MP 7,1 Most won’t be able to afford a new Mac Pro

[TheRealAlex]

PCIe 4 could come later. Technically, you don't need a new chipset to enable PCIe 4 support.
[doublepost=1559700071][/doublepost]
Not quoting this specifically, but I caught a post on a blog yesterday. Someone was curious how the new Apple display would perform against a standard reference monitor like the Sony or Eizos. I hadn't thought of that when that lady was doing the feature list of the new Apple display and explaining how they got around to fixing common issues.

I don’t think it’s about how it would “perform” against a Sony Reference class studio monitor. It’s just not in the same class. It doesn’t even have all the manual control knobs. Not to mention it’s not about performance or looks or how the display handles an image. It’s about Engineers making $100,000 a year, are literally trained on how to use Sony Reference monitors. A Honda Civic isn’t in the same class as a Mercedes Benz AMG GT. Someone driving a Civic could hurt themselves trying to drive a V8 Bi-turbo 650HP engine.


Wake me Up when it has

Hardware Level Meltdown and Spectre solutions
PCI Express 5.0
HDMI 2.1
NVIDIA support
Who actually makes the 1400 Watt Power supply
802.11 ax or WiFi 6 internal not some $500 extra module.

I have Many many questions.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

The MP7,1 is already five years late. PCIe 4.0 basically doesn't exist yet.

Should the MP7,1 have been delayed a couple of more years until PCIe 4.0 becomes established?

I have no clue what you're talking about. The first AMD PCIe 4.0 motherboards arrive this summer along with the first SSDs cards that will use it and the first AMD Radeon 7nm GPUs that will make use of it. That's THIS SUMMER. The Mac Pro doesn't release until next fall and it's using PCIe 3.0. PCI 5.0 meanwhile has just been standardized, which means you could be seeing PCI 5.0 products in 12-24 months as well. That leaves PCIe 3.0 in the DUST.

None of this would be an issue if Apple didn't IGNORE updating their Mac Pro for 4-6 years at a time. But sadly this is now what we can expect from them. They don't even lower the price of the thing year-to-year as it becomes hopelessly outdated. Apple is too big and has too much money for "they're just a small company compared to XXXX" to be an excuse anymore. If the don't have enough people on a given hardware team, they should be hiring like mad. They can afford a small city as a new headquarters shaped like a UFO, but they can't get anyone to work for their hardware design teams to keep a simple hardware refresh going for the Mac Pro and Mac Mini once or twice a year??? It's unacceptable and it's the reason why the Mac has largely been ABANDONED for high-end graphics video editing and such. They replaced Final Cut Pro with a version that was vastly inferior to the existing version (i.e. it wasn't ready to go on release) and I think THAT even more than the hardware was what really broke the came's back.

For such a world class company, Apple cannot seem to manage it's halo products worth a DAMN anymore and that's because the iPhone has been the biggest cash cow in the world to the point where they don't even CARE about the rest of the business. The problem is that smart phones won't power the company at those levels forever (it's already falling off even now) and they are rushing to find new products and relevancy in a world that has passed them by in areas they used to be a big deal in. They FINALLY at least admitted the "trash can" Mac Pro was a BAD IDEA (something some of us said LOUD AND CLEAR from Day one while the typical Kool-Aid Brigade told us how stupid we were to not see the genius in a cigar smoke removing Mac Pro that required a flotilla of external wires to do with the old Mac Pro did internally while having no standardized upgrade path for GPUs (as they abandoned PCI Express) and were fully dependent on Intel's slowing XENON release schedule in areas that a consumer grade CPU would more than do.

Now just looks at the BASE price factor. $6000 for an 8-core model with what, a 1TB SSD? That's INSANE. You're telling me they couldn't manage a $2K-3K base model? Bullcrap. They don't want to "compete" with their own iMacs. The problem is that some of us don't LIKE or WANT an iMac. So that means the Mac Mini, which thankfully isn't quite the underpowered POS the last release was, but not the beautiful easily accessed version the 2012 model was either (by comparison; there was a time when even Macbooks could easily add hard drives, memory and even batteries without opening the case or invalidating warranties, but that's sadly no longer the case as we entered the age of the Apple Store rip-off methodology.

