Interesting that the $50,000 Dolby color grading monitors are matte then... Hmmm...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
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)
- Thread starter Mago
- Start date
-
- Tags
- macpro 2016
- Sort by reaction score
You’re of course entitled to your preference, but your notion of a matte screen is at least a decade out of date.
Eizo, HP, Benq, the people who make actual Pro displays, they're not drinking the glossy Kool-aid.
[doublepost=1550738042][/doublepost]
another way to look at that is...
The concept of a "brain box" with a fixed GPU (other than the equivalent of the most basic intel graphics for a remote access) that can't be upgraded independently of the processors and memory, is a completely 100% boneheaded idea for an expensive, highly GUI and display oriented system, in which processing requirements are on a multiyear, even decadal capability lifecycle, whereas GPUs can become obsolete within 12 months. Thinking that "professional" customers won't be able to wrap their heads around the simple concept that a Mac Pro purchase requires 2 components - a brainbox, and a graphics box (and a monitor, keyboard, mouse etc), assumes that the people buying them are dumb enough to need instructions for a spoon.
Built in, non-replacable gpus are why the 2013 failed, not the inability to buy a new one every year with an updated GPU.
I only use Matte but understand when a glossy monitor would be better.
Say you are editing a "scary" movie and you also are scary. You really don't want anyone sneaking up behind you!
Say you are editing a "scary" movie and you also are scary. You really don't want anyone sneaking up behind you!
Wrong, DP 1.4 support in TitanRidge is thru USB-C ALT Mode, so when you plug a DP1.4 cable(usb-c) to a TitanRidge TB3 it actually what does is to fall back to USB-C alt mode for Display Port, allowing full DP1.4 output (w/o tb3 overhead), of course you lose the ability to daisy chain TB3 Peripherals (as its no longer a TB3 once you plug a DP1.4 USB-C Display).
.
Titan ridge TB3's internally still in DP1.2 mode if you plug actual Thunderbolt Monitor to the TB3 Daisy Chain .
The good is you can Plug an 8K Display to an TB3-TR controller, the bad is it isn't really a TB connection but an USB-C DP1.4.
[doublepost=1550746404][/doublepost]
I believe more in DNG than his "sources".
BTW I remember DNG talked about a MBP with bigger display and same footprint with some discrete components as storage and ram, sametime DNG talked about MMP as having cartridge GPU modules with an PCIe x8 cartridge available for generic peripherals other than GPUs, not an stackable mac-mini-pile design
If we go with the stackable modular theory / rumor (which is exactly what I had been going on about in the Space Grey Mac mini thread)...
I would assume SO-DIMMs for the Brain module, especially if it is supposed to be slightly larger than a Mac mini, but maybe full-size DIMM slots...?
I can see why the soldered CPU, so they can sell you newer Brain modules down the road; but socketed would be what the masses really want...
I can also see the Brain having the soldered Apple T2 / SSD boot drive combo within...
Assuming Xeon CPU, maybe a discrete GPU (one of the numerous low power / low end basic Navi units that have shown up), this may be all some need, maybe add a Storage module down the line...
But I would love to see AMD CPUs instead; maybe two Brain modules, one for Ryzen (up to 16C/32T) & one for Threadripper (up to 64C/128T); either would still need a discrete GPU integrated into the motherboard (again with the low end Navi)...
As for the Storage module, a few different enclosures; quad (or octo) M.2 NVMe SSD, quad 2.5" SSD...?
Maybe a multiple 3.5" HDD module, might be too bulky for the overall optics...
It may be that we have to pay for (and wait on) special Apple GPU modules in the future...? Or will the GPU modules have a PCIe slot within (but limited card selection due to size constraints), or maybe a MXM slot (another expensive hard to source option)...
What GPU modules (assuming total proprietary, no internal PCIe or partial proprietary with MXM within) might we see at launch...? Radeon VII...? Mid-range Navi offerings...? High-end Navi down the line...?
This I/O module...? If there is a separate I/O module, what does it contain...? Might it have audio & video I/O...? And what form of minimal I/O does that leave on the Brain module...?
If it really is a set of stackable modules, it may be pretty cool...
