PDA

View Full Version : Pre-Release PowerMac/XServe Replacement CPU Benchmarks?


MacRumors
May 24, 2006, 11:59 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

ArsTechnica provides a summary (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060524-6898.html) of some recent pre-release benchmarks of Intel's upcoming Woodcrest chip, and reports that gains of 15-40% are typical over Intel's latest Xeon-class chip (code-named Dempsey).

Woodcrest represents the top of Intel's upcoming Core 2 lineup and is targeted at "server and workstation" markets. Most speculation has centered around Apple using Intel's Conroe Core 2 "desktop" chip, but a recent page 2 rumor (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/04/20060423221844.shtml) indicated that Woodcrest could also be in consideration. Previously Apple compared its top-of-the-line PowerMacs to Xeon-class machines.

Anandtech recently provided (http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713&p=1) a sneak peek at preliminary benchmarks between Intel's Conroe compared to an overclocked AMD Athlon X2. Conroe consistently beat the AMD system, however the systems were set up by Intel. While the reviewer did not see anything fishy on the surface, the results should be taken with a grain of salt.

Currently, Woodcrest is expected next month with Conroe expected to arrive in July 2006.

combatcolin
May 24, 2006, 12:01 PM
Anyone else geting that Monty Python "GET ON WITH IT" feeling?

:p

camomac
May 24, 2006, 12:01 PM
bring it on... this could be really exciting.. mmm new powermacs?

silvergunuk
May 24, 2006, 12:04 PM
Looks Like The Mac Pro's Could Be Here Within A Month. Lovely!

longofest
May 24, 2006, 12:11 PM
Looks Like The Mac Pro's Could Be Here Within A Month. Lovely!

Doubtful. The processors will be available, but with Creative Suite still not native, QuarkXPress 7 not being Dual Binary until later this summer, and other pro apps being in a similar quandry, I think WWDC is still a good bet for replacement Powermacs.

XServe, on the other hand, is a totally different story. Just look at how long it has gone untouched. We very well could see an XServe refresh in the next month or two.

sluthy
May 24, 2006, 12:15 PM
Hmm, what do you reckon?

Merom - Mac mini, iMac
Conroe - Powermac (or simply Mac now?)
Woodcrest - xServe

or possibly:

Merom - Mac mini
Conroe - iMac
Woodcrest - PowerMac, xServe

or even forgo Conroe altogether:

Merom - Mac mini, iMac
Woodcrest - PowerMac, xServe

or maybe...

Merom - Mac mini, iMac
Conroe - 'Mac'?
Woodcrest - PowerMac, xServe

Maybe the 'PowerMac' will move entirely into the Woodcrest server market (to the point where it and the xServe are only a form-factor apart) leaving room for a new headless Conroe 'Mac', for creative/business 'prosumer' types who don't require server power but need more expandability and choice than an iMac? Or is that lineup too crowded and overlapped?

EDIT: Forgive me, it's 3.15AM and I'm wired doing an assembly language assignment, so if I'm rambling...

bigbossbmb
May 24, 2006, 12:19 PM
Doubtful. The processors will be available, but with Creative Suite still not native, QuarkXPress 7 not being Dual Binary until later this summer, and other pro apps being in a similar quandry, I think WWDC is still a good bet for replacement Powermacs.

XServe, on the other hand, is a totally different story. Just look at how long it has gone untouched. We very well could see an XServe refresh in the next month or two.

XServe, definitely as soon as the chips are available... But I think that Apple will release their pro desktop at this time too. There are tons of film and video people itching for these machines. Also CS might run under rosetta fairly well with these chips' speed.

vmardian
May 24, 2006, 12:19 PM
Doubtful. The processors will be available, but with Creative Suite still not native, QuarkXPress 7 not being Dual Binary until later this summer, and other pro apps being in a similar quandry, I think WWDC is still a good bet for replacement Powermacs.

XServe, on the other hand, is a totally different story. Just look at how long it has gone untouched. We very well could see an XServe refresh in the next month or two.

Almost every single Apple Pro App is universal. Lightroom is also universal.

ImAlwaysRight
May 24, 2006, 12:32 PM
Haven't seen too many Power Mac rumors. I, for one, would think Apple would use the new chips as an opportunity to give the Power Mac a redesign. Maybe not too drastic, but along the lines of the iBook --> MacBook redesign. At least this time it looks like Apple could announce the new Power Macs in the summer and have them shipping almost immediately. At least not a late September/early Oct. release that happened when the G5 Power Macs came out, which was a delay of 2-3 months.

zwilliams07
May 24, 2006, 12:36 PM
I hope this does bode for a quicker release of a Mac Pro (PowerMac). Its the only reason I'm holding off on making an Intel Mac purchase.

Last time I bought a Mac was an iBook G3/700 back in Summer of 2002.

Gawd I need a new machine.

