Reactions to Mac Pro 7,1 2019 [consolidate here?!]

[fhturner]

So many threads w/ reactions and commentary...wish it was all in one thread. Maybe we can pick one and migrate comments there? Or start here and copy/paste from other bits?

I'd say probably not the "Waiting for Mac Pro 7,1" thread, just because it's got speculation going back so far...

Anyway, is anyone else just a teensy bit disappointed (not surprised) that there appears to only be one CPU socket? I know, there will be few that need more than the 28-core option, but I always like knowing the potential is there...and that you can square off against a crazy LTT build that has 2 sockets.

 

[ssgbryan]

Overpriced for 2019.

Well priced for 2016.

And having PCIe 3.0 on it with PCIe 4 coming out July is a bummer - hopefully, they will fix that.

 

[Zwhaler]

I was certainly hoping for dual CPU support, up to 56 cores and 112 threads. That would have been next level. But at 300W, I can see they they only went with one. It is still going to be blazingly fast and should mitigate long-term thermal concerns. In addition, they emphasized GPU performance, which they should. It delivers on the GPU front (as long as you don't care about Nvidia). I'm just happy Apple did this, because they didn't have to; they could have just killed it.

 

[bonzichrille]

People seem confused regarding the power spec of the new Mac Pro. All comes with 1400 W powersupply. They use a CPU heatsink which can handle the heat generated by a 300W CPU.

Overall I think it is a pretty well put together pro machine. However, top spec is gonna be something like 25000USD.

 

[ssgbryan]

I was certainly hoping for dual CPU support, up to 56 cores and 112 threads. That would have been next level. But at 300W, I can see they they only went with one. It is still going to be blazingly fast and should mitigate long-term thermal concerns. In addition, they emphasized GPU performance, which they should. It delivers on the GPU front (as long as you don't care about Nvidia). I'm just happy Apple did this, because they didn't have to; they could have just killed it.

What you want is available......

From AMD.

 

[Ph.D.]

It's the classic Mac Pro born again. Nice!

But:

* The base configuration graphics and storage are pathetic for the price.
* Almost certainly the SSDs remain proprietary.
* Apparently no other stock internal storage options, so you will need a NAS or something.
* A "proper" minimal configuration (let's say 12 cores, 2TB, single Vega-II) will likely be in the $8k-10k range.
* The display seems very nice, but it's $6k with its $1k stand, making a reasonably complete package upwards of $15k.

So, very nice, but yow, those prices!

(And yes, I own a cMP, now retired in favor of a 5 GHz 9900k with 2080ti, 32GB ram, 2 TB SSD for half the base mMP's price. I still want one of these new ones, though!)

 

[pastrychef]

Apple gave the pros what they asked for. It looks like an absolute beast of a computer.

Most of the people who are complaining about the cost probably have never purchased a Mac Pro when they were new.

 

[Ph.D.]

Dup. Sorry.

 

[MyRumors]

I wish they would come out with a prosumer version. Maybe with i7/i9, no ECC , less slots, less power etc and bring the price down to a more affordable level.
Same with monitor, just give me the iMac monitor as a standalone with the new design.

 

[startergo]

Anybody to comment on this:

 

[fhturner]

Apple gave the pros what they asked for. It looks like an absolute beast of a computer.

Most of the people who are complaining about the cost probably have never purchased a Mac Pro when they were new.

Disagree on cost reactions. Copied from another post of mine:

All four previous Mac Pro generations/revisions (2006, 2008, 2009/10/12, 2013) have been in the $2000-3000 range, and were plenty powerful at the time of their introduction. This is TWICE the high end of that range, w/ no apparent option to get down below $5999 (remember the 2006 could be down-configured w/ 2.0GHz for $2200 or something close to that). People wanting or needing an expandable and configurable system needn't be labeled "not in the target market" just because they are having a hard time accepting the "extra money" being twice what all previous iterations have commanded...

I agree w/ you on it being a beast. I think they really did deliver most of what we wanted. Just SO expensive for base configuration. Compare that to a base iMac Pro that has 4x the storage, more powerful GPU, *and* includes a 5K display...for $1000 less. That's a lot of sacrifice to gain that expandability.

 

[juanm]

So what does the 1K stand do, exactly?

 

[Ph.D.]

Anybody to comment on this:
View attachment 840381

Yes. Nice enough for machine learning, etc., but it means you may not be able to easily (or at all) add a non-Apple graphics card. And programs might struggle to use multiple graphics chips?
[doublepost=1559594167][/doublepost]

So what does the 1K stand do, exactly?

Holds up the display in a form-factor that matches the screen? OK, it has tilt and swivel too. Yay!

