The display looks great and all, but I have trouble finding the value proposition of a $1000 coating upgrade. You can get pretty great professional displays for that price difference.
Doesn’t do HDR, doesn’t have FALD, Tops out at 400 nits (vs 1000 on the XDR) and has 1000:1 contrast ratio, as opposed to 1,000,000:1 OLED-like contrast ratio of the XDR.
One is suitable for working on HDR content - the other is literally incapable of properly displaying it. Whether or not you think your eye can or cannot tell, these are just facts.
Yep, not a proof monitor and the Dell is 2k better. Color Gamut and Gamma is wrong on Apple stuff anyways and no 3d LUT. The Pro comes with one old or two old AMD Cards. No Nvidia drivers. Much less software than on Win. AMD is running circles around Intels 2 generations old chip. The upgrade path is 6 years or more no can do hardware like that.
Incredible. Only from Apple, where less is always more, and costs a whole lot more, too...;) I wonder how many Apple-ites will be buying those $1k monitor stands?...! Only from Apple. I wonder...does the Pro come standard with the same measly 12-month warranty Apple puts on most everything else it sells--last I checked? (You have to pay for a longer warranty.)
build a Threadripper system for less than half as much that will run circles around the xeons and won't need the proprietary pci-e daughter board as well.
Threadripper? I just Built a better speced Intel based Thinkstation P520c at Lenovo.com for $2500. Now that isnt as nice of a case (opinion) but that case is worth $3500 only if the wheels are worth $400. Oh wait. Apple charges $400 to upgrade the legs to wheels. LOL
Around a third of the price depending on the spec but with a much faster CPU and PCIe 4.0 storage. Apple's margins are amazing so maybe that bite out the Apple relates to the relative cost to them with the rest the profit margin! :)
It's very odd, why would you use a Mac in the first place, it's not powerful enough to justify its premium price. Software wise it's not as comprehensive as windows.
I work in the industry target for this Mac Pro. I prefer HP z8 because they have a more versatile configuration and warranty is far superior. That said, Hp prices are no different than Apple’s.
I still need to see details about what PCIe cards I can install in these Macs. If they need Apple EFI or any proprietary hardware that would be the most critical thing. NOT the price.
Please post the config of the z8. Likely you are not matching the same CPU. z8s use Bronze/Silver/Gold/Plat Xeons. Apple uses the W-series for the Mac Pro 2019.
We have bought hundreds of HP workstations (mostly from VARs). I like them a lot. But they are not significantly cheaper than Apple's workstations. They may go on sale or certain config can come cheaper but overall they are in the same stratosphere as any branded workstation.
The other difference is the Apple uses the M suffix Xeons for the 28 core model where as the HP can be configured without. That's several thousand dollars just to enable greater than 1 TB memory capacity. Thanks Intel for your artificial product segmentation.
It really is nut scratching that Apple wouldn't partner with AMD for CPU's when they have clearly superior chipsets, CPU microarchitecture and scalability...AND they already use them exclusively for GPU support - because there is no longer any driver development for nVidia GPU's under Catalina.
I havent seen anything about price drops on the W-3200 platform, only the W-2200. Come to think of it, i havent actually seen any W-2200 chips even for sale....
Out of date? Its using the newer socket'd Xeon W based on Intel Xeon Scalable 2nd gen. I havent seen many if any machines based on this platform yet. It cost a lot yes, but so would any machine running this platform, then Apple does they mega markup and we are there.
People are probably referencing AMD so the implication is that the performance is out of date rather than the shelf life.
The irony here is that Apple chose AMD for the GPUs where they are second best and Intel for the CPUs where AMD are now top dog. A rookie mistake, as if they sent an intern to the shop to buy the parts and they got confused, bought the wrong ones and spent too much on the bling for the case. Imagine a Bentley with a diesel engine that thinks it's a Maserati.
