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 Rising
- Thread starter No One
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sorry, I wasn't clear, it includes two double wide PCIe slots, but it has four slots total. I didn't see close enough to read if both are x16 slots.
I had only glance, but they looked like 6-pin connectors on logic board of Mac Pro tower. But several connectors present, so could be, other connectors are for 8-pin. Or maybe 6-pin connectors are really 8-pin. Or maybe two 6-pin and two 8-pin, so it can support two 300W cards. Make sense for very different connectors for 6-pin and 8-pin so users don't force in wrong connector and ruin logic board. But also make sense for two 6-pin because GPU grow more efficient with every generation. But why other connectors present in same area if not for GPU? I fear I make more questions than answers.
I try to find Xeon part numbers but no luck. Too compartmentalized. All I can say is the CPU heatsink is a novel design that uses available space most efficiently. With full size video cards there will not be the extra space of the old Mac Pro tower and a clever design channels fresh air to the PCIe compartment. Given the amount of internal expansion it's astonishingly small to the extent that I found myself wondering if Apple leveraged higher dimensions in its creation. This is a very special achievement for Apple and once again we find ourselves lucky to be Mac users.
I try to find Xeon part numbers but no luck. Too compartmentalized. All I can say is the CPU heatsink is a novel design that uses available space most efficiently. With full size video cards there will not be the extra space of the old Mac Pro tower and a clever design channels fresh air to the PCIe compartment. Given the amount of internal expansion it's astonishingly small to the extent that I found myself wondering if Apple leveraged higher dimensions in its creation. This is a very special achievement for Apple and once again we find ourselves lucky to be Mac users.
Well...except anything that requires incredibly graphics intensive tasks with relatively quick turnaround. That rules out every single current Mac computer, where the best you can get without going cMP is a Firepro D300/500/700 or a M390/M395 on the 5k iMAc. And those are good, not trying to say those are bad by any means, but not sufficient when $699 PC builds are better equipped (graphics-wise). The nMP was pretty good for 2013. But 3 years has aged it very poorly.
Everyone's definition varies, but part of my definition of a professional computer includes the ability to adapt to a rapidly changing work climate. Imagine buying a camera where you were permanently stuck with a kit lens. Sure, you can do good things with it for a while, but eventually, you really need significantly better glass. I mean, there's a reason professionals will buy an Epic or Dragon over an AX1. Sure, some pro's may buy the AX1, but it's no question that one is a far superior, more professional level camera.
As for music production, though, there are several current macs that will do just fine. I've seen the new iMac's as the sole device in a quite a few bays, actually.
How is display signal wired from GPUs?
Does it go through thunderbolt controller?
If it is and it should be by design of Mac Pro, there will be no full size GPUs that are going outside of the case with their ports. All what you could have been seeing was engineering mule.I think the "trash can" design will prevail with few updates to its cooling technology whether be it liquid cooling or air cooling, doesn't matter.
One of the things that was in Apple's mind was obsession about efficiency. I do not believe they would allow GPUs that would spoil that "feature" from their computer.
Last edited:
When one reviews benchmarks comparing Nvidia and AMD GPU's they learn each has an advantage over the other depending on the benchmark. The nMP does not permit the end user to select the card which best meets their specific need. Unless the task is one for which an AMD GPU excels over an Nivida GPU they're stuck using a slower GPU. With the cMP one could select the GPU which performs best for their task (assuming availability of OS X drivers).
My first ever response to a Mac forum ever. Been using Mac since 1987. My last purchase (MacPro late 2013 8 core) has been a disaster. Had to replace every single piece of hardware (an extra USD 4,000) to the original price (USD 12,000) after 1 year and 3 months (yes past the warranty). I have lost faith in Apple. I switched to Widows for my professional videography. Apple is on the slippery way down.
As far as you see production as just music-making and not mixing, i totally agree with you. But for heavy superintense mixing you need a lot of power, if you're not in the Accellerator DSP team.
