MP 7,1 Mac Pro 8.1 - WHAT IF...

[singhs.apps]

Sorry, TLDW.

What's the gist?

Well, the screen shot should give some hint. Basically somewhat similar to Apple’s integrated approach but multi vendor partners… first in servers but later trickle down to workstation, PCs etc.

As it is the pc world has a long history of laptops with each new generation becoming good enough for even some desktop class work. It wouldn’t be too far fetched to to try in the desktop space (Macstudio style )

The likes of Dell and HP are well placed to mimic Apple’s approach if AMD/Intel/Nvidia are willing.

2x works great BTW. Interesting part starts around 9.00

 

[iPadified]

But you understand it is ONLY fringe because it isn't able to keep up with the big boys. I can PROMISE YOU, if Apple released an 8.1 that was more powerful and faster than a Puget System loaded with 2 4090's and a 64 core CPU, PIXAR, LUCASFILM, ILM, WETA, DREAMWORKS, DISNEY, DIGITAL DOMAIN, GLOWSTICK BAY STUDIOS, LUNAR ANIMATION, AND EVERY OTHER VFX HOUSE would buy all of their supply, and I mean ALL of their supply IMMEDIATELY and without hesitation. They would become the powerhouse in the FX world overnight.

There is strategic value to them doing it, they just haven't had an interest in doing it ever since they lost that crowd 12 years ago.

I believe the big boys and girls uses a rendering farm and not a pair of gaming cards. Apple never had the 3D crowd. Big mistake, I agree. Corporate and Apple? Not really a good connections there either.

 

[iPadified]

As it is the pc world has a long history of laptops with each new generation becoming good enough for even some desktop class work. It wouldn’t be too far fetched to see if they want to try in the desktop,space (Macstudio style )

The likes of Dell and HP are well placed to mimic Apple’s approach if AMD/Intel/Nvidia are willing.

Z2 mini G5 springs to mind of a compact WS like Mac Studio.

 

[maikerukun]

This I would definitely agree with.

 

[maikerukun]

My point was the studio fulfils the black box role of the iMac Pro (minus monitor + portability = successor to the tcMP too).

So either Apple put it out there as a stopgap for the Mac pro/iMac Pro +’we want beefy Mac mini pro’ crowd or they pushed it out because the extreme M1 AS version was even less scalable.

I could be wrong but a lot of peeps seem to like the Mac Studio, potential Mac pro customers not bothered about internal expansion (even the tcMP had its admirers )

Much of the lower end minus expansion role of the Mac pro might be cannibalised by the studio.

I suspect we will see a lot of such devices in the PC world soon.

I don't disagree with this. I love my Mac Studio. I have one upstairs in my music studio. It's daily driven and performs well for the music studio. And my MacBook Pro M1 Max is used for all of my editing. And my Mac Pro 7.1 is used for all of my 3D animation and VFX. All of them have a place in my eco system. and the Mac Studio is perfect for 90% of people. But that other 10%...they just need something more, I need something more.

 

[maikerukun]

I don't understand why the mac pro should be expensive.
the philosophy is customizable, with precisely a low starting price. Otherwise it's pointless.
Except movie and animation studios, and very few prosumers, nobody will put 8000 dollars in a base model mac pro, when the mac studio with m2max will do 95% of what we need for less than 4000 dollars. And when a nvidia workstation will be around 4000 dollars too (talking about base models).

Personally, I am willing to put $60k towards a maxed out Mac Pro 8.1 if it gives me at least 25% more power than what my current Mac Pro 7.1 gives me. Keeping my entire ecosystem on one OS is invaluable. If they build it, I will come.

 

[singhs.apps]

But that other 10%...they just need something more, I need something more.

You and a few of us too.
Apple has an opportunity to really create a great ‘mackintosh’.

I for one, am happy they are taking their time with the 8.1
Just don’t go 50krazy on the price.

 

[maikerukun]

I believe the big boys and girls uses a rendering farm and not a pair of gaming cards. Apple never had the 3D crowd. Big mistake, I agree. Corporate and Apple? Not really a good connections there either.

