For people where BOTH cost and running Apple’s apps is of the UTMOST importance (and maybe no so much stability) they can go that way. 100% of people that purchase the Mac Pro are not those folks. And that doesn’t really bother Apple because they will still make a profit on each Mac Pro they sell.
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.
MP All Models Is Apple ****ing themselves over the ThreadRipper 3 yet?
- Thread starter macjunkie2013
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And not just "for the money" either. Threadripper 3 would be a better product than Xeon W even if they cost exactly the same.
Yea, you’re not in denial ?... after Apple literally went on an apology tour for what a failure the trash can Mac pro... but keep on trucking with your own apologies...
Agreed, this is the #1 reason why switched back from Hackintosh to a 2010 Mac Pro a few years ago. The main issue I see is an expectation (promoted by Apple) that the Mac Pro 7.1 is the ultimate workstation, yet in several cases that may not be true?
Never the less, I am using it for 3D and 2D art work with some HitFilm occasionally mixed in. No audio or Abobe Premier. My switch from Nivida to AMD graphics has not been great ether, I admit dropping Nivida really pissed me off, I have and still do work within it, but after a couple years it is clear to me that Apple does not give a ****.
FYI
I read that Threadripper runs faster in Linux, so I guess that might be an option too. I just don't see myself buying the MacPro 7.1 at this time. Almost all the apps I use run native in Linux, except PS. I wish there was an application as good as PS with it comes to painting, editing color channels and filters but I don't see it.
Last edited:
And mobile CPUs - there's plenty of vendors who do Pro Xeon laptops, as opposed to "Pro" laptops.
Because apparently it's only a "Pro" "Workstation" if it has a Xeon in it.
This would have likely been back when cheap motherboards were using chipsets from VIA/SIS, etc.
AM4 is now pretty solid and the new threadripper launch has been pretty flawless.
Intel are not immune to stability and other problems on their HEDT platform. You might not notice if you're on consumer level gear, but X99 and X299 (intel HEDT chipsets) were a mess on launch.
AMD's AM4 and TR4 boards were a bit rough on launch too, but they're well sorted now. My X470 AM4 board in the machine in my sig (it's running an ASrock X470 Taichi) has been pretty rock solid for the past 18 months.
[automerge]1574907618[/automerge]
This is why i think Apple simply MUST ship an AMD box (or a number of them) within the next 12-18 months, or be left behind.
The current i9s in the iMacs are getting thrashed by mid-range R7s on the AMD side.
Either Apple have an absolutely massive ARM based AXX based chip ready for desktop purposes (derived from their iOS devices and scaled up massively) or they need to switch to AMD - or simply be left behind in terms of performance.
Last edited:
Well.... final cut isn't the only video editing software out there.
I'd suggest that if Apple are betting the farm on final cut and logic.... that's a very tenuous hold they have on any sort of pro market.
All it takes is for Adobe to put out a killer version of Premier and they're screwed.
You're talking a 2x performance delta here, BEFORE the 64 core threadrippers come out early 2020.
That will be a 3-4x performance improvement for CPU bound stuff. At some point, people will switch. And like i said, intel have nothing significant on their roadmap for the next couple of years out...
Performance simply doesn’t matter to most of Apple’s customers. Or, I should say, the current performance of even the LOWEST end Macs outstrips what most people use them for... which is why SO very many find it easy to shift to iOS (rather than replace their Mac with another Mac). The majority of computers they sell are to non-Pro’s where if Safari can render the Facebook.com website, that’s all the performance they need. If their Numbers spreadsheet calculates an answer in 4 nanoseconds or 80 nanoseconds, these users don’t care. The folks that DO care 100% about performance and nothing else moved on a looong time ago to systems that could outperform Macs for less money. There are others that care about performance, but the applications and the OS experience is more important than raw performance. You can have the fastest running AMD workstation in the WORLD, but if it’s not running macOS or Apple software, then it’s the fastest running paperweight in the world.
