MP 7,1 Waiting for Mac Pro 7,1 A1991 (no more)

[Mago]

TBD: 21.5 Inch, 4K retina display 4096x2304 pixels, HDR - 999$
27 inch, 5K retina display, 5120x2880 pixels, HDR - 1999$.

Reading @deconstruct reply, it has sense, they sell a 4K USB-C 21" for Macbooks and the Mac nano, 1000$ for the 21" model is excessive, LG just launched a 27" 4K usb-c enabled on much less http://9to5mac.com/2016/06/04/lg-27ud88-w-usb-c-4k-monitor-macbook-review/ 660$ 27" 4K is a no-brainer, Apple can't bill more than 500$ for a 21" 4K USB-C.

On the oter hand a 2000$ 5K Retina display also is too high but more plausible.

Mac Pro:
Dual FirePro G300: Polaris 10 with more than 5.8 TFLOPs of compute power FP32 each.
Dual FirePro G500: Vega 10 Pro with 3584 GCN cores, 96 ROPS, and 8 GB of HBM2 and 1/4th DP ratio.
Dual FirePro G700: Vega 10 XT with 4096 GCN cores, 96 ROPS, 16 GB of HBM2 and 1/4th DP ratio.

Top offering for CPU: 18 core. 6, 8, 12, 18 core CPUs available.
Base model: 6 cores, 16 GB of RAM, Dual G300, and 512 GB SSD NVMe for 2999$.
Mid-Range model: 6 cores, Dual G500, 512 GB SSD, 32 GB of RAM for 3999$.
RAM tops at 256 GB from Apple.
SSD - 2 TB max, with lower price tiers, for the rest.

My predictions .

I think different, G300 and G500 to be based on Polaris 10 pro and xt, and G700 either (ideally) on Vega Pro, more likely to be a downgraded W8100 with lower closk and no ECC ram, this way fit the MP TDP same way they did with W9000 and D700, a know equation.

Also i doubt Apple to offer 2TB SSD, same tiers bit cheaper NVMe twice faster.

On Ram I'll doubt Apple to offer more than 128GB is so unlikely some people will buy it due Apple's tax they know their customer behavior, I ordered my MP with 12GB then I first installed 64GB the same day it arrived, they are aware this behavior while possible, an Mac Pro out from Apple with 256GB will be an unlikely unicorn.

 

[ManuelGomes]

Doing a W8100 would be going backwards now.

 

[mathpunk]

The E5-16xx-v4 processors just showed up on ark:

http://ark.intel.com/products/family/91287/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-v4-Family#@Server

 

[Zarniwoop]

The E5-16xx-v4 processors just showed up on ark:

http://ark.intel.com/products/family/91287/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-v4-Family#@Server

Thanks. Ingredients for nMP v2 are here, Polaris is the only missing part anymore.
[doublepost=1465409881][/doublepost]

Reading @deconstruct reply, it has sense, they sell a 4K USB-C 21" for Macbooks and the Mac nano, 1000$ for the 21" model is excessive, LG just launched a 27" 4K usb-c enabled on much less http://9to5mac.com/2016/06/04/lg-27ud88-w-usb-c-4k-monitor-macbook-review/ 660$ 27" 4K is a no-brainer, Apple can bill more than 500$ for a 21" 4K USB-C.

Apple is not using standard 4k display, iMac 21.5" has bigger resolution and externally it will need DP 1.3 or higher. The competition has a standard 4k resolution and is not a problem for DP 1.2.

 

[Mago]

Apple is not using standard 4k display, iMac 21.5" has bigger resolution and externally it will need DP 1.3 or higher. The competition has a standard 4k resolution and is not a problem for DP 1.2.

Apple could offer DP1.3 on USB-C ports as remedy for TB3 lack of DP1.3, is perfectly possible on models with dGPU (not on those with iGPU only), also explains why DaknetGuy insist on the L2016 MP having ALL ITS Port Video Enabled (including both TB3 and USB-C), even has sense his formula on only 4 TB3 and 6 USB-C by feeding the I/O panel only with 8 PCIe3 lines and using a PEX switch Apple could handle all its I/O w/o having to route 4 USB3.1 signals to the Back I/O panel.