 

[bpeeps]

Says who? We don't even know **IF** there will ever be another Mac Pro, much less what configuration it will offer and how much it will cost. Despite Apple's statement that there would be one, that was TWO YEARS AGO, and we've heard nothing since. If there actually is an unveil, there's no guarantee that it will be prohibitively expensive (although I certainly wouldn't put it past Apple to make yet another boneheaded decision here...they do still have the trash can for sale @ $3000 somehow).

I see many people "pre-lamenting" that any new Mac Pro will be super-expensive, so it won't be a success or they won't be able to afford it. This may be based on the $5000 iMac Pro entry price, but very few recognize that w/ the iMac Pro, you're getting a ~$1500 5K display included. So I don't think that $5000 price tag guarantees an expensive Mac Pro. But again, the "realization" of the "backing into a thermal corner" was TWO YEARS AGO, and THAT was FOUR YEARS after the development of the Mac Pro, so I'll not worry too much about the theoretically high cost of a 5-year-overdue revision of the Mac Pro until there's actually some acknowledgement by Apple that Mac Pro is still an active product line.

Oof this comment did not age well. Apple pretty much said they were designing another Mac Pro two years ago.
[doublepost=1559705458][/doublepost]

now that the new Mac Pro has been announced what are the odds that the iMac Pro might go down in price, for me 4500 is way too much to spend, but if they slashed it in half, or even more Id buy one for me it would be more than plenty for my very first mac

If the iMac Pro drops in price it basically meets a specced out iMac. That price is 100% firm.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Won't be commercially available for a few years, though. PCI SIG announced PCIe 4.0 back in 2011. After several delays and revisions it was re-announced in 2017. You're looking at 2024-2026 for PCIe 5.

I don't believe that. I bet you see the first Intel motherboards within 12-16 months. They will likely just skip right over PCIe 4.0 because it's running so late and SSDs have already surpassed PCIe 3.0 bandwidth and are 50% of the way already (before a single SSD is released this summer) into 4.0's bandwidth. SSDs will have maximized 4.0 bandwidth in less than 16 months. 5.0 is NEEDED sooner rather than later, IMO.

The problem with the Mac Pro here is that Apple doesn't update it for years on end. At $6000, that's a lot to ask when everyone else will have PCIe 5.0 in less than two years and Apple MIGHT update a few specs in 4 years....(if you're lucky). I hope I'm wrong and Apple has changed its policies regarding the Mac Pro, but I doubt it unless this thing sells like hotcakes and it won't due to the INSANE starting price. If its base price were even $2800, you MIGHT see some serious adoption, but not at $6000 without a monitor....

 

[0388631]

I don’t think it’s about how it would “perform” against a Sony Reference class studio monitor. It’s just not in the same class. It doesn’t even have all the manual control knobs. Not to mention it’s not about performance or looks or how the display handles an image. It’s about Engineers making $100,000 a year, are literally trained on how to use Sony Reference monitors. A Honda Civic isn’t in the same class as a Mercedes Benz AMG GT. Someone driving a Civic could hurt themselves trying to drive a V8 Bi-turbo 650HP engine.


Wake me Up when it has

Hardware Level Meltdown and Spectre solutions
PCI Express 5.0
HDMI 2.1
NVIDIA support
Who actually makes the 1400 Watt Power supply
802.11 ax or WiFi 6 internal not some $500 extra module.

I have Many many questions.

You have a point. But not every studio or production house is spending the money on 40 grand monitors. As for your MBZ and Honda comparison, it's good. I suspect Apple made the monitor not with the intention of selling a lot, but make it more affordable for production houses or 'pros' to have access to something that's like an Eizo or Sony but not the same. That said, I've driven the GT and it's wonderful. I'm a family man so my next purchase is so far more likely to be the E63 wagon.

Your hardware suggestions are on point except:

-2022 or 2023 for a new architecture by Jim Keller and whoever he instructed Intel to hire to work with him.

-2024-2026 for PCIe 5.

-Good point on HDMI.

