Contribute
Register

Apple Unveils Redesigned Mac Pro Desktop and Pro Display XDR at WWDC

Joined
Feb 21, 2011
Messages
98
Motherboard
Asus Rampage V Extreme X99
CPU
i7-5960
Graphics
GTX 1080 Ti
Xeon Workstation/Server class CPU's have many more PCI lanes and thus do not suffer this limitation, that is the primary reason Apple use Xeon CPU's in the Pro products in addition to the high core counts and the ability to use ECC memory.
@jaymonkey
This has nothing to do with performance, maybe used as an excuse - the higher/more exotic/more proprietary/more difficult to find/more overpriced the hardware, the better the margin for profit. Apple has been using Xeons for other products too (where it shouldn't), it's not the first time. If it was the sheer performance that Apple was after or/and the best benefit for their customers we would have had Power9, EPYC, SMP Xeons etc (or even just a Threadripper).

Regarding the PCI-e lanes, 16x might not be that dramatically better than 8x for rendering or deep learning (not that Apple cares about researchers or scientists) and ECC RAM is mostly used as locking weapon in the Intel ecosystem. If it is about NVME I/O throughput, what will happen when other companies start offering PCIe 4.0 (or is it 5.0?) solutions by the time Apple's new Mac Pro comes out ?

@scottkendall
I have never bought Celeron CPUs, they are inferior CPUs for many tasks. I said that I am not making the same comments typical PC users do when they are just bashing Apple instead of Intel too (yet, yes Apple can be blamed indirectly for choosing/locking users to Intel/Xeon).
 

pastrychef

Moderator
Joined
May 29, 2013
Messages
14,641
Motherboard
Gigabyte Z390 M Gaming
CPU
i9-9900K OC'd @ 5.1GHz
Graphics
Radeon VII
Mac
MacBook, Mac Pro
Classic Mac
iBook, Power Mac, PowerBook
Mobile Phone
iOS
@jaymonkey
This has nothing to do with performance, maybe used as an excuse - the higher/more exotic/more proprietary/more difficult to find/more overpriced the hardware, the better the margin for profit. Apple has been using Xeons for other products too (where it shouldn't), it's not the first time. If it was the sheer performance that Apple was after or/and the best benefit for their customers we would have had Power9, EPYC, SMP Xeons etc (or even just a Threadripper).

Regarding the PCI-e lanes, 16x might not be that dramatically better than 8x for rendering or deep learning (not that Apple cares about researchers or scientists) and ECC RAM is mostly used as locking weapon in the Intel ecosystem. If it is about NVME I/O throughput, what will happen when other companies start offering PCIe 4.0 (or is it 5.0?) solutions by the time Apple's new Mac Pro comes out ?

@scottkendall
I have never bought Celeron CPUs, they are inferior CPUs for many tasks. I said that I am not making the same comments typical PC users do when they are just bashing Apple instead of Intel too (yet, yes Apple can be blamed indirectly for choosing/locking users to Intel/Xeon).
Yes, Apple should have waited until PCI-e 7.0 is available to release the Mac Pro so you can be future proof.
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2016
Messages
1,932
Motherboard
Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 5
CPU
I9 9900k
Graphics
Vega 64
Mac
Mac mini, Mac Pro
Mobile Phone
iOS
@scottkendall
I have never bought Celeron CPUs, they are inferior CPUs for many tasks. I said that I am not making the same comments typical PC users do when they are just bashing Apple instead of Intel too (yet, yes Apple can be blamed indirectly for choosing/locking users to Intel/Xeon).

I am not here bashing anyone and I do not really think anyone in this post is really bashing anyone apple or intel. Other then over the $1000 monitor stand, but your not talking about the stand. Also it is nothing new for Apple to run on a limited set of hardware from limited manufactures, if apple is nothing they are consistent with their relationships. Their software is built around running on this said limited set of hardware. If you do not like being locked in then don't use their $20/Free OS. Over the course of the life of most Mac Hardware they give you free OS upgrades, said upgrades could cost between $400-1000 on a windows PC.

@jaymonkey

Regarding the PCI-e lanes, 16x might not be that dramatically better than 8x for rendering or deep learning (not that Apple cares about researchers or scientists) and ECC RAM is mostly used as locking weapon in the Intel ecosystem. If it is about NVME I/O throughput, what will happen when other companies start offering PCIe 4.0 (or is it 5.0?) solutions by the time Apple's new Mac Pro comes out ?
I call 5 mins faster on a 2 min track fairly dramatic.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 21, 2011
Messages
98
Motherboard
Asus Rampage V Extreme X99
CPU
i7-5960
Graphics
GTX 1080 Ti
Yes, Apple should have waited until PCI-e 7.0 is available to release the Mac Pro so you can be future proof.
PCI-e 7.0 might come in 6 years or more. PCI-e 4.0 is already here.
 