While Threadripper is faster than Xeon W, it doesn't have the same amount of RAM support. The standard W-32XX supports 1TB RAM and the 32XXM supports 2TB RAM. Since Threadripper doesn't support RDIMMs, it can only use 256GB RAM. What AMD should do is create a Xeon W competitor with Epyc that is basically Threadripper with 8 RAM channels and RDIMM support.
Then since they are already designing new boards and such, it wouldn't have been to hard to create a Workstation board for 1S Epyc, which would have been faster, and have allowance for even higher core counts and memory.
It isn't officially supported but I believe it should run, iirc it did on TR1. Anway, you have Epyc P CPUs that would be mostly suitable for that. Same money, tons of memory and performance.
You might need to go dual socket to get 2 TB RAM support however, since you would need 16 RAM slots and not sure it's available on a 1 socket motherboard.
My company just bought a SuperMicro 2U4N with each node having 2x Epyc 7502's, 1TB RAM, and dual dual-port 25GbE cards for $44k. We did spend another $12k on almost 80TB of SSD, so for only and extra $3k you could have what we got.
Bingo. I was really hoping Apple's delay with this mac prk release where due to it adding threadripper options. That would make sense, but hey it's Apple! Less is more!
Pretty sure Papaspud was implying the exact opposite of the best when stating "don't care if you have the best." Wording it another way "money is no object and I know I'm not getting a good deal for the price I'm playing, but I do not care about bang for the buck."
Eh, pricing is obscene, but it is Apple after all. It's a shame they still can't be bothered to let Nvidia release drivers on Mac OS, and it's also going to be awkward now that Threadripper and Epyc destroy this on the CPU end of things, but aren't even options.
I wondered why Apply retreated from making a real desktop system, but it sort of makes sense when you realize how unmotivated they are to support diversity of hardware. They spent years designing this platform, and both CPU and GPU fronts it's inadequate, given the pedigree.
You get a lot more for your money with the z8. Better selection too. People who use these systems dont dare what OS its running. This mac pro is going to flop.
I agree with a better selection, but it also a different choice. HP uses a different line of Xeon processors. And often, people make a mistake as an apple to apple comparison. They are not.
I strongly disagree, you get an "a lot more" from z8. If you can if you are looking for a specific configuration but overall, the MP2019 is the same price range as the z8s.
I assume you mean "care what OS it is running". Uhm, they do. People who buy these are usually integrating it into a large, often established workflow. They need it to support specific software, thus OS versions. As there are niche software or environment e that are strictly Linux or Windows, there are software that is Mac OS only. Then there is an environment that is both (we do Windows and Mac OS).
Nvidia probably wants no part of this. AMD, who already can't compete in the professional space, looks 10x worse with their hardware attached to these prices. The ~$45k profit margin on this wouldn't be going into Nvidia's pocket, it goes into Apple's. Nvidia looks much better giving you $50k worth of performance for $50k than $5k worth for $50k. Nvidia has clear differentiation and good optics across Tesla, Quadro, and GeForce. The Mac Pro doesn't line up with any of it because it has no clear purpose. It's just an overpriced heater. If I had a billion dollar business like Nvidia with a sterling reputation in the professional compute, rendering, and consumer gaming spheres, and Apple came to me wanting to put my hardware in this low-volume pile of crap, I'd say "No," since it would be a multimillion dollar reputation hit for a few thousand in profit.
Then you'd be a fool. Getting into Apple's workstation business invariably means getting into their entire Mac business, which is an opportunity that nVidia would be mad to pass up. Unfortunately I'm pretty sure bumpgate was responsible for killing that relationship dead, and Apple recently dropping them out of the drivers makes it unlikely they'll reverse course any time soon.
What a load of bull. Apple is not using nvidia because of CUDA. Apple does not want its mac to just another CUDA terminal. They want all GPU assisted work to be done with Metal. They are playing politics with what should be sensible consumer options.