-I don't see Apple working with NVidia given that NVidia screwed Apple over, though I'm sure there's more to it than just NVivida being the bad guy. Given how non-OS software prefers NVidia, I know why you're pissed.

-A lot of companies believe it or not. The majority of PSUs on the market are white labeled and modified by a third party OEM like Corsair or EVGA. Underneath it, it might be a Seasonic. As for for who needs it... You'd be surprised at how much juice high end hardware sucks at full load. Even 1,600 and 1,800 watt PSUs exist.

-AX isn't finalized yet though WiFi router manufacturers are making routers using the tech. It also isn't completely bug free.

 

[Micky Do]

As excited we are with any announcement at WWDC, realistically, the majority of Mac enthusiasts likely won’t be able to afford a Mac Pro.

Prices will likely start around $5K, so unless you’re a professional, or a company that needs the horsepower, you might be better off with an iMac.

I doubt we’ll ever see a $1500-$2500 breakout tower. It’s not like the old days where a hobbyist can afford to tinker with an expansion slot based G4 Power Mac or Cheese Grater Mac.

Most folks don't need the grunt of a Mac Pro, so it does it matter? I think not.

Those who really do need one, will be able to afford a Mac Pro specced out to suit their requirements.

 

[0388631]

I don't believe that. I bet you see the first Intel motherboards within 12-16 months. They will likely just skip right over PCIe 4.0 because it's running so late and SSDs have already surpassed PCIe 3.0 bandwidth and are 50% of the way already (before a single SSD is released this summer) into 4.0's bandwidth. SSDs will have maximized 4.0 bandwidth in less than 16 months. 5.0 is NEEDED sooner rather than later, IMO.

Argue with Intel and their roadmap. PCIe SSDs were pushing bandwidth when they first came out. Each lane tops out around 980 MB/s. A PCIe 3.0 8x SSD can handle around 8 GB of data transfer a second. Gigabyte manufacturers a PCIe 3 SSD that uses 8 lanes and it's a gig and half short of the full bandwidth available for 8 lanes. This isn't theoretical limits either. Those cards are B2B, not B2C. They top out at 6.5 GB/sec throughput. It'll be years before you see such a card made for the B2C market. You could buy one if you wanted to and had several thousand to blow. And that's before hardware limitations requiring a very expensive motherboard and capable processor.

The faster the transfer, the hotter these things run. And they'll come with their own heatsinks or fans.
[doublepost=1559707005][/doublepost]

The problem with the Mac Pro here is that Apple doesn't update it for years on end. At $6000, that's a lot to ask when everyone else will have PCIe 5.0 in less than two years and Apple MIGHT update a few specs in 4 years....(if you're lucky). I hope I'm wrong and Apple has changed its policies regarding the Mac Pro, but I doubt it unless this thing sells like hotcakes and it won't due to the INSANE starting price. If its base price were even $2800, you MIGHT see some serious adoption, but not at $6000 without a monitor....

No one is going to have PCIe 5 in two years. Get that through your brain. Intel controls the chipsets. Not mobo vendors. AMD controls the chipsets, not the vendors. The processor also has to support it. Can't have it if your CPU manufacturer doesn't support it.

Outside of the cMP, when was the last time Apple let the MP languish between releases?

 

[TheRealAlex]

I have no clue what you're talking about. The first AMD PCIe 4.0 motherboards arrive this summer along with the first SSDs cards that will use it and the first AMD Radeon 7nm GPUs that will make use of it. That's THIS SUMMER. The Mac Pro doesn't release until next fall and it's using PCIe 3.0. PCI 5.0 meanwhile has just been standardized, which means you could be seeing PCI 5.0 products in 12-24 months as well. That leaves PCIe 3.0 in the DUST.

