac), etc and then show off performance is SO MUCH BETTER vs previous systems or current competing hardware

Its the way to try to get around the fact that Moore's law is dead (or dying at least) but the general population, most people, and the youtubers will just run the same benchmarks for their same limited video production benchmarks and cultivate the narrative that the M1 is the greatest thing since sliced bread when in reality its a very impressive soc but with limitations. Furthermore, as hardware gets faster, most people don't even have experience using a tower desktop computer and will overlook how great modularity is for standard components because theyve never been exposed to it.

Another thing that is hilarious is Apple's insistence that theyre "environmentally friendly or conscience" when in reality, when someone is done with a mac studio theyll just chuck it in the garbage contributing way more to e-waste than a simple wire from an iphone. My mac pro however will keep riding on.

/rant

 

[goMac]

I do think these cherry picked comparisons apple is showing of their soc vs a 3090 etc (as @deconstruct60 alluded to) are a larger story and borderline deceptive. It seems to be a trend of these chip design teams to add these custom accelerators for video encoding, ML (although you cant really train any real DL models on a mac), etc and then show off performance is SO MUCH BETTER vs previous systems or current competing hardware

With a Mac Pro, I think Apple is going to have to have something undeniably competitive. M1 Max, and likely M1 Ultra, have too many gaps and places the performance doesn't hold up.

Kind of why I think, or hope, Apple does something discrete or MPX-y. By my math, Jade4c wouldn't cut it for something that is generally competitive with the AMD 7000 or Nvidia 4000 series. They'd need Jade8c for something that is generally competitive. Because much like M1 Max, I'm guessing the M1 Ultra vs 3090 benchmarking only holds up under certain workflows and not generally.

But if they did some sort of discrete modules that's just a ton of GPU cores shoved onto a card with a giant heat sink - like an MPX module - that seems obtainable.

Also might make sense because the CPU performance that Apple's delivering would be quite good for a Mac Pro. It's just the GPU thats a problem.

 

[4wdwrx]

Apple's Mac Studio isn't modular -- and that's a good thing | Digital Trends

Apple announced the Mac Studio, and it fits in a similar spot as the modular Mac Pro. But it's a good thing the Mac Studio isn't following in those footsteps.

www.digitaltrends.com

 

[ADGrant]

So let's do a little summary:

No 8k HDMI based TV/monitors
No large capacity internal storage (I have a 15.36TB U.2 NVME drive in my Mac Pro, and 20TB internal spinner for time machine, you cannot have either in a studio)
No cards necessary for audio pros and many other pros
No memory over 128GB ram
No ability to ever upgrade your RAM
No ability to ever upgrade your internal storage
No ECC memory, which needed for large amounts of ram
No dual booting
No ability to put in higher end video cards that will destroy the video of the studio in 3..2...

So everyone here that thought the trashcan was a loser, most real pros and enthusiasts, thinks this is even more of a loser. At least the trashcan would let you update internal storage and ram. This is even more limited than the trashcan, ie it's worse.

As a Mac mini pro, this mostly rocks. As a Mac Pro mini, this is an utter loser.

All true but unlike the trashcan, the Studio won't have cooling issues and I think it will be updated more frequently.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Apple's Mac Studio isn't modular -- and that's a good thing | Digital Trends

Apple announced the Mac Studio, and it fits in a similar spot as the modular Mac Pro. But it's a good thing the Mac Studio isn't following in those footsteps.

www.digitaltrends.com

The link is appreciated, but the analysis, IMO, is atrocious. It's so bologna based on only apple options. Um, hello, the entire point of modularity is you are NOT stuck with only apple options. I have a reference 6900x, it's way cheaper, and faster than the apple option. Works great. No drivers. No issues. This analysis is just bunk.

I actually hope this guy was a paid shill because otherwise the tortured analysis speaks way more poorly. As always, YMMV.

 

[4wdwrx]

The link is appreciated, but the analysis, IMO, is atrocious. It's so bologna based on only apple options. Um, hello, the entire point of modularity is you are NOT stuck with only apple options. I have a reference 6900x, it's way cheaper, and faster than the apple option. Works great. No drivers. No issues. This analysis is just bunk.

I actually hope this guy was a paid shill because otherwise the tortured analysis speaks way more poorly. As always, YMMV.

I agree most are poorly debated, but is right about the * in the upgradeability. There will probably never be a new motherboard available to replace, limiting CPU, memory, and PCIe.

The CPU even at 28 Cores were already non-competitive when introduced.

You can upgrade to 1.5TB, PCIE RAID, and quad PCIE graphics, however the more efficient silicon with higher bandwidth overcomes it, like 'quality over quantity'. Furthermore, the OS will continue to be optimized, and dedicating less engineering resources to Intel platforms (ie. 1.5TB is equivalent in performance of an AS with far less memory due to much higher bandwidth and efficiency, like how back in the days, when Windows ran more sluggish even with more RAM than Macs.

Will the rumored Ice Lake Mac Pro release? I wish Apple will sell the motherboard. Even then PCIE 5 and Thunderbolt 5 will be out soon.

