MP 7,1 Are you happy with how long the 7.1 Mac Pro has lasted?

[playtech1]

I think people were hard on the Mac Pro 7,1 because it's introduction left a massive gap in Apple's product line for a high powered moderate-cost headless Mac that wasn't filled until the Mac Studio came along in 2022. It was the gap it left rather than the machine that was the issue.

I think nowadays people can be rightly critical of the 7,1 for its out-of-date specs for the cost.

Once again the Mac Pro looks like it's at the very bottom of Apple's priority list. It's almost like they expected it to sell like hot cakes despite a Mac OS workstation addressing a very small part of an already niche market.

 

[mode11]

It's not like Apple releases Mac Pros whenever it would be technologically feasible. They're not on a yearly or otherwise predictable cycle.

It's a niche within a niche, and while it's a very interesting and cool one, it's not their first priority.

You can say that again. I think it's fair to say that if it were technologically feasible, Apple would have released the Mac Pro by now. Certainly, alarm bells will be ringing if WWDC comes and goes with no news.

Even if Apple release a new MP this year, the long delay and typical lack of communication have thrown some cold water on the commitment they professed at the 2017 Apology event. It's risky to base a business around such a capricious workstation vendor. Doubly so if the 8,1 turns out to have a significant / surprising change in form factor.

The MacPro isn't for everyone. It's very much a professional machine. What I mean by that is if you can't make up the cost in a couple months time or less, it's not for you. I never understand the whining about how much these systems cost. They pay for themselves.

Not every business has infinite money. I work for a university, and the lack of a sensibly-priced desktop Mac with a decent GPU has traditionally removed them from the conversation when it comes to lab use. The Studio may change that, but universities typically buy HP, Dell or Lenovo PCs that come with a decent Nvidia card. And whilst they wouldn't upgrade the CPU or GPU down the road, it's useful to be able to increase internal storage or RAM.

There were those who wanted the mythical xMac, a mini-tower with less expansion than the Power Mac / Mac Pro of the day; but the main want there was for upgrading the GPU down-the-road...

The GPU has always been the issue. Apple will either sell you a compact / thin / SFF computer with a necessarily middling GPU, or an expensive workstation that has space for a proper desktop GPU. They've refused to sell the equivalent of a typical desktop PC.

Whilst a second-hand Mac Pro partially fills that role, it only works if Apple consistently update the Mac Pro. In the last decade updates have been all over the place.

IMO, the Studio is a pretty decent machine. But it's unclear what Apple's plans for it are once the Mac Pro eventually arrives.

7,1 could see extended life if Apple supported the 7000-series of AMD GPUs, but end-users would be limited to third-party gamer Radeons and maybe some W-series workstation cards, because I doubt Apple would manufacture MPX variants...?

Yes, this is the problem with proprietary form factors. Apple can't just use reference PCBs and stick tasteful black heatsinks on them, they'd need to re-engineer the whole card. Which they can't be bothered to do at this point. Though I expect the bigger issue is that they don't want to extend the lifespan of the 7,1, or raise the bar for the next incarnation - they want people hungry for the 8,1 when it eventually emerges.

I have no idea how your sentence fragment would add anything to what I posted or where it would fit, sorry.

He's saying the Studio Ultra's GPU isn't as powerful as an AMD 6800XT.

The 7,1 started with 256 GB SSD on the base config, now it's 512 GB. Link: https://www.macrumors.com/2022/03/09/mac-pro-now-starts-with-512gb-storage/
It's not technically a price drop, but an upgrade of the base configuration, which arguably amounts to the same thing.

How generous! An extra 256GB SSD amounts to a negligible upgrade for a computer that starts at 6K.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

I have no idea how your sentence fragment would add anything to what I posted or where it would fit, sorry.

I believe you.

 

[deconstruct60]

Even if Apple release a new MP this year, the long delay and typical lack of communication

....

IMO, the Studio is a pretty decent machine. But it's unclear what Apple's plans for it are once the Mac Pro eventually arrives.

Folks accuse Apple of lack of communications, but occasionally this is not so much Apple not communicating and end users not listening and simply inventing what they 'want to hear'.