Final Cut isn’t the only video editing software, but a lot of those that use it LOVE to use it or HAVE to use it because their customers require they use it. As I mentioned before, Apple really doesn’t have a horse in the Intel/AMD fight. The performance of what Intel is putting out is FAR greater than the majority of Apple’s customers need, and for many of the remaining ones, other things may take precedence over performance. I mean, consider, the Mac Pro trash can has been power constrained for years, they didn’t even have INTEL’S latest in them, yet they continued to sell.
Threadripper meant to compete with HEDT. EPYC would be comparable to Xeon tho.
AMD is seriously competing with Intel and they actually got reputations for high performance.
Also, macOS Catalina 15.2 Beta added AMD APU code names which means Mac will eventually gonna use AMD CPU.
Anyway, at this point, Intel isn't able to compete with AMD in terms of performance and I don't see any reasons for not to use AMD CPU to replace Intel. If there are, tell me except for TB3.
[automerge]1574911924[/automerge]
Actually, two Asrock motherboards support TB3 but both of them considered as a special type of motherboard.
AMD is seriously competing with Intel and they actually got reputations for high performance.
Also, macOS Catalina 15.2 Beta added AMD APU code names which means Mac will eventually gonna use AMD CPU.
Anyway, at this point, Intel isn't able to compete with AMD in terms of performance and I don't see any reasons for not to use AMD CPU to replace Intel. If there are, tell me except for TB3.
[automerge]1574911924[/automerge]
When we will get USB4 on AM4, that is the moment we will start seeing AMD CPUs in Apple computers.
P.S. Interesting wording you've used there for that bet.
Actually, two Asrock motherboards support TB3 but both of them considered as a special type of motherboard.
Yup. And what's worse (for Intel) is that they don't and they seem to be having supply issues with 14nm which is a 2015 process at this point. It feels like Pentium 4/D vs Athlon 64 days all over again.
Disagree....More like Pentium 4 vs Athlon (non-xp) again. Athlon killed it. Then XP came. Then 64.
Intel had the Pentium 4, which was a lousy ass chip.
Intel had the Pentium 4, which was a lousy ass chip.
Intel is going to be bringing Sapphire Rapids on 2021 with Pcie 5.0 and DDR5, and 2022 with Granite Rapids on 7nm. Since Mac Pro is basically 2020 product, those are most likely going to be next round of updates for Mac Pro.
If Apple was planning to switch to AMD, then new Mac Pro would have been already based on Threadripper 3 which is launching around same time as those Mac Pros are.
If Apple was planning to switch to AMD, then new Mac Pro would have been already based on Threadripper 3 which is launching around same time as those Mac Pros are.
AMD Threadripper 3 didn't even exist in June 2019. It was released in Nov and threadripper is not a server CPU.
AMD has advantages in terms of increasing core counts because of MCM design. Even Intel considering to use MCM for Xeon. Intel is still having problems with 10nm in terms of performance and security so I highly doubt it.
It doesn't matter if Threadripper 3 didn't exist in June 2019. Companies like Apple (or any major PC manufacturers) gets several years of roadmap before any public knowledge so they could have announced it ahead if they were planning to switch. It could have been named "EPYC" but more likely be like threadripper with higher clock speeds. It doesn't really matter since Threadrippers are higher clocked EPYC with Quad-channnel memory.
Sapphire Rapids is Willow Cove based processor (which is successor of Sunny Cove which is Ice Lake is based on) and widely expected to be MCM. Willow Cove is expected to be 10% better than Sunny Cove(which has already 18% higher IPC than Skylake), so I wouldn't worry about its performance. And Sunny Cove and beyond cores doesn't suffer from security problems like Skylake so I wouldn't expect security to be a big concern either.
Apple added AMD APU in macOS Catalina 15.2 beta. This probably means Apple will gonna use AMD CPU. If not, there is no reasons to add AMD APU in macOS.
10nm failed to compete with AMD 7nm. How do you even know that Sapphire Rapids and Willow Cove will be better? Intel has a roadmap and 14nm still exist till the end of 2021. How come?
