New Mac Pro (7.1)

[lucienpalmer]

Originally Posted by LukeHoward

Just got mine installed. Haven't tried to stress anything out in Pro Tools yet, I have to say it doesn't feel a great deal snappier than my MacPro5,1. But... perhaps it's power lies beneath the surface :)

I also managed to get it installed in my 600mm rack (480mm rack depth). Slightly unorthodox and it won't be coming out in a hurry, involving the use of some 5" rack extenders. The rails taper in a bit because they bump into the back of the rack, which means I can't get the machine in all the way (indeed, it took quite a bit of force to get it in at all). But it will do for now. Hopefully there will be a third party solution for shallower racks.

FYI, the W5700X is now available for ordering (both as BTO and aftermarket).

Luke, will you post some photos of your tails and rack extenders installed. Grab different angles and such. I have a similar issues with racking the Dolby Atmos RMU, and I bought several styles of extenders. I eventually found one that worked best. I might be able to brainstorm a different configuration for you.

BTW, can you also post the specs of which 7,1 configuration you got? I looked back earlier in the thread and couldn’t find it.

[LukeHoward]

Hi Lucien,

Originally Posted by lucienpalmer

Luke, will you post some photos of your tails and rack extenders installed. Grab different angles and such. I have a similar issues with racking the Dolby Atmos RMU, and I bought several styles of extenders. I eventually found one that worked best. I might be able to brainstorm a different configuration for you.

Sure thing, will do when I get to the studio. This is what I used. The problem isn't the extender themselves, it's that the rails hit the back strip as they exit the rack, which taper them in so that it's not possible to push the Mac Pro all the way into locking position. It seems pretty stable though and I'm happy I managed to get it in without the use of a shelf.

BTW, can you also post the specs of which 7,1 configuration you got? I looked back earlier in the thread and couldn’t find it.

I bought the 16-core model with the RX580, 32GB RAM and 1TB disk, to which I added 128GB of OWC RAM and a 4TB Accelsior 4M2. (One annoying thing about the Accelsior is that it identifies itself to IOKit as an external disk, which means it mounts as removable drive. From my brief poking around the disk arbitration source it would need firmware or driver support to do otherwise.)

I am thinking about upgrading to the W5700X mostly for the extra Thunderbolt buses (it adds two).

Apropos of my earlier point about CPU usage, it could simply be that the Pro Tools CPU usage meter includes PCIe bus bandwidth, and that explains the three-fold difference. The session I tested had a lot of high latency plugins in it (e.g. iZotope) so play start felt laggy, but that's not really the computer's fault. So more investigation is required. However, I will say that some general things such as, say, Installer did not feel any faster than my MacPro5,1 – I kind of hoped it would have a bit more “new computer snap” to it.

[LDS]

Originally Posted by LukeHoward

I bought the 16-core model with the RX580, 32GB RAM and 1TB disk, to which I added 128GB of OWC RAM and a 4TB Accelsior 4M2. (One annoying thing about the Accelsior is that it identifies itself to IOKit as an external disk, which means it mounts as removable drive. From my brief poking around the disk arbitration source it would need firmware or driver support to do otherwise.)

There are some tutorials on the web somewhere about swapping out the removable drive icon for a standard internal drive icon.

[LukeHoward]

Originally Posted by LDS

There are some tutorials on the web somewhere about swapping out the removable drive icon for a standard internal drive icon.

Yeah, found those, and did that (actually, OWC have a bunch of even fancier icons you can download). But – it's really about the behaviour of external vs internal which is baked deep into the OS.

[LDS]

Originally Posted by LukeHoward

Yeah, found those, and did that (actually, OWC have a bunch of even fancier icons you can download). But – it's really about the behaviour of external vs internal which is baked deep into the OS.

Is it really applicable beyond aesthetics though? From my understanding, the disk arbitration script applies to any disk beyond the root drive. All it is really doing in the case of the 4M2 is identifying that it is running on I/O outside of what comes internally native to the system. From my experience, most PCIe based solutions are identified in a similar way by OSX.

OWC are a reputable brand. If altering the way the 4M2 was identified by OSX improved its performance rather than its aesthetics, they probably would have addressed it.

[LukeHoward]

Originally Posted by LDS

Is it really applicable beyond aesthetics though? From my understanding, the disk arbitration script applies to any disk beyond the root drive. All it is really doing in the case of the 4M2 is identifying that it is running on I/O outside of what comes internally native to the system. From my experience, most PCIe based solutions are identified in a similar way by OSX.

OWC are a reputable brand. If altering the way the 4M2 was identified by OSX improved its performance rather than its aesthetics, they probably would have addressed it.

Maybe. I just don't think you should be able to eject what is clearly an internal drive. Re: "I/O outside of what comes internally native to the system", SATA disks on my MacPro5,1 weren't identified as removable. Why should PCIe storage be any different simply because the technology has changed? IMO the OS should interrogate whether the storage is attached via Thunderbolt (kIOPCITunnelledKey) or not and use that to set the location.

[LDS]

Originally Posted by LukeHoward

Maybe. I just don't think you should be able to eject what is clearly an internal drive. Re: "I/O outside of what comes internally native to the system", SATA disks on my MacPro5,1 weren't identified as removable. Why should PCIe storage be any different simply because the technology has changed? IMO the OS should interrogate whether the storage is attached via Thunderbolt (kIOPCITunnelledKey) or not and use that to set the location.

I don't disagree with you... but it is Apple. The 5,1 was 8 years ago. A lot has changed. Why put proprietary connectors on hard drives? Why install T2 chips? Why solder components to motherboards? Why glue batteries in laptops?

[LukeHoward]

Originally Posted by LDS

I don't disagree with you... but it is Apple. The 5,1 was 8 years ago. A lot has changed. Why put proprietary connectors on hard drives? Why install T2 chips? Why solder components to motherboards? Why glue batteries in laptops?

True, hard to disagree. I guess I should file a bug...

[lucienpalmer]

Originally Posted by LDS

I don't disagree with you... but it is Apple. The 5,1 was 8 years ago. A lot has changed. Why put proprietary connectors on hard drives? Why install T2 chips? Why solder components to motherboards? Why glue batteries in laptops?

What is the point your are trying to make?

[LDS]

Originally Posted by lucienpalmer

What is the point your are trying to make?

That user-upgradability and Apple still remains largely an oxymoron.