 

[mattspace]

All true but unlike the trashcan, the Studio won't have cooling issues and I think it will be updated more frequently.

You can't know that. No one looked at the 2013 Mac Pro and immediately thought "that design will result in endemic overheating failures".

Under-provisioning cooling capacity is a deep part of Apple's DNA.

 

[impulse462]

The link is appreciated, but the analysis, IMO, is atrocious. It's so bologna based on only apple options. Um, hello, the entire point of modularity is you are NOT stuck with only apple options. I have a reference 6900x, it's way cheaper, and faster than the apple option. Works great. No drivers. No issues. This analysis is just bunk.

I actually hope this guy was a paid shill because otherwise the tortured analysis speaks way more poorly. As always, YMMV.

I agree most are poorly debated, but is right about the * in the upgradeability. There will probably never be a new motherboard available to replace, limiting CPU, memory, and PCIe.

The CPU even at 28 Cores were already non-competitive when introduced.

You can upgrade to 1.5TB, PCIE RAID, and quad PCIE graphics, however the more efficient silicon with higher bandwidth overcomes it, like 'quality over quantity'. Furthermore, the OS will continue to be optimized, and dedicating less engineering resources to Intel platforms (ie. 1.5TB is equivalent in performance of an AS with far less memory due to much higher bandwidth and efficiency, like how back in the days, when Windows ran more sluggish even with more RAM than Macs.

Will the rumored Ice Lake Mac Pro release? I wish Apple will sell the motherboard. Even then PCIE 5 and Thunderbolt 5 will be out soon.

Agree with both of these. I wish apple will sell the logic board for a new/updated mac pro with new intel socket/faster pcie and thunderbolt but that really seems to be asking for too much apparently. Re the article; I couldn't follow the analysis at all either and he's arguing from the point of view of "why would you bother want to upgrade parts" just awful. really a shame how far desktop computers have fallen and ironically I think its because of how fast (until recently) hardware has gotten.

You can't know that. No one looked at the 2013 Mac Pro and immediately thought "that design will result in endemic overheating failures".

Under-provisioning cooling capacity is a deep part of Apple's DNA.

Couldn't have said this better lmao.

 

[randy85]

Eh, we paid all that money for a 7.1 to have access to that power 2 years ago. 24+ months of making a living with it and it will still work well for a while longer.

This happens all the time with anything technology related. You just have to make a good judgement for how much to spend, how long it will last you, and how to cope when it's no longer best thing out there.

I see a similar thing in the camera space where people get pretty angry when a company releases a new model which is cheaper and better than the thing they bought a couple of years prior. Perhaps manufacturers do drip feed improvements on a timeline that encourages regular upgrades (and max profits), but the alternative is that they stop improving their products after you've bought-in on something - in which case people would complain they're not innovating etc.

 

[jvlfilms]

It's really funny you mention this because my aging 5,1 and announcement of the studio kind of solidified my desire to get a 2019. And I have a M1 Max MBP

The Mac Pro 7,1 will be the last machine to have Intel/Windows support for the foreseeable future and that's really something people need for their workflows. Yes, the Studio is immensely powerful for such a tiny machine and is more than enough for most people... until you want to use a specific audio card or PCIe card. Until you need to boot into another OS. Until you want more internal storage.

People, like myself, are still finding ways to use their 5,1 in 2022 so the 7,1 has plenty of life left in it before being obsolete.

 

[mattspace]

I see a similar thing in the camera space where people get pretty angry when a company releases a new model which is cheaper and better than the thing they bought a couple of years prior.

The fundamental difference is that reality doesn't change over time to make existing cameras less capable of photographing it.

A DSLR from 2012 photographs just as well as it did in 2012. A computer from 2012 can't browse the web as well as it did in 2012, because the maker of the computer has elected to refuse to enable the provision of security updates for its operating system.

While we may want newer cameras to get better photos, computers (or computers pretending to be telephones) require you to keep buying in order to keep doing the same thing you were previously doing.

 

[iPadified]

Remember that the tax daddy only lets you deduct a computer three years (in my country) so it should have payed for itself during that time span then the rest of the time until EOL you will use it for free. It also means that you could buy a new computer every three years. Hence, configuration at the time of purchase is much more important than upgradability at least in a corporate setting. Degrading a computer to secondary activities or as backup computer is good idea to extent the life rather than upgrades.

 

[TrevorR90]

So uhh, I'm typing this message on my 7,1 and it still feels as fast as it did before. I don't get it, is it all of a sudden not going to be fast anymore?

 

[joelypolly]

Well it won't get slow but I see a lot more optimizations will start going in exclusively for Apple SoCs which is a bit of a bummer.

 

[joebclash]

Lol, my Mac Pro is just fine thanks. I have a 128 audio channel Dante pcie card in there. There is no equivalent M1 solution...

Alot of people seem to forget pcie slots are crucial to many workflows. Dante and HDX cards are some examples. Glad to see there are Dante users on this board. I use Dante for live sound.