No, everybody doesn't appear to be getting it. Otherwise they, like you, wouldn't be making the same mistake over and over and over and over again. If they, and you, got it then I wouldn't have to keep correcting you.
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.
Is the new Mac Pro a failure?
- Thread starter ZombiePhysicist
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
haha.. ok.
i can't force you to listen to me.
keep on trying then.. maybe you'll get people to understand your point eventually.
good luck.
Finally something we agree on. And since the nMP FAILS to run it due to the non-upgradeable GPUs, I think the mods should close this thread and make it a sticky with a 100% "FAIL" vote.
Speaking of which, where are those GPU upgrades you predicted would be here long ago?
You recently stated that they would be here when they were wanted/needed. I'd say even wearing Apple colored glasses you would have to see that the day is here. (well past actually) Are they (still) 6 months away? Or can you finally admit that they aren't going to be riding over the hill to save the nMP from the (well predicted) early obsolescence?
You are the one that introduced the hardware saying Apple could upgrade the hardware in the Tower if they wanted too, I didn't say anything about the Hardware being changed/upgraded in my post that you responded too. I simply pointed out that neither box would meet the requirements as are. Which we have agreed on.
Lets make it layout. as you and pl595 want, and not the hardware Theres nothing in the LAYOUT of the nMP that means that it cannot do upgradeability, as that is what you are commenting on. There is nothing in the Tower/cMP layout either that prevents it, of course there isn't.
iFxit did a tear down of the nMP so if you can tear down then you can put back together. This would therefore allow the LAYOUT to take better cards ( if there are cards available, however we are talking LAYOUT not hardware now) when reassembling would it not.
What is now available in PCI-E that you cannot put at the end of Thunderbolt? There are people out there with eGPU's.
Yes Thunderbolt has disadvantages compared to a PCI-E slot however those are Hardware Disadvantages not Layout
If you want to make it LAYOUT then all that you have with the tower based on layout is that you can fit more physically inside a Tower the size of the cMP then you can inside something the size of the nMP, and that is easier to work on.
I seriously doubt that ANYONE that voted No on here would actually dispute that.
At that point once you remove the hardware inside you are surely down to how it looks, or dare I say it Form over Function!, in that it looks neater wrapped up in a single case under the desk, ( my desk which has lasted 25 years so far, I wouldn't trust with a loaded cMP and the 30" Dell ) as opposed to several boxes connected by cables ( depending upon what you need to add to your System ). Both layouts would allow you to do exactly the same work, it would simply be that one looks neater then the other.
So we have had 2 years of I want my Mac Pro in a Tower because it looks neater internally, rather then externally! I can understand that perfectly. ( I say two as end of 2013 to beginning of 2016 isn' 3 )
Apologies if i have misunderstood what you have meant by its about the Layout/form factor, not the hardware. There is of course no reason that updated hardware COULDN'T have been put into the cMP Form factor. There is no reason why updated Hardware CANNOT be put into the nMP layout.
The problem appears to be merely that Apple HAVEN'T done either of these two things.
When you say something factual people will listen.
Apparently I give you too much credit by thinking you'll understand.
Another episode of the Bickersons....
Although it seems that it's the whole neighborhood against one Bickerson.
Although it seems that it's the whole neighborhood against one Bickerson.
Dude, I just face-palmed at that. Those two concepts are not even remotely related.
Decimates the nMP at what? Name Apple's target markets for the Mac Pro where it decimates the nMP. According to @MacVidCards it won't even pass the Oculus test.
Overkill is not the same as too fast. Spending $1200 for the fastest possible 1TB drive just doesn't make financial sense when the same money will buy an 8 bay RAID and the user can't tell the difference. Do you actually do any video editing? It's the reason I bought my cMP. I'd take the RAID over the SM951s any day at that price.
Apple ignores the valuable games market too. It's their choice. Doesn't mean they always will.
Because if the RAID is in the workstation and the latter died, I'd lose more functionality than just the workstation and there are far fewer things to go wrong in the NAS.
