New Mac Pro - PCIe 1.25 GB/s SSD, Dual ATI/AMD FirePro GPUs with 3X 4K monitors

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
I betcha version 2 (or maybe version 3) will come with 10 GigE built in.

Apple always leaves something big out in the first iteration.
 

ViRGE

Elite Member, Moderator Emeritus
Oct 9, 1999
31,516
167
106
I betcha version 2 (or maybe version 3) will come with 10 GigE built in.

Apple always leaves something big out in the first iteration.
10GigE is still stupidly expensive right now, even for a pro system. So I'm not at all surprised they have not included it. Controller costs still need to come way down, especially for switches.
 

Patranus

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2007
9,280
0
0
10GigE is still stupidly expensive right now, even for a pro system. So I'm not at all surprised they have not included it. Controller costs still need to come way down, especially for switches.

10GigE is already supported via Thunderbolt 1 also.
 

ViRGE

Elite Member, Moderator Emeritus
Oct 9, 1999
31,516
167
106
10GigE is already supported via Thunderbolt 1 also.
All the joys of paying for an expensive 10GigE controller and the joys of paying for an expensive Thunderbolt controller.:p Intel badly needs to let 3rd parties make native TB-to-<x> bridges so that it can be done as a one-chip solution.
 

TheStu

Moderator<br>Mobile Devices & Gadgets
Moderator
Sep 15, 2004
12,089
45
91
All the joys of paying for an expensive 10GigE controller and the joys of paying for an expensive Thunderbolt controller.:p Intel badly needs to let 3rd parties make native TB-to-<x> bridges so that it can be done as a one-chip solution.

The Thunderbolt controller isn't that expensive is it? I mean, a single chip solution is usually preferred but...
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
Yeah, that's why I said version 2 or perhaps version 3. The current Thunderbolt to 10GigE cost is $1000, but you can already get Intel 10GigE NICs under $350 new.

Intel Ethernet Converged Network Adapter X540-T1

33-106-144-02.jpg
 

ViRGE

Elite Member, Moderator Emeritus
Oct 9, 1999
31,516
167
106
The Thunderbolt controller isn't that expensive is it? I mean, a single chip solution is usually preferred but...
The official price isn't published. But $25 keeps popping up for the basic endpoint version (Port Ridge and its successors). Meanwhile the higher end versions that allow daisy chaining basically double that.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
Apple was the first to make GigE mainstream, in the Power Macs. (13 years ago!) So, I'm thinking Apple will also be the first to make 10GigE mainstream.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
Apple Insider Developer secretly tested new Mac Pro for weeks inside Apple's 'Evil Lab'

The Foundry this week announced that MARI, its industry-standard 3D painting package 3D digital painting tool used in films "Avatar" and "The Avengers," is coming to the Mac. The developer, along with Oscar-winning animation studio Pixar, showed off MARI for OS X at WWDC this week, just 8 weeks after it began porting the software to the Mac.

MARI was shown running on the new cylindrical Mac Pro, demonstrating the work Pixar is doing with the software to complete its upcoming feature film "Monsters University."

---

"We were essentially doing a blind tasting of the machine," said Jack Greasley, MARI product manager at The Foundry. "All we could see was the monitor, and the Mac Pro was encased in a giant metal filing cabinet on wheels. Experiencing the machine in this way was actually really cool, because I can tell you that the speed and power of this machine really stands up. Mari running on this machine out of the box is the fastest I have ever seen it run."

---

From his time testing the new Mac Pro, Greasley came away impressed. In particular, he praised the fast PCI Express flash storage, dual graphics processors, and potential for expandability with six Thunderbolt 2 ports. He also said that Open GL and Open CL are well-integrated into the new Mac Pro, which provides a big boost for MARI.

What Greasley didn't see until this week was the cylindrical design of the new Mac Pro. After its unveiling, he was pleased, declaring the unique Mac a "beautiful machine."

"I can see some real innovation and thought has gone into what users want and need," he said, "and I don't think pro users should be concerned."
 

Hugo Drax

Diamond Member
Nov 20, 2011
5,647
47
91
I think its gonna be around $4k

More like 6k minimum. Two high end fire pros are 3k a pop. And if they use the mid tier model it will probably start at 6k for a barebones model and ramp up quickly in price.
 

Tegeril

Platinum Member
Apr 2, 2003
2,906
5
81
More like 6k minimum. Two high end fire pros are 3k a pop. And if they use the mid tier model it will probably start at 6k for a barebones model and ramp up quickly in price.

