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

[mavericks7913]

I doubt Threadripper will go beyond 32 cores for a while. Running 64 cores on measy quad channel memory would have too many scenarios where memory throughput will be limiting factor. Higher clocked 32 core will provide much better balance.

Too bad. It is leaked information and it always true. First one was 16 core and 2nd one was 32 core.

https://www.funkykit.com/news/amd-ryzen-9-3800-and-threadripper-3990wx-black-edition-spec-leaked/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/a3b0sp/amd_zen_2_ryzen_threadripper_processor_rumors_wow/

Also, Threadripper will use EPYC ROME core configuration which is already shown before. Total 8 chips of 7nm 8 cores will make 64 cores. Truely possible.

[doublepost=1549393275][/doublepost]

Let me put it to you this, this way.

Every CEO of any company who will pick Intel over AMD in upcoming 2 years, both on desktop, or Server market will be extremely stupid, and deserves to be sacked because of wasting company's money, on outdated hardware.

Every CEO DOES GIVE YOU KNOW WHAT about Total cost of ownership. AMD last round have had Value on their advantage, compared to Intel. This round, they will have ALL OF IT: Performance, Efficiency, Value to their advantage over Intel.

Being Apple, you want to be on the bleeding edge of technology, otherwise you rule out yourself from ANY equation. Thousands of proffesionals will have the choice: paying 5000$ for iMac Pro or two times faster computer, using AMD mainstream CPUs, for half as much, what will they pick? How much faster computer you can buy, using AMD hardware, with the same money you pay for iMac Pro?

Where did you got Info on 16 Core CPU getting to 5.1 GHz base...?

At 125W TDP on 7 nm Maximum Two core Turbo clock possible is 5.1 GHz, without binning. All-core Turbo states will be lower. 65W 8C/16T CPU is supposed to Turbo to 4.0 GHz on all cores in 65W's.


Have you heard anything about AMD Renoir? It is 7 nm monolithic APU. It has 8 cores, and most likely 16-20 CU's.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-3000-series-matisse-specs,38310.html

Not just a rumor but it was leaked at Russian store with same specs. Ryzen 9 3850X will have 16 cores at 4.3ghz to 5.1ghz, 135w, and only $499. Unlike Intel, AMD Ryzen can turbo all cores at the highest clock speed.

 

[koyoot]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-3000-series-matisse-specs,38310.html

Not just a rumor but it was leaked at Russian store with same specs. Ryzen 9 3850X will have 16 cores at 4.3ghz to 5.1ghz, 135w, and only $499. Unlike Intel, AMD Ryzen can turbo all cores at the highest clock speed.

No. It can't achieve highest Turbo state clock on all cores. That is the first thing.
Secondly - that "leaked" SKU list in Russian shop was a placeholder based on AdoredTV leak. And we are not sure it is 100% correct, 7 months before the release, based on alpha silicon, and mentioning CES release(which never happened).

One more thing. ALL leaks are getting SKU list wrong. Ryzen 3800 cannot be Ryzen 9 CPU. It can only be Ryzen 7 3800 and 3800X, based on branding AMD has got with first Ryzen release(Ryzen 7 1800X). You usually do not change the SKU price/bracket/branding placement.

 

[namethisfile]

Well, you all (AMD assocaites Koyoot and co-associate sssgbryan and newly hired intern, Mavericks here) made your fine points (albeit all hype as of right now) but it still won't happen.

The "it" being AMD CPU's in Macs.

Wanna bet?

I already made this bet along with the bet with Koyoot that if Apple puts AMD CPU's in Macs, then I will give $5 to charity and then I will post a receipt here as proof.

Thank you and thanks for copy and paste hype.

PS--That's called putting $$$ where my mouth is
[doublepost=1549396304][/doublepost]

No. It can't achieve highest Turbo state clock on all cores.

Look at Mr. hype-train here reigning in the newly hired intern.

 

[koyoot]

Well, you all (AMD assocaites Koyoot and co-associate sssgbryan and newly hired intern, Mavericks here) made your fine points (albeit all hype as of right now) but it still won't happen.

The "it" being AMD CPU's in Macs.

Wanna bet?

I already made this bet along with the bet with Koyoot that if Apple puts AMD CPU's in Macs, then I will give $5 to charity and then I will post a receipt here as proof.

Thank you and thanks for copy and paste hype.

