When will the new Mac Pro be next updated?

[fuchsdh]

I don't think anyone should be expecting any great advances in speed; it's a tock iteration after all. The bigger things that interest me are the native USB3 support and DDR4 RAM rather than the processor (although getting two more cores for the same price suits me just fine.)

 

[goMac]

Something else to consider is the motherboard in this thing. It was a pretty radical change from a design standpoint. Usually they like to recoup costs associated with development before they have to re-tool things. --Someone else mentioned mac mini being long in the tooth...could be the reason.

I'm starting to wonder if the Mini is delayed because they want to move production to the same US factory (I haven't heard if they already have, so I'm assuming not.) They might want to retool it a bit to fit with the existing production line.

 

[MMcCraryNJ]

Wait, why are we all under the assumption that the base model $2999 Mac Pro will be 6-cores for the next update? Did I miss a big piece of news or something?

 

[goMac]

Wait, why are we all under the assumption that the base model $2999 Mac Pro will be 6-cores for the next update? Did I miss a big piece of news or something?

There's some speculation that the base model could move to 6 cores.

Haswell-EP is upping the core counts on all the processors, but I believe there will still be a 4 core option. The top end is supposed to move to.. I think... 18 cores?

There will still be Haswell-EP 4 core options, and Apple could use them, but I'd expect the prices on the 4 core Xeons to drop at that point.

 

[EvilMonk]

Knowing that the time between the previous Mac Pro and the current one (3 years... only with 2 small refresh in between... same generation of CPUs and chipset) and the cMP only beginning to ship at a steady pace (Still didn't get my new Mac Pro 8 cores 3Ghz) I odered almost 2 weeks ago. I wouldn't expect soon

 

[goMac]

Knowing that the time between the previous Mac Pro and the current one (3 years... only with 2 small refresh in between... same generation of CPUs and chipset) and the cMP only beginning to ship at a steady pace (Still didn't get my new Mac Pro 8 cores 3Ghz) I odered almost 2 weeks ago. I wouldn't expect soon

I think a lot of that time went into the redesign, and the spin up the factory and manufacturing.

Given that's not a factor this time (unless Apple is abandoning the can design) I don't think that sort of timeframe really applies here.

 

[MMcCraryNJ]

There's some speculation that the base model could move to 6 cores.

Haswell-EP is upping the core counts on all the processors, but I believe there will still be a 4 core option. The top end is supposed to move to.. I think... 18 cores?

There will still be Haswell-EP 4 core options, and Apple could use them, but I'd expect the prices on the 4 core Xeons to drop at that point.

Ah, I see. Thanks for the info.

This makes my decision a bit tricky. I'm currently saving up to order a 6-core model and upping the storage to 512. I'm currently a student, but I graduate the third week of September. I wanted to have it ordered about a week before that date to get in on the student discount ($330 off, plus whatever is saved on the tax). I don't need any more than the 6c, so if I wait until the refresh I could potentially save more money even without a student discount. But if I wait for nothing, then I'd lose that money.

I guess I just have to hope we get more info before the month of September.

 

[paulrbeers]

That comparison isn't really accurate, because on Haswell the core counts will all jump again. Sure, each core may only be 5-10% faster, but if the base model moves to six cores, that's going to be about 60% faster than the previous model, not 5-10% faster.

I don't think the current Mac Pro is a bad machine at all, or slow, but let's be realistic here. Haswell-E is getting a core count boost from all the info we've heard so far.

First off, I specifically noted in paragraph two that I was comparing Core to Core and not counts of cores. That's an impossible comparison because not all software scales based on cores. Some are single to quad threaded and thus 6 cores wouldn't matter at all. Other's do not scale well, so even if you add 2 more cores it wouldn't necessarily be an increase of 50%. Sure your geekbench scores will increase, but again only some scenarios will it matter.

Further, it is an IF the entry level starts at 6. I've seen various rumors about Haswell-E and it's all over the board with how many cores it will have. 4 is still very possible and probably will be especially for power "lite" servers. Would Apple bump to 6-core as its entry? Sure, they could. That doesn't mean they will. The only thing we CAN be sure of, is that core to core, it's only a 5% increase....

 

[goMac]

Ah, I see. Thanks for the info.

This makes my decision a bit tricky. I'm currently saving up to order a 6-core model and upping the storage to 512. I'm currently a student, but I graduate the third week of September. I wanted to have it ordered about a week before that date to get in on the student discount ($330 off, plus whatever is saved on the tax). I don't need any more than the 6c, so if I wait until the refresh I could potentially save more money even without a student discount. But if I wait for nothing, then I'd lose that money.

I guess I just have to hope we get more info before the month of September.