None of this would be an issue if Apple didn't IGNORE updating their Mac Pro for 4-6 years at a time. But sadly this is now what we can expect from them. They don't even lower the price of the thing year-to-year as it becomes hopelessly outdated. Apple is too big and has too much money for "they're just a small company compared to XXXX" to be an excuse anymore. If the don't have enough people on a given hardware team, they should be hiring like mad. They can afford a small city as a new headquarters shaped like a UFO, but they can't get anyone to work for their hardware design teams to keep a simple hardware refresh going for the Mac Pro and Mac Mini once or twice a year??? It's unacceptable and it's the reason why the Mac has largely been ABANDONED for high-end graphics video editing and such. They replaced Final Cut Pro with a version that was vastly inferior to the existing version (i.e. it wasn't ready to go on release) and I think THAT even more than the hardware was what really broke the came's back.

For such a world class company, Apple cannot seem to manage it's halo products worth a DAMN anymore and that's because the iPhone has been the biggest cash cow in the world to the point where they don't even CARE about the rest of the business. The problem is that smart phones won't power the company at those levels forever (it's already falling off even now) and they are rushing to find new products and relevancy in a world that has passed them by in areas they used to be a big deal in. They FINALLY at least admitted the "trash can" Mac Pro was a BAD IDEA (something some of us said LOUD AND CLEAR from Day one while the typical Kool-Aid Brigade told us how stupid we were to not see the genius in a cigar smoke removing Mac Pro that required a flotilla of external wires to do with the old Mac Pro did internally while having no standardized upgrade path for GPUs (as they abandoned PCI Express) and were fully dependent on Intel's slowing XENON release schedule in areas that a consumer grade CPU would more than do.

Now just looks at the BASE price factor. $6000 for an 8-core model with what, a 1TB SSD? That's INSANE. You're telling me they couldn't manage a $2K-3K base model? Bullcrap. They don't want to "compete" with their own iMacs. The problem is that some of us don't LIKE or WANT an iMac. So that means the Mac Mini, which thankfully isn't quite the underpowered POS the last release was, but not the beautiful easily accessed version the 2012 model was either (by comparison; there was a time when even Macbooks could easily add hard drives, memory and even batteries without opening the case or invalidating warranties, but that's sadly no longer the case as we entered the age of the Apple Store rip-off methodology.

Not giving Apple an excuse, but I’ve seen enough episodes of Shark Tank to be an expert. Why would Apple even care. To release a MacPro I give them credit.

When iPhone is 80% of my business and PC Sales are maybe less than 20% MacPro sales won’t ever be even half a percent of sales.

 

[Kpjoslee]

No one is going to have PCIe 5 in two years. Get that through your brain. Intel controls the chipsets. Not mobo vendors. AMD controls the chipsets, not the vendors. The processor also has to support it. Can't have it if your CPU manufacturer doesn't support it.

Outside of the cMP, when was the last time Apple let the MP languish between releases?

Intel's Sapphire Rapids (after Ice Lake) in 2021 will have PCIe 5.0 support, and Intel announced CXL high speed interconnect few months ago which also uses PCIe 5.0. It is coming in 2021 given how Intel is heavily betting on it.

 

[foliovision]

When first introduced, the IIfx was offered in these configurations:

• Macintosh IIfx: 4 MB memory, 1.44 MB SuperDrive. $8,989 USD.
• Macintosh IIfx 4/80: 4 MB memory, 80 MB HDD. $9,869 USD.
• Macintosh IIfx 4/160: 4 MB memory, 160 MB HDD. $10,969 USD.
• Macintosh IIfx 4/80 with Parity Support: 4 MB of parity error-checking RAM, 80 MB HDD.

Introduced May 15, 1990:

• Macintosh IIfx 4/80 with A/UX: 4 MB memory, 160 MB HDD, A/UX 2.0 preinstalled. $10,469 USD. Shipments began in June.

Yes, you're right. That's why student me at the time didn't own one but my girlfriend's father who was chief surgeon at Paris's top hospital did own one. And the days of hardware incompatibility and sky high prices are what made Bill Gates's fortune and what saddled the world with Windows. In his second coming, Jobs realised his mistake on the first time around and decided to go with a Unix base and standard hardware. Hence the second blooming at Apple. The main executives were not certain of this btw: I monitored stock sales by executives throughout $100/share period. They were frequent and included Jobs himself and the rest of the gilded senior execs, who all missed out on about 200% appreciation of their shares and stock options over the next two years.