I think it would be more reasonable for Apple to have it set up as

Merom - MacBook, MacMini, MacBook Pro
Conroe - iMac, (maybe upper MacBook Pro)
Woodcrest - MacPro, Xserve

Remember the G5 was a Server class chip, and it is in both PowerMacs and Xserves.

longofest
May 24, 2006, 12:40 PM
Almost every single Apple Pro App is universal. Lightroom is also universal.

Not all of the creative world runs on Apple's software solutions.


As for what I personally see future lineups as, I think Conroe is actually going to end up in the iMac. So here is what you'd see:

Merom: Macbook/Macbook pro (once they transition from Yonah)
Conroe: Mac Mini and iMac... Mac Mini might end up in Merom line...
Woodcrest: Mac Pro and XServe

The only reason I think you are seeing the iMac and Mac Mini using Yonah is because Apple wanted to transition those first, and Yonah was the first Core-architecture based chip out. Yonah, however, is meant for laptops, so I think once Apple has a desktop chip available to it (especially one that is designed to allow for thin-form factor like Conroe), they will use it.

mikemodena
May 24, 2006, 12:49 PM
Can't wait to make my intel transition to a Mac Pro from my current PowerMac. I'm currently selling my iBook now to get a MacBook.

jiggie2g
May 24, 2006, 12:59 PM
Woodcrest is not nor will it ever see daylight in a power mac/Mac Pro. Conroe will do just fine and from most benchmarks it out performs the Athlon X2 by atleast 20% clock 4 clock. Hate to break It to you but the dual socket days are over for Desktop macs. You really think apple is gonna put is gonna put 2 $80 cpu's in a prosumer machine....not. maybe in an Xserve but not a mac pro. here's how it will break down. iMac will use Merom as it is already pin compatible with the current Core duo mobile chips. no need to change the motherboard.

MacMini / Core Duo 1.86-2.0 2MB L2

Macbook / Core Duo 2.16-2.33 2MB L2

iMac / Core 2 Duo(merom) 2.16-2.33 4MB L2

Macbook Pro / Core 2 Duo(merom) 2.1-2.33 4MB L2

Mac Pro / Core 2 Duo(Conroe) 2.4-2.67 and 2.93 XE 4MB L2

Incase you are wondering why I placed the Macbook and Macbook Pro at the same speed , please note that Core 2 has an advantage of 20% over Core 1 clock 4 clock not to mention the advantage of having double the L2 cache. The core 1 still is slated to clock up to 2.33 ghz i see the chip becoming thier new value chip(think Celeron but better) for lower end machines.

macgeek2005
May 24, 2006, 01:01 PM
Does this mean we might get new PowerMacs before WWDC?

Glen Quagmire
May 24, 2006, 01:02 PM
Mac Mini: Merom
MacBook: Merom
MacBook Pro: Merom
iMac: Merom, or Conroe if it runs cool enough.
Mac Pro: Conroe (single CPU) for a low-end model, Woodcrest for the high-end (dual CPU) ones.
XServe: Woodcrest.

I'll take a Woodcrest-powered Mac Pro, please, and bid a fond farewell to my Mac Mini and a not quite-so-fond farewell to my trusty four year old Xeon-powered PC.

NVRsayNVR
May 24, 2006, 01:02 PM
Anyone else geting that Monty Python "GET ON WITH IT" feeling?

:p

YEAH! Let's get it on already! Boost that stock up so I can cash in and get some new gear! Talk is cheap... Announcement the damn thing! :mad: :D :D

"Think Alike... BE Different!"

JurgenWigg
May 24, 2006, 01:04 PM
Hmm, what do you reckon?

Merom - Mac mini, iMac
Conroe - Powermac (or simply Mac now?)
Woodcrest - xServe


Someone correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't Merom the notebook/portable chip, whereas Conroe is the desktop chip? Why would they put Merom in an iMac??

macgeek2005
May 24, 2006, 01:05 PM
Someone correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't Merom the notebook/portable chip, whereas Conroe is the desktop chip? Why would they put Merom in an iMac??

Because the iMac is a desktop.

jiggie2g
May 24, 2006, 01:09 PM
Someone correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't Merom the notebook/portable chip, whereas Conroe is the desktop chip? Why would they put Merom in an iMac??


Because the iMac already contains a notebook cpu in Yonah , has a small enclosure which requires lower thermal output and merom is pin compatible with Yonah so this is just a more logical step, for apple to put in a conroe it would require a redesign of the motherboard and cooling with merom it's just a chip swap.

Glen Quagmire
May 24, 2006, 01:10 PM
Woodcrest is not nor will it ever see daylight in a power mac/Mac Pro. Conroe will do just fine and from most benchmarks it out performs the Athlon X2 by atleast 20% clock 4 clock. Hate to break It to you but the dual socket days are over for Desktop macs. You really think apple is gonna put is gonna put 2 $80 cpu's in a prosumer machine....not. maybe in an Xserve but not a mac pro. here's how it will break down. iMac will use Merom as it is already pin compatible with the current Core duo mobile chips. no need to change the motherboard.