Lenovo must be doomed as well then. I just checked and none of its workstations offer enough graphics power for VR. Dell and HP will be alright. They offer workstations with enough GPU power but, amusingly, it's ~$700 cheaper to go with AMD than Nvidia.
i get it that it's exciting but slow down some.. cool them horses.
you're not going to wake up tomorrow or next month or next year and be living a completely different life.
well, next year maybe holds some possibility for 4D (or even greater dimensionality) simulations to be generated via VR in order for us to actually experience higher dimensions instead of trying to imagine them.. once we understand we don't live in a three dimensional world and that it's only our eyes/brain that make us think as such -- we're going to change.. seriously change.. maybe less than a decade and people are going to be like "holy crap! the world is not round!! it's this _____ (with 'this' being something we can't even imagine today) .. maybe more than a decade away.. idk.. but that's probably just an elementary example of what we may discover through the ability to see the world(?) through new eyes.
currently, we call this stuff 'virtual'.. thing is, what we're currently living under the guise of is virtual.. and technology, such as this VR stuff, is going to help us eventually find RR.. reality reality.
but for real.. it's the technology itself that's important.. it's completely irrelevant as to which corporation in early 21st century made the technology available for $$ earlier than some other corporation..
like-> who invented the computer?
i'll bet $1grand you don't know the answer to that without goggles.. it's no longer important who did it.. it's important that it's been done.
dunno.. where's 7,1?
i think there's another thread to make guesses at that one.
[doublepost=1452562189][/doublepost]
#1550
Last edited:
I personally voted that nMP is not a failure for few other reasons. Mostly when I do upgrade my computer - I upgrade it whole. I like that it is extremely efficient in that small package.
People may not agree with me on that last thing, but lets get a little imaginary: Dual Fury X/Titan X coupled with fast Broadwell EP CPU, lots of RAM, and fast SSD. All packed in 450W package. Is that a failure?
No. But those who will expect upgradeability from computer will vote for it regardless of everything. And that is ok.
Here everybody is right, and none of us is at the same time.
Wow, progress. You ALMOST admitted that you were wrong.
(EDIT: I added a few more of your predictions, how are those Apple Store SSD upgrades coming?)
In case you've forgotten, you USED to claim that the presence of screws PROVED that GPU upgrades were coming. I seem to recall that you used the phrase "most upgradeable Mac ever" or something along those lines.
So are you finally admitting that they AREN'T coming?
As I pointed out some time ago the nMP has the BIOS/EFI for the GPUs in the boot room, so for Apple to offer GPU upgrades would require them to offer an EFI update for the entire machine as well. (ie, you'd not only have to remove "the most user friendly standard screws available", you'd also have to run a firmware update)
And if 7,1 gets TB3 and NVME then you can kiss GPU updates goodbye, as those both are wired through the GPU boards, very little chance that Apple will keep them backwards compatible, I'd say NO CHANCE.
So, if anyone with 6,1 wants to work on VR, they will need to REPLACE the entire machine, as many of us predicted (and you argued strongly against).
I'll make it an easy copy & paste for you.
"Whoops, I was wrong"
Last edited:
What utter, unbelievable nonsense.
Perhaps Lenovo's CTO menu doesn't have suitable GPUs - so order the cheapest option and get a GTX 980 from Newegg for less than the CTO price of a lesser card. And I see Quadro M6000 options on the Lenovo website. If a 12 GiB Maxwell with 3K cores and 12 GiB of RAM isn't on the Oculus list - then it's simply an error on the list.
Do upgrade the power supply, though. I bought a low end Dell Precision T3610 a couple of years ago (same basic system/CPU/chipset as the 6-core MP6,1). Recently tossed the entry level Quadro K600 for a GTX 960. The upgraded power supply on the Dell had dual 6-pin connectors - the 960 only needed one. Fine for me - I don't need super graphics, but I do need at least dual DisplayPort to drive two Dell P2715Q 4K monitors.