Anyway I still bet on a 6 TB3 Mac Pro L2016, I dont have expectations it to include Vega10 but a good 2015 GPU as W8100 or Fury Nano.

 

[Roykor]

CUDA has been deprecated in a lot of Adobe's offerings; the only thing I know that requires CUDA is the no-longer-supported raytracing in After Effects. Everything else you can do with OpenCL.

As for dual Xeons, when it comes to my After Effects work all those processors have meant jack ****. The program is horribly unoptimized and multithreaded rendering is often slower than just single-processor rendering. Maybe that's finally going to change but Adobe's been saying "performance is coming" with AE for three years and we're still not there.

I am not sure where your sources are from, and if you have one about Adobe dropping Cuda, i would like to read it. Sadly there is not a clear list somewhere and the Adobe website haves a very bad search engine. I know that there are some exclusive Cuda accelerators in Photoshop and illustrator. Also from the From the Adobe site i can share you this. Quite a list if you ask me. In overal, there is Cuda all over the place in Adobe, so an Nvidia at this moment, is still the best option above ATI.

List of GPU accelerated effects in Premiere Pro
Here is a list of the effects and transitions that can be accelerated by CUDA in Adobe Premiere Pro.

• Alpha Adjust
  
  
• Basic 3D
  
  
• Black & White
  
  
• Brightness & Contrast
  
  
• Color Balance (RGB)
  
  
• Color Pass (Windows only)
  
  
• Color Replace
  
  
• Crop
  
  
• Drop Shadow
  
  
• Edge Feather
  
  
• Eight-Point Garbage Matte
  
  
• Extract
  
  
• Fast Color Corrector
  
  
• Four-Point Garbage Matte
  
  
• Gamma Correction
  
  
• Garbage Matte (4, 8, 16)
  
  
• Gaussian Blur
  
  
• Horizontal Flip
  
  
• Levels
  
  
• Luma Corrector
  
  
• Luma Curve
  
  
• Noise
  
  
• Proc Amp
  
  
• RGB Curves
  
  
• RGB Color Corrector
  
  
• Sharpen
  
  
• Sixteen-Point Garbage Matte
  
  
• Three-way Color Corrector
  
  
• Timecode
  
  
• Tint
  
  
• Track Matte Key
  
  
• Ultra Keyer
  
  
• Video Limiter
  
  
• Vertical Flip
  

• Cross Dissolve
  
  
• Dip to Black
  
  
• Dip to White
  

List of GPU accelerated effects in Premiere Pro
Here is a list of the additional effects and transitions that can be accelerated by CUDA in Adobe Premiere Pro.

• Directional Blur
• Fast Blur
• Invert
• Additive Dissolve
• Film Dissolve
  
• Warp Stabilizer

 

[Mago]

Asuming DarknetGuy is rigth, the MacPro Late 2016 should have:

4 TB3 ports
6 USB-C (all video enabled, possible supporting DP 1.3)

As Dual GPU options:
Polaris Pro/XT as G300/G500 options 4/8 GB ram, Dual Vega10 GPU with 16GB Ram (I think a W8100 derivate more likely) as G700.

Upto Dual PCIe2 NVMe (also could enable apple to Offer 2TB options)

Dual 10GbE still possible, consider will share bandwidth with USB-C/TB3, a dual GbE more likely.

WiFi / Bluetooth running from internal USB3 Headers.
[doublepost=1465411190][/doublepost]

Doing a W8100 would be going backwards now.

Not so, the W8100 is moreless the compute-enabled (1:2 FP64) version of the Fury Nano.

 

[rockyromero]

Reading


On Ram I'll doubt Apple to offer more than 128GB is so unlikely some people will buy it due Apple's tax they know their customer behavior, I ordered my MP with 12GB then I first installed 64GB the same day it arrived, they are aware this behavior while possible, an Mac Pro out from Apple with 256GB will be an unlikely unicorn.

