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
When Apple previewed the iMac Pro at WWDC 2017, they did a good job of providing more than vague specs and quite a bit of information was available on the website later that day. What was vague was what CPU would the iMac Pro use, as Intel did not introduce the Xeon W until nearly 3 months (86 days) later. Speculation was rampant for the months subsequent to the sneak peek.
It is possible that if Apple is going to continue using Xeon W, they will be similarly vague with CPU specifics as Intel may or may not announce the Basin Lake refresh by June 3rd (WWDC Keynote). Intel just refreshed the Xeon scalable CPUs, but I do not think there is any consensus here that Apple is interested in using them.
If Intel has new Xeon W CPUs (and possibly a dual processor capable variant) waiting in the wings, they may hold off announcing it until after WWDC and volume shipments of the CPUs may not begin until Q4 (Oct-Dec), which would not surprise me at all. Apple did the same with the iMac Pro and even added the 14-core option at introduction when only the 8-, 10-, and 18-core models were initially advertised.
I think anyone truly interested in the new Mac Pro knew this would be the case based on previous Apple product launches. Hopefully, the wait will be worth it...
There is no dual processor variant of the W line. If you want dual Xeons, its SP or nothing.
I know there is no dual processor variant of the Xeon W...however, before August 29th of 2017, there was no Xeon W either, so it is always possible that Intel could create a specific dual processor capable CPU for the workstation market, although I have not read any rumors to that effect as of today.
That is what the SP series is today. Intel consolidated their previous separate 2P, 4P, and 8P Xeon lines into one big SP product line. So its W if you want one socket, or SP if you want 2+. All major workstation vendors offer them in 2P workstatation or server format. Some also offer the 4P or 8P setups.
Links? I don't buy that.
Since Apple doesn't make the MP6,1 - why would it matter where the factory is located? If the design is a problem to manufacture (thank you, Jony) - then the location of the factory shouldn't be an issue. It would be delayed whether it was assembled in Texas, Taiwan, Malaysia, or Cupertino.
Here are the links -
https://www.theverge.com/2016/12/21/14037030/apple-made-in-america-failure
https://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/20/app...-in-the-us-slowed-production-report-says.html
https://www.macrumors.com/2019/01/28/2013-mac-pro-postponed-us-screw-shortage/
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/28/technology/iphones-apple-china-made.html
If by “a bit vague” you meant “just plain misleading, shamelessly trying to sell regular mid range gaming gpus as high end workstation gpus”, you are correct.A bit vague about the GPUs as well
Thanks. Apple is screwed.
You may be right...however, it may also be one of the reasons why it has taken so long for Apple to release the new Mac Pro is that they want to make sure they do not repeat the manufacturing mistakes of the past.
I know that most people on this forum have zero faith in Apple's ability to give Professionals what they want after the debacle that was the Late 2013 Mac Pro, but I have to admit to being excited to see what Apple comes up with after more than two years since their "confession". I will not be buying one at the prices I think they will be asking, but then again, I am not their target market.
sadly the new mac pro will be about profit not quality first or innovation first as in the past
I can HOPE they will do well but the prices will be insane and its easy to look at the track record of recent things they have done to innovate since Steve is gone and there is very little to show and quality ? well that again speaks for itself
like many know and realize when Steve died so did the Apple we all loved
I can HOPE they will do well but the prices will be insane and its easy to look at the track record of recent things they have done to innovate since Steve is gone and there is very little to show and quality ? well that again speaks for itself
like many know and realize when Steve died so did the Apple we all loved
...You do realize Apple is and always has been a business, right? And that Jobs especially was all about making money?
Again, what is "insane" prices anyhow? ASUS revealed a $15K workstation and the price is only 'insane' if you don't care about what you get for that money.
I remember demoing a NeXT cube back in the day, slicker than bat guano but manufactured out of unobtainium.
A bit vague about the GPUs as well
I assume Apple still relying to AMD so I assume 7,1 will using latest Radeon VII (7 nm), unless AMD doesn't launch any new GPUs. Just slightly faster than Vega 64 though.
It reminds me with D300/D500/D700 lol.
Also it most likely Apple would use fancy name again in disguise as workstation GPUs.
Recently, refreshed iMac Pro are boasted using new Vega Pro 64X, but I'm not sure it would fast as full fat standard desktop version of Vega 64 card. Not even actual discrete Vega 64X exist. I bet 64X are just clocked slightly faster, or at least clocked near regular desktop version of Vega 64.