Why won't Woodcrest feature in an Intel-powered Mac Pro? If they use Conroe, Apple will be going from a dual CPU, dual core workstation to a single CPU, dual core computer. Hardly an impressive comparison: "Yes, it's brand new but it's got half as many CPUs and cores as the G5 one, but they're quite quick, so you'll have to put up with it." Conroe would be a step backwards for the high-end Mac Pro. It would work fine as a low cost model, but for rendering tasks and the like, dual CPUs are a godsend.

What are these mythical $80 CPUs you talk of? Celerons? If you mean Conroe, Conroe is single CPU only (successor to the present Pentium 4). If you want duality of processors, you need Woodcrest.

The top of the range G5 costs $3299, if memory serves. The prices of the Intel machines have been the same or slightly more than the Power PC ones. Are Apple really going to charge $3299 for a computer with one lonely Conroe in it?

milo
May 24, 2006, 01:11 PM
Someone correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't Merom the notebook/portable chip, whereas Conroe is the desktop chip? Why would they put Merom in an iMac??

The same reasons they put yonah (a laptop chip) in the iMac. Cooling, power consumption, cost and availability.

milatchi
May 24, 2006, 01:20 PM
Glad to see we're moving forward with the intel transition.

ZnU
May 24, 2006, 01:31 PM
Woodcrest is not nor will it ever see daylight in a power mac/Mac Pro. Conroe will do just fine and from most benchmarks it out performs the Athlon X2 by atleast 20% clock 4 clock. Hate to break It to you but the dual socket days are over for Desktop macs. You really think apple is gonna put is gonna put 2 $80 cpu's in a prosumer machine....not.

This is complete nonsense. Conroe is the Pentium 4 replacement. Woodcrest is the Xeon replacement. Apple's towers start at $2000. Go look at $2000 machines from other x86 vendors like Dell or HP, and see whether they have Xeon or Pentium chips in them.

Anyway, Woodcrest doesn't start at $800. Yes, the most expensive (3 GHz) chip will be $850, but as the pricelist on this page (http://www.mikeshardware.co.uk/RoadmapQ306.htm) shows, Woodcrest will start all the way down at 1.6 GHz, for $230, which is cheaper than all but one of the Conroe chip models! Woodcrest will allow Apple to expand the towers upwards in the market if they want to, but Apple can also use the chip without any problems at their current price points.

I'm also not sure why you describe the towers as 'prosumer'. Five years ago, maybe that was the case, but these days, particularly in the x86 world where Apple now lives, machines in that price range are not really consumer machines. (Except, possibly, when they're high-end gaming machines, but that's not going to be the case for Apple's towers, just because of the OS X game availability situation.)

Conroe is going to end up in $800 Dell specials. The idea that Apple will be using it in $3300 towers is ludicrous.

starnox
May 24, 2006, 01:32 PM
I think they will use woodcrest in Mac Pro, after all the fuss Apple has been making about the Core Duo having two cores, I don't think they could turn around and stick a single processor in their top model machine. Like something said they put a G5 in the PowerMac and Xserve, so why not put a woodcrest in a Mac Pro and Xserve (or maybe MacServe :p)

Rocketman
May 24, 2006, 01:36 PM
XServe, on the other hand, is a totally different story. Just look at how long it has gone untouched. We very well could see an XServe refresh in the next month or two.

I am wondering what the real world performance increase will be from now to that? Perhaps over 2x in real world performance if all the rumors and tech reports are near accurate.

Will we see YA Apple branded attempt at the supercomputer prize?

I want to see Apple market 4U desktop/floortop systems to uber gamers :)

Rocketman

Mike Teezie
May 24, 2006, 01:40 PM
Damn. The entire Mac lineup is going to be smokin' fast.

The benchmarks are showing that the freaking consumer laptop Macbook is outperforming the Dual 2.0 G5s.

Just think about what the Powermac is going to be like with Intel's desktop chips.....:eek:

electronboy
May 24, 2006, 01:47 PM
We will probably get the Conroe desktop processor and Apple will continue charging us $3,000 for a top of the line PowerMac or whatever they call it.

I hope we get the XEON equivalent, but that probably won't happen.

Core Trio
May 24, 2006, 01:47 PM
Someone correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't Merom the notebook/portable chip, whereas Conroe is the desktop chip? Why would they put Merom in an iMac??


Because the chip currently housed in the iMac is also a notebook chip, and they are pin compatible.

