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

Page 6 - 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
Quite frankly, I still don't really see an insurmountable issue here. Personally, I think if the price isn't outrageous, they'll sell reasonably well.

I see this as Apple controlling support issues, by removing the variable of ever-changing internals. In other words, this can be viewed by big clients as a plus from the support side.

However, I see two potential issues:

1) Legacy device support. However, this can be handled like they've handled it in the past, by allowing continued sales of old hardware for a time. In this case, they're already providing a half-year's heads up. If you must use that specific internal card on a Mac, you can buy a current Mac Pro.

2) Thunderbolt conflicts. One thing I've noticed (with limited experience) is that higher end pro-oriented Firewire devices seem to behave better on average, than low end Firewire devices. I suspect the same will be true Thunderbolt. So the problem here is you'll potentially have mixing and maxing of such devices in various client machines, leading to conflicts.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
http://mashable.com/2013/06/17/new-mac-pro-4-things/

Two things I didn't know:

There's no power brick. Not that I was really expecting one, but nice. (It's annoying on the Cube.)

The external shell is polished aluminum. That'd look sweet. Unfortunately, I suspect most the leftover used units from pro use will look all scratched to hell.

P6100004.jpg
 

Childs

Lifer
Jul 9, 2000
11,313
7
81
2) Thunderbolt conflicts. One thing I've noticed (with limited experience) is that higher end pro-oriented Firewire devices seem to behave better on average, than low end Firewire devices. I suspect the same will be true Thunderbolt. So the problem here is you'll potentially have mixing and maxing of such devices in various client machines, leading to conflicts.

Out of curiosity, are you just basing this on FW or have you run into specific Thunderbolt conflicts? I use TB to go from a Mac to a TB Display to a Pegasus array to a TB FC adapter, with no issues. TB works fairly well.
 

ultimatebob

Lifer
Jul 1, 2001
25,134
2,446
126
And what makes you think that this machine isn't capable of performing local rendering at a comparable rare (or higher) to the other currently high end workstations on the market?

I'd imagine that it will be a rendering powerhouse when it is first released. The problem comes when a faster video card comes out a year later and it doesn't fit in this cute little case. Instead, you need to wait another year for Apple to release a new Mac Pro and pony up $4,000 * for that system instead of $1,000 for a pair of new higher end video cards.

* $4,000 is my guess price for the mid-range dual GPU model with a mid range Xeon processor, 16 GB of RAM, and 384 GB of SSD storage.
 
Last edited:

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
11,901
2,846
136
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.
AAPL was overbought when everybody owned it expecting continued near triple-digit growth in iOS. Now that the growth of iPhone and iPad is tapering off, it's oversold. While I couldn't prove it to you, I haven't heard or read any investment opinions that argued the languishing Mac Pro has any meaningful influence on the current trading price.

As far as demand goes, it's not whether the aggregate market demand is low. It's whether Apple's current and prospective position in that segment is significant within their $160B business. They killed off Xserve because they couldn't make it successful, not because it was a poor product or not enough businesses needed rack-mount Unix servers. Apple has consistently proven they can launch hits and create demand in consumer products, but not nearly to the same degree for business customers.

I understand what you're saying about Apple under Tim Cook needing to prove themselves, but there are many other ways they could possibly do so. Taking market share in workstations is not near the top of the list. I'd say by far the biggest thing today is what shape iOS 7 launches in, and second to that would be the next iPhone launch.

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).
Yes, the Mac desktops are affordable but they are still premium products compared to other OEMs. Most PC growth is now in developing countries where Apple really isn't interested in low margins.

You're right about content creation industries where many artists have an affinity for Mac OS X, but I'm speaking a bit more broadly.

Anyway, we'll just have to agree Apple has a lot of work to do to reinvigorate profit growth. I should let this thread get back on track. ;)
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
Out of curiosity, are you just basing this on FW or have you run into specific Thunderbolt conflicts? I use TB to go from a Mac to a TB Display to a Pegasus array to a TB FC adapter, with no issues. TB works fairly well.
My personal experience is with Firewire. Nonetheless, I have read on the forums about Thunderbolt issues. My suspicion is that this will only get worse as Thunderbolt products become more common.

