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

[blackadde]

Profitable and PROFITABLE are pretty different things. Does Apple see midrange towers as a growth market? Do they see a stream of after-market upgrades and sales? Are those users more likely to eat up a disproportionate amount of customer service resources? Are they better served putting that money into ARM development? What about return on investment on development vs. a marketing push to shove those users onto iMacs? Are enough of those people eventually going to just pony up for the 7,1 that releasing the xMac would cannibalize those margins?

Lots of questions, not a lot of hard data. Apple is a huge company but they can’t hit all targets at all times - for instance, high end PC gaming is bigger than ever and Apple has long since conceded that market. They don’t have the ecosystem for it and they don’t play nicely enough with 3rd party vendors for it to be an easy fit.

I’d like to see the xMac happen because I’m one of the people best served by a midrange tower computer. Back when the trashcan came out I was in the market for a new desktop to replace my old iMac, but I just didn’t see a future in it. I am very glad I transitioned to Win10 for my work because I would have been waiting an awfully long time for an upgrade path that would have blown my budget anyways (7,1).

 

[throAU]

It is hard to understand that Apple is ignoring one of the large markets: PC desktop. If Apple makes a modular desktop with non-Xeon and severs parts, it would be profitable.

Whether or not it is profitable, it would encourage a lot more power users to actually use their platform.

And power users are frequently the people asked for hardware recommendations by normies who are looking to buy a computer. Those recommendations may well be for lesser, more profitable models.

 

[Tesla1856]

Apple need to stop trying to be revolutionary with design for what is essentially a workstation box and build things that work. Apple Pros could have had something with Mac Pro 7.1 performance *2 years ago* if Apple actually focused on getting pro hardware out the door rather than making it pretty.

We've been building workstation PCs with effective cooling for decades. It is a solved problem. Stop re-inventing the wheel and ship the hardware your customers need to do their jobs.

You have a point, but remember, this is Apple hardware.

I was surprised to see no AIO Liquid-Cooler (ie Asetek) for at least the CPU. But go over to Dell and find the Precision Fixed Workstations with LC. Instead, you find towering-heat-sinks (similar to this), and GPU's cooled by fans like always. Maybe I'm the one behind the times ?

I did not look real-close at Apple's video-card cooling, but their solution does seem to cool the whole-box ... even if fully-loaded. Hopefully, that grill will take a filter (that's a lot of air being drawn-in).

 

[JoeG4]

I was surprised to see no AIO Liquid-Cooler (ie Asetek) for at least the CPU. But go over to Dell and find the Precision Fixed Workstations with LC. Instead, you find towering-heat-sinks (similar to this), and GPU's cooled by fans like always. Maybe I'm the one behind the times ?

There are two really popular heatsinks in the DIY PC community right now:

Noctua's dual tower coolers:

NH-D15

Built on the basis of the legendary NH-D14 and carrying on its quest for ultimate quiet cooling performance, Noctua’s flagship model NH-D15 is an elite-class dual tower cooler for the highest demands. Its expanded heatpipe layout and two premium grade NF-A15 140mm fans with PWM support for...

noctua.at

Be Quiet's Dark Rock Pro 4

DARK ROCK PRO 4 silent high-end Air coolers from be quiet!

No compromise silence and performance

www.bequiet.com

AIOs actually have a bit of a poor reputation for being overpriced and not being worth the money.

What about return on investment on development vs. a marketing push to shove those users onto iMacs?

I haven't really seen such a push. They made the iMac Pro and then kinda sat on it. I might live in a weird little bubble but I don't really understand Apple's fixation on all-in-one desktops. Who the heck still buys them? Practically everyone who would have bought one in the early 2000s moved on to a laptop.

So much of the point of getting a desktop is to get things you can't practically have in a laptop. The slim aesthetics of the iMac don't jibe very well with the thermal demands of a hot CPU and GPU.

I guess it's wonderful they care so much about the people who run mall kiosks that.. totally end up buying the $400 Dell/HP/Sony that looks like a really bad imitation of an iMac.

 

[blackadde]

AIO coolers are more or less fine - they act as a bridge between the performance of a tower cooler and a full custom WC loop. I suspect the simplest reason that Apple/Dell don't go that route is just that they aren't pushing the CPUs anywhere near hard enough to require them by staying within voltage spec and the added cost / complexity (no pump!) aren't worth it.