But will the inherent possible proprietariness of it all kill it from the start...?
Maybe we will also see some major improvements / performance gains on the Apple Pro software, which might reel some folks back in to the overpriced Mac Pro hardware market...?
And think about the power distribution... Each module has an appropriate PSU, but only the Brain module has the actual power input... So it is (is it...?) passing 120v upstream, a hyper expensive Apple power strip...?!? ;^p
I would assume SO-DIMMs for the Brain module, especially if it is supposed to be slightly larger than a Mac mini, but maybe full-size DIMM slots...?
I can see why the soldered CPU, so they can sell you newer Brain modules down the road; but socketed would be what the masses really want...
I can also see the Brain having the soldered Apple T2 / SSD boot drive combo within...
Assuming Xeon CPU, maybe a discrete GPU (one of the numerous low power / low end basic Navi units that have shown up), this may be all some need, maybe add a Storage module down the line...
But I would love to see AMD CPUs instead; maybe two Brain modules, one for Ryzen (up to 16C/32T) & one for Threadripper (up to 64C/128T); either would still need a discrete GPU integrated into the motherboard (again with the low end Navi)...
As for the Storage module, a few different enclosures; quad (or octo) M.2 NVMe SSD, quad 2.5" SSD...?
Maybe a multiple 3.5" HDD module, might be too bulky for the overall optics...
It may be that we have to pay for (and wait on) special Apple GPU modules in the future...? Or will the GPU modules have a PCIe slot within (but limited card selection due to size constraints), or maybe a MXM slot (another expensive hard to source option)...
What GPU modules (assuming total proprietary, no internal PCIe or partial proprietary with MXM within) might we see at launch...? Radeon VII...? Mid-range Navi offerings...? High-end Navi down the line...?
This I/O module...? If there is a separate I/O module, what does it contain...? Might it have audio & video I/O...? And what form of minimal I/O does that leave on the Brain module...?
If it really is a set of stackable modules, it may be pretty cool...
But will the inherent possible proprietariness of it all kill it from the start...?
Maybe we will also see some major improvements / performance gains on the Apple Pro software, which might reel some folks back in to the overpriced Mac Pro hardware market...?
And think about the power distribution... Each module has an appropriate PSU, but only the Brain module has the actual power input... So it is (is it...?) passing 120v upstream, a hyper expensive Apple power strip...?!? ;^p
When I look at matte screens you can easily see the pixelation and small dots everywhere. I guess my eyes are better than most.
That's the resolution, not the screen coating. If you're talking about the "noise" effect of the diffusion coating, that's different from pixellation. And yeah, it bothers me too, even on "semi-matte" screens like Dell's PQ line.
SO-DIMMs for ECC ram?
also soldered workstations cpu's? and storage? the imac pro does not have that.
Wasn't there a German workplace safety guideline that explicitly states that display coatings should have anti-reflective treatment.
Also, on the higher end professional screens, the coating material used seem to behave differently than your consumer matte ones. On the Eizo ColorEdges that we use, they have thickish coatings but upon close inspection the pixels beneath do not disperse as much. If you ask a colorist, he would rather losing some sharpness in the image, than seeing his tee shirt reflected right onto the glass.
Also, on the higher end professional screens, the coating material used seem to behave differently than your consumer matte ones. On the Eizo ColorEdges that we use, they have thickish coatings but upon close inspection the pixels beneath do not disperse as much. If you ask a colorist, he would rather losing some sharpness in the image, than seeing his tee shirt reflected right onto the glass.
Looking at SO-DIMMs if there is a space constraint, but full-size DIMM slots would be best for wider availability of fast RAM...
The whole post about a stackable modular Mac Pro is going from the video posted a page back or so, in which they claim to have inside info which outlines a soldered CPU...
And the last few Mac products have gone to the soldered boot storage / T2 combo; the iMac Pro is not soldered but is proprietary, I believe...?
According to the leaker the brain module has 8 “User serviceable” DIMM (full size I assume) slots for 512 GB of memory. The brain module is also claimed to have a similar SSD config to the iMac Pro with two proprietary modules connected to the T Chip.
