I know it's early, but RDNA 3 gets announced Nov 3, with a December probable release date.

Last time the 6900 XT PC version worked fine in the 7.1 Mac Pro, so I am assuming the 7900 XT should as well since it's just basically a faster GPU. Any hints of drivers popping up early hidden in software yet?

Since the 7.1 Mac Pro is still going strong, with an Apple Silicon Mac Pro no where to be seen yet, I am assuming Apple will give us at least one more solid generation of GPU upgrades.

MPX modules I'd expected to come months later after the PC GPU card launches last like time. I wouldn't be surprised if they maybe just gave us a 7900 XT and kept the 6800x duo as is.

Any guesses as to what may happen?

rondocap said:

I know it's early, but RDNA 3 gets announced Nov 3, with a December probable release date.

Last time the 6900 XT PC version worked fine in the 7.1 Mac Pro, so I am assuming the 7900 XT should as well since it's just basically a faster GPU.

This is wishful thinking, no?

rondocap said:

Any hints of drivers popping up early hidden in software yet?

Nothing yet with Ventura GM, Apple added NAVI 10/14 support for the first time (RX 5xxx and W5xxx) back with 10.15.1, but back then the cards were already available for some time.

rondocap said:

Since the 7.1 Mac Pro is still going strong, with an Apple Silicon Mac Pro no where to be seen yet, I am assuming Apple will give us at least one more solid generation of GPU upgrades.

MPX modules I'd expected to come months later after the PC GPU card launches last like time. I wouldn't be surprised if they maybe just gave us a 7900 XT and kept the 6800x duo as is.

Any guesses as to what may happen?

Even more wishful thinking.

Maybe Apple will add driver support for the new generation of NAVI GPUs sometime down the road, but new MPX modules?!?

The 7900 XT will probably saturate the 7,1 CPU.

My wish is Apple sell a new 7,1 motherboard and CPU upgrade kit.

rondocap said:

I know it's early, but RDNA 3 gets announced Nov 3, with a December probable release date.

Last time the 6900 XT PC version worked fine in the 7.1 Mac Pro, so I am assuming the 7900 XT should as well since it's just basically a faster GPU. Any hints of drivers popping up early hidden in software yet?

Since the 7.1 Mac Pro is still going strong, with an Apple Silicon Mac Pro no where to be seen yet, I am assuming Apple will give us at least one more solid generation of GPU upgrades.

MPX modules I'd expected to come months later after the PC GPU card launches last like time. I wouldn't be surprised if they maybe just gave us a 7900 XT and kept the 6800x duo as is.

Any guesses as to what may happen?

Click to expand...

"Just a faster GPU"?? No it's a bit more than that. Also as mentioned above, the support didn't come until much later after the cards were released.

Id love for it to happen tho as I have a Mac Pro 7.1 currently with a 6900.

Yes, it will work. In Windows and Linux...

I don't mind dropping a grand on an off-the-shelf GPU if the 7.1 supports it.

Question is - do Apple need to make MPX versions to have the incentive to get the drivers done? and if so, is that likely at this stage?

EDIT: Also if the AS Mac Pro starts at around £6K, then at what point to people give up on the 7.1s if going the MPX route (the W6900X MPX module costs £6k).

If we don't at least get drivers for the 7,1 I'm going to be seriously pissed.

To spend SO MUCH money on such a shortlived machine, and not even get two generations of GPU driver upgrades for the trouble?

That would be hard to forgive.

I think it's very possible that Apple goes "if you want better GPU performance in your 2019 Mac Pro then you should but the new Apple Silicon Mac Pro."

goMac said:

I think it's very possible that Apple goes "if you want better GPU performance in your 2019 Mac Pro then you should but the new Apple Silicon Mac Pro."

I am afraid you may be right.

Grumply said:

If we don't at least get drivers for the 7,1 I'm going to be seriously pissed.

To spend SO MUCH money on such a shortlived machine, and not even get two generations of GPU driver upgrades for the trouble?

That would be hard to forgive.

Forgive yourself or Apple, or both ?

4wdwrx said:

Forgive yourself or Apple, or both ?

Bit of both, but we're talking 93-95% in Apple's favour here.

Now the 6.1 is around 600 dollars/euros in second hand, and the 7.1 should be around 2000 dollars/euros for the 16 cores.

Mac3Duser said:

Now the 6.1 is around 600 dollars/euros in second hand, and the 7.1 should be around 2000 dollars/euros for the 16 cores.

Here the 16 core 7,1 is going for over AUD$10k (6400 euro) secondhand.

is it not too much for a 2019 configuration ? And benchmarks vs the M1 max / M1 ultra ?
with a amd rx7900 xtx at 999 dollars, I hope the 7.1 will have the drivers.

Mac3Duser said:

is it not too much for a 2019 configuration ? And benchmarks vs the M1 max / M1 ultra ?
with a amd rx7900 xtx at 999 dollars, I hope the 7.1 will have the drivers.

CPU is the most meaningless measure for computing. The vast majority of things that are "cpu limited", simply need a bit more time and the job is done - it's not an absolute or real time limiter of performance. Graphics, peripheral expansion these aren't things that can be solved with a few more seconds, they're hard limits on what the system can do, and needs to be able to do in real time.

I would happily buy a new computer with no more CPU power than my existing machine, but I will not accept a reduction in expansion or upgradability for ram, graphics, ports etc. That (and the "based on a server, not based on a smartphone" reliability of Xeons) is where the price premium is going to remain for secondhand 7,1s.

