MP All Models Is the Mac Pro still relevant in 2025

[Happy_John]

I don't think this is related to the OPs question.

That said your Beetle analogy is not a good one. The Beetle can utilize the same infrastructure as when it was new. It can utilize fuel that is easily available today. The same cannot be said of computers. A computer is only as useful as the availability of software to run on it. Unless you intend to use contemporary software forever with it at some point you will be forced to upgrade (and you would be hanging out in the PPC or Early Intel Mac discussions).

The reality is, for the majority of people an EoL system cannot be maintained indefinitely and an upgrade will be necessary.

Yes, and the question of whether a Mac Pro is a valid option then will be a relevant one, but for a lot of people running Mac Pros, which (unless you have more money than sense) were bought for a particular professional purpose, and the machine still fits that purpose, it really isn’t. It’s a professional tool, and if it still meets a professional needs, then it still works.

Just because Apple declares a product “vintage” or “obsolete”, it doesn’t mean that product is automatically bricked.

I know a hell of a lot of people who are still happily running MP 5,1s. They’re not working specifically in the tech industry. The drawbacks of all Intel Mac Pros is not that it is an irrelevant machine or it is somehow worse because it is not new, but simply 1) their power consumption (which is a big issue) and 2) software compatibility ( which can be an issue, but not as much as people think. If you work in print design or in a recording studio, you might want to upgrade you 5,1, but you don’t need to.

The Apple Silicon Mac Pro is an incredibly niche machine. There are people who need very specific / proprietary PCIe card slots fir very specific use cases, or need immense amounts if RAM, but it’s a very small number. Apple clearly didn’t want to release an Apple Silicon Mac Pro at all, the Studio is clearly the spiritual successor to the Mac Pro, but they released one fir the reasons made in posts above 1) to appease a very specific user-base and 2) political reasons - the 2019 Mac Pro was the “Made in the USA” Mac, and the 7,1 ticks that box.

A new Mac Pro will be relevant to a very small customer-base, and irrelevant to the vast majority of customers. To be fair, any desktop Mac is irrelevant to the majority if Mac customers, as Mac desktop sales are dwarfed by Mac laptop sales. And iPhone sales are far larger than all Mac sakes combined.

Tw Mac Pro always were, and even more so today, is, irrelevant to the mojito ty if Apple’s customers.

Given that, blanket questions/statements like this “ Is the Mac Pro relevant in 2025” make no sense. Irrelevant to whom? No every Apple customer has identical priorities. The Mac Pro is now a niche a product as Apple makes.

I needed a Mac pro for my work in 2010. I don’t need an M2 Mac Pro in 2025. That’s me. Other people may be different.

It’s not a “one size fits all” situation. You can’t say a particular Mac relevant or irrelevant, you can only say if it is relevant or irrelevant for you and your use cases.

 

[JSRinUK]

I replied in another thread musing over the future of the Mac Pro.

The landscape is changing due to AI/LLM, and the need for more RAM and faster RAM. That’s why nVidia are making so much money (don’t they do a $10k GPU with 96GB RAM or something?). There are some who will pay vast sums of money for machines that can run massive local LLMs and other AI.

Whilst the Studio is a good demonstration of what “unified memory” can do, and maxing out at 512GB RAM allows for staggeringly large local LLMs, they’re not really ideal for this.

As this area develops, 512GB RAM won’t be enough. 800GB/s memory bandwidth will just be too slow.

If Apple develops the Mac Pro into something that can be spec’d with TBs of much faster RAM, the Mac Pro may regain its crown. Maybe they won’t do this, but maybe they’re looking further ahead than we think.

 

[avro707]

Mine still do the job - I could use more RAM. The worry is the internal OEM storage since it is hard to find and bespoke.

What if a slightly larger (and more powerful) iPhone could do the job of a computer and run MacOS on a desktop computer screen while the phone behaves as a phone? Then the Mac Mini could be obsolete too, as would the iMac.

