MP 7,1 New MP - it's not for you. So who is it for?

[defjam]

(a) Apple are 'early adopters' of the new Xeon W chips which have increased I/O and RAM capability of single Xeon configs - most of the PC Xeon workstations with comparable PCIe and RAM capacities currently out there are dual Xeon systems (which means you can has 56 cores if you like...)

What do you mean by "early adopters"? To my knowledge these are new processors which weren't available. Keep in mind that Apple is playing catch up to other workstations vendors. For example HP's Z8 workstation which already had the capability of having 56 cores and 3GB of RAM was released over two years ago. Yes, they had to split those 56 cores across two processors which means you could configure the Z8 with a single 28 core processor (this is an assumption I do not know if there are any technical restrictions preventing the use of a single 28 core processor in the Z8), just like the 2019 Mac Pro. Even the lower cost Z6 can be configured with 28 cores.

These are unlikely to be the same processor as what Apple is using but you need to realize Apple is coming to this party two years later. IMO where Apple may shine is in the GPU department. I suspect Apple's GPU offerings will be quite competitive, if not better, than other solutions. However that's speculation but Apple has done it in the past. The problem is that those solutions are quickly overcome by the advance of technology and what was a strong performer becomes meh quickly. Apple needs to ensure they continue to update this technology as technology marches forward. Otherwise the 2019 Mac Pro GPU solutions will be just like the 2013 Mac Pro GPU solutions. Good for their time but uncompetitive today.

 

[thisisnotmyname]

There's no doubt some high end, professional users received some before Tuesday. However I'm curious as to why sites like AnandTech, as far as I can tell, did not receive any.

I don't know why they would. When I think Apple I'm not thinking Anandtech. I know they review some Apple stuff but that's not their focus at all, I associate them more with the "stuff things in a box" crowd than I do with any of the major manufacturers solutions.

 

[Macshroomer]

Photoshop used to be the benchmark for pro usage, but a Mac mini with enough RAM is all you need for retouching now. You can edit 4K YouTube/GoPro videos on a MBP or an iMac, mix music on your laptop, blah blah blah. This is a machine for 5% of Mac users and I am a little jealous.

Are you working in the industry?

Because I think you greatly underestimate the actual productivity of good hardware and the Mac Mini's UHD 630 is greatly underpowered for anything but rank amateur iPhone video edits. I could not imagine using a Mac Mini for working with the massive amount of high res still image files I do on my iMac Pro.

I have no issue spending $17K to $25K on a well equipped and expandable Mac Pro for my business, it will save me time and that means more time for other things like spending time out in the field creating content and meeting clients.

 

[dpny]

Are you working in the industry?

For almost 30 years. I still have the install floppies for Photoshop 1.0 somewhere.

Unless you're an edge case--and you very well might be--the vast majority of work can be done on a Mac mini/MBP, This is escalating with the increasing turn towards digital, which means the days of worrying about having enough resolution for high-end print work are slow disappearing.

 

[vel0city]

For almost 30 years. I still have the install floppies for Photoshop 1.0 somewhere.

Unless you're an edge case--and you very well might be--the vast majority of work can be done on a Mac mini/MBP, This is escalating with the increasing turn towards digital, which means the days of worrying about having enough resolution for high-end print work are slow disappearing.

Not in my experience. Print designer who is now all digital. My clients (music/entertainment/movies) are demanding artwork at much higher resolutions than I used to supply for print. Album cover art (movie OSTs) for example has to be supplied to the majors in at least 4k, and they want all layers intact. As screen resolution increases, artwork needs to be supplied in high enough res to display correctly. Big files. With the Pro Display XDR at 6k I just know that all my clients are going to increase their artwork spec to 6k.

 

[dpny]

Not in my experience. Print designer who is now all digital. My clients (music/entertainment/movies) are demanding artwork at much higher resolutions than I used to supply for print. Album cover art (movie OSTs) for example has to be supplied to the majors in at least 4k, and they want all layers intact. As screen resolution increases, artwork needs to be supplied in high enough res to display correctly. Big files. With the Pro Display XDR at 6k I just know that all my clients are going to increase their artwork spec to 6k.

Out of curiosity, what's the final output for your work? Print?? Digital? Both?

