MP All Models 40 core ASI with PCI-E slot is around the corner!!

[ZombiePhysicist]

Sure, and then the next day someone said "hey, let's move the entire product architecture at a fundamental chip level in a direction that makes PC-style modularity extremely difficult" and changed course 180 degrees. Or, Apple had been working for years prior to the 7,1 on a transition plan to ARM and knew exactly that they were doing and what they were saying.

The only thing the above is evidence of is a complete lack of imagination. That somehow SOC means you cant have memory or slots. It does not. Same kind of very certain thinking that told us modular couldn't possibly mean slots—which happened to be proven 100% wrong.

 

[exoticSpice]

The only thing the above is evidence of is a complete lack of imagination. That somehow SOC means you cant have memory or slots. It does not. Same kind of very certain thinking that told us modular couldn't possibly mean slots—which happened to be proven 100% wrong.

You have can't have DIMM slots with a unified memory architecture but it's 100% possible to have PCIe slots.

Plus DIMMS don't have enough bandwidth of they decide on a SoC based mac pro.

I personally don't care for DIMM slots but PCIe slots is a must.

 

[Matty_TypeR]

PCIe slots or slot is fine as long as its not just dedicated to Apple hardware only at rip off prices, and can take PC based cards for storage and Audio, also GPU's or you buy a new Mac pro and 3 years later the 5090 card 8800xt card makes your 3 year old non upgradable mac redundant. Apple would like it to be new one every 3 years most likely.

 

[exoticSpice]

PCIe slots or slot is fine as long as its not just dedicated to Apple hardware only at rip off prices, and can take PC based cards for storage and Audio, also GPU's or you buy a new Mac pro and 3 years later the 5090 card 8800xt card makes your 3 year old non upgradable mac redundant. Apple would like it to be new one every 3 years most likely.

Expect Apple to support standard PC audio and storage pcie cards but not GPUs.

 

[exoticSpice]

Apple knows that it's M1 Ultra GPU is weak. That's why they delayed it. An M2 8 core GPU vs M1 8 core GPU is 13% percent faster.

M1 series had very weak GPUs at the high end.

 

[Matty_TypeR]

the 4090 to 3090 is supposed to be 40% faster, so is the 7900xt so will the M2 be enough at only 13% faster.

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

I think PCIe slots are a given. There have to be features and benefits that separate the Mac Pro from the Studio other than raw power, much in the same way that the Studio is not simply a more powerful Mini (more I/O). Each product has its own narrative.

Apple made a big deal about the return of PCIe slots and Craig F even said in an interview that the Mac Pro fills an additional segment for hobbyists who just want to tinker. They give customers those capabilities and the rest is up to them.

However I don’t see MPX being supported. That would require the same cooling concept as the current machine, and I honestly think Apple will want to move forward with a simpler system. Most non-MPX boards have fans built-in if they’re required.

 

[goMac]

Apple knows that it's M1 Ultra GPU is weak. That's why they delayed it. An M2 8 core GPU vs M1 8 core GPU is 13% percent faster.

Right - it's hard for me to see Apple scrapping an M1 Mac Pro as anything but them knowing it would be DOA. M1 "Extreme" would have trouble against high end cards - especially in dual or quad configs. They'd be releasing a new top end Mac Pro that would be slower than the previous top end Mac Pro.

The M2 we see on new models is going to be substantially different than what the Air has. The Air has a 5 nm version of M2. Newer Macs will probably get a 3 nm version of M2. That should double GPU performance.

M2 dropping to 3 nm would probably give them enough room to make a big scene and say that it's faster than even a Mac Pro with dual 6900s or quad 6800s. They could probably say they're more efficient than a 4090 - but it's doubtful even at the high end they could get past dual 4080s. I would guess their real bottom line standard is they need something that isn't slower than a decked out Mac Pro 7,1.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

You have can't have DIMM slots with a unified memory architecture but it's 100% possible to have PCIe slots.

Plus DIMMS don't have enough bandwidth of they decide on a SoC based mac pro.

I personally don't care for DIMM slots but PCIe slots is a must.

I do not see why dimms couldn't be used. They could effectively be used as the memory space and the unified memory almost like a cache. Another way would be to have the DIMMS be a giant RAM disk or scratch space.

