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

[MacPoulet]

an Intel based 8.1 Mac Pro is the WAY TO GO...

And you know what's wild? There's a way to do this WITHOUT LOSING FACE! and quite frankly, while GAINING MORE RESPECT!

All they have to do is...

When they announce the new INTEL BASED 8.1 MAC PRO...all they have to say is...

Tim Cook - "We were working hard on an Apple Silicon focused solution for the Pro crowd, but as you know, we listen to our customers, and we've seen the feedback, and we know what you want. When it comes to editing on the go, and smaller more personal creative studios, nothing offers the portability or flexibility of the M-Series Apple Chip Lineup.

from the M2 Mac Mini, to the powerful portable powerhouse, the M2 Max MacBook Pros, and even or M2 lineup of iPad Pros...nothing comes close...

but when it's time to truly step up to the plate. When wattage control needs to become OUT OF CONTROL...you want the uprgradeability, the modularity, and the absolute power maximizing potential of the 7.1 Mac Pro. You want the successor. You want the absolute best of the best.

Introducing the all new 8.1 Mac Pro".

Press goes nuts. YouTubers go nuts. Hobbyists and professionals go nuts. Apple wins. We all win.

Just saying lol...

I don’t think they be able to say that either. Apple has taken a very public stance on being “green” (even if their practices don’t often reflect it), so that message would need to be tweaked.

Maybe something like “We have some amazing new technologies for the Apple Silicon Mac Pro, but we’re not going to rush it to market. It’s going to take a little longer, but our customers will love it.”

That of course would mean the ASi Mac Pro would have to be amazing and not just a Studio with an expansion box (which I would love personally but I’m no longer the target market).

 

[vinegarshots]

Anyone who thinks Apple would backtrack on Apple Silicon and make another computer with Intel chips hasn’t been paying attention to Apples marketing for the past 20 years. Apple has always been about staking their brand reputation on the next best thing (whether or not it’s actually true at the time). Even though Jobs is dead, his reality distortion field is still strongly in place at Apple. They’ve already placed Apple Silicon firmly in its position as Apples next best thing, and to produce anything new with Intel chips would destroy their branding efforts entirely. It ain’t gonna happen.

 

[maikerukun]

Anyone who thinks Apple would backtrack on Apple Silicon and make another computer with Intel chips hasn’t been paying attention to Apples marketing for the past 20 years. Apple has always been about staking their brand reputation on the next best thing (whether or not it’s actually true at the time). Even though Jobs is dead, his reality distortion field is still strongly in place at Apple. They’ve already placed Apple Silicon firmly in its position as Apples next best thing, and to produce anything new with Intel chips would destroy their branding efforts entirely. It ain’t gonna happen.

They’ve already said they have a few more intel computers on the way. They also haven’t ended their relationship with intel. And Mac Pro has ALWAYS been a vague question in terms of the M series. They never directly said when the Mac Pro would be complete. Their 2 year transition came and went in fact, and could be used as proof that they’ve completed the transition, with Mac Pro being something else entirely.

 

[prefuse07]

Macs With Intel Processors Still Coming Amid Transition to Apple Silicon

While Apple is rapidly transitioning its Mac lineup from Intel processors to its own Apple silicon, it's worth highlighting as 2021 wraps up that...

www.macrumors.com

*shrug* take it how you will, but here is another one:

https://www.techradar.com/news/apple-will-continue-to-use-intel-processors-in-macs-for-a-while/

 

[Boil]

They’ve already said they have a few more intel computers on the way. They also haven’t ended their relationship with intel. And Mac Pro has ALWAYS been a vague question in terms of the M series. They never directly said when the Mac Pro would be complete. Their 2 year transition came and went in fact, and could be used as proof that they’ve completed the transition, with Mac Pro being something else entirely.

The final Intel 27" iMac was one of those "few more", and an Ice Lake refresh for the 7,1 Mac Pro would have been the other "few more" but Intel messed those CPUs up so much that nobody wanted to use them...

And when the Mac Studio with the M1 Ultra was announced, they clearly stated there was a final machine to make the ASi transition, the Mac Pro...

As for the two year transition, things happened throughout the world that disrupted those plans, so the transition has gone longer than anticipated...

The next Mac Pro will be of the Apple silicon variant; until that debuts Apple will continue to offer the dated 2019 7,1 Intel Mac Pro, much as it kept the 2018 i5/i7 Intel Mac mini around whilst waiting to (finally) launch the M2 Pro Mac mini...

 

[maikerukun]

The final Intel 27" iMac was one of those "few more", and an Ice Lake refresh for the 7,1 Mac Pro would have been the other "few more" but Intel messed those CPUs up so much that nobody wanted to use them...