Yes they definitely use render farms no question, as they are necessary for final export, but that doesn't mean you don't want the beefiest and most reliable systems you can get. And being in one ecosystem is always better. Because outside of rendering and graphics work, all the personal computers and laptops at creative studios tend to be MacBooks and iMacs. Literally every computer that isn't being used for animation is Apple. Might as well finish out the circle.

 

[maikerukun]

You and a few of us too.
Apple has an opportunity to really create a great ‘mackintosh’.

I for one, am happy they are taking their time with the 8.1
Just don’t go 50krazy on the price.

I'm all for them taking their time lol. I honestly just wish they'd let AMD give us that new 7000 series on the 7.1's so I can upgrade my w6800x duos. But tbh if they allowed for that, I wouldn't be in the market for the 8.1 so, that's not gonna happen lol.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

I think you should ask yourself: 1) Is the Mac Pro community strategically important for Apple? 2) Is the Mac Pro community large enough to make business sense?

The failure of Apple was to brand the trashcan "Mac Pro" and at the same time did not have a conventional Mac Pro in the lineup. Another miscalculation by Apple was that in order to improve the performance, AMD and Intel increased power usage which of course did not go down well with the MP 2013 format. I think the "apology" was for that miscalculation: they had build themself into a thermal corner. Sure they had because they were relying on AMD/Intel.

With the Mac Studio and MBP Max optimised for video, the number of users who needs a traditional Mac Pro is declining. That is the current head ache for the the Mac Pro community and probably for Apple as well.The signs are clear: the inability to provide a Mac Pro for the european market due to some electricity standards (how sad is that?), in an attempt to revitalise the segment with Mac Pro 2013 (which failed) and six years of waiting for 7,1 that also become very expensive (to the chargrin of many here). It screams that the Mac Pro is an economic failure and has been since at least 10 years ago.

I think you should ask yourself, why would a completely humiliating and embarrassing apple apology tour take place for something they care so little about.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

But you understand it is ONLY fringe because it isn't able to keep up with the big boys. I can PROMISE YOU, if Apple released an 8.1 that was more powerful and faster than a Puget System loaded with 2 4090's and a 64 core CPU, PIXAR, LUCASFILM, ILM, WETA, DREAMWORKS, DISNEY, DIGITAL DOMAIN, GLOWSTICK BAY STUDIOS, LUNAR ANIMATION, AND EVERY OTHER VFX HOUSE would buy all of their supply, and I mean ALL of their supply IMMEDIATELY and without hesitation. They would become the powerhouse in the FX world overnight.

There is strategic value to them doing it, they just haven't had an interest in doing it ever since they lost that crowd 12 years ago.

What do you know! You only work in the field and do visual effects for music videos, hollywood movies, etc. You do not have the awesome power of smug arrogance on your side. /sarcasm

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Sorry, TLDW.

What's the gist?

Looks like intel released a Xeon Max that seems to have memory on chip, BUT still has access to memory off chip too! INTERESTING.

Not sure I'm understanding it correctly, but that is the gist I took from the above section starting around 5min marker.

So you can get it with 'just' 64GB 'HBM' on package memory, hybrid with DDR ram and HBM memory, or using HBM memory just as 'cache'.

Thanks @singhs.apps for the very cool and relevant heads up!

 

[singhs.apps]

Looks like intel released a Xeon Max that seems to have memory on chip, BUT still has access to memory off chip too! INTERESTING.

View attachment 2116918

Not sure I'm understanding it correctly, but that is the gist I took from the above section starting around 5min marker.

So you can get it with 'just' 64GB 'HBM' on package memory, hybrid with DDR ram and HBM memory, or using HBM memory just as 'cache'.

Thanks @singhs.apps for the very cool and relevant heads up!

64 GB maybe good for entry level stuff but considering the target industry most likely a cache, but as your screen capture suggests it’s flexible (bottom right )

AMD has basic graphics in the TR 8k series … itself a sign of how AMD is seeing stuff going forward, or intel’s much derided consumer GPU venture which they plan to use as part of the CPU itself.

Towards the end, he even wonders why no one’s released a pure raytracing accelerator yet(something I have been wondering too)

So maybe Apple has something planned? Maybe.

