Is the new Mac Pro a failure?

[AidenShaw]

when this thread is locked..

Which is clearly your goal.

Not to have an open discussion about the MP6,1 - but to shut off any discussion with people who aren't happy with the MP6,1.

Your motives are now clear.

 

[flat five]

Which is clearly your goal.

Not to have an open discussion about the MP6,1 - but to shut off any discussion with people who aren't happy with the MP6,1.

Your motives are now clear.

you got me.
but damn man, the feeling i get when the mods finally take permissions away from posting in a thread.. oh.. wow.
it's exhilarating.. orgasmic even.

i just can't help myself.

 

[realtwang]

You are right. I know for sure that Apple are losing professional audio users. Composers mainly I believe, but possibly also ProTools users.

And how do you know this? I am a professional audio user, living in major pro audio city, and I see nothing but more people switching to Mac. The amount of studios with PC based workstations is shrinking if anything.

 

[realtwang]

And one more thing...If users want to choose their graphics card, processor, drive, and everything else in the machine, why are they waiting for Apple to build a machine that's exactly what they want? Sounds like those users should just be building their own machine anyway.

 

[Max(IT)]

The definition of a workstation is very flexible and subjective. I feel that a large part of it isn't even the computer itself, it's the level of support, the way the seller markets the computer, or even the intended purchasing audience.

However, just like the definition of obscenity, "I know it when I see it". I completely understand that it is debatable; the following is just my opinion only:

• When I see a Z-Series HP, I definitely think "workstation". I don't think most people would question this.

• When I see a cMP, I also think "workstation". There are many parallels with the Z-Series that differentiates it from a typical general purpose PC. For example the available dual CPU options, ECC RAM standard, lots of memory slots, etc.

• When I see that Alienware, I definitely think "gaming computer". It's really powerful, and heck, it might be equal to or even faster at doing actual work than an actual workstation--but I still wouldn't call it a workstation. Just as Microsoft Word might be more effective for writing than a pencil, that doesn't mean Microsoft Word is a pencil.

• When I see a nMP it's a bit hard for me to define, in large part because the nMP is somewhat unique in the computing world. I don't think of it as a workstation in the classical sense--it just seems so unlike other workstations in the history of the term. Yes, it might do a lot of work quite well, but so would any PC with powerful components. It's definitely not a gaming machine--no Macs are, even if they are used as such. Nor is it a typical, general purpose computer--the nMP's secondary, compute-only GPU is too niche for that definition. What the nMP really excels at, and what it seems to be designed for, is to be a compact OpenCL monster for Apple's Pro apps. Sure, it can be used for a lot of other purposes just as any other computer can, but that seems to be it's raison d'etre.

I like, and mostly agree, with your analysis. Being targeted primary at Apple's Pro apps, why can't you (and the others Apple bashers here) see the nMP as a "workstation" ?

Easy test - run a CUDA-based app.

(Just ordered six more Titan-X cards to go into three 24-core 512 GiB Haswell-EP servers... Enjoy your 7970s....)

wow mate, is it so difficult to understand that not all of the professionals out there are looking for CUDA-based apps ?
BTW the Titan-X , powerful as it is, doesn't qualified as a workstation-class graphic adapter. The Quadro serie are.
My point is that you, and a few others here, are a competent tech geek, but professionals studios out there aren't going to configure and buy gaming machines to do their job.
They are looking at professionals workstation-class solutions, even if not top notch in performance.
For some of them a MP still is a good and reliable solution.

 

[Max(IT)]

Which is clearly your goal.

Not to have an open discussion about the MP6,1 - but to shut off any discussion with people who aren't happy with the MP6,1.

Your motives are now clear.

Aiden, with all due respect, you are not having any open discussion here.
Your only point is you want an open box where you can put whatever you want, even not workstation-class hardware, caring only about performance.
You clearly are not a MP user, but even in the old model.
The cMP still was a "closed" environment, in the Apple's way, with a very few choices available regarding graphic adapters and basically only ram and internal storage user upgradeable.

Your point is clear enough and you are entitled to have that.
But I know a lot (if not most) of professionals that dont really care about what's inside their workstation. They just want the job to be done.
Do not mix up tech enthusiasts with pros: they are not the same.

And one more thing...If users want to choose their graphics card, processor, drive, and everything else in the machine, why are they waiting for Apple to build a machine that's exactly what they want? Sounds like those users should just be building their own machine anyway.

exactly.
On forums like this there are tech geeks that love the DIY way.
They are not the target for MP (and most of the Apple's products anyway).

What I don't understand is the reason they are here to bash Apple.

