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
Thunderbolt -- backhaul.
PCI-e "on/off ramp" to Thunderbolt -- endpoint.
You have the designations backwards. TB 40Gb/s x4 PCI-e v3 32Gb/s 40 > 32 ... backhaul bigger than the endpoint. 40Gb/s > ( 2 * 17Gb/s ) ( two DPv1.2 streams.) [ also bigger than a single DP v1.4 stream (~26Gb/s ) and bigger than than 1.3x v1.4 steams. Can't quite get two full 1.4s. But not much needs two full 1.4s at the moment. )
You are apparently getting trapped into some notion the the internals of the Host system is end-all, be-all of the network ( the primary backhaul between everything). It is not in the context of Thunderbolt. It is just a point on the network. Without Thunderbolt that internal host system has no access to the data so it can't possibly be the backhaul because it doesn't even go there.
For example:
TB_device_1 <------> Host_system <----- > TB_device_2
Technically TB_device 1 could send some DMA data directly to TB_device 2. The host system is just a transition point in that context. This isn't USB where the host tells all the peripherals exactly what to do all the time. Or that devices and only talk to the host (or perhaps relay data to the host on command).
The designated Host in the TB docs I linked in has some duties of managing setting up the topology of the network, handing out address , and some hot plug/unplug duties but in the nonimal TB network steady state, it is just an endpoint. ( that why some of the newer cards with a controller that can choose some snapshot hack of what they see fall into the "happens to work" state. ).
There is more than just one "on ramp" to the Thunderbolt backhaul. That why Thunderbolt is simply just just PCI-e. The substantive utility is moving multiple protocols at the same time. If you only want to move solely just one then you don't particularly need Thunderbolt. Thunderbolt typically makes more efficient use of the backhaul available because can mix two high speed flows to get to a larger amount than any of the single ones. That's why the backhaul is bigger than the end points. ( same reason why your ISP links to you are smaller than their link to the backbone of the Internet. ) . Schemes like USB-C Mode of subsetting the wires to protocol X and another subset to protocol Y waste lots of bandwidth. ( the first iteration of the TB controllers did that just to be simpler and cheaper... not because that is what Thunderbolt protocol was suppose to do. )
If need even more.....
https://thunderbolttechnology.net/sites/default/files/Thunderbolt3_TechBrief_FINAL.pdf
If you are using the HDMI port you can't "use any two ports". The section up above this one in the document outlining that the Bus 0 is stripped of a stream is still relevant here. It isn't all in that one paragraph. The HDMI port will eliminate Bus 0 since it won't have two. But yeah the switching appears relatively heaving to make the top two port and the MPX Bay 2 more relevant.
One thing to note there is that it is only two XDRs displays even though there are 6 DP streams. The load here is perhaps a bit much for these GPUs. Three 5K displays ( using all 6 of the DP streams) works fine. So two XDRs on a single GPU chip will bog it down in terms of even more medium-high resolution displays also added.
From the myriad of "if these then those ports " something like this block diagram.
In retrospect, it makes some sense since will need to 're-drive' the DisplayPort signals over longer distances. So passing them through a switch will effectively also do that. I haven't seen a three-input , one output switch chip but I didn't look everywhere. ( and hack it with just 2 two input switches in series).
If leave MPX Bay 2 open and use a Vega II solo or W5700X card then ports 1&2 on second connector and 3&4 on first one are "dead". It is a complicated path to get connector one's port 2 all the way to the top.
If divert it to the I/O then pretty likely that the top ports are "shorted on video' to make that XDR work on the back. ( folks seem to be shying away from hooking up major video to the top ports so most probably won't notice. )
The cards that do all four ports could get by with just four simpler re-drivers and lots fewer trace paths.
Anybody else order from Expercom? Their prices beat my corporate discount (6%) by a couple hundred bucks, and I figured I could wait a few extra days over Apple's quoted delivery dates... But I'm really hoping I didn't sign myself up for delivery in February at this point!
Apple’s quoted dates seem ultra-conservative. I ordered a BTO Mac Pro on Friday with an expected delivery date of “December 24 to January 2nd.” It shipped this morning and will be delivered on December 18th.
Expercom is generally pretty good and in my experience practices the “under promise over deliver”- when new products come out they usually have significant lead time but usually aren’t that long.
Keep us posted on when yours ships
Yes, I should have clarified that, but to be honest I kind of expected the person I was replying to had read that article, and would realise that "Drive HDMI and one Pro Display from the Card" would be clear to mean "use the HDMI port and then one of the ports from Bus 1 because the document says you need to do that".
The part about "any two ports" is not my claim or wording, it's Apple's wording to describe which ports are capable at all, of driving the Pro Display.
My point was that the claim about the 'system' ports being unusable for such a display was incorrect, and thus Bus1 on the card + the Bus on the I/O card can drive two Pro Displays, while Bus 0 on the card drives HDMI.
Mac Pro 2019 Teardown
The Mac is back and more Pro than ever, throwing away the cylindrical “trash can” design in favor of something that resembles a computer. Its...
www.ifixit.com
Has anyone received a mMP yet?
I'm quite curious about the memory installed in the base model. Is it the same, rated @2933, as the one that comes with the 12core and above? Or has Apple skimped on that too?
I'd think it is the same, so you can upgrade the base 32GB without having to use different modules.
The kits available at the store have no mention to speed. Still, if you BTO with all six channels populated with 8GB modules (48GB) you'll pay 360€ extra. But buying the additional 16GB (2x8GB) kit later on will set you back 480€!! Tim is your friend, indeed.
I'm guessing they'll be using the same modules all around.
Could lookup for those SK Hynix sticks though.
No need after all, those are rated @2933, mentioned in the kit's page.
Guess the factory installed are the same, hopefully.
Intel should not have crippled the 8core to 2666, maybe later on with the heat from AMD TR3 they'll unlock as a bonus. Unless this is a binning issue.
And maybe Apple will later on update the base model to 512GB SSD.
I'm also curious as to how much they'll ask for the W5700X, somewhere around 2000€.
If anyone finds a block diagram or some info on the lane allocation please post.
I'm quite curious about the memory installed in the base model. Is it the same, rated @2933, as the one that comes with the 12core and above? Or has Apple skimped on that too?
I'd think it is the same, so you can upgrade the base 32GB without having to use different modules.
The kits available at the store have no mention to speed. Still, if you BTO with all six channels populated with 8GB modules (48GB) you'll pay 360€ extra. But buying the additional 16GB (2x8GB) kit later on will set you back 480€!! Tim is your friend, indeed.
I'm guessing they'll be using the same modules all around.
Could lookup for those SK Hynix sticks though.
No need after all, those are rated @2933, mentioned in the kit's page.
Guess the factory installed are the same, hopefully.
Intel should not have crippled the 8core to 2666, maybe later on with the heat from AMD TR3 they'll unlock as a bonus. Unless this is a binning issue.
And maybe Apple will later on update the base model to 512GB SSD.
I'm also curious as to how much they'll ask for the W5700X, somewhere around 2000€.
If anyone finds a block diagram or some info on the lane allocation please post.
It's 2933 per Ifixit. It's not cheaping out regardless—probably costs Apple less to stock just one RAM speed.
"All memory included with your Mac Pro is 2933MHz. Mac Pro models with 8 core processors operate memory at 2666MHz."
Mac Pro (2019) memory specifications - Apple Support
Learn about the types of memory (RAM) used in Mac Pro (2019).
Expercom is generally pretty good and in my experience practices the “under promise over deliver”- when new products come out they usually have significant lead time but usually aren’t that long.
Keep us posted on when yours ships
Well, yesterday it changed from "pending" to "processed", and has a ship date of "Dec 31 - Jan 8", so not too bad. Luckily, I'm not one of the ones desperate to put it into service in 2019. 2020 works just fine for my tax plans.
Meanwhile, seems s trashcan re-boot it's still possible:
www.patentlyapple.com
Rumor: Apple Plans to Launch a new High-End Mac in 2020 designed to address the Esports Market
Professional, competitive video game playing—the phenomenon known as esports—has seen double digit growth for much of the past decade. With a massive following, many say it will soon become an official Olympic event. A new rumor today claims that Apple is going to launch a new high-end Mac for...
Meanwhile, seems s trashcan re-boot it's still possible:
Rumor: Apple Plans to Launch a new High-End Mac in 2020 designed to address the Esports Market
Professional, competitive video game playing—the phenomenon known as esports—has seen double digit growth for much of the past decade. With a massive following, many say it will soon become an official Olympic event. A new rumor today claims that Apple is going to launch a new high-end Mac for...
clutching at straws to keep this thread alive ???? There is nothing there pointing at the older design at all. Or much substance of anything desktop.
Apple has not cared about the gaming community for a decade or more and the gaming community has not cared about Apple for at least as long, if not longer.
It does seem that quite a fair number of current e-sports titles run on macOS and I suppose if Apple throws enough money at the developers, the ones that are not (like Overwatch) might be ported over. But really, I just don't see "serious" gamers (those ready to drop $2500-5000 on a rig) buying a Mac - especially a Mac that does not come with native support for the latest nVidia gaming cards - when they could get a Windows PC for the same (or less) and have access to (effectively) every game.
It does seem that quite a fair number of current e-sports titles run on macOS and I suppose if Apple throws enough money at the developers, the ones that are not (like Overwatch) might be ported over. But really, I just don't see "serious" gamers (those ready to drop $2500-5000 on a rig) buying a Mac - especially a Mac that does not come with native support for the latest nVidia gaming cards - when they could get a Windows PC for the same (or less) and have access to (effectively) every game.
The 'spin' here is that Apple is about to do a complete '180' turn because of Arcade. Since Apple is in the bankroll and assist produce game business that the tail will wag the dog in the Mac space.
Apple coming out with a high end MBP 16" update with a beefier Navi GPU that happens to game a bit better. That could happen, but it would have higher GPGPU computation abilities too for more than a few titles outside the gaming space also. But Apple chasing Windows games ? Not very likely at all.
Apple isn't going to completely ignore gaming, but it isn't likely they are going to skew the Mac models that way.
However, Apple has cared about gaming on iOS devices. Also that is is about the only differentiating edge that AppleTV (hardware) has left at this point. (with AppleTV+ deploying on TVs , Roku , and FireTV , it is only going to take 2-3 more years before that is collectively higher deployed usage than AppleTV. ).
And how many of them are in Arcade?????? That is suppose to be the real driver for Apple deep seated change of heart.
I think what is lost here is that some games are going to leak out of Arcade ( unless Apple paid the whole bill to keep them local). Once they do there is no big Arcade only leverage here. Hence little driver to push the Mac product development in that direction.
Even more so when there are no Nvidia GPU cards. So Apple would be doing a complete '180' on Nvidia too. Don't hold your breath.
Apple move with kernel drivers moving to an in between layer between user space and kernel is going to both the "princess and the pea" latency folks. Apple isn't going to toss security for eeking out marginally better driver latencies.
Is everything on Arcade supposed to work on iOS, iPadOS, tvOS and macOS? If so, then yes I could see macOS gaming benefitting as developers who would normally not look at the Mac will port, but will developers be designing to iOS/iPadOS since they are the largest platforms? And will those ports work as well on macOS? We've already seen raw Catalyst apps look pretty poor, with the best being heavily tuned and massaged to be more like a UIKit project to be "Mac-like".
Agreed. Plus a high-end gaming laptop would be thick and heavy to accommodate the enhanced cooling system to allow the Core i9 CPUs and upper-end Navi GPUs to work. With Ive gone, I guess anything is possible, but such a design goes against Apple's portable design philosophies over the past decade (which is always make it thinner and lighter where possible).
Im scratching my head over this rumor.
Its way better to run games on Linux, than on Mac OS, currently. While Mac OS is still 15-20% behind Windows in Graphics performance, Linux is currently either 5% behind, or faster than Windows. So what is the point of it?
The rumor is interesting, but what if... its not gaming PC targeting E-Sport, and it is a console - competitor for Xbox Series X and PS5?
Not having Nvidia GPUs in Mac ecosystem is not an issue.
Its way better to run games on Linux, than on Mac OS, currently. While Mac OS is still 15-20% behind Windows in Graphics performance, Linux is currently either 5% behind, or faster than Windows. So what is the point of it?
The rumor is interesting, but what if... its not gaming PC targeting E-Sport, and it is a console - competitor for Xbox Series X and PS5?
If Apple will throw money into the devs to optimize for their own platform titles like Overwatch, it will mean that those games will be better optimized for AMD GPUs, than they are/will be for Nvidia. At least on Apple platform. Its that simple.
Not having Nvidia GPUs in Mac ecosystem is not an issue.
Last edited:
However, not having it is an issue in the Windows ecosystem and if someone is going to drop well into the low four-figures for an Apple gaming rig, I expect they would be using BootCamp to run Windows games, as well.
Last edited:
Apple....Gaming PC? I thought tomorrow was Christmas Day, not April Fools.
More likely that. However, probably not targeting Series X or PS5 but the price points they vacated.
AppleTV with a A12X (or A13X or A14X depending upon when they move and if there is a A13X at all). But that wouldn't be an AMD GPU.
But an x86 console ? No... Apple already has a console that is meant to be hooked to a TV all the time. All putting in a mainstream x86 CPU-GPU would do is drive Apples costs up to where they wouldn't compete with the next gen consoles on price at all. In the Gaming space, nobody is likely going to pay more for Apple than the other options.
For casual and games for fun. Yes. For professional e-sports, that isn't sitting on a solid foundation for an extremely very wide set of games.
The only way Apple is going to get into gaming and eSports - is to create their own league for broadcast on the TV+ service, in which everyone competing will use AppleTV hardware, on Apple Arcade titles, or Mac Mini's with standardised eGPUs
The company's core drive, is to try to avoid situations in which they can be directly compared to their competitors. They will never put themselves in a position where a Mac version of a game, running on AMD hardware, is going to go up against a Windows version, running on Nvidia hardware, unless it's deliberately hobbling the Nvidia side, by putting the top AMD card, against its "equivalent" - a mid-range Nvidia card.
The company's core drive, is to try to avoid situations in which they can be directly compared to their competitors. They will never put themselves in a position where a Mac version of a game, running on AMD hardware, is going to go up against a Windows version, running on Nvidia hardware, unless it's deliberately hobbling the Nvidia side, by putting the top AMD card, against its "equivalent" - a mid-range Nvidia card.