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
I really don’t think you can split a typical workload that clear between single threaded and multi threaded. Take 3D content creation: rendering is highly optimized for multi threaded, but a ton of the work prior with modeling, texturing, maybe animation and rigging could very well be bottleneck with single thread performance. A Mac Pro would be too expensive as a mere render box. Or take photo editing: It is mostly with exporting a ton of raw files you might see a benefit of high multi threaded workflow. A lot of retouching tools are not optimized for multi core. Don’t know about video editing, but again: you are doing other stuff than just rendering the final video out. Tons of work prior to that.
^ Exactly, single thread performance is very important for these tasks. And rendering - aren't you better off sending that to another machine/farm anyway? I'd not like to have my expensive workstation blocked or slowed down by render tasks.
Plus with Apple's fixation on small and silent it may well cook itself if regularly used for rendering.
Plus with Apple's fixation on small and silent it may well cook itself if regularly used for rendering.
The W-3275 28 core is claimed to have a Turbo Boost speed of 4.6 GHz. No word on the Turbo Boost speeds for the lower-core models, but one imagines they would at least be around that. Compare this to the W-3175 28 core, which maxes out at 3.8 GHz.
For comparison, the W-2000 series in the iMac Pro have Turbo Boost speeds from 4.2 GHz to 4.5 GHz. Their successors - Basin Falls - look to be around the same speed based on the comparable i9 models.
So I think the 3000 series would give the Mac Pro sufficient single-core performance while offering exceptional multi-core.
For comparison, the W-2000 series in the iMac Pro have Turbo Boost speeds from 4.2 GHz to 4.5 GHz. Their successors - Basin Falls - look to be around the same speed based on the comparable i9 models.
So I think the 3000 series would give the Mac Pro sufficient single-core performance while offering exceptional multi-core.
Yeah, I agree. I was just worried that Apple would be stupid enough to use the server oriented Xeon SP versions which seem to have relatively low turbo boost. But I would assume that the W-3000 series will be solid.
Damn, now I want one!
3D graphics defiantly need a lot of RAM, I edit video professionally for broadcast TV, we are all Mac here save for our Avid Media Servers and backend things I have no idea on (I.T. and techs look after that). We are one of the biggest production companies in the world. The colourists probably need up to 64Gb of RAM when they are working in High definition video (I work offline edit)
At home I produce music, have 32 Gb RAM and it doesn't really break a sweat. Ableton Live Hackintosh 6800K, I'd say most people don't need much more than the latest iMac 5k or Mac mini, but I've never really liked the form factor. I has a 2010 Mac Pro for years before going hackinstosh
[doublepost=1559249811][/doublepost]
I agree most people would be best off with the latest iMac 5K with the 9900 processor. Video editor don't really need multiple internal drives IMO, well not in the old sense. I'd prefer say a 1tb NVME drive for OS and apps and then a RAIDED NVME PCIE card with 4 blades running at full tilt for 4K video files and then some sort of 10Gbe or Thunderbolt 3 storage solution for backup and storage (that's IMO of course on what I'd prefer).
Audio guys are better off with the same internal NVME and just a Thunderbolt or 10GBe storage solution, unless you are dealing with a lot of Samples and even then the bandwidth on audio is very small, it's not really needed
Threadripper is probably the way forward for Mac Pro and Ryzen for iMac and Mac mini
For me possibly either way, I'm not sure. Hackintosh is a lot of time wasted, also when you update you have to be careful. I guess it depends if Apple come up with something in the ballpark of exactly what I want and the price I want it at. I can factor in my time wasting building a hackintosh and tweaking it.
The thing is you can build something with faster memory, better graphics cards, better cooling, better features for less money, but like I said you have to factor in does the thing "just work". I also use windows mainly for gaming, so dual booting makes sense for me.
