Please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe your latest prediction for the Apple Silicon Mac Pro is for an M2 "Extreme" with up to 1.0TB of unified memory? Basically, four M2 Max dies linked using next generation UltraFusion interconnects? While I'm no CPU architect, that sounds like a reasonable assumption and would make the Mac Pro a powerful, capable, scalable machine. If it follows the same trend as the M1 series, then it should easily be the most efficient workstation in existence, assuming it is released within the next year or so.
Now, that hasn't stopped some people from fantasy designing their own SoC. Evidently, everyone is a CPU architect these days. This isn't just from MR, but folks who should know better, such as over at the Ars Technica forums. One common solution that I have heard, for matching the 1.5TB maximum system memory of the current Intel version, is that Apple will start using external DIMMs, just for the Mac Pro, no other Macs. I've even heard some insist that Apple will resort to implementing HBM2 in such a solution. I've also seen many insisting that, since AMD will be announcing the
RX 7000 series with RDNA3 later this year, that the Mac Pro will feature the return of discrete graphics. (That would also be in direct opposition to another
@Cmaier prediction that the M2 would perhaps feature ray tracing.) That theory is that Apple will use MPX modules to support upgradeability for such features. There's also
a persistent rumor of one last Intel version with an Ice Lake Xeon, secretly wandering Cupertino's hallways like a forlorn x86 revenant.
Of course, at the top of the wish list is always the return of Boot Camp support for Windows, assuming Microsoft doesn't renew
its ARM exclusivity contract with Qualcomm. This is despite Craig Federighi* specifically stating that Apple won't support direct booting of other operating systems, and that their solution is virtual machines. Sure, Apple has made a few unnoficial accommodations for Asahi Linux
during the boot process, but those were minor tweaks to make it easier for that project. Apple's
Rosetta engineers have helped CodeWeavers support 32-bit programs with CrossOver on Apple Silicon Macs. However, these are implementations that don't involve a shift in strategy or substantial engineering resources. Every indication suggests that VMs and WINE are considered satisfactory solutions, from Apple's standpoint.
(*Craig said that in an
interview with Gruber that native Windows ain't happening. I timestamped the exact quote because I constantly hear about the inevitable return of Boot Camp. Even then, some folks refuse to believe, despite them hearing it straight from Apple's senior vice president of software engineering, who is literally the decision maker for such things.)
None of that matches Apple's strategy thus far, in fact all public indications appear to be the opposite, but I suppose hope springs eternal. I think the Apple Silicon Mac Pro is the last hope for the return of these features, so a lot of people are projecting their personal desires onto it, which would then theoretically spread to the other models. The Mac Pro is the pinnacle of Apple's Mac line, so it is the penultimate symbol for a personal wish list. I'm not a CPU designer, but
@Cmaier is, so I'm wondering if he sees any logical reason for Apple drastically altering its designs to accommodate any of these features, which appear entirely regressive, from my perspective? Perhaps there is something that I am missing in this debate, and the Apple Silicon Mac Pro will be more exotic than I am picturing?
I realize that, five years from now, people will still be asking for eGPU support, Boot Camp, easy internal upgrades, and a free pony, but it's best to dispel such notions whenever possible. What these people desire already exists. It's called a PC.