PS--That's called putting $$$ where my mouth is
[doublepost=1549396304][/doublepost]

Look at Mr. hype-train here reigning in the newly hired intern.

I do not see anywhere Me betting anything with you. You wanted at the start bet that AMD CPU will not run circles around Intel CPU. When it has been proven to you, that it "might", you switched the topic to the idea, that Apple will not switch to AMD.


Its funny that you call anyone who does not agree with you, AMD associates. Maybe the problem is you, not others who do not agree with you?

I asked you a simple question. What is benefit for Apple to stick with Intel, when AMD has much better hardware, that is also cheaper to buy, and easier to maintain(better efficiency). And mostly: can design WHATEVER Apple wants with their Semi-Custom business.

Now, lets sum up: Apple is dropping Intel. There are two possibilities for Apple suppliers: AMD, or their own, ARM hardware.

Building ARM chips for their computers will be too costly. And you need to have x86_64 hardware. What lasts from that equation?

A good editorial on the matter: https://www.macworld.com/article/3331849/macs/apple-should-drop-intel-for-amd.html

And once again: What will be benefit to stay with Intel, for Apple when AMD has better hardware, and everybody who will use that hardware will have advantage over Apple? Marketing, technological, performance, price advantage.

 

[namethisfile]

I do not see anywhere Me betting anything with you.

I made two bets. One specifically to you about your "Zen2 16-core CPU" "running circles" around 9900K.

And, I made another one that Apple will not put AMD CPU's in Macs to the rest of the world, but, also specifically to you because you're so vehement about it.

You even asked me if I wanted to back out by declaring that the 2950x already runs circles around the 9900K and I replied by showing a GB4 and CB benchmarks of both showing that that wasn't necessarily true.

To then clarify how much "running circles" around the 9900k would equate, I said, 3500 and above in cinebench.

The Apple not putting AMD CPU's in Macs is such an obvious prediction to make that I declared to you that even if you think AMD is this or that--that Apple will never put AMD CPU's in Macs.

Ever!!!

Or, do you have short-term memory or something?

PS--As to the AMD Associates nomenclature, I thought it was a funny thing to make since you're so hyped about it.

 

[koyoot]

I made two bets. One specifically to you about your "Zen2 16-core CPU" "running circles" around 9900K.

And, I made another one that Apple will not put AMD CPU's in Macs to the rest of the world, but, also specifically to you because you're so vehement about it.

You even asked me if I wanted to back out by declaring that the 2950x already runs circles around the 9900K and I replied by showing a GB4 and CB benchmarks of both showing that that wasn't necessarily true.

To then clarify how much "running circles" around the 9900k would equate, I said, 3500 and above in cinebench.

The Apple not putting AMD CPU's in Macs is such an obvious prediction to make that I declared to you that even if you think AMD is this or that--that Apple will never put AMD CPU's in Macs.

Ever!!!

Or, do you have short-term memory or something?

PS--As to the AMD Associates nomenclature, I thought it was a funny thing to make since you're so hyped about it.

Show me where I have written blatantly that I am taking your bet.

And then I can laugh at you, once again, that you are still completely not answering my question.

So once again. What is benefit FOR APPLE to stay with Intel, when AMD has better hardware, and it appears - better roadmap?

I will put the bar higher. Show me how, low-power architecture like ARM, can in any way compete in high performance with x86_64 CPUs, for Apple to put them in their upcoming computers.

Then we can talk about possibility that Apple never will switch to AMD.

 

[namethisfile]

Show me where I have written blatantly that I am taking your bet.

Well, you asked me if I still wanted to bet. And, I said, Yes.

16 core Threadripper is running circles around 9900K, in everything apart from gaming.

And 16 core AM4 CPU will be faster than 16 core Threadripper 2950X. You still want to bet?

You're not obligated to take the bet. But, you should since you're so confident. You have $5 don't you? And, it's to charity. It's for a good cause!

 

[mavericks7913]

No. It can't achieve highest Turbo state clock on all cores. That is the first thing.
Secondly - that "leaked" SKU list in Russian shop was a placeholder based on AdoredTV leak. And we are not sure it is 100% correct, 7 months before the release, based on alpha silicon, and mentioning CES release(which never happened).

One more thing. ALL leaks are getting SKU list wrong. Ryzen 3800 cannot be Ryzen 9 CPU. It can only be Ryzen 7 3800 and 3800X, based on branding AMD has got with first Ryzen release(Ryzen 7 1800X). You usually do not change the SKU price/bracket/branding placement.