The CPU in question is the infamous Xeon W 3175X, a perfect match with the “thermal corner” if you ask me :/
Might just be a underclocked ”B” variant again at the end of the day.
Basic graphic / management processor option could be included in the T3 ? Chip without mandating extra pice lanes.
As for the soldered CPU, look what they have done with the Mac mini. Custom BGA parts.
Given the concurrent talks of thunderbolt 4 and the fact W3175 X has PCIe 3 only, would the IO module contain thunderbolt 3 at launch and to be upgraded to thunderbolt 4 later down the line? And how is the TB video signal to be routed with “4 GPUs Scalability”?
And there is still the ultimate question upon this mysterious high bandwidth, stackable interconnect, which we know is not PCIe. If it turns out to be a CAPI- like fabric solution or even a variant of Hypertransport then the module BOM is going to soar.
Plenty questions unanswered, but this looks to be a typical overengineeried apple solution that probably provide little real world benefit for all the efforts. Although I can see some problems of the 6,1 ‘s design philosophy being addressed.
The physical flash storage is not soldered, the T2 that has the controller logic for the SSDs is directly attached to the motherboard.
Only one CPU choice is not likely or an 3K cpu as starting point. AMD will crush that with more pci-e lanes.
I can see an T3 chip that is an IPMI with out the remote network as seen on servers that has basic video.
But still with needs at least 1 m.2 slot. Maybe TB4 is really pci-e 3.0 X8 per bus.
Workstations really do not need TB video signal even more so with real video card in a slot.
also 8 DIMMS is odd for apple with an 6 channel cpu.
48 CPU + DMI pci-e is not really a lot if say.
dual 10G X4
TX x4 or more (do not stack it off of DMI)
16 4 TB3 buses
16 Video / pci-e slot 1
8 pci-e slot 2
or maybe
16 4 TB3 buses
16 Video / pci-e slot 1
16 Video 2 / pci-e slot 2
TX on DMI
With AMD EYPC 128 with 1 or 2 cpus
64 CPU to CPU link or just open with 1 cpu (may work in stacking system)
and from there.
TX chip as chipset.
If its the resolution then I guess 4K still isn't enough. All I see are tiny pixels. I have an older HP 1080p glossy coat and it still looks amazing.
The leaker specifically states that “the model they are working on is a dual GPU design”, and a Quad GFX design exists. So instead of resorting to having 8x lanes for each GFX they will have a EPYC 2 brain module as well?
As for thunderbolt video signal, I am pretty sure their flagship 6K 3K Display will use thunderbolt and thunderbolt only.
The number of DIMM slots seems odd, but 512GB maximum memory support for the CPU is already odd to begin with. It’s pretty much either not having max capacity (6 x 64) or not gettting concurrent 6 channel bandwidth (8 x 64) and such trade off should be easier to make with a 8 slot system than 6.
Regarding the IPMI, I think T chip should offer proper 3D support as well with the performance we are seeing from the A12 graphics.
The whisper about TB4 is far more interesting among all these:
According to the podcast, the anonymous leaker was particularly reluctant about Thunderbolt 4’s PCIe specification and, while “acknowledging the need of PCIe 4,” “claimed the specification has not be finalized.” He? also said to have received a prototype TB4 board from intel, which, if equipped with intel’s first PCIe 4 platform (Copperlake), is not robust enough just yet. The quoted “60GBPs” transfer speed they have achieved either match that of PCIe 4 x4.
Given the lengthy validation process of a interface such as TB, (we saw TB3 launched 2.5 years after PCIe 3) the design specification should been finished long before the launch of PCIe 4.
All of which point to the possibility of a new PCIe 3 thunderbolt protocol, but with limited number of pins on USBC (which “is still being used”), it’s hard to imaging how they increased the transfer speed using x4 PCIe link.
Last edited:
Your statement would be correct with PCIe 3; If they are willing to adopt Whitley (Copper lake) early then it is possible to get PLX switches working to convert PCIe 4 x8 to PCIe 3 x16.
Vega 20 and Navi will support PCIe 4 nevertheless.
Dunno. I'm of the opinion that Apple considers the nMP "modular" to be similar to the MacPro tower.. Which if you think about it it was modular also. One or two trays..One or two DVD drives..Etc.