That said, not sure the complexity is worth it. But I do not see why they are technically mutually exclusive. Perhaps not terribly practical, but not sure why it has to be an impossibility.

 

[goMac]

I do not see why dimms couldn't be used. They could effectively be used as the memory space and the unified memory almost like a cache. Another way would be to have the DIMMS be a giant RAM disk or scratch space.

That said, not sure the complexity is worth it. But I do not see why they are technically mutually exclusive. Perhaps not terribly practical, but not sure why it has to be an impossibility.

If everything here turns out like the rumors say - I think thats more effort than Apple wants to put into a Mac Pro.

With Intel - there were a wide variety of CPUs available. They didn't have to build their own workstation chip and architecture - they could just buy from Intel.

Now that they have to do the architectures in house it doesn't seem like they're willing to put in much more effort than "M2, but bigger." Custom architectures for just one machine would hurt the bottom line. Build a Mac Pro using a really big version of the same CPU you'd have in an iPad.

 

[exoticSpice]

the 4090 to 3090 is supposed to be 40% faster, so is the 7900xt so will the M2 be enough at only 13% faster.

I am comparing only the base M2 with 8 core. The minimum increase is what I first compared with.
The M2 10 core GPU version is 35% faster than M1.

Apple could increase the power budget of GPU in the Mac Pro.

 

[exoticSpice]

Right - it's hard for me to see Apple scrapping an M1 Mac Pro as anything but them knowing it would be DOA. M1 "Extreme" would have trouble against high end cards - especially in dual or quad configs. They'd be releasing a new top end Mac Pro that would be slower than the previous top end Mac Pro.

The M2 we see on new models is going to be substantially different than what the Air has. The Air has a 5 nm version of M2. Newer Macs will probably get a 3 nm version of M2. That should double GPU performance.

M2 dropping to 3 nm would probably give them enough room to make a big scene and say that it's faster than even a Mac Pro with dual 6900s or quad 6800s. They could probably say they're more efficient than a 4090 - but it's doubtful even at the high end they could get past dual 4080s. I would guess their real bottom line standard is they need something that isn't slower than a decked out Mac Pro 7,1.

All M2s will be 5nm but we still don't know the details of the M2 Max or Ultra. How they differ from previous gen.

 

[PsykX]

The GPU is definitely the weakness of the M1 line.

I mean, of course it runs circles around integrated cards (those from Intel always sucked from day 1), but it doesn't scale well, especially for it to beat dedicated cards.

Basically those who paid for the 64-cores GPU upgrade on a Mac Studio are throwing their money out of the window.

It makes sense that they scrapped the M1 Extreme and the new Mac Pro altogether, for now.

 

[goMac]

All M2s will be 5nm but we still don't know the details of the M2 Max or Ultra. How they differ from previous gen.

Nope. The rumor is the higher end M2s will be 3 nm. Supposedly 3 nm production will be going online sometime in the second half of 2022. Could have even started already (the next iPhones are rumored to also use the 3 nm process.)

 

[goMac]

I mean, of course it runs circles around integrated cards (those from Intel always sucked from day 1), but it doesn't scale well, especially for it to beat dedicated cards.

From what I've seen - it can in some scenarios. There are workloads that do very well with unified memory. A dedicated GPU might be faster in theory - but may spend a lot of time idle waiting on work in practice.

However - getting there requires a lot of optimization on the part of developers. And it doesn't scale to all workloads. Thats going to be a problem. Some workloads will be improved by Apple Silicon - others will be hurt by it. It also requires the software be properly optimized in Metal.

It would be ideal if customers could choose a discrete GPU solution on Apple Silicon and then everybody could have a solution that works best for them. The risk Apple takes is they may just end up losing those customers to Windows or Linux workstations.

 

[exoticSpice]

Nope. The rumor is the higher end M2s will be 3 nm. Supposedly 3 nm production will be going online sometime in the second half of 2022. Could have even started already (the next iPhones are rumored to also use the 3 nm process.)

That is late next year for 3nm

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

If everything here turns out like the rumors say - I think thats more effort than Apple wants to put into a Mac Pro.

With Intel - there were a wide variety of CPUs available. They didn't have to build their own workstation chip and architecture - they could just buy from Intel.

Now that they have to do the architectures in house it doesn't seem like they're willing to put in much more effort than "M2, but bigger." Custom architectures for just one machine would hurt the bottom line. Build a Mac Pro using a really big version of the same CPU you'd have in an iPad.