You do realize that the DGX Station from nVidia is even more expensive than the Mac Pro right? It is the only other system that can offer quad GPU with links (other vendors are limited to two cards with nvLink).
The people who are going to be buying the top end models make that much money in one contract or a few. And that computer will make them 20-100x the cost of of it. You have to think of the long term money they will make using a computer like that. This is a WORK computer, and is going to be used for the next 5-10 years. $50K is nothing compared to what they will make with this machine.
False. My company does video editing for internal and client jobs. We are about a 500 person agency. There's no way we'd pay this kind of money for a video editing station. 10k would have been acceptable which would allow us 3 - 4 full time video editors. The price to performance and longevity of this machine is not worth it when we see threadripper CPU and nvidia GPU already outperforming the top specs on this mac pro.
In 1-2 years time this machine will be slow compared to whata coming. There's no way an even strippes down version is worth it.
If Apple came out and said... "We will sell you new motherboards or cpu in the future that will work with this mac pro" then MAYBE we'd consider it... But knowing Apple that is unlikely.
We'll be switching to linux or windows video editing stations.
Look into putting Apple's Afterburner FPGA card into an external chassis. I have a feeling for editors leveraging ProRes day in, day out, that that'll be the major performance booster. An iMac Pro with that card should be significantly less with similar performance with that card.
"If you need this level of performance for productivity, you are not going to use it for 10 years, because at that point it would run at a snails pace."
never assume that exponential 'performance' increases are forever. they aren't, as anyone who signed a mortgage in 2007 can attest. the same is true in hardware and software. the physical limits of semi-conductors is within cite. Moore is still true, but on the down low.
Tim Cook is an absolute brainlet. $400 for wheels where you could get some at home depot for $20 that would work just as well. The hardware in this mac pro is already beaten and outdated by threadripper 3970x for half the price. Apple stock is going to take a hit in 2020 for sure. Sell sell sell...
I see a lot of people are delusional about this product.
Let me put one thing clear before I start this maybe-rant. I do not like the pricing, but Apple is hardly the only ones who do it in this market. The market of professional equipment. Everything is priced higher because they can afford it. These machines will be used to make millions, sometimes billions.
That out of the way, let us discuss a few things: Why didn't Apple use AMD processors? Well, that's probably the easiest answer. When they decided to engineer this thing, AMD's Zen2 Arch was not anywhere close to being done, heck I don't even know if Zen was released yet. Gotta remember, these things don't come to market 30 days after engineering. Intel probably also gave Apple a great deal on the Xeons. And maybe the Xeons have features Apple wanted, like AVX-512/VNNI support.
Why did Apple use AMD GPUs if they didn't use their CPUs? Isn't that the wonders of PCIe? being able to use an Intel CPU with AMD GPUs? Also, these aren't just "Rx580s", they are customized for Apple. And Apple will not use NVidia GPUs due to a long standing feud between the two companies.
Why's it so expensive? Because you aren't the target market, and yes, I realize some in the target market would also say it's expensive... but welcome to enterprise equipment. Where prices are made up, and companies buy it anyways, because it will help them make a boat load of money. At 50K, if this thing can help animators make a movie in 10% less time, you bet your ass they will be sold immediately.
It's the pro scene that is messed up with pricing. But if people are willing to buy it, why not price it high? At the end of the day, if it helps you make millions, what's 50k?
I agree with you that prices are made up… but that's because all prices are made up. Apple clearly wants to make a profit here, but it's a different market compared to any other device segment for them. When you consider the much lower volume over other Mac types and overhead for building in the US I doubt that their profit margin is any higher, and could very well be lower because of the higher average price tag per unit and because they can use it as a marketing tool. Everything I've seen with equatable PCs and displays from a full service vendor shows that it's competitively priced.
Fair enough that Apple simply isn't nimble enough to design a product in response to AMD crushing it. However, Apple's modifications to GPUs traditionally hasn't been very positive. They seem to just make them slightly different so that they can give them a new model number and it is less obvious that they are selling you an RX 580 for $500.