I installed 128GB memory on my nMP that came with 16GB.

I would like the ability to scale to 512GB if I wanted for future applications.

➰

 

[koyoot]

Not so, the W8100 is moreless the compute-enabled (1:2 FP64) version of the Fury Nano.

W8100 is not Fiji. It is Hawaii Pro(2560 GCN 1.1) chip, declocked to 824 MHz if I remember correctly. Fiji chips on FirePro GPUs are only in S9300X2 and Fury Pro Duo.

 

[pat500000]

Asuming DarknetGuy is rigth, the MacPro Late 2016 should have:

4 TB3 ports
6 USB-C (all video enabled, possible supporting DP 1.3)

As Dual GPU options:
Polaris Pro/XT as G300/G500 options 4/8 GB ram, Dual Vega10 GPU with 16GB Ram (I think a W8100 derivate more likely) as G700.

Upto Dual PCIe2 NVMe (also could enable apple to Offer 2TB options)

Dual 10GbE still possible, consider will share bandwidth with USB-C/TB3, a dual GbE more likely.

WiFi / Bluetooth running from internal USB3 Headers.
[doublepost=1465411190][/doublepost]
Not so, the W8100 is moreless the compute-enabled (1:2 FP64) version of the Fury Nano.

I wonder if it's necessary to call nMP late 2016 when they would release Mac Pro once in a lifetime. Lol

 

[Mago]

Darknet guy leak, now has more sense, see:

back i/o panel on current nMP is wired to 8 PCIe3 lines, there is an PEX switch to connect 6tb2 and 4UB3.

As C602 has no USB3 to wire the i/o panel's USB3, C612 which has USB3 also lacks USB3.1 to feed rear USB-C ports.

Current Back I/O panel also receives 6 DP1.2 signals to feed 6 TB2 and the HDMI1.2, on the nMPv2 or 2016 the same arrangement could be used to feed with DP1.3 signals all 6 USB-C ports sharing 4 DP1.3 with TB3 ports (splitted to 8 DP1.2).

Also Enables a possibilty, to offer Updated GPUs for current nMP base ( I Know , I Know Apple will never offer such upgrade chance), since the GPU pining dont need to change, even the PCIe SSD still on PCIe2 bus.
[doublepost=1465414100][/doublepost]Even USB-C ports on the L2016 MP could include D.P. 1.4 support http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016...an-drive-8k-monitors-over-a-usb-type-c-cable/

 

[koyoot]

Darknet guy leak, now has more sense, see:

back i/o panel on current nMP is wired to 8 PCIe3 lines, there is an PEX switch to connect 6tb2 and 4UB3.

As C602 has no USB3 to wire the i/o panel's USB3, C612 which has USB3 also lacks USB3.1 to feed rear USB-C ports.

Current Back I/O panel also receives 6 DP1.2 signals to feed 6 TB2 and the HDMI1.2, on the nMPv2 or 2016 the same arrangement could be used to feed with DP1.3 signals all 6 USB-C ports sharing 4 DP1.3 with TB3 ports (splitted to 8 DP1.2).

Also Enables a possibilty, to offer Updated GPUs for current nMP base ( I Know , I Know Apple will never offer such upgrade chance), since the GPU pining dont need to change, even the PCIe SSD still on PCIe2 bus.
[doublepost=1465414100][/doublepost]Even USB-C ports on the L2016 MP could include D.P. 1.4 support http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016...an-drive-8k-monitors-over-a-usb-type-c-cable/

You may remember this: http://appleinsider.com/articles/15...ac-8k-later-this-year-display-partner-lg-says

What If Apple readies not 4 and 5K monitors, but 21.5 inch 5K and 27 inch 8K display?

21.5 inch 5K display for 999$? Yes, please!
27 inch 8K for 1999$? Yes, please!