 

[jinnyman]

Besides, high percentage of PC workstation sits in a rack room where noise is non issue. Cluster of server grade CPU chips in one 4u workstation with 8 gpgpus sounds like a jet plane taking off and still cools ok. I wouldn't want AIO in a rack room if I were to maintain them.

 

[Quu]

I don't think the Mac Pro is a failure but it feels like it doesn't do much very well, just okay.

For instance. $5,999 starting price but you only get an 8 core CPU, 32GB of RAM, RX 580 and 256GB of SSD. So the pricing is quite off I feel for that base spec.

The RAM comes by default configured in quad-channel even though the CPU's are all six channel capable. Leaving some performance on the table with a non-optimal memory configuration by default.

The SSD modules are proprietary and cannot be changed by the user and Apple has explicitly told owners they won't upgrade the modules for them after purchase. Apple will only replace them if they fail and only with identical modules to the system originally was purchased with.

The Mac Pro allows you to install your own PCIe cards which is great but you don't get the power cables with the Mac Pro that are necessary for the high performing cards most users would want to install, the selection of MPX cards is small and is likely not to grow much. This cable kit is made solely by Belkin and sold separately.

The Mac Pro can take hard disk drives that use SATA but Apple didn't include a hard drive cage or power cable in the box instead requiring purchasers to buy a third party module at significant cost that comes with a hard drive intended for surveillance video recording and not professional storage (Western Digital Purple 8TB).

The system even when configured with the 28 Core Intel XEON is outclassed in performance by the already available Threadripper 32 Core 3970X and in 1 month from now the Threadripper 64 core 3990X will be available which costs just $3,990 and more than doubles the performance of the 28 Core XEON available in the Mac Pro.

Due to the Mac Pro Intel's XEON's we are relegated to PCIe 3.0. Today this isn't such a huge problem since most add-in cards use PCIe 3.0 but with this systems high cost and expandability it's expected you'll keep it for many years. It feels sour to spend so much money on outdated technology. Threadripper already supports PCIe 4.0 which doubles the available bandwidth for the same lane widths. You can today buy PCIe 4.0 M.2 SSD's which would work in PCIe slot adaptors at up-to 7GB/s sustained read/write. A fair leg up on the Apple provided SSD's. There are also 100Gb/s-400Gb/s network cards available from Mellanox that use PCIe 4.0 to reach those high speeds.

Apple still hasn't allowed NVIDIA to sign their driver packages for macOS Catalina (or the previous operating system for that matter) so users cannot use the highest performing graphics cards on the market even if they wanted to.

Due to the aforementioned NVIDIA driver issues the tower is pointless for any developer utilising NVIDIA's CUDA technology.

The machine does have some really nice things like silent high performance cooling, powerful modular power supply and built in dual 10Gb ethernet it lacks a lot of things you would expect to come standard on a regular desktop let alone a high end workstation that is meant to offer extreme levels of flexibility to professionals.

There may be some things here that people will see and go, well I don't need more than 28 Cores, I don't need faster GPU's, I don't need CUDA, I don't need PCIe 4.0. To you I say, then why are you spending so much money on a super high end workstation when you don't need all the best stuff? You'd probably be fine using a $2,000 Dell.

The whole point of these kinds of workstations is to provide performance and capability well beyond consumer systems so that you can either get your work done faster or achieve greater results in the same amount of time. In this case we already have consumer systems shipping with 16 Core CPU's and PCIe 4.0 (Ryzen 3950X) which doesn't just beat the Mac Pro base spec for 1/6th the price but will absolutely crush it into oblivion.

The final thing I wanted to touch on was the Afterburner card. This is a great addition to the Mac Pro but at $2,000 it really makes me laugh. Especially when you have DaVinici Resolve just blasting through 8K video editing by offloading work to your GPU's - In-fact Final Cut Pro itself got an update recently that gave it a Metal 2 compute upgrade and it kinda makes the Afterburner card redundant for most video editing tasks including timeline scrubbing and multiple stream playback.

So yeah I don't think it's a fail but it's a really hard sell. The PowerMac G5 and then Mac Pro were always niche but this addition is like a niche on a niche on a niche. You have to jump through some serious hoops for it to do anything better than a Threadripper or EPYC workstation.

