I think we'll finally see integrated GPUs in the entire Mac Pro lineup. For once, Apple can now guarantee a baseline level of GPU power across their entire product range - from Apple Watch to Mac Pro. This is a big deal.
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.
MP 7,1 Mac Pro 2019 installed AMD RX 6900 XT with Vega II Duo exists
- Thread starter Liber
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The discussion is starting to come full circle back to my original argument: the Intel, large Mac Pro is being kept alive with MPX modules and the first AS Mac Pro offerings are smaller, inbetweeners that are cheaper "best for almost everyone" computers. They would still have great gfx performance, but not quite up to a maxed out Intel MP with 4x GPUs.
The design Apple is using for M1 won't hold up for higher power chips. The trade offs they have made are great for battery life, but have a performance ceiling.
And again, Apple has acknowledged that. They've said that M1 is but one of many different chip designs they are working on. The Mac Pro won't be a larger M1. M1 is not how all Apple Silicon is going to be designed, and that's straight from Apple.
They can't and won't do an Intel based Mac Pro forever. They will want to stop supporting Intel, and they will want to end macOS support for Intel.
I think eventually we'll see an Apple Silicon based full size Mac Pro, with MPX slots. Rumors have also stated that future Apple Silicon will use discrete GPUs in some products, and not integrated. I think the iMac is being rumored as one of the machines that will use a discrete GPU design. And that makes a lot of sense. In a case that size it doesn't really make sense to put all your thermal output in one tiny section of the case.
I have tested 11.2, doesn’t work.For GPU supportability, you may join this thread.
AMD Polaris, Vega, & Navi GPU macOS Support
This thread is about compatibility of Polaris, Vega, & Navi GPUs with the Mac Pro. This information is mostly reference for Mac Pro 4,1 (2009), 5,1 (2010, 2012), and 7,1 (2019). Mac Pro 6,1 (2013) users may also find this information useful since it is possible to connect an eGPU via the...forums.macrumors.com
According to the info at there.
11.1's GPU driver contains the 6900XT's device ID. However, the driver is incomplete, and no full acceleration.
If you want to test this card, better try the latest 11.2 beta (if there is a spare drive for you to try).
Agreed. I don't think there will be any new Intel Mac Pros going forward. I think the 2019 is the last one.
So one questions is: how long can Apple keep the 2019 "current" despite being capped by the current Xeon line?
And the other question is how Apple addresses GPU heavy loads. My stand basically is that if there is any truth to the 64/128 core GPUs from Apple, then I don't think they will keep designing for 3rd party GPUs as well. Once they go for something like 128 cores, I think the future just keep iterating new design generations like that, or go even higher in cores. It's quite possible that they break the GPU side of things out into a separate module—almost like a traditional GPU. But then it's an Apple only GPU and might have a proprietary interface.
Of course, it's easy to dismiss these ideas since they are new and there is no support for them yet. It's also easy to keep believing in traditional GPUs, since that is what we know. Let's just say that for me it's a huge question mark right now, and I will rest my case until the large AS iMacs get here. Or the new AS Mac Pro, which ever happens first.
Apple has a ten year window with the 2019 7,1 and 2021 7,2 Intel models to get the AS model up to similar performance. I think that is doable.
If Apple is selling a Mac Pro in 2031 with the performance of a 2021 Intel Mac Pro, what they do with AS will be moot - the high end of the market will have long since abandoned the platform, and they won't have sold any Mac Pros for at least five years.
Do you really see a high-end Apple GPU, a completely proprietary design used only in the Mac Pro, competing with the best that AMD or Nvidia have to offer? Companies that focus on GPUs and spread their development costs across the whole PC market? And furthermore, that Apple can lead the market in GPU design, or at least stay competitive, for the foreseeable future? Because if they can't, desktop Apple users will become very frustrated.