 

[pat500000]

You may remember this: http://appleinsider.com/articles/15...ac-8k-later-this-year-display-partner-lg-says

What If Apple readies not 4 and 5K monitors, but 21.5 inch 5K and 27 inch 8K display?

21.5 inch 5K display for 999$? Yes, please!
27 inch 8K for 1999$? Yes, please!

Or third party monitors?

 

[G-News]

Or a shiny mother of pearl watchband for a bargain $500.

 

[Dean Yu]

You may remember this: http://appleinsider.com/articles/15...ac-8k-later-this-year-display-partner-lg-says

What If Apple readies not 4 and 5K monitors, but 21.5 inch 5K and 27 inch 8K display?

21.5 inch 5K display for 999$? Yes, please!
27 inch 8K for 1999$? Yes, please!

8K? Sure.
27" 8K? Nah.
Do you really want iPhone PPi on a Mac display?
VR/AR is a better solution in term of screen real estate.

 

[goMac]

You can buy a 27" iMac with a 5k display for $1,800.

I'd expect to see the 27" 5k display at $1000. Maybe as high as $1200, but likely $1000.

 

[Mago]

What If Apple readies not 4 and 5K monitors, but 21.5 inch 5K and 27 inch 8K display?

21.5 inch 5K display for 999$? Yes, please!
27 inch 8K for 1999$? Yes, please!

Ha Ha, maybe with Zen 32core+ Dual Vega 10 or dual nVidia Pascal GP100

 

[AidenShaw]

Ha Ha, maybe with Zen 32core+ Dual Vega 10 or dual nVidia Pascal GP100

4K or larger monitors won't work on a GP100...

 

[kucharsk]

Certainly hoping for 10GigE ports.

With Comcast and other ISPs now offering 2G+ speeds to the home, it would be nice to see Apple systems that could actually use it.

At present the only way to utilize it is to add a 10GigE card to a PCIe Mac Pro.
[doublepost=1465442080][/doublepost](Sorry, accidentally hit post and attempts to edit the post give me a "Not found" error).

... or a rather pricy third party 10GigE Thunderbolt adapter.

 

[flat five]

With Comcast and other ISPs now offering 2G+ speeds to the home, it would be nice to see Apple systems that could actually use it.

... or a rather pricy third party 10GigE Thunderbolt adapter.

heh.. talking about $4000/yr internet but the 10GbE adapter is rather pricey.
ok

 

[beaker7]

Maybe they'll put the 10GbE chips in and throttle them back to 3Gb due to the heat and power consumption of 10GbE.

 

[kucharsk]

At least with Comcast that 2G service is only $3599.40/year.

 

[deconstruct60]

The E5-16xx-v4 processors just showed up on ark:

http://ark.intel.com/products/family/91287/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-v4-Family#@Server

http://ark.intel.com/products/series/91318/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-1600-v4-Product-Family#@Server

Weird pages for the 1600 entries. There is no Max Turbo listed on the pages. ( are present on the i7 69xx pages though).

Previous gen
http://ark.intel.com/products/series/81064/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-1600-v3-Product-Family#@Server


Prod ____ v3 ___ v4
1620 3.5GHz 3.5GHz 4 cores ( no change )
1630 3.7GHz 3.7GHz 4 cores ( no change )
1650 3.5GHz 3.6GHz 6 cores ( 0.1GHz bump )
1660 3.0GHz 3.2GHz 8 cores ( 0.2GHz bump )
1680 3.2GHz 3.4GHz 8 cores (0.2GHz bump )

Unless Intel added some substantially better Max Turbo to the 1620-30 those are rather deeply kneecapped. The expectation that Apple "has to" have 6 cores minimum is probably a bust. The pricing isn't present in ark. If it is radically down with those relatively kneecapped 20-30 models then maybe the entry point of the 1650 is now where the 20 was. With the general rise in the Core i7 69xx equivalents pricing that seems extremely doubtful. Additionally, this site mentions two entries not present yet 1603 and 1607 which are likely the "cheaper still' models.

