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

[Zdigital2015]

If one is wedded to CUDA for ML, why would the Mac Pro 7,1 be on your radar even if it did support nVidia? You can get less powerful, but significantly cheaper base hardware with Windows and Linux and you can also scale far beyond what a Mac Pro can do on those platforms if you have the cash.




Honestly, Apple should have shown the 7,1 off at the National Association of Broadcasters keynote, not WWDC. The crowd would have been weeping in the aisles at "only" having to pay $6000 (with stand) for a display that can actually hold it's color for more than 30 seconds and they would only want a fully-tricked out Mac Pro so the entry price and configuration would not even register with them.

I was making the same argument to @Mago about people's desire for Apple to support NVIDIA GPUs on the 2019 Mac Pro...what is the point? If you are wedded to CUDA for your everyday work, Windows 10 or Linux on a purpose-built system (or self-built, if that's your fancy) is going to be way more cost-effective than buying a base $6K Mac Pro and then hoping Apple lets NVIDIA in the door. So much so that you can probably have a couple of NVIDIA GPUs on an X299 board running a Core i9-9800X, 128GB DRAM, 1TB of NVMe m.2, 2x Quadra RTX4000 8GB, nice mobo, PSU, et al. for less than $4000.00 and be perfectly happy for quite a while. There's no way NVIDIA and CUDA will match the performance on the Mac that they are getting with Windows and Linux. With that leftover $2K, someone can do the majority of their other computing tasks on a 13" MacBook Pro and also use it as a front end for the Cuda box, right? I know a lot of the apps necessary only run on Windows, but that's what VMWare is for or simply using Microsoft Remote Desktop to the CUDA box.

I am just not sure what the burning desire for NVIDIA on the Mac Pro is at this point...Apple surely isn't going to start using NVIDIA in the MacBook Pro, Mac mini or the iMac...I know the Mac Pro could be viewed as a special case, but for the number of units Apple is likely to move in FY2019, I just see that market being teeny tiny...I suppose for eGPU support, but Apple doesn't make it easy to use the eGPU in BootCamp, and BootCamp support seems to be even more tenuous at this point. Foreshadowing the move to ARM? Who knows, more likely the desire to get devs to embrace Metal 2 to entice iOS devs to port their Apps over to macOS (especially games).

 

[deconstruct60]

..what is the point? If you are wedded to CUDA for your everyday work, Windows 10 or Linux on a purpose-built system (or self-built, if that's your fancy) is going to be way more cost-effective than buying a base $6K Mac Pro and then hoping Apple lets NVIDIA in the door.

That is actually a different point. That one of Apple expanding the group of folks who are in the xMac group to be a much larger pool of folks. Dragging GPU cards into that is mostly just an added distraction. There is a bit of opaqueness there in that that is a "loss" to the whole mac ecosystem. What Apple is doing with some other parts of the line up probably play a bigger role there than what they are doing with the Mac Pro.

I am just not sure what the burning desire for NVIDIA on the Mac Pro is at this point...Apple surely isn't going to start using NVIDIA in the MacBook Pro, Mac mini or the iMac...I know the Mac Pro could be viewed as a special case, but for the number of units Apple is likely to move in FY2019, I just see that market being teeny tiny...I suppose for eGPU support,

There are two major issues. First , is that they have left a major hole between the 580X MPX module and the Vega II modules. If that is a very wide gap then the "plan" is for folks to fill it with classic GPU cards. If point most of the folks in the middle to the classic GPU card market then Nvidia has a sizable chunk of that. Apple would be telling folks to ignore that part..... which is a huge chunk of what Apple told them to look at in the first place. The bigger the gap between the larger this issue gets ( $300 MPX option -------> $2,100 next option or $250 ---> $1,399 or two different gaps). There is probablly not $200-400 move to the 'next' option here.

Lack of choice is going to be an issue. Especially, when Apple is saying they are not going to provide a lot of choices themselves ( they are punting this to 3rd parities). Perhaps Apple is hoping Intel shows up as an alternative choice but when there is only one player to fill a major role folks tend to get twitchy ( because that one player may flake out. apple certainly has a track record on that). Intel may goof up being a 2nd source for GPus. (they aren't inspiring blind confidence in folks lately either).