What evidence do we have over the effort they are willing to put in? A lot of the same things were being said about the 7,1 and it surprised everyone. We basically got everything we asked for. It was a cheese grater with more slots.

Now if that is your supposition, I can say it's not an unfair supposition. But that's different than some evidence of effort.

Frankly, if they dont put in the effort to make this also a modular machine, they should just forget it. Because the pros/enthusiasts will abandon apple and this was just a wasted exercise. So I'm going to be more optimistic and say, they're going to put in a lot of effort to make this what pros/enthusiasts want.

Hopefully we'll find out this year who guessed better.

 

[exoticSpice]

Build a Mac Pro using a really big version of the same CPU you'd have in an iPad.

lol. The same version as the iPad. What? The M1/M2 barely support monitors and limited to 24GB RAM.

It will likely be based(ie foundation) on the M2 Max which is a Mac chip. Definitely not built for iPad. M2 Max -> M2 Ultra.
Hector Martin the guy who reverse enginners apples' chips says that the true Apple Mac chips are the Pro, Max and Ultra versions.

The Mac Pro will be based on 2 M2 Ultra.

 

[exoticSpice]

Frankly, if they dont put in the effort to make this also a modular machine, they should just forget it. Because the pros/enthusiasts will abandon apple and this was just a wasted exercise. So I'm going to be more optimistic and say, they're going to put in a lot of effort to make this what pros/enthusiasts want.

Yeah, audio pros will be fine with the lack of upgradable RAM it happens. BUT limiting it one PCIe slot is going to the death of the Mac Pro. Audio pros need more than one slot. 3 is the minimum.

 

[goMac]

It will likely be based(ie foundation) on the M2 Max which is a Mac chip.

M2 Max is just a larger version of M2 which is what the M2 iPad will be using.

M2 Max isn't a fundamentally different chip from M2. It has some more memory channels and more GPU cores. Possibly some extra PCIe lanes. But it's like the jump from an i3 to an i5. It's not some new design.

That is late next year for 3nm

Ohhhh I just saw 3nm is delayed at TSMC. Nevermind then! Apple has a problem on their hands then if they have to build a Mac Pro at 5nm or 4nm.

 

[singhs.apps]

Ohhhh I just saw 3nm is delayed at TSMC. Nevermind then! Apple has a problem on their hands then if they have to build a Mac Pro at 5nm or 4nm.

Apple has more than a problem if they are relying on node shrink to gain performance advantage.

 

[Mike Richardson]

If the new Mac Pro does not have PCIe slots then Apple is goddamned stupid.

 

[goMac]

Apple has more than a problem if they are relying on node shrink to gain performance advantage.

Eh, both Nvidia and AMD have been playing the node shrink game for a while now. It's likely going to be the big deal for both vendors next generation.

But I think Nvidia was going down to 5 nm. If Apple is at 5 or 4 nm, and they're stuffing a GPU into the same chiplet as the GPU with standard DDR5 memory... it's going to be an ugly fight. Nvidia and AMD will be bringing faster VRAM and a whole lot more thermal headroom.

 

[singhs.apps]

Eh, both Nvidia and AMD have been playing the node shrink game for a while now. It's likely going to be the big deal for both vendors next generation.

But I think Nvidia was going down to 5 nm. If Apple is at 5 or 4 nm, and they're stuffing a GPU into the same chiplet as the GPU with standard DDR5 memory... it's going to be an ugly fight. Nvidia and AMD will be bringing faster VRAM and a whole lot more thermal headroom.

Point being, Nvidia/AMD are/will be more powerful if comparing at the same node level as Apple. Power draw is not that much of a concern (reasonable limit) if drawing off the wall

 

[Matty_TypeR]

Apple silicon will be focusing on metal, if they drop AMD like Nvidia those 2 have no interest in metal tweaks or drivers. So in metal AS will perform as no support for AMD or NV with PCIe.

2 things in windows 4090 and 7900xt will destroy AS as the M2 cant even boot windows let alone run GFX from it. Will Apple even support windows with AS drivers for DX11 or DX12 i doubt that very much.

If the next Mac Pro is purely OSX metal based it will no doubt be DOA as NV and AMD will support the PC market alone.