A general point here is that just over 50%* of Apple's revenue comes from the iPhone / iPad. The Mac is 14%, of which the Mac Pro is likely a very small percentage (the majority surely being MacBooks). Porting macOS to run on chips similar to those used in iOS devices obviously brings huge cost savings to the Mac line. But by the time you're creating monster 100+ core (CPU/GPU) chips for niche Mac products, you're a long way from the iPhone, to the point where the synergies just aren't there.
*Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/382260/segments-share-revenue-of-apple/
Last edited:
It's like when people think that if you enlarged an insect to the size of a person it would have incredible strength (as opposed to just collapse under its own weight). A Raspberry Pi Zero is probably incredibly efficient, but that doesn't mean super computers should all be using its 'special sauce'.
Not really. I think I need to work my way back to square one, as some of the things I've speculated on seem to 'slippery slope' and extend themselves to meanings I didn't intend.
I'm happy that things point to the Intel Mac Pro getting updates. There might very well be a 7.2, but I don't think it will get a new Intel CPU. I do see updated MPX modules coming, which is great.
I think AS Mac Pro will replace all Intel Mac Pros in time. I think the first AS Mac Pro will co-exist with an Intel Mac Pro and I think that it will be cheaper and only use AS—no support for normal GPUs. I think this is the smaller AS Mac Pro we've heard about.
As it is now, I don't think Apple plans to use traditional GPUs in the future. I don't think Apple is "competing" with PCs or self built systems at all. Macs only compete with Macs.
I believe Apple wants to continue building fast, responsive and powerful systems, but I also think they are willing to drop niche markets if it doesn't fit in with their overall strategy. This is no different than the lack of CUDA support we've had for years now. There is no denying that CUDA has been and still remains (for now) the standard in accelerating 3D workflows and other things.
I think attractive Apple computers can change the software landscape to some degree. If we get a new AS Mac Pro that is reasonable in price, together with a new Apple display that is HDR compatible and offers the right mix of resolution and performance... my guess is that a lot of people would be happy to use that for work. I mean, even today, it's almost ridiculous how some seem to be willing to bend over backwards to use a M1 Mac Mini as a professional workstation.
It's my guess that the overall system experience with the coming AS Macs will be very good. A lot of people will be happy, while some edge case user groups might fall between the cracks.
I'm positive Apple will cover all of desktop publishing, development work, photography, illustration and design, audio work, video editing including light compositing and 3D work. All in all a good chunk of the market.
Judging by the early success of the entry level AS models, I think they made the right call by changing the system architecture, even if it would mean that they would need to drop plug in GPUs (which isn't a fact at all).
Fair enough. Perhaps third time lucky after the G4 Cube and 2013 MP. 'Cheaper' in this case probably meaning starting at £4000.
This supposes that at some point in the fairly near future, AS GPUs will be 'good enough' for pretty much any purpose, precluding the need for discreet GPUs. I think this is plausible for laptops and iMacs, but I doubt an SoC would be able to rival e.g. an RTX3080 any time soon. There are lots of people though who want / need a lot of GPU grunt, and consider it a major benefit of a desktop computer. Ditto being able to upgrade after a couple of years.
This applies to a point. For 2D / video work I wouldn't disagree. But for motion graphics or 3D animation, renders can still take a long time and increasing resolution / fidelity / ray-tracing / effects will likely soak up all available power for the foreseeable future. People working in those fields will find it hard to justify investing in a Mac Pro with a relatively weak GPU. Especially if they're spending all day in Adobe / Autodesk / Maxon products anyway.
That's true. Does relegate the MP to ever more niche status, though - many people who need a strong CPU and reasonable GPU may just get an iMac (or iMac Pro, if Apple ever update it).
@AndreeOnline I do not understand your desire to see Apple introduce some new type of GPU package to the market. What is wrong with PCIe?
If Apple wants to make GPUs, great, and I’m absolutely certain they will contain proprietary features which make them a joy to use in MacOS. BUT, I need the option of AMD and Intel GPUs too.
I should be able to walk into Micro Center, pick up an Intel or AMD GPU (within reason), and plug it into my AS Mac Pro.