 

[Pressure]

It's also for filthy-rich folk like me that just want a nice, expandable tower again, like my fondly-remembered 3,1 was, to surf the net on.

Actually I do some "real" work too, but on a linux machine. I'm doubtful I even could switch back at this point, but I have a mMP on order anyway for some foolish reason. It just better arrive before the end of the year or I'll lose it as a business deduction. Sigh.

As long as you get the invoice this fiscal year it doesn't matter. And to address that other thing, if you are indeed filthy rich, why does it matter anyway. Buy whatever you want, it's your money to spend 👍

It's certainly beyond what I am willing to pay for my needs and the new screen doesn't give me anything over the UP3218K I already have for photography and web development, except much worse resolution (~33% less) and ppi.

 

[Ph.D.]

As long as you get the invoice this fiscal year it doesn't matter.

No, it has to be received and put into service this year for it to be deductible this year.

Besides, it doesn't look like I will be billed before it ships anyway.

 

[Macshroomer]

For almost 30 years. I still have the install floppies for Photoshop 1.0 somewhere.

Unless you're an edge case--and you very well might be--the vast majority of work can be done on a Mac mini/MBP, This is escalating with the increasing turn towards digital, which means the days of worrying about having enough resolution for high-end print work are slow disappearing.

Been in the industry almost 33 years, still shoot black and white film and have a 500 square foot fine art darkroom that will output 45" x 55" on silver gel paper to serve niche clients. But I also work with very high end commercial and editorial clients and direct video and that is almost all digital. Lightroom will absolutely make use of GPU and CPU cores in addition to clock speed.

I just don't agree that a Mac Mini's GPU is all that well equipped for most income earning photogs. Even my new MacBook Pro has that plus 8GB of dedicated GPU and I am seeing a hell of a lot better PS CC and LR CC performance because of it. I don't know a single full time pro using a Mac Mini for photo work.

I know this is a tangent to the topic but saying easing concerns regarding resolution is actually something else and that is the mid and low end markets for photographers as a whole are evaporating and have been for some time. But the high end not only still uses print but is going even bigger and loving more and more high hi res for certain things because increased dynamic range is often associated with those higher res cameras. That shows up in as small as a full page magazine ad. But what is replacing print ads are high res LCD displays that are often tiled in sets of 8-10 wide to make massive slideshows and videos. I am finding a definite need for imagery that is well over 20,000 pixels wide on the long end for both electronic displays and large murals.

So maybe the software engineer by day, "Dave's Fine Art Landscapes" by night kind of pseudo-photographer can get by with a Mac Mini but not many full time pros who expect to be in business in 10-15 years can.

 

[dpny]

I know this is a tangent to the topic but saying easing concerns regarding resolution is actually something else and that is the mid and low end markets for photographers as a whole are evaporating and have been for some time. But the high end not only still uses print but is going even bigger and loving more and more high hi res for certain things because increased dynamic range is often associated with those higher res cameras. That shows up in as small as a full page magazine ad. But what is replacing print ads are high res LCD displays that are often tiled in sets of 8-10 wide to make massive slideshows and videos. I am finding a definite need for imagery that is well over 20,000 pixels wide on the long end for both electronic displays and large murals.

That's interesting, because when I've done big print work--trade shows and billboards--our venders tell us to target 100 dpi, max. That, and the move to PDF workflow for print, and the inherent compression in X-1a, means we've been able to get sloppy with final res when we just don't have big files.

There's a similar thing in the digital world. Not so much for video, but for any app/website you'll find more and more of the work is being outsourced to Central America/India, and there's no reason to worry about using hi-res assets when most people will be looking at the end product on their phone or ****** laptop.

 

[defjam]

I don't know why they would. When I think Apple I'm not thinking Anandtech. I know they review some Apple stuff but that's not their focus at all, I associate them more with the "stuff things in a box" crowd than I do with any of the major manufacturers solutions.

AnandTech was just an example to illustrate how technical sites did not receive a review unit. It could have easily been Ars Technica, Toms Hardware, etc.
[automerge]1576175572[/automerge]

Unless you're an edge case--and you very well might be--the vast majority of work can be done on a Mac mini/MBP, This is escalating with the increasing turn towards digital, which means the days of worrying about having enough resolution for high-end print work are slow disappearing.