 

[lowendlinux]

I like, and mostly agree, with your analysis. Being targeted primary at Apple's Pro apps, why can't you (and the others Apple bashers here) see the nMP as a "workstation" ?



wow mate, is it so difficult to understand that not all of the professionals out there are looking for CUDA-based apps ?
BTW the Titan-X , powerful as it is, doesn't qualified as a workstation-class graphic adapter. The Quadro serie are.
My point is that you, and a few others here, are a competent tech geek, but professionals studios out there aren't going to configure and buy gaming machines to do their job.
They are looking at professionals workstation-class solutions, even if not top notch in performance.
For some of them a MP still is a good and reliable solution.

The things that make a quadro and FP shine is not the ECC or the name it's the optimized drivers and FP64 if those drivers aren't available (they're not in nix) and you work load isn't FP64 (there isn't many and none for the Mac IIRC) then the only real deciding factor is do you need ECC memory.

Aiden, with all due respect, you are not having any open discussion here.
Your only point is you want an open box where you can put whatever you want, even not workstation-class hardware, caring only about performance.
You clearly are not a MP user, but even in the old model.
The cMP still was a "closed" environment, in the Apple's way, with a very few choices available regarding graphic adapters and basically only ram and internal storage user upgradeable.

Your point is clear enough and you are entitled to have that.
But I know a lot (if not most) of professionals that dont really care about what's inside their workstation. They just want the job to be done.
Do not mix up tech enthusiasts with pros: they are not the same.


exactly.
On forums like this there are tech geeks that love the DIY way.
They are not the target for MP (and most of the Apple's products anyway).

What I don't understand is the reason they are here to bash Apple.

We actually do care because we need to get stuff done and anything that I purchase is toward that end. I know the SW I use what it's capable of and the resources it needs and I purchase based on that. If I didn't know I'd find people that do much like you did when you started asking questions when you were looking to buy your new laptop.

The Apple supported upgrades to the cMP were limited but the market produced the stuff that was required so really it's not limited to what Apple made like it is now and that's the problem.

 

[Max(IT)]

The things that make a quadro and FP shine is not the ECC or the name it's the optimized drivers and FP64 if those drivers aren't available (they're not in nix) and you work load isn't FP64 (there isn't many and none for the Mac IIRC) then the only real deciding factor is do you need ECC memory.

If you are running a "critical mission" computer, the presence of ECC isn't a "deciding factor": it is a must.
My point is RELIABILITY beats PERFORMANCE if you are a "pro" (whatever it means).

 

[lowendlinux]

If you are running a "critical mission" computer, the presence of ECC isn't a "deciding factor": it is a must.
My point is RELIABILITY beats PERFORMANCE if you are a "pro" (whatever it means).

It's actually not especially in a graphics card 10-15 years ago I'd agree.

 

[Simon R.]

And how do you know this? I am a professional audio user, living in major pro audio city, and I see nothing but more people switching to Mac. The amount of studios with PC based workstations is shrinking if anything.

A forum I have frequented over many years has clearly seen a shift from Mac (Logic/DP) to PC (Cubase mainly) during that period. Many pros, mainly power users who can't do their work from a simple laptop setup.

 

[whodatrr]

And here's another thing...

Notice a trend here? Ten or so years ago, we were at ~250 days between releases. Now, we're over 700 and counting.

 

[Max(IT)]

And here's another thing...

Notice a trend here? Ten or so years ago, we were at ~250 days between releases. Now, we're over 700 and counting.

That's the "real" failure of the current MP.

 

[whodatrr]

Yep, 2+ years between releases doesn't demonstrate a serious commitment. and who knows how much longer we'll have to wait for a refresh? Heck, I know companies on a 2.5yr refresh schedule, though most are at or around 3yrs. Still, we're now getting close to the point where a worker getting a refreshed workstation will wind up with the exact same model they got last time around, which is just silly.

That's the "real" failure of the current MP.

 

[F1Mac]

A forum I have frequented over many years has clearly seen a shift from Mac (Logic/DP) to PC (Cubase mainly) during that period. Many pros, mainly power users who can't do their work from a simple laptop setup.

You shouldn't base your conclusions on forum observations... The reality is different. Macs are prominently used in the audio/post world.

 

[Max(IT)]

Yep, 2+ years between releases doesn't demonstrate a serious commitment. and who knows how much longer we'll have to wait for a refresh? Heck, I know companies on a 2.5yr refresh schedule, though most are at or around 3yrs. Still, we're now getting close to the point where a worker getting a refreshed workstation will wind up with the exact same model they got last time around, which is just silly.

that's a point I agree with you.
They should have released a "2015 MP" with a new CPU and a new GPU this summer.