So yeah, interesting developments but as the narrator cautioned, it’s a big ‘if’ . Nevertheless a sign of where things are headed all over. Some may trickle down to the consumer market. Apple’s success (so far) with the m1 in the consumer space may have the others trying it out.

I won’t be surprised if in the not so distant future you configure your parts and the system gets shipped to you, pre fixed to the mainboard with some PCI slots free for 3rd party cards.

As always the market will decide.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

64 GB maybe good for entry level stuff but considering the target industry most likely a cache, but as your screen capture suggests it’s flexible (bottom right )

AMD has basic graphics in the TR 7 series … itself a sign of how AMD is seeing stuff going forward, or intel’s much derided consumer GPU venture which they plan to use as part of the CPU itself.

Towards the end, he even wonders why no one’s released a pure raytracing accelerator yet(something I have been wondering too)

So maybe Apple has something planned? Maybe.

So yeah, interesting developments but as the narrator cautioned, it’s a big ‘if’ . Nevertheless a sign of where things are headed all over. Some may trickle down to the consumer market. Apple’s success (so far) with the m1 in the consumer space may have the others trying it out.

I won’t be surprised if in the not so distant future you configure your parts and the system gets shipped to you, pre fixed to the mainboard with some PCI slots free for 3rd party cards.

As always the market will decide.

Also showing that having the package ram AND dimms may become a regular 'thing' in the not too distant future for the high end market.

Using it as a super high speed cache makes a LOT of sense. Just imagine how fast the corpus of say 256gb on package ram can change with fast dimm memory as you move from one part of your workflow to another. It could be really sweet if done properly. 256gb very fast cache memory and say 2TB dimms could be a very powerful combo.

 

[deconstruct60]

64 GB maybe good for entry level stuff but considering the target industry most likely a cache, but as your screen capture suggests it’s flexible (bottom right )

Systems composed of a single HBM package will likely be very low. If put 50-1000 of those 64 GB packages into a coherent system and that's 3.2 - 64 TB of overall system RAM. That really is not "entry level stuff".

The target industry is supercomputer nodes. Not solitary, single user, single app desktops.

It isn't homogeneously flexible to the applications. The mix-mode in the middle requires an App rewrite. For Apple that likely the mode you are pragmatically pushing to once take into account that the CPU and GPU would likely have to share the HBM/"Poor mans HBM via LPDDR5". Caches for CPUs do not have the same access patterns as caches for GPU.

Pragmatically, This is mostly second generation stuff for Intel. This "flex mode with HBM" stuff was in the Xeon Phi ( Knights Landing). And also Intel's OS work with trying to weave substantially different Optane DIMMs in with pure RAM DIMMs. ( requiring application modifications and/or kernel tweaks in many/most cases ).


Not particularly surprising it shows up here because when Xeon Phi "Kings Hill" was killed off a new Aurora Intel package was to take its place.

The End Of Xeon Phi – It’s Xeon And Maybe GPUs From Here

To a certain extent, the “Knights” family of parallel processors, sold under the brand name Xeon Phi, by Intel were exactly what they were supposed to be:

www.nextplatform.com

Supercomputer node that is focused on HPC and a couple of local GPGPU compute accesslerators needs to keep up and would/could go HBM only. The very high bandwidth RAM is spread between CPU package and GPU packages to keep the cores fed. Nodes that are tasks with File I/O probably can lean on a bigger/better cache hierarchy.
There is also some configurations being thrown at in-memory datawarehouses where the apps are already tweaked to deal with different speed "fast RAM".

The vast bulk of Xeon SP gen 4 thrown into individual workstation sockets is not going to be these. A relatively few will, but that isn't what is paying the bills for this HBM variant development.

And this "everything and the kitchen sink" is one reason why this hundreds bugs and ridiculous number of steppings to work through that greatly delayed its time to market. Jumping up and down trying to push maximum complexity at Apple SoC isn't likely going to get them to come out quicker ( or last long term as a viable product. )


[ Time will tell how well Intel's HBM 'bolt on' works versus AMD far more cleanly and purposeful 3D stack of simply just more L3 cache in HPC supercomputer node use cases (smaller capacity jump , but lower latency hit) . ]

AMD has basic graphics in the TR 7 series … itself a sign of how AMD is seeing stuff going forward, or intel’s much derided consumer GPU venture which they plan to use as part of the CPU itself.