Apple is responsible for their feud with Nvidia. Did Nvidia's 8600GT cause problems 10 years ago? Absolutely. Does Nvidia have the best products on the GPU market right now? Absolutely. Could Apple have let the consumer choose either AMD or Nvidia? You know the drill. That's all on Apple.
And no, they are over-priced. The target market can pay $25k and get 128-cores of AMD EPYC and completely crush the MacPro, but not by 10%, but by 300%. No studio worth their salt is going with a MacPro over that unless they absolutely cannot move away from MacOS, in which case they need to set up a damn cluster and keep the front end iMac's or iMacPros (which is how quite a few studios are already set up, by the way).
The pro scene isn't the problem. The problem here is Apple, and every company will pay less money for more performance. This Mac Pro is going to be a flop, just like the last one, but what does Apple care since they are a software & services company moonlighting as a iPhone company these days. A look at this Mac Pro shows they clearly don't care.
Apple's pro ecosystem is compromised without Nvidia RTX serie… or at least getting AMD to hurry the heck up with their equivalents to Tensor cores & ray-tracing cores + a more competent alt to CUDA.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
81 Comments
Back to Article
milkywayer - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Ah the $1100 monitor stand (incl tax) is available now?? My payers have been answered.YB1064 - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
A fool and his money are soon parted.TheinsanegamerN - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
I see what you did there.sayed - Sunday, December 22, 2019 - link
what?willis936 - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
The display looks great and all, but I have trouble finding the value proposition of a $1000 coating upgrade. You can get pretty great professional displays for that price difference.dd_nvidia - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
what displays would be comparable to this?willis936 - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
None. Why do you ask?quiksilvr - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Dell's 8K monitor.WinterCharm - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Doesn’t do HDR, doesn’t have FALD, Tops out at 400 nits (vs 1000 on the XDR) and has 1000:1 contrast ratio, as opposed to 1,000,000:1 OLED-like contrast ratio of the XDR.soooo nope.
Llawehtdliub - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Because the eye can tell....krazyfrog - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Yes it can and you should get yours checked if it doesn't.AdditionalPylons - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
If you can't then you're not in the market anyway.Spunjji - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
One is suitable for working on HDR content - the other is literally incapable of properly displaying it. Whether or not you think your eye can or cannot tell, these are just facts.808Hilo - Friday, December 13, 2019 - link
Yep, not a proof monitor and the Dell is 2k better. Color Gamut and Gamma is wrong on Apple stuff anyways and no 3d LUT. The Pro comes with one old or two old AMD Cards. No Nvidia drivers. Much less software than on Win. AMD is running circles around Intels 2 generations old chip. The upgrade path is 6 years or more no can do hardware like that.WaltC - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Incredible. Only from Apple, where less is always more, and costs a whole lot more, too...;) I wonder how many Apple-ites will be buying those $1k monitor stands?...! Only from Apple. I wonder...does the Pro come standard with the same measly 12-month warranty Apple puts on most everything else it sells--last I checked? (You have to pay for a longer warranty.)hescominsoon - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
build a Threadripper system for less than half as much that will run circles around the xeons and won't need the proprietary pci-e daughter board as well.goatfajitas - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Threadripper? I just Built a better speced Intel based Thinkstation P520c at Lenovo.com for $2500. Now that isnt as nice of a case (opinion) but that case is worth $3500 only if the wheels are worth $400. Oh wait. Apple charges $400 to upgrade the legs to wheels. LOLsmilingcrow - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Around a third of the price depending on the spec but with a much faster CPU and PCIe 4.0 storage.Apple's margins are amazing so maybe that bite out the Apple relates to the relative cost to them with the rest the profit margin! :)
FunBunny2 - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
"Apple's margins are amazing"Barnum was right.