 

[OS6-OSX]

I think Apple made a number of strategic and tactical decisions that basically painted the Mac Pro into a corner...

 

[Nermal]

I'd love to see a cheaper "box with slots and drive bays". I begridgingly went from a hackintosh to an iMac a few years ago, with storage provided by NAS, but honestly I'd rather have masses of internal storage. Back in the "good old days" that sort of thing was available to mere mortals (I think the cheapest Power Mac started at $1299) but now it's effectively impossible unless you spend a small fortune.

 

[avro707]

What I don't like is the reliance on bespoke storage on these newer Macs. Should be using the standard NVME storage devices like everything else for ease of repair and replacement of the storage.

The "SSD" that Apple use for 2019 Mac Pro are no longer sold.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

Edit: I mean is, buying a Mac Pro relevant in 2025, not its usage

As a fairly new owner of the M4 Max Studio, I'm finding that the Studio reminds me of a time when Apple had an affordable, fast and beautifully designed desktop computer (outside of the iMac and mini). It got me thinking about the viability of the Mac Pro in 2025.

Mac Pro: Base model 7,000, Max configuration M2 Ultra 24 cpu core/76 gpu core 32 core neural engine, 192GB of ram and 8TB of storage. $11,800
Mac Studio: Base model 2,000, Max configuration M3 Ultra 32 cpu core/80 gpu core, 32 core neural engine, 512GB of ram and 16TB of storage 14,100

What function can a Mac Pro do, that the Studio is incapable of? The only thing that the Mac Pro has AFAIK, is PCIe slots, but that expandability is extremely limited since the GPU is on the SoC.

I came across this video, and he touches upon points on why the Mac Pro is no longer the go to computer for most people who previously used Mac pros.

Obviously we all await release of the next MP. I expect Apple to do some good things, because they can. We will see. I am personally curious about MP even though an MBP max or a Studio will always meet my needs.

Discussion of the existing MP is IMO a waste of bandwidth.

 

[TechnoMonk]

Reasons to buy an upgraded Mac Pro. Assuming Apple goes with 512 GB RAM.

PCIE, can go up to 32TB internal Storage Fast nand, racked with other Mac Pros, you could get to 2TB of RAM on a thunderbolt 5. memory BW could be a constraint.
If there are devices that need to connect to Mac Pros using PCIE.

Mac Studio is pretty solid, and fewer reasons to go for Mac Pro.

 

[mattspace]

The thing that occurred to me for no reason yesterday, is that Apple no longer produces a workstation, all it makes are at best high-end consumer PCs.

The M2 Mac Pro is basically just a consumer PC, in that it has Apple's consumer PC league processors, small consumer pc ram capabilities (no ECC), consumer pc graphics capabilities, can't go over 6 displays.

And at the end of the day, all Apple Silicon macs are just iPads with enlarged capacities, and different peripherals. IF Apple allowed macOS to boot on an iPad, it would be undetectable to a user.

The 2019 was a proper workstation (something that has fundamental differences to a PC), albeit lower end than comparable models from Lenovo etc.

 

[avro707]

32TB internal Storage Fast nand

Which is available for about 3-5 years after release and then vanishes, no longer available except on eBay at extravagant prices from 3rd party sellers.

It should be standard storage that is commonly available and shared with PC workstations. That makes it a safer purchase if you intend to use it for a longer time.

One of my 2019 Mac Pros can run 10 6K XDR displays, or 12 4K displays. A newer must be able to do that.

 

[haravikk]

The current Mac Pro is really nothing more than PCIe expansion box, as without slotted RAM and truly upgradeable storage (proprietary modules don't count) that's really the only thing that's different. The case is great, but it's massively over-engineered for the limited reasons you have to actually open that thing.