I don’t think anybody’s interested in another proprietary fiasco - we all know where that road leads.
If Apple wants to make GPUs, great, and I’m absolutely certain they will contain proprietary features which make them a joy to use in MacOS. BUT, I need the option of AMD and Intel GPUs too.
I should be able to walk into Micro Center, pick up an Intel or AMD GPU (within reason), and plug it into my AS Mac Pro.
I don’t think anybody’s interested in another proprietary fiasco - we all know where that road leads.
The only desire I think I've mentioned in this thread is that Apple keeps supporting the 7.1
I have zero desire for Apple to make their own GPU. I don't argue based on what I want, but on what I think will happen. I felt my eyebrows raise I bit when I read what you wrote.
In a perfect world, Apple's own integrated architecture would outperform random PC parts, and software would support it. And by support here, I'm talking about accelerated 3D rendering, video effects and other tasks that are being performed on GPUs today.
As a close second a Mac Pro would support any available GPU on the market so that an end user could buy the part that performs best with their software of choice.
Third is that Apple's products aren't market leading but are more than good enough (and I mean good enough, not as another way to say 'pretty weak') to perform the things I need.
Distant fourth is if AS never gets much better than what we already have: super nice and strong in a few areas, but with huge gaps in certain areas. I have posted a Davinci Resolve benchmark here that people can try. The M1 Mac Mini is down to single digit fps playback when using taxing effects, while GPUs reach realtime playback.
There is a risk that coming AS hardware does everything the M1 does well EVEN BETTER, but is equally bad at what the M1 struggles with.
Right now I can't decide if option 1 or 3 is more likely. 1 is a longshot, but I'm not thinking so much of pure computing grunt, but more as a system as a whole.
I feel your pain and sympathise. But the reason the thread has spun out of control is that there are no news (unfortunately) about that.
You won't miss it once it works!
I think option 1 is most likely, in conjunction with option 2. At least for the first generation, and until devs (forced) and consumers are fully on board.
The rumored Mac could be the one to bring me back from the virtualization fold. Really looking forward to seeing what that's about.
Hopefully, finally, a Mac.
[edit] and no doubt they'll pack their GPUs with some sauce you can't get anywhere else - they have an opportunity to reignite the desktop market here. If the Mac can take 2 MPX modules worth of AS GPUs, we're looking at silent supercomputer power (of yesterday) next to your monitor.
VR will bloom. I think we have to be approaching the point where the proliferation of accessible computing power will spark a new age of discovery. A bunch of kids doing their homework on 200 TFLOP Macs are gonna make us all look bad.
*sleepy*
Last edited:
I think this is very much on the money. There are many professional workloads that don't require a massive powerful GPU - as you said, most 2D work is a great use case - but those people are often just as well served by a Mini loaded up with RAM at a very small fraction of the price.
For people to splurge $$$ on the Pro Apple needs something seriously compelling and the primary differentiator is performance headroom, provided by scalable CPU and GPUs options not bound by low thermal or power ceilings.
Nvidia is not Intel. They've been steaming ahead of the pack for many years now and Apple would have to pull a significantly larger rabbit out of their hat to build a GPU solution that begins to rival cards like the consumer RTX 3090 (nevermind their heavy-duty professional solutions like A100). I don't see Apple taking the performance crown in that space for a very long time, if ever.
More to the point that you're replying to, I disagree strongly that Macs only compete with Macs. That head-in-the-sand attitude leads to an ever-shrinking world of hardware and software options, and ultimately a software ecosystem death spiral. Particularly in the professional space where people are more interested in their workflow's performance per $ per unit time than their OS's niceties.
The single reason that Apple is turning heads with M1 is because of performance relative not only to older Macs but to the larger PC space as well. Apple is killing it there and they will deservedly win a lot of converts who would have otherwise bought a Win10 PC, bringing new developers with them to chase that market.
Last edited:
I'm not a fan at all of opinion-stated-as-fact.
