MP 7,1 Mac Pro... did they shoot themselves in the foot?

[retta283]

I bet that this is more a business/philosophical problem between NVIDIA and Apple than a technical one and NVIDIA GPUs would work with drivers.

If my memory serves me correct, this is due to the massive Nvidia GPU failures in Apple machines during the late 2000s-early 2010s. Perhaps someone will hack an Nvidia driver/card in somehow someday. Not sure what all would need to go into it.

If there was a prosumer version, I would buy it on launch. But the price and specs are well above what I can justify.

 

[ssgbryan]

You need a third option.

I’m out by the end of the year.

And it won’t just be on the desktop.

 

[Flint Ironstag]

No doubt about that, but if Apple had a prosumer upgradeable Mac between the mini 2018 and Pro 2019, you would buy it? Or you still go for a MP7,1?

Both.

 

[Alaska_guy]

Plenty of e5-2697v3 dual proc machines for $2500 if you look around, just not in the apple space... that's 14 core 28 thread for a single proc. Scores 27k pass mark single processor.... 2 of those would be way overkill/perfect for most prosumers.


https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https://www.ebay.com/ulk/itm/183757661691

 

[tsialex]

Plenty of e5-2697v3 dual proc machines for $2500 if you look around, just not in the apple space... that's 14 core 28 thread for a single proc. Scores 27k pass mark single processor.... 2 of those would be way overkill/perfect for most prosumers.


https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https://www.ebay.com/ulk/itm/183757661691

It's a 2014/2015 used workstation, we are talking different things.

 

[Alaska_guy]

true, I guess if you look at it in todays market, they are producing what they feel is right if your talking new tech. It's highly expensive because its new. I just feel those dual e5's are still VERY valid processors and more than likely will be in another 5-7 years for most people. I guess the trashcan uses e5 v2's. So they may be a valid upgrade for some people, but unless I am mistaken those trash can's can't be upgraded to dual socket and kind of defeats the purpose for people like myself with cMP 5,1's.

 

[ct2k7]

true, I guess if you look at it in todays market, they are producing what they feel is right if your talking new tech. It's highly expensive because its new. I just feel those dual e5's are still VERY valid processors and more than likely will be in another 5-7 years for most people. I guess the trashcan uses e5 v2's. So they may be a valid upgrade for some people, but unless I am mistaken those trash can's can't be upgraded to dual socket and kind of defeats the purpose for people like myself with cMP 5,1's.

Even the new generation isn’t dual socket.

 

[mavericks7913]

Yup we need a mid-range modular Mac desktop. iMac, Mac mini, and iMac Pro cant replace a mid-range modular Mac desktop due to the poor cooling system, upgradability, and form factor.

 

[macguru9999]

I bet that this is more a business/philosophical problem between NVIDIA and Apple than a technical one and NVIDIA GPUs would work with drivers.

I think it stems mainly from the dodgy nvidia graphics daughterboards that plagued the imacs from 2011 and 2012. And all those macbooks. Apple feels let down

 

[dazzer21-2]

I'm curious. Specs-wise, the 7,1 is without a doubt, for the many, absolute overkill! In terms of the price, the base £6K spec is hobbled in terms of its spec (8-core, 32GB RAM, 580x - items that are comparable to a £5k iMac Pro and that includes a screen) and you're paying the premium for the R&D and engineering that has gone into allowing MASSIVE upgradability later on down the line. It's an expensive way in. So, what I'm wondering is this: if you're a film/animation.imaging pro at whom this is aimed, you need not answer this, but for the rest of the MP5,1 and 6,1 or iMac Pro/top-line iMac users looking at this with $ signs in their eyes... what would you use it for? I'll admit, I salivate at the thought of wheeling one under my desk, but in terms of what I'd use it for, I'd be barely using 1% of its potential.

 

[Pressure]

Well, the main problem these days are simply that NVIDIA keeps drumming up CUDA and have no support for METAL, which is the future of MacOS.

 

[chfilm]

I think they did everything right here. A less powerful upgrade would be meaningless for owners of the current 6.1 nMP.
I think prosumers will be extremely happy with an iMac pro, and everyone else with serious needs should just get the new one. It‘ll last 8 years EASILY. Heck, I WANT that new machine, but my nMP is still plenty fast enough for everything I do, and where it‘s not, it‘s due to poor software optimization - looking at you, ADOBE LIGHTROOM.