It may not mean much more than a placeholder. Apple may choose to have Navi based iGPU instead of Intel iGPU on next Macbook Air or smaller MBP. AMD is year behind on curve with their mobile offerings while still struggling with battery life with higher than ideal idle power.
So far Intel is abandoning 10nm for desktop but just going to focus using 10nm on mobile and server product, which doesn't require high clock speed. Intel's 14nm 2021 offering is "Rocket Lake" which is 14nm CPU + 10nm GPU according to rumors, and doesn't look like anything more than APUs for NUCs and some low cost mobile product. It doesn't look like it has anything to do with desktop and server lineups.
Current Ice Lake laptops are available in decent quantity so it looks like yield problems are actually improving and clock speed looks like it is usable for Xeons (Currently 3.9Ghz max so likely in low 4Ghz range for servers)
Sapphire Rapids is going to be using improved version current 10nm so I think they will be able to make sufficient quantity to be viable for main server lineup. Performance wise, it will likely be 20-25% better than current Cascade Lake in terms of IPC so if they can achieve the turbo clock of 4.0 or better, along with likely improvements in multicore scaling, it will likely be competing well against Zen 3, 4 based counterparts.
That's not how it works. Navi iGPU is not available even for the 3rd gen APU in 2020. APU doesnt come separately for mobile CPU.
Be aware that the current-gen is base on 12nm, no 7nm. And yet, the performance is identical or better than the 10th gen 10nm mobile CPU base on Youtube. Once they reach 7nm for mobile CPU, it will be different.
10nm delayed since 2015 and it's very difficult to trust Intel's roadmap especially since 10nm isnt that great in terms of performance.
It is possible. Intel had Kaby Lake-G with Vega M well before AMD's own APUs had Vegas. Then again, it probably won't mean much more than placeholders for something else.
I am very aware current Ryzen APUs are on 12nm. But Ryzen APU's problem is not about what nm it is based on, but it keeps drawing higher than idle power and it has always been a problem for AMD in their laptop APUs. I don't expect 7nm to be much different, and Ice Lake mobile showed great gains in terms power efficiency. So I don't expect Apple to move to Ryzen APU, and even if they switch, they will move to their own ARM solution.
10nm delay is well known since 2016. But this time, Intel actually has product out and are actually available to purchase. There is a big difference between only talking about it and actually having a product out. It means 10nm situation is actually improving.
It really doesn't matter if the 10nm performance isn't as good as their 14nm (Actually, there is no process better than Intel's process in terms of maximum clock speed). Intel needs 10nm for its density so it can increase the core count without shooting power efficiency over the moon. Willow Cove is going to be major improvement over Skylake in terms of IPC so it should be fine even with some clockspeed sacrifice.
TB3 for Apple is not an issue. You can get TB3 working on AMD PC systems already via screwing around, but (and this is the big one) - APPLE were co-developer of thunderbolt with Intel. Apple have whatever they need to make this work out of the box with AMD systems. They part-own the IP.
[automerge]1574930569[/automerge]
Intel were going to be bringing 10nm in 2015-2016, and were claiming 10Ghz by 2004. Intel has a history of claiming big things and not delivering.
Sapphire Rapids is not going to get to AMD's CURRENT core count levels.
If Apple are waiting for Sapphire rapids, they're going to be competing against 64 plus core Threadrippers with 10-25% IPC improvement above and beyond what the just released Threadrippers have. It will be a bloodbath.
AMD aren't standing still on process tech either. They're using TSMC who have 7nm+ in advanced stage and are working on 5nm right now. By the time intel get 10nm shipping in volume, AMD will be on 7nm+ or 5nm TSMC.
Basically intel need to do a ground up re-design (like AMD did with Zen, which took 4-6 years) to fix the various problems they have with core count scaling and being able to build many smaller dies instead of monolithic dies to improve yield to be able to compete.
They have been caught napping by AMD in terms of design - who are currently firing on all cylinders, and 10nm is a disaster.
Intel have previously been able to rely on their fab advantage to make up for less advanced processor designs for decades. But now they have (for the first time i can remember, and i've been in tech for 20+ years) both a design problem AND a fab process problem.