I imagine there will be a variety of Fire Pro options and not all of them start nearly as high as you're suggesting.
 

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
11,901
2,846
136
More like 6k minimum. Two high end fire pros are 3k a pop. And if they use the mid tier model it will probably start at 6k for a barebones model and ramp up quickly in price.

I imagine there will be a variety of Fire Pro options and not all of them start nearly as high as you're suggesting.
yeah Apple is crazy, but I'm not sure they're $6k crazy.

Honestly if they did that, then the likely next step is to kill off the all-in-one Mac Pro as they ultimately did to the G4 Cube and Xserve.
 

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
Heh. If the base price were 6k just go ahead an stick a fork in it. Even when you're riding your segway down the hill from your mansion to the money tree grove to pick up a stack of thousand dollar bills that fell on the ground, there's all kinds alternatives in the 6k range. Even 4k would be pushing it.
 

Tegeril

Platinum Member
Apr 2, 2003
2,906
5
81
Heh. If the base price were 6k just go ahead an stick a fork in it. Even when you're riding your segway down the hill from your mansion to the money tree grove to pick up a stack of thousand dollar bills that fell on the ground, there's all kinds alternatives in the 6k range. Even 4k would be pushing it.

The 3GB W9000s are 3k a piece, but they're top end, not base.
 

Childs

Lifer
Jul 9, 2000
11,313
7
81
yeah Apple is crazy, but I'm not sure they're $6k crazy.

Honestly if they did that, then the likely next step is to kill off the all-in-one Mac Pro as they ultimately did to the G4 Cube and Xserve.

$6K is what a similar Mac Pro costs now, without the PCI-e storage and second GPU.
 

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
^Yes, but double the previous base model price?

(Starting to wonder just how just low my Apple stock will nosedive once they announce the price of this thing...)
 

TheStu

Moderator<br>Mobile Devices & Gadgets
Moderator
Sep 15, 2004
12,089
45
91
^Yes, but double the previous base model price?

(Starting to wonder just how just low my Apple stock will nosedive once they announce the price of this thing...)

I'm a little upset that they didn't announce the price at launch. I'm expecting the base cost to be $2500-3000. I really am curious to know since even though it is way, WAAYY more power than I need at home, I wants it.
 

Childs

Lifer
Jul 9, 2000
11,313
7
81
^Yes, but double the previous base model price?

(Starting to wonder just how just low my Apple stock will nosedive once they announce the price of this thing...)

The current base model is only 4 cores with HT. What they showed at WWDC is close to the current high end config, which costs 2x the current base model. Most likely what we saw at WWDC was the high end config.
 

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
11,901
2,846
136
^Yes, but double the previous base model price?

(Starting to wonder just how just low my Apple stock will nosedive once they announce the price of this thing...)
while just about anything can be argued as the latest reason for AAPL to dip, the Mac Pro base price really shouldn't be a factor. Mac sales are 70% portables and the workstation cut of that is basically a rounding error. Macs are a respectable 10% unit share of the U.S. market, but still haven't cracked the top-5 internationally as estimated by Gartner/IDC. Mac market share growth seems to have tapered off along with the malaise of the PC industry as a whole.

As a share of Apple's net profit, Macs generate less than 20% now. While that's still a pretty strong business (by itself, one of the very few successful "PC" OEMs), it's arguably been years since the Mac has influenced AAPL share price.

I'm purposely ignoring iPads although many have argued their inclusion makes Apple a top PC vendor.

@Childs I think we all mostly agree there's no way the new base price is close to $6k. If it did start that high, the new Mac Pro will sell about as well as all-electric autos, and eventually be scrapped due to disinterest.
 

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
while just about anything can be argued as the latest reason for AAPL to dip, the Mac Pro base price really shouldn't be a factor.
I disagree. Pricing themselves completely out of the professional workstation market I believe would have a disastrous effect on their stock price. I hope I'm wrong- I haven't enjoyed watching my own shares drop.

My hope is they scale this machine back and create a base model that's more realistic, in the $2,500-$3000 range. Then go nuts with the high end model. That way plenty of people who need something more powerful than an iMac or Mini -but not 6k worth of overkill- can stay with the Mac platform.