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2016/...ions_of_Intel_Xeon_E5-1600_v4_processors.html

I suspect the numbers in parens in that table are actually the Max Turbo speeds.

A process shrink and zero increase in clock and no change in TDP? Perhaps there is something about the design that is a barrier (e.g., internal ring bus max stable speed or something). Or just plain squeeze play for money on Intel's part. Need 6 cores, then have to spend at least $600+. Either way entry Mac Pro update probably still has 4 cores.
[doublepost=1465449784][/doublepost]

....
Apple is not using standard 4k display, iMac 21.5" has bigger resolution and externally it will need DP 1.3 or higher.

Don't necessarily need DP 1.3. The dual 1.2 in TBv3 would work just as well for Apple 21.5 "Retina" display as it will tfor their 27 "Retina" display (with more pixels). Most likely, the lower workload is a better match to the laptops' and the mini's GPUs.

Apple could also come out with a "cheaper" Retina iMac model that was 24". For example Dell has a panel 4K

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=bsd&cs=04&sku=210-AGNK

that is a "pixel double" of the current non-Retina iMac resolution ( iMac 1920 1080 Dell 2415Q 3240 2160 ). A $549 + 400-500 worth of computer would get you the same "entry level" iMac prices currently have ( 949-1049 ~ $1099 ).
That way Apple could down non-retina from the entire iMac line up. If the price of those now older 4K panels drops even more Apple could push the price into the $899-999 range for the "edu iMac" without feeling much of a pinch on margins.
Selling them as displays would be one way to boost the volume of panels sold. And could sell them so still worked with TB v2 devices.


I suspect though that Apple will take he route of non-Retina entry iMac ( for margin) and going TBv3 only for any new Display Docking Stations if they do any. It would be a good thing though for them to have at $400-500 "display" though (and sub $1K iMacs ).

 

[ManuelGomes]

Mago, as koyoot pointed out W8100 is Hawaii based, not Fiji. That's why I said it would be going backwards. Anyway, if it was Fiji based it would still be a step back, in power consumption and wouldn't be the latest tech again.
I'm with the DN guy, as I said before 4 TB3 ports seems right and another 6 USB-C (even better with video capability).
About time the 1600 surfaces but oddly no prices referred.
Almost no differences in speeds, prices should also maintain or even rise, as per i7. No way entry level will be 6 core.
But was there an official announcement from Intel? Don't think so.
New reference to macOS from Apple:
http://appleinsider.com/articles/16...of-macos-rebranding-surfaces-on-apple-website
Meanwhile they changed it back.
[doublepost=1465461614][/doublepost]Thinking about it, how can you do video out on all USB ports? The remaining 6 ports should be plain USB3.0 from the PCH. Unless you add extra USB3.1 or TB3 controllers for alt mode.
Do you believe they will use DP1.4 with compression to do 5K@60Hz HDR on the new TB3D?

 

[Zarniwoop]

Will it be macOS X again, or become macOS 11? We don't have to wait too much anymore for the answers. Four days.

Polaris will bring double performance for nMP 2016 compared to previous model. (D300 = 2TFLOPs, D500 2.2TFLOPs. Polaris could do 2.5x easily) THAT is something. The GDDR memory bus is limiting the full speed, so maybe 2x is the reality. New texture compression algorithms helps on GL side, but not GPGPU.

Broadwell-EP brings just ~15% speed bump, unless macOS and key apps are recompiled for it.

True, Polaris should deliver raw power 2.5x compared to 2013 MP. But it needs faster GDDR in order to achieve that in GPGPU. What if there's going to be a surprise Polaris 10 model with HBM2? Low yields are no problem, there's limited market for the high end model anyway. For GPGPU use even Polaris would benefit. Then AMD could reach the full 2.5x. (UPDATE: I gave it a second thought, and GDDR5/X should be enough for Polaris 10)

G300 = Polaris Pro 4GB GDDR5
G500 = Polaris Pro 8 GB GDDR5/X
G600 = Polaris XT 16GB HBM2 / GDDR5/X

And G700 is reserved for the future Vega.