Second, it is relatively clear that a sizable chunk of the GPU market buyers just aren't objective ( or rational at times). It is a control issue. "My choice" has to matter most. [ Again it is exacerbated at bit by Apple putting even more slots in this Mac Pro which many are going to perceive as their choice matters "more". ]

 

[fuchsdh]

If one is wedded to CUDA for ML, why would the Mac Pro 7,1 be on your radar even if it did support nVidia? You can get less powerful, but significantly cheaper base hardware with Windows and Linux and you can also scale far beyond what a Mac Pro can do on those platforms if you have the cash.




Honestly, Apple should have shown the 7,1 off at the National Association of Broadcasters keynote, not WWDC. The crowd would have been weeping in the aisles at "only" having to pay $6000 (with stand) for a display that can actually hold it's color for more than 30 seconds and they would only want a fully-tricked out Mac Pro so the entry price and configuration would not even register with them.

NAB is definitely a better fit for the Pro, but the WWDC unveil was probably to signal boost the story and also to make a more declarative statement that they’re back to compete in the market.

I imagine most developers are on 15 inch MacBook Pros.

 

[barmann]

look, I get it.. this 7,1 is far out of range for what many people are willing to spend on a computer.. I think every single person posting here and elsewhere understands this too..

so how many times do you have to keep pointing out that MacPro is too expensive? who are you trying to convince? everybody, including Apple, already knows this..

are you just going to keep posting how expensive it is for the next few years? or do something else more productive instead?

The new MP is not too expensive in terms of affordability , but in terms of value and product strategy .
It's pricing is based on the iMP, which is a big nono .
Apple doesn't know this . They still think they made the right call .

But feel free to defend Apple, and keep posting about how the posh MP is too expensive , how that's fine , without bothering to provide any coherent argument .

 

[CWallace]

The new MP is not too expensive in terms of affordability , but in terms of value and product strategy .
It's pricing is based on the iMP, which is a big nono .
Apple doesn't know this . They still think they made the right call .

In terms of comparing base and certain specific configurations, this is true.

But the MP 7,1 is significantly more scalable than than an iMP is and there is a cost to offering that scalability. Not $6000 worth of cost, IMO, so I will spot you that, but more than the $2500-3000 cost some have advocated a being more acceptable.

 

[ManuelGomes]

Finally we got the mMP in our local Apple page. However, the nMP just disappeared, although in the Us site it's still there, in case you want one (bottom of the mMP page).
Guess they won't be selling it here anymore.
[doublepost=1562767736][/doublepost]The 8core nMP with 32GB/256GB with KB and mouse, same config as base mMP, goes for 4.607,00 USD, not that far off.
Thing is, how much will the mMP be here in EUR?

 

[JesterJJZ]

So when do we think ordering and info on BTO pricing will start?

 

[fuchsdh]

So when do we think ordering and info on BTO pricing will start?

The Xeons are actually out, so I guess any day could be BTO update day. I'll put my wager down for September personally.

 

[ManuelGomes]

September is a safe bet, even because they initially had September instead of Fall for availability. Oooops. They corrected it though so, maybe there was (another) delay?! Hope not.
Also, releasing it alongside (or close to) the iPhones doesn't sound good. Although, it has been shown off, now it's just delivery release, so...
We'll have to wait anyway, but I'm curious as to the BTO options, how much will they charge for the Vegas, if they'll come around and have a 512GB SSD (it's just inserting another 256GB module for $%&# sake).

 

[ManuelGomes]

I'd go for the 16 core, Vega and 1TB SSD but I guess the 8 core will have to do :-(
The price premium for the 16 core should be insane.

One thing I find puzzling, it should come with Mojave installed, according to the available info. But by the time it'll be available, Catalina is already out.

 

[ManuelGomes]

Can't wait for the in-depth reviews, see the actual internal PCIe layout, how they allocate lanes.
The PCH is almost irrelevant, mostly some legacy stuff only I guess, and probably some PCIe lanes used too. I wonder if Apple used the C621 and additional 10GbE controllers (Intel?) or C622 which already supports 2 ports.