Just because desktop computers have leveled off in sales (as they inevitably would, as radios did, as TVs did, as any new technology eventually will after the initial rush) doesn't mean that Apple should cede that segment of the market to others. People are going to continue to produce and make things using desktop computers- no matter how big a fad tablets and smartphones are currently.

I don't believe Apple's lack of marketshare in desktops equals no demand for desktops. It just means Apple hasn't done the best possible job of meeting the full demand that actually is out there. 6k+ boutique boxes aren't going to earn then a higher share either. (I'm reminded that their original boutique box sure didn't- and it wasn't because there was no demand for desktop computers. There was just no big demand for overpriced faux-fashion statements substituting for practical/cost-effective.
 

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
11,901
2,846
136
I disagree. Pricing themselves completely out of the professional workstation market I believe would have a disastrous effect on their stock price. I hope I'm wrong- I haven't enjoyed watching my own shares drop.

My hope is they scale this machine back and create a base model that's more realistic, in the $2,500-$3000 range. Then go nuts with the high end model. That way plenty of people who need something more powerful than an iMac or Mini -but not 6k worth of overkill- can stay with the Mac platform.

Just because desktop computers have leveled off in sales (as they inevitably would, as radios did, as TVs did, as any new technology eventually will after the initial rush) doesn't mean that Apple should cede that segment of the market to others. People are going to continue to produce and make things using desktop computers- no matter how big a fad tablets and smartphones are currently.

I don't believe Apple's lack of marketshare in desktops equals no demand for desktops. It just means Apple hasn't done the best possible job of meeting the full demand that actually is out there. 6k+ boutique boxes aren't going to earn then a higher share either. (I'm reminded that their original boutique box sure didn't- and it wasn't because there was no demand for desktop computers. There was just no big demand for overpriced faux-fashion statements substituting for practical/cost-effective.
Agreed on the stock price, but most of that we can attribute to Android's smartphone success and inroads into the iPad's dominance as well. IMO investors aren't losing sleep over the very small slice of Apple's business that workstations represents. If anything, Apple has already let the product line stagnate for years with token updates at best. If it comes in at $3k as we believe it will, newness alone will provide at least a temporary shot in the arm. But drastically overdesigning and overpricing it and making it DOA shouldn't have a material affect on the stock price. Having said that it's 2013, not 1993. A $6k base price would make no sense whatsoever as we've already covered.

If anything, the iMac and Mac mini are arguably boutique desktops. They're already at the high end of the market for mainstream desktop PCs. OTOH the Mac Pro, even when it was bundled with a low-end GPU, has always been a niche product starting at $2300+.

I agree with you Apple shouldn't cede any product line that has solid potential. I'm speaking more to the reality that they're a bit player in corporate IT departments (outside of "mobile" devices). Apple full-well knows its strength lies with consumers, and a few feeble attempts otherwise are not convincing. I.e. when they claimed Time Capsules had "enterprise-grade" HDs; meanwhile original TC power supplies were failing and they were using run of the mill hard drives.

Doesn't mean they can't change, but we just haven't seen it yet.
 

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
Agreed on the stock price, but most of that we can attribute to Android's smartphone success and inroads into the iPad's dominance as well. IMO investors aren't losing sleep over the very small slice of Apple's business that workstations represents.
Any other company I'd say you're right, but Apple is viewed differently by investors than us tech fans. There's concern that they are in an inevitable decline, propped up mainly by an existing fanbase, not as much building a future one. Blundering in an entire product category (even a small part of their current business) isn't exactly the "we've still got it" message they should be sending right now. Apple used to be a company that rather than seeing a market and saying, "The demand is low, so we'll do a 'low-demand' product." they said, "Forget what everyone else thinks. We'll CREATE the demand." I personally want to see them get back to that attitude.

If Apple wants to get out of workstations because demand is low, then get out of workstations. Introducing expensive "planned failure" would be the exact opposite way to do that.

If anything, the iMac and Mac mini are arguably boutique desktops. They're already at the high end of the market for mainstream desktop PCs. OTOH the Mac Pro, even when it was bundled with a low-end GPU, has always been a niche product starting at $2300+.
Relatively speaking, the Mini and iMac are affordable. The iMac is probably the most successful computer line of all time.

The MacPro has been so successful within its niche that it's still viable even after being left to languish for years. I doubt you can walk into any major production house of any kind anywhere and not find at least a few of them, and I'd argue they're probably the best represented of any workstation line. And for what it is, it's also been affordable. The pricing tier has been in line with their competition (most start in the 2-3k range and go up from there).