What are the signs that Threadripper 7000 has an iGPU? The desktop Ryzen 7000 have an iGPU but that is a completely different IO hub chiplet.

Sightings of TR 7000 Pro so far have pegged it as very likely being the same package as Eypc (just like the previous "Pro" iterations) .

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 7000 "Storm Peak" CPU With 64 Zen 4 Cores Spotted

AMD's Ryzen Threadripper 7000 CPUs codenamed "Storm Peak" has appeared within the Einstein @Home database & features 64 Zen 4 cores.

wccftech.com

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 7000 "Storm Peak" CPU spotted with 96 cores - VideoCardz.com

AMD Threadripper series getting more cores with “Storm Peak” New AMD OPN codes have shown up on Einstein @ Home website. It looks like someone is testing unreleased AMD CPUs with high core count. This is definitely not the first time we spot an unreleased AMD processor on volunteer computing...

videocardz.com

AMD slowed down the rollout of this generation Eypc package to weave CXL 1.1 into the package. There is no iGPU at the server level for the Zen 4 generation in the server space. Hence, very likely non for the Threadripper space either.
a GPGPU as a compute accelerator is being driven by both CXL 1.1 and by proprietary InfinityFabric links to AMD Mixxx series accelerators.


There might be a "non Pro" Threadripper but likely would come with socket SP6 which again is for Server packages.

AMD SP6 socket for next-gen Zen4 EPYC series has been pictured, same size as SP3 - VideoCardz.com

AMD SP5 socket has been confirmed It didn’t take long for the rumors about AMD’s next-gen SP6 socket to already find a confirmation through newly leaked photos. Over at AnandTech forums one can find photos and schematics for the socket codenamed SP6. This socket has been explained in leaked...

videocardz.com

Somewhat possible if push the CPU core count down below 64 to add an iGPU bandwidth pressure uplift. Smaller, more manageable socket but also possibly loosing memory channels. ( at least the standard usage as server does. could be other pins can repurpose if don't have power distribution issues to cover. )


Either way Threadripper is a derivative product forked from the server package products. The volume to support the specific chiplet development is being driven by the server package unit volumes; not by diving deep into a 10% of 1% niche.

Towards the end, he even wonders why no one’s released a pure raytracing accelerator yet(something I have been wondering too)

completely disintegrated from the raster process is going to buy what? Similarly from the display output process buys what in most use cases ?

So maybe Apple has something planned? Maybe.

Apple has something planned to jump eyeball deep into the server and supercomputer node market? Probably not. MacOS still doesn't do more than 64 threads. The shared kernel between the rest of the Apple product line up probably means that isn't going to change.

Apple has shown distinct disinterest in CXL. Their chiplet interconnect is homegrown and likely not looking to couple to third party dies. And also extremely focused on highest per/watt ( not max interopertibilty).

So yeah, interesting developments but as the narrator cautioned, it’s a big ‘if’ . Nevertheless a sign of where things are headed all over. Some may trickle down to the consumer market. Apple’s success (so far) with the m1 in the consumer space may have the others trying it out.

AMD's 3D stacked cache already has. CXL will in future iterations of Intel (Gen 14 ) and AMD (probably another iteration (or two) ).

Some of the previous Xeon Phi cards ran a lightweight Linux on the 'card' and communicated to the host system over a virtual ethernet connection implemented over the PCI-e x16 connection (set up virtual ethernet device on both sides and then can just communicate with apps that used physical wire mechanisms to talk from node to node).

A MI300 node or Mx Max node on a card communicating back to the host Mac would be doing scale out cluster inside the container.

 

[singhs.apps]

What are the signs that Threadripper 7000 has an iGPU? The desktop Ryzen 7000 have an iGPU but that is a completely different IO hub chiplet.

For the 8000 series. Corrected

 

[Kimmo]

Was really hoping for a surprise announcement of the Apple Silicon Mac Pro during a half-time spot featuring Paul Simon in a turkey suit, but no joy.