Well, PCI e 3.0 on the 7.1
And I hope Apple will make drivers for RX7000

mattspace said:

CPU is the most meaningless measure for computing. The vast majority of things that are "cpu limited", simply need a bit more time and the job is done - it's not an absolute or real time limiter of performance. Graphics, peripheral expansion these aren't things that can be solved with a few more seconds, they're hard limits on what the system can do, and needs to be able to do in real time.

I would happily buy a new computer with no more CPU power than my existing machine, but I will not accept a reduction in expansion or upgradability for ram, graphics, ports etc. That (and the "based on a server, not based on a smartphone" reliability of Xeons) is where the price premium is going to remain for secondhand 7,1s.

Click to expand...

Support and drivers are most important in my thought.

Installing it physically is useless with no driver support.

I am sure everyone wants to use 4090 in MacOS.

4wdwrx said:

Support and drivers are most important in my thought.

Installing it physically is useless with no driver support.

I am sure everyone wants to use 4090 in MacOS.

Sure, drivers are taken as read, more from the perspective as to "why has the 7,1s value not plummeted because Xeon's are slow?" - it doesn't matter how much faster a Mac Studio might be, the things it's faster at aren't the things that history has shown to be important to the people who were the buyers of a Mac Pro.

It will be very interesting to see how 7900 performs in blender/cycles using the HIP api. Since HIP seems to perform similar to metal that will give us a great insight into this card. Lets assume we can just use the marketing value of 60TF. That is almost 3x perf gain compared to a 6900xt. So two of these in the 7.1 would provide 120TF and a very nice and useful performance for 3d rendering. As i have written elsewhere, that will be extremely hard for apple to beat with their own AS solution. Especially on price. My bet is that apple will just ignore the 7900 series on mac and act as if didn’t exist. Then release their AS macpro and touting some weird/extreme edge case where it is great. I really hope I am wrong though and we get amd support both on the 7.1 and on AS.

mattspace said:

Sure, drivers are taken as read, more from the perspective as to "why has the 7,1s value not plummeted because Xeon's are slow?" - it doesn't matter how much faster a Mac Studio might be, the things it's faster at aren't the things that history has shown to be important to the people who were the buyers of a Mac Pro.

Because there is no replacement for the Mac Pro yet?
I would argue the 7,1 is last proper Mac Pro.
Also

mattspace said:

CPU is the most meaningless measure for computing. The vast majority of things that are "cpu limited", simply need a bit more time and the job is done - it's not an absolute or real time limiter of performance. Graphics, peripheral expansion these aren't things that can be solved with a few more seconds, they're hard limits on what the system can do, and needs to be able to do in real time.

Try using a FX AMD CPU/Sandy Bridge vs a i7 Alder Lake. Everyone would notice a difference in just browsing OS. CPUs also determine how the user experience is and in any setting. Of course, this is just one aspect but calling CPU advancements "meaningless" is outright a bad take.

If more CPU was available for me I would take it. I want the best for my workstations if I am spending thousands I want the best available CPU and best GPU. That's something Apple does not provide and will never provide. They have too much pride to do so.

exoticSpice said:

Because there is no replacement for the Mac Pro yet?
I would argue the 7,1 is last proper Mac Pro.
Also
Try using a FX AMD CPU/Sandy Bridge vs a i7 Alder Lake. Everyone would notice a difference in just browsing OS. CPUs also determine how the user experience is and in any setting. Of course, this is just one aspect but calling CPU advancements "meaningless" is outright a bad take.

If browsing the operating system can tax the CPU, any CPU, then you have bigger problems than your CPU being old.

exoticSpice said:

If more CPU was available for me I would take it. I want the best for my workstations if I am spending thousands I want the best available CPU and best GPU. That's something Apple does not provide and will never provide. They have too much pride to do so.

Sure, but in terms of how you experience the system, the CPU isn't the part doing the realtime performance stuff - the fluidity of your UI isn't the CPU. The speed of file loading over local network to a NAS isn't the CPU. Same CPUs upgraded the GPU, and my click to render time in RAW photo app is halved, viewport pan and zoom much smoother - all that matters, all of that is the experience of using the system.

except for the amount of Ram, even if above 256 GB, you really have to edit films in Hollywood, explain to me why a 2019 xeon which consumes a lot, by far less efficient on a single core, would be as good as an AS M2ultra.
On the other hand, mac pros have never been very good in 3D compared to nvidia PCs. AMD cards are a bit behind except for FCP. If AS M2ultra GPU are better for videos rendering than the AMD cards, why the 7.1 would be the last best mac ?

Mac3Duser said:

except for the amount of Ram, even if above 256 GB, you really have to edit films in Hollywood, explain to me why a 2019 xeon which consumes a lot, by far less efficient on a single core, would be as good as an AS M2ultra.
On the other hand, mac pros have never been very good in 3D compared to nvidia PCs. AMD cards are a bit behind except for FCP. If AS M2ultra GPU are better for videos rendering than the AMD cards, why the 7.1 would be the last best mac ?

The RX 7900 XTX will be much faster in 3D than the M2 Extreme and you could theoretically use several AMD cards increasing the power of your PC by several times which is unlikely to be the case with Apple Silicon. AMD cards are very good for 3D with one exception: raytracing. If you're doing 3D on a Mac and hate Windows then you have no choice.
But yes, for youtubers 3D doesn't matter.

7900 drivers for macs are not sure, for the moment. (and maybe a bit limited by PCIE 3.0)