So I really dont know how to justify this new toy, but I‘m sure, next year I‘ll find a way

 

[alphaod]

The poll is just biased if there is no option is say "I would buy the new Mac Pro."

 

[maflynn]

The poll is just biased if there is no option is say "I would buy the new Mac Pro."

I think the OP is looking at folks who will not be buying the Mac Pro and asking what their options/opinions are. That is they wanted a headless iMac with upgrade ability but not a 6,000 desktop that churn out 8k videos like nobodies business. From that perspective the poll makes sense

Its kind of a moot point since apple is not producing a smaller, less powered Mac Pro. Their only option is a PC or an iMac (or iMac Pro).

 

[chfilm]

I think the OP is looking at folks who will not be buying the Mac Pro and asking what their options/opinions are. That is they wanted a headless iMac with upgrade ability but not a 6,000 desktop that churn out 8k videos like nobodies business. From that perspective the poll makes sense

Its kind of a moot point since apple is not producing a smaller, less powered Mac Pro. Their only option is a PC or an iMac (or iMac Pro).

Did you consider the Mac mini? It’s also a very capable machine now actually.

 

[maflynn]

Did you consider the Mac mini? It’s also a very capable machine now actually.

Its capable in some respects but not that upgradeable, and that's my point. I've owned a Mac Mini in the past, and its a nice computer.

 

[chfilm]

Its capable in some respects but not that upgradeable, and that's my point. I've owned a Mac Mini in the past, and its a nice computer.

The 2013 nMP also wasn’t upgradable, but I never saw it as a problem during it‘s 6 year lifespan that I owned one. Everything I needed to upgrade I could with TB2. (Raids and Breakout Cards). I don‘t really see the issue with an iMac pro for „Semi-pros“ that want to edit corporate videos or do some medium-hard compositing.

 

[JoelTheSuperior]

Its capable in some respects but not that upgradeable, and that's my point. I've owned a Mac Mini in the past, and its a nice computer.

It did get me thinking though - if there was say, a Mac mini with an i9 I'd be all over that. That said, I suspect the issue, ultimately, is Intel's failure to develop some decent 7nm chips.

 

[Zdigital2015]

I bet that this is more a business/philosophical problem between NVIDIA and Apple than a technical one and NVIDIA GPUs would work with drivers.

The GPU issues with earlier MacBook Pros (8600M GT, IIRC) aside, I believe it comes down to business and ego.

NVIDIA is a company with a dynamic leader who built the company from the ground up and is a leader in its field.

APPLE is a company whose dynamic leader built the company from the ground up and is a leader in its field.

Both companies are used to being the dominant voice in any room or at any negotiating table. This can lead to a clash of personalities and egos, even outside of the CEOs and Executive Suite.

NVIDIA is very protective of its technology, IP, secrets, et al.

Apple is very protective of its technology, IP, secrets, et al.

Both companies believe the way their way is the better way forward.

NVIDIA wants its proprietary CUDA PCP platform and API product to dominate the market, especially AI and machine learning, which in turns sells more NVIDIA GPUs (hardware).

Apple wants its proprietary METAL 3D GPU and API and Core ML product to dominate the market, especially AI and machine learning, which in turn sells more Apple hardware devices. Apple does not want CUDA to dominate this market.

NVIDIA wants to maintain its leadership and its secrets.

Apple wants to maintain its leadership and its secrets.

NVIDIA believe the GPU is central and in some cases, more important, than any other component of the typical computer, which is in entitled to believe, even if it is a bit off the mark.

Apple believes the GPU is simply one puzzle piece in a larger strategy and therefore not especially special or noteworthy to the other pieces, especially if they are buying it from another vendor and not engineering it themselves. Therefore, Apple believe NVIDIA is like any other LARGE component vendor they partner with (AMD, Intel, Qualcomm); important, strategic...but not to be trusted anymore than is absolutely necessary for them to know only enough to get the job done and the hardware built for Apple to sell and reap the rewards.

Apple views NVIDIA as a competitor, which means they do not consider it a trustworthy strategic partner and, in the end, it does not serve Apple's needs in the way Apple wants. Therefore, NVIDIA is kept out and barely even acknowledged as existing.