Next big opportunity for Apple Marketing; December 25th.

If Tim Allen isn't available, Billy Bob will do.

 

[deconstruct60]

Similar arguments that were proven failures about why ‘more trashcan’ was ‘inevitable’ and ‘good, enough, for us’. And yet, 7,1.

Similar arguments when? At no time in the past was Apple constructing their own SoC or CPU or GPU for the Macintosh.

The "similar" arguments before were that Apple would solder down memory for Intel Sever chips because Apple was soldering down memory for Intel laptop chips that optionally took substantially different RAM so-DIMMs (or soldered configuration). The only 'similarity' there is taking a "monkey see , monkey do" approach to Apple will apply x to desktops because they are doing it on laptops.

There is little similarity here on that front at all. Apple does not have a server only chip. There are not creditable rumors of one . So if Apple engineering only built one type of LPDDR5 family memory controller to use across all of their chips then hand waving about how ECC DDR5 DIMMs are coming 'real soon now' has about zero similarity at all. Intel built multiple types of memory controllers all along during the Apple period on x86.

Apple has not deviated from LPDDR only memory controllers during their whole time doing SoCs. Watch SoC reuse the E cores and other elements from the phone series. The M1/M2 are being shared across iPads and Macs. Apple has extended track record of leveraging a high amount of reuse across their SoCs. This isn't making the argument that because phones have it so Mac has to have it. It is that Apple isn't building it for their tool kit at al.


There were about as many 'wrong' Apple is going to solder down everything arguments as there was 'Apple is going to slap a refreshed logic back in a 5,1 container' . Apple did neither of those. They ship no SATA drives in the BTO set ups for the current Mac Pro. ( it is a 3rd party option but largely due to being provisioned out of the Intel chipset that Apple had to buy anyway.) It doesn't mean Apple is super excited to macOS on HDDs.


The Mac Pro 2013 was followed by the iMac Pro which has been followed by the Mac Studio. When exactly did Apple break away from that path. The notion that the Mac Studio is gong to be dumped for a similarly priced "box with slots" is extremely dubious. About as equally dubious that they would make a new Mac Pro with zero slots. The extremes on either side don't make sense.

More likely Apple is going to do a highly engineered solution that is more so in the middle ground. Some PCI-e , but not 'king kong' sized. RAM capacity, but again not 'king kong' sized. GPU , but not 'king kong' sizesd. etc.
If they are going to keep the MP 2019 around for a decent while while also selling a Apple Mac Pro .. wouldn't be too surprising to see the same case thrown at both to reduce costs (for both). Doesn't cost much not to use 2 slots in the current box for new board with fewer slots. ( did it with the Mini case.)

MPX connector is highly engineered, but it toward what Apple wanted to do. It was not mimic or cloning what AMD/Intel were doing. Instead of some 'Rube Goldberg' external loop back cables and a funky GPIO card they produced something far cleaner with less cables and less complexity). Non standard long or tall cards PCI-e don't fit in a Mac Pro. Never was about taking any card possible.

Very high likelihood that Apple is going to put an Apple GPU on this Mac Pro SoC. The inertia of the software stack leans that way. Detaching a high performance GPU from the memory system it was design for is technically dubious. It isn't Apple mindlessly copying the laptop board build tactic on another system.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Similar arguments when? At no time in the past was Apple constructing their own SoC or CPU or GPU for the Macintosh.

The "similar" arguments before were that Apple would solder down memory for Intel Sever chips because Apple was soldering down memory for Intel laptop chips that optionally took substantially different RAM so-DIMMs (or soldered configuration). The only 'similarity' there is taking a "monkey see , monkey do" approach to Apple will apply x to desktops because they are doing it on laptops.

There is little similarity here on that front at all. Apple does not have a server only chip. There are not creditable rumors of one . So if Apple engineering only built one type of LPDDR5 family memory controller to use across all of their chips then hand waving about how ECC DDR5 DIMMs are coming 'real soon now' has about zero similarity at all. Intel built multiple types of memory controllers all along during the Apple period on x86.