I actually really loved the 2013 Mac Pro design, and really wish I had been able to afford one, but by the time I could it was already becoming obsolete (no updates to any of its hardware). If Apple had spent more time thinking about the upgrade path for these machines I think it could have been far more successful, e.g- if the CPU and GPU(s) had come in some kind of modules to make them easier to swap out.

An M-series version of that design could be fantastic, as Apple could have total control over the hardware, but I expect they just won't touch it now that they have the Studio — it's a capable machine, but I really do not like the "fat Mac Mini" design of it, the "trash-can" Pro, for all that it was mocked, was a far more interesting design, and it's a tremendous shame they didn't use it, especially when they already had the tooling for it.

 

[Rob__Mac]

What I liked about my 2019 Mac Pro was the ability to somewhat keep up with the Nvidia GPU performance with my AMD GPU's. I do a lot of 3D rendering. Now I have to use a PC because there is no Apple solution for intense 3D rendering.

 

[innerproduct]

Been waiting for a mac pro since 2012 that supports my needs in graphics (3d) and compute. Just want something on par with what is available on pc, that is right now a threadripper pro with dual nvidia cards. No problem if most of it is soldered but would prefer modularity. A current mac pro does not solve anything for me. The m3 ultra studio would have been an instant buy if it was available fall 24 but since it wasn’t i got a mbp16 instead for a daily driver and i use PCs for special needs (high end 3d and AI). If there comes a mac studio m5 ultra next year, that will be what I buy for a personal ws but i would still need PCs in my workflow. If a new mac pro was to appear, it would need to be a significant more powerful machine than a mac studio. The fabled ”extreme” chip would tick that box (or any solution that basically doubles perf from a maxed out studio). I do not use pci cards much. It would be good for faster network cards and a local storage though. A machine with about 2tb mem bandwidth, 60 +cpu cores and 160+ gpu cores sounds about right. Maybe built in 100Gbe as well. Coupled with an updated xdr display.
I assume apple build some specialty server chips these days so it might happen, right? Right?!

 

[pivo6]

For 99,9% of users this thing isn't relevant nowadays.

 

[Happy_John]

The thing that occurred to me for no reason yesterday, is that Apple no longer produces a workstation, all it makes are at best high-end consumer PCs.

The M2 Mac Pro is basically just a consumer PC, in that it has Apple's consumer PC league processors, small consumer pc ram capabilities (no ECC), consumer pc graphics capabilities, can't go over 6 displays.

And at the end of the day, all Apple Silicon macs are just iPads with enlarged capacities, and different peripherals. IF Apple allowed macOS to boot on an iPad, it would be undetectable to a user.

The 2019 was a proper workstation (something that has fundamental differences to a PC), albeit lower end than comparable models from Lenovo etc.

Yes, that’s been a shift in focus by Apple for a very long time. It,s along time sic e theye’ve sold exserves and RAID arrays, or even printers and routers/switches.

I think it’s more complicated than simply saying, we’re not going to brother with entreprise solutions.

Firstly, an odd and interesting things about the Xserves and the XDR display is that, completely differently to the consumer/prosumer level products, was that the Xserve and the XDR were piteched as economy/low cost alternatives to the competition. The Xserve was cheap at the time for a rack-mounted server. The XDR was far cheaper than a “proper” reference kontor but claimed to have equivalent accuracy.

I think it’s the same with the Studio M3 Ultra. It’s not cheap, but it’s a hell of a lot cheaper, both in sticker price and running costs, than a Local LLM / AI box stuffeed with nvidia hardware. It won’t be nearly smpower, but the tagline would be that it’s powerful enough.

And that I think is Apple’s reasoning. Their high end Macs are not as high-end as they used to be, relative to the level of technology of the time. But I think, as technology advanced and provide higher and higher performance, more and more customers don’t need top tier in the way they used to. The top tier is becomeing a smaller and smaller section of the market.

In 2010 I needed a Mac Pro profesionally. I needed the expandability and I needed the power and torque. Basically I needed a tractor.

