Not really. His biggest issue right now is disk performance and networking speed. Moving to an internal NVME RAID and adding a 100Gb/s ethernet card probably solve his problems over his current iMac Pro. The FPGA card would just be a bonus. He will probably move one of the external GPUs from its enclosure into the new machine.
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.
Apple to Release Mac Pro and Pro Display XDR on December 10
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not really. His biggest issue right now is disk performance and networking speed. Moving to an internal NVME RAID and adding a 100Gb/s ethernet card probably solve his problems over his current iMac Pro. The FPGA card would just be a bonus. He will probably move one of the external GPUs from its enclosure into the new machine.
I remember the 68030 CPU clocking at 25 MHz. And thinking I was in heaven upgrading it with an aftermarket unit that clocked at 50 MHz.
[automerge]1575829820[/automerge]
Got it. You're into product names.
I'm into performance and costs. And Apple's best performing computers for the pro market were substantially more expensive relative to typical tech salaries back then than they are today.
What's interesting, nobody whined about it then.
So you want to stick a cpu with a TDP of 280W into a case designed around a cpu with a TDP of 140W? I’m sure that will work well.
Bruh, I was with you up until you crashed the car into a brick wall. You need a better counter argument, damn, man.
Last edited:
That is awesome! Does that mean we will not have to hear you complain about them any more? Anyone who considers Ubuntu a replacement for a macOS machine is certainly not someone in Apple's target market.
Those aren't drives. Like the iMac Pro the single SSD drive is broken up into 3 physical components. The T2 ( with the 'brains" ; SSD controller ) and the two NAND chip daughtercards. There is only one storage device there. Those cards are basically 'dumb' places to hold the data. The NAND chips are far more likely to eventually wear out so they are replaceable those cards are not pragmatically interchangeable between systems. They are meant to be used just by the specific T2 chip instance. ( just as the NAND chips in a regular SSD are mated up to that specific controller.)
If getting a 4TB drive then really should just refer to it as a 4TB drive. Pretty good chance those daughtercards may have to be replaced in pairs ( unless Apple went out of thei way to redundantly store the wear and other meta data. ]
I have a 2018 Mac mini with eGPU for my daily. The eGPU was better than nothing, but I won't miss it. The eGPU is bottlenecked and buggy (less buggy under Catalina but it still does weird sh** that my Hack doesn't do).
Random users? No.
Apple implementation of the T2 SSD on the iMac Pro and Mac Pro probably won't be mimied by 3rd parties because it is really internal SSD components, not complete drives.
Removing and replacing the NAND chip daugthercard will require reinitializing the T2 SSD ( and most likely all the initial metadata about the drive). That isn't going to be plug-and-play. There will be a tool to securely to do that. Authorized repair will be able to do this but it probably won't trickle out to random 3rd parties.
The more accurate verb here is that the drive will be able to be repaired ( failed NAND chips ), but not particularly a upgrade nor replace ( as will need a backup to restore any repair and deep reset. ).
So they are just supposed to waste money if they don't need the extra hardware? Businesses exist to make as much money as possible. If they do not need more than 8 cores, why waste money paying for more?
iMac, iMac Pro, MacBook Pro and Mac mini are not legitimate replacements to the Mac Pro, even compared to the base configuration. The Mac Pro has expandability and much MUCH better thermals.
And a much better power supply as well; 1.4 KW iirc.
I’d imagine a heap will end up rack mounted for either whole-machine or virtualised build servers.
I’ll likely get one once I’ve moved (it’s not practical to move one internationally IMO) - for development work. More cores and effortless extra memory and PCIe SSD storage is very attractive.
If they offer a config with an even more basic video card (I use 2x 4K displays on a god damn Mac mini with no egpu now) I’d probably take that option, assuming it’s still enough to run a couple of 4K displays (the 580 is listed as running 6 of them, I do not have that many eyeballs).
Yes, it’s a different kind of machine. Only the box size and shape is similar. For my uses, it’s a poor choice, as I would never use 99% of what differentiates it from an 8 core iMac. I needed everything the 5,1 could deliver. No longer.
