Apple has been pushing AVX2 as well. The Mac Pro has been the odd missing link in AVX2 compatible machines for Apple.
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.
Mac Pro Refresh "b" Possibilities?
- Thread starter iBighouse
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple has been pushing AVX2 as well. The Mac Pro has been the odd missing link in AVX2 compatible machines for Apple.
First, why would they have to skip a version? They can do both.
Second, you read your own link wrong. Those 80 lanes are supplied by 2 Broadwell chips (40 each).
I predict that they drop the 4 core and the 6 core becomes the base, maybe at a $3500 price point.
The form factor means I would not expect a lot of radical changes, just a new CPU and whatever that chipset entails. I'd expect a GPU update, but the current GPUs have unfavorable thermal characteristics that will have to be mitigated. Would not shock me to see slightly hobbled next gen AMD graphics or even a switch back to NVidia. The R290x cards run pretty toasty.
Also, it's June. I don't expect this revision in 2014.
The form factor means I would not expect a lot of radical changes, just a new CPU and whatever that chipset entails. I'd expect a GPU update, but the current GPUs have unfavorable thermal characteristics that will have to be mitigated. Would not shock me to see slightly hobbled next gen AMD graphics or even a switch back to NVidia. The R290x cards run pretty toasty.
Also, it's June. I don't expect this revision in 2014.
You'll be happy to hear that there is no 4-core SKU. It starts at 6-core.
Basically it drops one notch. price for a 4-core is the price for a 6 core; price for a 6-core is the price for an 8 core and so on. The 14-core is the top of the line processor.
DDR4 RAM starts out at 4GB and up to 32GB sticks. So 128GB of RAM is possible on 4 sticks.
I wonder if Apple will stick with DDR3 with haswell-ep.
Basically it drops one notch. price for a 4-core is the price for a 6 core; price for a 6-core is the price for an 8 core and so on. The 14-core is the top of the line processor.
DDR4 RAM starts out at 4GB and up to 32GB sticks. So 128GB of RAM is possible on 4 sticks.
I wonder if Apple will stick with DDR3 with haswell-ep.
Maybe we can see....
DDR4, more options on the GPUs, bigger and faster storage. Speed bump on processors or even new line of processors fitted-in....?
Thunderbolt 2 or even newer point revisions in Thunderbolt almost fit as a "must".....At least, but not less important, a nice price cut......
DDR4, more options on the GPUs, bigger and faster storage. Speed bump on processors or even new line of processors fitted-in....?
Thunderbolt 2 or even newer point revisions in Thunderbolt almost fit as a "must".....At least, but not less important, a nice price cut......
Part of why I think the 6 core is the sweet spot in the current offering.
You'd need to think long and hard about whether you'd need 8 or 12 cores in the current line-up at these prices.
Absolutely. I think in the refresh the 8-core will be the sweet spot. That's why I'm waiting. The problem though is DDR4 is not going to be cheap. That makes me wonder if Apple will stick with DDR3.
SKU for what? Haswell-EP? I really hope the base becomes the 6 core. I think the Pro should come with at least 16gb of ram too. It's the Pro for christ sakes.
There was that mysterious $250 million payment to Micron that many people believe was from Apple for DDR4
Last edited by a moderator:
This. Especially considering just how big of a pain in the *** it is to re-engineer a version B of the nMP, they'll stick to their normal upgrade frequency.
Besides, IF I were to ever get a nMP, I wouldn't do so until Alpine Ridge.
E5 v4 ( Broadwell ) has exactly the same amount of PCIe lanes as E5 v3 (Haswell). It is extremely likely the exact same new socket ( since members of same tick/tock design cycle).
The article mentions 80 lanes in conjunction with two E5 v4 CPU packages. Guess what? Two E5 v2 ( Ivy Bridge) gets you the same number now in systems that support two packages. Apple has walked away from that even smaller sub-market and likely aren't coming back.
80 isn't 'new' for v4. In fact, it was present in E5 v1.
There is no room for 4 more RAM slots (and a second CPU ) in the current Mac Pro. That's why there isn't 8 .... not some new Broadwell pixie dust.
