Funny, they were enough of a category to save the company from bankruptcy. Think different.
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 7,1 - hit or Miss?
- Thread starter JazzyGB1
- Start date
-
- Tags
- mac pro 7 mac pro 7.1
- Sort by reaction score
I'm a die hard Mac fan and a 3D artist and… it's been a tough road. For the sort of GPU renderers I've been using the past few years (Redshift, Octane) Windows and CUDA has been essential. The last 6 months or so I've been able to use Redshift on my Mac Pro and it's been really great.
I've got an Nvidia RTX 2070 Super that I was using for Windows the last year or so, but because I'm only using it sparingly I put it in an eGPU case so I can switch it off - it's so noisy compared to the Mac Pro. However, I have to say - I spent £400 on this Nvidia card and it absolutely wipes the floor with my W5700X…
That's not all that was being discussed, though. Part of the issue is that Apple has been useless supporting the thing, with all kinds of GPU/driver issues that Apple themselves are fully in control of fixing, but there are still issues a year later. No excuse for that at all in a "Pro" workstation, and very poor showing by Apple.
I know for a fact Apple has been updating the GPU drivers with fixes, especially in Big Sur.
There are a lot of valid complaints about the Mac Pro like the lack of Nvidia support. Metal adoption problems. But all those things were equally as true a year ago when (most) of these same people were raving about the Mac Pro.
What changed is they saw how awesome Apple Silicon could be. I'm pointing out _that's not really a problem for the Mac Pro's future._
Don't understand why youtuber will buy 7,1. I think just to look cool in their video.
I get in ye olden days that you had to have a Power Mac or even early Mac Pro to cut video well in FCP or Premiere. But that was a long time ago. These days you can do simple cutting of 4k on... almost anything. I mean even your phone would be just fine if you had a large enough screen on it.
The Mac Pro still absolutely destroys an M1 in stuff like complex compositing with a lot of content. Sorts of things that would really push a GPU. Also the sort of stuff YouTubers, and people like (I think) Paul Chato aren't doing.
It's going to take a lot of work for Apple to catch up to something that has a Vega Duo or two thrown into it. And I'm curious (and skeptical) if they can do that with a system-on-a-chip.
But for people who aren't really the target audience of the Mac Pro, there always were solutions that were better and cheaper. If you bought a Mac Pro as a status symbol you're going to be disappointed. Paul Chato's videos are always especially grating to me because he's clearly one of the old school Power Mac guys. I get it but... he always seems attached to this idea of Apple and the industry at large that isn't really a thing anymore. And he'll just complain endlessly about it like it's Apple's fault.
There is a lot you can criticize Apple for. I think they've done an awful job with macOS recently, and supporting third party devs. But endless complaining about the Mac Pro is not really where it's at.
(I also think a lot of the YouTube speculation about future Apple Silicon designs is wildly off base. It just seems like it's random multipliers applied to core counts evenly.)
I agree with most of what you say. We differ in that although many are at a loss to articulate it, they are justified in being upset about the Mac Pro. Apple abandoned the enthusiasts and gave them no enthusiast mode of Mac Pro. Rmmaterial if they get it for status, or tinkering, or genuine technical need, it’s a machine the enthusiasts want, and apple essential to;d the think different enthusiasts to go **** themselves.
as a result, a large part of the enthusiasts have and are leaving, and a sizable portion will vent wanting apple to do better. im personally on the side of the enthusiasts. as always, ymmv.
This rebuttal reminds me of those nagging spouses who point out that one time you did that one thing twenty years ago and still bring it up constantly.
It was great for Apple and those enthusiasts back then. But time marches on, and Apple would never have grown to be as successful as it is if catering to its old customers was its overriding concern. Yeah, it sucks if you're left out of the continuing vision of the company, but that's the world of consumer products. If something doesn't work for you, you buy something else. Demanding a company cater to you specifically is fine and well, just don't expect them to actually do it.
Apple doesn't owe me jack for being a Mac user 30 years, any more than I owe a computer company loyalty.
Paul Chato's videos are some of the cringiest content I come across on Youtube. An angry old guy upset the world has changed while adopting the clickbait look of people young enough to be his grandkids at this point.
MaxTech has incredibly dumb arguments too (I wonder what parallel dimension he wandered in from where Apple promised the 6,1 would have GPU upgrades) but he doesn't look as much of a tool while he does it.