Not sure I would agree with this. One of the YouTube bloggers stated one of their benchmarks went from ~20 minutes (MBP 16") to ~11 minutes (iMac Pro), to ~4 minutes (Mac Pro). That's quite a drop with that task taking 20% the time on the Mac Pro than on the 16" MBP.

 

[deconstruct60]

I understand why Apple decided to ship some YouTube blogger an evaluation system; Visibility. What I find puzzling is why only to YouTube bloggers? We keep hearing that "Unless you're a professional, high end, professional user this thing is not for you". I can't imagine these three individual YouTube bloggers viewers consist of many "professional, high end" users which are the alleged target market for the 2019 Mac Pro.

Your causality here is way off. Youtube blogger talking about anything remotely interesting because that is how they get paid. More juicy 'tidbit' , the more video views , the more ad views .... all lead to bigger paycheck at the end of the month.

Apple giving these folks loaners ( for a month or so or even deep discount try-and-pay-later systems ) is primarily just buying advertising. It isn't a coincidence that all of these folks videos dropped within an hour of the launch. They were part of the "guerrilla" marketing campaign. ( freedom fighter bankrolled by deep pocketed government in the shadows. )

Apple probably has given early access to other traditional media folks. However, those folks day job is not bragging on YouTube about their NDA project they are working on. Those folks will probably more so have casual conversations with friends on the "down low" about general characteristics , Also Apple has probably more so given it to folks in that realm who are going to buy Mac Pros in quantity directly. So not "advertising" to random folks who might buy. It is folks who say "if mac pro passes benchmarks we'll buy XX of them. So can we have one to benchmark with early? " If that is an instant > $1.5M payday for Apple the answer is probably different than random Joe who wants to buy one.

As far as I can tell, at least at the time I made my original statement, no technical publication appears to have received an evaluation unit.

The gamer focused Tech porn press. ... why would they be eager to give them one. Especially the ones who are primarily interesting in "got it first , here is the review of these 6 Windows games and geekbench scores and PCMark scores" ones The ones that do "deep dive" reviews ( Anadtech and some ArsTechnica ) aren't day one ( or 2-3 ) reviews. Anandtech has gotten slower of late than what they used to do.

Even the reviews that do more workstation type ones often also weave into the mix CAD apps that may not be present on macOS either.

You'll probably see stuff like this bubble out over the next couple of weeks.


https://9to5mac.com/2019/12/12/music-producers-tes-mac-pro/

That isn't really all that good if look closely because it boils down to " it was overkill for what we're doing". There are some audio folks where this won't be overkill, but lots of "overkill" stories is a dual edged sword due to the high base price of the system.

I would think Apple would have provided a few to publications which focus on the intended market. I'm sure we'll start seeing reviews from such publications but I get the impression it will be because they purchased one to evaluate and were not provided one by Apple.

Even the general gross area publications are broader targeted than this system. Apple actually doesn't need a publicity bump right now anyway. The delivery date for the Mac Pro just slide out another day to December 31st earliest now. If Apple can't meet demand, why divert one to publications? To do what raise demand even higher that they can't meet?

Apple can line up a review later for when they probably will need a demand bump. The current story is more than several folks will have by Monday.

https://www.macrumors.com/2019/12/12/mac-pro-orders-begin-shipping/

There will be dozens of folks chirping about these by next Tuesday on social distribution media sites.
The notion that a few key publications are the key to getting the marketing message out is antiquated.

 

[Macshroomer]

That's interesting, because when I've done big print work--trade shows and billboards--our venders tell us to target 100 dpi, max. That, and the move to PDF workflow for print, and the inherent compression in X-1a, means we've been able to get sloppy with final res when we just don't have big files.

There's a similar thing in the digital world. Not so much for video, but for any app/website you'll find more and more of the work is being outsourced to Central America/India, and there's no reason to worry about using hi-res assets when most people will be looking at the end product on their phone or ****** laptop.

Then we have different clients. The last few murals I did were at least 180PPi and some were 300 as per requested. I think you will find very high end clients are looking for new ways to differentiate and one of those is to take advantage in advances in technology.