Last edited:
Considering that the $10,000.00 USD base price for the NeXT Cube Turbo and the 32-bit NeXT Dimension board was $3,995.00 USD, which would be $25,356.00 in today's dollars, then a $15,000.00 USD Mac Pro might be pretty darn wild..it better be.
[doublepost=1555178054][/doublepost]
Looks like Acer is entering the market to at about $20,000.00 USD - https://www.anandtech.com/show/14208/acer-conceptd
None of these prices are insane if the performance inside is there. I spent my early 20's in the golden age of Silicon Graphics Workstations, so $15-$20K was the norm...not insanity.
If the tea leaves are correct, I am guessing we will see single and dual capable Xeon Scalable systems and not just some Xeon W rehash.
Well Apple has been working with professionals for over a year to develop this thing so it's going to give at least some of the professional market what they want (just as the Late 2013 did).
sadly that PRO to them is prob pop youtubers so it will run Red 8K footage great but that is about and every popular influencer youtuber will have one tout how great it is etc.
kinda like the awesome grey iMac pro hahahahahahhahThen again, anything works for some pro users - minis, iMacs, MBPs , tcMP, even cMPs .
What will work for all users , are upgradable computers using industrie standard parts and connectors .
It's that simple ; Apple wont reinvent their arse again; and if they tried, it wouldn't be a quantum leap in computing anyways .
And this time, even the initial reviews would be negative, thanks to the tcMP .
The tcMP rather quickly went from kinda cool to Why? to devensive buyers to universal fubar .
Another tcMP like concoction would go straight to fubar in reviews and general perception .
I'm not sure if you're saying "trust Apple" or "buy a Z-series" here.
Seriously, you can't be suggesting that customers wanted the MP6,1.Apple is notorious for not reaching out to customers through focus groups and other means. Do you really know that Apple is bringing customers into the design process? And is it a façade, or is Apple actually listening?
I can't imagine that any customer focus group would have suggested the disastrous MP6,1 "trashcan", with its thermal issues and over-hyped GPUs (mid-range gaming GPUs fraudulently passed off as high-end workstation GPUs).
My expectation would be that a realistic poll of Apple's former customers* would ask for something like a Z4/Z6/Z8 range of compatible systems covering a range of single and dual processor configurations, with support for multiple TiB of RAM at the high end.
*The worst thing that Apple could do is to listen only to the people who bought the crippled 6,1 trash can. They need to ask the people who moved to Z and Precision and ThinkStation and others (including Hackintosh). Or, cancel the 7,1 and reset everyone's expectations so that everyone realizes that Apple is a phone and tablet company, and that everyone else should look to other vendors for computers.
Last edited:
Here's the easy formula.
Intel Xeon W = literally E5-1600 v6 (if continue using former E5 model)
Higher clock speed and mainly for workstation.
Intel Xeon SP = literally E5-2600 v6 / E7 4000 / 8000 v6 (if continue using former E5 / E7 model)
Higher core counts, low clock speed, mainly for multi socket server / workstation.
To add insult to injury, it more confusing with gold/platinum/bronze model.
Intel name scheming are inconsistent in the best.
I'm not sure if you're saying "trust Apple" or "buy a Z-series" here.
Apple is notorious for not reaching out to customers through focus groups and other means. Do you really know that Apple is bringing customers into the design process? And is it a façade, or is Apple actually listening? . . .
.
Apparently, in 2018, as part of the iMac pro development, Mac hired a bunch of people with NDAs to advise and test the product while it was in development, so they could see what the workflows were like with different designs. These were supposedly a variety of professionals that used computers in different roles ranging from graphic design, to biomolecular modeling, to large database maintenance, to VR, and so forth. https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/05/apples-2019-imac-pro-will-be-shaped-by-workflows/.
I have no idea if that was a facade or not, but it would make sense Apple would be doing something similar with the Mac Pro--though admittedly it might be just for propaganda purposes rather than actually letting the customers shape the design. The contracts apparently extended for these advisors after the iMac pro was released, so Apple must be using them for *something*.
Except Apple never offered that in any Mac Pro or any Xserve. The systems you use/support are well beyond anything Apple ever offered and would ever offer because you would never pay the "Apple Tax" those systems would add compared to using commodity stuff from the PC OEMs. And your industry peers never would have done it, either, for the same reasons.
The clamor for a commodity design (i.e. - Z-series) is from people would will pay the "Apple Tax", but want to maximize the return by being able to leverage it for a decade (as many have done with their first-generation "cheese-graters") with internal upgrades.