First, AMD can. I guess you never used it before.
Second, This is the third time that we got the same price and spec from both places. gen 2 thread ripper leaked with 32 cores and it was correct.
Third, they gonna change the branding name.
One more thing, you will see the truth around June.

 

[namethisfile]

I will put the bar higher. Show me how, low-power architecture like ARM, can in any way compete in high performance with x86_64 CPUs, for Apple to put them in their upcoming computers.

Then we can talk about possibility that Apple never will switch to AMD.

Well, low-power ARM CPU's can be great for laptops. In desktops where low-power is not a priority, a hypothetical ARM CPU has that much headroom to work with.

We don't know if and when Apple will start using their ARM CPU's in desktops and laptops. But, the trend of ARM CPU's becoming competitive with equivalent x86 CPU's have been getting there. So, if you reach out for that crystal ball, it's not a hard pill to take that ARM CPU's will play a bigger role in our future outside of iPads and iPhones.

In the realm of Macs, this can be a desktop ARM CPU. Or, it could be a hybrid Apple ARM CPU + Intel x86 CPU. Who knows? Anything can happen.

The only thing I know for sure that won't happen is...

...you know this already....

....

....

....

....

No AMD CPU Inside Macs!!!!


PS--Apple's T2 chip can be a precursor of these hybrid systems down the road.

PPS--In a world where Intel Xeon W-3175x is $3K, we could see a future, albeit, hypothetical Mac Pro with custom Intel Xeon + Apple ARM CPU that offers 50% more performance, let's say, for even lower price because of the hybrid Apple Arm CPU + custom Intel Xeon CPU thing.

PPPS--Or, we could see a Cascade Lake Xeon Mac Pro with Apple Arm CPU hybrid system and it's the only thing in the world that exist and boom, Apple has a Mac Pro that HP or Dell can only wish to make.

PPPPS--Or, we could see custom Apple ARM chip solely for the purpose of expediting bandwidth of CPU-GPU-RAM crosstalk that enables the modular Mac Pro, truly modular in that it isn't limited to current TB3 bandwidth....

 

[koyoot]

The only thing I know for sure that won't happen is...

...you know this already....

....

....

....

....

No AMD CPU Inside Macs!!!!

How do you know this?

There is lots of technical reasons why Apple would put AMD CPUs in Macs. What are the reasons why they would not put them, apart from your thinking? You never came up with anything logical to back up your claims.

Well, you asked me if I still wanted to bet. And, I said, Yes.



You're not obligated to take the bet. But, you should since you're so confident. You have $5 don't you? And, it's to charity. It's for a good cause!

I do not see there Me saying that I am taking that bet.

 

[AidenShaw]

And once again: What will be benefit to stay with Intel, for Apple when AMD has better hardware, and everybody who will use that hardware will have advantage over Apple? Marketing, technological, performance, price advantage.

Two words:

Trusted Supplier​

Companies value being able to depend on a supplier. AMD may being hitting a home run right now, while Intel has stumbled - but companies want nine innings a game, all season long.

AMD has been in the gutter for so long they are not trusted. A single good product doesn't make AMD trustworthy.

Only the DIY gamers will jump ship so quickly (and the AMD fans who cherry-pick DIY sales from overseas and claim that AMD outsells Intel 2:1). And the 'core queens' who cheerlead for 16/32/64 cores are just as bad - since most of them are probably running games and applications which struggle to scale to 6 or 8 cores. (And yes, again thank you ssgbryan for pointing out one of the problem spaces that scale easily.)

 

[koyoot]

Two words:

Trusted Supplier​

Companies value being able to depend on a supplier. AMD may being hitting a home run right now, while Intel has stumbled - but companies want nine innings a game, all season long.

AMD has been in the gutter for so long they are not trusted. A single good product doesn't make AMD trustworthy.

Only the DIY gamers will jump ship so quickly (and the AMD fans who cherry-pick DIY sales from overseas and claim that AMD outsells Intel 2:1).

And Intel with its manufacturing problems, and 5 times changing, over past 2.5 years roadmap of hardware releases, which affected Apple is Trusted Supplier?

AMD is executing flawlessly over 2 nodes. How is that going for Intel?

The other side of the coin you talked about AMD can also be this. On Zen 2 Products will just not stupid people who value their money, and time, and care about performance they get for their money.

