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)

Oh snap! Didn't Apple mentioned about tb2 to tb3 connector?! If so....wouldn't that for nmp as well?
[doublepost=1477672679][/doublepost]
koyoot said:
If it is Zen+Vega(4Core+16CU+HBM2) APU for 13 inch MacBook Pro - yes, please.
If it is 8 core, 95W CPU for iMac - yes, please.

Everything else will not be interesting from CPU perspective.
Click to expand...
And Mac Pro?

By the way, didn't Apple announce tb2 to tb3 connector? If so, wouldn't that be used for for nmp?
 
Like this?
http://wccftech.com/amd-raven-ridge-apu-vega-zen-hbm-2017/
[doublepost=1477689192][/doublepost]I'm starting to wonder if the nMP will not be based on Naples indeed. All this wait, the partnership with AMD, Intel's solution is somewhat on a limb - either use of BDW-EP with old C612 or wait for SKL-W.
Although I'd have liked to hear some news I'd prefer they update to an optimal solution, no compromise. And current BDW isn't it.
 
Do you still believe in MW? They've been updating the upcoming nMP article for the last 3 years, always so sure that this time it will come. And the reliable source seems to miss every time.
Wouldn't Apple at least mention it yesterday if it was to come in November? They won't be doing another show, and I don't believe in a silent update either. After so long, they need to come up with something really good and make noise about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: filmak
koyoot said:
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000563435

Lisa Su claims that the GPUs in MacBook Pro have been codeveloped with Apple.

So it appears Apple and AMD do have a partnership, however not announced.
Click to expand...
Sorry friend, I don't buy this theory unless Apple is controlling AMD.

So unless there is some cues about Apple having a controlling interest on a company they depends I doubt Apple is granting indirect control on some of its products to an external interest.

Even I'll be not stranged if Apple switched its Mac Pro gpu to nVidia at last moment just to keep open doors with an alternative provider.

This is not 2013 when AMD had an very good GPU (d700) and nVidia a gray record, now nVidia shines and AMD is delayed at best and it's Polaris gpu fall well below nVidia in watts/performance.

An iMac on AMD APU it's good to stop Intel dictating cpu prices but as long Apple don't get cuff with AMD or Intel just not to repeat the PowerPC fiasco with IBM now with AMD.
 
ManuelGomes said:
Why would you call it a failure?
Click to expand...

Because if you competitor is doing 500x better than you, you have failed.

Pascal = Most energy efficient, Fastest GPU architecture on the planet. It also has CUDA, which is used in computing in more important "Pro" applications like Davinci Resolve and Premiere Pro (which a lot of people who use pro Macs use) is more optimized for CUDA than OpenCL or even Metal.

Apple got a good deal on the AMD chips that's all and they went after that rather than performance.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pat500000, tuxon86, jeff7117 and 2 others
SDAVE said:
Because if you competitor is doing 500x better than you, you have failed.

Pascal = Most energy efficient, Fastest GPU architecture on the planet. It also has CUDA, which is used in computing in more important "Pro" applications like Davinci Resolve and Premiere Pro (which a lot of people who use pro Macs use) is more optimized for CUDA than OpenCL or even Metal.

Apple got a good deal on the AMD chips that's all and they went after that rather than performance.
Click to expand...
Neither a failure or a fiasco, simply not good enough as promised.

AMD Promised the most power efficient gpu and actually achieved an big efficiency jump from Fiji, but lately nVidia did it better and retained the efficiency crown with comfortable margin.

Now lets see how Vega compares with Pascal GP100 / 102.

Also I have same concerns about Zen, notwithstanding it's architecture has clear optimization about IPC predictable it should deliver better single thread IPC than Intel's best, but I'm not convinced about its efficiency, I guess Zen cores will be individually faster upto 15-20% than any Intel core at 20-30% higher TDP.
 
JimGoshorn said:
I agree. If they decide to create a new Mac Pro, they are going to make an event of it.
Click to expand...

The 2013 was a total redesign, and deserved an event. If the update is at the end of November or early next year, it will just be updates and not necessarily deserved of an event. I would image an updated processor, new AMD chips, TB3, 10GBe, Faster/Bigger SSD.
 
Mago said:
Sorry friend, I don't buy this theory unless Apple is controlling AMD.

So unless there is some cues about Apple having a controlling interest on a company they depends I doubt Apple is granting indirect control on some of its products to an external interest.

Even I'll be not stranged if Apple switched its Mac Pro gpu to nVidia at last moment just to keep open doors with an alternative provider.

This is not 2013 when AMD had an very good GPU (d700) and nVidia a gray record, now nVidia shines and AMD is delayed at best and it's Polaris gpu fall well below nVidia in watts/performance.

An iMac on AMD APU it's good to stop Intel dictating cpu prices but as long Apple don't get cuff with AMD or Intel just not to repeat the PowerPC fiasco with IBM now with AMD.
Click to expand...
This is your opinion and I respect that, despite reality looking differently from your opinion(about Apple-Nvidia relationship, and potentiality of Nvidia hardware in any of Macs).

However I will give you one point of view for efficiency.