Apple was abundantly and explicitly clear that the Mac Studio was not the "new Mac Pro". It is a replacement for the large screen iMac. Apple explicitly said so, so there is no 'reading of tea leaves " there . From 2006-2019 the Mac Pro didn't much of anything to the large screen iMac plans at Apple. Why would that change now? It is two different product categories.

The iMac/Studio is covering more of the performance zone that the previous decade Mac Pro /PowerMac covered... but that is just relatively the norm across the PC/Computer industry over long term trends that future smaller systems are more capable of doing the work of older larger systems. ( Moore's Law , other tech advances , etc. )

If Apple brought back the large screen iMac perhaps that would be a threat to the Mac Studio. But the Mac Pro ... that is just inventing things Apple said exactly the opposite of their strategic direction . So far there are very miniscule signs Apple is trying to bring back the large screen iMac. The Studio display is not a good sign. The apparently delayed but 'higher still, but less than a XDR ' external monitor is an even worse sign (at the very least Apple is waiting on new screen panel tech to make a big move here. No new "this is the long term future" panel ... no iMac. The screen is pretty much a critically essential part of the system.)

This line of "confusion Mac Studio / MP " smells more like yet another Apple should do a far more affordable xMac ( $1,000's price range , hyper modular box with slots). If the MP got 'rid' of the Mac Studio , then it would have to lower in price to cover that range. For the last decade, Apple has said 'No' to the xMac. It has been clear (to characterize the communication there hasn't been clear is ludicrous. ) . The switch to Apple Silicon and the Mini Pro and Mac Studio is an even more clear 'No' (to the hyper modularity aspects of the xMac. It is not a "no" to covering most of the performance. )

Yes, this is the problem with proprietary form factors. Apple can't just use reference PCBs and stick tasteful black heatsinks on them, they'd need to re-engineer the whole card.

It is about function more than form. If Apple just sprinkled 'apple pee' on a reference AMD card it really wouldn't work well with all those XDR and Studio Display and Thunderbolt display monitors that Apple sold. The standard AMD card doesn't have Thunderbolt output. Thunderbolt is pragmatically not proprietary at all. If pass the qualifications can get a "Thunderbolt" logo utilization authorization. ( Intel has to stamp it. And it is single company. ).

Thunderbolt to a Apple monitor is a Mac standard. The whole line up does it. It is inherently a property what being a Mac is at this point. Some Macs have a HDMI video out, but that is really a secondary video out in the Mac ecosystem.


The MPX connector is at a huge disconnect with the M-series SoC in that Apple solves most of the problem at the main package level. On Apple silicon the connector is mostly a solution in search of a problem (that is mostly now gone). Its value as a "solution" is much lower. ( The Main SoC can itself drive 4-to-6 TB connectors. ) . What is still hobbled is the 7,1 which could very well be a static (and shrinking over time) user base. Again a value proposition problem as to return on investment.

[ AMD added iGPU to their mainstream packages. 'XPU" packages are coming to server land systems also. Apple isn't completely outside the technological trends here. They are adopting at a different speed. ]

 

[mode11]

Folks accuse Apple of lack of communications, but occasionally this is not so much Apple not communicating and end users not listening and simply inventing what they 'want to hear'.

What's Apple's latest communication about the forthcoming Mac Pro? Sorry, I must have missed it.

Apple was abundantly and explicitly clear that the Mac Studio was not the "new Mac Pro".

Yes. Don't think I (or anyone else) have claimed otherwise.

It is a replacement for the large screen iMac. Apple explicitly said so, so there is no 'reading of tea leaves " there .

Did they actually 'explicitly say so'? My recollection is that the 27" iMac was silently discontinued around the same time as the Studio's release, and people just put 2 and 2 together. In any case, I made no comment about the iMac.

From 2006-2019 the Mac Pro didn't much of anything to the large screen iMac plans at Apple. Why would that change now? It is two different product categories.

Sorry, I'm struggling to follow your point here. Between 2006 and 2019, the Mac Pro went through a variety of form factors, including an iMac chassis, along with long periods of being forgotten about.