I'm not bothered that Apple has computers in this price range. What's crazy is that they don't have the mid-tower with three PCI slots and four to six ram slots for single processor (up to 12 cores these day I believe) in the $2500 to $5000 range depending on processor, RAM and drives.

 

[TheRealAlex]

How Long before a $3,000 GAMING PC with a AMD Ryzen 2 3900X 12 Core Machine with X570 and PCI Express 4.0 and a GTX 2080 Ti, 32GB DDR 4 RAM @ 4200Mhz XMP OC. And 4.7 GHz OC all Cores.

DESTROYS, a base 8 Core Intel Xenon MacPro which costs $6,000



LinusTech Tips, JayZtwocents, GamersNexus please make this video.

 

[Pval]

The AMD won't run MacOS? (properly at least).

From the forums:
While the OS will boot if you intend to use it for anything other than browsing then no it's not suitable, saying that everything else should work is a gross misrepresentation of reality and even the folks at the aosx forums would recommend against using Hackintosh currently for anything more than a curiosity.

Using a Hackintosh for any non-hobbiest activity is already dangerous as it exposes you to a pretty severe liability if you are delivering commercial services on top of it, using an unstable system without the needed kernel extensions to run it is even a worse idea.

The truth is that if you want OSX just buy a Mac, if you really want a hackintosh to work on then Zen isn't ready and likely will never be until there will be an official Mac running on this hardware, if you just want to learn how to use it then running it on a virtual machine is the way to go.

 

[LFO8]

I think some people that are suggesting going iMac Pro are missing the point. This new Mac Pro design is vastly superior in terms of projected lifespan due to the upgradabiluity. I think this baby will let you run 10-12 years at least. Look at how much lifespan people got out of the 3,1 Mac Pro.

iMac Pro is powerfull but just not an option for people the kind of lifspan and durability & upgradability that comes with a tower model Mac Pro. It's about longevity & flexibility as much as it is about having the horsepower in the here and now.

That's what made the Mac Pro great and I believe this new model will have that greatness again. Yes, the entry price is super expensive for us prosumers but when these things hit the second hand market in 3-4 years time I think you can still have 7 years of joy out of it at a price you can afford AND have the grow-along expandability.

I know that won't help any prosumers in the here and now. But if you look at the history of the cMP: that is how that market unfolded. The pro's forked up the premiums (mostly) and prosumers to consumers got them a while later in the second hand markets. All I can say is I am keeping my 5,1 alive for as long as I can till the 7,1 pops up in second hand markets.

 

[pcd109]

Apple never had a Mac Pro for less than $2499,00

That's just not true. Both PowerMac G4 and G5 had sub 2000$ models back in the days -i used to have both. Also the original MacPro was a 2199$ model followed by quad core that was the same(the top of the line 3.0 ghz models where also sub 4k). Not sure how a 6k MacPro is something usual. If Apple would have gone Threadripper/Epyc price would have being much lower. The Xeon W models are power hungry models that require special vrm cooling solutions alongside with monster power supplies, not to mension way more expensive than AMD for basically same performance. The 28 core Xeon W part has roughly the same performance as Threadripper 2990wx(just 4-5% advance in cinebench r15) and will get obliterated by the monster 64 cores Epyc or the Threadripper 3 models. The 7nm Zen cores are MUCH more power efficient and better overall than anything Intel not to mention way cheaper. Looks like Apple is not capable to escape Intel. What is funny though, even Apple does not ditch Intel witch has at least an equal performance solution but way cheaper(threadripper) it does ditch the industry standard NVIDIA.

 

[tsialex]

That's just not true. Both PowerMac G4 and G5 had sub 2000$ models back in the days -i used to have both. Also the original MacPro was a 2199$ model followed by quad core that was the same(the top of the line 3.0 ghz models where also sub 4k). Not sure how a 6k MacPro is something usual. If Apple would have gone Threadripper/Epyc price would have being much lower. The Xeon W models are power hungry models that require special vrm cooling solutions alongside with monster power supplies, not to mension way more expensive than AMD for basically same performance. The 28 core Xeon W part has roughly the same performance as Threadripper 2990wx(just 4-5% advance in cinebench r15) and will get obliterated by the monster 64 cores Epyc or the Threadripper 3 models. The 7nm Zen cores are MUCH more power efficient and better overall than anything Intel not to mention way cheaper. Looks like Apple is not capable to escape Intel. What is funny though, even Apple does not ditch Intel witch has at least an equal performance solution but way cheaper(threadripper) it does ditch the industry standard NVIDIA.