 

[shaunp]

I like, and mostly agree, with your analysis. Being targeted primary at Apple's Pro apps, why can't you (and the others Apple bashers here) see the nMP as a "workstation" ?

I've got a nMP, that I'm using now to write this post. It's a 6-core with D700's, 512GB SSD and 64GB of Crucial RAM. It's a very nice machine for general 'stuff', running a small VM lab for development work and I use it for photo editing in Lightroom and Photoshop too. I push it quite a bit and throughout it has remained reliable and is always utterly silent.

Having said that I would swap it in a heartbeat for a design similar to the older Mac Pro as I think the current machine just lacks options. The graphics are too slow when pushing around 20MP images at 1:1 - I need to view them at 1:1 to check quality before I submit them for stock. I have the highest spec GPU's apple provide and I can't upgrade them.

Sometimes I find the CPU limiting. Yes I could have gone for the 12-core but it was twice the price, but doesn't offer twice the performance for my workloads. I would prefer a single, fast GPU and a second CPU.

And I would love some internal storage space - 8 x 2.5" bays would be great as i can put either SSD or SAS in there. I don't need a massive amount of storage and my Pegasus thunderbolt array, while very good, could easily be housed inside a machine with a midi-sized case. I do a lot of work with storage professionally so I do get that others need more than I do and thunderbolt would be useful - as would some PCI slots to put FC HBA's if you want to do it properly.

So while I like the nMP I see it's limitations through daily use and I would say that it's a 'low-end' workstation. It has ECC RAM and Xeon CPU's which enable workstation reliably, but it lacks in scalability. I can see the appeal of chucking a few parts into a PC case for a fraction of the money and getting something really quick, but I also see the appeal of ISV certification too. Reliability and supportability matters if you are looking at workstations.

Another argument for not calling it a 'workstation' is that it will be compared to HP Z, Dell Precision and whatever Lenovo are making these days. HP Z and Dell Precision scale much higher and are much more flexible platforms, but they charge a lot for this. The nMP is reasonably good value, or was good value when it was launched, compared to these other platforms. It's a bit long in the tooth now and needs a more frequent update cycle - 12 months perhaps?

I think the biggest reason it is not considered a workstation however is Apple's attitude towards the market. They treat everybody with the same level of smugness and contempt. I get that the masses need to be guided but business users generally have a better idea of what they want. We also have a need to budget and plan so we need to know a platform is worth investing in before we do so.

For me the next rMBP will be deciding factor in my strategy. I have a second laptop (a Dell M4800) so I can have 32GB in my mobile lab. Dell and Lenovo are producing laptops based on mobile Xeon that have 64GB. If Apple are serious they will also produce a laptop based on mobile Xeon and have a 64GB limit - and yes some of us do need this, I appreciate that you might not but these things are called options and that is what Apple are lacking right now. If the rMBP just becomes a lighter and thinner version of what it is now and there's no update of the nMP announced by the WWDC in June that tells you everything you need to know about the future plans for Apple's plans for the 'Pro' market place. I'll be looking at HP Z and Dell Precision at that point.

 

[AidenShaw]

If you are running a "critical mission" computer, the presence of ECC isn't a "deciding factor": it is a must.
My point is RELIABILITY beats PERFORMANCE if you are a "pro" (whatever it means).

However, it's hard to say that ECC is "mission critical" for pro audio or video work (especially since the "FirePro" Dx00 on OSX don't have it).

An occasional single bit error in an audio or video stream will be inaudible or invisible.

 

[Max(IT)]

I've got a nMP, that I'm using now to write this post. It's a 6-core with D700's, 512GB SSD and 64GB of Crucial RAM. It's a very nice machine for general 'stuff', running a small VM lab for development work and I use it for photo editing in Lightroom and Photoshop too. I push it quite a bit and throughout it has remained reliable and is always utterly silent.

Having said that I would swap it in a heartbeat for a design similar to the older Mac Pro as I think the current machine just lacks options. The graphics are too slow when pushing around 20MP images at 1:1 - I need to view them at 1:1 to check quality before I submit them for stock. I have the highest spec GPU's apple provide and I can't upgrade them.

Sometimes I find the CPU limiting. Yes I could have gone for the 12-core but it was twice the price, but doesn't offer twice the performance for my workloads. I would prefer a single, fast GPU and a second CPU.