In any case, There are plenty of photographers who will make good use of what a Mac Pro has to offer. Maybe not the most built versions but certainly mid tier models.

 

[deconstruct60]

...
Basically if you have a lot of money invested in custom softwares, you need roadmaps from your vendor as insurance on your investment.

Those Intel roadmaps from 2015-2017 were great insurance weren't they ? If your company had 'bet the farm' on those roadmaps you'd be in great shape now ... not.

Roadmaps don't matter as much as execution.

 

[defjam]

Apple giving these folks loaners ( for a month or so or even deep discount try-and-pay-later systems ) is primarily just buying advertising. It isn't a coincidence that all of these folks videos dropped within an hour of the launch. They were part of the "guerrilla" marketing campaign. ( freedom fighter bankrolled by deep pocketed government in the shadows. )

I know this and believe I have already acknowledged this. However obtaining this type of "advertising" doesn't preclude them from other forms.

IMO sending these to these three YouTube bloggers generates a lot of buzz but with who? People who are not the target market? Sure, they're talking up how wonderful the 2019 Mac Pro is but the information they provided, at least their initial videos, was weak on anything substantive. I'm not the target market and I found their videos woefully lacking in learning anything new about the Mac Pro (OK, I wasn't aware the box had Velcro "handles" so I guess that's something). They had these systems for approximately two weeks and almost nothing about performance. We already knew it was going to be fast, well built, attractive, and expensive, we didn't need any of these three to tell us that.

 

[deconstruct60]

.....

We've long since passed the point where most users need a machine that powerful. Photoshop used to be the benchmark for pro usage, but a Mac mini with enough RAM is all you need for retouching now. You can edit 4K YouTube/GoPro videos on a MBP or an iMac, mix music on your laptop, blah blah blah. This is a machine for 5% of Mac users and I am a little jealous.

If Apple decently updates the Mini ( bumps the internal volume slightly up ) and the iMac Pro (hardware and price ) in Q1-Q2 of 2020 it isn't even going to be for the 5% ... more like 1% of Mac users.
[ and the higher margin bump that packed into the Mac Pro price makes up for the teetering on the brink of "too few being bought to be interesting enough" threshold of less than 1% zone. There is likely a 'low volume' tax here in the Mac Pro that some folks are willing to pay. When not enough of them are willing to pay it will probably disappear. ]

 

[gugy]

Self employed digital artist/graphic designer working for the entertainment industry here. Movie posters, album art, style frames, concept art, matte paintings. Cinema 4D, ZBrush, Photoshop, Substance, Octane, Redshift, occasionally Keyshot. Buy all my own equipment and will be getting a new Mac Pro and XDR display in the new year. Windows not an option.

You make a good point. I am on the fence about either get the MP or MBP 16" maxed out. The cost is on the MBP side, but it's true the MP should last at least ten years (like my MP 5,1), so in the long run, it pays off big time.
What kind of configuration are you considering on the MP? I am also a motion designer working on the entertainment industry, mostly in LA.
I asked this question on this thread.
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/new-mac-pro-configuration-for-motion-graphics-design.2215440/

 

[deconstruct60]

I know this and believe I have already acknowledged this. However obtaining this type of "advertising" doesn't preclude them from other forms.

IMO sending these to these three YouTube bloggers generates a lot of buzz but with who? People who are not the target market? Sure, they're talking up how wonderful the 2019 Mac Pro is but the information they provided, at least their initial videos, was weak on anything substantive.

They are in the target market. The one video blogger iJustine in the group here.

https://9to5mac.com/2019/12/10/mac-...pressions-performance-benchmarks-more-videos/

She notes in her video that she went out of her way to rent 3 RED cameras to do that piece. If Apple can help convince a greater number of YouTube bloggers that they can't keep up unless shooting high end RAW video then they can generate more market for the Mac Pro. The more giant pile of RED RAW 8k video you have the more likely need a Vega II Duo (or two). More Youtubers with giant gobs of 6K-8k RAW source video that needs to be whittle down to HD viewing audience the better chances are that the Mac Pro will be more successful.

