Not just drivers, it’s been mentioned that the SoC lacks the ability to support GPU workloads over PCI.
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 2023 Teardown
- Thread starter Spaceboi Scaphandre
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ruined how? The case easily detaches from ~99% of the electronics ( there is still some in the top is the teardown is covered completely by the video. ). The grading is all being down at the bottom of the case. Tape some plastic protection over the electronics in the top and can wash aluminum in the bottom 3/4 of the case. ( NOTE: did not grade cheese toward the top of the case. )
It would be midly awkward to wash, but could wash this almost like you would a 25lb cheese grader.
It is more than a bit superficial . Didn't show how the wi-fi is integrated into the system and other tech details that they lightly skimmed over. A bit more teardown work and they would have a 100% aluminum case that they could just toss in a big wash tub and clean. Is not ruined any more than any other aluminum kitchen appliance.
Why insist on using a product that isn't specialized for your workflow?
Why should any company spend extra on a dying market that isn't profitable for them anymore and on chip tech that does not benefit ~80% of their typical wanted users that odds are is growing?
These changes keeps the product relevant to most users.
The applications you listed above take up space on the silicon die. Do they actively buy Macs much less Mac Pros in the same volume as Greek Gods?
Even Intel's proposing to reduce legacy x86 tech in Intel x86-S. Why? Because few ever use today and in the decades to come.
“There’s an old Wayne Gretzky quote that I love. ‘I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been.’ And we’ve always tried to do that at Apple. Since the very very beginning. And we always will.” - Steve Jobs
That is likely mostly a software issue. I think root cause disconnect there is that folks are trying to map the kernel security and caching model presumed in existing GPU drivers back over onto the model that Apple is using for the M-series (which isn't UEFI or same security constraints. )
AI/ML is a dying market? scientific research is a dying market? no idea where you're getting these ideas from. Apple pushed these people away with the trashcan. x86 isn't going anywhere in these fields. it is very hard to scale up RISC processors (ARM, RISC-V) to meet HPC loads; these typically involve buliding custom/domain specific HW accelerators which is not a trivial task.
cmon man don't use that quote out of context it makes you look naive and not know what you're talking about. ARM has gotten big because of small mobile devices so people can get addicted to social media; this isnt the industry that I'm talking about. while there is a push to get RISC-V architectures in HPC and warehouse style computers, imo it's not close yet although I think it will get there eventually. In the meantime, x86 isn't going anywhere for HPC.
The main issue issue is that apple is obessed with look/design over function and they messed up their entire userbase with the trashcan leading to a mass exodus. now they have a new SoC architecture which is again great for mobile platforms but doesn't scale up well for workstation class products but since majority of those pro users pre-trashcan have left there isn't as much pushback.
Relative to Macs sold for AI/ML was it growing to the degree that Apple would not list them on the Mac Pro much less Mac Studio product page?
Its absence is an indicator Apple's not successful in those use cases and they're better off going after an easier market.
Perhaps the reason why Apple actively advertised its AI/ML use in the past was because it was using Xeons and AMD dGPUs that incidentally had those features built-in even when Apple may not be actively interested to pursue them.
That quote's on point. If the use case isn't popular on Macs then why waste their time/money satisfying such weak demand?
Tim's better off pursuing AR where the real volume is.
Apple's industrial design was the main selling point for many consumers.
Remove that and the Apple tax becomes more glaring.
Why should Apple take extra effort for <15,000/year unhappy users when they're shipping 28+ million Macs to those who enjoy the SoC?
Apple's very behind when it comes to ML. Any companies doing ML ain't gonna buy Mac Pros for that, they're gonna use Nvidia workstations since the CUDA cores process faster.
That doesn't mean the pro Macs can't do ML. My Macbook Pro does. But to the level of enterprise, it's not enough.
That's exactly why the M2 Extreme chip got cancelled. Why burn the R&D on a chip they're hardly gonna sell?
The downside is the Mac Pro is now left feeling unfinished, but tbh nowadays the Mac Studio is moreso the new Mac Pro, and the "Mac Pro" is only there for those who need PCIE (though one can argue is PCIE really worth the extra $3000 over the Studio?)
Why bash a fish that cannot climb a tree when a chimp's more adept at it?
To win internet arguments and get upvotes.
Claim the Mac Pro is a "halo product" that induces more sales of laptops, iPhones and iPads when pro desktops hardly sells.
In which side of the millennium are people thinking this way from?
For the use cases Apple listed on the Mac Pro page... yeah it matters even when it is capped at 192GB.
Pro desktops are expensed out & used to generate revenue and not a hobbyist's toy.
A fish climbing onto land is how we all got into this mess
Wipe that smug look off your face fish you know what you did.
Well hey it seems to be working as pricing it absurdly too high is pushing people into getting the Mac Studio instead. People don't want consumer products, they want high end products at a bargain, so that Mac Pro gives the illusion that the Mac Studio is a steal in value.
That 192gb memory cap is actually the new Mac Pro's fatal flaw. That's not enough for the professionals who buy Mac Pros. They need at minimum 300gb with how many assets they got loaded in Logic combined with ProTools running in the background as well.
😅A fish climbing onto land is how we all got into this mess
Wipe that smug look off your face fish you know what you did.
Splitting of the Mac Pro and & Mac Studio is meant to lower the cost of a pro desktop for those who never wanted PCIe slots.
It even got me eyeing the thing when it 1st came out 15 months ago.