eek2121 - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
You can buil an 128 core EPYC based server for around half the cost. I don't criticize Apple's pricing much, but damn.Xex360 - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
It's very odd, why would you use a Mac in the first place, it's not powerful enough to justify its premium price. Software wise it's not as comprehensive as windows.Llawehtdliub - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
"Professionals" demand to usw macOS, silly! Windows bad!FunBunny2 - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
real professionals use *nix. always have.29a - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
So you're saying Mac users are "real professionals" since OSX is unix.808Hilo - Friday, December 13, 2019 - link
The netherlands are Unix and Apple purdifies and loopholes. Not something I want to deal with in a business...so Win for me.crimsonson - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
But this is not competing with DIYers.This is competing in terms of hardware specs to the HP z8 and similar workstation.
smilingcrow - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
True, but the comparison shows what their margins must be like.crimsonson - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
True.I work in the industry target for this Mac Pro. I prefer HP z8 because they have a more versatile configuration and warranty is far superior. That said, Hp prices are no different than Apple’s.
I still need to see details about what PCIe cards I can install in these Macs. If they need Apple EFI or any proprietary hardware that would be the most critical thing. NOT the price.
Samus - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Last I checked a 28 core z8 with 512GB RAM and 4TB SSD was $18,000. Apple wants almost double that and the only difference is a $3000 video card.crimsonson - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Please post the config of the z8. Likely you are not matching the same CPU. z8s use Bronze/Silver/Gold/Plat Xeons. Apple uses the W-series for the Mac Pro 2019.We have bought hundreds of HP workstations (mostly from VARs). I like them a lot. But they are not significantly cheaper than Apple's workstations. They may go on sale or certain config can come cheaper but overall they are in the same stratosphere as any branded workstation.
Kevin G - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
The other difference is the Apple uses the M suffix Xeons for the 28 core model where as the HP can be configured without. That's several thousand dollars just to enable greater than 1 TB memory capacity. Thanks Intel for your artificial product segmentation.Samus - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
It really is nut scratching that Apple wouldn't partner with AMD for CPU's when they have clearly superior chipsets, CPU microarchitecture and scalability...AND they already use them exclusively for GPU support - because there is no longer any driver development for nVidia GPU's under Catalina.goatfajitas - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
$6000 for an 8 core Intel CPU, 32gb RAM, Radeon 580 and and a 256gb SSD? OMG, this is ridiculous even for Apple. Seriously WTF?cosmotic - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Agreed; this system was out of date when it was announced a year ago. Then AMD pounced. This system is positively old and it's not even shipping yet.cosmotic - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
And it costs a bajillion dollars.Alistair - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Apple: The only company that will sell you Intel CPUs for the original price before Intel cut them in half last month. $300 per core.danielfranklin - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
I havent seen anything about price drops on the W-3200 platform, only the W-2200.Come to think of it, i havent actually seen any W-2200 chips even for sale....
danielfranklin - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Out of date? Its using the newer socket'd Xeon W based on Intel Xeon Scalable 2nd gen. I havent seen many if any machines based on this platform yet.It cost a lot yes, but so would any machine running this platform, then Apple does they mega markup and we are there.
smilingcrow - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
People are probably referencing AMD so the implication is that the performance is out of date rather than the shelf life.The irony here is that Apple chose AMD for the GPUs where they are second best and Intel for the CPUs where AMD are now top dog.
A rookie mistake, as if they sent an intern to the shop to buy the parts and they got confused, bought the wrong ones and spent too much on the bling for the case.
Imagine a Bentley with a diesel engine that thinks it's a Maserati.