First off, I specifically noted in paragraph two that I was comparing Core to Core and not counts of cores. That's an impossible comparison because not all software scales based on cores. Some are single to quad threaded and thus 6 cores wouldn't matter at all. Other's do not scale well, so even if you add 2 more cores it wouldn't necessarily be an increase of 50%. Sure your geekbench scores will increase, but again only some scenarios will it matter.

Further, it is an IF the entry level starts at 6. I've seen various rumors about Haswell-E and it's all over the board with how many cores it will have. 4 is still very possible and probably will be especially for power "lite" servers. Would Apple bump to 6-core as its entry? Sure, they could. That doesn't mean they will. The only thing we CAN be sure of, is that core to core, it's only a 5% increase....

Apple could still offer 4 cores as the entry level, but I don't see Intel keeping the 4 cores at the same price, I think Intel would possibly drop the price of the four core. With the top end moving to 18 cores-ish it's going to push the entire line down.

Apple could very well continue offering 4 cores as the base, not drop the price, and keep the change, but then they have to add an extra 18-ish core model at the top end, which is why I think there is a good chance they could just drop the 4 core off the bottom.

There's a lot of uncertainty here, it's definitely not a simple refresh. Haswell-EP is actually a pretty significant refresh with the core counts shifting.

Almost all pro software these days is optimized for multiple cores, usually up to 8 or 12. Very rarely do I see pro software that isn't. Does one need the speed boost of extra cores? I don't know. Just reporting the facts. Haswell-EP is not going to just be a minor upgrade, especially once you pull DDR4 RAM into the package as well.

The rev b nMP upgrade is going to be similar to the jump from the 2006/2007 Mac Pro to the 2008. New type of RAM, decently faster GPUs, iteration on the processor architecture that produces more cores and finer optimizations.

 

[MacProCard]

Kind of funny to see all the speculation here. I'm new to Mac so this is a first for me. Just released the dang thing to where you can get it, and now all the haters so desperately want this thing to be "outdated" already. That's what they're waiting for..the even better one. lol

 

[reco2011]

And we said that's irrelevant since this thread is asking about the Mac Pro.

Whether we're talking about the Mac Pro or not is irrelevant. The CPU technology used in the Mac Pro is out of date. Let's step back one year to the oMP. Would you have said the CPU technology it used was not out of date?

----------

Haswell is only about 5-10% faster than Ivy Bridge (for CPU) on CONSUMER processors. Thus, even if there was a Haswell Xeon (which there is not), saying that it is "out of date" is hardly true. It might not be the newest architecture, but it holds its own against the newest. At 5-10%, most users would never even notice and even in renderings you are looking at maybe shaving a couple minutes off an hour long encoding.

Truthfully, even Sandy Bridge holds its own against Haswell. Heck as we have seen comparing the 2010/2012 Westmere based Mac Pros, even they hold their own against the new Ivy Bridge based Mac Pros.

Sadly we have only seen minor 5% increases from generation to generation since the i-series processors were introduced. Most of the increases have come from the iGPU's which are not used in Xeon processors anyway. Yes we have seen an increase in CPU cores jammed into one die, but not an increase as it pertains to a single core processing power.

I didn't say the current Xeon processors aren't fast nor that they couldn't hold their own. I merely said it's already out of date technology.

 

[fuchsdh]

Kind of funny to see all the speculation here. I'm new to Mac so this is a first for me. Just released the dang thing to where you can get it, and now all the haters so desperately want this thing to be "outdated" already. That's what they're waiting for..the even better one. lol

"Haters" seems like a strong and erroneous word choice.

 

[EvilMonk]

Kind of funny to see all the speculation here. I'm new to Mac so this is a first for me. Just released the dang thing to where you can get it, and now all the haters so desperately want this thing to be "outdated" already. That's what they're waiting for..the even better one. lol

Well you'll find out that its common for the Mac community...
Always whining about one thing, speculating, then complaining about speculations... once its released they say its the best thing ever even if they were complaining that they wouldn't buy anymore Apple products if it happened...

----------

Whether we're talking about the Mac Pro or not is irrelevant. The CPU technology used in the Mac Pro is out of date. Let's step back one year to the oMP. Would you have said the CPU technology it used was not out of date?

----------



I didn't say the current Xeon processors aren't fast nor that they couldn't hold their own. I merely said it's already out of date technology.

Compared to what?
Just to let you know there isn't any competition to Intel out there... and I don't see yet the day apple will release anything with more than 2 sockets... so exit the Xeon E7...

 

[AidenShaw]

my rule of thumb- if you're not sure whether ECC memory is critical or not, you don't need it.
Some people do, but not everyone.