Mark Gurman, now speculates Apple to Sneak-peek the mMP at the WWDC...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...target-combining-iphone-ipad-mac-apps-by-2021
I believe Gurman enters here on a daily basis nad hate all us, maybe he has all our avatar in a wall aiming darts at them ...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...target-combining-iphone-ipad-mac-apps-by-2021
I believe Gurman enters here on a daily basis nad hate all us, maybe he has all our avatar in a wall aiming darts at them ...
I certainly hope so! One of the big criticisms of the 2013 MP was the rats nest of cables you had to assemble for a usable pro work space.
I hope it's NOT a beefed-up mac mini, where you pile on a bunch of separate "modules" and tie them together with data cables!
You don't need a secret source to come out with a "Apple might show hardware it's said is coming in 2019 halfway through 2019 at the same place it showed the last one off at"-type article.
forget that modular, BTW I doubt the stackable mMP concept .
I feel DNG "leaks" more feasible, some kinda tcHybrid loaded with proprietary-PCIE GPUs (discrete easy to upgrade, or upgradeable at an authorized center). do not expect any possibility to load it with DVDs SpinnerHDD etc all this is pre-historic stuff now, while some support for std PCIe peripherals may comeback, unlikely youll be able again to install an STD GPU into the mMP.
I don't expect any spinning HD's or DVD drive. I merely said the old tower came with one or two of them. A type of modular component.
This does seem like an "Apple-ish" version of modularity... A lot of flexibility, but Apple maintains control.
One issue with the idea of passing 120V power between modules is the possibility of building a configuration that won't run from a standard outlet. The base unit is going to need to support at least 500 watts for CPU and RAM, especially if the W3175X rumor is right (and it seems like a very likely CPU). High-end GPU modules could easily draw over 300 watts apiece (the GPU itself can draw around 300, plus power supply overhead and anything else bundled in there). I/O and storage modules are lower draws, but they aren't negligible - a unit with a couple of 10GB Ethernet ports, multiple SSD slots, etc. could use 100-200 watts, and anything with PCIe expansion needs to provide 75 watts per slot, even assuming the slots don't support GPUs, which live in graphics modules.
One CPU/RAM module (500), one high-end GPU module (350), and one dual-PCI I/O module (350) is already a 1200 watt potential draw. That's barely going to fit on a 15 amp 110V circuit (probably not complying with best practices about spare capacity), and it'll severely restrict what can share a 20 amp circuit with it - a couple of monitors or a laser printer could trip the breaker. Add a second GPU module, and even a 20 amp breaker is awfully close! A dual-CPU configuration with the RAM slots full probably won't fit on a standard 110V 20 amp circuit unless it uses a single lower-power GPU and is relatively light on storage and PCIe.
If modules had separate power input, people might plug too many into one breaker, but at least Apple isn't encouraging it...
One issue with the idea of passing 120V power between modules is the possibility of building a configuration that won't run from a standard outlet. The base unit is going to need to support at least 500 watts for CPU and RAM, especially if the W3175X rumor is right (and it seems like a very likely CPU). High-end GPU modules could easily draw over 300 watts apiece (the GPU itself can draw around 300, plus power supply overhead and anything else bundled in there). I/O and storage modules are lower draws, but they aren't negligible - a unit with a couple of 10GB Ethernet ports, multiple SSD slots, etc. could use 100-200 watts, and anything with PCIe expansion needs to provide 75 watts per slot, even assuming the slots don't support GPUs, which live in graphics modules.
One CPU/RAM module (500), one high-end GPU module (350), and one dual-PCI I/O module (350) is already a 1200 watt potential draw. That's barely going to fit on a 15 amp 110V circuit (probably not complying with best practices about spare capacity), and it'll severely restrict what can share a 20 amp circuit with it - a couple of monitors or a laser printer could trip the breaker. Add a second GPU module, and even a 20 amp breaker is awfully close! A dual-CPU configuration with the RAM slots full probably won't fit on a standard 110V 20 amp circuit unless it uses a single lower-power GPU and is relatively light on storage and PCIe.
If modules had separate power input, people might plug too many into one breaker, but at least Apple isn't encouraging it...