Quad Processor Power970 PowerMacs

Shrek · Feb 14, 2003

How many of you here would like to see future PowerMacs with 970s in them that are quad processor-capable?

Personally I would like to be able to buy a PowerMac that has only one processor in it, and then later I can expand to two processors and eventually four.

What do ya'll think?

ELYXR · Feb 14, 2003

I think that's a great idea! The Mac platform could really benefit from forward thinking like this. I remember buying the Abit BP6 motherboard. It was engineered to use dual Celeron processors, which Intel have since locked. It was a great idea, "economic multi-processing". To my knowledge noone has jumped back on that since.

peter2002 · Feb 14, 2003

Just buy 2

Just buy 2 PowerMacs and network them together. Bullseye, you got a quad Mac. Software needs to be updated like Adobe has to After Effects Pro bundle that can use distributed computing.

Pete

Shrek · Feb 14, 2003

Re: Just buy 2

Originally posted by peter2002
Just buy 2 PowerMacs and network them together. Bullseye, you got a quad Mac. Software needs to be updated like Adobe has to After Effects Pro bundle that can use distributed computing.

Pete

Yes, but the kind of expandability and forward thinking that I mentioned above couldn't happen that way. You should be able to buy a PowerMac with one processor for really cheap.

rice_web · Feb 14, 2003

Hey, don't forget, clustering is rumored to be implemented as early as Mac OS X 10.3 (at least in the server edition), which could open the door to extremely fast computing.

Imagine a school district that just bought two lab-fulls of eMacs, and they are all networked together. On days when a full class is in the lab, the machines would operate normally, but those times when a student comes in after school, he suddenly has access to a sixty-node supercomputer, and that just for his iMovie project.

MrMacMan · Feb 14, 2003

Originally posted by rice_web
Hey, don't forget, clustering is rumored to be implemented as early as Mac OS X 10.3 (at least in the server edition), which could open the door to extremely fast computing.

Imagine a school district that just bought two lab-fulls of eMacs, and they are all networked together. On days when a full class is in the lab, the machines would operate normally, but those times when a student comes in after school, he suddenly has access to a sixty-node supercomputer, and that just for his iMovie project.

Or maybe for folding... hm... I hear another great idea coming...

I would sure like that quad powermac would be okay but more for servers. Clustering would be super!

praetorian_x · Feb 14, 2003

Re: Just buy 2

Originally posted by peter2002
Just buy 2 PowerMacs and network them together. Bullseye, you got a quad Mac. Software needs to be updated like Adobe has to After Effects Pro bundle that can use distributed computing.

Ummm, no. You don't have a quad mac. You have a weak ass cluster, running over slow ethernet. Firewire would be more interesting, but would still be insanely slow compared to a truely quad system. Furthermore, the programming for distributed computing is much nastier than mutlithreading an application, which is tricky enough on its own.

I'm more concerned that Apple get single and dual proccessor configurations up to snuff before they move on to quads. Quads would be another step torwards the SGI-ification of apple.

Cheers,
prat

Shrek · Feb 15, 2003

You must realize that when clustering not only will you have a slow system, but you are buying more than just more processors. Not only are you buying the processors, but you are buying a whole 'nother system! I mean like, c'mon, you'd be paying for more than what you need and almost no one is going to go for that (it's too expensive), and all we're asking for here is just more processors and the ability add those processors later if you want to. Sheeesh.

noht* · Feb 15, 2003

Re: Re: Just buy 2

Originally posted by praetorian_x
Ummm, no. You don't have a quad mac. You have a weak ass cluster, running over slow ethernet. Firewire would be more interesting (...)

why? ethernet is at 1000 mbit now while firewire is at 800... ethernet comes close to its theoretical maximum troughput, too. i backed up all my files yesterday over a 100 mbit network and got about 10-11 mbytes a second...

[edit: ok, maybe the latency is better with firewire...but i don't know really]

FelixDerKater · Feb 15, 2003

Would it be logical to build a motherboard with four processor slots already there, so you just add as you like, or as your budget allows? That would be the most sensible thing.

Shrek · Feb 15, 2003

Re: Re: Re: Just buy 2

Originally posted by noht*

why? ethernet is at 1000 mbit now while firewire is at 800... ethernet comes close to its theoretical maximum troughput, too. i backed up all my files yesterday over a 100 mbit network and got about 10-11 mbytes a second...

[edit: ok, maybe the latency is better with firewire...but i don't know really]

I'm telling you, there should be no need to buy a whole 'nother system. All were asking for here is two more processors. No money games.

Shrek · Feb 15, 2003

Originally posted by FelixDerKater
Would it be logical to build a motherboard with four processor slots already there, so you just add as you like, or as your budget allows? That would be the most sensible thing.

Thank you Felix for supporting my point-of-view.

Search

Search

Quad Processor Power970 PowerMacs

Shrek

macrumors 65816

ELYXR

macrumors regular

peter2002

macrumors 6502

Shrek

macrumors 65816

rice_web

macrumors 6502a

MrMacMan

macrumors 604

praetorian_x

macrumors member

Shrek

macrumors 65816

noht*

macrumors member

FelixDerKater

macrumors 68040

Shrek

macrumors 65816

Shrek

macrumors 65816

Our Staff