Good rule.

For me, I did buy an E5-1650v2 system (T3610) both because it could support 128 to 256 GiB of RAM and because the RAM was ECC.

I don't need ECC because I run critical tasks that would be compromised by a single bit error, but because I don't want to wonder if some corruption, app or system crash is due to a memory problem.

With ECC - a memory error gives me a BSOD with "memory error" clearly stated as the cause.

Something else to consider is the motherboard in this thing. It was a pretty radical change from a design standpoint. Usually they like to recoup costs associated with development before they have to re-tool things. --Someone else mentioned mac mini being long in the tooth...could be the reason.

Another thing to consider is while the new socket may be faster, a new 6c version will still lose to a 12c old version in practical computing.

A couple of comments....

First, motherboards are dirt cheap to design - it's all automated. In no way is Apple constrained by "it would be too expensive to redesign the motherboard". Look at the variety of motherboards that Asus, MSI, ... produce - if it were capital-intensive they couldn't afford the breadth of their offerings.

Second, the same motherboard could work with the Haswell-EP. (The Haswell-E has been shipping for a long time, the -EP is the one for the new MP6,1.)

Why? Because the motherboard is the little round thing at the bottom with the C602 (AKA X79) PCH. The processor is on a daughtercard - which obviously would need to use the new socket. Searches on the web offer conflicting opinions on whether the C602 will work with the Haswell-EP.

Third, much of the engineering effort on the MP6,1 was dealing with packaging and thermal issues. You don't have to start over from square one if the new CPU uses 10 watts more or less - it's a minor parameter adjustment for the CAD model.

Just to let you know there isn't any competition to Intel out there... and I don't see yet the day apple will release anything with more than 2 sockets... so exit the Xeon E7...

It looks unlikely that Apple will ever release any new system with two sockets.

 

[handsome pete]

Whether we're talking about the Mac Pro or not is irrelevant. The CPU technology used in the Mac Pro is out of date.

Of course it's relevant. Do yourself a favor and read the first post of this thread. It's asking about opinions on buying the Mac Pro. As pointed out to you numerous times, the Mac Pro uses a Xeon processor, the most current one available. Haswell EP is expected sometime towards the end of the year. You cannot buy this now. So Apple is using the most current processor for this computer. I'm not sure why that's so hard for you to understand.

Unless you're trying to play semantics by constantly referring to the consumer chips. And if that's the case then the Mac Pro will always be using outdated technology unless they start throwing some i7s into it. And they're not going to do that, so that's why it's completely irrelevant to this discussion.

Let's step back one year to the oMP. Would you have said the CPU technology it used was not out of date?

Of course. There were Xeons available with newer architecture. Not the same situation as the current Mac Pro.

 

[AidenShaw]

As pointed out to you numerous times, the Mac Pro uses a Xeon processor, the most current one available.

Haswell Xeons are in fact shipping and have been for some time.

Haswell EP is expected sometime towards the end of the year. You cannot buy this now. So Apple is using the most current processor for this computer. I'm not sure why that's so hard for you to understand.

But since Haswell consumer chips and Haswell Xeons are currently shipping, why is it so hard to understand that the MP6,1 is using previous generation technology?

There aren't any current technology (Haswell) E5-16xx v2 and E5-26xx v2 CPUs right now, but the E5 v2 CPUs are clearly previous generation - even if they're the latest available. We're a few weeks or months from the E5-16xx v3 and E5-26xx v3 chips that will use Haswell.

But, since I recently bought a Dell T3610 hex core (same E5-1650 v2 as the hex MP6,1) - clearly I decided for myself that the Ivy Bridge was good enough. But I would never claim that the Ivy Bridge is the latest technology - clearly Haswell is the latest. My new Dell T3610 is using previous generation technology - but it is the right machine for me right now.

 

[Thunderbird]

There's already a recent thread on this question:

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1742828/

 

[handsome pete]

Haswell Xeons are in fact shipping and have been for some time.

Yes, but not the Haswell EP chips that Apple will logically upgrade to. So unless Apple would consider any of these other chips then why even bring it up?

But since Haswell consumer chips and Haswell Xeons are currently shipping, why is it so hard to understand that the MP6,1 is using previous generation technology?

Because if we go by that, then the Mac Pro will be frequently not using current technology.

If someone is specifically looking to buy the Mac Pro, then the only relevant part information would be the actual parts that will be used for upgrades.

 

[MacProCard]

A couple of comments....

First, motherboards are dirt cheap to design - it's all automated. In no way is Apple constrained by "it would be too expensive to redesign the motherboard". Look at the variety of motherboards that Asus, MSI, ... produce - if it were capital-intensive they couldn't afford the breadth of their offerings.