You are matter of factly saying that my statement of Macs competing against Macs is sprung out of "head in the sand". That isn't the case at all.
If you come to terms with the fact that there are not only users who buy a 'computer' (they compare Macs to PCs), but also those who just buy 'Macs', then you will see that what I'm saying can be valid.
No need to interpret this as an invitation to discuss further, I just wanted to clarify that.
I could totally see apple making ALoT of cash putting two m1 chip on a pcie card and use it as a coprocessor on the intel macpro...
sell it for 3k and dominate everything on the market...
a 16 core macpro with two m1 chip as coprocessor will make circle around a threadripper... after all the afterburner card is apple silicon used as a SOC/ASIC....
now imagine every 16x slot populated with this kind of card and you are looking at somthing that will litterally annihilate a 64 core epyc with 3090....
the «m1 » is a very,very powerful chip if you use it solely as a coprocessor in apps such as fcp or Ame or blender...
after seeing a m1 crunshing canon 1dxmk3 raw rushes on davinci resolve like if it was nothing, if apple don’t think about building such cards, well they absolutely should...
a mac mini m1 is over 7000 in GB5
so basically half the power of a 16core xeon that sits at 14000...
now each of those dual m1 pcie card would double the compute power of your MP7.1...
one 16 core with one card would equal a 28 core... with gpu power on top of that...
sell it for 3k and dominate everything on the market...
a 16 core macpro with two m1 chip as coprocessor will make circle around a threadripper... after all the afterburner card is apple silicon used as a SOC/ASIC....
now imagine every 16x slot populated with this kind of card and you are looking at somthing that will litterally annihilate a 64 core epyc with 3090....
the «m1 » is a very,very powerful chip if you use it solely as a coprocessor in apps such as fcp or Ame or blender...
after seeing a m1 crunshing canon 1dxmk3 raw rushes on davinci resolve like if it was nothing, if apple don’t think about building such cards, well they absolutely should...
a mac mini m1 is over 7000 in GB5
so basically half the power of a 16core xeon that sits at 14000...
now each of those dual m1 pcie card would double the compute power of your MP7.1...
one 16 core with one card would equal a 28 core... with gpu power on top of that...
If that's a PCIe card, but not MPX card, then that will be a big gift for the 5,1 users (unless that card can only work via the T2).
Apple will develop its discrete GPU
Total hardware control Earlier this week, there were some rumors that Apple will use its graphics IP to build the discrete graphics processors, probably starting with a notebook first, and we can assure you that these plans are real. The initiative to make a laptop-based GPU is as old as the...
Apple Reportedly Prepping New Self-Built iMac GPU for 2H 2021 - ExtremeTech
Apple will reportedly ship its own GPU in next year's iMac, potentially replacing AMD across its product stack.
www.extremetech.com
There have been multiple sites stating that an Apple discrete GPU is in development, and will be used in high end iMacs and MacBook Pros, and higher.
The plan does not seem to be all GPUs will be integrated. Some Macs will continue to use discrete GPUs.
The Mac Pro may be the only Apple computer that will allow for cpu and gpu upgrades. The iMac may be completely locked down.Apple will develop its discrete GPU
Total hardware control Earlier this week, there were some rumors that Apple will use its graphics IP to build the discrete graphics processors, probably starting with a notebook first, and we can assure you that these plans are real. The initiative to make a laptop-based GPU is as old as the...www.fudzilla.com
Apple Reportedly Prepping New Self-Built iMac GPU for 2H 2021 - ExtremeTech
Apple will reportedly ship its own GPU in next year's iMac, potentially replacing AMD across its product stack.
There have been multiple sites stating that an Apple discrete GPU is in development, and will be used in high end iMacs and MacBook Pros, and higher.
The plan does not seem to be all GPUs will be integrated. Some Macs will continue to use discrete GPUs.
I don’t think discrete GPUs necessarily means upgradable. It probably means a GPU that has a higher performance ceiling than what can be done with integrated.
Guessing a future full size Mac Pro will probably still be upgradable.