Last edited:
Yea the ONE and only time the company almost went bankrupt! the one time the company was formed with a confounding enthusiast. The one time after formation it was sold only to enthusiasts for years. The one time for decades it was sold to enthusiasts as the majority of their market share. The one time for decades financial analysts and others noticed its rabid loyal customers at its core were enthusiasts. That one time for decades that enthusiasts in Hollywood would shove macs into media constantly giving it free exposure. the one time enthusiasts helped it transition from computers into iPods and broader markets by being enthusiastic evangelists And supporting a product panned by the broader market...yea that one time...?
a lot more than one company would kill for any one of those one times...
This rebuttal reminds me why people and the internet sucks, all the more so in combination.
Last edited:
You're missing the entire point of Apple's existence. Apple from the jump was about making mass-market products. As the market for computing devices grew, so did Apple. Bringing up its founding suggests you fundamentally misunderstand the entire company's history.
I watched the latest Max Tech video finally (I'd seen his previous ones talking about the Mac Pro vs Apple Silicon.)
There's a lot he gets wrong, especially on the W5700, mostly based on community posts. Including here!
The W5700X has had a lot of driver issues, but they have been _mostly_ associated with Catalina. Big Sur made a lot of improvements to the driver, and I'm even seeing more improvements and fixes in 11.3. Apple hasn't abandon the Mac Pro and they haven't abandon the W5700X. They have abandon Catalina. The video plays it up like Apple and AMD have just abandon the W5700X and that AMD isn't working on it because Apple is blocking them and that's just a flat out lie. I don't know where he's getting that from.
Lots of fuss over Apple Silicon but I'll just add two things:
- Apple Silicon is also having a lot of basic GPU bugs and connectivity issues. Apple is promising fixes but most haven't shown up yet, and as far as I know they're not in 11.3 either. So the AMD drivers aren't unique in their issues. Recommending Apple Silicon Macs as a way to get away from the driver issues is kind of misleading. It's not the AMD drivers, and it's not specifically the Mac Pro. Apple is having a lot of quality issues across the line.
- Apple Silicon has still not shown anywhere near the graphics performance of a Mac Pro. There's some handpicked benchmarks around certain workflows. And that's fine, like I said I think there are a lot better machines for basic 4k editing. But that's not new. A Mac Mini a year ago would have been a better choice for a lot of typical FCPX. But that also doesn't mean the Mac Pro is a failure. There is a lot of stuff the Mac Pro can do that any of the M1 Macs don't have enough horsepower for.
I think there are very real quality control issues with macOS right now. Especially around graphics. And there are a lot of third party developers that are still ignoring the Mac. Apple and the Pro Group have been making progress, but it's real slow. But you can't throw that specifically at the Mac Pro. Software is not holding up across the line right now, including Apple Silicon.
(I didn't make it through the Chato video but he said he had no first hand experience but he was oh-so-outraged over the MaxTech video so I left it at that.)
There's a lot he gets wrong, especially on the W5700, mostly based on community posts. Including here!
The W5700X has had a lot of driver issues, but they have been _mostly_ associated with Catalina. Big Sur made a lot of improvements to the driver, and I'm even seeing more improvements and fixes in 11.3. Apple hasn't abandon the Mac Pro and they haven't abandon the W5700X. They have abandon Catalina. The video plays it up like Apple and AMD have just abandon the W5700X and that AMD isn't working on it because Apple is blocking them and that's just a flat out lie. I don't know where he's getting that from.
Lots of fuss over Apple Silicon but I'll just add two things:
- Apple Silicon is also having a lot of basic GPU bugs and connectivity issues. Apple is promising fixes but most haven't shown up yet, and as far as I know they're not in 11.3 either. So the AMD drivers aren't unique in their issues. Recommending Apple Silicon Macs as a way to get away from the driver issues is kind of misleading. It's not the AMD drivers, and it's not specifically the Mac Pro. Apple is having a lot of quality issues across the line.
- Apple Silicon has still not shown anywhere near the graphics performance of a Mac Pro. There's some handpicked benchmarks around certain workflows. And that's fine, like I said I think there are a lot better machines for basic 4k editing. But that's not new. A Mac Mini a year ago would have been a better choice for a lot of typical FCPX. But that also doesn't mean the Mac Pro is a failure. There is a lot of stuff the Mac Pro can do that any of the M1 Macs don't have enough horsepower for.