And when the Mac Studio with the M1 Ultra was announced, they clearly stated there was a final machine to make the ASi transition, the Mac Pro...

As for the two year transition, things happened throughout the world that disrupted those plans, so the transition has gone longer than anticipated...

The next Mac Pro will be of the Apple silicon variant; until that debuts Apple will continue to offer the dated 2019 7,1 Intel Mac Pro, much as it kept the 2018 i5/i7 Intel Mac mini around whilst waiting to (finally) launch the M2 Pro Mac mini...

We'll see. You could be right...but then again, so could I.

And I hope I am, unless they've got something to genuinely be a replacement.

 

[maikerukun]

Macs With Intel Processors Still Coming Amid Transition to Apple Silicon

While Apple is rapidly transitioning its Mac lineup from Intel processors to its own Apple silicon, it's worth highlighting as 2021 wraps up that...

www.macrumors.com

*shrug* take it how you will, but here is another one:

https://www.techradar.com/news/apple-will-continue-to-use-intel-processors-in-macs-for-a-while/

These articles are EXACTLY what I was referring to...and this by far makes the most sense for them to do.

 

[jmho]

The issue is that developers have spent the last 2 years porting their x86 code and replacing it with ARM64, while also modifying all their Metal code to run on Apple Silicon with its own unique set of features.

There is absolutely no way Apple are going to pull a "surprise, you know all that code you just deleted - put it back, and maintain two code paths - also you're going to need to buy the new Mac Pro in order to fix bugs that show up because your code is now running on two completely different drivers"

Most devs would just drop support for the Mac Pro and tell their users to bootcamp into Windows.

Apple's entire ecosystem relies on convincing devs to use Metal. Metal when targeting Apple Silicon is fantastic where you know that if it runs on 1 Apple Silicon device it will run on all Apple Silicon devices. Metal when targeting Apple Silicon AND Intel and AMD GPUs is a spaghetti code nightmare that requires testing on all kinds of devices. Devs are looking forward to dropping Intel just as much as Apple are.

 

[singhs.apps]

It makes no sense to launch an intel Mac Pro, this late in the game.

A ‘current’ intel Mac Pro exists. Apple would be expecting those who wish to and have to remain on x86 macOS system will just buy the current offering.

There is less pressure today (if such things exist for Apple) to release a Mac Pro compared to 2018 (they have blown past the two year deadline anyway). Unlike the tcMP, the 2019 MP is not a dead-end-paint-myself into a corner product. It still has legs.

Sure the new Xeon-Ws are good, but will get eclipsed by the zen 4 TRs. Besides with a hard limit of 64 threads tops, the only way a 38/56 core Intel Mac Pro can work is by disabling multi-threading. A new 28 core doesn’t make sense, performance wise (not when Apple has signalled it going it’s own route, and the Mac Pro is last one remaining)

Also Apple’s choice to go it’s own way will loose its shine if they cave in and release an intel Mac Pro. It will be admitting that it has no solutions in its lineup for top end desktop demands.
Having to convince developers to make a u-turn will also be undesirable.


The more I look at it, the more it appears Apple will have some surprise in store for the Mac Pro.
No way are they just plonking in an ultra with expansion slots and calling it a day.

At the very least try and prove that there is more ways to get top class workstation performance than what we have been seeing so far in the x86 space.

Whatever it will be … it will be interesting for sure.

 

[mode11]

Macs With Intel Processors Still Coming Amid Transition to Apple Silicon

While Apple is rapidly transitioning its Mac lineup from Intel processors to its own Apple silicon, it's worth highlighting as 2021 wraps up that...

www.macrumors.com

*shrug* take it how you will, but here is another one:

https://www.techradar.com/news/apple-will-continue-to-use-intel-processors-in-macs-for-a-while/

Both those articles are from Dec 2021, and make clear they’re just speculation, with no insider knowledge.

 

[maikerukun]

Both those articles are from Dec 2021, and make clear they’re just speculation, with no insider knowledge.

Speculation or not, it makes sense...even everyone in the comments on those articles think it makes the most logical sense. And I happen to agree.

Also, mind you, the Mac Pro has always been a STATEMENT PIECE. Something that let's the highest end of their users compete with the best of the best but also proves to the industry that they are the best across the board.

Folks like me with a 7.1 will put it up for sale, but if I don't get $20k - $25k I will keep it, and just buy the new Intel 8.1...and when the AS Mac Pro drops a year or two after that, I'll pick that up if it is able to beat the 8.1 Intel.

I'm so excited to see what they do in March!