And please document this "~$700 cheaper" on graphics with links to the CTO websites. Sounds off-base unless you're comparing a Radeon to a Maxwell Quadro.
Dude, I just face-palmed at that. Those two concepts are not even remotely related.
I find that, your rudeness, insulting. That you dont find them related doesnt make it so.
Neither does the nMP. Yet he also said, if youre going to 'force' either system to work on the tech, the cMP will be the better performer. Im sure that just slipped your view.
Crazy thing. Never once have I talked to pros doing massive photoshop or 4k work, and they were like, no way, that's way too fast a hard drive. That your opinion is that's what you believe to be money well spent is not representative of all professionals, if any.
I suppose,'no one needs more than one TB SSD on the nMP,' now goes along with equal justification 'that no one needs more speed than the SSD on the nMP,' and those two chestnuts will join the great pantheon of winning arguments along with 'no one needs more than 640k ram on a PC.' Thanks for the long soliloquy-apology.
Yea, but you guys said games dont matter, it only matters if pros like Pixar do it. Guess what, Pixar does it.
An yet, almost any of their machines can be easily upgraded to support it, and not a single professional mac can.
Last edited:
When I was doing the Gaming Rigs in Windows that was how I used to the upgrades as well. By the time spent the money on the new GPU, would want a new CPU etc to take full advantage of it, then the Storage would look a little slow, so that would get upgraded as well. Becomes easier to just build the new machine rather then upgrade.
Would be a nice machine, hopefully something like that will be what the 7,1 will be like. Apple really cannot wait for Skylake in 2017. As the OpenCL on Fury is higher performing then I suspect that will be Fury X rather then a 980ti/Titan X that appears, unless Nvida/AMD have newer GPU's ready to go when the 7,1 is finalised.
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-radeon-fury-x-beats-titan-x-in-opencl.html
Someone will want to see what basing that statement on! Just ignore the hyperbole about spanking.
there will be some naysayers as CUDA won't be supported if AMD is selected again, however unless there is a change of heart from Apple, ALL of the current lineup of dGPU's are AMD, so seems to be where going.
Hopefully will have TB3 and support for eGPU's over Thunderbolt so they can add them in if only externally for the people that need CUDA
[doublepost=1452565057][/doublepost]
I haven't understood this sentence either.
Could you explain to me please ( I have asked politely ) how if something has an overpriced case it stops the functioning
I simply don't understand what you are saying here hence why asking if you can clarify.
Thanks in advance.
I said earlier "Disagree, if it has an overpriced case, it's not functioning."
Sorry for lack of clarity.
Sure, what I mean is, sometimes you are paying purely for design and no gained functionality. For example, if you add a bedazzled case with diamonds and gold etc. that is otherwise identical to an aluminum case. Stuff that is purely for design aesthetics, in such an extreme made up example, the price of the machine would sky rocket costing, perhaps, 100x the cost of the same non-jewelry version of the machine. In such an extreme case, you clearly have form over function, IMO.
Now some will rightly argue, that the nMP is smaller and quieter, uses less power, and that does provide valuable function and utility to some. True. I agree. And others will argue, that it comes at the price of expandability, and actually fails in being smaller because you need external boxes, and then it fails at being quieter and more power efficient because of it. And for their uses. Also, true. I agree.
From my vantage, for many if not most professionals, like the Mac cube before it, this is a triumph of design form over function for the professional market segment.
Even if you disagree with the point, I hope I made the point a little more clearly.
From the article:
The video also notes, power supply is part of the machine, so no brick.
Sorry for lack of clarity.
Sure, what I mean is, sometimes you are paying purely for design and no gained functionality. For example, if you add a bedazzled case with diamonds and gold etc. that is otherwise identical to an aluminum case. Stuff that is purely for design aesthetics, in such an extreme made up example, the price of the machine would sky rocket costing, perhaps, 100x the cost of the same non-jewelry version of the machine. In such an extreme case, you clearly have form over function, IMO.