Llawehtdliub - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Keep up, Dan. AMD threadrippee already kicks it's ass for half the price.. Come 2020 Q2 it will be significantly outdated. Pcie 3? Laughs all around!schujj07 - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
While Threadripper is faster than Xeon W, it doesn't have the same amount of RAM support. The standard W-32XX supports 1TB RAM and the 32XXM supports 2TB RAM. Since Threadripper doesn't support RDIMMs, it can only use 256GB RAM. What AMD should do is create a Xeon W competitor with Epyc that is basically Threadripper with 8 RAM channels and RDIMM support.Topweasel - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Then since they are already designing new boards and such, it wouldn't have been to hard to create a Workstation board for 1S Epyc, which would have been faster, and have allowance for even higher core counts and memory.Zizy - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
It isn't officially supported but I believe it should run, iirc it did on TR1.Anway, you have Epyc P CPUs that would be mostly suitable for that. Same money, tons of memory and performance.
fred666 - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Epyc support up to 2 TB RAM. You can get a single socket Epyc system for much less than this Mac.https://www.newegg.com/supermicro-mbd-h11dsi-n702-...
You might need to go dual socket to get 2 TB RAM support however, since you would need 16 RAM slots and not sure it's available on a 1 socket motherboard.
https://www.newegg.com/supermicro-mbd-h11dsi-n702-...
nandnandnand - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
No AMD = no buysvan1971 - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
$53K ? Put me in for 2, I'm sure my workflow will increase 10 fold and they will pay for themselves in 20 years.schujj07 - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
My company just bought a SuperMicro 2U4N with each node having 2x Epyc 7502's, 1TB RAM, and dual dual-port 25GbE cards for $44k. We did spend another $12k on almost 80TB of SSD, so for only and extra $3k you could have what we got.airdrifting - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Yeah $1000 monitor stand, no thanks and fu apple.Papaspud - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
When money is no object and you don't care if you have the best....... we present apple!!!!rahvin - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Those Xeon W's are not "the best". They are overpriced monstrosities that are often outperformed by consumer level Ryzen processors at 1/8th the cost.Llawehtdliub - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Bingo. I was really hoping Apple's delay with this mac prk release where due to it adding threadripper options. That would make sense, but hey it's Apple! Less is more!PeachNCream - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Pretty sure Papaspud was implying the exact opposite of the best when stating "don't care if you have the best." Wording it another way "money is no object and I know I'm not getting a good deal for the price I'm playing, but I do not care about bang for the buck."gijames1225 - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Eh, pricing is obscene, but it is Apple after all. It's a shame they still can't be bothered to let Nvidia release drivers on Mac OS, and it's also going to be awkward now that Threadripper and Epyc destroy this on the CPU end of things, but aren't even options.I wondered why Apply retreated from making a real desktop system, but it sort of makes sense when you realize how unmotivated they are to support diversity of hardware. They spent years designing this platform, and both CPU and GPU fronts it's inadequate, given the pedigree.
crimsonson - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Price is in line with HP, Dell and other workstations.bernardl - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Yes, indeed. But most replying on pricing are not really in the market for a pro workstation.They don't know that an HP Z8 can be configured to cost more than 100,000 US$.
Llawehtdliub - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
You get a lot more for your money with the z8. Better selection too.People who use these systems dont dare what OS its running. This mac pro is going to flop.
crimsonson - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
I agree with a better selection, but it also a different choice. HP uses a different line of Xeon processors. And often, people make a mistake as an apple to apple comparison. They are not.I strongly disagree, you get an "a lot more" from z8. If you can if you are looking for a specific configuration but overall, the MP2019 is the same price range as the z8s.
I assume you mean "care what OS it is running". Uhm, they do. People who buy these are usually integrating it into a large, often established workflow. They need it to support specific software, thus OS versions.
As there are niche software or environment e that are strictly Linux or Windows, there are software that is Mac OS only.
Then there is an environment that is both (we do Windows and Mac OS).
DominionSeraph - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Nvidia probably wants no part of this. AMD, who already can't compete in the professional space, looks 10x worse with their hardware attached to these prices.The ~$45k profit margin on this wouldn't be going into Nvidia's pocket, it goes into Apple's. Nvidia looks much better giving you $50k worth of performance for $50k than $5k worth for $50k.
