Let us know when Thunderbolt stops being a solution in search of a problem.
[automerge]1574813879[/automerge]
[automerge]1574813879[/automerge]
Last edited:
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 All Models Is Apple ****ing themselves over the ThreadRipper 3 yet?
- Thread starter macjunkie2013
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
T-Bolt is Apple's albatross. And deservedly so, for buying into the "T-Bolt must carry graphics" mistake.
Not bad my dude. Ty for the link. Those are pretty sweet and at a reasonable price point. I know nothing about their flavor of linux but the technical specs are great.
I can build a Threadripper box cheaper than a decently specced iMac. Not iMac Pro. iMac.
Threadripper is not pricey at all when you put it in the context of what it is competing against.
You don't need to go Threadripper either. the r9-3950x beats the i9-10980XE in most workloads quite handily. At 3/4 the price.
All AMD CPUs also do ECC.
They are taking too long, and already, technology has been catching up on them.
Their inability to fast track professional machines shows that Apple is not fit for doing business in strictly professional sector.
If MP 7.1 were out in market when it was first introduced, there's merit in its value compared to other machines available at that time. But for now or 2020, it's not. What it offers at 5,999 is a complete joke and even insulting to customers.
Apple. Either do things right and stop doing secrecy and design for Ive stuff and make a truly professional machine, with up to date cost per price ratio, that can compete with other comparable machine, or keep secrecy and do design for ive stuff to make a great machine for prosumers.
Their inability to fast track professional machines shows that Apple is not fit for doing business in strictly professional sector.
If MP 7.1 were out in market when it was first introduced, there's merit in its value compared to other machines available at that time. But for now or 2020, it's not. What it offers at 5,999 is a complete joke and even insulting to customers.
Apple. Either do things right and stop doing secrecy and design for Ive stuff and make a truly professional machine, with up to date cost per price ratio, that can compete with other comparable machine, or keep secrecy and do design for ive stuff to make a great machine for prosumers.
You know nothing about Pop!_OS?
Unanonimously regarded as quite possibly best distro all around. Stable, insanely fast, up to date, because System76 curates their own repositories(ElementaryOS App Store).
If I would not require more cutting edge stuff(kernel 5.4) I would be running Pop!_OS instead of Manjaro on all of my machines. The only machine that is not running Manjaro is using Ubuntu, for stability reasons(work has to be done on something, that will not break, one day, which is unfortunately common theme for All Arch Based Distros).
EOT.
I have a schedule for computer replacement several years out for my company. October - December 2019 was a time frame to replace an old iMac. My plan was to do this with the Mac Pro 7.1. Looks like that replacement will happen in January 2020. I'm not worried. I don't consider the iMac Pro to be a better option for our workflow and it doesn't have substantive future upgradability. The Mac Pro 7.1 is also more mobile and the XDR monitor is something my staff are looking forward to using. I replaced a PC that was in rotation last month with one supplied by JUNS. I have another iMac that will be rotated out in late 2020 and finally the last iMac late 2015 model a year after that. If Apple has something incredible ready in late 2011 or early 2020 - all the better timing for me. But it's not make or break. I'll chose from the available Apple options. I have already depreciated the old machines and will sell them for a small amount. I can't run a company chasing "next years" greater than ever CPU be that Intel or AMD.
That is usually entirely dependant on the software developers and it can be a tricky thing like where you suddenly are very dependant on running your app of choice in a specific version with the right GPU driver revision (which may lead to conflicts elsewhere).
Also at least in the 2D/3D DCC space only a minority of developers so far really embrace it (and it's probably around a decade now of this stuff being done) and not every type of task is even suited to it.
[automerge]1574831935[/automerge]
Also: yes it looks like Apple is partnering with the wrong company in the CPU space AND the wrong company in the GPU space for this machine. Ouch!
And waiting for the next release of this computer after the upcoming one... oh well. With their pricing this will never be anything but a niche that will make the previous MPs seem like commonplace computers. Are we talking years or decades of waiting for the next iteration here?