And I would love some internal storage space - 8 x 2.5" bays would be great as i can put either SSD or SAS in there. I don't need a massive amount of storage and my Pegasus thunderbolt array, while very good, could easily be housed inside a machine with a midi-sized case. I do a lot of work with storage professionally so I do get that others need more than I do and thunderbolt would be useful - as would some PCI slots to put FC HBA's if you want to do it properly.

So while I like the nMP I see it's limitations through daily use and I would say that it's a 'low-end' workstation. It has ECC RAM and Xeon CPU's which enable workstation reliably, but it lacks in scalability. I can see the appeal of chucking a few parts into a PC case for a fraction of the money and getting something really quick, but I also see the appeal of ISV certification too. Reliability and supportability matters if you are looking at workstations.

Another argument for not calling it a 'workstation' is that it will be compared to HP Z, Dell Precision and whatever Lenovo are making these days. HP Z and Dell Precision scale much higher and are much more flexible platforms, but they charge a lot for this. The nMP is reasonably good value, or was good value when it was launched, compared to these other platforms. It's a bit long in the tooth now and needs a more frequent update cycle - 12 months perhaps?

I think the biggest reason it is not considered a workstation however is Apple's attitude towards the market. They treat everybody with the same level of smugness and contempt. I get that the masses need to be guided but business users generally have a better idea of what they want. We also have a need to budget and plan so we need to know a platform is worth investing in before we do so.

For me the next rMBP will be deciding factor in my strategy. I have a second laptop (a Dell M4800) so I can have 32GB in my mobile lab. Dell and Lenovo are producing laptops based on mobile Xeon that have 64GB. If Apple are serious they will also produce a laptop based on mobile Xeon and have a 64GB limit - and yes some of us do need this, I appreciate that you might not but these things are called options and that is what Apple are lacking right now. If the rMBP just becomes a lighter and thinner version of what it is now and there's no update of the nMP announced by the WWDC in June that tells you everything you need to know about the future plans for Apple's plans for the 'Pro' market place. I'll be looking at HP Z and Dell Precision at that point.

surely current Mac Pro wasn't designed to be "scalable".
Said that, in professional environment I see a very few upgrades to existing workstations. The usual pattern is to configure a new one according to your needs, use it over a period of 4-6 years and then buy a new one.
Why is your 2 years old workstation already "long in the tooth" ?

I can understand a tech geek or a PC gamer looking for the "latest and greatest" hardware every year / year and half, but a pro usually can keep his hardware for a longer time.

I agree, as I said before, that Apple should have been updated its MP in 2015, but this should be matter of concern for NEW CUSTOMERS, not for someone who bought it in 2014 like you.
Less than 2 years and your workstation is already old ? Something's wrong with your initial choice....

My two cents.

However, it's hard to say that ECC is "mission critical" for pro audio or video work (especially since the "FirePro" Dx00 on OSX don't have it).

An occasional single bit error in an audio or video stream will be inaudible or invisible.

Aiden I'm not happy about MP's GPU since the beginning, by historically Apple has never chose the best graphic adapters...

 

[AidenShaw]

surely current Mac Pro wasn't designed to be "scalable".
Said that, in professional environment I see a very few upgrades to existing workstations. The usual pattern is to configure a new one according to your needs, use it over a period of 4-6 years and then buy a new one.

I agree - most upgrades that do happen are adding memory or additional/larger disks.

However, I see *lots* of BTO "upgrades". HP and Dell have tons of options when purchasing the system, the MP6,1 just a couple.

So, upgradeability and expandability are very useful - even if the cabinet is never opened after the box is unpacked.

 

[JoSch]

That's the "real" failure of the current MP.

I wouldn't call that a failure of MacPro. I rather would call that a failure of Apple.

 

[-hh]

Looking at a spec sheet and trying to conclude how it react in various work loads is only speculation and theory.

It is pretty straightforward to look at Power In vs Power Out to determine what a design's load capacity is.

There may be other factors that we may not know or think about that will also play into the equation.

But of course ... and one of the big variables for an ambient aircooled system is what the inlet temperature is ... was the test done in an 70F air conditioned office space, or was it done at the +95F upper limit of the product's specifications?

I'm not sure about this first test your talking about as I don't see how any actual tests were done.

It was a simple crosswalk of Apple specifications, which revealed that the heat dissipation capability of the design failed to exceed its heat generation capability.

EDIT: Just reading the post above me I see we do have some actual testing and confirmation that it does appear that throttling is not an issue, at least on the most part.

Good to hear; FWIW, I'd appreciate the convenience of a link to whoever's already done some benchmark tests.

I think we do have some workstations that are used in business that are more geared to office productivity apps such as Microsoft Office. We tend to talk workstation here as with powerful graphic cards.