Those free units to just about as mass market publications ( NY Times , MacWorld. , PCWorld , etc.) of old .... just about as broad with incrementally different demographics.

I'm not the target market and I found their videos woefully lacking in learning anything new about the Mac Pro (OK, I wasn't aware the box had Velcro "handles" so I guess that's something).

I didn't even waste time on the "unboxing" parts of the video. Nobody is going to buy it because of the box it comes in. But don't have to watch that either. ( it is like the Olympic where they stuff stories about how some athlete's dog had an accident 6 months ago before the actual athletic events. ) All the publications with mass reader base are going to throw some filler in there to tap into folks who probably have no interest in the device reading the story.

There was significant stuff in there is didn't waste time on the unboxing. One common thing was that if going to stuff all the giant RAW video onto a single drive it would blow out the . For more they were using "jellyfish" drives for bulk storage. So folks really do need to make up mind as to how much local or DAS/NAS/SAN.

MKBHD noted that his RED transcode was faster than real time. For folks deep in RED space they may not need a lot more than that.

These videos were all "eat your own dogfood". (***) The lead time was that folks could edit the video and have time to polish it up and it was all done on the machine being viewed. That was the primary point. ( if have a 4K youttube feed crank it up and look for artifacts. ). Since that was the primary task that is pretty much going to be the only benchmark that was going come out of it. It is a narrow task , so a narrow benchmark.


(***) P.S. I wouldn't be shocked if Apple basically told them to use high end Red RAW data with multiple camerad to shoot their videos on as a condition of getting the setup. And that the video had to be edited on the device were being loaned.

 

[theluggage]

What do you mean by "early adopters"? To my knowledge these are new processors which weren't available. Keep in mind that Apple is playing catch up to other workstations vendors. For example HP's Z8 workstation which already had the capability of having 56 cores and 3GB of RAM was released over two years ago.

They're "early adopters" of the new 2019 Xeon-W processors that support 64 PCIe lanes and 1-2TB RAM per processor - the older processors in those HPs (and the older Ws in the iMac Pro) tend to be from the "scalable" range that max out at 48 PCIe lanes and 512 or 768GB RAM, even the 28 core ones.

So, at the moment, people point out the cheaper PC Workstations in the $2-$5k range, and immediately get knocked down by the faithful because they don't have as many RAM and 8/16-lane PCIe slots - to match that (and support quad CPUs) you have to pick a PC with dual Xeons, which pushes the price way up and makes the MP look like a better deal - if you're a Real True Pro who actually needs that sort of power (if you don't, you're just paying $3k over the odds in order to get more PCIe and RAM expandability than you'll ever need).

(...of course, as you say, that also means that Real True Pros can get a 56 core PC workstation which will clean the Mac Pro's clock on multicore-optimised workloads...)

However, give it 6 months and there will probably be a lot more workstations from the Big 3 using the new Xeon W chips with re-designed cases and motherboards that support Mac Pro expandability.

 

[defjam]

They're "early adopters" of the new 2019 Xeon-W processors that support 64 PCIe lanes and 1-2TB RAM per processor - the older processors in those HPs (and the older Ws in the iMac Pro) tend to be from the "scalable" range that max out at 48 PCIe lanes and 512 or 768GB RAM, even the 28 core ones.

IOW those "older" workstations were using processors that were available at the time they were introduced.

With that said I'm still unsure what your point is. Apple isn't doing anything special here but using the latest processors from Intel. How is that being an early adopter? Furthermore what benefit does it offer over something like the Z6 or Z8...aside from saying it allows for a single processor system configurations?
[automerge]1576185652[/automerge]

They are in the target market. The one video blogger iJustine in the group here.

https://9to5mac.com/2019/12/10/mac-...pressions-performance-benchmarks-more-videos/

She notes in her video that she went out of her way to rent 3 RED cameras to do that piece. If Apple can help convince a greater number of YouTube bloggers that they can't keep up unless shooting high end RAW video then they can generate more market for the Mac Pro. The more giant pile of RED RAW 8k video you have the more likely need a Vega II Duo (or two). More Youtubers with giant gobs of 6K-8k RAW source video that needs to be whittle down to HD viewing audience the better chances are that the Mac Pro will be more successful.