However id love the iMac to be refreshed with Conroe

jiggie2g
May 24, 2006, 01:48 PM
Why won't Woodcrest feature in an Intel-powered Mac Pro? If they use Conroe, Apple will be going from a dual CPU, dual core workstation to a single CPU, dual core computer. Hardly an impressive comparison: "Yes, it's brand new but it's got half as many CPUs and cores as the G5 one, but they're quite quick, so you'll have to put up with it." Conroe would be a step backwards for the high-end Mac Pro. It would work fine as a low cost model, but for rendering tasks and the like, dual CPUs are a godsend.

What are these mythical $80 CPUs you talk of? Celerons? If you mean Conroe, Conroe is single CPU only (successor to the present Pentium 4). If you want duality of processors, you need Woodcrest.

The top of the range G5 costs $3299, if memory serves. The prices of the Intel machines have been the same or slightly more than the Power PC ones. Are Apple really going to charge $3299 for a computer with one lonely Conroe in it?

1st of all the $80 was a typo i ment $800 at 3.0ghz per cpu, now that's seattled. I was referring to Woodcrest costing. well to call using a conroe a step backwards already tells me that you don't know anything about cpu architecture. Conroe and Woodcrest are the same CPU (think Athlon X2 and Opteron) just woodcrest is more rigorously tested for server certification.
Woodcrest would also need a dual socket motherboard and ecc-ram you have any Idea how much that will cost apple. they will have to sell that machine for $4000

read this then open your mouth

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2748

AMD 64 and G5 were pretty much equal clock 4 clock. so if i have a conroe that is already 20% faster at the same speed plus have an advantage of 500mhz on top of that. You are telling me I am taking a step backwards becuase i don't have a quad. Here I will break it down for you.

Quad 2.5ghz G5 have 1MB L2 dedicated per core x 4 for 4MB total cannot be shared

DC Core 2 at 3.0ghz 2MB L2 per core x 2 for 4MB total can be shared for a single app (Photoshop, FCP HD , etc.)

now lets get to the cpu ,

3.0ghz Conroe = 3.6ghz G5 when you add the 20% advantage. plus the shared L2 , now do u still think this is a down grade. you really think that Quadstill looks so good now.

macgeek2005
May 24, 2006, 01:50 PM
Look, guys.

Apple has been giving us more not less, recently.

They're constantly speed bumping their machines, releasing notebooks with much faster CPU's than expected. (Not a single member on this site would have guess that apple would have put the CPU's they did in the MacBooks).

My point. Apple is not compromising anymore. They are going to put Woodcrest in the Mac Pro.

They need this to blow every PC system out of the water, and they need it to be "The worlds fastest personal computer".

They can't afford to put Conroe in it.

Some_Big_Spoon
May 24, 2006, 02:00 PM
I don't know, do you think no CS3/native maters enough to hod back the release? I think they'd be more than happy to get the sales, no? I think, and I'm most likely wrong, that they'll offer PPC PM's in tandem with the Intel until the big kids get their software Universal (a' la' OS9 Macs held over in the transition)

Again, could be totally wrong, but there seems to be enough early adopters to warrant the release, myself included.

Doubtful. The processors will be available, but with Creative Suite still not native, QuarkXPress 7 not being Dual Binary until later this summer, and other pro apps being in a similar quandry, I think WWDC is still a good bet for replacement Powermacs.

XServe, on the other hand, is a totally different story. Just look at how long it has gone untouched. We very well could see an XServe refresh in the next month or two.

mozmac
May 24, 2006, 02:02 PM
This would be a great move on Apple's part. Their higher-end systems MUST use higher-end chips. Picture this...a dual-xeon type PowerMac with two 30" Apple Displays. Have OS X running on your main display and XP and Linux running natively in their own windows on the second display. They would all run faster at the same time than my 2.0GHz ThinkPad runs XP right now.

Can anyone say, "The Greatest Computer in the World!" ? I know I can.

tristan
May 24, 2006, 02:03 PM
MacBook Pro - Meron
iMac - Conroe
MacPro - Woodcrest

That's how Intel's positioning their chips, and that how it will be. Anyone who says different is smoking my uncle's "oregano". Only open questions are what will be in the Mac Mini and the future Macbooks. (Probably older Core Duos.)

manu chao
May 24, 2006, 02:06 PM
Woodcrest would also need a dual socket motherboard and ecc-ram you have any Idea how much that will cost apple. they will have to sell that machine for $4000
Except that the current Powermacs already have a dual socket motherboard and ecc-ram and cost $3300.

AvSRoCkCO1067
May 24, 2006, 02:11 PM
MacBook Pro - Meron
iMac - Conroe
MacPro - Woodcrest

That's how Intel's positioning their chips, and that how it will be. Anyone who says different is smoking my uncle's "oregano". Only open questions are what will be in the Mac Mini and the future Macbooks. (Probably older Core Duos.)