Last edited:
All of this is why Linux is such a mess and STILL isn't a viable desktop for most people.
Not knocking your post, just found it humorous. Let's face it - Linux is free, and Windows is free for many. When given a choice, the people overwhelmingly have spoken! ?
All of this is why Linux is such a mess and STILL isn't a viable desktop for most people.
Neither is free if your time has value, and I spend far less time bitching about Linux than i do with windows these days.
With Linux i patch, reboot, upgrade, change UI, etc. on MY terms - not Microsoft's.
Exactly. AMD is the CPU king. Nvidia remains the GPU king. Period!
I'm not a fanboy of either one, but when you are railing it for 2 years running, then that's enough to influence what any buyer should care about. This is AMD's first monumental year, and we know that it WILL continue into 2021. That will make 2 years solid of spanking intel, and possibly spanking intel in 2021 unless Intel somehow manages to figure out the 7 nm process (they keep failing at shrinking) and we know that because we know both roadmaps are available. Honestly, I would not place stock in Intel right now.
Nvidia DOMINATED last year, and they dominate this year. They will likely continue dominating next year. The primary reason I am leaving the Mac is because I am expected, as a gamer (and video editor, and photo editor, and etc) to swap my 1070 (which is old hat now, but still very capable) to a RX580 (which I also own) in order to install the next MacOS from High Sierra. My 1440p gaming experience will suffer by 30%. It's just not worth it anymore.
[automerge]1574833911[/automerge]
I remembered I tried Ubuntu 14 years ago. I couldn't figure out how to install programs in a user friendly method. You don't simply just double click on executables if I remember correctly. I did however get the OS installed so I made it that far. I may have gotten Firefox running as well. Linux is not a viable desktop platform for the masses.
The "Windows updates automatically" BS is way too overplayed. While I notice it constantly on my work PC and it is annoying, I hardly EVER notice it with my Mac or my PC. I think too many people confuse IT bloated Windows work laptops vs a home computer Windows and equate them equal.
Windows runs absolutely beautiful on a 5,1. In-fact, it runs faster and "teh snappier" than MacOS does.
Last edited:
One thing no one ever mentions is compiler optimization. How well do common MacOS apps really perform on TR3? This isn’t a pointed question. I really do not know the answer. If the compiler and code are heavily optimized for Intel, how does that affect performance on latest Zen stuff?
Would this present extra work/challenges for anyone developing optimized code for MacOS?
AMD is absolutely embarrassing Intel lately. Intel was embarrassing themselves just fine with the 10nm fiasco.
Would this present extra work/challenges for anyone developing optimized code for MacOS?
AMD is absolutely embarrassing Intel lately. Intel was embarrassing themselves just fine with the 10nm fiasco.
Tell that to Apple
I did when it first came out. Firewire part II
Good question. But honestly, if you just ignore games, and go straight into anything productivity, multi-threaded, rendering, get-****-done, seconds, latency: AMD wins what, 100% of the time with 100% of the software/platforms within Windows? I doubt that any Intel "software optimizations" really plays a role for most things, otherwise you'd see "tit-for-tat". But that just ain't showing up. Seems to me that such improvements would show up regardless of OS...
I think you answered it yourself. AMD is embarrassing Intel with Zen 2. It's not like Zen 2 requires more TPD or clock speeds to do this, either. Zen 2 is beating Intel with less heat/TDP at significantly lower clocks. With as compact as Apple is making things these days, they are heavily mistaken going with Intel for every form factor. That includes the rip-off 7,1 Mac Pro, which I have proven to be a 100%+ cost increase over what Apple used to charge for a Mac Pro given inflation. It went from "expensive, slightly nuts, but doable" into "not a chance for me" for many users.
Can you imagine that Zen 3 is 10% improvement over what is out right now....
I'm truly excited to relive a golden age with AMD again. It brings me back to the past.