Maybe this should be a new thread, but does Apple just hate admitting it made a mistake? While the nMP was an edgy new form factor, and the internals arranged in a unique and compelling way, the internals were average and the lack of flexibility seemed to be a total misread of the professional market. At this point, it seems that the nMP was a mistake in that they tried to do too much and forgot to take into consideration how the Mac Pro had been used and why it was used. It seems time for Apple to bite the bullet, admit it was wrong, and figure out a way to fix the mistakes it made with the nMP.
Clever designs for the heat sink and moving air to the PCI compartment still sounds like a potential recipe for overheating. What about heat generated by the RAM and SSD? The tube is astonishingly small for all it has but look where that's gotten Apple with heat issues. How about the iMac and it's heat issues? How many fans are cooling this puppy?
Actually I may have retract this what I posted.How is display signal wired from GPUs?
Does it go through thunderbolt controller?
I think the "trash can" design will prevail with few updates to its cooling technology whether be it liquid cooling or air cooling, doesn't matter.
One of the things that was in Apple's mind was obsession about efficiency. I do not believe they would allow GPUs that would spoil that "feature" from their computer.
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...is-announcements.1975249/page-8#post-23070337
It gives a possibility that next Mac Pro can really have open PCIe slots for internally connectable GPUs.
And that you may say the truth, actually.
Last edited:
Interesting. We can expect Tube sales would have been strong at first because of pent up demand brought about by years of neglect. The last significant update was 2009, so many users had waited for four years on basic tech like USB 3.0 and PCIe 3.0. Westmere was only a CPU bump and thus significant only for those who benefitted from more than 8 cores. Incidentally, those same users who need more cores have waited since 2010 for Apple to give them more than 12 cores. From 4 to 12 cores in four years (2006-2010), then stagnation while the rest of the workstation world continues apace.
I remain skeptical of the Tube's success after the initial 2013 rush. None of the studios or pros I've dealt with like it and a few talked about switching to Windows. Online forums are full of pros criticizing the Tube for all the obvious reasons. Finally there is continued enthusiasm for the cMP which one wouldn't expect if the Tube was a worthy replacement. I don't remember such a phenomenon with either the Power Mac G3, G4, or G5 towers.
[doublepost=1467223210][/doublepost]
Nice find! I think that is a far greater tell on Apple's part than the return of software RAID. Together they do suggest something may be up.
Have previous OS X releases during the Tube era ever featured framebuffer personalities matching official video card releases? I've heard of Apple running "hackintoshes" for use in internal development, supposedly because they need the versatility (PCIe slots, lol). Presumably Apple could add support for video cards used internally that will never be in any products, though one would think they could use internal patches rather than bake support for their private hackintoshes into OS X.
On the other hand there is complete 6 DP port framebuffer built in that kext. So it may indicate that the design might be only updated design, and the complete personality for RX 480 would indicate only eGPUs.
That is at least only my logic based on what we know.
I don't mind the design. Only thing I would want is better cooling. And much updated GPUs with Fiji or Vega.
That is at least only my logic based on what we know.
I don't mind the design. Only thing I would want is better cooling. And much updated GPUs with Fiji or Vega.
Nope, not since the nMP was released. Last time this happened was with HD 7870 and HD 7770: Both of them never saw a official "Mac Edition", but Apple still provided framebuffers for the official PC reference designs.
Well now I'm skeptical. Is that you MVC?
I think Apple suport AMD eGPU cages not linked to nMP update, or maybe just a a Mule Mockup driver, the good thing here is seing full Rx480 support as it is a Desktop-Only GPU internally the only Mac enabled for this is the Mac Pro, still to check any new driver update/inclusion on today's macOS beta.
I'd guess none, because of the way his tongue is hanging out.
Considering MacRumors only represents one tenth of a percent of active users, smaller still the actual Pro users. Which probably consist primarily of hackers, crackers and the always broke professionals.
Now that is an interesting development...
Add the discontinued Thunderbolt display to the list of possible clues. Thunderbolt's display support could be yet another incentive for Apple to ditch the Tube since Thunderbolt 3 uses Displayport 1.2, which lacks the bandwidth to drive more than a single 5K display at 30hz. Could Apple seriously offer pros a new Tube incapable of driving even a single 5K 60hz display? While TB3 lags, both Nvidia's GTX 10 series and AMD's $200 R9 RX 480 ($230 for the 8GB version) feature DisplayPort 1.4 which, with DSC, can drive an 8K 60hz monitor. Thus the yet to be announced Thunderbolt 3 Tube is already obsolete, and if the Mac Pro is to support professional displays out of the box then Apple's only path forward is to redesign it with conventional PCIe slots.
