Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

New Mac Pro Announced at WWDC! - It's OFFICIAL!

michael zaletel said:
802.11ac can handle 500 Megabits per second, so yes, I think it can transmit 4K wirelessly.
Click to expand...

jimhare said:
Doesn't the RedRay CODEC work at 9Mb/s? My 3 year old router can handle this so my suggestion would be absolutely.
Click to expand...

Very interesting...

I presume Apple would use H.265. What kind of bitrates are 4k 265 streams running at?

Terry VerHaar said:
Have to admit, that one goes over my head. Am I not hip enough?
Click to expand...

If it does then I'm right there with you. I'm just following along on that one.
 
WTF I dont care if this is in Pink naugahyde. (Yes google that one ) What I care about is that it works .

Now for the apologies...... I'm sorry Apple made something different, that its not modular enough, its not boxy enough, it uses somthing other than Cuda, it incorporates a "lazy susan" idea, it doesn't fit in a rack apparently, hah!, it has to be plugged into other things, it firmly establishes 4k as the future for consumers, it so small that its too portable, it's disruptive to Feng shui desk stylists, it looks like something Darth Vader would edit on, it doesn't suffer from in-numerable security updates, the secretary can mistake it for a vase, its a spaghetti monster, that you can run 2 x 4k monitors plus a 4k projector simultaneously. But most of all ..... I'm sorry for being sorry.

For some, this design isn't for you I get it & thats fair enough.......but just maybe you should also look at your own reactions to new tech. Because some posters are starting to sound like they aren't on a website known for espousing disruptive technology.
 
Matt Gottshalk said:
We will see, but I read this from an engineering perspective on another site:

"It's because it's a non-optimal configuration which makes airflow perpendicular to heat flow, instead of parallel to it. In layman's terms, if the air is being sucked in from the bottom and exhausted at the top, components higher up your chimney will have less cooling because they're getting air that's been warmed up by components lower in the chimney.
Click to expand...

That's why components are separated into three parallel sections, and the air flow seems less obstructed with this wind tunnel approach compared to a typical housing.
 
Mike Garrick said:
Now for the apologies...... I'm sorry Apple made something different, that its not modular enough, its not boxy enough, it uses somthing other than Cuda, it incorporates a "lazy susan" idea, it doesn't fit in a rack apparently, hah!, it has to be plugged into other things, it firmly establishes 4k as the future for consumers, it so small that its too portable, it's disruptive to Feng shui desk stylists, it looks like something Darth Vader would edit on, it doesn't suffer from in-numerable security updates, the secretary can mistake it for a vase, its a spaghetti monster, that you can run 2 x 4k monitors plus a 4k projector simultaneously. But most of all ..... I'm sorry for being sorry.
Click to expand...

:)

If $ 3/4/5K are really insufficient to prevent a design-known company's top-of-the-line professional creative tool from being mistaken for a bucket or a vase in 2013...I'd be willing to add a few hundred on top of that.
 
awesome quote Peter! I hope you don't mind I post it in FB :001_tongue:

Peter Majtan said:
glass-half-full.jpg


The glass above is neither half full nor half empty.
It is 100% full. It is full of water and air.
Unfortunately these days many take air for granted...

:sifone: Peter
Click to expand...
 
Matt Gottshalk said:
We will see, but I read this from an engineering perspective on another site:

"It's because it's a non-optimal configuration which makes airflow perpendicular to heat flow, instead of parallel to it. In layman's terms, if the air is being sucked in from the bottom and exhausted at the top, components higher up your chimney will have less cooling because they're getting air that's been warmed up by components lower in the chimney.

Ideally you want airflow to be parallel to the flow of heat. e.g. heatsink fan sucks in air through the sides of the heatsink and blows it out the top. So the heatsink is hottest at the bottom (closest to CPU), coolest at the top. Air is coolest at the bottom, hottest at the top. That makes the heat gradient consistent across the air temperature gradient (a certain temperature air always sees the same temperature metal), providing uniform cooling.

On top of that, if your heat gradient is in a moving loop (e.g. water cooling), you want the cooling medium (usually air) moving in the opposite direction of heat flow. That sets up a countercurrent heat exchanger, which is the most efficient at both extracting heat and lowering temperature.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countercurrent_exchan...

If they'd set up an active water cooling loop which pumped water across all the CPUs and GPUs, sent the water to the top where it was cooled by hot air being exhausted, then moved down until it was finally cooled by fresh air being taken in, then this would be a really sweet countercurrent cooling setup. But as best as I can tell, they're not using water cooling. They're just shunting a bunch of heat pipes to the center. So if there's any vertical separation of CPUs and GPUs, stuff higher up will run hotter than stuff further down.