A few years ago I finally upgraded, a quibbled between an M2 Studio and M2 Pro Mini. I Got he Mini, on the basis I might return it and exchange it for the Studio, and I’ll also be sending jobs to my much upgraded 5,1

That didn’t happen. The Mini was enough, TB4 gave enough expansion options, and I didn’t need the 5,1.

If I upgrade again, hypthetically, I’m wondering if a base M4 chip would be enough for me.

Previous to the MacBook Air being available with M-chips and a 15” screen, I would have thought that I had to have a MacbookPro or nothing. An Air just didn’t have enough of what I needed. Now I think it’d be overkill for me to buy a MBP.

I like expensibe top-tier Macs, but I really don’t need them.

What I’m doing on these machines hasn’t changed that much, what’s changed is whart’s considered the norm for processing power and speed.

Some people do, but that section of the customers-base is shrinking. And Apple’s product lines are reflecting that.

It’d disappointing for users who want massive levels of performance, but, at the moment, I don’t think Apple is trying to seriously compete with nvidia at that level. The plus side is that, at the lower/entry levels, if you avoid Apple’s upselling as much as possible, a desktop Mac or Macbook is now very competively priced. Which is not something you’ve always been able to say about Apple in the past.

 

[TechRunner]

The few I know who were using them have switched to either Studios or MBPs.

 

[bradman83]

Which is available for about 3-5 years after release and then vanishes, no longer available except on eBay at extravagant prices from 3rd party sellers.

It should be standard storage that is commonly available and shared with PC workstations. That makes it a safer purchase if you intend to use it for a longer time.

One of my 2019 Mac Pros can run 10 6K XDR displays, or 12 4K displays. A newer must be able to do that.

Isn't that the point of having PCIe slots? You could pop in a standard multi-slot NMVE PCIe slot and expand out your storage using off the shelf M.2 storage modules.

 

[iSayuSay]

MacPro is one nice looking desktop, for sure. But is it necessary? Well I would say no, Apple chips are very efficient it only needs Mac Studio sized chassis to keep all those components cool. MacPro is definitely oversized for what it is, and PCIe slots are basically useless, as most Mac "expansion cards" are sold as Thunderbolt external box.

Graphics cards support are also non existent. So yeah, MacPro could be a very nice looking Windows desktop PC, solid build, silent, powerful and certainly RTX5090-worthy. But it's too big just for Mac alone. Mac Studio is plenty enough.

 

[avro707]

Isn't that the point of having PCIe slots? You could pop in a standard multi-slot NMVE PCIe slot and expand out your storage using off the shelf M.2 storage modules.

But that doesn't solve the problem of Apple using its own special proprietary storage devices for the computer.

Us folks with the 2019 Mac Pro have the potential issue of the NAND storage for those which is very critical for the whole computer. If it fails, we have to go find replacements that aren't all that common, and then you have the whole nonsense of having to set it up again using another Mac.

 

[m1maverick]

Just because Apple declares a product “vintage” or “obsolete”, it doesn’t mean that product is automatically bricked.

OP is inquiring about new Mac Pro purchases, he's not referring to those who already own and use them.

I needed a Mac pro for my work in 2010. I don’t need an M2 Mac Pro in 2025. That’s me. Other people may be different.

This is exactly why the OP is asking the question. How many people in this forum own a 2023 Mac Pro? I suspect if you look at the distribution the numbers will be larger for the older (2006-2012) models and smaller for the later models. Why? Because the Mac Pro has become less and less relevant as Apple as slowly neutered it and their alternatives are, except for PCIe slots, as competitive or, at this point in time, more capable.

Does this mean there are no use cases for a Mac Pro? Certainly not. But Apple is making it less and less relevant.

 

[Happy_John]

But that doesn't solve the problem of Apple using its own special proprietary storage devices for the computer.

Us folks with the 2019 Mac Pro have the potential issue of the NAND storage for those which is very critical for the whole computer. If it fails, we have to go find replacements that aren't all that common, and then you have the whole nonsense of having to set it up again using another Mac.