Agreed. I'm betting that they differentiate the MacBook and Mini lines from the MacBook Pro, at least for awhile (the MacBook + Mini will use Yonah, whereas the MacBook Pro will use Merom)

jiggie2g
May 24, 2006, 02:21 PM
Except that the current Powermacs already have a dual socket motherboard and ecc-ram and cost $3300.


Current Powermacs do not come with ECC-ram is it optional , on the Intel and AMD this is not an option but a requirement and upgrading the ram will cost you big time. Incase anyone remembers why the original Athlon 64FX 940pin failed for this exact reason.Also Dual socket x86 motherboards traditionally 2.5-3x as much as single socket versions.

I still don't get why people are so hard up in thses forums for Woodcrest IT'S THE SAME FREAKIN' CPU AS THE CONROE. save for the ability to use dual sockets. You will not see a performance boost unless u use dual sockets.



Conroe is going to end up in $800 Dell specials. The idea that Apple will be using it in $3300 towers is ludicrous.

you mean like the X2's that occupy most $800 PC's that's just the nature of the PC market. The same AMD cpus that are in these bargin bin PC are the same ones in Server Class computers. just in larger quantities.

Opteron 170 = Athlon X2 4000+ (both 2.0ghz 2x 1mb L2 )

Operton = Athlon 64 / Woodcrest = Conroe

Stridder44
May 24, 2006, 02:25 PM
Because the chip currently housed in the iMac is also a notebook chip, and they are pin compatible.

However id love the iMac to be refreshed with Conroe


I've been holding out on an iMac for this very reason.

longofest
May 24, 2006, 02:28 PM
Woodcrest would also need a dual socket motherboard and ecc-ram you have any Idea how much that will cost apple. they will have to sell that machine for $4000
...
AMD 64 and G5 were pretty much equal clock 4 clock. so if i have a conroe that is already 20% faster at the same speed plus have an advantage of 500mhz on top of that. You are telling me I am taking a step backwards becuase i don't have a quad. Here I will break it down for you.

Quad 2.5ghz G5 have 1MB L2 dedicated per core x 4 for 4MB total cannot be shared

DC Core 2 at 3.0ghz 2MB L2 per core x 2 for 4MB total can be shared for a single app (Photoshop, FCP HD , etc.)

now lets get to the cpu ,

3.0ghz Conroe = 3.6ghz G5 when you add the 20% advantage. plus the shared L2 , now do u still think this is a down grade. you really think that Quadstill looks so good now.

Some of what you say is good info and it's good to point out. Other parts I'm hoping you will explain a bit.

First the good parts. One of the BIG advantages of the Core architecture is the shared Cache as you point out.

But where are you finding this information that Woodcrest requires a dual-socket motherboard and ECC-RAM? Woodcrest is a dual-core CPU, and although ECC-ram would be good if you have mission-critical stuff, all indications is that Apple will build their next-gen PowerMac similar to today's version with it being able to accept either ECC or non-ECC.

jiggie2g
May 24, 2006, 02:37 PM
Some of what you say is good info and it's good to point out. Other parts I'm hoping you will explain a bit.

First the good parts. One of the BIG advantages of the Core architecture is the shared Cache as you point out.

But where are you finding this information that Woodcrest requires a dual-socket motherboard and ECC-RAM? Woodcrest is a dual-core CPU, and although ECC-ram would be good if you have mission-critical stuff, all indications is that Apple will build their next-gen PowerMac similar to today's version with it being able to accept either ECC or non-ECC.


answered in post above.

Detlev_73
May 24, 2006, 02:38 PM
Damn. The entire Mac lineup is going to be smokin' fast.

The benchmarks are showing that the freaking consumer laptop Macbook is outperforming the Dual 2.0 G5s.

Just think about what the Powermac is going to be like with Intel's desktop chips.....:eek:

Got any links to any reviews that show this? Owning a dual 2.0 G5, I'm interested to see how it does against the MacBook Pro, maybe even the new MacBook.

weitzner
May 24, 2006, 02:39 PM
i think the powermac replacement will be out before WWDC because it's already been announced that there will be a leopard preview. seems to me that they usually focus on one thing at the keynote. new powermacs AND leopard preview would be too much i think. they'll probably announce that all of their apps are universal and maybe have someone from MS and/or adobe come out and give a time frame. then they'll get into leopard. it will be good.

prostuff1
May 24, 2006, 02:51 PM
This is good news indeed.

Now for my perspective on what i would like to come out of the mac lineup once conroe, woodcrest and merom.

1. Mac mini - goes dual core yohan all around (possibly gets non-
integrated graphics)
2. MacBook - stays yohan but gets non integrated graphics
3. iMac - I hope they put conroe in them assuming heat and space are not
a problem.
4. MacBook Pro- goes merom and dual-layer DVD all around. (And
assuming the MacBooks stay with integrated graphics then a true
replacment for the 12in Powerbook).
5. Powermac(or whatever it will be called) - gets woodcrest with a single
dual core CPU in low end and dual dual core CPU in the two higher end.
6. XServe(or whatever it will be called) - gets woodcrest with dual dual
core CPU all the way around.