Sure, they could over-engineer some proprietary output solution for their proprietary GPU cards, but if the Tube already has thermal issues, and Xeon TDP is set to rise on both Broadwell and Skylake processors with high core counts, well that's a lot of engineering fixes for a flawed design. It may be cheaper and easier to return to a conventional tower design that will last for another decade.
Incidentally, the R9 RX 480 requires only a single 6-pin PEG, so No One's claimed sighting could indeed be ready to brandish a brace of AMD Polaris video cards.
Finally we have the supposed delay of the new MP intro due to the Orlando massacre. At the time I wondered why Apple would need to delay announcement of a bump in Xeons and GPUs. But a form factor reset would indeed demand undivided media attention. Apple must be careful to control messaging lest the tech media blare in unison: "Apple Resurrects Mac Pro Tower after Tube Debacle!"
Ok, now to throw a wet towel over my Mac Pro Tower fantasizing: what if the reference to the RX 480 is simply for Apple's new eGPU? It's the most profitable solution to enable not only the Tube but Apple's entire Mac lineup to run bleeding edge displays. Even better, with each new AMD GPU generation Apple can convince a portion of users to upgrade to the latest eGPU (assuming they bother to update it that often). Charge $500 for a $200 eGPU sealed in a thin box with inadequate cooling and call it a success. Can't innovate my ass!
I'm afraid to say that the latter scenario is more in character for today's Apple than the former.
Last edited:
Not true, neither accurate.
TB3 has enough bandwidth to drive a 5K display on MST, and spare bandwidth for an extra TB1 data channel and a USB3 data Channel.
Further given the next Macs likely to integrate a Mix of TB3 and USB-C TB3-Less Ports, Apple has available USB-C Muxers with DP1.4 Support since past February, and since September with DP1.3 support, so its safe to assume the Next Macs with dGPU on board will support DP1.3/1.4 on USB-C non-TB3 ports (as those gpu being DP1.3/1.4 capable as all the polaris family).
But Apple likely Will Release a TB3 Display because it can be feed with dual DP1.2 from Intel's Iris GPUs, this way offering a solution appealing more new Mac Users not only those with dGPU on board which likely will opt to use a non thunderbolt3 monitor on DP1.3 thru USB-C.
Further the rumored Thunderbolt Display with on Board eGPU it's a FIASCO, just lacks technical sense, since it only improves the Video Performance for Macs w/o dGPU, since a PC architecture Imposes to use only one Kind of GPU at time, or Two same type if you have SLI like bridges, the same reason that imposes to disable the iGPU on your laptop when you are on dGPU, using an eGPU will disable both iGPU and dGPU and in the case the GPU is the same type as the on board dGPU on my knowledge there is no SLI bridge possible thru Thunderbolt3, so the Rumored TB3 Display with eGPU is a FIASCO, the best case if you use an eGPU it will disable your dGPU and force you to run graphics on PCIe 4x bottle neck, just not to mention the added TB3 Latency.
Last edited:
You can use more then 1 video card in pc's in non SLI mode even on board intel + an add in card.
Hmmm, I guess you're somewhat right about TB3 and 5K displays.
This TB3 FAQ states that it supports a single 5K 60hz display. So wikipedia was wrong about that. But that still limits it to a single 5K 60hz display. You cannot drive an 8K display over TB3, but you can with a modern video card from AMD or Nvidia. So the point stands, a TB3 Tube Pro will have severely hobbled display support compared to other desktop computers. Even a sub-$1000 Windows box could drive an 8K display with the right video card, while an $8,000 Mac Pro can't drive an 8K display no matter how much money you throw at it.
The Tube is a failure. Time to take it out back and put it out of its misery.
Say for yourself. For me that design is good. Only thing what it needs is hardware update, and slightly more powerful PSU, and liquid cooling.
That is my opinion.
Is there enough space available for these?
Perhaps a redesign is required?