Apple has not deviated from LPDDR only memory controllers during their whole time doing SoCs. Watch SoC reuse the E cores and other elements from the phone series. The M1/M2 are being shared across iPads and Macs. Apple has extended track record of leveraging a high amount of reuse across their SoCs. This isn't making the argument that because phones have it so Mac has to have it. It is that Apple isn't building it for their tool kit at al.


There were about as many 'wrong' Apple is going to solder down everything arguments as there was 'Apple is going to slap a refreshed logic back in a 5,1 container' . Apple did neither of those. They ship no SATA drives in the BTO set ups for the current Mac Pro. ( it is a 3rd party option but largely due to being provisioned out of the Intel chipset that Apple had to buy anyway.) It doesn't mean Apple is super excited to macOS on HDDs.


The Mac Pro 2013 was followed by the iMac Pro which has been followed by the Mac Studio. When exactly did Apple break away from that path. The notion that the Mac Studio is gong to be dumped for a similarly priced "box with slots" is extremely dubious. About as equally dubious that they would make a new Mac Pro with zero slots. The extremes on either side don't make sense.

More likely Apple is going to do a highly engineered solution that is more so in the middle ground. Some PCI-e , but not 'king kong' sized. RAM capacity, but again not 'king kong' sized. GPU , but not 'king kong' sizesd. etc.
If they are going to keep the MP 2019 around for a decent while while also selling a Apple Mac Pro .. wouldn't be too surprising to see the same case thrown at both to reduce costs (for both). Doesn't cost much not to use 2 slots in the current box for new board with fewer slots. ( did it with the Mini case.)

MPX connector is highly engineered, but it toward what Apple wanted to do. It was not mimic or cloning what AMD/Intel were doing. Instead of some 'Rube Goldberg' external loop back cables and a funky GPIO card they produced something far cleaner with less cables and less complexity). Non standard long or tall cards PCI-e don't fit in a Mac Pro. Never was about taking any card possible.

Very high likelihood that Apple is going to put an Apple GPU on this Mac Pro SoC. The inertia of the software stack leans that way. Detaching a high performance GPU from the memory system it was design for is technically dubious. It isn't Apple mindlessly copying the laptop board build tactic on another system.

There were dozens of apple apologists making hand waving arguments why the trash can was great and the future. Then Apple did an apology tour promising a modular Mac and the apologists still said “modular” doesn’t mean slots and made more justifications for how great another trash can Mac future would be. Now apologists saying “noting changed the studio and iMac Pro are proof” and other moron arguments, which were all broken by the one two punch of an Apple apology tour promising an Apple modular Mac, and delivery of an 8 slot device called a Mac Pro, 7,1.

Your long tiresome inaccurate rationalizations are just more proof that history is irrelevant to those hell bent on ignoring it.

 

[StuAff]

It's Schrodinger's Mac. Until they take it out of the box (metaphorically) we know nothing about it. We don't know what it looks like, any of the specs, price, or when it's being released. As it won't be using Intel we don't even have a Xeon roadmap to go on. All we do know is that there is a new Mac Pro coming at some point in the future. All the guesses we can come up with are wrong. Some of us might just be less wrong than others. As I recall, no-one predicted the 2013 correctly, and I honestly can't remember if anyone nailed down much correct about the 7,1 either. MPX and eight PCIe slots certainly weren't mentioned.

 

[mode11]

There were about as many 'wrong' Apple is going to solder down everything arguments as there was 'Apple is going to slap a refreshed logic back in a 5,1 container' . Apple did neither of those. They ship no SATA drives in the BTO set ups for the current Mac Pro. ( it is a 3rd party option but largely due to being provisioned out of the Intel chipset that Apple had to buy anyway.) It doesn't mean Apple is super excited to macOS on HDDs.

This seems to be an attempt to set a record for most amount of straw men in one paragraph. Back in 2017, no-one was expecting the new Xeon-based 7,1 to have everything soldered down. No-one imagined Apple would reuse the 5,1 case after a 7-year gap. Literally no-one even considered that Apple would use an HDD boot disk in the 2019 Mac Pro. Aside from a few low-end iMacs, Apple had been all-in on SSDs since about 2012.