The iMac/Studio is covering more of the performance zone that the previous decade Mac Pro /PowerMac covered... but that is just relatively the norm across the PC/Computer industry over long term trends that future smaller systems are more capable of doing the work of older larger systems. ( Moore's Law , other tech advances , etc. )

Yes, we're all well aware that computers get faster, and today's iPad kicks the ass of yesterday's tower. What's your point?

If Apple brought back the large screen iMac perhaps that would be a threat to the Mac Studio. But the Mac Pro ... that is just inventing things Apple said exactly the opposite of their strategic direction . So far there are very miniscule signs Apple is trying to bring back the large screen iMac.

Sorry, are you actually replying to someone else? I'm starting to think so, since I never mentioned the iMac, and you keep going on about it.

The Studio display is not a good sign. The apparently delayed but 'higher still, but less than a XDR ' external monitor is an even worse sign (at the very least Apple is waiting on new screen panel tech to make a big move here. No new "this is the long term future" panel ... no iMac. The screen is pretty much a critically essential part of the system.)

Whatever; I never professed to have any interest in the Studio Display. It's terrible value, with its sole distinction, other than typically nice Apple build quality, being 5K resolution.

This line of "confusion Mac Studio / MP " smells more like yet another Apple should do a far more affordable xMac ( $1,000's price range , hyper modular box with slots). If the MP got 'rid' of the Mac Studio , then it would have to lower in price to cover that range. For the last decade, Apple has said 'No' to the xMac. It has been clear (to characterize the communication there hasn't been clear is ludicrous. ) . The switch to Apple Silicon and the Mini Pro and Mac Studio is an even more clear 'No' (to the hyper modularity aspects of the xMac. It is not a "no" to covering most of the performance. )

I didn't invent the rumour that the Studio may be a one-and-done. At this point, the onus is on Apple to show a consistent update schedule for their Pro desktop offerings (which includes the Studio).

The Mac Pro is widely (and uncontroversially) believed to be delayed. The rumour is that the planned 4xMax "Extreme"
chip didn't work out. Unless Apple has something else up their sleeve (which of course they may do), the only other solution that we know of is the Ultra. At the same time, the Studio is still on M1 whilst almost everything else is on M2. It's reasonable to speculate that if the Mac Pro is forced to make do with an Ultra, they won't want the cheaper Studio competing with it. Hence it might stay on M1 for the foreseeable, or even be discontinued.

To be clear, this is not something I'd relish. I'd like to buy an M2 Max Studio, but I want to know Apple's medium-term desktop strategy first. Something only the release of the Mac Pro will reveal.

It is about function more than form. If Apple just sprinkled 'apple pee' on a reference AMD card it really wouldn't work well with all those XDR and Studio Display and Thunderbolt display monitors that Apple sold. The standard AMD card doesn't have Thunderbolt output. Thunderbolt is pragmatically not proprietary at all. If pass the qualifications can get a "Thunderbolt" logo utilization authorization. ( Intel has to stamp it. And it is single company. ).

Thunderbolt to a Apple monitor is a Mac standard. The whole line up does it. It is inherently a property what being a Mac is at this point. Some Macs have a HDMI video out, but that is really a secondary video out in the Mac ecosystem.

Seems like another own-goal. Perhaps if Apple gave their monitors the ability to connect to DisplayPort in addition to Thunderbolt, they would be more useful all round. Given they use the same connector, and TB is presumably just channelling DP over some of the pins, it wouldn't be a massive stretch.

 

[Smartuser]

How generous! An extra 256GB SSD amounts to a negligible upgrade for a computer that starts at 6K.

The graphics card was also updated. In any event, you're sidestepping the point. Somebody posted wrongly that there were no price drops and I proved them wrong and backed it up with facts. It wasn't about them being generous.

I believe you.

Instead of wasting time with sentence fragments and then posting condescending witty remarks if they don't care to decipher your posts, just post clearly.

 

[Smartuser]

He's saying the Studio Ultra's GPU isn't as powerful as an AMD 6800XT.

Thanks, my aversion to unpunctuated writings may have prevented me from seeing that, also the fact that I haven't kept up with AMD GPUs.