And the 'core queens' who cheerlead for 16/32/64 cores are just as bad - since most of them are probably running games and applications which struggle to scale to 6 or 8 cores. (And yes, again thank you ssgbryan for pointing out one of the problem spaces that scale easily.)

You do understand that AMD CPUs will be faster per core, and per clock, than Skylake derivatives?

 

[mavericks7913]

How do you know this?

There is lots of technical reasons why Apple would put AMD CPUs in Macs. What are the reasons why they would not put them, apart from your thinking? You never came up with anything logical to back up your claims.

I do not see there Me saying that I am taking that bet.

Sadly, there is only one reason why Apple would not put AMD CPU. Thunderbolt 3. Intel+Apple own this technology and AMD is still not able to support TB3. The TB3 controller is not available to AMD but Intel CPU. Totally impossible at this point.

 

[koyoot]

Sadly, there is only one reason why Apple would not put AMD CPU. Thunderbolt 3. Intel+Apple own this technology and AMD is still not able to support TB3. The TB3 controller is not available to AMD but Intel CPU. Totally impossible at this point.

Then it also Rules out completely the possibility for ARM CPUs.

If TB3 is on Apple computer possible, for ARM CPUs, it will be possible for AMD CPUs. And I think I know How Apple can do this: T2, or its future replacements.

 

[namethisfile]

Two words:

Trusted Supplier​

Yep.

That Koyoot also harps on nanometers like 7nm, etc. Node, etc. They're all the processes that Amd has taken the opportunity to milk. So, for some rando-person to also be on the same by-line makes one, at least, squeamish that he's so into AMD's brochure booklet.

And, he's mostly right. 7nm beats whatever nm intel is doing. And, indeed, Intel has stumbled on their move to 10nm.

But, the fact that he is milking it, in adherence to the AMD brochure is tacky to say the least.

He also harps on value, etc. And, more-cores etc, of which the upcoming Zen2 16-core CPU will have over the 9900k. Apparently, it will MSRP for $499. And, on paper it looks good.

But, that is only on paper. More cores for $50 less than 9900k. Sure win, right? Yeah, if you're like a regular person looking to pinch your pennies (and $499 is not necessarily "cheap") and you want 16-cores no matter what. Then, sure, go for it. Knock yourself out seeing 16-cores/32-threads on Windows task manager for a mere $499!

I don't wanna get into the petty things about owning a Ryzen on PC but it's not a sure-dunk or as rosy as Koyoot says it is. Even, though, Zen 2 "promises" this and that, I wanna see it first. And, that is from an individual. So, to say, Apple, a company would willy-nilly a move to AMD is not going to happen.

 

[koyoot]

Yep.

That Koyoot also harps on nanometers like 7nm, etc. Node, etc. They're all the processes that Amd has taken the opportunity to milk. So, for some rando-person to also be on the same by-line makes one, at least, squeamish that he's so into AMD's brochure booklet.

And, he's mostly right. 7nm beats whatever nm intel is doing. And, the Intel has stumbled on their move to 10nm or whatnot.

But, the fact that he is milking it, in adherence to the AMD brochure is tacky to say the least.

He also harps on value, etc. And, more-cores etc, of which the upcoming Zen2 16-core CPU will have over the 9900k. Apparently, it will MSRP for $499. And, on paper it looks good.

But, that is only on paper. More cores, for $50 less than 9900k. Sure win, right? Yeah, if you're like a regular person looking to pinch your pennies (and $499 is not necessarily "cheap") and you want 16-cores no matter what.

I don't wanna get into the petty things about owning a Ryzen on PC but it's not a sure-dunk or as rosy as Koyoot says it is. Even, though, Zen 2 "promises" this and that, I wanna see it first. And, that is from an individual. So, to say, Apple, a company would willy-nilly a move to AMD is not going to happen.

I have only one response to this post:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.


P.S. 8C/16T 65W TDP CPU, which kicked 9900K's bottom, will cost under 200$ . 500$ will cost 16C/32T CPUs .

 

[mavericks7913]

Then it also Rules out completely the possibility for ARM CPUs.

If TB3 is on Apple computer possible, for ARM CPUs, it will be possible for AMD CPUs. And I think I know How Apple can do this: T2, or its future replacements.

Not a same story. At least Apple owns half of TB technology. AMD is out of option already.
[doublepost=1549410330][/doublepost]

WHat? I was referring to the 16-core Zen2 CPU, of which is the CPU we have been referring to in recent post.