Mac Pro's for legacy users who still need PCIe slots.
I've gone through i386 towers, i486 towers and G4 towers and I never used their expansion slots.
If a 90s and 00s equivalent of a Mac Studio came out with top-end CPU & dGPUs of the era I'd have bought that if it meant a reduction of 1/3rd the MSRP.
The Mac Pro doesn't give you that perception unless you are accepting of losing the PCIe slot that you may have used previously.
I agree with the memory cap but it appears to be a technical limitation of the type of RAM they used.
If I am not mistaken it is the same RAM that is used on iPhones and iPads?
That's the thing. These are the types that are going to upgrade to the next model the moment it comes out anyway. Those who do scientific workloads aren't in business of upgrading every 3-4 years, or even 5-7. My workload requires a new GPU every few years but I can't physically afford to pay bank for a whole new Mac Pro every time one comes out. I was visiting the SVMF at NASA's Johnson Space Center about a year and a half ago and you wouldn't believe how many 5,1's they had strewn about. It's a tank, and completely repairable. Also what's the deal with the Mac14,8 moniker? You would think it would be MacPro8,1.
This line you keep repeating is starting to become offensive. scientists/researchers, people who run simulations with large datasets, and people who do 3D modeling are not hobbyists. youtube video editors are not the peak of what professionals are and they are closer to hobbyists than the other professions i mentioned.
The drivers already exist for the two exact cards I mentioned, people use them already with macOS. Hence why I asked if anyone actually has tried it.
Surely this wonder processor which can move heaven and earth should be able to handle a lowly GPU workload.
No they’re not hobbyists, but just how big a pool do you think the people that do that for their work AND are apparently their IT professional at the same time?
A great many? It's more than you'd think. at least at the places I've worked.
Again people have fallen into Apple's marketing trap and their catering to youtuber and other video editors who think that video editing is the pinnacle of what a "professional" is.
Besides, this is supposed to be a workstation class product, which by any real stretch of definitions caters to all sorts of people who use their workstation for their job and allows for modular upgradability. Again, for any other vendor, this conversation is never had. it is assumed that the people buying this computer for their WORK will also upgrade components as their needs change over time. You don't seem going into the macbook air forum and complaining that I can't replace the battery.
I’ve worked at universities and ESPN. I’ve never seen an end user of a machine that was purchased for them be allowed to be upgraded by that person.
You’re saying that’s common in the data scientist field? They both run and are personally allowed to do hardware modifications?
Hopefully nothing that matters, given the massive security risk posture that allows….
There are no Apple Silicon third party GPU drivers. Apple never released any AMD GPUs drivers compiled for ARM.
Don't tell that for all the audio engineers, musicians and studios still running MacPro5,1 with 1/2 or 1/4 of that. It's not because someone have a workflow that require 1TB as cache that everyone else also need it.
It appears that their use case do not have enough users to merit the R&D.
Does NASA buy more than 75,000 Mac Pros annually? How about the whole scientific community worldwide?
Them still using the 2010 Mac Pro more than a dozen years later is an indicator they're not worth aggressively serving further.
Likely changed to avoid leaks/speculation of future products that would adversely impact sales old older SKUs.
All current Apple Silicon products follow the Mac14,x model name, this came directly from the iOS naming scheme.
Last edited:
It isn't meant to offend but to point out that the complaint of how expensive Mac Pros have become is normal for those who use it to make bank. It is a business expense and not something you casually buy like a pair of airpods.
The Intel and AMD chips that could service scientists/researches/etc are now absent.
They are not Apple's target market any longer. If they were then Mac chips would be designed for their use case. Scientists/researchers/etc benefited from Apple using x86 that shared the R&D cost of all PC users.
With Mac chips it uses the R&D of iPhone chip use cases ~90% and the ~10% is the ~80% typical Mac use case.
Apple has a very good competitive analysis and performance/use case dev teams. So they keep making designs that seem to hit most sweet spots.
When iPhone and Android ate into Canon/Nikon/Sony's digital camera market they looked to Youtubers and other vloggers as their new growth market.
It did not cover all their lost market share but it help soften it.
Same with that those editors likely buy Macs far more often than any budget-limited scientist/researcher.
I can easily see editors buying more than 75,000 Macs annually for YouTube alone.
The scientists/researchers/etc are better served with Threadripper + Nvidia dGPU workstations. They can easily do piece meal upgrades when budget permits.
It's a limitation caused by design choices.
DRAM density is currently something like 0.3 gigabits per mm2. That's about 16.5 cm x 16.5 cm for a terabyte, which is much larger than the M2 Ultra package. As long as Apple insist that RAM must be on package, their products either have lower memory capacity than their competitors, or they have to use stacked solutions like HBM.
Yeah, at least the M2 Macs. Early M1 Macs retained the old identifier scheme.
What you dont like that old top 40 trashcan apologist song/argument, being dragged out here again? Sure it spent 4 years buried in a barrel under the site of apple's last concert on their apology tour.... but c'mon, it's and oldie but a goodie. Also self identifies who you can ignore as an apologist. It's not a bug, it's a feature.
You are correct and I should have written current Apple Silicon Macs.
Most Macs with Apple Silicon M1 still have the traditional model identifier scheme, while the M1 Mac Studio already have the new Mac1x,x identifier.
Interestingly the $500 DTK Mac mini with the A12Z had the model identifier ADP3,2.
Last edited: