Contribute
Register

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yep. I was just thinking this yesterday. Something that I was also thinking about is people saying that this is rackmountable, but I don't see any ears on this, and the access looks to be two-sided anyway. The studios that would buy these often have machine rooms separate from the mix room. I worked at a post production house that had this kind of setup. All the computers, drives, and realtime samplerate converters were in one extremely cold machine room, with patch bay tie-lines to physically link up other studios in the building. They had KVM extenders that must have been over 100 feet long under the flooring. I have a machine "basement" and that's where I park anything that makes a lot of heat or noise.

So, I'm trying to figure out why this case would be so elaborate if it's likely to end up in a machine room and the monitors end up being Eizo, Dolby, or Canon displays.

Depends on use case, I suppose. I can see single towers sitting in small recording studios...
 
I was just thinking this yesterday. Something that I was also thinking about is people saying that this is rackmountable, but I don't see any ears on this, and the access looks to be two-sided anyway.
They said that there is a modified version of the case intended for rack mounting the MP. This is something I didn't expect to see. Thought that Apple had completely left the server biz. They likely got the idea from all the Mac mini server farms that are so popular. Minis are quieter and more efficient than conventional servers. That makes a huge difference when you've got hundreds of them running in the same room 24/7.

410187


410188

So, I'm trying to figure out why this case would be so elaborate if it's likely to end up in a machine room
Because it's an Apple product. If the MP motherboard was placed in a generic black steel case designed for a server room how could they impress you by showing it at WWDC ? Apple is all about the production and sale of premium products.
 
Last edited:
Interesting that they reused previous designs - I think the old aluminium case front looks better but like the lift off idea of this one. I think they will sell quite a lot of them just for the design and expect whatever silly price they charge for the lowest spec machine in this case, they will sell a lot more of them than are needed.
 
Interesting that they reused previous designs - I think the old aluminium case front looks better but like the lift off idea of this one. I think they will sell quite a lot of them just for the design and expect whatever silly price they charge for the lowest spec machine in this case, they will sell a lot more of them than are needed.

Yes, I like the visual heritage.

I think the larger holes on this new Mac Pro will be functionally much better than the MacPro1,1-5,1s. Much more air should be able to get through. I felt that the tiny holes of the old Mac Pros were a bit too restrictive.
 
they will sell quite a lot of them just for the design and expect whatever silly price they charge for the lowest spec machine in this case, they will sell a lot more of them than are needed.
We'll see 30-40 YT reviewers buy them and send them back before the 30 day return period is up. Apple intends it to be a type of status symbol. When you have one, you feel that you are in an elite group because they are so expensive. Youtubers will own one short term, make their videos and make money from all the hype generated by these.
 
i respect your opinion, my hackintosh tower cost me 7,000 but i only pay good money for things that i think that are worth the cost of the money

i can pay 1000 for a video card
i can pay 1700 for a CPU

i paid 1500 for my drone

but 1000 for a monitor stand, cmon
that is unacceptable

maybe apple would it have include it in the price with the monitor all together and save themselves the embarrassment and the boos

that way no one will ever known that they are paying 1000 just for the monitor stand

Have you ever bought a red camera? Every little accessory costs money in the thousands. Think of it like that. I think they’re jus trying something here to increase their bottom line but it shouldn’t have been in the keynote price wise it’s actually embarrassing because they are taking their loyal user base to the cleaners.

But whoever’s gonna buy these monitors it’s not a regular joe who could afford the ACD from 2006-2011 or whatever.
 
This is one of the ugliest pieces of junk I have ever seen. It's not even powerful enough. I am not the PC-idiot who compares apples to oranges and suggest that my Celeron runs Crysis better than a Xeon. Xeons are overpriced, that is Intel's fault/greediness, but it is Apple's fault for forcing people into paying the Intel/USA tax without giving a flexility to many (past, current or potential) customers that STILL appreciate OPTIONS and a smoother pricing/specification pattern. Xeons might make sense (or not) if you really need that >512GB RAM system, but their advantage (and reasoning for the high/locked price from Intel) is the ability to run multiple of them in SMP, something that Apple does not offer (but their rivals will). And do not hold your breath if you believe that people will just manage to put 3rd market cheap AMD/NVidia GPUs inside without nullifying any cooling advantage this design might have.
 
This is one of the ugliest pieces of junk I have ever seen. It's not even powerful enough. I am not the PC-idiot who compares apples to oranges and suggest that my Celeron runs Crysis better than a Xeon. Xeons are overpriced, that is Intel's fault/greediness


@gorg,

Your forgetting that standard (non X series) desktop class CPU's like the i3,i5,i7 and i9 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
 
Last edited:
This is one of the ugliest pieces of junk I have ever seen. It's not even powerful enough. I am not the PC-idiot who compares apples to oranges and suggest that my Celeron runs Crysis better than a Xeon. Xeons are overpriced, that is Intel's fault/greediness, but it is Apple's fault for forcing people into paying the Intel/USA tax without giving a flexility to many (past, current or potential) customers that STILL appreciate OPTIONS and a smoother pricing/specification pattern. Xeons might make sense (or not) if you really need that >512GB RAM system, but their advantage (and reasoning for the high/locked price from Intel) is the ability to run multiple of them in SMP, something that Apple does not offer (but their rivals will). And do not hold your breath if you believe that people will just manage to put 3rd market cheap AMD/NVidia GPUs inside without nullifying any cooling advantage this design might have.

So much Hostility, you may not be an PC-idiot not sure what that is. But Xeons really never have and likely never will run games well. The Xeons are like Mac Trucks ready for the big load while your Celeron, and I series chips are more for speed with consumer apps and gaming. The Celeron actually might run games just as good with proper video card. As I think it has even been mentioned on this forum that most people who by a system that can be upgraded will never upgrade it. They will buy it with the specs they want and never think about it again. Also as discussed the price of this new system really comes down to the case being over engineered and expensive not that they have used intel Xeons processors.

I am a partner for a music production studio they have a iMac with I7 quad core and 32gb of memory, 14,2. I recently donated my old Mac Pro 2013 base with quad Core CPU 32gb of memory, to the studio. Side by side the Mac Pro/xeon kills the I7/iMac when rendering Tracks by not just a few seconds by at least 5 mins for a 2 min track. All that processing happens on the CPU.
 
Last edited:
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).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top