Now, you wanna talk about a Zen 2 8-core CPU for under $200 that will kick a 9900k's butt?

Too bad. 3rd gen Ryzen will be available soon and Intel cant develop that fast. The first Ryzen released in 2017 and now, we are looking at 3rd gen with more cores and better IPC than Intel. They just need to make a small chip to apply all CPU while Intel needs to make several CPU one by one. Tell me how much is it to buy AMD 32 cores? Under $2000. What about Intel?

Oh btw, Intel still has a security issue that they need to change the entire CPU design.

 

[namethisfile]

I have only one response to this post:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.


P.S. 8C/16T 65W TDP CPU, which kicked 9900K's bottom, will cost under 200$ . 500$ will cost 16C/32T CPUs .

WHat? I was referring to the 16-core Zen2 CPU, of which is the CPU we have been referring to in recent post.


Now, you wanna talk about a Zen 2 8-core CPU for under $200 that will kick a 9900k's butt?

 

[AidenShaw]

AMD is executing flawlessly over 2 nodes. How is that going for Intel?

Compared to more than two decades for Intel?

That's what "trusted supplier" is based on, not a flash in the pan.

 

[koyoot]

Now, you wanna talk about a Zen 2 8-core CPU for under $200 that will kick a 9900k's butt?

The CPU demoed by AMD is 65W version of 8C/16T single Chiplet CPU. It will cost around, or less than 200$, depending on the decision AMD will make. We have not seen any 6C/12T engineering samples of Zen 2 CPUs, so they can go as low as Ryzen 5 3400 SKUs, which, based on previous history, of Ryzen 5 X400 SKUs are priced exactly at 169$ mark.

In the demo, AMD has shown, at CES, 3.8 GHz All-Core Turbo 8C/16T CPU edged out 4.7 All core Turbo Intel Core i9-9900K CPU, thanks to higher IPC, and thanks to better multithreaded performance. So yes, there is a huge chance that under 200$ CPU, which most likely would be 95W, high clock version of said CPU will kick 9900K's bottom.

Oh btw, Intel still has a security issue that they need to change the entire CPU design.

Which Zen 2 will be completely free of . No security holes, whatsoever .

Compared to more than two decades for Intel?

That's what "trusted supplier" is based on, not a flash in the pan.

Reputation you can ruined in 5 seconds, you know? What it needs is idiot in charge. BK was booted out of Intel for... performance reasons, you know?

 

[AidenShaw]

Reputation you can ruined in 5 seconds, you know?

Like you did with your claim that AMD outsells Intel 2:1 ???

 

[namethisfile]

So yes, there is a huge chance that under 200$ CPU, which most likely would be 95W, high clock version of said CPU will kick 9900K's bottom.

Do you wanna make a bet?

 

[koyoot]

Like you did with your claim that AMD outsells Intel 2:1 ???

And it isn't?

 

[AidenShaw]

And it isn't?

Perhaps your 'AMD rose' tinted glasses missed this fact.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/waiting-for-mac-pro-7-1.1975126/page-432#post-27059776

You don't understand "trusted supplier" at all, do you?

And you really, really don't understand that links to pages that support your argument are really important, and that posts like "And it isn't?" destroy any credibility that you might have built.

Support your arguments, or just log off and go home.

You have lost all credibility.

 

[koyoot]

Again. Why do you fail tounderstand that you post Q1 2018 market share, when AMD was outselling Intel 2:1 from September 2018(I specifically said that AMD was outselling Intel 2:1 for past 4 months)? It means: Q4 2018.

Why do you lack basic logic, and understanding of what has been said, and what is posted?

This is data from ONE European retailer. European Amazon, sites like OC.uk were experiencing similar situations, because of Price hike Intel CPUs experienced EVERYWHERE, apart from United States.

For past 6 months the best selling CPU on Amazon.com is... Ryzen 5 2600. The only place where Intel is getting significant market share in sales is American market, because it has not been affected by price hikes. All of this has been discussed by guys from Motley Fool and Seeking Alpha, and widely analysed.

So. Wasn't AMD outselling Intel 2:1 for past 4 months?

P.S. Yes. AMD is very well trusted supplier. Why? Because it is not affected by manufacturing problems, that gobble your fabs, so that you cannot push enough CPUs to feed the demand, so they end up costing 3 times as much as MSRP.