Yesterday I have had the opportunity to test two GPUs for my home build and 1080p gaming. Intel i7-6700T, 16 GB Kingston HyperX Fury 2400 MHz, Crucial BX300 525 GB, MSI Z170 Mini-ITX motherboard, Be Quiet! Silent Loop 280 for CPU, Fractal Design Nano-S, and two GPUs. GTX 1050 Ti Gigabyte Gaming X 4 GB, and XFX Radeon RX 470 4GB Single fan. Why? Because the difference between two GPUs is just 100PLN in my country.

Then me and my friend with who I was playing with those builds tested 2 games in which we play.
Resolution 1080p, All maxed out with 4x Antialiasing. Those games were Heroes of the Storm, and Overwatch.
One thing we were curious: how efficiency will be affected by V-Sync.

We run up HotS. Power consumption for build with GTX 1050 Ti was around 110-120W at the wall. How RX 470 faired here? around 120-125W. HotS is not very demanding game and is more optimized for Nvidia architectures, so here is slight advantage for GTX 1050 Ti.

How Overwatch faired here. This is very demanding game, which cannot be maxed out but GTX 980 Ti in 4K/Epic setting(it averages 40-45 FPS).

Well the power consumption for whole system at the wall was around 140-145W for GTX 1050 Ti.

How faired here RX 470? 140-145W.

I do genuinely have very hard choice right now between the two of these GPUs. Max power consumption for both of the GPUs for whole system: GTX 1050 Ti 156W as observed, RX 470 4GB - 218W.

I do like very much the GTX 1050 Ti. But...

What would you do on my place, guys? And sorry for slight off-topic.
 
koyoot said:
This is your opinion and I respect that, despite reality looking differently from your opinion(about Apple-Nvidia relationship, and potentiality of Nvidia hardware in any of Macs).

However I will give you one point of view for efficiency.

Yesterday I have had the opportunity to test two GPUs for my home build and 1080p gaming. Intel i7-6700T, 16 GB Kingston HyperX Fury 2400 MHz, Crucial BX300 525 GB, MSI Z170 Mini-ITX motherboard, Be Quiet! Silent Loop 280 for CPU, Fractal Design Nano-S, and two GPUs. GTX 1050 Ti Gigabyte Gaming X 4 GB, and XFX Radeon RX 470 4GB Single fan. Why? Because the difference between two GPUs is just 100PLN in my country.

Then me and my friend with who I was playing with those builds tested 2 games in which we play.
Resolution 1080p, All maxed out with 4x Antialiasing. Those games were Heroes of the Storm, and Overwatch.
One thing we were curious: how efficiency will be affected by V-Sync.

We run up HotS. Power consumption for build with GTX 1050 Ti was around 110-120W at the wall. How RX 470 faired here? around 120-125W. HotS is not very demanding game and is more optimized for Nvidia architectures, so here is slight advantage for GTX 1050 Ti.

How Overwatch faired here. This is very demanding game, which cannot be maxed out but GTX 980 Ti in 4K/Epic setting(it averages 40-45 FPS).

Well the power consumption for whole system at the wall was around 140-145W for GTX 1050 Ti.

How faired here RX 470? 140-145W.

I do genuinely have very hard choice right now between the two of these GPUs. Max power consumption for both of the GPUs for whole system: GTX 1050 Ti 156W as observed, RX 470 4GB - 218W.

I do like very much the GTX 1050 Ti. But...

What would you do on my place, guys? And sorry for slight off-topic.
Click to expand...

I think that you would decide easier about it when you count the needs of the rest of the software you 're using. Any compute needs served better with cuda/opencl or more stable drivers or software compatibility, better 4k output, more ports etc, you know better... Now if it's only for gaming, I think you should check which one has less heat and less noise...
 
filmak said:
I think that you would decide easier about it when you count the needs of the rest of the software you 're using. Any compute needs served better with cuda/opencl or more stable drivers or software compatibility, better 4k output, more ports etc, you know better... Now if it's only for gaming, I think you should check which one has less heat and less noise...
Click to expand...
Well we have checked both of those factors. This is only gaming build for me and my friend. The GTX 1050 TI averaged around 60-61 degrees C in Overwatch, and the fans were spinning at around 900 rpm. However the fans I would say in this case are inaudible. There is complete silence coming from the case. I have to say, that Gigabyte GPU is extremely silent, even under load, but also the case is very sound proof ;).

RX 470 on the other hand averaged 55-57 degrees celsius(because it was loaded at around 65%, compared to 90% for GTX 1050 Ti) in Overwatch. We have not checked how it behaved in Heroes, because it is completely meaningless because of how optimized(very old engine...) that game is.
 
ManuelGomes said:
Do you still believe in MW? They've been updating the upcoming nMP article for the last 3 years, always so sure that this time it will come. And the reliable source seems to miss every time.
Wouldn't Apple at least mention it yesterday if it was to come in November? They won't be doing another show, and I don't believe in a silent update either. After so long, they need to come up with something really good and make noise about it.
Click to expand...

"Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me"

I think we're way past twice.