 

[mode11]

Also, mind you, the Mac Pro has always been a STATEMENT PIECE. Something that let's the highest end of their users compete with the best of the best but also proves to the industry that they are the best across the board.

I disagree. As someone else pointed out, the 6,1 may have been a style statement, but was far from the most powerful workstation on its release, and sat unmodified for 6 years before it was finally replaced.

The 7,1 is a powerful machine, but released at a time when Threadrippers were stomping Intel, and doesn't support Nvidia GPUs. And itself hasn't seen a system-level upgrade in 4 years. So is hardly ruling the roost in the high end space.

It seems much more like the Mac Pro is a machine that Apple reluctantly and sporadically updates, whilst internally debating whether they can get away with discontinuing it. Part of the speculation with the 8,1 is over whether Apple releases it at all, and if so, whether it's just a Studio with some PCIe slots.

 

[maikerukun]

This is AWESOME!!! LOL and just wanted to point it out. Us with our 7.1 Mac Pros and w6800x duo's are STILL king of GPU LMFAO!

The w6800x Duo has BEAT the RTX4080 and is still one of the 2 strongest GPUs you can currently get sub $10k

I'm sorry but the 7.1 is simply a beast and even now against the ABSOLUTE LATEST NVIDIA HAS TO OFFER, My trusty little monster is around the speed of and in some cases faster than 2 RTX 4090's

Love to see it <3

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-apple-exclusive-dual-gpu-beats-rtx-4080-rx-7900-xtx

 

[prefuse07]

C'mon apple.... give us one more Intel Mac Pro, and then blow us away with an AS Mac Pro in 3-4 years... Make it so

 

[Boil]

View attachment 2165696

I like the pic of a standard PC Radeon card in an eGPU enclosure, but it is labeled as "MPX GPU going into Mac Pro"...

 

[maikerukun]

C'mon apple.... give us one more Intel Mac Pro, and then blow us away with an AS Mac Pro in 3-4 years... Make it so

EXACTLY! It's like what a freaking waste to NOT take advantage of a system so far ahead that it can even best the best PC has to offer that just came out right now!

What a sad time we live in if they really don't follow through on "one more intel"

 

[maikerukun]

I like the pic of a standard PC Radeon card in an eGPU enclosure, but it is labeled as "MPX GPU going into Mac Pro"...

LMFAO! Yeah I kind of cracked up at that too.

 

[vinegarshots]

This is AWESOME!!! LOL and just wanted to point it out. Us with our 7.1 Mac Pros and w6800x duo's are STILL king of GPU LMFAO!

The w6800x Duo has BEAT the RTX4080 and is still one of the 2 strongest GPUs you can currently get sub $10k

I'm sorry but the 7.1 is simply a beast and even now against the ABSOLUTE LATEST NVIDIA HAS TO OFFER, My trusty little monster is around the speed of and in some cases faster than 2 RTX 4090's

Love to see it <3

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-apple-exclusive-dual-gpu-beats-rtx-4080-rx-7900-xtx

Did you forget the DUO part? It's TWO gpus in one module. Two GPUs BARELY beat a single 4080 in a single game benchmark. Not really impressive, and certainly not worth all the hyperbole
EDIT: On top of that, you can get a 4080 for $1200, versus $5000 for a DUO

 

[maikerukun]

Did you forget the DUO part? It's TWO gpus in one module. Two GPUs BARELY beat a single 4080 in a single game benchmark. Not really impressive, and certainly not worth all the hyperbole
EDIT: On top of that, you can get a 4080 for $1200, versus $5000 for a DUO

Nah son, he's running it outside of its actual environment. We already knew it was 33% faster than an RTX 309, Duo or not...and this was never about that...it's about the fact that you CAN build out a system in the Mac environment that makes it faster than 2 RTX 3090's in EVERY way currently...and faster than 1.5 RTX 4090's...any way you slice it, those of us that have maxed systems are comforted knowing there's nothing in the price range on the PC side that is gonna outperform this bad boy in Octane. You would have to get 2 A6000's to do so, and 2 of those...is currently $20k...Apple's system is CHEAPER

When it comes to the Mac Pro, that's one Apple you're gonna have to eat, but first drink a shot of that vinegar and chase it with a plate of lemons cuz that's some sour Apples you got there

 

[vinegarshots]

Nah son, he's running it outside of its actual environment. We already knew it was 33% faster than an RTX 309, Duo or not...and this was never about that...it's about the fact that you CAN build out a system in the Mac environment that makes it faster than 2 RTX 3090's in EVERY way currently...and faster than 1.5 RTX 4090's...any way you slice it, those of us that have maxed systems are comforted knowing there's nothing in the price range on the PC side that is gonna outperform this bad boy in Octane. You would have to get 2 A6000's to do so, and 2 of those...is currently $20k...Apple's system is CHEAPER

When it comes to the Mac Pro, that's one Apple you're gonna have to eat, but first drink a shot of that vinegar and chase it with a plate of lemons cuz that's some sour Apples you got there

Nah son, TimeSpy is an ancient PC game benchmark that has very little relevance to any real-world use, and you're making this out to be way more than it is.