The "I believe you" post just puts it over the top and wins the Condescension Academy Award.

 

[mode11]

The graphics card was also updated.

Well, you should have said. Though according to Tech Power Up (https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-pro-w5500x.c4105), the W5500X is only 3% more powerful than the old RX580, so nothing to get too excited about.

In any event, you're sidestepping the point. Somebody posted wrongly that there were no price drops and I proved them wrong and backed it up with facts. It wasn't about them being generous.

I don't think you proved anything. For a start, to be pedantic, they were correct - there wasn't a price drop. You're just arguing that a spec bump is equivalent to one.

And given that 256GB and 512GB are both pathetic for a workstation, the buyer would have to upgrade anyway. So there was no meaningful change in the value proposition.

 

[Smartuser]

Well, you should have said. Though according to Tech Power Up (https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-pro-w5500x.c4105), the W5500X is only 3% more powerful than the old RX580, so nothing to get too excited about.

You keep deflecting the price drops (see below) by saying they weren't exciting, which I never stated.

I don't think you proved anything. For a start, to be pedantic, they were correct - there wasn't a price drop. You're just arguing that a spec bump is equivalent to one.

And given that 256GB and 512GB are both pathetic for a workstation, the buyer would have to upgrade anyway. So there was no meaningful change in the value proposition.

If you actually read the linked articles, they were actual price drops for the higher 2013 Mac Pro configurations, and this also applies similarly to the 2019 Mac Pro configuration.

It's really simple: Somebody posted here that there were never any price drops on the 2013 and 2019 Mac Pros, I was able to find facts that prove the opposite, and now you somehow go on this futile attempt to somehow discuss it away because it wasn't enough of a drop for you.

Two configurations of the 2013 Mac Pro that were sold by Apple on their site had a price drop. They cost X and Y, respectively, before the drop, and less than that after. In addition to that, everything that was CTO on those configurations was also dropped in price. The price dropped, it was labeled as a price drop and reported on as a price drop.

For the 2019 Mac Pro, the configuration that is now the base one was not sold before by Apple as a non-CTO one, but has also dropped in price.

 

[mode11]

It's not technically a price drop, but an upgrade of the base configuration, which arguably amounts to the same thing.

You keep deflecting the price drops (see below) by saying they weren't exciting, which I never stated.

Make your mind up.

I only questioned your analysis of the 7,1, not the 6,1 (which I agree did have a price drop).

 

[Smartuser]

Make your mind up.

I only questioned your analysis of the 7,1, not the 6,1 (which I agree did have a price drop).

I had replied to the other person who post that there were no price drops. I showed that there irrefutably was one on the 2013 model and that arguably (effectively, in my opinion, but in a way that someone could contest) there also was one on the 2019.

I had never said that either was exciting. What's the contradiction?

 

[prefuse07]

I had replied to the other person who post that there were no price drops. I showed that there irrefutably was one on the 2013 model and that arguably (effectively, in my opinion, but in a way that someone could contest) there also was one on the 2019.

I had never said that either was exciting. What's the contradiction?

Hey, since you're a Smartuser -- let's stop while we're ahead, and not turn this into what usually happens with someone getting banned.

Keep the thread on topic. If you are feeling contentious, please step away from your keyboard for a few minutes and take a few breaths.


Again, let's keep this thread on topic, which is:

Are you happy with how long the 7.1 Mac Pro has lasted?​

Let me also add that -- if you don't even own a 7,1, then you really shouldn't even be posting.

 

[Smartuser]

I don't think you proved anything. For a start, to be pedantic, they were correct - there wasn't a price drop. You're just arguing that a spec bump is equivalent to one.

Since you want to be pedantic: A spec bump in itself just means that specs are raised in a new model. The term doesn't say anything about pricing. A spec bump for the same price amounts to a price drop if that configuration was available before, independent of whether it was sold as CTO only before or also in stores.

And given that 256GB and 512GB are both pathetic for a workstation, the buyer would have to upgrade anyway. So there was no meaningful change in the value proposition.

I happen to think that the entire value proposition of the Mac Pro is pathetic, but I'm not letting this color my statements of fact here.