Joined
Feb 21, 2011
Messages
98
Motherboard
Asus Rampage V Extreme X99
CPU
i7-5960
Graphics
GTX 1080 Ti
Joined
Jul 13, 2016
Messages
1,932
Motherboard
Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 5
CPU
I9 9900k
Graphics
Vega 64
Mac
Mac mini, Mac Pro
Mobile Phone
iOS
Which application/hardware ? (we are talking PCI-e lanes, typically for GPUs)
Everything uses PCI lanes if you GPU takes all your lanes then your Hard drives do not have the lanes. Pretty sure devices on TB bus use the PCI lanes thus if your 16 is eaten up by two video cards running 8x each your TB is forced off the PCI x16 lanes and routed threw the PCH as Jaymonkey noted. When rendering audio and video this slows down your system.

It would be ignorant to think that a freeway with 16 lanes would move at the same speed as a freeway 32 lanes. Why would it be any different in your computer?
 

pastrychef

Moderator
Joined
May 29, 2013
Messages
14,641
Motherboard
Gigabyte Z390 M Gaming
CPU
i9-9900K OC'd @ 5.1GHz
Graphics
Radeon VII
Mac
MacBook, Mac Pro
Classic Mac
iBook, Power Mac, PowerBook
Mobile Phone
iOS
PCI-e 7.0 might come in 6 years or more. PCI-e 4.0 is already here.
Not on any Intel based motherboard.

And if Apple had been using AMD CPUs since 2005, you would have been complaining about them choosing AMD.

People like you just look for stuff to complain about.
 
Joined
Feb 21, 2011
Messages
98
Motherboard
Asus Rampage V Extreme X99
CPU
i7-5960
Graphics
GTX 1080 Ti
Everything uses PCI lanes if you GPU takes all your lanes then your Hard drives do not have the lanes. Pretty sure devices on TB bus use the PCI lanes thus if your 16 is eaten up by two video cards running 8x each your TB is forced off the PCI x16 lanes and routed threw the PCH as Jaymonkey noted. When rendering audio and video this slows down your system.

It would be ignorant to think that a freeway with 16 lanes would move at the same speed as a freeway 32 lanes. Why would it be any different in your computer?
Ordinary X299 chipset motherboards have 44 lanes on non-Xeon CPUs. NVME needs 4x anyway.
 
Joined
Feb 21, 2011
Messages
98
Motherboard
Asus Rampage V Extreme X99
CPU
i7-5960
Graphics
GTX 1080 Ti
Not on any Intel based motherboard.
The new Mac Pro is not competing against just machines with Intel motherboards.


And if Apple had been using AMD CPUs since 2005, you would have been complaining about them choosing AMD.

People like you just look for stuff to complain about.
I guess you have not been complaining about the lack of Nvidia support since Mojave either.

People like you just accept anything offered without complain.
 
Joined
Feb 15, 2018
Messages
276
Motherboard
Aorus x299 Gaming 7 Pro
CPU
i9-9980XE
Graphics
RTX 2080 TI
Mac
iMac
Mobile Phone
iOS
@gorg,

Your forgetting that all desktop CPU's (i3,i5,i7 & i9 series) only have 16 PCI lanes .... so once you put a PCIe GPU in the system everything else either has to go through the PCH or through PCI bridges/switches which vastly cripples the expansion I/O.

Xeon Workstation/Server class CPU's have many more PCI lanes and thus do not suffer this limitation, that is the primary reason Apple use Xeon CPU's in the Pro products in addition to the high core counts and the ability to use ECC memory.

Cheers
Jay
sorry to interrupt but not all CPU are 16 lanes only, i have a i9 and is 44 lanes through the CPU, the chipset has some lanes but they are useless, i have 2 highpoint SSD7102 with 4 samsung 970 pro in each card for a total of 8 m.2 drives, the speed is insane, constant reading and writing without dropping or slowing down, yes AMD has 64 lanes but i don’t like AMD even if it offers more lanes than intel, also for hackintosh intel is better, i do run my video card at 8x for a total of 40 lanes off the CPU, i benchmark my card at 16x vs 8x and there is almost no difference in frame rate, just a single frame difference, the video card doesn’t saturate the pci-e port or bus but the 16x m.2 card losses half of their speed if you change from 16x to 8x that’s why i run my video card at 8x because i technically don’t loose anything, the 16x m.2 card goes up to almost 12,000 at 16x and at 6,000 at 8x so i have to run the video card at 8x so i don’t loose the speed on the m.2 drives by running one of the cards at 8x, the point is that my i9 cpu has 44 lanes not just 16x
 
Last edited:
Top