Nvidia has clear differentiation and good optics across Tesla, Quadro, and GeForce. The Mac Pro doesn't line up with any of it because it has no clear purpose. It's just an overpriced heater.
If I had a billion dollar business like Nvidia with a sterling reputation in the professional compute, rendering, and consumer gaming spheres, and Apple came to me wanting to put my hardware in this low-volume pile of crap, I'd say "No," since it would be a multimillion dollar reputation hit for a few thousand in profit.
Spunjji - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Then you'd be a fool. Getting into Apple's workstation business invariably means getting into their entire Mac business, which is an opportunity that nVidia would be mad to pass up. Unfortunately I'm pretty sure bumpgate was responsible for killing that relationship dead, and Apple recently dropping them out of the drivers makes it unlikely they'll reverse course any time soon.id4andrei - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
What a load of bull. Apple is not using nvidia because of CUDA. Apple does not want its mac to just another CUDA terminal. They want all GPU assisted work to be done with Metal. They are playing politics with what should be sensible consumer options.Kevin G - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
You do realize that the DGX Station from nVidia is even more expensive than the Mac Pro right? It is the only other system that can offer quad GPU with links (other vendors are limited to two cards with nvLink).LordConrad - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Apple... for tech yuppies with more money than sense. Ignore the outdated internals, we have the flashy aluminum case!lukewayne - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
Anton, very interested to know how/if the XDR Display can be used with a PClilkwarrior - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
The XDR Display will work w/ PCs just fine. It just uses Thunderbolt 3 which modern PCs & laptops accommodate.MrEcho - Tuesday, December 10, 2019 - link
The people who are going to be buying the top end models make that much money in one contract or a few. And that computer will make them 20-100x the cost of of it. You have to think of the long term money they will make using a computer like that.This is a WORK computer, and is going to be used for the next 5-10 years. $50K is nothing compared to what they will make with this machine.
Llawehtdliub - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
False.My company does video editing for internal and client jobs. We are about a 500 person agency. There's no way we'd pay this kind of money for a video editing station. 10k would have been acceptable which would allow us 3 - 4 full time video editors. The price to performance and longevity of this machine is not worth it when we see threadripper CPU and nvidia GPU already outperforming the top specs on this mac pro.
In 1-2 years time this machine will be slow compared to whata coming. There's no way an even strippes down version is worth it.
If Apple came out and said... "We will sell you new motherboards or cpu in the future that will work with this mac pro" then MAYBE we'd consider it... But knowing Apple that is unlikely.
We'll be switching to linux or windows video editing stations.
Kevin G - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Look into putting Apple's Afterburner FPGA card into an external chassis. I have a feeling for editors leveraging ProRes day in, day out, that that'll be the major performance booster. An iMac Pro with that card should be significantly less with similar performance with that card.Boland - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
what software are you using? You said you may switch to Linux. If you’re really talking about video editing, that doesn’t make any sense.nevcairiel - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
If you need this level of performance for productivity, you are not going to use it for 10 years, because at that point it would run at a snails pace.And any sane business will still look to save $25k or so if another machine can make them the same money, without paying the Apple tax.
FunBunny2 - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
"If you need this level of performance for productivity, you are not going to use it for 10 years, because at that point it would run at a snails pace."never assume that exponential 'performance' increases are forever. they aren't, as anyone who signed a mortgage in 2007 can attest. the same is true in hardware and software. the physical limits of semi-conductors is within cite. Moore is still true, but on the down low.
goatfajitas - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
That is kind of everyone's point. Other more powerful "WORK" computers are 1/3 the price and could remain in use for longer.cnxsoft - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
$200 for a VESA mount adapter... It must be a really good one.Llawehtdliub - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Tim Cook is an absolute brainlet. $400 for wheels where you could get some at home depot for $20 that would work just as well.The hardware in this mac pro is already beaten and outdated by threadripper 3970x for half the price.