Power Macs are not Mac Pros

The only Mac Pro sold for less than US $2499 was the MP1,1 downgraded to 2.0 Xeons, sold for $200 less. Every other Mac Pro was more expensive.

You can still read the press releases and check prices:

2006 Mac Pro (2x2core 2.66GHz $2499) August 7, 2006 PRESS RELEASE Apple Unveils New Mac Pro Featuring Quad 64-bit Xeon Processors
2007 Mac Pro (8core $2799*) no PR
2008 Mac Pro (8core $2799) January 8, 2008 PRESS RELEASE Apple Introduces New Mac Pro
2009 Mac Pro (4core $2499, 8core $3299) March 3, 2009 PRESS RELEASE Apple Introduces New Mac Pro
2010 Mac Pro (4core $2499, 8core $3499, 12core $4999*) July 27, 2010 PRESS RELEASE Apple Unveils New Mac Pro With Up to 12 Processing Cores
2012 Mac Pro (4core $2499*, 8core $3799*) no PR
2013 Mac Pro (4core $2999, 6core $3999) December 18, 2013 PRESS RELEASE All New Mac Pro Available Starting Tomorrow

*Mactracker prices.

 

[Razzerman]

till the 7,1 pops up in second hand markets

I afraid that's going to be wishful thinking. I can see the 2nd hand market for these machines being not far off the original price, even after a few years, as there won't be many being sold 2nd hand

 

[aakshey]

Says who? We don't even know **IF** there will ever be another Mac Pro, much less what configuration it will offer and how much it will cost. Despite Apple's statement that there would be one, that was TWO YEARS AGO, and we've heard nothing since. If there actually is an unveil, there's no guarantee that it will be prohibitively expensive (although I certainly wouldn't put it past Apple to make yet another boneheaded decision here...they do still have the trash can for sale @ $3000 somehow).

I see many people "pre-lamenting" that any new Mac Pro will be super-expensive, so it won't be a success or they won't be able to afford it. This may be based on the $5000 iMac Pro entry price, but very few recognize that w/ the iMac Pro, you're getting a ~$1500 5K display included. So I don't think that $5000 price tag guarantees an expensive Mac Pro. But again, the "realization" of the "backing into a thermal corner" was TWO YEARS AGO, and THAT was FOUR YEARS after the development of the Mac Pro, so I'll not worry too much about the theoretically high cost of a 5-year-overdue revision of the Mac Pro until there's actually some acknowledgement by Apple that Mac Pro is still an active product line.

Ready to eat up your words?

I had originally predicted the Mac Pro to cost 7999 without a monitor, assuming same storage and graphics as the iMac Pro.

Reality?

The base model costs 5999. But to get to a 1TB SSD (iMac Pro base) you'll probably spend an additional 750-1000 bucks. To upgrade from the crappy AMD 580X to at least a Vega 56 (iMac Pro base), you'll probably spend another 500-750 bucks.

So we are very close to 8k now. My original prediction.

The upgrades aside, I had already told everybody that it will never happen at 5k and will 100% be more expensive than the iMac Pro, that too without a monitor.

So I have been pretty bang on.

The base version is 6k and that's less storage and worse graphics than the 5k iMac Pro.

So although I didn't nail it 100% right, I was 85% there.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

No one is going to have PCIe 5 in two years. Get that through your brain.

Yeah, sure. Right.

 

[MIKX]

YWhat's crazy is that they don't have the mid-tower with three PCI slots and four to six ram slots for single processor (up to 12 cores these day I believe) in the $2500 to $5000 range depending on processor, RAM and drives.

I totally agree with you with one exception .. 4 PCIe slots 8 + 8 + 2 x 16 with a much wider space between slot 1 x 16 & slot 2 x 16 all powered solely by the PCI ports ( if that is economically possible ).