BTW, you have an Apple TB product, and high end pro TB products. I wonder what would happen if you threw in a Belkin Thunderbolt dock and a couple of 3rd party Thunderbolt hard drives.

In fact, it kinda feels like SCSI in a way too. SCSI -> Firewire -> TB. I think it would foolish to assume that TB is going to be pain-free, esp. since Apple has already had to issue OS updates to address weird TB issues.
 

Childs

Lifer
Jul 9, 2000
11,313
7
81
My personal experience is with Firewire. Nonetheless, I have read on the forums about Thunderbolt issues. My suspicion is that this will only get worse as Thunderbolt products become more common.

BTW, you have an Apple TB product, and high end pro TB products. I wonder what would happen if you threw in a Belkin Thunderbolt dock and a couple of 3rd party Thunderbolt hard drives.

In fact, it kinda feels like SCSI in a way too. SCSI -> Firewire -> TB. I think it would foolish to assume that TB is going to be pain-free, esp. since Apple has already had to issue OS updates to address weird TB issues.

The only other TB devices I have is a LaCie USB3+TB SSD drive and a TB to 10GigE adapter, and everything is literally like plug and play. Low end devices that dont pay for proper support or validation will probably have problems, just like any other tech. USB was dodgey for awhile. I would think a problem with a Belkin TB dock is Belkin's issue. Not to say that its impossible for there to be issues, just that I haven't experienced it yet.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
I agree, but I guess my point was that the problems with internal device compatibility might end up just being transferred to external devices.

The bottom line though is I don't disagree with Apple's choices here. With Thunderbolt 2, if it works even just "most" of the time as advertised, then it's fine because the bandwidth of Thunderbolt 2 is sufficient for most devices that previously had to be internal, and "most" of the time is pretty much the same situation as with internal devices.

Thunderbolt 2 provides 20 Gbps in each direction, which real world should actually be faster than most current PCIe SSDs for example. I don't think there will be too many complaints in the near term of being "limited" to 1.5 GB/s for reads and writes.

What I'd like to see though is more Thunderbolt ports in general. The Mac Pro gets the right idea with 6 Thunderbolt 2 ports. I don't know how many independent channels this represents, but I hope at least a few. Daisychaining and hubs are all fine and dandy, but then you potentially split bandwidth, and theoretically this may mean more conflicts.
 
Last edited:

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
Thunderbolt 2 is equal to about 5x lanes of PCIE 2.0.
20Gbps/10 (bits to bytes) = 2GBps*1000 (GB to MB) = 2,000MBps = 500MBps*4

If you actually read your own links, you'd see it works out perfectly, and does not get you, "about 5x" (the PCI-e Wikipedia article spells it out).

Meanwhile, the first person to build a dual-socket Haswell/Maverick Hackintosh wins. :D
Why not just go Windows? HP makes perfectly fine workstations. Just get weened off of Californian fruit entirely, if it's a problem.

I'd imagine that it will be a rendering powerhouse when it is first released. The problem comes when a faster video card comes out a year later and it doesn't fit in this cute little case. Instead, you need to wait another year for Apple to release a new Mac Pro and pony up $4,000 * for that system instead of $1,000 for a pair of new higher end video cards.
OTOH, that's unusual to do. Most just refresh their PCs in a 2+ year cycle. Lack of expansion is more an issue for internal storage and other cards, than for video.
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
48,732
5,470
136
Does anyone else see an issue with having all of the ports on the back?

What if I want to plug in a USB stick or headphones? You could always spin it around to the front for easy access, but then you've got your USB keyboard, USB mouse, speakers, Thunderbolt devices, printers, and power cable all spewing out the front.
 

TheStu

Moderator<br>Mobile Devices & Gadgets
Moderator
Sep 15, 2004
12,089
45
91
Does anyone else see an issue with having all of the ports on the back?

