MP 7,1 Is the new 7,1 Mac Pro a failure on arrival

[ZombiePhysicist]

Watch my tone? Sit down, kid. You don't get to tell me to "watch my tone".



But you HAVE to talk about switches. Because if you put a faster Ethernet port in the Mac, what's it supposed to connect to? Basically, you're maneuvering the buyer of the Mac into:

• paying for the ports on the Mac
• paying for the optics or DACs that connect to those ports
• PAYING FOR SOMETHING THAT CONNECTS ON THE OTHER END!

10GBASE-T is currently the most flexible option for higher speed connections, and they easily autoneg down to GigE. Your solution would not provide that level of flexibility and would force end users to have very expensive switches in their offices/studios/etc. Switches that make a lot of fricken noise!

Keep trying.

Watch me. Watch your tone.

NO you just lost the argument moving the goalposts. You seem comfortable with your failures, so at least you got that going for you. The switch was not part of my proposition. And you dont need to, you can direct connect straight to your NAS for instance which many people already do with 10GBe. At 40Gbe that's actually pretty attractive. The switches will come down in due time, particularly if you end run the catch 22 by putting out the client side.

Thanks for playing.

 

[jasonmvp]

NO you just lost the argument moving the goalposts.

At this point I'm just laughing at you. You really don't have a clue what you're talking about, but continue blithering on anyway. It's funny.

You seem comfortable with your failures, so at least you got that going for you.

And how have I failed exactly? I know I failed to educate you, but I'm not sure that's on me.

The switch was not part of my proposition.

But it has to be. HAS TO be. You have to think of the entire package when it comes to building a new "thing" for a customer to buy. How are they going to use this "thing"? Where are they going to put it? What are they going to connect it to? And how? If you make a "thing" that they can't connect, they don't buy it.

Get it? Actually don't answer that because I know you don't.

And you dont need to, you can direct connect straight to your NAS for instance which many people already do with 10GBe. At 40Gbe that's actually pretty attractive.

WOW! Talk about moving goalposts? HA! So you're proposing a single 40GigE interface directly to their 40GigE-equipped NAS. And then another 10GigE or GigE interface for general networking? Or did you have some other screwball idea cooked up?

The switches will come down in due time, particularly if you end run the catch 22 by putting out the client side.

I'm so glad you feel that way. In fact, I do hope they come down in time, too. And become quieter. But they're neither "down" nor "quiet" right now! And that's the key point. Realistically there's nothing your proposed solution can connect to and provide the same level of flexibility that Apple's solution does. Not even remotely. You don't seem to grok that, and I don't know that I can do anything else to help you in that matter. You've made your mind up and aren't going to let facts cloud things up for you.

As you were.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

At this point I'm just laughing at you. You really don't have a clue what you're talking about, but continue blithering on anyway. It's funny.



And how have I failed exactly? I know I failed to educate you, but I'm not sure that's on me.



But it has to be. HAS TO be. You have to think of the entire package when it comes to building a new "thing" for a customer to buy. How are they going to use this "thing"? Where are they going to put it? What are they going to connect it to? And how? If you make a "thing" that they can't connect, they don't buy it.

Get it? Actually don't answer that because I know you don't.



WOW! Talk about moving goalposts? HA! So you're proposing a single 40GigE interface directly to their 40GigE-equipped NAS. And then another 10GigE or GigE interface for general networking? Or did you have some other screwball idea cooked up?



I'm so glad you feel that way. In fact, I do hope they come down in time, too. And become quieter. But they're neither "down" nor "quiet" right now! And that's the key point. Realistically there's nothing your proposed solution can connect to and provide the same level of flexibility that Apple's solution does. Not even remotely. You don't seem to grok that, and I don't know that I can do anything else to help you in that matter. You've made your mind up and aren't going to let facts cloud things up for you.

As you were.

Ok Goalpost Mover, laugh it up, it becomes you. I noticed you shut the hell up about those chipsets...

Switches, you ADDED that as something you felt is needed. I'm saying it's not. Yes, I'm suggesting 40Gbe can be used for direct connection to your NAS. You still have a 2nd port you could use to connect to whatever network you want

And nothing stops you from having a 10Gbe switch and using that if you want to instead. But for those that want it, they would have the 40gbe. Also, I showed switches that were full on 100/400 for all 30+ports. You can obviously get switches for far less with just 2 ports at those speeds. That said, It's not part of my argument. My argument is adding it in on the client side. Spending $200 to add ports to your client/NAS is irrelevancy. Having it on the Mac is also very doable particularly on a Mac Pro. Adding those on the client side, much like when USB was added to the iMac helped bring about lower prices on non-client peripherals...switches included.

 

[Nugget]

Neither of you is coming off well in this exchange, maybe you both need to take a break.

Seems pretty clear to me, 10GbE is the best and most flexible solution that can be offered stock that's still downwardly compatible with whatever random network a customer might have. Anything "better" than 10GbE would have to be offered alongside legacy ethernet compatible connections which changes the equation completely. So you aren't arguing for 40gbe instead of 10gbe you have to be arguing for 40gbe in addition to 10gbe.

10GbE and PCI slots is unquestionably the most flexible and economic choice today for Apple and their customers.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Neither of you is coming off well in this exchange, maybe you both need to take a break.

Seems pretty clear to me, 10GbE is the best and most flexible solution that can be offered stock that's still downwardly compatible with whatever random network a customer might have. Anything "better" than 10GbE would have to be offered alongside legacy ethernet compatible connections which changes the equation completely. So you aren't arguing for 40gbe instead of 10gbe you have to be arguing for 40gbe in addition to 10gbe.