Things are going to be ugly for intel for some time. They have the cash to (eventually) dig themselves out most likely, but all the money in the world simply can't buy development time.
edit:
intel may "have product out" on 10nm right now, but it performs worse than their 14nm parts. Yes, even on mobile - in terms of power consumption.
10nm being "out" right now is a face-saving move for the board to be able to claim to shareholders that 10nm is "shipping". 10nm is a total disaster, but intel have shovelled far too much money into it to write it off entirely.
They're only doing tiny mobile processors with it because the process is so broken thats all they can get an acceptable yield on....
Also, for the non-cpu-tech following apple peeps in here... this is why Apple have been dragging their feet on upgrades, etc. Not because of laziness so much. But because despite intel releasing new CPUs, they've all been basically the same damn thing since 2016 with a different badge on them.
Last edited:
Well if you are referring to the lack of updates for the Trashcan: surely they could have gone with a new GPU design there since the dual one wasn't exactly utilized well nor known for reliability. A single slot for storage in a workstation is a bit sad, too and being stuck on TB2 for six years...?
I'd like to think there would have been plenty of areas to update the machine besides the CPU if only they had wanted to. Didn't stop them from updating their other product lines either.
Yeah, they will, just like they have brought 10 nm process in 2015
That "Vega" GPU was Polaris(GFX 8.1) GPU. True Vega GPUs were all GFX 9.0 and higher.
Then explain to everybody here:
1) Placeholder for what? Another AMD based Apple computer? Because that is the only option
2) What is Van Gogh doing in those kexts? You don't know what Van Gogh is? Well, it is Semi-Custom AMD APU. Semi-Custom. It will not be a product available anywhere else. What is it doing in Apple kexts?
Could it be that somebody in Apple headquarters is testing software, how it runs on AMD CPUs and APUs?
I love this logic, that can appear only on Apple forums.
It is more expensive and more work demanding to go from Intel(x86) to AMD(x86) for CPUs on their desktop and mobile computer lineup, than to go from x86, to ARM.
Come on, guys. Stuff like this can only appear only on this forum.
Yeah, they will, just like they have brought 10 nm process in 2015
That "Vega" GPU was Polaris(GFX 8.1) GPU. True Vega GPUs were all GFX 9.0 and higher.
Then explain to everybody here:
1) Placeholder for what? Another AMD based Apple computer? Because that is the only option
2) What is Van Gogh doing in those kexts? You don't know what Van Gogh is? Well, it is Semi-Custom AMD APU. Semi-Custom. It will not be a product available anywhere else. What is it doing in Apple kexts?
Could it be that somebody in Apple headquarters is testing software, how it runs on AMD CPUs and APUs?
Apple could be testing in-house created ASICs that replicate the works of the Dutch masters.
This is a rumors site and you're speculating like crazy, great, but don't mistake some codewords for any sort of definitive product direction.
Then you clearly do not understand the scale
. We have never before seen AMD APUs, ALL OF THEM, let alone one APU, in Apple kexts. And you clearly forgot most important part: Van Gogh, which is Semi-Custom product. Semi-Custom. If it appears in Apple kexts, and it is semi-custom product it means two things:1) Apple is testing stuff on this hardware, because they already have samples of it. That is what they need Kexts in the OS for.
2) APPLE ORDERED THE DESIGN OF VAN GOGH! Nobody else could, and it wont appear anywhere else, if it is product for Apple, for which, everything points to. You get it right now, what Van Gogh is, and what is happening?
Then you clearly do not understand the scale
1) Apple is testing stuff on this hardware, because they already have samples of it. That is what they need Kexts in the OS for.
2) APPLE ORDERED THE DESIGN OF VAN GOGH! Nobody else could, and it wont appear anywhere else, if it is product for Apple, for which, everything points to. You get it right now, what Van Gogh is, and what is happening?
No, I understand. I'm just keeping my feet on the ground. You can dream all you like but you need to keep perspective, this is in no way definitive of any real purchasable product to be available in the near term.