 

[Smartuser]

Hey, since you're a Smartuser -- let's stop while we're ahead, and not turn this into what usually happens with someone getting banned.

Keep the thread on topic. If you are feeling contentious, please step away from your keyboard for a few minutes and take a few breaths.


Again, let's keep this thread on topic, which is:

Are you happy with how long the 7.1 Mac Pro has lasted?​

Let me also add that -- if you don't even own a 7,1, then you really shouldn't even be posting.

You've cast your vote on the posts, and now only I am not allowed to reply to others. The other side is 100% correct.

Okay got it, there were no price drops on anything ever, and I'm happy with how long the 7.1 Mac Pro has lasted.

 

[prefuse07]

You've cast your vote on the posts, and now only I am not allowed to reply to others. The other side is 100% correct.

Okay got it, there were no price drops on anything ever, and I'm happy with how long the 7.1 Mac Pro has lasted.

I never said the other side was correct, but you came in here spouting this:

Now I'm putzing around on an M1 Ultra Mac Studio that runs rings around a 28 CPU Mac Pro but doesn't have the design, ECC RAM, extensibility and so on.

Yet you've never used a Mac Pro 7,1, have you?

And then when someone tells you that a Studio can't even keep up with an RX-6800XT (in a 5,1 at that):

Nor the ability to keep up with a lowly Amd6800xt

You play the victim card and call him condescending, yet you have the gall to say this to someone else:

So, you know, I would do some research next time before posting these kinds of things.

Why don't you take your own advice and do some research before posting that the Studio can "run rings around a 28 core Mac Pro" -- that is just false.

As to the price drop thing -- again, you're taking the thread off topic by picking a fight with several members over price drops, and that's off-topic. So what if there were or weren't price drops? -- you didn't end up buying one anyway, so it doesn't matter in the end.

It's like me complaining that Bugatti dropped the price on a Veyron, which, btw, I don't own, nor was I looking to ever purchase one, so why would I waste my time arguing over that, you know what I mean?

Anyway, back on topic -- I am glad that you're happy with how long the 7,1 that you never owned lasted.

 

[SDAVE]

Wrong on both counts or at least one, depending how you count it:

The 7,1 started with 256 GB SSD on the base config, now it's 512 GB. Link: https://www.macrumors.com/2022/03/09/mac-pro-now-starts-with-512gb-storage/
It's not technically a price drop, but an upgrade of the base configuration, which arguably amounts to the same thing.

The 6,1 had a price drop in 2017: https://www.macrumors.com/2017/04/04/mac-pro-gpu-cpu-upgrades-price-drop/

So, you know, I would do some research next time before posting these kinds of things.

That's literally not a price drop. They just made the base model have a small bump in SSD size. And also got rid of the RX580X, now it's W5500X for the base model. So you should do research before responding and saying I'm wrong.

The price of the machine is exactly the same as before. It's obviously not worth buying it right now at all, unless you're in dire need of PCIe slots, for which there are more janky work arounds like TB4 external PCIe enclosures.

Regarding 6,1, duly noted, but what happened there from what I remember back then is that the prices on some of the parts, especially Xeon SKUs dropped in price, so Apple had to adjust prices accordingly. So in general, while technically they did drop the price of the final product, it was due to the pricing of the SKUs in the device itself from 3rd parties such as AMD, Intel and whatever memory module provider they were using at the time.

I've been with Apple on the professional side since the 90s, I think I know when I'm wrong about these. This is probably my 30th Mac and not counting how many I've used in different jobs in my long career.

 

[brucewayne]

He isn't dead.

True - he bestowed this on the world a few months ago https://www.macrumors.com/2023/02/01/jony-ive-designs-red-nose-comic-relief/

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Instead of wasting time with sentence fragments and then posting condescending witty remarks if they don't care to decipher your posts, just post clearly.

The irony continues.

 

[m1maverick]

I don't think you proved anything. For a start, to be pedantic, they were correct - there wasn't a price drop. You're just arguing that a spec bump is equivalent to one.