10GbE and PCI slots is unquestionably the most flexible and economic choice today for Apple and their customers.

The sockets for the 40/100/400 fiber sfp connectors can support fiber or copper connectors, so you could pick what you like. So you can choose what type of transceiver you want to go in that socket.

 

[fuchsdh]

[/sarcasmON] You must not be a "real" pro. You sound like a "Mac Tinker". [/sarcasmOff]

Yea, those are some crazy numbers.

Here is another thing. Cat8 lets you do 40Gbps networking today. Fiber goes up to 400Gbps. Apple is sooooooo woefully behind the curve on networking options, it's kind of stunning. Many of these options are dirt cheap too. Cat8 cabling and NIC cards are dirt cheap. I just dropped 100Gbps fiber around the house, the cabling is cheap. Apple not having a multi CPU chip option is also disappointing.

I wouldn't think it's fair to compare them to all the highest most extreme cases, but the value proposition is profoundly out of wack at this point.

If the prices on 40Gbps networking equipment counts as "dirt cheap" to you, I shudder to think of what's considered expensive.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

If the prices on 40Gbps networking equipment counts as "dirt cheap" to you, I shudder to think of what's considered expensive.

cat8 cabling does40gbps. It’s not much more than cat7. Nic for 40gbps fiber are around 200. in The realm of Mac Pro equipment, they are not on the pricier side of say a decent video card. Obviously ymmv and fair minded folks can disagree on what institutes cheap or not.

 

[Schismz]

This is wrong. To be allowed the “assembled in USA” status allows US FTC allows around at most 20% foreign content:

Complying with the Made in USA Standard

Introduction Basic Information About Made In USA Claims The Standard For Unqualified Made In USA Claims Qualified Claims Comparative Claims The FTC and The Customs Service Other Statutes What To Do About Violations Introduction The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is charged with preventing

www.ftc.gov

I didn't know that...

So sequence of events to Magical Object re-existing, was:

- Apple announce Mac Pro price. While intending to build everything in China.

Exhibit A:

2019 Mac Pro will be manufactured in China

Apple boasted its domestic manufacturing achievements with the 2013 Mac Pro, which was manufactured in Austin, Texas, and bore an...

9to5mac.com

Then, after that part, Donald Trump is all like, No..

Exhibit B:

Apple’s new Mac Pro to be made in Texas

As part of its commitment to US economic growth, Apple today confirmed that its newly redesigned Mac Pro will be manufactured in Austin, Texas.

www.apple.com

So they really are assembled in the USA, and Apple ate the price difference between their intended margin and what they got hit with.

In conclusion, incontrovertible, completely irrefutable, fully-documented proof that Donald Trump Made America Great Again! (While using it as podium to hammer on Nancy Pelosi. I'm sure Tim Cook is BurStInG with j0Y. He looks happy in that Flextronics factory.)

http://instagr.am/p/B5G6OHth0-i/
I'm ready for another 5-7 long years wandering lost in the desert (But hope for an upgrade in 3.)

Cheers, Apocalypse Now!

 

[throAU]

Settle for "good enough"? Seriously? It is only "good enough" if you are chained to OSX.

I am moving to a Ryzen 7 system - roughly the same performance as the base 7,1 for around $1300. And with the 3900X down to $400, I can bump back up to 12 cores. Or spring for a 16 core 3950X at xmas, or a 4000 series Ryzen

See my sig

Bought it for half the price of an imac pro... over a year ago...
[automerge]1584406711[/automerge]

My guess is that macOS has been thoroughly optimised for intel processors, and software such as Final Cut Pro make use of features like intel quick sync for much of their performance advantages.

Quicksync does not exist in desktop Xeon processors (Not sure on mobile xeons, but they're a crappy artificial product segmentation exercise by intel anyway), as Xeons have no integrated GPU which is where the quicksync hardware lives.

The iMac Pro and Mac Pro do not have quicksync capable hardware.

A 64 threadripper (maybe 32 core, even) is faster than anything intel has at video processing anyway through sheer brute force of core count.

 

[DCswitch]

No, my argument is more reality based. Find a copper-based 25G or 40G interface and controller chip that doesn't overheat itself into oblivion while it's running. Here's a hint: they don't exist. The 10G chip in the Mac is already a fire breather and needs its own heat sink. And you want faster?

Oh, wait, I know: go optics instead. That'll fix everything, right? Sure, and then drive the end users' costs up massively. And finally, what home or office infrastructure are these 25/40/... equipped Mac Pros going to connect to? Have you priced out faster switches lately? I'm sure you realize that those switches are ALL data center centric, right? They cost a cubic butt-ton PER PORT, and make so much noise you can't hear yourself think.

Pretty clear you don't do networking for a living. As it turns out: that's precisely what I do.

But that's OK, the Mac Pro provides you x16 PCI-E slots that can handle 100G! So run right out and snag a 100G card for your Mac Pr.... oh... wait... you don't have one yet, do you? Too busy bitching about its content and pricing.

Never mind. Carry on.

I'm wondering if you could help me. I have a 7,1 and I'm trying to add a 100G card that plays nice. The only card I see is a Chelsio, but it keeps dropping shares when connected directly to our TrueNAS (different subnet). I haven't tried a switch yet because I tend to think that will resolve the issue, but I don't want to add a switch just to connect one Mac Pro.

Any guidance would be appreciated.