Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

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

flat ,issues with the nMP GPUs:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/mac-pro-late-2013-gpu-driver-issues.1860297/page-41

I think they won't change direction much, people are getting their hopes up with the "modular" reference but in the end it will all come to the same, but now with some more "upgradeable" options.
I believe they admitted only that the nMP wasn't ready for the time, no dual GPU support to make real use of the innovative design.
Well, we'll see in a year+.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ILUVAPPLE69
sigmadog said:
It's nice to see the Mac Pro forums heating up again. It was getting pretty quiet around here up until a couple weeks ago.

Also, I've changed my signature to better reflect the Mac Pro status. I hope you like it.
Click to expand...
hmm. maybe sigs don't show up on mobile? otherwise, yours is kinda weird.
;)

IMG_0550.PNG
 
  • Like
Reactions: sigmadog
Mago said:
Apple May Just Commision (and I bet they will do) Reference Design GPUs with just the PCIe interface and DP output re-routed to the card end, not modding the most important part: GPU-Memory lines and Thermals, thus they will be able to deliver new GPU as soon new refrence design are released since re-route the PCIe and DP buses to a custom connector very close to its original locations its something so-trivial even can be automated at the Eagle Software (the CAD used to design Logic Boards), even I bet Apple Will do This, controlling what PCIe peripheral users can insert gives they more system reliability and less warranty issues, PCIe cards are prone to shortcuts due miss aligned conexion, Apple dont want that, further also they NEED to FEED THUNDERBOLT 3 controllers with DP output, and I doubt they will plug an DP cable from the GPU to the Motherboard, thats dirty.

Modular Mac Pro doesn't mean Commodity Mac Prom forger ISA PCIe GPUs return to the Mac.
Click to expand...

Haha, that's what the TB2 cards in HP's computers do. You only get a single TB port because one of the ports has to be used for a small jumper cable between the GPU and the PCIe card. The video requirement for TB does mean they're gonna' have to do something more than just slap some stock GPUs in and call it a day.
 
goMac said:
They do. We've discussed it previously, but it's a requirement.



They might even be able to dig up an ARM chip with a custom GPU somewhere.
Click to expand...


Totally. On top of it not being standard to skip video over TB, given Apple's making a new display announcement, what are the chances the display WONT be thunderbolt, given the Macbook Pro?

Anyone know if that ASUS solution had to use the iGPU? Not that APple would ever make anything so ugly (though I would laugh).

38l4I3k.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: pat500000
slughead said:
Totally. On top of it not being standard to skip video over TB, given Apple's making a new display announcement, what are the chances the display WONT be thunderbolt, given the Macbook Pro?

Anyone know if that ASUS solution had to use the iGPU? Not that APple would ever make anything so ugly (though I would laugh).

38l4I3k.jpg
Click to expand...

I have the TB 3 version card in my ASUS MB. And the MB has no iGPU.

hero.jpg

I get TB3 for my new external bays and one can run a display off it.

You do need a newer Graphics card with at least 2 displayport connectors.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: slughead and ILUVAPPLE69
Peace said:
I have that TB 3 card in my ASUS MB. And the MB has no iGPU.

I get TB3 for my new external bays and one can run a display off it.

You do need a newer Graphics card with at least 2 displayport connectors.
Click to expand...
Apple could easily hide such a DP cable inside the case, flushing it against corners with special linings to make it almost invisible. The mid to higher ATX cases out there all have fairly decent cable management which Apple will surely improve upon.
 
Chancha said:
Apple could easily hide such a DP cable inside the case, flushing it against corners with special linings to make it almost invisible. The mid to higher ATX cases out there all have fairly decent cable management which Apple will surely improve upon.
Click to expand...

Or... the case could be designed so that all PCI slots are several inches towards the front of the machine, with just an exit hole, like in the back of the TB display's stand for "cable management".

People suggesting Apple would never make something so ugly as a machine requiring a loopback cable on the outside... have you looked at the nMP DeskOctopus lately? ;)
 
askunk said:
Why blaming Linus... let this be a lesson for the mMP :D
Click to expand...

i don't think there will be much of an issue regarding a user tinkering with the innards of a newnew mac pro..
at least, if judging apple's past actions with their flagship computer..

the imac shown in the video scores a 5 (or 4?) on iFixIt's repairability meter (with 10 being easiest).. i imagine it would score at least a point higher if not for needing to unseal to get inside..

the cMP was easy to get into and relatively easy to work on.. no proprietary fasteners and no interfering solder (that i know of).. i don't know if ifixit had a score back then but i'd assume 7 or 8..

nMP scores an 8.. it's easy to get inside and fairly easy to remove/replace most of the components :


• Mac Pro Late 2013 Repairability Score: 8 out of 10 (10 is easiest to repair)

• For being so compact, the design is surprisingly modular and easy to disassemble. Non-proprietary Torx screws are used throughout, and several components can be replaced independently.

• The easily-opened case is designed to make RAM upgrades a snap.

• The fan is easy to access and replace.

• While it will require a bit of digging, the CPU is user-replaceable—meaning intrepid fixers should be able to save considerably by upgrading from the base-level processor configuration.​

----
so, as far as getting inside the thing and tinkering with components, i'd imagine the new design to be at least on par with the past couple of iterations.

---
edit-
oh, i think the latest mbp scores a 1 ;)
(or maybe 2? i'll check in a minute)
 
mattspace said:
Or... the case could be designed so that all PCI slots are several inches towards the front of the machine, with just an exit hole, like in the back of the TB display's stand for "cable management".

People suggesting Apple would never make something so ugly as a machine requiring a loopback cable on the outside... have you looked at the nMP DeskOctopus lately? ;)
Click to expand...
and they will also hide / force all display data over the TB bus's / letting you just use DP out with no TB + TB ports.
 