What if I want to plug in a USB stick or headphones? You could always spin it around to the front for easy access, but then you've got your USB keyboard, USB mouse, speakers, Thunderbolt devices, printers, and power cable all spewing out the front.

That's why they sell the $999 Thunderbolt display with all those ports on it, duh
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
Does anyone else see an issue with having all of the ports on the back?

What if I want to plug in a USB stick or headphones? You could always spin it around to the front for easy access, but then you've got your USB keyboard, USB mouse, speakers, Thunderbolt devices, printers, and power cable all spewing out the front.
Well, FWIW, there is a handle on top and the computer is small enough so you can spin the back to the front. Furthermore, there is a motion sensor that lights up the back ports when you do this. While from a practical point of view having front ports is nice, I also do appreciate the aesthetic improvements of having all the ports in the back.

In fact, this is exactly how the iMac is designed. No ports in the front, just in the back. On mine there are slots on the side, but the most recent models have done away with those too. The problem with the iMac though is that it's bulky and heavy, so it isn't as convenient to "spin" it around, and the back doesn't light up either.

I suspect that Thunderbolt ports are not ports that will see a lot of plugging and unplugging. Yes we do that a lot for USB, but on my iMac it's not usually an issue for two reasons - attached USB hub, and wired keyboard with USB ports.

I realize though that many people prefer wireless keyboards, but I don't. It's too bad Apple doesn't sell a wireless keyboard with numeric keypad, but even then I'd probably stick with wired since with wired I never have to worry about Bluetooth issues and batteries. Hopefully, they'll update it to USB 3 soon. I'm willing to deal with those for a mouse though, because I don't really like wired mice.

The big difference though is this means the Mac Pro will ideally be a true desktop, not a tower that sits underneath the desk.


That's why they sell the $999 Thunderbolt display with all those ports on it, duh
The ports are on the back of the Thunderbolt Display, too. The main benefit is that the display is on the desk, so you don't have to crawl around underneath your desk to access the ports on the old Mac Pro.
 
Last edited:

TheStu

Moderator<br>Mobile Devices & Gadgets
Moderator
Sep 15, 2004
12,089
45
91
The ports are on the back of the Thunderbolt Display, too. The main benefit is that the display is on the desk, so you don't have to crawl around underneath your desk to access the ports on the old Mac Pro.

Yea, I know. I'm making a joke.

I remember back with Apple first released Numbers it didn't have support for freezing panes, which is something that is super useful for very large spreadsheets. Someone put together a fake Apple KB page for it that said something like:

'Apple sells the 30" Cinema Display, a 2560*1600 resolution LCD monitor that offers more screen real estate than any other display on the market today. If you find that you are still needing more display space, you can always purchase a second 30" Cinema Display.'
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
Bits to bytes is a divide by 8, not 10 scenario.
For the likes of TB, PCI-e, SATA, HDMI, and so on, it is a divide-by-10 scenario. Each byte is sent as a 10-bit string, where the added bits are used to reduce DC bias. The raw bit value is higher, so that's what they use for marketing. Since 10(8/10)(10/8) = 10, you can conveniently divide by 10 instead of 8, for the data bandwidth.
 
Last edited:

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
BTW, Anand was saying that real world we should expect to get about 1.5 GB/s over Thunderbolt 2 (as opposed to up to about 0.9 GB/s with Thunderbolt).
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
BTW, Anand was saying that real world we should expect to get about 1.5 GB/s over Thunderbolt 2 (as opposed to up to about 0.9 GB/s with Thunderbolt).
For user data, that makes sense. 2GBps, minus raw protocol (mainly PCI-e) overhead, minus other protocol overhead (for the NIC, SATA controller, etc.), and then whatever else, like reductions with several devices daisy chained, and whatever else.

For basically any desktop needs except giving data to a GPU or high-end RAID setup, there should be plenty of bandwidth to go around, so long as the total number of TB ports, and their bandwidth, increases over time (so you can put your old hardware on one port, and new hardware on newer faster ones).

I very much hope that TB catches on more than FW did, TBH.
 