7. I think it would be nice to see something that has iMac specs but with a
PowerMac type setup. So it would have a conroe processor but there
would be space to upgrade graphics card and possibly one or two other
slots (to put a TV tuner card in or somehting else). These could start
at about $1,000.

That is my hope for the mac lineup once all of the new Intel processors come out.

eric_n_dfw
May 24, 2006, 02:58 PM
Got any links to any reviews that show this? Owning a dual 2.0 G5, I'm interested to see how it does against the MacBook Pro, maybe even the new MacBook.

Java code compilation: http://www.gearlive.com/index.php/news/article/byte-001-macbook-pro-dual-g5-powermac-44103/
Final Cut Pro Universal: http://www.creativemac.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=38816&afterinter=true

Soli Gratia
May 24, 2006, 03:02 PM
I've been waiting for a few months for the MacBook to be released, and amongst all this anticipation I now find that there is a potential for the Merom processor to replace the current dual-core chip. Just curious, but could someone please explain the major advantages of Merom? I mean, I'm an engineer and I'm going to use Windows on the Mac 1/4 time for specific apps, but...will Merom really be worth the wait?

jiggie2g
May 24, 2006, 03:09 PM
iMac will not use Conroe okay get it now please let it go. Power Mac will not use Woodcrest , maybe Xserve will.

iMac uses the socket 479pin that Yonah currently occupies this is infact pin compatible with the 479pin Merom , both work on a 667mhz FSB this will be plenty as Core 2 is not bandwidth starved. Conroe uses the socket LGA 775pin needs either a 965x-975x chipset to work and has higher voltage and dissipates 65watts compared to 35watts for Merom. why would apple over haul the imac for Conroe when all they need is a simple chip swap to boost performance with Merom

Woodcrest/Conroe/Merom = same freakin' core the difference is in the FSB on the chipset not the CPU itself.

Woodcrest = 1333FSB 80watts

Conroe = 1066/1333FSB for E6/XE chips 65-80watts(XE)

Merom = 667FSB 35watts T7 series

this is done for different reasons , Merom uses lower FSB for heat reason as it will be used in small enclosures(remember iMac G5), Conroe can go high in a desktop and operates at a higher freqency , Woodcrest is a server chip and this does not matter plus need the added nandwidth for multi-cpu setup.

BornAgainMac
May 24, 2006, 03:11 PM
Damn. The entire Mac lineup is going to be smokin' fast.

The benchmarks are showing that the freaking consumer laptop Macbook is outperforming the Dual 2.0 G5s.

Just think about what the Powermac is going to be like with Intel's desktop chips.....:eek:

Even the high-end Mini are doing well against the Dual 2.0 G5. Perhaps soon the slowest new Mac on the planet will be faster than any G5 based Mac including the Quads. Having said that, I am happy with my Dual 2.0 G5 with it's monster graphics card taking up 2 slots and game play has been smooth. It won't retire to some old lady that just needs word processing, Mail, and Internet.

Core Trio
May 24, 2006, 03:17 PM
i think the powermac replacement will be out before WWDC because it's already been announced that there will be a leopard preview. seems to me that they usually focus on one thing at the keynote. new powermacs AND leopard preview would be too much i think. they'll probably announce that all of their apps are universal and maybe have someone from MS and/or adobe come out and give a time frame. then they'll get into leopard. it will be good.


You're forgetting "One More Thing..."

And then steve opens up the doors to the cabinet under the Apple Cinema display he was working on and reveals a redesigned Mac Pro, proceeds to click the "About This Mac" and reveals the server class intel processos inside. It will be a joyous moment.

4God
May 24, 2006, 03:22 PM
Doubtful. The processors will be available, but with Creative Suite still not native, QuarkXPress 7 not being Dual Binary until later this summer, and other pro apps being in a similar quandry, I think WWDC is still a good bet for replacement Powermacs.

XServe, on the other hand, is a totally different story. Just look at how long it has gone untouched. We very well could see an XServe refresh in the next month or two.


I thought QuarkXpress 7 was announced and released as a universal binary yesterday.

macgeek2005
May 24, 2006, 03:24 PM
You're forgetting "One More Thing..."

And then steve opens up the doors to the cabinet under the Apple Cinema display he was working on and reveals a redesigned Mac Pro, proceeds to click the "About This Mac" and reveals the server class intel processos inside. It will be a joyous moment.

Yes please.

longofest
May 24, 2006, 03:39 PM
I thought QuarkXpress 7 was announced and released as a universal binary yesterday.