I've also played with the idea of getting a cheaper Mac, say a Mac mini and then a cheaper gaming machine, rather than combining the two
[doublepost=1559254910][/doublepost]
PCIe 5 probably won't come out for at least a year or two, PCIe 4 is going to have a very short life span that's for sure. They've released the specs for it yesterday but it won't actually make it to consumers for a while, same with USB 4 from what I've read
The thing is you can build something with faster memory, better graphics cards, better cooling, better features for less money, but like I said you have to factor in does the thing "just work". I also use windows mainly for gaming, so dual booting makes sense for me.
I've also played with the idea of getting a cheaper Mac, say a Mac mini and then a cheaper gaming machine, rather than combining the two
[doublepost=1559254910][/doublepost]
PCIe 5 probably won't come out for at least a year or two, PCIe 4 is going to have a very short life span that's for sure. They've released the specs for it yesterday but it won't actually make it to consumers for a while, same with USB 4 from what I've read
I had a hackintosh running MacOS Sierra on an i7-3770k, GTX 970 and had Windows 10 for gaming. It was cool for a while, until, I also ran into issues when updating MacOS. And, then I completely turned my PC into just for gaming when I decided to buy a used mid-2010 Mac Pro in 2015-2016....
That is why I made a bold prediction that Apple will get its hands on it first before industry. Why? Because they're so freaking rich that they can afford to? They also need to be the new king of the hill and PCIE5 will surely garner that spotlight. They also need fast bandwidths for modular systems, in which PCIE5 will provide (more so than PCIE4)... And, even though Intel timetable for adopting PCIE5 is not in line (meaning, not late this year) with the upcoming Mac Pro... it doesn't mean Apple can't create a chipset and logicboards with PCIE5... So, it's totally possible that a new Mac Pro is PCIE5-ready when it is released later this year or early next year.
PCIE5 would allow 4x RTX Titans for example to not be bandwidth starved...
Apple could implement T3 chip, which has PCIE5 mode in it...
It's totally possible...
More possible than Apple putting TR3 or Ryzen3 in Macs, IMO!
But Intel doesn't even have CPUs that can utilise PCIe 4 let alone PCI e5 but I guess anything is possible.
Gigabyte unveils new X299G motherboards for upcoming new Core X series around August or September but will be fully capable to support the enhanced Intel HEDT CPUs.
https://wccftech.com/aorus-next-gen-x299g-motherboard-intel-core-x-cpu-x499-aorus-xtreme/
Note that all the motherboards only have PCIe 3
If Apple release something similar for the Mac Pro, they are going to be handicapped out the gate in regards to PCIe speeds, this is a really important factor, NVME speeds will be slower than some competitors and GFX card throughput will be slow compared to AMD
Not necessarily. PCIE5 can be implented via chipsets and the logicboard circuitry per PCIE5 spec. Even, if the upcoming Cascade Lake Xeons aren't marketed as supporting PCIE5 by Intel... a hypothetical-PCIE5-ready-MacPro can still leverage it because a CPU is just a dummy and will not not work in PCIE5 speed just because Intel didn't say it couldn't.... IMO...
These thoughts about PCIe5 are really very very funny, given the fact that the last cMP, with slots, in 2012 (died in 2013) was still offering SATA2 and Usb 2.0. And those were the good days of MacPro.
The 2013 one, was offering USB 3.0 and next PCIe but the trade-off was no slots, no SATA etc.
The last decade's technology progress, and their huge income from iDevices, made Apple to not make better their traditional workstations and the other Macs (like the other PC companies did), but they decided to take the opportunity and move to an even more proprietary design of systems, preferably as sealed as possible, with soldered components. And slim.
Apple may have lots of money but they are not available for the MP team... and they do not think as we (the Mac users) wish, they do think different(ly), it is proved.
The 2013 one, was offering USB 3.0 and next PCIe but the trade-off was no slots, no SATA etc.
The last decade's technology progress, and their huge income from iDevices, made Apple to not make better their traditional workstations and the other Macs (like the other PC companies did), but they decided to take the opportunity and move to an even more proprietary design of systems, preferably as sealed as possible, with soldered components. And slim.