Even if a new model shows up in a few weeks what are we going to get? A $5000 single CPU 6-core with 12GB of RAM and two AMD GPU squeezed into a thermal failure prone chassis that gets spanked by a Win10 box costing considerably less? Will it be user upgradeable? Will Apple forget that it exists for another 3-4 years? I'm pretty certain that we would be in for another teeth gnashing 3-4 year wait before they decide to throw us another bone or kill it outright.

The survival of companies like HP, Dell etc depends on offering cutting edge technology at competitive prices. Apple only gets 12% of it's revenue from the Mac and obviously views it as more of a vestigial appendix, than an essential component of their business. Win10 may be less than ideal, but at least I know that I can depend on a company like HP to provide me with a steady stream of up to date and high quality choices. And I can't believe I am typing this, but with products like the Surface Studio MS has proven that they are hell bent and determined to make a comeback by breaking new ground and innovating.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ssgbryan and xmonkey
The amount of delusion on forums is staggering! Folks, Apple will cut all of the desktops and only leave laptops and then get out of laptop business as well. At the huge price they set the laptops Apple computer sales will crash. It's just a matter of time until tim cook(yea, small letters) will kill macs for ever. Just look at the 'mac' page on Apple site: no desktop other than iMac and it is already 1 year old!
 

Attachments

  • macs.png
    macs.png
    609.2 KB · Views: 81
Mago said:
Neither a failure or a fiasco, simply not good enough as promised.

AMD Promised the most power efficient gpu and actually achieved an big efficiency jump from Fiji, but lately nVidia did it better and retained the efficiency crown with comfortable margin.

Now lets see how Vega compares with Pascal GP100 / 102.

Also I have same concerns about Zen, notwithstanding it's architecture has clear optimization about IPC predictable it should deliver better single thread IPC than Intel's best, but I'm not convinced about its efficiency, I guess Zen cores will be individually faster upto 15-20% than any Intel core at 20-30% higher TDP.
Click to expand...

The only reason AMD Is still in business is because XBox and PS4 use their GPUs. And now the MacBook Pros.

No one in the scientific computing industry uses AMD, it's all nVidia. I'm not even mentioning the PC gaming industry or VR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xmonkey
SDAVE said:
The only reason AMD Is still in business is because XBox and PS4 use their GPUs. And now the MacBook Pros.

No one in the scientific computing industry uses AMD, it's all nVidia. I'm not even mentioning the PC gaming industry or VR.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and Marketshare for AMD in PC gaming jumped in last two quarters because of console sales?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssgbryan
koyoot said:
Yeah, and Marketshare for AMD in PC gaming jumped in last two quarters because of console sales?
Click to expand...

The RX480 is a sweet spot for medium range of that industry, but nVidia already answered them with the GTX1050 and GTX1060.

Care to share a link?
 
koyoot said:
This is your opinion and I respect that, despite reality looking differently from your opinion(about Apple-Nvidia relationship, and potentiality of Nvidia hardware in any of Macs).

However I will give you one point of view for efficiency.

Yesterday I have had the opportunity to test two GPUs for my home build and 1080p gaming. Intel i7-6700T, 16 GB Kingston HyperX Fury 2400 MHz, Crucial BX300 525 GB, MSI Z170 Mini-ITX motherboard, Be Quiet! Silent Loop 280 for CPU, Fractal Design Nano-S, and two GPUs. GTX 1050 Ti Gigabyte Gaming X 4 GB, and XFX Radeon RX 470 4GB Single fan. Why? Because the difference between two GPUs is just 100PLN in my country.

Then me and my friend with who I was playing with those builds tested 2 games in which we play.
Resolution 1080p, All maxed out with 4x Antialiasing. Those games were Heroes of the Storm, and Overwatch.
One thing we were curious: how efficiency will be affected by V-Sync.

We run up HotS. Power consumption for build with GTX 1050 Ti was around 110-120W at the wall. How RX 470 faired here? around 120-125W. HotS is not very demanding game and is more optimized for Nvidia architectures, so here is slight advantage for GTX 1050 Ti.

How Overwatch faired here. This is very demanding game, which cannot be maxed out but GTX 980 Ti in 4K/Epic setting(it averages 40-45 FPS).

Well the power consumption for whole system at the wall was around 140-145W for GTX 1050 Ti.

How faired here RX 470? 140-145W.

I do genuinely have very hard choice right now between the two of these GPUs. Max power consumption for both of the GPUs for whole system: GTX 1050 Ti 156W as observed, RX 470 4GB - 218W.

I do like very much the GTX 1050 Ti. But...

What would you do on my place, guys? And sorry for slight off-topic.
Click to expand...


This is Mac Pro forum, not the cheapest game PC forum

What we are interested here is what has AMD to offer against 1080 or even 1070.
If you get excited from the performance of the least performant card from Pascal family, that's OK, but not in the Mac Pro forum.

I'm not a fan of a brand/corporation, I'm just fan of the best tool for the job and at this moment it comes from NVidia.
AMD keeps promising the next big thing, which will dwarf Intel and NVidia and we are still waiting....
 
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