 

[ManuelGomes]

I also am curious as to the speeds of the 256GB SSD. The advertised 2.6/2.7GBps are for the 2 module options only? Or will this single 256GB module also work as those speeds?

The supplied KB and mouse now is a dilemma, the grey option should look better, but I already had an eye on the space grey ones. :-(

Funny detail, the inclusion of a lightning cable. For the iPhone of course, no use for my iPadPro though. Still, a bit redundant since you're assumed to already have one, supplied with the iPhone. Why not supply the XDR stand instead, at no additional cost?!

 

[shuto]

The supplied KB and mouse now is a dilemma, the grey option should look better, but I already had an eye on the space grey ones. :-(

I agree, the space grey keyboard looks much nicer than silver and black keyboard. Maybe ebay the silver and black and buy a space grey one instead?

Wish the whole Mac Pro was in space grey finish.

 

[goMac]

Funny detail, the inclusion of a lightning cable. For the iPhone of course, no use for my iPadPro though. Still, a bit redundant since you're assumed to already have one, supplied with the iPhone. Why not supply the XDR stand instead, at no additional cost?!

The keyboard and mouse charge via the included lightning cable. It's not for an iPhone (but it will work with one.)

 

[ManuelGomes]

Yeah, too bad you can't choose when ordering, at least it doesn't seem so. The silver looks better with the mMP though.

goMac, indeed. Only remembered that after writing

Doing the math, here the base mMP will probably go for little over 7,000 EUR or so.
The base 8 core nMP, with 16GB RAM, goes for 4,699 EUR. Add to that 480 EUR for another 16GB, 85 EUR for the mouse and 149 EUR for the keyboard for a similar config to the mMP. That should be around 1,700 EUR extra for the base mMP, if we're to compare similar configs. It's the price of expandability I guess, very much in line with what was expected I'd say. Still hard to swallow though.

I'm already freaking out, what I'm aiming at now would be the base mMP with a single Vega and the Pro display XDR with stand. That should go for 14,000 USD, considering 2,000 USD for the Vega - hope it will be less. That will be more than 16,000 EUR!! Shoot... way more than I was initially considering.

 

[donnyluvd2bowl]

Hi Everyone!

Can I ask a stupid question...

Will the new mac pro be locked to Mojave and newer OS? I'm not a mac guy normally, but was told by someone with regard to a newer trashcan that they were told by Apple it was not able to be rolled back. Now, I don't believe that for a million reasons, since those components have been basically the same through several OS. But, iirc with the new T2 chips, Apple are managing to restrict third-party servicing, so I'm wondering if they're going to make the hardware incompatible with older OS versions.

 

[th0masp]

So why would you (consider it)? Isn't it basically old news on release?

AMD just upended Intel in single- and multicore-performance as well as number of cores and with less power draw to boot. Any answer from Intel will surely come with a new socket. PCIe will see some upgrades in the near future, too. Both beyond the scope of this system.

So, assuming you invest in 2019, will this rig not look like grandpa's PC two years from now?
I mean I'm aware there's always a faster thing around the corner but it just looks like a particularly bad time to settle on a current-day premium-platform - and one that has just been trounced (from the looks of early reviews, anyway).

At least with the older MP's there wasn't much progress with CPUs and bandwidth in like half a decade. Investment well protected by Intel, you might say.

 

[H2SO4]

I'd go for the 16 core, Vega and 1TB SSD but I guess the 8 core will have to do :-(
The price premium for the 16 core should be insane.

One thing I find puzzling, it should come with Mojave installed, according to the available info. But by the time it'll be available, Catalina is already out.

If I was to buy, I'd get one straight away. This was I have the option of going all the way back to 10.14
[doublepost=1562868449][/doublepost]

So why would you (consider it)? Isn't it basically old news on release?

AMD just upended Intel in single- and multicore-performance as well as number of cores and with less power draw to boot. Any answer from Intel will surely come with a new socket. PCIe will see some upgrades in the near future, too. Both beyond the scope of this system.