Second, the same motherboard could work with the Haswell-EP. (The Haswell-E has been shipping for a long time, the -EP is the one for the new MP6,1.)

Why? Because the motherboard is the little round thing at the bottom with the C602 (AKA X79) PCH. The processor is on a daughtercard - which obviously would need to use the new socket. Searches on the web offer conflicting opinions on whether the C602 will work with the Haswell-EP.

Third, much of the engineering effort on the MP6,1 was dealing with packaging and thermal issues. You don't have to start over from square one if the new CPU uses 10 watts more or less - it's a minor parameter adjustment for the CAD model.

It looks unlikely that Apple will ever release any new system with two sockets.

Okay. You should spend your time building factories and shrinking other technologies down to 1/10 their normal size.

I looked at the T3610. I believe B&H had them. I also looked at the HP Z820. I just could invest that much in an outdated design.

 

[AidenShaw]

Okay. You should spend your time building factories and shrinking other technologies down to 1/10 their normal size.

My point is that the incremental effort to update to the new socket is small - regardless of the initial effort.

I looked at the T3610. I believe B&H had them. I also looked at the HP Z820. I just could invest that much in an outdated design.

The T3610 and Z820 are different classes of machines - different in both price class and capability class.

 

[reco2011]

Compared to what?
Just to let you know there isn't any competition to Intel out there... and I don't see yet the day apple will release anything with more than 2 sockets... so exit the Xeon E7...

Compared to the Haswell based technology. Look, I'm not saying the Ivy Bridge based processors are bad. I'm just saying there is newer technology in use (and has been for over a year). I fully understand there are no Haswell based Xeons available. But that doesn't mean the Ivy Bridge technology has been superseded. Therefore, when you talk about the technology, the Mac Pro is behind. That's not a bad thing. It's just the way Intel has decided to manufacture their products.

----------

Of course it's relevant. Do yourself a favor and read the first post of this thread. It's asking about opinions on buying the Mac Pro. As pointed out to you numerous times, the Mac Pro uses a Xeon processor, the most current one available. Haswell EP is expected sometime towards the end of the year. You cannot buy this now. So Apple is using the most current processor for this computer. I'm not sure why that's so hard for you to understand.

Note *I* said technology.

Unless you're trying to play semantics by constantly referring to the consumer chips. And if that's the case then the Mac Pro will always be using outdated technology unless they start throwing some i7s into it. And they're not going to do that, so that's why it's completely irrelevant to this discussion.

I'm referring to technology. The reality is there is a newer technology available.

Of course. There were Xeons available with newer architecture. Not the same situation as the current Mac Pro.

I'm not referring to Xeons. I'm referring to technology. Have I said the word technology enough to make my point?

 

[reco2011]

Yes, but not the Haswell EP chips that Apple will logically upgrade to. So unless Apple would consider any of these other chips then why even bring it up?

I mentioned it as a point of observation (an accurate one at that). Others have turned a simple statement of fact into an attack on the Mac Pro. Some people here need to stop being so defensive of the Mac Pro when no defense is warranted.

 

[handsome pete]

I'm not referring to Xeons. I'm referring to technology. Have I said the word technology enough to where it will sink in?

And have I said that's a pointless semantical argument enough to sink in?


Like I said before, if we're simply talking technology, then the Mac Pro will practically always be behind because it's using the Xeon EP chips. When it gets Haswell, Broadwell consumer chips will be right around the corner. When it gets Broadwell, Skylake consumer chips will be right around the corner. And that's IF the Mac Pro gets updated towards the end of the year. If it doesn't get updated until the following year then the gap is even less.

So what's the point in saying the technology is out of date? Technically you're right. Now does that make you feel better? But as long as Apple is using a certain line of CPUs, then they are the only ones relevant when speculating a system refresh, making all of this "technology" talk dumb.

----------

I mentioned it as a point of observation (an accurate one at that). Others have turned a simple statement of fact into an attack on the Mac Pro. Some people here need to stop being so defensive of the Mac Pro when no defense is warranted.

I couldn't care less about the virtues (or lack there of) of the Mac Pro. But your observation isn't very germane to the conversation, and could be easily misinterpreted by some based on the advice requested.

 

[Truthfulie]

If you think you are going to get benefits from DDR4 RAMs, you should wait. If not, I don't think you need to consider upgrade until Broadwell-E or even Skylake.

 

[reco2011]

And have I said that's a pointless semantical argument enough to sink in?

It's not pointless to me because *I* said technology. Others have taken what I said and misrepresented it into something else. If anyone is playing the semantic argument it would be those who cannot accept the statement is correct.