Apple may have lots of money but they are not available for the MP team... and they do not think as we (the Mac users) wish, they do think different(ly), it is proved.
yeah I agree. Im a sound designer in the film industry. My ancestral macpro is probably fine except a few things. Any kind of high end soft synth will crank up the cpu but you can work around this issue. We need new ports. Hooking up via firewire 800 is depressing. usb 2.0 is depressing. But we need pci-e slots for hdx cards. All the video guys I work with are doing crazy things with imac pros and ****. Its kinda funny watching them render stuff with a deadline on a machine everyone knows is throttling so it looks cool.
[doublepost=1559261765][/doublepost]
Pro xeon has double the pci lanes of the regular stuff afaik. Yeah pcie 4 and 5 are gonna be faster but guess what? If apple designs the thing right then its updated every 18 months like every other computer company does. We can all sit on the sidelines and wait for that one last bit of tech but there will just be something else on the horizon.
Let's hope Apple has talked and listened to a lot of pros...
What professionals really want
from the new Mac Pro
https://trib.al/b6sqoFl
What professionals really want
from the new Mac Pro
https://trib.al/b6sqoFl
In any case, I do really want the next Mac Pro to be released and have the better technologies available, and as much expandability and upgradeability is possible but It seems that they have difficulties to present a new one or even talk again about it. They may also have stopped any development, despite what they have said two years ago.
So be ready for good news (hopefully) or disappointing ones.
iMacs (pro or not) will be for sure offered to soothe our pain.
[doublepost=1559263542][/doublepost]
At least there is some pressure about it.
So be ready for good news (hopefully) or disappointing ones.
iMacs (pro or not) will be for sure offered to soothe our pain.
[doublepost=1559263542][/doublepost]
Nice. The most important word is "listened".
At least there is some pressure about it.
This has little to nothing to do with the Mac Pro. These might make sense for TVs which could use a bump in processor "horsepower" later but even there the increased costs is probably a killer. [ Intel just killed off the old format they put this in. This is yet another were doesnn't seem to be an indication they have broad consenous as to "who" the market really is. ]
There are some embedded contexts where these might make sense but there is no indication that Apple is using "modular" in this fashion.
Right, but overall you're still constrained by the PCIe4/3 bandwidth of the CPU.
It's like putting a gigabit switch on a 100 megabit internet connection. It doesn't suddenly give you gigabit ethernet, even if in theory you have the bandwidth. Or like putting a PCIe 3 card in a PCIe 2 Mac Pro. It'll work, but the PCIe 3 lanes are still running at a max of the PCIe 2 speeds.
You could probably squeeze out... maybe 24 lanes of working full speed PCIe 5.0? But that's only enough for one GPU, maybe two if you start cutting corners. And there are no PCIe 5.0 GPUs, so what's the point?
Or if you start working on them and things look better as art. i took the liberty of using your artwork to run up a few T-shirts for Mondays big event. I should have had just 1 demo made. The artwork looked 1000 times better.
Anyone wanna buy 20,000 printed, boxed t-shirts?
The point of doing something like this would be to cut down development cost down the road as it would not require a redesign in a year or two...Apple should at least go for PCIe 4 or we will be stuck with PCIe 3 the next 3-8 years
I don’t think that’s likely at all. It used to be getting dual processors was a much more cost-effective way of getting more votes, but Intel has consciously made the multiple socket CPUs more specialized and expensive. Apple wasn’t and isn’t going to make a super-high-end tower so that leaves -W Xeons pretty much by default.Yeah, I agree. I was just worried that Apple would be stupid enough to use the server oriented Xeon SP versions which seem to have relatively low turbo boost. But I would assume that the W-3000 series will be solid.
Damn, now I want one!
Agreed. The days of multi-socket CPUs in a Mac are long gone. Any app that can benefit from more than 28 cores can easily offload the work over a network to dedicated render boxes