 

[jinnyman]

There may be some things here that people will see and go, well I don't need more than 28 Cores, I don't need faster GPU's, I don't need CUDA, I don't need PCIe 4.0. To you I say, then why are you spending so much money on a super high end workstation when you don't need all the best stuff? You'd probably be fine using a $2,000 Dell.

When all the short comings are stocked together, MP 7,1 suddenly looks less promising. You know, it's always the same. People defends Apple at no cost. If Apple were to introduce MP 7,1 with EPYC, nVidia, non proprietary upgradability, the same people defending Apple will still defend Apple's decision. All the power and options were available for last 2~3 years, and people are suddenly joyous over the vast improved performance compared to 6,1 or 5,1. People actually compare machines from 2013 and 2010 wow!

The stuff Apple's offering at base configuration is a total rip off, yet people defends it saying the future options it offers are vastly superior. I guess that's true, but people interested in base configuration don't need future possibility of going 6 channel ram, going 1400W power, going 2 MPX full modules and going W variant of Xeon.

I get it. It's meant for different target audience. Then at least be respectful about it and include 10 Core CPU and 1TB SSD at least in the base configuration. The thread on non Apple bootable PCIe SSD options are growing over 17pages. That's telling people. 256 gig for 5,999 machine and Apple fan defends it by saying that people will upgrade anyway, and better to go low so that upgrade cost is cheaper OR people doesn't need more than 256. LOL

 

[Quu]

When all the short comings are stocked together, MP 7,1 suddenly looks less promising. You know, it's always the same. People defends Apple at no cost. If Apple were to introduce MP 7,1 with EPYC, nVidia, non proprietary upgradability, the same people defending Apple will still defend Apple's decision. All the power and options were available for last 2~3 years, and people are suddenly joyous over the vast improved performance compared to 6,1 or 5,1. People actually compare machines from 2013 and 2010 wow!

The stuff Apple's offering at base configuration is a total rip off, yet people defends it saying the future options it offers are vastly superior. I guess that's true, but people interested in base configuration don't need future possibility of going 6 channel ram, going 1400W power, going 2 MPX full modules and going W variant of Xeon.

I get it. It's meant for different target audience. Then at least be respectful about it and include 10 Core CPU and 1TB SSD at least in the base configuration. The thread on non Apple bootable PCIe SSD options are growing over 17pages. That's telling people. 256 gig for 5,999 machine and Apple fan defends it by saying that people will upgrade anyway, and better to go low so that upgrade cost is cheaper OR people doesn't need more than 256. LOL

Mhm and I think a lot of these shortcomings would be acceptable on a system priced reasonably, shame it isn't.

 

[blackadde]

The knock-on effects of the 2013 trashcan failure really bit Apple in the ass. Not only did it asphyxiate their professional customers for the better part of a decade (leading to an exodus to greener pastures), but it pushed them into a delivery window for the 7,1 exactly as their partners (Intel for CPU, AMD for GPU) were both on the back foot $ vs perf-wise in the high-performance market.

 

[JoeG4]

Besides, high percentage of PC workstation sits in a rack room where noise is non issue.

Ehhh. Not really. The stuff sitting in a rack room are rack mounted servers, like $20-50,000 Dell PowerEdges. We have plenty of those where I work lol. Some of us also have Dell Precision workstations hiding under our desks for smaller build server tasks.

It's interesting that Apple sells the Mac Pro with an optional rackmount case. I appreciate that they at least thought about it for a moment.


Thinking about the trash can:

Honestly, when they introduced a $1000 monitor arm I thought they were telling us loud and clear that they didn't think the trashcan mac pro was a mistake. It felt like they were doubling down on their principles, and that we just didn't understand/appreciate designer hardware.

The cynical side of me would get a little chuckle out, had they introduced a Mac Pro Edition with 24k gold plated handles and a ceramic case.

Edit: Before people get angry, I am sure there are configurations where it's a bargain or whatever.