The Mac Pro 2013 was followed by the iMac Pro which has been followed by the Mac Studio. When exactly did Apple break away from that path.

Erm, with the Mac Pro 2019, which came out in between the iMac Pro and the Mac Studio??

MPX connector is highly engineered, but it toward what Apple wanted to do. It was not mimic or cloning what AMD/Intel were doing. Instead of some 'Rube Goldberg' external loop back cables and a funky GPIO card they produced something far cleaner with less cables and less complexity).

MPX is neat, but its benefits are debatable vs. just buying mainstream PC GPUs for far less money. Having to plug a power cable into a GPU is hardly the end of the world.

Non standard long or tall cards PCI-e don't fit in a Mac Pro. Never was about taking any card possible.

How useful. Seems like an oversight to me - why not just build a workstation that can fit anything it might reasonably be expected to?

Very high likelihood that Apple is going to put an Apple GPU on this Mac Pro SoC. The inertia of the software stack leans that way. Detaching a high performance GPU from the memory system it was design for is technically dubious.

Which kind of exposes the weakness of an SoC approach that is ultimately iPhone-first, with everything a development of that. Makes total sense for laptops and iMacs, but it remains to be seen if it can for the Mac Pro. The issue is not whether Apple have the engineering talent, but whether the economics favour making a unique, massive chip for their slowest-selling product line. Nothing else in their product stack has or needs lots of PCIe lanes.

 

[iPadified]

There were dozens of apple apologists making hand waving arguments why the trash can was great and the future. Then Apple did an apology tour promising a modular Mac and the apologists still said “modular” doesn’t mean slots and made more justifications for how great another trash can Mac future would be. Now apologists saying “noting changed the studio and iMac Pro are proof” and other moron arguments, which were all broken by the one two punch of an Apple apology tour promising an Apple modular Mac, and delivery of an 8 slot device called a Mac Pro, 7,1.

Your long tiresome inaccurate rationalizations are just more proof that history is irrelevant to those hell bent on ignoring it.

7,1 was a reaction to tcMP but careful what you which for: entry prices got a bit steep for most. The 7,1 is much better than the 6,1 but also the 5,1. Large power supply and sufficient power to the GPU. After some digging, the three PCIe appeared to share 300W in the 5,1. Not even one 4090...Ergo, the 5,1 is not a Mac Pro by the 7,1 standard but at best a mid range tower which explains the pricing of them.

It does not change the fact that non-modular computers have taken over the world and PC towers, which 7,1 belongs to, are squeezed by sufficiently high performing non-modular computers and cloud computing. The world is not as it was during the 1995-2010 where towers had their peak.

Please stick to rational arguments. "Apple apologist" is not an argument.

 

[mode11]

After some digging, the three PCIe appeared to share 300W in the 5,1. Not even one 4090...Ergo, the 5,1 is not a Mac Pro by the 7,1 standard but at best a mid range tower which explains the pricing of them.

That doesn't really follow. The 5,1 was a dual-CPU workstation running ECC RAM, which with modern DIMMs can be expanded up to 256GB. In the era it was released, it was a high-end system.

PCI power delivery is a narrow way of defining the machine. After all, it has a roughly 1000W PSU and can easily drive modern high-powered cards via the PIXLAS mod. If Apple had updated the 5,1, it would have been simple enough for them to beef up the AUX power sockets.

 

[iPadified]

That doesn't really follow. The 5,1 was a dual-CPU workstation running ECC RAM, which with modern DIMMs can be expanded up to 256GB. In the era it was released, it was a high-end system.

PCI power delivery is a narrow way of defining the machine. After all, it has a roughly 1000W PSU and can easily drive modern high-powered cards via the PIXLAS mod. If Apple had updated the 5,1, it would have been simple enough for them to beef up the AUX power sockets.

Looked it up on Apple home page and I remember it was a problem. Mods? I thought we talkad about professionals and not enthusiasts.

 

[mode11]

You're missing the point. My reference to PIXLAS was just to demonstrate that the AUX power 'limitation' was arbitrary, and related to GPU needs of the era. There was loads of spare capacity, and it would have been trivial for Apple to provide it had they revised the 5,1 - e.g. by using thicker traces on the motherboard.