Long term memory density is going to go up and the max memory that fits in 4 DIMM slots will also go up. Over time the current Mac Pro design isn't going to fail to pick up more users that have incrementally higher memory requirements over time.
Traditionally RAM has been much cheaper buying from a 3rd party, so most users prefer a minimal configuration. Most other workstation providers offer the same. Why pay the Apple premium?
Fantasy. If Apple doesn't run the USB 3.0 of the new C610 chipset out to the ports (i.e., just uses same discrete USB 3.0 solution ) using now then the updates are very straightforward. Drop in new CPU socket. Route the four DDR4 DIMM sockets along similar paths the four DDR3 sockets and done.
Same external sockets hooked to same controllers. The CPU socket change is isolated just to the CPU daughter board. The chipset change isolated just to the backplane. The TDP of E5 v3 isn't changing much.
They need a speed bump on the GPUs. If keep AMD boards (i.e., committed to just GCN v1.1 offerings) then largely a board layout tweak as long as don't greatly increase the VRAM chips being leveraged. If aiming at next generation for both AMD and Nvidia along with a design bake-off competition between then there would be a bigger time slide.
I would wager that Apple is a couple months behind due to having folks cover bugs/glitches in getting this version 1 out , but Q1-Q2 2015 would be plenty time to tweak the current design even if didn't start till later in 2013. (no probelms at all if Apple assigned enough folks to pipeline the design work. But Apple chronically understaffs so delays in the 2013 Mac Pro probably hiccuped into the follow on. )
E5 v3 requires a new socket and chipset. That means there is incremental work to do.... not revolutionary work to do. Apple's normal frequency is Intel's with about a Quarter ( or two 3-6 months) error bars.
What pain? It simply needs a new daughtercard for the Haswell-EP CPU, and a new motherboard if the C602 PCH has to be upgraded.
Probably since that is a E5 v3 feature.
doubtful since these are Apple custom boards, it is quite non Apple like to bulk up the design teams so that have teams cranking out largely overlapping products. For embedded GPU designs Apple picks a winner and goes to market with it.
Bigger SSD is commonplace. Faster? Perhaps marginally. A bigger improvement in situation would be 3rd party SSDs and perhaps a more standardize SSD socket.
Speed bump unlikely. E5 v2 probably isn't getting any speed bump updates. The update will be E5 v3. Effectively a new line.
Thunderbolt controller chipset + supporting electronics needs to get cheaper more so than "newer point" revisions at this point. TB just changed and only hit initial volume production in 2014. Constantly jab at the standard and it will never get traction.
At least, but not less important, a nice price cut......
Given it took months to get to "order and ship in 2-3 days" status that's unlikely. Demand for the Mac Pro is going to be much softer for the next round, but between shift to DDR4, core count increase, and probably bigger SSD drives Apple will probably set the prices the same. Even if those components all slide in price they can un-kneecap the VRAM sizes on the GPU cards.
I won't be surprised if they stick some "Retina" iMac in the huge pricing gap between standard top iMac config and entry Mac Pro now ( $1999 - $2999) . Two configs around $2,300 and $2,600 would not be a shocker at all.
It does force you to buy higher density, more expensive modules though.
I had to buy 4x16GB all at once to get 64GB.
I did not really have the option of getting 4x8GB, and then if I felt like I needed more, adding another 4x8GB at a later date.
On a nMP you would have to get 4x8GB and if you needed more, you have to yank those out and then add 4x16.
It's not a huge deal, but it's not trivial either, especially if you may want to go for 128GB, you're looking a t 4x32GB and I read DDR4 ram is going to be $$$.
Yes the base will be the 6-core. The 8-core will be the new sweet spot.
Good call on the Micron thing. I didn't connect the dots on that. That makes sense.
Good call on the Micron thing. I didn't connect the dots on that. That makes sense.
If you get more there isn't a big disconnect in paying more. 16GB of memory should naturally cost more than 8GB.
As for higher density being more expensive .... that is a factor of time. When "brand new" technology there is a premium. 2 years out? Not so much.
Folks on the leading edge of tech curve pay more. Some folks want to camp on the tail end of the curve to pay the least. In the middle the costs are not particularly expensive.