Intel reigned starting with the "Core2" era. Continued to reign with the i3-i7 era. That time is now up. If you really don't care about AMD or Intel, you should really start to care, because AMD re-birthing into something amazing today. If you're dead-set on a 7,1 Mac Pro, you honestly should give it a bit more thought when it comes to performance/dollar...
It's quite funny to read a poster above think that Threadripper 3 is expensive. Honestly, any person who is about to buy a Mac Pro 7,1 that thinks a Threadripper 3 is expensive is actually clinically stupid. Those are fighting words, but it's truth. If Apple used even the BEST TR3 chips, they would not only be faster "computers", but they'd probably be able to charge $500 less than what they charging for now. Knowing Apple as of recent, charging a 300% overhead is acceptable. Not to me, anymore. MacOS is not worth that.
Last edited:
Times change. Ubuntu (or Pop! etc.) now even runs from livecd with Firefox, Libreoffice, etc. preinstalled.
There is an app store interface just like macOS. It will even suggest to install apps if you try and run something that is not present.
Your knowledge from 14 years ago is pretty out of date mate...
For a typical internet user, Ubuntu "just works" in 2019. It runs more software than macOS out of the box (because running a lot of windows software is even a matter of just double-clicking the installer for it to spin up in an instance of WINE. NO winebottler application needed. It is transparent.
With steamplay, linux now runs more AAA games than macOS too.
I await your assessment of the AppleTV v1.0 (or click-wheel iPod, or similar) because that's the era you're basing your Ubuntu assessment on.
For mac Pro type tasks, a Linux (or Windows for that matter) threadripper box will run Blender and other apps of that ilk faster than a Mac Pro.
Last edited:
I don't claim that my experience with Ubuntu from 14 years ago still holds true. I claim (and a few others above me) that there must be a reason why it's simply not a popular OS even today.
Sure, I expect it to be improved from a user experience perspective since then....duh. It's was, and probably still is, lagging behind everything else, why wouldn't it be? Linux is not ran from a single-entity with millions of R&D to improve and make things better for targeted users...
Judging whether or not Linux runs more games than MacOS is a boring argument. While MacOS I will admit has an impressive selection on Steam (compared to how much games MacOS had before pre-Intel days) saying that Linux has more games on-hand vs MacOS does nothing to further your argument.
How about Windows? It has 100% of the games available and has the best software compatibility. That includes designer software, too, which all designers in my group are now using. Adobe is now best run on Windows.
Sure, I expect it to be improved from a user experience perspective since then....duh. It's was, and probably still is, lagging behind everything else, why wouldn't it be? Linux is not ran from a single-entity with millions of R&D to improve and make things better for targeted users...
Judging whether or not Linux runs more games than MacOS is a boring argument. While MacOS I will admit has an impressive selection on Steam (compared to how much games MacOS had before pre-Intel days) saying that Linux has more games on-hand vs MacOS does nothing to further your argument.
How about Windows? It has 100% of the games available and has the best software compatibility. That includes designer software, too, which all designers in my group are now using. Adobe is now best run on Windows.
The windows world is intel optimised too.
The only Mac-relevant thing you won't get on Threadripper is intel quicksync. But you can pretty much brute force that with the core count, and you don't get that on intel CPUs with no GPU integrated either (like... pretty much any pro level intel CPU - e.g, the Xeon W series in the Mac Pro, Core i9s, etc, which is what we'd be comparing to threadripper).
So.... answer is it will most likely run mac software faster, just like it does in windows (which is also heavily intel optimised).
The difference with the mac world is that if Apple decide to ship threadripper, they will certainly consider optimising their own software for it.
In Windows land, AMD (and threadripper in particular) are still small volume compared to intel and MS probably don't bother to do much with optimising Windows for it - because they don't particularly care how AMD perform vs. intel - that's AMD's problem to solve.
Also, intel write a good optimising compiler that many use in the windows world. A compiler that just so happens to perhaps force non-intel CPUs down the sub-optimal code path, whenever they feel they can get away with claiming it is an oversight (as opposed to anti-competitive shenanigans).