IF running displays directly from spigots on the GPUs is not a good idea, what makes running DP1.x over TB3 a better delivery system? One would hope, that if Apple really is looking at a fully modular design, that PCIe4 lanes would be supported at the connection points - AFAIK the iPass cable was an external PCIe2 patch.

The other huge leverage point I'd love to see is a way to use a high speed link to other modular MacPros, so one could roll their own render farm... Make it truly modular and the user can pick just the right resources for the use case.
 
I think you're more likely to see Apple rerouting the video signal via software, like how Thunderbolt GPU docks can reroute the video signal back to the internal laptop display. No reason for a physical cable anymore when you can do it in software.

That's if Apple uses PCIe cards, which isn't for sure.
 
goMac said:
I think you're more likely to see Apple rerouting the video signal via software, like how Thunderbolt GPU docks can reroute the video signal back to the internal laptop display. No reason for a physical cable anymore when you can do it in software.
Click to expand...

Is that really rerouting video signal or copying frame buffers? Pragmatically there is a difference. If the internal GPU is grabbing the data data to display it isn't really being "rerouted." The steam never got to the DisplayPort state in the first place.

For example the touch bar of the MBP is copying out of a frame buffer. The actual DisplayPort output of the Intel iGPU is maxed out feeding the embedded display and the thunderbolt ports. It isn't routed. The graphics data is copied and the T1 chip's GPUs actually drives the screen.


That's if Apple uses PCIe cards, which isn't for sure.
Click to expand...

The Apple's cards are going to have PCIe connections, just probably not a the standard socket. That is only really needed for just one socket.

If there is a second GPU socket that could be standard. For example, if it is just a "compute" GPU it doesn't necessarily have to do video out. ( or some proprietary back-channel link. The time Apple spent on hooking up Crossfire on the MP 2013 I thought was a waste of time from day 0. The graphics stack doesn't support so it is really only a Windows thing; which is silly for a Mac. ).

If it is a secondary GPU card with output to more legacy standard video out ports, then the video probably isn't heading for TB. Most folks picking non-Apple GPU cards (if an option) probably aren't picking Apple only TB display docking stations either. If the physical ports are on the card, it is just far less Rube Goldberg to just hook them up to the display. Folks looking for cheaper and interchangeable probably are going the that path.

Yeah it is asymmetric. One socket is for Apple+TB updates and another for more mainstream market updates. However, it is better than having neither of those two. Trying to put a round peg in square hold of non TB aware GPU cards will be a pain ( yeah you have hack around in software but I bet some users will screw that up with rogue hacks). Flip side .... the AMD vs Nvidia fanboy dust up by squeezing out the other cards may be more work than Apple wants to do. [ Apple would need to commit to doing about an average of card a year. If Apple can't allocate a 48 weeks/year GPU team for the Mac Pro they are going to need a more standard slot. One of the real current problems is about resource allocation, not really design. ]
 
flat five said:
nMP scores an 8.. it's easy to get inside and fairly easy to remove/replace most of the components :
Click to expand...

You guys tend to be a bit too fussy and take a joke too seriously. :D

However, there is no use of iFixit ranking if you can't find the replacement parts. ;)
That's the point Linus made... and I must say that it is sometimes revealing to listen to the reaction by a PC savvy guy, but still Windows user. 90% of his criticism is perfectly motivated.

Telling me that the nMP is user upgradeable collides JUST A BIT :p with all we had to say on this forum in the last few years on the trashcan (and not only), which - I am not sure if you read :p - has been confirmed (finally) by Apple, as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZombiePhysicist, ILUVAPPLE69, tuxon86 and 1 other person
From PikerAlpha's Xeon iMac blog post reply:

The way I read “modular” is that Apple wants (to / to be able to) use the same baseboards for their own servers, replacing servers from other vendors, and install CPU’s and other hardware based on their need.
Click to expand...

Yes, the servers for datacenters and the next Mac Pro may share some parts, but it remains to be seen if Apple is really willing to sell the same hardware to us.
Click to expand...

Together with the news of apple cutting ties with Supermicro, this move would be intriguing.

Plus, without knowing the validity of his source, the mMP will be "much more like a PC".
 
Dean Yu said:
From PikerAlpha's Xeon iMac blog post reply:
Together with the news of apple cutting ties with Supermicro, this move would be intriguing.
Plus, without knowing the validity of his source, the mMP will be "much more like a PC".
Click to expand...
This is seriously interesting, I wouldn't have imagined Apple would go back this route but it would be great if it's anything close to the XServe and XServe RAID. They were comfy as f__k.
 
Apparently Apple had early feedback that the 6,1 was weak, so they knew they had a potential disaster from the start. With so much invested in the manufacturing plant, nobody dared admit the mistake and write the investment down. Hubris kept the company from figuring out how to save the puppy somehow and/or come up with an earlier replacement. This is a very European failure: Hang the enterprise; save the face of some corporate bigwig too important to overrule.

It seems that new Apple products tend to lead to a scramble for the outgoing models instead of the new ones. Myself: the 6,1 made me get a 5,1 (as did the animation school mentioned in the video below); ditto for me with the no-jack iPhone; ditto for some with the mBP Touchbar.

So now… what? Schiller:

So the team certainly has been spending a lot of time with customers to understand what better would fit most workflows, to take the time to do something great, and something inspired[,] and that we’re proud to put the name Macintosh on. [My emphasis]​

Take the time to do something great!? Therein lies the problem: unconstrained design; overthinking; form over function and certainly performance. Too much time to market means obsolete out of the gate. Repeating the mistake is not the way to fix this. They should rush an interim solution to market rather than take their time. Pride hath no other glass…

 
  • Like
Reactions: ILUVAPPLE69, robotica, JimGoshorn and 3 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back