 

[fhturner]

* The base configuration graphics and storage are pathetic for the price.

Yeah, especially when compared to the iMac Pro. The base iMac Pro should be the bare minimum for the base config on this, particularly when it's $1000 more and w/o a ~$1500 display (so around $2500 more).

* Almost certainly the SSDs remain proprietary.

Yeah, really wish we didn't have to be handcuffed by the T2 and proprietary SSDs. Just kinda bizarre to me that we're further down this proprietary storage path. Hey, Apple, have you heard about this cool thing called M.2???

* Apparently no other stock internal storage options, so you will need a NAS or something.

Would've been nice to have maybe a single bay for 3.5" drive, or maybe two. Their packaging for the whole system looks really nice, so I'm not too broken up or surprised by lack of options here. At least we have PCIe slots, tons of RAM slots, and overall better expansion options again!

That said, I wonder what those SATA ports in the photos are about...
[doublepost=1559594278][/doublepost]

So what does the 1K stand do, exactly?

Holds the display up, of course!

 

[cinnabun814]

$999 for an optional stand is some horse excrement apple! Other than that the machine looks very nice! I wish I could afford one haha

 

[fhturner]

but it means you may not be able to easily (or at all) add a non-Apple graphics card. And programs might struggle to use multiple graphics chips?

I don't think we lose any "normal" PCIe functionality. It's just "extra". If you look at the Tech Specs page, it discusses the bottom four double-wide slots, and the fact that they're fed by some 8-pin connectors, to the tune of up to 300W per connector. [corrected below]

EDIT: Should read two 8-pin connectors w/ 300W total.

 

[MatrixRabbit]

I had just bought the 8-Core MBP, and was DYING for an awesome Mac Pro. Something revolutionary, exotic, stunning. I just felt VERY let down watching the announcement. I know the "Trash Can" was hated, but it was an engineering marvel. It felt very futuristic, a remember the shipping box being SO small, and just sat quietly on my desk.

I guess the 2019 is what Pro's have asked for, a big boxy machine, reminiscent of the 2006 model.

I'll admit, the setup looks snappy with the monitor, and probably $15,000+ price tag.

The monitor is absolutely stunning, everything I wanted. But $6,000?! Nope. I'll buy a maxed iMac Pro.

 

[startergo]

Yes. Nice enough for machine learning, etc., but it means you may not be able to easily (or at all) add a non-Apple graphics card. And programs might struggle to use multiple graphics chips?
[doublepost=1559594167][/doublepost]

Holds up the display in a form-factor that matches the screen? OK, it has tilt and swivel too. Yay!

My first thought is that power delivery of 400W through the PCIE slot is only for the proprietary card

 

[Ph.D.]

If you look at the Tech Specs page, it discusses the bottom four double-wide slots, and the fact that they're fed by some 8-pin connectors, to the tune of up to 300W per connector.

I think there are only two of these "MPX bays", each with 300W total connectors, not four. But good catch. Note that you won't be able to use Thunderbolt for your display(s) if you use them with after-market cards, though.

 

[Jegriva]

The specs are good, the design is good. It's just 1000$ too much. I'll buy one used.

 

[Thysanoptera]

My first thought is that power delivery of 400W through the PCIE slot is only for the proprietary card

Yes, it looks like it. But there are two connectors that look like the mainboard PCIe power connectors on 5.1, that's where most likely the regular 8 pin PCIe power cables can be attached.

 

[kipwheeler]

So what does the 1K stand do, exactly?

It looks like it allows you to swivel the monitor between portrait mode and landscape mode, and it looks like it's sturdy enough to hang several extra kilos of weight off it in addition to the monitor, while aimed at whatever angle you like.

 

[fhturner]

I think there are only two of these "MPX bays", each with 300W total connectors, not four.

Right. Sorry, should have been more specific. And correct. Tech Specs say there are two 8-pin connectors for those four double-wide slots w/ 300W between them.

 

[Ph.D.]

Right. Sorry, should have been more specific. And correct. Tech Specs say there are two 8-pin connectors for those four double-wide slots w/ 300W between them.

Just for further clarity: It appears that each of the two MPX bays have 300W aux power (net 4 8-pin connectors with 150W each for the whole system).

 

[Zwhaler]

What you want is available......

From AMD.

I'm happy with AMD GPUs. I was speaking on behalf of others, some of whom will certainly complain on this forum about the lack of Nvidia options from Apple.
Unless you're talking about CPUs, in which case I was just hoping Apple would support dual CPU regardless of the manufacturer. Truth be told, I am more than happy with the single CPU configuration of the new Mac Pro.