I have to confess to not watching her channel. The fact that some YouTube bloggers shoot with RED doesn't translate into any significant numbers who do. Regardless I guess, as I said earlier, YouTube bloggers must be the target market. Despite numbers of people in this forum and publications stating that you have to be a high end production studio to need these. Perhaps I just have a different definition of high end production studio then others?

As for the remainder of your comments I didn't see much value in responding to it individually so I decided to say that if the YouTube'rs are the target market they did a fairly light job of providing anything other than cheer leading. There was a slight amount of valuable information in the two I watched but nothing to write home about.

But again...why didn't Apple send review units to other publications?

 

[theluggage]

Apple isn't doing anything special here but using the latest processors from Intel.

That is my point. I think we're violently agreeing with each other here. I'm not defending the Mac Pro.

What I'm saying is that currently the higher Mac Pro configurations are competing with the likes of HP, but only because HP have to go with dual "scalable" Xeons to match the PCIe and RAM capacity (...so more expensive motherboards to start with and woo-hoo if you actually add a second Xeon).

Apple are "early adopters" of the Xeon W-3000 series because they. have. adopted. them. early.

 

[defjam]

That is my point. I think we're violently agreeing with each other here. I'm not defending the Mac Pro.

If that's your point I'm not really sure why you're stating it. Nothing personal but saying the 2019 Mac Pro is using the latest Intel processors doesn't seem to be saying much.

What I'm saying is that currently the higher Mac Pro configurations are competing with the likes of HP, but only because HP have to go with dual "scalable" Xeons to match the PCIe and RAM capacity (...so more expensive motherboards to start with and woo-hoo if you actually add a second Xeon).

Only because HP and others have to do with dual "scalable" Xeons? In order to obtain a 56 core configuration, something not possible with the 2019 Mac Pro, you have to configure two 28 core processors.

Unless there's a technical restriction one could configure a single 28 core processor in these systems. OK, so one has to use a dual processor motherboard. At these configurations it's my opinion whatever incremental cost is associated with a dual core motherboard is likely inconsequential.

To illustrate: Adding the 28 core processor to the "base" HP Z8 costs $19,640 to the "base" (the configuration for the system which has the customize option) configuration cost of $3,564. The entire system cost of $3,564 represents 20% of the processor upgrade cost. One can even purchase a "base" Z8 for $2,489, the motherboard in the Z8 can't be that expensive (assuming they're not different between the two).

IMO paying extra for a dual CPU socket motherboard isn't that much of an issue. Especially when you get an additional 12 DIMM sockets to enable 3TB of memory and additional PCIe lanes.

Apple are "early adopters" of the Xeon W-3000 series because they. have. adopted. them. early.

That doesn't make them early adopters. They're just adopters of the current technology. When HP released the Z8 were they early adopters of the processor technology available at the time?

 

[thisisnotmyname]

That is my point. I think we're violently agreeing with each other here. I'm not defending the Mac Pro.

If that's your point I'm not really sure why you're stating it.

Pot, Kettle, I'd like to introduce you, I think you'll have much in common

 

[defjam]

Pot, Kettle, I'd like to introduce you, I think you'll have much in common

What does this even mean? If you've got something to say then say it.

 

[blackadde]

Self employed digital artist/graphic designer working for the entertainment industry here. Movie posters, album art, style frames, concept art, matte paintings. Cinema 4D, ZBrush, Photoshop, Substance, Octane, Redshift, occasionally Keyshot. Buy all my own equipment and will be getting a new Mac Pro and XDR display in the new year. Windows not an option.

Why isn't Windows an option? All of these work on Win10, and Octane / Redshift are reliant on CUDA for the time being, as far as I'm aware. What kind of hardware have you been using thus far - an eGPU solution?

According to the Redshift FAQ:

Does Redshift run on mac?
Yes, Redshift runs on macOS. Please note, though, that Redshift requires an NVidia GPU. All the recent macs contain AMD GPUs so, by default, they won't run Redshift. You'll need to use an eGPU solution to connect an NVidia GPU to your mac. Please ensure that you try the freely available demo version with your mac to determine compatibility and stability before making a purchase!

(I don't currently work in 3D, although I am interested in learning more about rendering solutions.)