I think you're being awfully pedantic about this. The original price of the six-core standard configuration was $3,999 and was subsequently reduced to $2,999. The original price of the eight-core standard configuration was $4,999 and was subsequently reduced to $3,999. The twelve-core was initially priced at $6,499 and was subsequently reduced to $4,999 while at the same time receiving an upgrade to 16GB (from 12GB) RAM and D500 GPUs (instead of D300s). The original four-core configuration was discontinued at the same time these price cuts went into effect.

These aren't spec bumps to the four-core, they were previous configurations that were reduced in price (with one receiving a bump in spec too) along with the discontinuation of the lowest end model.

I think his post was accurate and anyone challenging it is being pedantic and not in the spirit of his message. At the end of its life all of the 2013 Mac Pro configurations could be had for less than when it was initially introduced. That is a price cut.

All pricing / configuration information was taken from EveryMac.

 

[impulse462]

While I do think the base model is a tad overpriced, I've been pretty happy with my 7,1.

I've made some tame upgrades:
1. running ubuntu bare metal for deep learning workloads
2. 2 Titan RTXs installed
3. 3 8TB sabarent SSDs on a PCIe adapter as well as booting linux from a 2TB samsung SSD
4. upgraded to 192gb of ram

I'm a PhD student and in addition to our departments compute clusters, I've implemented, designed and trained multiple deep learning models and algorithms for my research. Already data from experiments that I've run on this have made it to 2 publications (hoping for 2 more by the time I graduate ). Not to mention I've used it to do hw and projects for graduate courses.

As @prefuse07 mentioned earlier in this thread, sometimes I just sit and stare at it while training because it's really a work of art. Also, compared to building a system myself, the cooling system for the xeon is exquisite; I don't think I've ever seen the CPU cores get above 55C at load. The GPUs on the other hand do get toasty (mid 80s) but thats expected.

Overall I could have saved more money on building my own system but I'm sure that thing would sound like a jet engine while running my experiments. I never was able to get the original cheesegrater so I told myself the extra cost for this was worth it and so far it has been. Not to mention with linux this thing is rock solid...I really only restart the computer to periodically clean the insides since dust tends to build up.

 

[Boil]

Overall I could have saved more money on building my own system but I'm sure that thing would sound like a jet engine while running my experiments.

Yeah, but you could have (slaps top of PC chassis...) packed SO much RGB into this bad boy...! ;^p

 

[dgdosen]

My guess is that M series SoCs are more expensive for Apple to produce than buying from Intel. Every M series changeover has usually resulted in price increases.

Apple just doesn’t have the volume to bring M series prices down. That’s why M series Extreme died. They were never going to make enough to make it cost effective.

Meantime Intel does have the sort of volume to make Xeon cost effective to produce.

So that's saying that Apple no volume purchasing power with TSMC? Even though they're buying wafers for iPhones as well?

Apple sales are down, yet profits are up. That points to just the opposite.

 

[goMac]

So that's saying that Apple no volume purchasing power with TSMC? Even though they're buying wafers for iPhones as well?

Apple sales are down, yet profits are up. That points to just the opposite.

They're not doing enough volume to make up for the design and production costs (vs something like the Xeon). Chips like M1 Ultra are really expensive to design, and they added a fabric that is only used on a fraction of the Macs they ship. The Mac Studio is not really price competitive. Hard to estimate CPU costs, but the Ultra version is $4000, and costs $2000 more than the Pro version. So that doesn't really point to any sort of price savings on the CPU.

Volume purchasing power? Apple is lucky that they have 3 nm capacity wrapped up. But they likely aren't doing runs of stuff like M1 Ultra long enough to really make it super cost effective. iPhone chips are pretty cost effective to product because those are really long runs - probably continuous.

 

[macguru9999]

I love my mac pro 7,1. Bought (hardly) used. no regrets

 

[randy85]

Love mine. Bought a middle spec machine and upgraded with Afterburner, RX 6800XT, aftermarket RAM and 16TB of NVME storage. I even got some wheels for cheap off Amazon. It never crashes and plows through my work.

To me, it doesn't last until the 8.1 comes out. It lasts as long as I can use it. I would even be happy if the Apple Silicon version came out a year ago, none of it detracts from what mine can do.