Apple stock is going to take a hit in 2020 for sure. Sell sell sell...
goatfajitas - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Apples cash cow is mobile devices. This workstation wont hurt them if it doesn't sell. The dull masses will still buy their other products.M O B - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
When can we see a review? Curious what is user-upgradeable as well as to see details on the thermals.Xyler94 - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
I see a lot of people are delusional about this product.Let me put one thing clear before I start this maybe-rant. I do not like the pricing, but Apple is hardly the only ones who do it in this market. The market of professional equipment. Everything is priced higher because they can afford it. These machines will be used to make millions, sometimes billions.
That out of the way, let us discuss a few things:
Why didn't Apple use AMD processors?
Well, that's probably the easiest answer. When they decided to engineer this thing, AMD's Zen2 Arch was not anywhere close to being done, heck I don't even know if Zen was released yet. Gotta remember, these things don't come to market 30 days after engineering. Intel probably also gave Apple a great deal on the Xeons. And maybe the Xeons have features Apple wanted, like AVX-512/VNNI support.
Why did Apple use AMD GPUs if they didn't use their CPUs?
Isn't that the wonders of PCIe? being able to use an Intel CPU with AMD GPUs? Also, these aren't just "Rx580s", they are customized for Apple. And Apple will not use NVidia GPUs due to a long standing feud between the two companies.
Why's it so expensive?
Because you aren't the target market, and yes, I realize some in the target market would also say it's expensive... but welcome to enterprise equipment. Where prices are made up, and companies buy it anyways, because it will help them make a boat load of money. At 50K, if this thing can help animators make a movie in 10% less time, you bet your ass they will be sold immediately.
It's the pro scene that is messed up with pricing. But if people are willing to buy it, why not price it high? At the end of the day, if it helps you make millions, what's 50k?
FunBunny2 - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
"At 50K, if this thing can help animators make a movie in 10% less time"only if no other machine on the planet can do that relative to some specific 'standard machine'.
solipsism - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
I agree with you that prices are made up… but that's because all prices are made up. Apple clearly wants to make a profit here, but it's a different market compared to any other device segment for them. When you consider the much lower volume over other Mac types and overhead for building in the US I doubt that their profit margin is any higher, and could very well be lower because of the higher average price tag per unit and because they can use it as a marketing tool. Everything I've seen with equatable PCs and displays from a full service vendor shows that it's competitively priced.M O B - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Fair enough that Apple simply isn't nimble enough to design a product in response to AMD crushing it.However, Apple's modifications to GPUs traditionally hasn't been very positive. They seem to just make them slightly different so that they can give them a new model number and it is less obvious that they are selling you an RX 580 for $500.
Apple is responsible for their feud with Nvidia. Did Nvidia's 8600GT cause problems 10 years ago? Absolutely. Does Nvidia have the best products on the GPU market right now? Absolutely. Could Apple have let the consumer choose either AMD or Nvidia? You know the drill. That's all on Apple.
And no, they are over-priced. The target market can pay $25k and get 128-cores of AMD EPYC and completely crush the MacPro, but not by 10%, but by 300%. No studio worth their salt is going with a MacPro over that unless they absolutely cannot move away from MacOS, in which case they need to set up a damn cluster and keep the front end iMac's or iMacPros (which is how quite a few studios are already set up, by the way).
The pro scene isn't the problem. The problem here is Apple, and every company will pay less money for more performance. This Mac Pro is going to be a flop, just like the last one, but what does Apple care since they are a software & services company moonlighting as a iPhone company these days. A look at this Mac Pro shows they clearly don't care.
lilkwarrior - Wednesday, December 11, 2019 - link
Apple's pro ecosystem is compromised without Nvidia RTX serie… or at least getting AMD to hurry the heck up with their equivalents to Tensor cores & ray-tracing cores + a more competent alt to CUDA.sayed - Sunday, December 22, 2019 - link
53,000$ are you crazy i only have 3000$ i don't like this mac is so sec LoL