New Mac Pro • Hacker News Board

Re: New Mac Pro

#271

Post by penagwin » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:17 PM UTC

Rebelgecko wrote: post #36

vbezhenar wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that Nvidia will release cards for this Mac. May be even existing ones will fit. There are PCI-E ports there after all.

Will they be able to release drivers with the new kext situation? They still don't even have drivers to use their newer cards in Mojave

Does any current-gen apple hardware ship with Nvidia hardware? To my knowledge they don't, which would explain why they haven't made any drivers for it (the only people who can get a GTX 1070 with mac osx would either have to spend 500$ on an eGPU enclosure or have a hackintosh).

But this one has PCIE ports so theoretically nothing is stopping the average joe from just adding a GTX 1070? That'd certainly add a lot more justification for updating the drivers I hope.

Cheers to everyone who wants nvidia drivers for hackintoshs :D

Re: New Mac Pro

#272

Post by shoo_pl » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:18 PM UTC

vbezhenar wrote: post #2

That price is just absurd. I waited for Mac Pro announcement to decide whether I'll stay with Windows or jump to macOS. Macbooks are not for me, but I hoped for a remotely reasonable priced computer, something like $2000 with another $1000 to expand with more memory, etc. But $6000 for 8-core CPU, 256 GB SSD, GPU that is less powerful than my old $200 NVidia 1060? It's just laughable. Otherwise seems like a good mach…

Well, I did not even hope it would cost $3k. The moment they released iMac Pro at $5k it was obvious it will cost at least that much.

I hoped for the same price point since it comes without a monitor.

Re: New Mac Pro

#273

Post by afarrell » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:18 PM UTC

knicholes wrote: post #255

jahnu wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who and/or how many engineers are making $500k a year!?

Download and install the app "Blind" to be shamefully informed of how many there are. Seemingly there is either a very large amount, or there are lots of SWEs who like to lie. Lots of it seem like stock options from FAANG and Uber.

s/SWEs/Anonymous chat participants/

Re: New Mac Pro

#274

Post by jedberg » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:19 PM UTC

Regardless of everything else, that AR thing on their web page was cool as shit. I just looked at a new Mac Pro on my couch!

Re: New Mac Pro

#275

Post by penagwin » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:19 PM UTC

vbezhenar wrote: post #150

Rebelgecko wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Will they be able to release drivers with the new kext situation? They still don't even have drivers to use their newer cards in Mojave

For me it's win-win situation for Apple. They help Nvidia with drivers, more people buy Mac Pro to use Nvidia GPU. I have no idea why Apple don't want to work with Nvidia. They are not selling desktop GPU after all. May be they have some hidden agreements with AMD.

Well obviously they have agreements with AMD. Apple gets special treatment from AMD/Intel/Nvidia, they get to see unrevealed roadmaps, custom contracts etc.

Whether it's an exclusivity deal or not we may never know. But it does seem strange given Nvidia cards generally have lower TDP/performance (something all macs struggle with)

Re: New Mac Pro

#276

Post by StillBored » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:20 PM UTC

shoo_pl wrote: post #257

threeseed wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

256GB SSD and base video card is fine. I would definitely look at a Mac Pro for software development (every minute counts) and if you're in that group there is simply no need for more storage or decent graphics.

That's silly to be honest. I am a developer myself and I can tell you Mac Pro or iMac Pro is a waste of money in every way imaginable. Look up barefeats benchmarks. Unless you have very specialised needs (like video editing) there is visible penalty when you increase the number of your cores. For every day usage 6-8 cores is what you should be aiming at, and preferably with highest clock speed possible. The more core…

What you say is true, but apple has generally been better at selecting processors from intel that aren't just re-bagged low clock xeons. It wouldn't surprise me if this thing is 5Ghz turbo on a couple cores. There was that 28core 5ghz beast intel was talking about (definitely not 300W though) and a few rumored W3175X, follow on.

Re: New Mac Pro

#277

Post by rwmj » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:20 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #212

ljw1001 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that just shows that they put the tiny, essentially useless HD in to keep the base price artificially low.

Isn't providing a lower cost option a good thing?

Bait and switch is a dark pattern, even if it's a common one.

Re: New Mac Pro

#278

Post by bayindirh » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:20 PM UTC

llampx wrote: post #186

duskwuff wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first step up from 256GB is 2x512GB, and there's configurations up to 2x2TB. My guess is that the 256GB configuration is meant for users that work primarily with data that's kept on network storage.

There's no professional that would buy a machine with 256GB of storage. Let's call it what it is - a throwaway configuration meant to hit a price point.

Multimedia professionals do not store their data in internal/primary drives.

They generally have RAID boxes with either Ethernet or thunderbolt connection.

Most video editing/rendering is done on big storage arrays anyway. So 256GB storage is more than enough for most serious multimedia professionals.

Re: New Mac Pro

#279

Post by arendtio » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:21 PM UTC

wjakob wrote: post #46

Lack of NVIDIA support is a deal-breaker. The AMD ecosystem is just so far behind when it comes to frameworks like CUDA, OptiX, cuDNN, etc.. Why can't Apple open up kernel-level support by cooperating more with NVIDIA? This state of things seems completely bizarre to me.

I know this is an Apple/Mac discussion, but from a Linux/OSS perspective, it looks very different. If it weren't for CUDA, Tensorflow and so on, I wouldn't even consider buying NVIDIA (anymore).

Currently, I have a laptop with NVIDIA graphics and a desktop PC with AMD graphics. The AMD stuff just works; out of the box (OSS, good performance, happy user). But NVIDIA either comes with nouveau (OSS, poor performance) or the nvidia proprietary binary driver which has all sorts of weird issues (e.g. always-on fans, animations running at different speeds, etc.).

Sure, this doesn't say anything about how a Mac would run with NVIDIA drivers, but it gives a hint that NVIDIA has its own weak spots. But the reason why Apple decided to skip on NVIDIA in this case, is probably rooted deeper within their strategies.

Re: New Mac Pro

#280

Post by amarshall » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:21 PM UTC

StillBored wrote: post #266

amarshall wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s more likely the new Mac Pro uses the as-of-yet unannounced (but leaked [1]) Xeon W-3xxx CPUs. The current Xeon W fare doesn’t have the core counts Apple is advertising. [1] https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-xeon-cascade-lake-w-...

Xeon W-3175X is 28 cores (and 250W).. But yes, I would expect a dual die 64 core monster like the 92xx series they recently announced. Of course the 300W power/thermal solution apple was talking about seems a bit limiting in that case.

Yes, but Apple lists 12, 16, and 24 core Xeon W options, none of which are currently available from Intel but do match those leaked for Cascade Lake Xeon W. So it’s quite doubtful Apple is using Skylake Xeon W since the majority of the specs don’t match.