Until the system throttles....At last, Space Invaders will run fast enough!
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
A very expensive, custom lock.
$999 stand so perhaps a $199 lock. LOL. The Kensignton lock works by turning a metal tab in a different direction after inseted into a hole. This thing has holes. Kind of need a "grappling hook" like thing that doesn't expand until in the hole. Would critically depend upon how much clearance there is from the holes to the internal board/panel inside whether can get something that will hold if mildly stressed. The Vesa mount point appears to slip into four of the vent holes of the display. They don't lock but are probably a snug fit. Just need something that won't let go.
[ I think the Mac Pro 2013 had a lock that looped through some of the air vents at the bottom. ] On the less expensive front.....
I'm not sure the scale is right but there may be a way to use a TSA luggage lock to loop through two adjacent holes in the back. Something along the lines of this
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01M2AHFZ6/
or one of the many variations on this. The way that Apple drills the holes is that 'backside" holes are offset from the "frontside" holes so that there is overlap of a backside hole into two frontside ones. If can loop something to through and back then. Won't stop someone who has tools but the other security cables aren't stopped by bigger tools.
Another option is the same path the Apple uses to attach the panel.... glue/bonding. Attach an anchor to the back. ;-)
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
I suspect the magnetic mount is specifically for security concerns: When your shift is over, disconnect the cables, pull the display off the magnetic mount, and check it into your company's equipment cage.
Seems a not so good chance.
1. While listed in the ark.intel.com nobody seems to be shipping new systems with these new W-32xx CPUs in volume. 'big' 7nm GPUs chips... similar issue "who has seen a MI60 in general public" and AMD is staggering their roll out on 7nm CPUs until later.
2. All the demos at WWDC were on 10.15 ( which isn't going to ship until late September. earliest Apple will probably shove it out the door before end of that quarter to book the upgrade fee as 'revenue' and goose the quarterly result. 15.1 , 15.2 trailing behind in October to fix the stuff they already knew was broken when they pushed it out the door on financial bonus reasons. ) .
3. Apple says "Fall". Well Fall doesn't even start until late September. Once into late why would it not be targeted at the OS that is shipping in the Fall. Apple would put in the work to ship on 10.14 only to turn around a couple weeks later and have to image new systems with 10.15. Versus just imaging all the new machines made in September with 10.15 and shipping them in October. (and don't have to switch over).
Besides. There is very good chance that this new system will run Fusion/Parallels/etc just fine and a older snapshot VM with Mojave will run just fine. Is Aperture any better than Adobe Photoshop/lightroom from that era on more cores? Major infrastructure work stopped on Aperture back in 2012 ( before the MP 2013 was introduced and most of this whole thread is a rant on how ancient it was/is ). I'm sure someone will get MacPaint up and running on this new Mac Pro but it won't particularly run any better than on an entry Mac Mini. Aperture probably pretty close to being in the same bucket.
Last edited:
I am a freelance motion graphic designer working remotely for clients from a studio shed in my garden. My studio is alarmed and secure, but still someone could smash through a window to get in, so I like the idea of bolting expensive computer equipment to the floor, so even if they do get it, it would be a pain to get anything out. This is what I did with my 2013 Mac Pro.
But yeah I hear what you are saying, the Kensington locks are more for computer labs, which isn't the intended market for a Pro Display XDR. Just trying to work out how I can make it hard to steal!
I feel like no one would realize how expensive the monitor is.
When I moved into my current place three years ago the neighbors decided my 15-year-old and well-nigh useless and worthless PowerMac G4’s were “fly ****.” Especially when it comes to pro gear people don’t have any idea what stuff costs.
ok so everybody thinks it’s too expensive right ?
that begs the question i asked before and got no answer.
how much did you think it was gonna cost ?
that begs the question i asked before and got no answer.
how much did you think it was gonna cost ?
When Apple release trash can back then six years ago, this case already included wheels lol. It also featuring lever to locking wheel shaft to prevent unwanted rolling.
Talking about 7,1 wheels..I wonder how Apple would costs it
Talking about 7,1 wheels..I wonder how Apple would costs it
$4999 with 8 cores, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD and a Vega GPU. Essentially same price as the iMac Pro (you trade the built-in monitor for expansion/configuration freedom).
I am in agreement with @CWallace on the configuration and price. $4999 for 8-cores, 32GB DDR4-ECC, 1TB SSD and a Vega 56 8GB GPU. The 256GB base SSD is just an insult. Minimum should have been 512GB.
Everything at least double what the base 2013 Mac Pro was at launch, 4c–>8c, 16GB->32GB, 256GB->512GB and 2x2GB GPU to 1x8GB GPU was my metric. Too bad Apple didn't think so.
Some customers don't need the higher end GPU or the storage. Servers, render farms, audio only customers, etc...