Yes, this is another complexity to the topic as well, as having excess computational capacity can make for 'fast response' systems for which it is a pleasure to perform such tasks on...and in some cases, a system with overkill can be justified (or at least rationalized) just from its 'snappiness', even if it doesn't really conform to the more traditional notion of the knowledge worker setting up some 'heavy' task to run on a workstation. But even here, power users come in all forms: a colleague is doing some surprisingly complex (multi-DOF) modeling in MS-Excel (of all things) and management is trying to push him to rewrite ~10 years worth of work into a different modeling application (IIRC, MathCAD?)...even though that won't speed anything up for him: it simply makes his work appear to be politically "More Respectable" by it not being done in Excel.

 

[shaunp]

surely current Mac Pro wasn't designed to be "scalable".
Said that, in professional environment I see a very few upgrades to existing workstations. The usual pattern is to configure a new one according to your needs, use it over a period of 4-6 years and then buy a new one.
Why is your 2 years old workstation already "long in the tooth" ?

I can understand a tech geek or a PC gamer looking for the "latest and greatest" hardware every year / year and half, but a pro usually can keep his hardware for a longer time.

I agree, as I said before, that Apple should have been updated its MP in 2015, but this should be matter of concern for NEW CUSTOMERS, not for someone who bought it in 2014 like you.
Less than 2 years and your workstation is already old ? Something's wrong with your initial choice....

My two cents.


Aiden I'm not happy about MP's GPU since the beginning, by historically Apple has never chose the best graphic adapters...

Your assuming I have the same needs as your users. My environment is very different. I have to build prototypes based on applications that now have rapid development cycles - 3-6 month updates. This is out of my control and why my upgrade cycles are 2-3 years not 4-6 years. I wish I could have a 4-6 year cycle, but it's not possible.

The nMP isn't terrible, and none of the performance issues I have seen with it are enough for me to can it just yet, but I need a mobile platform to work in conjunction with it and I constantly hit the limits of my 2012 rMBP. I don't feel the current one is enough of an upgrade to justify buying one and it still has a 16GB RAM limit - I need at least 32GB. I need both to be on the same OS as I don't want to be constantly swapping between Windows and OS X. If I have to swap the laptop, then I'll swap the desktop (prematurely) to maintain a single platform.

The long in the tooth comment was about the config options not my own nMP. Same was for the scaleability, I was talking about scaleability not upgradeability. Some would prefer a second CPU rather than a second GPU as nothing makes use of it other than FCP X.

You might be right about one thing though. I might have bought the wrong product. I'll know after the next WWDC when I see what my laptop options really are.

 

[linuxcooldude]

It was a simple crosswalk of Apple specifications, which revealed that the heat dissipation capability of the design failed to exceed its heat generation capability.

In other words, no actual testing was done. Spec sheets don't tell you everything. Even the iPad with lower specs often out performed other tablets for instance.

Some would prefer a second CPU rather than a second GPU as nothing makes use of it other than FCP X.

DaVinci Resolve and Premiere Pro come to mind. Maybe others.

 

[Max(IT)]

Your assuming I have the same needs as your users. My environment is very different. I have to build prototypes based on applications that now have rapid development cycles - 3-6 month updates. This is out of my control and why my upgrade cycles are 2-3 years not 4-6 years. I wish I could have a 4-6 year cycle, but it's not possible.

The nMP isn't terrible, and none of the performance issues I have seen with it are enough for me to can it just yet, but I need a mobile platform to work in conjunction with it and I constantly hit the limits of my 2012 rMBP. I don't feel the current one is enough of an upgrade to justify buying one and it still has a 16GB RAM limit - I need at least 32GB. I need both to be on the same OS as I don't want to be constantly swapping between Windows and OS X. If I have to swap the laptop, then I'll swap the desktop (prematurely) to maintain a single platform.

The long in the tooth comment was about the config options not my own nMP. Same was for the scaleability, I was talking about scaleability not upgradeability. Some would prefer a second CPU rather than a second GPU as nothing makes use of it other than FCP X.

You might be right about one thing though. I might have bought the wrong product. I'll know after the next WWDC when I see what my laptop options really are.

If your needs require to always have the latest hardware available, I think Apple has not the right solutions for you.

 

[JoSch]

The long in the tooth comment was about the config options not my own nMP. Same was for the scaleability, I was talking about scaleability not upgradeability. Some would prefer a second CPU rather than a second GPU as nothing makes use of it other than FCP X.

Actually, every application using OpenCL will also be able to use the second GPU.