Also, I'd need to do some calcs but my intuition says a circular shape is the worst shape for this. To maximize heat exchange, you want to maximize surface area presented to the airflow. A circular cross-section minimizes surface area encountering a given volume of airflow. That's why your car's radiator is a big rectangular grill positioned to present maximum surface area to incoming air. But there are mitigating factors having to do with boundary flow which may flip it the other way (the car's radiator is not as deep as the Mac Pro is tall) - I'd have to run some calcs to be sure. The pics however make it seem like they're not even doing that, and there's a huge open triangular region in the center where air will just pass through without cooling anything. I truly hope they have vanes running through that central space. "
Click to expand...

Matt - I am sure you are right. Apple doesn't have enough money to hire real engineers to figure this stuff out. So I think they googled it and came up with a design that way.
 
Looks like the new Mac Pro is a cousin to the Roomba, it even has the vacuum intake at the bottom.

Personally I think the new design is quite interesting and makes sense. Large fans are exponentially more efficient than smaller fans and fans are circular in shape, so it makes sense that the most efficient chassis that utilizes the least volume but the largest fans would be a cylinder with fans at both ends. And most PC chassis have relatively arbitrary airflow except that it generally goes from front to back, low to high, and then internal component (cpu/gpu) fans that run perpendicular to the overall airflow. By comparison, this mac pro seems like a pretty good balance of cooling performance and space if you were to come up with an unconventional design that is very logical. Not very friendly with currently-available boxy accessories/components, though.

As for components at the top being hotter than those at the bottom, all the components except maybe the SSD seem to be approximately in the middle thanks to the triangular heat sink. I agree the heatsink is probably going to be hotter at the top of the chassis than at the bottom, but I doubt they would need to put any high TDP components near the top.

I normally am not that impressed with Apple's new technology, but they certainly seem to be thinking outside of the box on this cylinder :)

It is too bad it will just have to be tethered to lots of rectangles anyway...
 
Terry VerHaar said:
Matt - I am sure you are right. Apple doesn't have enough money to hire real engineers to figure this stuff out. So I think they googled it and came up with a design that way.
Click to expand...
Hahahaahaaahahahahaaah
 
Matt Gottshalk said:
We will see, but I read this from an engineering perspective on another site:

"It's because it's a non-optimal configuration which makes airflow perpendicular to heat flow, instead of parallel to it. In layman's terms, if the air is being sucked in from the bottom and exhausted at the top, components higher up your chimney will have less cooling because they're getting air that's been warmed up by components lower in the chimney.

Ideally you want airflow to be parallel to the flow of heat. e.g. heatsink fan sucks in air through the sides of the heatsink and blows it out the top. So the heatsink is hottest at the bottom (closest to CPU), coolest at the top. Air is coolest at the bottom, hottest at the top. That makes the heat gradient consistent across the air temperature gradient (a certain temperature air always sees the same temperature metal), providing uniform cooling.
Click to expand...

By the same "engineering perspective" as the air is ingested from the side - the stuff on the opposite side will run hotter too. And if you ingest air from all sides at once - then the central portion is superheated adding the heat from the sides to its own heat...

Matt Gottshalk said:
If they'd set up an active water cooling loop which pumped water across all the CPUs and GPUs
Click to expand...

Same issue here - the components further down that loop will be running hotter. This is not something you can get rid off.
Ironically it is the Apple's setup that is most efficient as they keep the three key components at the same level - and made that quite obvious in the animation on the Mac Pro site...


Matt Gottshalk said:
sent the water to the top where it was cooled by hot air being exhausted
Click to expand...

Come again? That is some "engineering perspective" right there...

:sifone: Peter
 
Antony Newman said:
If a single Xeon E5-2600 v2 could scale to 12 cores x 3GHz x Hyperthreading (24 thread) x 30MB L3 with a TDP of ~130W ... why would you waste space, power, and increase complexity putting another Xeon on the motherboard?

AJ
Click to expand...

A second processor is never wasted space. The better question is why didn't they? Isn't that kinda the whole point about Xeons?
 
From a flow perspective the design isn't obviously bad. The open central core will draw hot air in from the slower moving air to the sides like a venturi, and will do so all the way up. This creates the cross flow discussed earlier.

Nothing wrong with that design from a heat flow perspective, and not enough information yet to see just how well they have done it.
 
What we don't know yet is whether it will be customizeable. Why would they hand-assemble it in the US if it wasn't customizeable?
 
Glen Powell said:
I won't be buying this piece of crap either!!! Can you believe that they built this without Selectron Tubes!?!?

C'mon really? Not yet released, and what they showed was just one iteration of what will probably be a whole product line of custom builds. The world moves on from legacy equipment, I have no clue when I last used the optical drive in my current MacPro tower. Don't need it. Products and tech evolve, get on, get out of the way, or get steamrolled...
Click to expand...

Sorry Glenn, but last I checked, we used RED ROCKET cards that are PCIe form factor. Even Thunderbolt 2 will limit performance of these cards, if I understand correctly.

Also, I didn't mention the optical drive, but I agree with you, they're not needed for most things nowadays. However, for a "pro" solution, it's a nice option to have... so is internal storage so we don't accumulate the clutter of external drives on our desks or floors. Just sayin'

Oh well... at least I can do this with my new Mac Pro

2fC2ThM.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top