. . . . and of course a single 16 core CPU with updated microcodes. No internal SATA is fine with me but Thunderbolt 3 would be extremely useful. , , and of course one USB 3.1 port

I would with just a little reluctance pay US$3,000 ~ US$3,500

It is not unreasonable to expect Apple to introduce a " Mid-7.1 " if they cannot entice their former 100% Pro-user market back to the fold over the next two years.

People generally do not like to change their up and working - longtime work/setup habits. . ergo; costwise, those semi-pros whom have since abandoned Apple will need some convincing to return.

If indeed the above becomes reality Apple will need to re-think their income stategy to recover their nMP development costs.

Tim seems to have forgotten that the first " powerful " Mac Pros established a nice pro-capable reputation which led to increased sales throughout the entire Mac range. The Apple "image" they had they frittered away.

Too much iPhone.

 

[pastrychef]

Why stop at PCI-e 4.0? Why not ask for PCI-e 10.0 and a Radeon XXXV so you can use this thing in the year 2050?

No Intel chipset has PCI-e 4.0 yet. There's nothing Apple can do. It's a limitation set by Intel.

It's as if you are out of things to complain about so you are asking for crap that doesn't exist yet.

 

[0388631]

Intel's Sapphire Rapids (after Ice Lake) in 2021 will have PCIe 5.0 support, and Intel announced CXL high speed interconnect few months ago which also uses PCIe 5.0. It is coming in 2021 given how Intel is heavily betting on it.

This is based on a questionable leak by none other than Huawei. It has not been confirmed by Intel at all. And that is on the condition that Intel can meet 10nm production for enterprise and mass market. They cannot at the moment. The 10nm parts they produce are low TDP.

 

[k2k koos]

Funny how on the new Mac Pro, the issue of drive bays was not discussed... Because they're no longer there. There's the option of SSD cards (2 max, with max 4TB storage), considering my 2009 Mac PRo has 4 bays and each has a 1 TB drive fitted, that is not much of an improvement, aside from being faster and smaller. I fear I may have to get an external drive bay that can hold my drives, to be able to transfer it's content to SSD's if getting this new Mac Pro is an option for me. I might otherwise get the Dustbin design, which will already outperform my aging machine, and use an external bay to house my drives. Still a decent machine for my useage.

 

[tsialex]

Funny how on the new Mac Pro, the issue of drive bays was not discussed... Because they're no longer there. There's the option of SSD cards (2 max, with max 4TB storage), considering my 2009 Mac PRo has 4 bays and each has a 1 TB drive fitted, that is not much of an improvement, aside from being faster and smaller. I fear I may have to get an external drive bay that can hold my drives, to be able to transfer it's content to SSD's if getting this new Mac Pro is an option for me. I might otherwise get the Dustbin design, which will already outperform my aging machine, and use an external bay to house my drives. Still a decent machine for my useage.

With 8 PCIe slots, you can install lots of M.2 adapters/blades - Apple even showed a photo of the new Sonnet FUS-SSD-4X4-E3 (M.2 switched card for 4 M.2 blades) when talking about PCIe slots.

 

[LFO8]

I afraid that's going to be wishful thinking. I can see the 2nd hand market for these machines being not far off the original price, even after a few years, as there won't be many being sold 2nd hand

I think that will depend in part on the refresh rate of these machines. Which could be slow due to the upgradability. So you may be right.. We'll see.

 

[pcd109]

Power Macs are not Mac Pros

The only Mac Pro sold for less than US $2499 was the MP1,1 downgraded to 2.0 Xeons, sold for $200 less. Every other Mac Pro was more expensive......

That's about right, i used a lot of them. So all of them at 2,5k and bellow 4k. Exactly what i said. Now, i heard a lot of complains about the new macpro. I for one think it looks drop dead gorgeous and after i see what is with the graphics i will most certainly buy one.
[doublepost=1559742265][/doublepost]

Funny how on the new Mac Pro, the issue of drive bays was not discussed...

It has a storage RAID module with 32 Tb or so capacity.