Which means it is a relatively straight forward issue to deal with.
Long term that isn't going to be a problem. Can you even buy 512MB DIMMs for current, modern machines ?
Again when? Exactly right now? Sure, there is almost no one with DDR4 systems that are buying it.
When there are 50M deployed systems that require it, it is going to be substantially less. When there are 100M even more so.
DDR4 RAM is going to be more expensive than DDR3 in same way DDR3 1866MHz DIMMs are now more than DDR3 1066MHz DIMMs.
Wait 5-6 years DDR3 memory will cost more than DDR4 ( because almost everyone stopped making it. Similar to increases seen in DDR2 modules now. )
There is no E5 1600 v3 (-EP) 4 core SKU or there is no Core i7 58xx/59xx (-E)? From what is leaking about the upcoming 5xxx models I don't think those two are going to exactly overlap. [ Intel appears to be stripping the entry level Core i7 5820 of PCIe lanes which would be a no-go for a Mac Pro. ]
Since Core i7 5xxx is competing with overclocked and cheaper mainstream Core i cores it makes sense not to overlap with several 4 core offerings with approximately same branding. In the Xeon E5 v3 space, not so much ( Xeon E3 is off in different space with different targets). Especially if going to gut the baseclock speed just to get to 6 cores. To hit a $294 price with 6 cores Intel would likely cripple the package in some way (e.g., the crippling on the 5820 or on base clock).
No 4 core E5 2600 v3 SKU would make sense too since there is only a couple of 'odd ball' 4 core SKUs now ( 2603 , 2609 , 2637).
The current E5 1680 v2 is really a tweaked 10 core E5 2680. There will likely be a 'proper' 8 core that is designed that way. The base clocks and cache sizes are likely going to be different. Those will have in impact on price at least as much as moving from v2 -> v3 shifts.
128GB RAM is possible now on the Mac Pro with DDR3 tech. Unlikely DDR4 was going to back-slide. It isn't so much 128GB capacity as that capacity with speed that is the new upside.
DDR3 would just increase the clamor for Apple to decrease pricing. More likely Apple goes with DDR4 to justify keeping the prices were they are now.
Additionally, DDR4 is better on power..
http://www.zdnet.com/micron-kicks-o...ntel-haswell-ep-server-processors-7000028027/
and Apple has the Mac Pro on a tight power budget.
DDR3 is just cheaper. Performance in computation or power is simply just better than DDR3.
Last edited:
Huh? The 2010 model to the current one was the only upgrade that took that long. Why are you spewing garbage.
Even that 2010 was months late - Intel released the Gulftown CPUs in CY2010Q1, the "Mac Pro 2010" was CY2010Q3.
There's the time proven adage: "Do not buy revision zero Apple hardware; wait until revision two if possible". This is backed by thirty years of Macs.
For raw CPU performance, the new Mac Pro is a poor value relative to the high end Mac Mini and iMac. Apple could remedy this with price cuts or a dual CPU option or maybe even having an inexpensive eight core AMD CPU board.
Digital audio input would be nice; also, TOSLINK connections for digital audio I/O just like the original Mac Pro.
I'd like to see a fingerprint sensor for a power switch; only authorized users could turn on the machine.
Also 10GBaseT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10-gigabit_Ethernet
For raw CPU performance, the new Mac Pro is a poor value relative to the high end Mac Mini and iMac. Apple could remedy this with price cuts or a dual CPU option or maybe even having an inexpensive eight core AMD CPU board.
Digital audio input would be nice; also, TOSLINK connections for digital audio I/O just like the original Mac Pro.
I'd like to see a fingerprint sensor for a power switch; only authorized users could turn on the machine.
Also 10GBaseT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10-gigabit_Ethernet
Generally quite true, but, I had already been waiting to get back into the MacPro game. I needed more than 4 cores and wanted to abuse said cores with video encoding and 3d rendering and audio processing.
I'm not disappointed. Machine is about what I thought it would be.
My Win8 machine running a slightly overclocked 4930k is a little bit faster, but I knew it would be, so I had no illusions about the performance. I have a Mac I can use pretty hard and I'm happy with it.