 

[Tesla1856]

1.There are two really popular heatsinks in the DIY PC community right now:

2. AIOs actually have a bit of a poor reputation for being overpriced and not being worth the money.

3. I might live in a weird little bubble but I don't really understand Apple's fixation on all-in-one desktops.

1. I haven't used anything like that since the days of Intel-Core-2. I have a similar one in my (older) HTPC.

My world is the Apple machines in my sig and the thinnest Windows UltraBooks I can find.
My Windows boxes all have nice Nvidia graphics-cards with Intel-i7 and i9. They need Liquid-Coolers for gaming, VR, and encoding-video (all cores running at 100% utilization).

2. Hmm, no I did not know that. Hard-loop or go-home, huh ?

3. Yeah, neither do I but I might end-up with one after-all. Right, the Dell and HP ones are pretty poor.

 

[high heaven]

Well, even Mac Pro can not use all resources for Final Cut Pro X cause it is very optimized that you dont need a high-end spec. It would be very difficult to fully load the Mac Pro 2019 with FCPX base on Max's video. If you add afterburner, Mac Pro uses only 1~5% of CPU and GPU...

 

[Tesla1856]

I don't think the Mac Pro is a failure but it feels like it doesn't do much very well, just okay.

For instance. $5,999 starting price but you only get an 8 core CPU, 32GB of RAM, RX 580 and 256GB of SSD. So the pricing is quite off I feel for that base spec.

So yeah I don't think it's a fail but it's a really hard sell. The PowerMac G5 and then Mac Pro were always niche but this addition is like a niche on a niche on a niche.

Yeah, that SSD size is lame, but that is what the NAS is for, right? I guess mine will be around $6499 (like I can afford one). Still, I'm glad Apple made it. People with money (and businesses) will buy them. macOS might live-on after all.

That was a good read. You seem to know your stuff.

 

[kwikdeth]

we won't see mac pros with PCIe 4.0. 4.0 was repeatedly delayed so a lot of manufacturers are just going to 5.0.

Leaked Intel server roadmap reveals DDR5 and PCIe 5.0 plans - OC3D

Leaked Intel server roadmap reveals DDR5 and PCIe 5.0 plans While Huawei was being dealt a killer blow from the United States, the company unveiled an ambitious product roadmap for their server systems, aligning with Intel’s planned offerings to deliver systems with DDR5 support and PCIe 5.0...

www.overclock3d.net

 

[avkills]

There is 1 thing the MacPro does better than any AMD CPU based system....run OSX.

I have a hackintosh so I know all the pitfalls of them.

 

[jinnyman]

There is 1 thing the MacPro does better than any AMD CPU based system....run OSX.

I have a hackintosh so I know all the pitfalls of them.

It’s not intel vs amd that affect how Mac OS runs. If Apple officially support, Mac OS will run just fine.
I’ve done hackintosh also.

 

[Coyote2006]

Apple should really release a Mac, means a smaller version of the MacPro. If they don't want to support internal drives then remove the space for it. Who needs more than one MPX slot? Who needs 12 RAM slots? Who needs CPU replacement if Apple/Intel can't provide boards that allow more than one generation of CPUs being added?

I'd say many/most 5,1 users would be happy with a Mac like this:

i9/Xeon CPU not replaceable
1TB, Apple SSD/T2 (unfortunately this has to be)
32GB RAM, 4 RAM slots (or 3 whatever makes sense to the CPU being used)
5700 GPU, 1 MPX slot
2 additional PCIE slots
silent cooling
$3500

 

[defjam]

When all the short comings are stocked together, MP 7,1 suddenly looks less promising. You know, it's always the same. People defends Apple at no cost. If Apple were to introduce MP 7,1 with EPYC, nVidia, non proprietary upgradability, the same people defending Apple will still defend Apple's decision. All the power and options were available for last 2~3 years, and people are suddenly joyous over the vast improved performance compared to 6,1 or 5,1. People actually compare machines from 2013 and 2010 wow!

I liken it to waking up from a six year coma. Technology marched forward during that time but the Mac Pro was stuck in 2013.

The stuff Apple's offering at base configuration is a total rip off, yet people defends it saying the future options it offers are vastly superior. I guess that's true, but people interested in base configuration don't need future possibility of going 6 channel ram, going 1400W power, going 2 MPX full modules and going W variant of Xeon.