So, assuming you invest in 2019, will this rig not look like grandpa's PC two years from now?
I mean I'm aware there's always a faster thing around the corner but it just looks like a particularly bad time to settle on a current-day premium-platform - and one that has just been trounced (from the looks of early reviews, anyway).

At least with the older MP's there wasn't much progress with CPUs and bandwidth in like half a decade. Investment well protected by Intel, you might say.

Would you mid elaborating on the bolded part please?

 

[th0masp]

If I was to buy, I'd get one straight away. This was I have the option of going all the way back to 10.14
[doublepost=1562868449][/doublepost]
Would you mid elaborating on the bolded part please?

I meant the current Intel CPU platform. Compare with the recently unveiled Ryzen 3000-series and it's not a pretty sight. It does not look like another bunch of years of standstill is on the horizon for CPUs.

 

[goMac]

I meant the current Intel CPU platform. Compare with the recently unveiled Ryzen 3000-series and it's not a pretty sight. It does not look like another bunch of years of standstill is on the horizon for CPUs.

Without even bringing AMD into it, this Xeon will be very much outdated by the 10nm Xeon coming at some point.

That's just how it goes though.

And that's not even bringing in the chance of ARM.

 

[fuchsdh]

I'd go for the 16 core, Vega and 1TB SSD but I guess the 8 core will have to do :-(
The price premium for the 16 core should be insane.

One thing I find puzzling, it should come with Mojave installed, according to the available info. But by the time it'll be available, Catalina is already out.

Why skip to the 16 core? The 12 core has the faster memory speeds and turbos to the same speed as the higher-specced cores, so it seems like the "sweet spot" with the current options, especially with escalating prices.

I agree, the space grey keyboard looks much nicer than silver and black keyboard. Maybe ebay the silver and black and buy a space grey one instead?

Wish the whole Mac Pro was in space grey finish.

The fact that the Mac Pro isn't space grey when it was clearly started sometime after the iMac Pro is strange to me. The only guess I have is a) they thought the space grey would look weird with the stainless steel (I'd disagree), or b) there'd be some difficulties with the color and the cheese grater itself since it's such a complex piece of geometry.

Without even bringing AMD into it, this Xeon will be very much outdated by the 10nm Xeon coming at some point.

That's just how it goes though.

And that's not even bringing in the chance of ARM.

10nm is what, 3 years overdue? It's kind of funny we've been in this twilight purgatory of Intel constantly missing key dates for almost as long as the Mac Pro has been in the same holding pattern. When Apple does switch architectures, it can't be said they won't have had a long history of reasons why.

 

[Macintosh IIcx]

One thing I find puzzling, it should come with Mojave installed, according to the available info. But by the time it'll be available, Catalina is already out.

Two reasons for shipping with Mojave: 1) support for older 32 bit apps. Some professionals might still need that old app that would not run on Catalina. 2) Mojave have been battle tested and is less prone to issues at this point in time. Another important point for professionals that need reliability above all.

Finally, if they really aim for a September shipment, Catalina won’t be ready.

 

[beaker7]

I meant the current Intel CPU platform. Compare with the recently unveiled Ryzen 3000-series and it's not a pretty sight. It does not look like another bunch of years of standstill is on the horizon for CPUs.

Could you point us to the benchmarks showing the consumer focused Ryzen 3000 series being compared to the Xeon W-3275?

If you're wishing to make an AMD comparison at least use the comparable workstation line.

 

[CWallace]

For the record, I have no dog in this fight. That being said, someone posted an engineering sample of the Ryzen 9 3950X Geekbench score vis-a-vis the Xeon W-3275 Geekbench score:

http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/12921561?baseline=13495867

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/c09c2p/if_you_pitted_a_ryzen_9_3950x_custom_build_vs_the/

 

[beaker7]

For the record, I have no dog in this fight. That being said, someone posted an engineering sample of the Ryzen 9 3950X Geekbench score vis-a-vis the Xeon W-3275 Geekbench score:

http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/12921561?baseline=13495867

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/c09c2p/if_you_pitted_a_ryzen_9_3950x_custom_build_vs_the/

I'm sure the 3950x will be great but pretty hard to believe these are credible results.

I mean, they didn't even fake the Xeon socket name correctly.