I'm specifically responding to your desire for their sales to be absolute crap. That comes across as jealously and frustration borne out of the price of the machine that I'm 100% certain you want. For the record, literally one job for a professional pays for this machine's base price. And if were really honest - that's a week and half worth of work. So, again - doesn't sound like this machine is for you. iMac Pro is still out there. Or a maxed out spec'd PC will do you fine, Alexandr.you need to stop using google translator - being able to afford something doesn't mean buying it as if you've got something to prove
if i'm pissed about anything in this case is that apple hasn't created a display line up for various needs.
There's nothing to argue. I'm talking about the Mac Pro and he's talking about a different product from 30 years go.
I see it a little bit differently. I don’t see this as Apple turning over a new leaf for the Mac. Folks that are still using the Mac at this point are doing so because they HAVE to (either they require some particular software or just really can’t stand working in a non macOS workflow). If they haven’t defected by now (someone mentioned a company still using 2009 systems), they’re not going to. Even after the Mac Pro is available, some may STILL stick to those 2009 systems. I don’t see this as, “Hey, folks, don’t leave!” or “Hey, come back, we’re sorry!”. It’s more like a simple business decision. Is this market large enough to be profitable? Then, can we make something that could sell to this market?
it does, kinda. The Mac Pro is the only system of it’s kind that can run macOS and Apple Applications easily and legally. So, even if I could get a better spec’d Threadripper system for $12, if it doesn’t run then apps I need, it’s a non-starter.
It IS pretty easy to know, actually. You can look at the market, where every potential iteration of product available under the sun, and see which one consumers are purchasing. In the broader PC market, portable devices are outselling desktops across the board. And, in many sectors, tablets are even outselling laptops. So, it’s easy to guess that the Mac mobiles would still be commanding 80% of all sales, and any new desktop would just slice out a sliver of the remaining %20 (MOST of which will still go to the iMac).
I actually think that a PC vendor could make a nice bit of change by providing systems that are easily hackintoshaable. I would imagine the ”tinker” value of keeping one of those running would far outweigh the ”tinker” value of an Apple made product.
Not probably, it absolutely will NOT sell in the millions.
Maybe over a number of years, sure, but by next year this time, if they’ve sold a million, I’d be quite surprised.
Last edited:
The people buying this don’t care what it looks like. It’s a tower and will be under a desk or in a cabinet.
I'm talking about Macintoshes models and I listed out the price of every Mac Pro since it's 2006 debut. Thats what i'm into.
Yearly sales of Macs in general is a little under 20M, the vast majority of which are laptops.Not probably, it absolutely will NOT sell in the millions.
If they update the Mac Pro in late 2021 and have sold a million of them before the 2019 is discontinued I’ll be surprised. But that’s nothing to do with the machine being “over priced” - the vast majority of computing needs for Mac users are met by the lower tier products.
That's not what I said.
The price/performance ratio of this machine is bizarre. The base is very expensive, and not that fast.
The SSD is tiny and there’s a paltry 32 GB of memory, that’s quite terrible, IMO.
I know it’s expandable, but then it will cost even more.
So it's not about price point, its about what you get for that price.
I agree with this. I don't expect AMD to take the very high-end (ie: 16" MBP or new MP) of Apple's Mac lineup but mid-range Macs with AMD Zen 2 CPU's would be great and there would little to no performance loss.
Congrats! I helped a lot of folks migrate off of Apple over the years. Some of them had an emotional attachment to the company and were able to be generally happier by migrating to a system that they designed and that they can decide which technologies they want to use and when.
My point exactly. The people that need/can justify the power of the Mac Pro simply don’t number in the millions.
I wonder how much it costs Apple to manufacture that case. The Dune pro gives some idea, but not really.
You know, that "trash can" Mac Pro isn't that bad of a design. The only problem with it is that it was running too hot for the purpose of running parallel GPU's but what if Apple re-engineered it so that it could handle the guts of the iMac Pro => one CPU & one GPU and give the user the capability to upgrade RAM & SSD? That should satisfy users that are looking for a desktop Mac that has the power of the iMac Pro without having to buy a built-in display yet don't need a full-blown Mac Pro.
Last edited:
And thats my point. Why is the base configuration $6,000? Don't say it's because of cooling.
That, I agree with. Since it doesn't come with a 5K display like my iMac, I think it should have been $4,000 or so.