But didn't they say that it would be easy for the user to update? That would imply that the design would be for the user (or could they have it both ways)."Modular" and "upgradeable" could be for manufacturing, not for the end-user.
But didn't they say that it would be easy for the user to update? That would imply that the design would be for the user (or could they have it both ways)."Modular" and "upgradeable" could be for manufacturing, not for the end-user.
I'll have to check that video out. That is a bummer being difficult getting to the drive.
PCI express speed determines how fast the scene data is loaded into GPU memory. Once it is loaded it doesn't affect render speed.
PCI Express 2.0 x1 500 MB/s
PCI Express 2.0 x4 2GB/s
PCI Express 2.0 x8 4GB/s
PCI Express 2.0 x4 15.75GB/s
So an average scene of 2GB loads in 4s, 2s, 1s or 0.25 s.
Plus maybe some data preparation overhead.
If you are rendering animations the complete scene data gets transfered only at the beginning of a sequence, for every consecutive frame very little extra data is transfered, camera motion, possible mesh deformations etc. so here PCI speed doesn't matter that much.
This is a legitimately terrible idea because it's trying to solve a problem that nobody has, which is the exact problem that has caused a 180 turn on the trashcan design. Nobody ever asked for Apple to make their flagship pro desktop 1/8th the size of the previous model. Nobody wants to play legos with their $3,500 workstation.
I'd be astonished if Apple try and overcomplicate the next Mac Pro and don't go for a more straightforward *ATX based design.
How sweet would it be if Apple is totally working us and they actually release the new Mac Pro at WWDC. And have literally been working on it for a few years now.
Did they design the thing on an iPhone?"I think we designed ourselves into a bit of a thermal corner..."
"Specifically, as mentioned a bit above, it was the unique triangular design of the Mac Pro’s thermal core that proved to be the limiting factor. Because it was designed to carry roughly balanced loads of heat on all three sides, it just wasn’t equipped to take on the task of supporting the now incredibly popular single massively powerful GPU configuration.
Simply put, it wasn’t built for one of the three sides of the triangle to get super hot."
Isn't that obvious enough? People are happy that Apple will continue making Macs with modular design. Everyone thought they would never return to that design and never admit their mistake. One year of waiting is less than eternity.Why do people write "finally!"? Finally what? Finally an announcement of sorts? You're happy with an announcement of a vague plan with no date in the foreseeable future? With what in effect is vapourware? With the lack of an explicit announcement Apple will stop making powerful computers? I was hoping for hardware updates this spring. I find this development unbelievable. Apple is channeling Microsoft from the 90's. Cool ideas launched (modular). But nothing real.
What?? Do you honestly believe that Apple would give a press interview about their future Macs just to spread lies and buy some time.It's possible that they are "working" us (intentionally or not) and will never actually release a new 'pro. Just wait out the "sometime after this year" - which gave the a lot of room to continue to sit on their hands - and then decide everyone has shuffled off to Windows or Linux already, and the 'pro dies with a whimper after all.
Even back then 1 TB bus is way to small and you can't bond them.Time to drag out this old image:
PCI-e 4.0 will not hit amd or intel till about 2020.AidenShaw, I'm curious what you think the next iteration of Mac Pro will look like. I'll take a stab:
- mostly rectangular chassis
- configurable dual or single CPU
- 4 full length, double wide, full height PCIe 4.0 x 16 slots
- 1 dedicated external PCIe expansion slot (to serve their vision of modularity)
OR
- NVlink or similar fabric to talk to external modules
PLUS
- dual 10GbE
- 8 RAM slots
- massive power supply with at least 1 each (6) + (8) pin connector per PCIe slot (perfectly measured for full sized GPUs)
- tons of TB4 ports
- lights out management (redundant power supply is too much to hope for)
Eh, there may be more, but that's off the cuff...
Even back then 1 TB bus is way to small and you can't bond them.
Yep. As we knew in the beginning, it was the Mac Cube 2.0
It's not a serious image, I just reposted it for fun.
It actually doesn't make any sense at all. If you don't get the PCIe slot module, do you not have any video? I guess you could have onboard video on a Mac Pro, but that's a bit off. Even worse, how can the power supply be an optional module?
Yup! All we need is a (quiet!) cheese-grater mac built to accommodate modern standards.
i.e.; lots of internal slots and bays for PCIe cards, RAM, SSDs. And ports too! Lots of 'em!