No, but you can avoid wear, and so increase the life-span of the proprietary storage, by using standard NVMEs for the majority of of your storage read-write needs.

Technically, the real issue here is that, with Apple’s storage, the controller isn’t on the card with the NAND chips, as it is on “standard” NVMEs. This is why you can’t buy handy little “adapters” from AliExpress as you could with say, 2015 MBPs.

And, to be blunt, this isn’t a Mac Pro only issue. At least your Mac Pro doesn’t have soldered-on storage.

 

[Happy_John]

OP is inquiring about new Mac Pro purchases, he's not referring to those who already own and use them.



This is exactly why the OP is asking the question. How many people in this forum own a 2023 Mac Pro? I suspect if you look at the distribution the numbers will be larger for the older (2006-2012) models and smaller for the later models. Why? Because the Mac Pro has become less and less relevant as Apple as slowly neutered it and their alternatives are, except for PCIe slots, as competitive or, at this point in time, more capable.

Does this mean there are no use cases for a Mac Pro? Certainly not. But Apple is making it less and less relevant.

Less relevant for most uses, but not completely irrelevant. That’s the first hair I’m splitting with the OP

You can only say if it is relevant or irrelevant for you. You can’t just say it is relevant or irrelevant. The “for you” ( or really “for whom”) can’t be omitted.

People have differing use cases.

The second hair is that it is not a case of “Buy and Mac Pro” and use a Mac Pro” and “Don’t Buy a Mac Pro and don’t use a Mac Pro” because this ignores the third case “Don’t buy a Mac Pro ( because I already have a Mac Pro. ) and do use that Mac Pro.” Mac Pros are still relevant to the people already using them for as long as they continue to use them.

That third option is consistently ignored on sites like these and by Apple YouTubers. If your current set-up meets your needs, you don’t need to upgrade. You don’t need to change you kit and devices every upgrade cycle. We’re pushed to upgrade every cycle, but that’s simply a marketing strategy.

 

[avro707]

And, to be blunt, this isn’t a Mac Pro only issue. At least your Mac Pro doesn’t have soldered-on storage.

I wonder what folks with the M2 Mac Pro do when their Apple "SSD" kits become no longer available? I'm sure that will happen. Not a nice thing with expensive machines like that.

 

[Happy_John]

I wonder what folks with the M2 Mac Pro do when their Apple "SSD" kits become no longer available? I'm sure that will happen. Not a nice thing with expensive machines like that.

True, but to be honest, M chips have been around for a while now, and the original fear that the NANDs would die hasn’t become reality as yet, so it’s likely that, with M-chip Macs, people will upgrade before that happens or something else other than the storage is what causes the machine to die.

That’s something I don’t really understand about the M2 Mac Pro. I undsters that Apple released it because 1) people shouted for it and 2) the Mac Pro 2019 ended up being a way of saying “Apple does manufacture some things in the USA”, and the M2 Mac Pro kept that up, but I don’t understand why they didn’t just put the M2 Ultra SoC on a removable board that connects to the backplane, as it does in the 5,1 Mac Pro and earlier.

The only reason to by a Mac Pro rather than a Studio is for the case, the cooling system, (which is woefully underused in the M2 MP compared to the 2019 MP) the PCIe slots and the extra I/O - and you’re paying an extra three grand for that. It would have been a far more attractive option if you could slot in a new SoC when needed.

 

[winxmac]

When a new Mac Pro was launched in 2023, 3 years since the switch to Apple Silicon from intel processors, Apple should have either re-used the 2013 design or called the Mac Studio the new, redesigned Mac Pro. The expansion provided by the 2019 and previous Mac Pro does not seem to be applicable to the 2023 one since you can no longer add a GPU through the motherboard. Even the other ports available seems to be of no use anymore. I never owned one but just watching from the sidelines so I could be wrong.