No... XPress 7 is shipping initially as PPC-only. It will be updated to be Universal Binary in the summer.

iMac will not use Conroe okay get it now please let it go. Power Mac will not use Woodcrest , maybe Xserve will.

iMac uses the socket 479pin that Yonah currently occupies this is infact pin compatible with the 479pin Merom , both work on a 667mhz FSB this will be plenty as Core 2 is not bandwidth starved. Conroe uses the socket LGA 775pin needs either a 965x-975x chipset to work and has higher voltage and dissipates 65watts compared to 35watts for Merom. why would apple over haul the imac for Conroe when all they need is a simple chip swap to boost performance with Merom

Woodcrest/Conroe/Merom = same freakin' core the difference is in the FSB on the chipset not the CPU itself.

Good call on remembering about the iMac having the pin-compatible socket for Merom.

Woodcrest/Conroe/Merom are not only differentiated by FSB, but cache sizes as well. Yes, they are based off of the same architecture, but they do have differences.

Apple has gone to a 4-core system with the Quad. I think they will want to keep at least one system that has a 4-core setup, and Woodcrest is the only chip that is going to be able to be placed in a multi-CPU configuration to my knowledge. I'm still of the opinion that Woodcrest is heading towards a home in the PowerMac. Of course, I could be wrong, as could we all.

Looks like we have a difference of opinion.

zweigand
May 24, 2006, 03:42 PM
How much of a price difference is there going to be between Merom and Conroe? Would putting a Conroe in the iMac bump up the production costs tremendously? If not, I could still see it ending up in the iMac.

They won't be as hot as the G5s were, will they?

odedia
May 24, 2006, 04:03 PM
I really hope they'll move to NVIDIA's SLI technology with the new Mac Pro design. It's goodbye for the 1 graphics card days. A Mac Pro can now potentially hold FOUR Geforce 7900 Cards, each with 512MB of RAM, making it a 2GB graphics engine beast. Other vendors are offering it (alienware even offers it in a notebook! 2 graphics cards!), so I'm sure Apple can do it too.

macgeek2005
May 24, 2006, 04:14 PM
I really hope they'll move to NVIDIA's SLI technology with the new Mac Pro design. It's goodbye for the 1 graphics card days. A Mac Pro can now potentially hold FOUR Geforce 7900 Cards, each with 512MB of RAM, making it a 2GB graphics engine beast. Other vendors are offering it (alienware even offers it in a notebook! 2 graphics cards!), so I'm sure Apple can do it too.

They better do that... or else.

JasonElise1983
May 24, 2006, 04:17 PM
Woodcrest is not nor will it ever see daylight in a power mac/Mac Pro. Conroe will do just fine and from most benchmarks it out performs the Athlon X2 by atleast 20% clock 4 clock. Hate to break It to you but the dual socket days are over for Desktop macs. You really think apple is gonna put is gonna put 2 $80 cpu's in a prosumer machine....not. maybe in an Xserve but not a mac pro. here's how it will break down. iMac will use Merom as it is already pin compatible with the current Core duo mobile chips. no need to change the motherboard.


Seriously? I'll give you that you know a lot about computers but do you know anything about marketing. People in this world don't give a rats behind about what it technically just as good or faster. People hear "Quad CPUs" and they are sold. If alienware and Falcon Northwest can sell "quad" opteron setups, why wouldn't apple so the same? You really make no sense for someone who knows so much about computers. Like someone else said, It's a step backwards.

My guess will be the same setup they have right now with 2-dual systems and 1-quad system. Noone seems to care tht the Quad costs $3300, people still buy it.

tristan
May 24, 2006, 04:24 PM
Apple has gone to a 4-core system with the Quad. I think they will want to keep at least one system that has a 4-core setup, and Woodcrest is the only chip that is going to be able to be placed in a multi-CPU configuration to my knowledge. I'm still of the opinion that Woodcrest is heading towards a home in the PowerMac. Of course, I could be wrong, as could we all.


You're not wrong at all - as a matter of fact, you're absolutely correct. Also, Woodcrest comes out *first* in the series of new Intel CPUs, and Apple will insist in being first in line with the newest, first, and best CPU.

As soon as is physically possible - which is in late June or so - and then for the forseeable future, you will always see a Mac Pro lineup that includes two of the fastest Intel chips available. Always. Because that's what Steve Jobs wants on his desktop.

milo
May 24, 2006, 04:26 PM
iMac will not use Conroe okay get it now please let it go. Power Mac will not use Woodcrest , maybe Xserve will.

I don't get your reasoning why the towers wouldn't use Woodcrest. I could see if the cheaper towers would have conroe, but why not at least use woodcrest in the high end model?