I don't know what the balance there should be. Maybe those could have been downgrade options? Maybe if the base price was lower with those options?
I think they should have been delete options, but just you don’t save that much. Maybe deduct $200 to go to the RX580 and $300 to go down the 256GB SSD, so the base line system would be $5499.
Maybe that should only be allowed with the rackmount model or something. If I actually needed a Mac Pro for my audio work. I would want to place it in a rack to get it out of the way and off the floor away from the dust bunnies.
I was hoping for a $4K base price (well, actually I was hoping for a $2K base price, but you know), my rationale being: it's an iMac Pro minus the display.
But that was always way too optimistic, Apple is a different company now.
But that was always way too optimistic, Apple is a different company now.
That's funny..
Personally I find $5999 typical. I kind of figured it was going to be more expensive considering everything.
But man. $2K ? LOL
Also most people here don't realize the $999 Stand is an upgrade it's not the regular stand. Don't know why Apple didn't make that clear.
But rest knowing the new display comes with a stand. Just not the one designed at NASA.
I prefer MacOSX and the 7,1 design gives me hardware options to tackle almost any assignment. If they had dialed it back to preserve a base model entry point closer to $3,999, we likely wouldn't have the beefy PSU, PCIe slots, DIMM slots, etc needed for a shredder.
There's no evidence or documentation stating that there's a free simple stand that comes with the display. The only stand mentioned on Apple's website is the $999 pro stand & the vesa mount.
Last edited:
NO it doesn't. Stop spreading this lie.
[doublepost=1560555920][/doublepost]
This isn't a valid argument over base model specs. If this is the framework for base configuration, why not sell an empty enclosure with everything a la carte? Many future Mac Pro customers will never fill the additional PCI slots with new cards, so why should they have to pay for this feature? What about the users who need maximum RAM, but not 8 cores? Or users who need the best GPU, but won't use more than 16gig of RAM? Single core clock speed or as many cores possible? There's always a use-case that doesn't benefit from every feature of the base configuration. This is true for all computers, not just pro machines.
Considering how well Apple usually does with messaging and such, the display is kind of bizarre. Why they even mentioned the price of the fancy stand versus saying "it's $6K for the monitor or $5.2K for the VESA mount one" as a strategy was odd. The display wasn't even really built for the developers in the room, so it was odd to dwell on the prices for them anyhow.
I too expected cheaper, but I wasn't expecting Apple to build a full-size tower and thus pivot towards the high-end workstation market so heavily. They haven't made an eight-slot computer since, what, the 9500 (6) in 95 and the IIfx a half-decade before that?
$2K? You weren’t expecting a Xeon, were you...? SMH
The base price of the iMac a Pro is $4,999, trading the monitor for the case at the same price, seems like a fair trade.
Note that all of the likely CPU choices seem to have a turbo speed of around 4.5 GHz.
So, they're all virtually the same speed on single core performance.
So the question is how many cores to buy for your workflow, not trading number of cores vs. single-threaded performance. It's about not wasting money on extra cores that will never benefit your workflow.
It's also possible that the single thread performance of the 28 core could crush the single thread performance of the 8 core.
The reason - the single thread on the 8 core has 16.5 MiB of L3 cache. The single thread on the 28 core has 38.5 MiB of L3 cache.
Last edited:
Apple has never built for the disparities you are illustrating.
I only used one PCI slot in my Quicksilver G4 and never added an internal HDD, but I still had to pay for those extra slots and bays. So has any use who ever bought a Dell or an HP or an IBM desktop or tower.
Maximum DRAM (1.5 TB), but not more than 8-cores makes zero sense...regardless, you have the option because Apple put 12 DIMM slots in the new Mac Pro. The only time someone wants the best GPU and only 16GB of DRAM is a gamer. The Mac Pro is not a gaming machine.
Since Steve Jobs returned to Apple, they have only ever sold one tower, from the B&W G3, to various G4’s and the cheese-grater G5 to the Mac Pro 2006-2012.
The choices Apple made with the 2019 aren’t knee jerk, they had 2-1/2 years to think about how much expandability to give the Mac Pro.
My observation is that the contingent of users who are saying that they don’t need all those slots or DIMM sockets, et al are simply trying to find a way to make Apple acquiesce to the endless pit of “choices” that PC OEMs fell into a long time ago. Apple refuses to play that no-win game and I think it infuriates users used to having OEMs kiss their ass to get them to buy THEIR PC over another’s OEM’s.
Yes, I think you missed the point of my post. Your first 2 sentences are essentially my exact argument. I was just pointing out the endless nature of arguments that have been made rationalizing the lower than expected specs of some of the hardware in the base config.
I believe there is much more money to be made on iPhone cases and data seems to back that up.
Just buy the VESA mount and use your own monitor arm, like most would do.