It's all relative. The 2019 Mac Pro is not the pinnacle of technology. Systems just as, or more capable, than it have been available for years. However when compared to Apple's previous offerings the Mac Pro is the pinnacle of Macintosh technology. Mac users are in awe of its capabilities whereas the rest of the world is like "Is that it?"
[automerge]1578919895[/automerge]

Apple should really release a Mac, means a smaller version of the MacPro. If they don't want to support internal drives then remove the space for it. Who needs more than one MPX slot? Who needs 12 RAM slots? Who needs CPU replacement if Apple/Intel can't provide boards that allow more than one generation of CPUs being added?

I'd say many/most 5,1 users would be happy with a Mac like this:

i9 CPU not replaceable
1TB, Apple SSD/T2 (unfortunately this has to be)
32GB RAM, 4 RAM slots (or 3 whatever makes sense to the CPU being used)
5700 GPU, 1 MPX slot
2 additional PCIE slots
silent cooling
$3500

I'd say most cMP users would be happy with a cMP with updated internals. A cMP with updated internals would be what many users would like. It was, IMO, the perfect desktop system. Apple already had it, all they needed to do was update it. Instead they go off on their "can't innovate my ass" kick ruining a good thing.

 

[avkills]

Guess I should added my sarcasm meter to my last comment.

Sure the Mac Pro isn’t the bleeding edge; but it is a hell of a lot better than anything else they make.

I would be ok with a i9 or a Ryzen based Mac with 1 MPX and a couple more PCI slots. But you don’t always get what you want.

Funny Apple is almost backwards. Intel CPU + AMD GPU / Probably should be AMD CPU + nVidia GPU.

But here we are. Perhaps it isn’t as big of a upgrade to fully loaded cMP users; but it was for me. And my hack was EOL; and I didn’t feel like making another one and dealing with it.

 

[Adult80HD]

Apple should really release a Mac, means a smaller version of the MacPro. If they don't want to support internal drives then remove the space for it. Who needs more than one MPX slot? Who needs 12 RAM slots? Who needs CPU replacement if Apple/Intel can't provide boards that allow more than one generation of CPUs being added?

I'd say many/most 5,1 users would be happy with a Mac like this:

i9/Xeon CPU not replaceable
1TB, Apple SSD/T2 (unfortunately this has to be)
32GB RAM, 4 RAM slots (or 3 whatever makes sense to the CPU being used)
5700 GPU, 1 MPX slot
2 additional PCIE slots
silent cooling
$3500

Apple has that, it's called the iMac or iMac Pro. The only thing those two don't have is the PCIe slots. Between the Mac Pro and those offerings I'm guessing that they cover the needs of 95% or more of their market, so the ROI on adding a new model probably isn't there.

 

[avkills]

Well, even Mac Pro can not use all resources for Final Cut Pro X cause it is very optimized that you dont need a high-end spec. It would be very difficult to fully load the Mac Pro 2019 with FCPX base on Max's video. If you add afterburner, Mac Pro uses only 1~5% of CPU and GPU...

He was only playing video back to show how much the Afterburner card helps in decoding ProRes. This frees the CPU and GPU for handling more effects and transitions. Editing isn’t just timeline performance.

 

[defjam]

Apple has that, it's called the iMac or iMac Pro. The only thing those two don't have is the PCIe slots. Between the Mac Pro and those offerings I'm guessing that they cover the needs of 95% or more of their market, so the ROI on adding a new model probably isn't there.

The iMac / iMac Pro are not that.

 

[Coyote2006]

Apple has that, it's called the iMac or iMac Pro. The only thing those two don't have is the PCIe slots. Between the Mac Pro and those offerings I'm guessing that they cover the needs of 95% or more of their market, so the ROI on adding a new model probably isn't there.

That's what probably Apple also thinks but no. I already have a monitor and I don't want an AIO solution. CPUs do not make that big jumps anymore, especially in single core tasks. So for most pro-users the possibility of changing the GPU and extending the RAM is more important. And eGPUs are not the solution. Too buggy, not really supported.

 

[jinnyman]

Apple has that, it's called the iMac or iMac Pro. The only thing those two don't have is the PCIe slots. Between the Mac Pro and those offerings I'm guessing that they cover the needs of 95% or more of their market, so the ROI on adding a new model probably isn't there.

Even you can't say for sure they will continue updating iMac Pro. So no. It's not that. That product's future may be discontinuation.