I think there are very real quality control issues with macOS right now. Especially around graphics. And there are a lot of third party developers that are still ignoring the Mac. Apple and the Pro Group have been making progress, but it's real slow. But you can't throw that specifically at the Mac Pro. Software is not holding up across the line right now, including Apple Silicon.
(I didn't make it through the Chato video but he said he had no first hand experience but he was oh-so-outraged over the MaxTech video so I left it at that.)
Last edited:
When it comes to "pro" computers, the world hasn't changed, though. Apple and it's blogger / podcaster sycophants said the 2013 Mac Pro was the future, and upgrade slots were the past, but that's not what happened, at all.
Slot-based computers are still the vast majority of getting-****-done desktop machines, and when you add in the dedicated Gaming / 3D workstation / Game Development / Reality Simulation machines (cause these are all basically the same combo - consumer processor with stonking big gaming GPU), it just becomes even clearer how out of sync Apple is, especially when you look at their laptop designs.
That's what's so funny about the pearl-clutching moral panic of Justin Long daring to go work for Apple's competition (hint, look who Tim Cook worked for, prior to Apple) and how it was such a betrayal - none of those ads care about the cpu, they're all focussing on how outdated Apple's laptop form-factors are, and how limited Apple's laptop performance envelope is. If you want to drive more than one external screen - nope, if you want to drive 3D graphics, nope, if you want a wide array of input options, or a drawing tablet, nope.
So on one end, you have Apple trying to "change the direction" of desktop machines, and everyone saying "no thanks", and on the other, Apple stamping its feet, and refusing to actually get with the times, and make the sort of form factors people want.
It's not really on topic for the Mac Pro, but Apple dropping eGPU on the Apple Silicon Macs is one of the biggest WTFs. They've taken machines that could be real powerhouses for those customer categories, but then cut support for actually using desktop cards when you're at a desk.
No but lets face it, "on topic" can be a pretty vague term here
Honestly I think dropping eGPU has more to do with these M1 machines being much more janky first gen parts-bin machines than anyone in the apple-o-sphere wants to admit. They're basically iPad Pros in a different form-factor - iPads can't run eGPU, so m1 macs can't either.
Just like the first gen aluminium Macbook (non-pro) which dumped firewire even though the preceeding polycarbonate models had it, and the Macbook Pro continued to have it, I imagine it'll come back once we get the machines that weren't panic-releases to get *something* out the door.
I'm hoping that's true. No ARM Radeon drivers doesn't bode well though. Maybe that will change in macOS 12. I think there are also some firmware issues that could be contributing on Apple Silicon.
What I've heard is that Apple doesn't like working with the GPU manufacturers. Nvidia had slow response times to driver fixes, and Apple _hated_ that. It had the potential to delay products and entire OS releases.
I've heard their working relationship with AMD is considerably better. It sounds like AMD actually has their driver engineers in Cupertino working directly with Apple engineers. And response times are much quicker.
But the feeling I've also gotten is that Apple hates any third party company being connected to their software releases, and they generally don't want to work with any outside driver writers. They maybe could see Apple Silicon as the time to "fix" that issue. Which would be a major mistake. Apple just improved their retail card support, it would be a big step back. Especially on laptops.
Apple's existence has gone through many periods. One almost to failure because some at apple thought exactly as you do. You're in good company with former CEO Skully.
Dude, what you 'know' about the company couldn't fill gnat's thimble.
There does seem to be a bit of a gulf between the 'I just need something that works' crowd and the tech enthusiasts who can't endorse anything but the latest (or yet to be released) products.
My Mac Pro quietly sits there and does whatever I ask. The 5700 XT works fine and the system never crashes. Every week I quickly turn around work I get paid for and I spend very little time watching rendering bars etc.
Maybe we all need to post more about how everything is going fine, just to balance out all the horror stories or tales of disappointment.
Yeah, it has.
Many of the people who needed Power Macs back in the day use iMacs or laptops now. The pie slice of people who need tower computers has shrunk, in terms of absolute numbers, and in terms of percentages.
