Would it be technically possible for Apple to make some M based upgrade for current Mac Pro owners in form of logic board upgrade or PCI card? Would it be meaning full besides discussion if Apple would be willing to do that at all?
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 1,1-5,1 Mac Pro to M1?
- Thread starter ghoniba
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Possible? ( like could a meteoroid hit the bullseye of the Apple campus) yes. Probable ? No.
Put a separate Mac on a PCI-e card doesn't really have much of any upside for Apple over selling yet another box (e.g. a Mini).
Apple sell a logic board upgrade? .... exactly when in the past 14 years have they done that? That pretty much answers that possibility. Apple primarily isn't in the computer parts selling business. They aren't trying to compete with ASRock , ASUS , MSI , etc. They aren't after providing components for Foobar's built-it with a trusty screwdriver and some thermal paste shops.
From what has been leaked so far about the upcoming M1 SoCs. Jade2C and Jade4C being largely just combos of a modified M1 Max ( Jade) die , then there is not PCI-e provisioning capability for a Mac Pro 2019 logic board. They could put a SoC on it with some x1 PCI-e slots, but it is doubtful a large subset of current (and legacy) Mac Pro owners would be happy with that. Even if Apple converted 3 (or 6) Thunderbolt headers into x4 PCI-e v4 provisioning "headers" that probably wouldn't fly too well with many of them either.
The core issue is that Apple primarily has a laptop skewed die. Even if they tweak it ( add an interchip communication subsystem ) to so come multichip module SoC the baseline is still a laptop die. ( they can crank the core count and boost the CPU and GPU benchmarks, but the general purpose I/O would probably still have their laptop constraints. ).
More likely they are going to do a "new" system with a substantively different form factor that probably shouldn't call a "Mac Pro". ( but likely will to hand wave "close the loop" on the transition). That form factor difference will mean it won't be a "drop in" replacement for the current ( or 2012 ) chassis.
Best case will get a very significantly , but not minimal, logic board with just. 2-3 slots with much lower aggregate bandwidth throughput, but something. (e.g., SSD drive slot cards , Audio/Video capture cards , etc. )
Worse case just a much, much smaller board with no significant (relative to Mac Pro history) general I/O.
P.S. there have been more reports about Apple using multiple die solutions for their TSMC N5 and N3 solutions. Those dies used in that multiple "CPU" chip SoC will extremely likely be constructed to talk to special instances of the some generation. ( not a generic M1 die used for most of the Mac line up and the iPad Pro). That isn't going to get you some kind of "add-in" card solution as the comms are specifically designed for single digit "cm" ( or less) like distances.
Without that a. M1, M1 Pro/Max on another card would essentially just be another Mac. (minus some extremely perverse , non-performant hackery ).
Last edited:
Apple are moving their machines more to specific markets. Coding videography and photography only primarily (I've no idea how the new Arm Macs perform with music programmes). It's new chips are pretty much based around these markets. They aren't for the general purpose anymore, whilst that's acceptable for its 'Pro' machines it's becoming the same for its consumer grade machines too like the Mac Mini or MacBook Air. They lack the software support Intel Macs have.
My point is yes they have made new processors that punch far beyond their weight, but they do so 'only' in very specific tasks.
I can't stand the new apps - I know iTunes is hated by most, but I've never had an issue. I recently purchased a iPod Classic and I hate trying to do anything through Finder or Music.app
I've used RetroActive to install iTunes and noTunes from GitHub to block the music app from opening.
Last edited:
If you’d stick your head out of the sand an look around the Apple Silicon forums you’d see that these machines make for great general purpose machines. Albeit lacking in 32-bit support (which Intel Macs after Catalina don’t have either) they have the same software compatibility.
And “only” specific tasks? You really must not be paying attention.
No they do not, no sticking heads in sand required, they don't run any Windows apps without major struggle and even then theirs no guarantee, have hardly any games support, if all your going to do is surf the web and email and play You Tube and run Office apps they are very overpriced for that, because beyond those tasks they can't do much outsider photo and video work.
It's very wrong to say Intel and Arm Macs have the same software support, they very clearly do not.
Last edited:
With the initial M1 macs almost a year ago, tests with LogicPro where amazing.
Macs have never run games well. If you want gaming and Windows, then buy a gaming pc and go back to middle school. It’s particularly clear you haven’t read any of the posters from 3d artists, programmers and the like who are testing the limits of Apple Silicon (and finding good things).
What you want is anti-innovation. And if that’s the case, that’s your prerogative. You are in the market for a Windows box with Intel, and there are plenty of oems that suit your needs.
However, your specific use case doesn’t define “innovation”. Making the same machines with the same parts from the same manufacturers is not “innovation”.
Apple has taken a risk, and it is paying off, with almost universal praise for their processors. That’s inarguably innovation.
You've changed the argument now, my original point still stands indeed you've strengthened it in your reply here, the new machines are targeted at specific markets, 3D artists and programmers are specific markets. And I've no idea where your getting this 'anti innovation' idea from? That's making a pure assumption.
Maybe Apple has taken a risk, maybe it's paying off, but only in specific use cases and markets, not general purpose, and Macs could game just fine under Bootcamp and Windows, this was a relief from Apples walled garden, which it seems to be reintroducing in some ways with the new Arm Macs.
Your being a little naive too, plenty of users like me who have had an Intel Mac for years and uses it for general purpose work and ran Windows on it too, but now finding they want a replacement only the new Arm Macs cannot do half of the things the Intel ones did, because of Arm.
I stated in my original argument that you quoted, that this is in fact innovation. That was the original point.
You stated that these machines were of limited use, saying nothing about 3d modeling, which I added as an example of a task that you did not account for.
Apple has never done well with games, that’s a hard fact. If your definition of “general use” must include gaming and not the myriad of other tasks that these new macs excel at, then I’m sorry your view is so myopic.
And if your life revolves around Windows gaming, then you were never in the Mac market. It’s been said for over 20 years now that Macs never gamed. Nothing has changed.
And if you cannot accept the state of gaming on Mac, go whine to the people who program games so they can alleviate the problem.
Lots of assumption here by you. You 'assume' I'm a windows gamer? Afraid not but you seem awfully hung up on this 'assumption' in your argument, also I never once stated the new computers are of 'limited use' that's a complete fabrication you've concluded yourself. I actually stated they are directed towards specific markets primarily video and photography which is true, I never once claimed they were 'specific only' to these markets.
So your tangent is misplaced I'm afraid as are your assumptions. I suggest you read my original reply again.
Let’s look at your posts:
“They can’t do much outside and photo and video work.”
Objectively wrong.
which is also wrong.
You stated, factually that these computers were not general purpose and only good for certain tasks due to the change away from Intel. That was your argument from the beginning.