Apple want their OS to take good advantage of their own hardware, so they would no doubt add AMD optimised code paths to it. Apple also run their own version of the clang/llvm open source compiler. Which has no cpu company behind it trying to cripple the other guys.
So i'd say that on macOS, performance could be even more of a win than in Windows if Apple do ship Threadripper (or AMD in general).
AMD really do fight an uphill battle on Windows - the fact that Threadripper is destroying intel so hard is in spite of the above concerns. If people on the Windows platform actually started optimising for AMD in preference to intel it would be even more lop-sided in AMD's favour.
AND... 64 core Threadrippers are coming in 2020!
Apple and intel have been in bed together for a long time. But now Apple (on the Mac side) need to either start shipping their own CPUs, switch to AMD in the short term - or get blown into the weeds by PCs running AMD processors.
Intel have nothing in the pipe for the next 2-3 years at least that even looks like it will come close. They virtually bet the farm on their new 10nm manufacturing process being a success (to help them scale up performance) and it simply hasn't panned out. It was due in 2015-2016 and still isn't shipping in volume, and the parts coming out using it are worse than the existing process. The only reason they're shipping them at all is to claim to shareholders that "10nm is ramping up" to "satisfy" promises they made.
In Windows land, AMD (and threadripper in particular) are still small volume compared to intel and MS probably don't bother to do much with optimising Windows for it - because they don't particularly care how AMD perform vs. intel - that's AMD's problem to solve.
Also, intel write a good optimising compiler that many use in the windows world. A compiler that just so happens to perhaps force non-intel CPUs down the sub-optimal code path, whenever they feel they can get away with claiming it is an oversight (as opposed to anti-competitive shenanigans).
Apple want their OS to take good advantage of their own hardware, so they would no doubt add AMD optimised code paths to it. Apple also run their own version of the clang/llvm open source compiler. Which has no cpu company behind it trying to cripple the other guys.
So i'd say that on macOS, performance could be even more of a win than in Windows if Apple do ship Threadripper (or AMD in general).
AMD really do fight an uphill battle on Windows - the fact that Threadripper is destroying intel so hard is in spite of the above concerns. If people on the Windows platform actually started optimising for AMD in preference to intel it would be even more lop-sided in AMD's favour.
AND... 64 core Threadrippers are coming in 2020!
Apple and intel have been in bed together for a long time. But now Apple (on the Mac side) need to either start shipping their own CPUs, switch to AMD in the short term - or get blown into the weeds by PCs running AMD processors.
Intel have nothing in the pipe for the next 2-3 years at least that even looks like it will come close. They virtually bet the farm on their new 10nm manufacturing process being a success (to help them scale up performance) and it simply hasn't panned out. It was due in 2015-2016 and still isn't shipping in volume, and the parts coming out using it are worse than the existing process. The only reason they're shipping them at all is to claim to shareholders that "10nm is ramping up" to "satisfy" promises they made.
Last edited:
I don’t think Threadripper shouldn’t be compared to Xeon, TR is a desktop chip, in the same market segment as intels x299 platform i7 and i9 HEDT chips a more direct comparison should be with AMDs Epyc platform, which is also making big strides in the server/ datacenter side. I’m not sure how different their architectures are. But in the consumer desktop space AMD are really shaking the intel tree. intel has stalled for years whilst AMD has cought up, competition is good and the Performance gap for consumers is closing or in some cases has flipped. I just got my daughter a Ryzen (3500u)windows laptop for school and it performs the same or better than the equivalent intel model (i5-8265u) with a better GPU, for much lower price. there are people out there that are running AMD hackintosh machines via a vm hyper visor dedicating one core to the VM managment and the rest of the cores to run the Mac, and the extra cores are brute force outperforming current macs on cheaper chips. Sorry for the rambling
The Mac Pro/iMac Pro runs a xeon desktop variant.
Xeons aren't only server chips, high end desktop/workstation variants exist (have done for years)- and Apple use them.