Rakehellion

Lifer
Jan 15, 2013
12,181
35
91
Does anyone else see an issue with having all of the ports on the back?

What if I want to plug in a USB stick or headphones? You could always spin it around to the front for easy access, but then you've got your USB keyboard, USB mouse, speakers, Thunderbolt devices, printers, and power cable all spewing out the front.

It's a cylinder. How do you know which side is the back?
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
I very much hope that TB catches on more than FW did, TBH.
Firewire was actually quite successful IMO... as a secondary non-free standard.

I guess the good news is that there is no per-port royalty cost for Thunderbolt AFAIK. Still, I see it mainly as a replacement for Firewire, cuz USB 3 is decent enough for a lot of the lower end market, and Thunderbolt's higher cost will be a significant barrier to overall market penetration.

It's a cylinder. How do you know which side is the back?
It's where all the ports are. :)
 

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
Why not just go Windows?
The Rainbow Bright Clowncar edition, or Fisher Price Playskool Professional?

Also, Windows works perfectly fine on the same hardware as OSX. People have too much of an either/or mindset sometimes.

HP makes perfectly fine workstations. Just get weened off of Californian fruit entirely, if it's a problem.
Again, no need for either/or. I personally use both OS's. Until there's Final Cut for Windows, no doing without OSX.

IMO, OSX was superior to Windows even when Microsoft was still serious about Windows.
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
The Rainbow Bright Clowncar edition, or Fisher Price Playskool Professional?
7 Professional, of course.
Also, Windows works perfectly fine on the same hardware as OSX. People have too much of an either/or mindset sometimes.
Sure, but that's usually silly, since you can get a more flexible non-Apple computer, if OS X compatibility is not an issue (or just a cheaper one). If it is an issue, or that flexibility is not needed, Apple hardware makes sense (and, they don't make cheap crap).

IMO, OSX was superior to Windows even when Microsoft was still serious about Windows.
...by not having a right mouse button, hiding directory structures (such as with applications, or mounted network shares), and needing frustratingly-broken ports-based add-ons to make it do anything? If it has software that's not on any other OS, then that's what you gotta use, but I find it ironic to call Windows by kid toy brands, yet to consider OS X to not be like that. It's every bit like that.
 
Last edited:

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
Firewire was actually quite successful IMO... as a secondary non-free standard.
It was a faster port for camcorders. Most people didn't even know what it was, if they weren't Mac people, and every external device that had a FW port also had USB 2, which is what got used. Outside of the SJRDF, it was a broken USB port :).

I mean successful like you might go into the non-Mac section of a store and buy a TB external drive, or TB network adapter, etc.. USB 3.0 will be ubiquitous, like prior USBs, for low cost, but that royalty kept FW in a bubble.
 

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
7 Professional, of course.
Sure, but that's usually silly, since you can get a more flexible non-Apple computer...
...dual-socket Haswell/Maverick Hackintosh

*hint* It's a PC...

...by not having a right mouse button, hiding directory structures (such as with applications, or mounted network shares), and needing frustratingly-broken ports-based add-ons to make it do anything? If it has software that's not on any other OS, then that's what you gotta use, but I find it ironic to call Windows by kid toy brands, yet to consider OS X to not be like that. It's every bit like that.
Holy cow. 1995 just dialed in at 28k and it wants it's outdated Mac stereotypes back! *Whooooosh!*
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
Holy cow. 1995 just dialed in at 28k and it wants it's outdated Mac stereotypes back! *Whooooosh!*
Sorry, but no, that's (a) that's all quite recent, and (b) it wasn't until 2006 that I first used any Mac since the Apple II. Jobs was better at framing the user experience, MS has been better at making features work that businesses want (though I think the end of their dominance is on the way). Both tell you how you should use your system(s), both present their software as more as less black boxes, and both work very well, while being frustrating on heterogeneous networks (when the Mac is the odd one out, it's got to get on the domain like the rest of them, and if that fails, it's back to fussing with samba like it were a Linux box).

*hint* It's a PC...
It's been that way for awhile. No need for hints.