Those customers that remain are willing to pay more than many, and the segment isn't likely to shrink away completely (as you point out, there are still situations where the need for power or expandability can't be addressed any other way easily.) There are companies that specifically cater to those markets, and make money doing it. Apple, in producing the Mac Pro and shifting away from the iMac Pro that was going to be their high-end computer option, clearly thinks there's some value in addressing it. But they've never been trying to be all things for all people. The enthusiasts wanted xMacs back in the day and they never got it. Maybe this mythical half-size Mac Pro that's coming is it, but based on the rumors it doesn't sound like something that has PCIe slots. We'll see. But even if it was the right form factor, it'll likely still not be as upgradable nor as cheap as these people want either. Would I personally like Apple to get serious about gaming? Sure. But it's never gonna' happen, so I don't act like it's the doom of Apple for not doing something about it (it's like expecting Nintendo to understand online services or Google to make high-quality hardware they support for years. Some stuff just isn't in a company's DNA.)
Apple is selling more Macs than ever. The argument that Apple needs to "get with the times" is mostly predicated on the small wedge arguing they are the most important consumer segment, and that hasn't been true for two decades at least, ever since more laptops were sold than desktops and the world didn't look back.
Again, it all comes down to this: arguing about the Mac Pro as a "failure" from one's personal needs explains why it's a failure to that person, but doesn't explain how it's a failure to the company.
In the realm of potential damage done to the company, the Mac Pro wouldn't even make a top ten. No one was using their awards speeches to complain about the lack of an enthusiast tower SKU, after all.
For which there is no evidence that this is a choice, because Apple has not tolerated the existence of a price / capability equivalent / competitor to the iMac.
Apple sold huge number of butterfly keyboard Macbooks, therefore the butterfly keyboard was beloved by customers, because look at the sales. Likewise the touchbar, everyone loves it, because look at the sales. Look at the sales of Face-ID iPhones, proves that noone really likes Touch-ID.
Any claim that Apple's success proves that their hardware is what their customers want, which ignores the hostage nature of their users, is disingenuous.
Funny about that, there's no awards ceremony that collects enthusiasts together.
They were switching to iMacs even when the cheesegrater Mac Pros were around.
Enthusiasts are critically important for emerging / minority platforms, and Apple certainly would not have survived without those true believers back in the day. Apple is now is a very fundamentally different company than the scrappy, threadbare survivor Jobs inherited after he took the helm for the second time.
Back then they were a computing company first and foremost and those users were first-class customers. Today Apple is a consumer electronics brand that also happens to make computers, more a vertically-integrated conglomerate like Sony than a focused computing OEM like HP or Dell. I'm not sure the old logic about needing enthusiasts still applies to a behemoth of this scale and in this market segment. Does Google need enthusiasts? Or Wal-Mart, Facebook, Amazon, Tencent? I ask that earnestly. That's the field they're playing in these days.
To varying degrees of success Apple is involved in phones, speakers, audio devices, integrated all-in-ones, laptops, wearables, tablets, credit cards, streaming services, etc. They're getting into AR and cars (?!). The front page of apple.com today only shows a sliver of a laptop halfway down the page, the only indication they make traditional computers at all.
And they're making money hand over fist while largely ignoring those old tinkerer fans, so it's obviously working at some material level. Apple's market cap was $5B in 2000 and $2,023B in 2020. When you're grown 40,460% in scale the rules are just different.
( Still waiting for my xMac. ?♂️ )
Back then they were a computing company first and foremost and those users were first-class customers. Today Apple is a consumer electronics brand that also happens to make computers, more a vertically-integrated conglomerate like Sony than a focused computing OEM like HP or Dell. I'm not sure the old logic about needing enthusiasts still applies to a behemoth of this scale and in this market segment. Does Google need enthusiasts? Or Wal-Mart, Facebook, Amazon, Tencent? I ask that earnestly. That's the field they're playing in these days.
To varying degrees of success Apple is involved in phones, speakers, audio devices, integrated all-in-ones, laptops, wearables, tablets, credit cards, streaming services, etc. They're getting into AR and cars (?!). The front page of apple.com today only shows a sliver of a laptop halfway down the page, the only indication they make traditional computers at all.
And they're making money hand over fist while largely ignoring those old tinkerer fans, so it's obviously working at some material level. Apple's market cap was $5B in 2000 and $2,023B in 2020. When you're grown 40,460% in scale the rules are just different.
( Still waiting for my xMac. ?♂️ )
Last edited:
Porsche is much more successful today with an SUV than it was early on. Yet, the reason the company is valuable is they did NOT forget their enthusiasts.
Apple is blowing up a bridge here unnecessarily. Giving enthusiasts what they want would not cost them much, and it would likely actually sell well.
If at some point apple could use those enthusiasts, that blown bridge... yea, not good.