As far as architecture difference between i9/xeon goes - Xeons are generally clocked lower for better power consumption and sometimes have higher core counts. The X299 i9s are all basically overclocked Xeons (with ECC memory support disabled... because... intel market segmentation games) that didn't make the grade (draw too much power) for server use.
However with the new Mac Pro (and other high end workstations) intel is basically shipping their highest end server Xeon - over-clocked as a desktop chip. To try and keep up. And it is getting destroyed by 32 core Threadripper. Both in outright performance, and performance per watt.
Last edited:
One question that remains for me with AMD however is system stability. I started working in my field during AMD's 'golden age' and had an Athlon on my desk. It was faster at lower clockspeeds than some Intel (probably Pentium 4) machines we had in the office but our Athlons generally also crashed a hell of a lot more often.
Also recall Opterons being a mixed bag a few years later.
Chipsets were apparently the reason and having heard about teething issues with this fresh generation of AMD chips and mainboards I couldn't help but think 'not this again...'.
Also recall Opterons being a mixed bag a few years later.
Chipsets were apparently the reason and having heard about teething issues with this fresh generation of AMD chips and mainboards I couldn't help but think 'not this again...'.
The Swift programming language is cross platform and runs on Linux. I regularly use Swift for Linux on Epyc and Threadripper machines. Swift has an incredible parallel and multi-threaded api called GCD. But to answer your question it runs amazing!
The Mac Pro's price meant it was DoA for those who wanted a headless iMac with expansion slots.
Now it might be DoA for the more hardcore workstation crowd as that 28 core CPU and I/O - that sounded somewhat impressive just a few months ago - can be matched or exceeded by far cheaper and less exotic kit.
Not sure what's left in between? People who absolutely must use MacOS no matter the compromises?
Now it might be DoA for the more hardcore workstation crowd as that 28 core CPU and I/O - that sounded somewhat impressive just a few months ago - can be matched or exceeded by far cheaper and less exotic kit.
Not sure what's left in between? People who absolutely must use MacOS no matter the compromises?
The reason why Linux is still under 2% of Market Share is because people don't want to install their OS on their computer. 99% of laptops are sold with Windows pre-installed. Its because that is what users want.All of this is why Linux is such a mess and STILL isn't a viable desktop for most people.
It took me 2 weeks to convince my aunt to install on their 11 year old computer, which is still chugging along perfectly well, Linux. She was so affraid she will not understand it, she did not wanted me to install anything else than Windows. Currently she is running Ubuntu 19.04, and said she was never happier with her experience with computers.
This is the main reason why Linux still loses. Its the perception it has in the community, that it is system not for noobs. Its complete BS. People have this perception of Ubuntu/Linux distros from 10-15 years ago.
And right now, and I know how it will be taken on this forum, it is by far the best OS on the planet. And I am not affraid to say something like this.
Contrary to popular belief I am computer noob. In general, Arch based OSes require you to learn the commands, so that you can fix when something breaks down. I don't know any of them. Ubuntu based distros do not require you commands, but here - I know almost all of them that are making my OS functional. I haven't used them yet. I haven't been required to use them.
Distros like Pop!_OS and Manjaro are rising stars of Linux scene. Manjaro is complete noob friendly, because you even have built-in GUI tool for swapping Kernels! Its on the a little unstable side, but it is nowhere near unstable as Windows is...
I switched all of my production machines and home entertainment to Linux months ago. I mainly on my gaming PC play Overwatch and Hearthstone. And yes, I run them on Linux, thanks to Lutris. For production I use KDENLive, and Krita, 99% of apps I run are Open-Source.
And it works perferctly fine, perfectly stable. Its only people's problem that they are resistant to changes.
EOT.
Based on the fact that ZAen 3 silicon is already in the wild, and samples are being tested, it is not 10% more performance
.It will be 15-20% overall performance increase, versus Zen 2, with Cache write bandwidth being on the same level as Skylake, so for games it means that Zen 3 will be faster for games, full stop
.You should ask those questions to people who were running Ryzen based hackintoshes for the past... 3 years?
Last edited: