Sidebar Sidebar
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)

Yesterday briefly an iMac 27 with Ryzen 3950 CPU appear at geekbench then removed, consider it maybe an Hackintoshs, or an prototype, looking for captures bringing more details to discard an Hackintosh.
 
If Ryzen was actually coming to macs we'd know already from device ID/strings in macOS betas that 9to5mac regularly leaks, right?
 
Yeah, back to RISC (OK, don't come again with x64 being RISC...).
They must have some high power ARM CPU testing in their labs I guess, nothing new here.
But there's a problem: the naming scheme :)
A series is taken by the mobile SoCs. Wx (for workstation) is also taken, so is Sx (server?), as well as Hx (for High Power) and also Ux (for Ultra High Power?) :)
You see, ARM is not an option, no naming available that suits it.
Too bad
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ctrlzone
ctrlzone said:
i'm all for ARM, the sooner the better.
Click to expand...
The CPUs in my office iMac 2015s have been running 24 hours per day, every day of the year with heavy video editing workloads - with very few days down (tsunami related events mainly) since the first day they entered the office... with no issues. I haven't seen any information that ARM chips can hold up under that type of use. Can they?
 
OkiRun said:
The CPUs in my office iMac 2015s have been running 24 hours per day, every day of the year with heavy video editing workloads - with very few days down (tsunami related events mainly) since the first day they entered the office... with no issues. I haven't seen any information that ARM chips can hold up under that type of use. Can they?
Click to expand...
ARM doesn't make CPUs, so it's not possible to answer your question in general.

Different companies license the ARM architectural designs, tweak them, and contract silicon fabs like TSMC to produce CPUs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssgbryan
AidenShaw said:
ARM doesn't make CPUs, so it's not possible to answer your question in general.

Different companies license the ARM architectural designs, tweak them, and contract silicon fabs like TSMC to produce CPUs.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clarification. Do you think the threadripper can handle the workload I described.
 
OkiRun said:
Thanks for the clarification. Do you think the threadripper can handle the workload I described.
Click to expand...
Both, as for Threadripper it's just an Rebadged Epyc Server CPU, and about ARM, yes it can as long you source it right, at the moment the best ARM sever CPU is made by Marvel (not Marvell) the ThunderX3 but not widely available, neither you can build a diy desktop or servers with that chip it's for OEM/Server Farms.
 
Threadripper is NOT a rebadged Epyc.

Threadripper has quad channel memory (256Gb max) and runs at a higher clock speed.

Epyc has 8 channel memory (2Tb max) and a LOT more pcie lanes.
 
AidenShaw said:
And do the chiplets share the architecture?
Click to expand...
Basically both CPU complex share the core chiplets, it's hub it's tailored to the L3 cache and I/O buses by it's SKU, this hub is made with 10nm process and it's different for Threadripper and Epyc mostly about memory I/o buses and pcie.

This hub is the one likely to get customized by or for Apple in an hypothetical Ryzen Mac.
 
AidenShaw said:
And do the chiplets share the architecture?
Click to expand...
Chiplets are the same for every, single chip: from Dekstop Ryzens, through Threadrippers, to EPYC CPUs.

What differs are I/O dies, and feature sets in them. Threadripper and EPYC have absolutely the same I/O dies(for manufacturing scale reasons), but with features disabled on Threadripper dies.

In essence, Threadripper 3000 series is an effect of product segmentation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssgbryan and AidenShaw
ManuelGomes said:
Radeon Pro W5700X @ 750€, dual @ 2000€ additional. I wonder what the extra 500€ are for? The IF link?
Click to expand...

The non-upgrade price of the W5700X is 1250 euros. So 1250 + 750 = 2000.

www.apple.com

Module MPX avec Radeon Pro W5700X

Améliorez les performances graphiques de votre Mac Pro grâce au Module MPX Radeon Pro W5700X d’AMD. Avec une puissance de traitement pouvant atteindre 9,4 téraflops, 16 Go de mémoire et 448 Go/s de bande passante mémoire, le processeur graphique Radeon Pro W5700X confère à votre Mac Pro des...
www.apple.com

There’s no IF link on the 5700.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jccmaxon
Hi
As much as I was eagerly waiting for this, and was ready to bite the bullet, the cost ended up to be a lot higher than what I was expecting. I kinda put it on hold for now.
Had the cost been lower and I'd probably have one by now, sure. But 6600€ for the base model? And another
Don't get me wrong. It's an excelent piece of engineering, hell of a machine.
But, as much as I love the thing, it's a lot of money for a rig that will be outdated pretty soon.
Guess this is becoming a thing, but I guess I'll be "Waiting for MP 8.1" :)
I get it that the base model needed to be as simple as it gets, but only 4 mem channels populated and a single 256GB SSD blade seems too much, at least on such an expensive rig.
Aside from that, Cascade could be short lived, Rapids aproaching rapidly (like that? :) ), with DDR5 and PCIe 4/5. And then there's the GPU thing. I was gunning for Vega, Polaris no way, Navi - not sure yet, but it's also getting old and starting at 3000€, so...
And then there's the Pro Display XDR at 6600€ plus the famous 1100€ stand :-(
20k€ even for the best Apple has to offer, and as I said before a hell of a machine, is still a lot more than what I was planning on spending.
Guess I'll hold on a bit more and see if next year or 2022 we'll have the 8.1 with some major arguments
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlueTide, Mago and vel0city
ManuelGomes said:
Hi
As much as I was eagerly waiting for this, and was ready to bite the bullet, the cost ended up to be a lot higher than what I was expecting. I kinda put it on hold for now.
Had the cost been lower and I'd probably have one by now, sure. But 6600€ for the base model? And another
Don't get me wrong. It's an excelent piece of engineering, hell of a machine.
But, as much as I love the thing, it's a lot of money for a rig that will be outdated pretty soon.
Guess this is becoming a thing, but I guess I'll be "Waiting for MP 8.1" :)
I get it that the base model needed to be as simple as it gets, but only 4 mem channels populated and a single 256GB SSD blade seems too much, at least on such an expensive rig.
Aside from that, Cascade could be short lived, Rapids aproaching rapidly (like that? :) ), with DDR5 and PCIe 4/5. And then there's the GPU thing. I was gunning for Vega, Polaris no way, Navi - not sure yet, but it's also getting old and starting at 3000€, so...
And then there's the Pro Display XDR at 6600€ plus the famous 1100€ stand :-(
20k€ even for the best Apple has to offer, and as I said before a hell of a machine, is still a lot more than what I was planning on spending.
Guess I'll hold on a bit more and see if next year or 2022 we'll have the 8.1 with some major arguments
Click to expand...

Pretty much the same thoughts here. I had the cash ready and was ready to dive in, but the specs made me hesitate and I realised that this machine is just too much of a compromise - it's not an ideal machine to run Adobe CC and still doesn't have a GPU rendering option readily available, despite all the right noises being made about Redshift and Octane. Apple have locked everyone out apart from an extremely elite/niche band of high-end film users.

As someone who makes money creating images on the Mac, it's incredibly frustrating to *still* feel homeless. There's nothing in Apple's lineup with ideal (or even workable) specs for someone working on still images created with 3D GPU renders from Cinema 4D and comped in Photoshop, with the occasional day spent in ZBrush. Nothing in their lineup is suitable without massive caveats hanging over a potential purchase.

Before the new Mac Pro launched, Apple reassured us by telling us they were spending time with creative professionals and were creating an ideal Mac Pro based on their workflow and requirements. I really wonder if there was any truth to this as I just can't imagine any creative professional asking for Xeons and anything other than Nvidia. Everyone I know in the graphics/motion graphics/3D/photography and music creation sectors are still all scratching their heads over this machine.

If my 2009 Mac Pro died tomorrow I just don't know what I'd do, which is a stupid situation for a self employed freelancer to be in. Apple are completely out of touch with what what a lot of creatives actually need.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlueTide, Flint Ironstag, ssgbryan and 1 other person
vel0city said:
Pretty much the same thoughts here. I had the cash ready and was ready to dive in, but the specs made me hesitate and I realised that this machine is just too much of a compromise - it's not an ideal machine to run Adobe CC and still doesn't
Click to expand...

Adobe CC is available for Windows 10 - and there are super fast AMD Ryzen PCs out there (with pcie 4.0 ssd's a mac user can only dream about). No Problem at all, and for privat communication you are able to install Linux on a separate disk / ssd without compromises.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssgbryan
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back