Just my 2¢.

 

[greenmeanie]

You are wrong bigly!

Dual Xeons today are only found on servers that cost a lot more than 5 figures. Intel has been packing multiple cores inside of the processor package for years. We won't see anymore workstations with multiprocessors like it was common around MP4,1 and MP5,1 time, MP7,1 already has 28 core support.

 

[JazzyGB1]

IMO Apple dropped the ball big time on this one.
I've owned Apple towers since G4 350 days and have owned nearly every apple tower since, including Mac Pro, Mac Pro 3.1 and finally the 4.1 (flashed to 5.1).
I'm not a 'pro' but I am a 'Power' user and so the tower form factor is the only one that facilitates my needs.
My current 2009 Mac Pro for instance is connected to a 32" 4k monitor, has 13TB of internal storage, extra USB3, Firewire & Sata ports plus a PCIe card for my SSDs.
So I cannot simply 'move' to an iMac however much Apple would like me to without sacrificing storage, screen space and functionality such as legacy connections - so iMacs and Mac Mini's are not an option.
It's outrageous then to suggest I am not Apple's 'target market' - I am...or at least...I should be.
Someone who buys a new BMW 7 series every year for 20 years for $100,000 cannot be declared 'not the target market' when BMW suddenly introduce one after 7 years of waiting that sells for $225,000 - that's effectively what Apple have done, and it's a real snub.
This is BY FAR the most expensive Mac ever made (excluding the limited edition 20th Anniversary Mac) and certainly the most expensive tower.
The last Mac Pro tower made in 2012 didn't start at $6k and they weren't considered any less 'Pro'.
They started from $2499, so it's unreasonable to more than double the price of the base model and then claim 'it's not for me' - it SHOULD be!!
I've been waiting nearly a decade for it.
By all means make it scaleable and have the high end model like this and offer $6k to $40k options for those that need them, but that shouldn't be the starting point.
It's just unreasonable for an Apple tower to cost more than twice what it used to and to expect powers users like myself not to be vexed by it. That either means Apple is oblivious to the consequences of doing it or simply doesn't care.
Either way doesn't reflect well on them
I shouldn't be made to feel i'm 'not worthy' of a tower form factor because I only have a $3.5k budget.Shameful IMO.

 

[olduser007]

Why would anyone see the imac pro as the alternative?

The imac pro can't be fixed or upgraded when people need to.

Sure it has power but it's not build for most people that put safety and easy use as a priority.

 

[ct2k7]

Why would anyone see the imac pro as the alternative?

The imac pro can't be fixed or upgraded when people need to.

Sure it has power but it's not build for most people that put safety and easy use as a priority.

It also throttles.

 

[Apple Master]

I think its great that a small community of mac "pro" users is getting a nice albeit ugly machine but Apple really isn't producing what the majority of mac consumers need. In the next 6 months they really need to produce a box that is a basic desktop that can support the wide array of available GPU's on the market. Just make a mid sized box that can hold an i7 or i9 and some slots for SSD's. I don't think that's too much to ask for. They have really deserted a large chunk of their market. It looks like I'll be stuck on this 5,1 for another 10 years and patching the OS to stay current.
[doublepost=1559852166][/doublepost]

Still, Apple handicapped the Mac Pro from day zero, with half the possible processing power, half the maximum RAM (although that's pretty difficult for me to imagine being a problem) and half of possible PCIe lanes. On top of that, it is cheaper to achieve specific performance with dual CPUs vs single with 2x cores.

You can get dual socket with cheapest gold Xeons from Dell for exactly 5k, with 32GB RAM, crappy GPU and HDD but technically complete and working.

But does it grate cheese?

 

[ssgbryan]

I think they did everything right here. A less powerful upgrade would be meaningless for owners of the current 6.1 nMP.
I think prosumers will be extremely happy with an iMac pro, and everyone else with serious needs should just get the new one. It‘ll last 8 years EASILY. Heck, I WANT that new machine, but my nMP is still plenty fast enough for everything I do, and where it‘s not, it‘s due to poor software optimization - looking at you, ADOBE LIGHTROOM.

So I really dont know how to justify this new toy, but I‘m sure, next year I‘ll find a way

Err...... no.

We have already looked at the iMac Pro and found it wanting.

It throttles under load.