Now some will rightly argue, that the nMP is smaller and quieter, uses less power, and that does provide valuable function and utility to some. True. I agree. And others will argue, that it comes at the price of expandability, and actually fails in being smaller because you need external boxes, and then it fails at being quieter and more power efficient because of it. And for their uses. Also, true. I agree.
From my vantage, for many if not most professionals, like the Mac cube before it, this is a triumph of design form over function for the professional market segment.
Even if you disagree with the point, I hope I made the point a little more clearly.
From the article:
The video also notes, power supply is part of the machine, so no brick.
Last edited:
"So what's there to cool, you may ask, from this full-metal, RGB-lit box that occupies 6.5l. Unlike Apple, MSI goes after the gaming enthusiast, and it shows in the specs. There's the obligatory high-end Intel Skylake processor, two full-fat GeForce GTX 980 cards in the laptop-friendly MXM form factor, four SODIMM slots for DDR4 memory, and two M.2 SSDs, all kept in check by the '360 SilentStorm cooling system'.
Lots of connectivity 'round back, including two Thunderbolt 3 and two mini-DisplayPorts, make it good in this respect too. Expect to pay around $3,000 for the top-of-the-range model though. Small on the outside, big on the inside."
Apple had better hurry with that 7,1.
If somebody Hackintoshes that thing, they won't be able to GIVE away the 6,1s. (except to people who value a shiny case over a functional machine)
And I really did suggest those EXACT GPUs as a nMP "fix". Someone could revrese engineer the connectors on the 6,1 GPUs and make an adapter board to allow MXMs to connect to TB2 outputs and also connect the SSD. The parts would cost like $5, it's the engineering and EFI/BIOS writing that would make it $$$$.
Lots of connectivity 'round back, including two Thunderbolt 3 and two mini-DisplayPorts, make it good in this respect too. Expect to pay around $3,000 for the top-of-the-range model though. Small on the outside, big on the inside."
Apple had better hurry with that 7,1.
If somebody Hackintoshes that thing, they won't be able to GIVE away the 6,1s. (except to people who value a shiny case over a functional machine)
And I really did suggest those EXACT GPUs as a nMP "fix". Someone could revrese engineer the connectors on the 6,1 GPUs and make an adapter board to allow MXMs to connect to TB2 outputs and also connect the SSD. The parts would cost like $5, it's the engineering and EFI/BIOS writing that would make it $$$$.
In the mean time, another article on point:
New Mac Pro 2016 release date rumours: new Mac Pro hint in El Capitan code but is it too little too late?
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/mac/new-mac-pro-2015-release-date-apple-ditched-discontinued-3536364/
from MacWorld article:
New Mac Pro 2016 release date rumours: new Mac Pro hint in El Capitan code but is it too little too late?
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/mac/new-mac-pro-2015-release-date-apple-ditched-discontinued-3536364/
from MacWorld article:
...more from MacWorld article:
...more from MacWorld article:
Last edited:
I understand the point, the form factor of the case, being smaller prevents extra features from being fitted internally.
However that is down to the shape of the case not it's cost. The cost you pay for the case won't stop the system functioning, as in working. Which is why I suspect Arron face palmed, as he like me probably read as you saying the price of the case stopped the system from working, which I figured couldn't be what you meant to say. The cost isn't related to wether the system works or not, you just pay more for the system.
Thanks for explaining what you meant by the entry. I didn't think it could mean how it read.
The context include F5's insistence that it was a better value due to the much more expensive case. Point being that even if it were true, spending more money on a case while removing features and raising the price $500 is a bad deal for everyone.
The monetary cost of the case makes it an exercise of form over function as well. Which was part of the earlier back and forth from another forum member that was speculating on $ cost of the case. Meaning, if it were solely a $ difference, I'd argue the nMP is still an exercise of 'form over function', in that youre placing such a high premium simply on the form in terms of high monetary cost (from that previous poster's hypothetical IIRC $1500) that it shows apple putting a premium of form for the case over function in that monetary sense as well.