You're essentially saying that you can buy a $5000 GPU, and it will outperform a $1,200 GPU...by 4 frames per second in an old game benchmark, and that's somehow impresssive?

And Octane? The dude didn't benchmark Octane. Why are you bringing up Octane now?


Here are some old Octane benches. One DUO is 1.2 seconds faster than one 3090. So yeah, two DUOs would be faster than two 3090s, BARELY. At a much greater cost. And two 4090s would be faster than two DUOS. This is old news though. Not sure why we're acting like this is something new.

https://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-pro...-geforce-rtx-3090-rtx-a6000-in-octane-render/

W6800X DUO:

• 14 sec render time (lower is better)
• 717 octanebench score (estimated)

RTX A6000:

• 16 sec render time (lower is better)
• 628 octanebench score

RTX 3090:

• 15.2 sec render time (lower is better)
• 662 octanebench score.

Also, RTX 4090:
~1200 octanebench score.

 

[prefuse07]

Nah son, TimeSpy is an ancient PC game benchmark that has very little relevance to any real-world use, and you're making this out to be way more than it is.

You're essentially saying that you can buy a $5000 GPU, and it will outperform a $1,200 GPU...by 4 frames per second in an old game benchmark, and that's somehow impresssive?

And Octane? The dude didn't benchmark Octane. Why are you bringing up Octane now?


Here are some old Octane benches. One DUO is 1.2 seconds faster than one 3090. So yeah, two DUOs would be faster than two 3090s, BARELY. At a much greater cost. And two 4090s would be faster than two DUOS. This is old news though. Not sure why we're acting like this is something new.

https://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-pro...-geforce-rtx-3090-rtx-a6000-in-octane-render/

W6800X DUO:

• 14 sec render time (lower is better)
• 717 octanebench score (estimated)

RTX A6000:

• 16 sec render time (lower is better)
• 628 octanebench score

RTX 3090:

• 15.2 sec render time (lower is better)
• 662 octanebench score.

Also, RTX 4090:
~1200 octanebench score.

😅 Prepare to be blown away, my friend.

 

[jmho]

I feel like I'm getting deja vu of Apple claiming that the M1 Ultra is also faster than a 3090*.

* in one particular benchmark **

** when the moon is aligned correctly

 

[prefuse07]

All I know is (and I'm waiting for him to post it again) -- but his W6800 Duo renders Octane X in 1 second flat, so that "estimated" render time of 14 seconds above made me lol.

Granted, the 4090 is still very impressive (and a reminder to us of what apple is competing against -- don't forget this, Mac Studio fanbois), but so is that 1 second flat render time on the Duo.

 

[maikerukun]

😅 Prepare to be blown away, my friend.

I was gonna get him, I was about to cook...then I was like "this dude popped in 1,398 comments and 56 pages deep trying to kick the most collectively advanced beehive this side of the internet...he's a plant" 😂😂😂.

We wrote a book. He wants to know why Octane was brought up, he wants to see results, he wants to come in and try to have this convo without first having this convo...ain't gonna happen lol.

 

[maikerukun]

Nah son, TimeSpy is an ancient PC game benchmark that has very little relevance to any real-world use, and you're making this out to be way more than it is.

You're essentially saying that you can buy a $5000 GPU, and it will outperform a $1,200 GPU...by 4 frames per second in an old game benchmark, and that's somehow impresssive?

And Octane? The dude didn't benchmark Octane. Why are you bringing up Octane now?


Here are some old Octane benches. One DUO is 1.2 seconds faster than one 3090. So yeah, two DUOs would be faster than two 3090s, BARELY. At a much greater cost. And two 4090s would be faster than two DUOS. This is old news though. Not sure why we're acting like this is something new.

https://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-pro...-geforce-rtx-3090-rtx-a6000-in-octane-render/

W6800X DUO:

• 14 sec render time (lower is better)
• 717 octanebench score (estimated)

RTX A6000:

• 16 sec render time (lower is better)
• 628 octanebench score

RTX 3090:

• 15.2 sec render time (lower is better)
• 662 octanebench score.

Also, RTX 4090:
~1200 octanebench score.

I beg to differ...but you'll learn❤️