But more than the monetary cost of the case, and and more specifically from its actual physical and (IMO limiting) form, that overly cramped nMP form, is, IMO, precisely what contributes to limiting the nMP's functionality (eg lack of expandability).
srry, didn't insist anything.
simply said some people will find value in the build and others won't.
'value' is not universal and is entirely subjective. (but i don't really need to explain this, right?)
just like i shouldn't need to explain that just because you don't see value in the build does not mean everyone else will share your view.
[doublepost=1452569661][/doublepost]but i will add this.. it's pretty clear the designers feel appearance and build quality are important factors regarding value to a user.. they even say this in the patents:
link to one of the patents
[0011] The outward appearance of a compact computing system, including its design and its heft, is important to a user of the compact computing system, as the outward appearance contributes to the overall impression that the user has of the compact computing system. At the same time, the assembly of the compact computing system is also important to the user, as a durable assembly will help extend the overall life of the compact computing system and will increase its value to the user.
if you disagree with that as a core design philosophy then you're barking up the wrong tree with apple.. because all of their stuff can be related to the above statement..
whether or not they succeed in integrating the philosophy into every design doesn't entirely matter.. because you can be pretty darn sure they at least tried to follow the notion.
you want a shoebox full of parts? go buy one.. too many to choose from (but hey, this is completely obvious too, right?)
Last edited:
I am sorry but I am just not understanding this post.
If they made 1 case out of machined aluminium and another 1 to which they applied a diamond coating if both are the same case form factor of the nMP then neither of them would allow internal expandability for you. The diamond coating case would be more expensive but won't give you any difference in what you can or cannot do with the machine. It is the same shape/form factor. I don't see how the price of the case affects the functionality of the system and what you can and cannot do with it.
It is the shape/form factor of the nMP case that gives you your issues. Please explain to me how the cost of the case would make a difference to the functionality when both are the same shape. It won't be as good value for money as you can't do anything extra but it won't have more or less functionality just because it costs more.
Can you expand more or less with the Diamond Case`? The same
Can you connect more or less to the system with the Diamond Case? The same
Will the machine perform the same ( assuming same internal spec ) with the Diamond Case? The same
The price of the case will make no difference here to how the machine performs or can be expanded/upgraded. It will be the same shape and components so has the same functionality.
The diamond coated case would cost more but your post reads as though saying that it wouldn't be as functional because it costs more.
Yes the cMP gives you better internal expandability so you don't have to go external but that is the shape/form factor of the case being bigger, nothing to do with the price of the case.
As it also a hot topic of Nvidia/CUDA vs AMD/OpenCL.
You have a requirement to run an App that relies on Cuda. You wouldn't say that you cannot run CUDA on the AMD Card because of the price of the card, or that the Nvidia Card can run CUDA because it more expensive. Here in the UK Nvidia 980ti are more expensive them AMD Fury X.
In the same way you cannot expand the nMP due to the shape of the case, not because of the price of the case.
Please explain how the price of the case, not the shape limits the functionality of the system. Your post is reading to me as though saying that because the case costs more it has less functionality, and then give an example of this as expandability, which is down to the shape not the price.
In your hypo, the diamond case, in no way affects functionality. So, yes, both would be identical in functionality.
Nevertheless, it would be the manufacturer putting a premium over non-functional features, eg, diamond coating, over functional features in such an instance.
If the non diamond version costs, say $1000. But the diamond version costs $100,000. Quite clearly, in that case, the manufacturer choosing to make a diamond version is placing a higher value on the form over the function. It is designing with that philosophy where the actual function is quite secondary in value to the form.
So that is the monetary sense of form being a more important and dominating concern over function, even if functions remain identical, ie, the manufacture simply placing a premium value over the concerns of form over function despite equal function.
Then there is a second sense where form dominates function. The cases, as between the cMP and nMP, quite obviously, are not identical. IMO, the nMP made compromises on expandability and other pro-desired features for the sake of form. Reasonable people can disagree on this, of course, but the proportion of this survey, and the comments from the latest macworld article on this topic are telling of apple's success in balancing form and function for the target professional market may be off.
Last edited:
- Status