It's not just a server chip, it's a server/workstation chip (and traditionally, the apple towers have been more powerful than the xserves). And the highest end macs are used as workstations, people are willing to pay top dollar to get top power. Since woodcrest can be used in a 4 core configuration, that will be more powerful than any conroe config, right? I'm skeptical that any dual core intel system will be able to beat the quad G5, apple needs a model that's a significant step up.

macgeek2005
May 24, 2006, 04:27 PM
You're not wrong at all - as a matter of fact, you're absolutely correct. Also, Woodcrest comes out *first* in the series of new Intel CPUs, and Apple will insist in being first in line with the newest, first, and best CPU.

As soon as is physically possible - which is in late June or so - and then for the forseeable future, you will always see a Mac Pro lineup that includes two of the fastest Intel chips available. Always. Because that's what Steve Jobs wants on his desktop.

Yayyy for Mac Pro's at the end of june.

However, I like the name PowerMac better.

jrhone
May 24, 2006, 04:49 PM
Not all of the creative world runs on Apple's software solutions.





But for the ones that do...liek Audio and Video people....this machine is LONG overdue....Why hold a machine back JUST for Adobe and Quark....what happens if they keep pushing the release back...keep the machine from being released? It didnt stop them from releasing the Macbook Pro....Plus its an even BETTER reason to buy a new MacPro and APERTURE....(I know its not really a Photoshop replacement, but...) I am a professional music person, and I would LOVE to replace my Dual 2 Ghz G5....that would then be my home machine and my main studio machine would be a new fully expanded Mac Pro....This will probably run my CS2 FASTER under Rosetta...but my audio stuff will SCREAM.....192Khz full surround sound mixes.....hmmmm.....

ModestPenguin
May 24, 2006, 04:51 PM
I severely doubt that they will cahnge the name, don't fret. PowerMac is much better than Mac Pro. Ugh. No. Please keep the name as it is.

alexeismertin
May 24, 2006, 04:56 PM
AI reports :

Offering yet another hint that it's done using the "Power" moniker in the names of its professional computer offerings, Apple Computer this week made a second trademark filing on the phrase "Mac Pro," this time in the United States.

081440
May 24, 2006, 04:57 PM
First off Apple's going to have toput more standard RAM in for users! No more of this 512 stuff if you have these kind of prosssecors.

Seconcd of all - this concern about wether CS3 will be released before Apple releases the Intel PowerMacs is nonsence. If Apple has a chance to get really fast processors in the PowerMacs sooner rather than later they'll do it. Plus just to satisfy all the Adobe users they'll probably keep the G5's available until CS3 is out. (They kept the G5 iMac available after the Intel version was out)

Believe me video editors will snap up the Intel Power Macs, I know I will get one as soon as possible. (It'll pay for it's self in saved time, heat, and electricity during rendering) :D

boncellis
May 24, 2006, 05:31 PM
...My point. Apple is not compromising anymore. They are going to put Woodcrest in the Mac Pro.

They need this to blow every PC system out of the water, and they need it to be "The worlds fastest personal computer".

They can't afford to put Conroe in it.

I recall getting into this argument with Hector a while back (where are you Hector baby?) and my feelng was that there's no need to look at Conroe and Woodcrest as mutually exclusive within the same line. You (macgeek2005) might be right about the first point--Apple putting Woodcrest in the PowerMac replacement--but that doesn't necessarily lead to your next point--that Apple "can't afford to put Conroe in it."

Maybe some users are still stuck thinking of the distinction between G4/G5. The Conroe PowerMac replacements could ostensibly be sold alongside the Woodcrest systems (at 70% of the price, most likely).

Think Different ;)

gnasher729
May 24, 2006, 06:28 PM
But where are you finding this information that Woodcrest requires a dual-socket motherboard and ECC-RAM? Woodcrest is a dual-core CPU, and although ECC-ram would be good if you have mission-critical stuff, all indications is that Apple will build their next-gen PowerMac similar to today's version with it being able to accept either ECC or non-ECC.

The main difference between Conroe and Woodcrest is that you can have more than one Woodcrest chip on the same motherboard, but only one Conroe chip. So if you use Woodcrest, then you should have two of them (or at least space to add a second one), otherwise you might as well stay with Conroe.

That said, I am really curious what Apple will do with the Powermacs. All the models that got Intel CPUs got at least twice the speed they had before (iMac single G5 -> dual core Yonah = twice the speed, Mac Mini -> Core Solo = twice the speed, everything else = four times the speed). A single Conroe chip at high clockspeed is faster than a single dual core G5, but not twice as fast; that needs two Woodcrests. And two Woodcrests (four cores) are faster than a dual chip = quad core G5, but not twice as fast.

But then Apple had single G5 towers for a while, so I could imagine three models with medium to high speed Conroe, two slowish Woodcrests, and two fast Woodcrests. (Note that in Intel's price lists, price grows extremely fast with speed, so two slow Woodcrests are likely to be faster and cheaper than the fastest Conroe chip available).

aswitcher
May 24, 2006, 06:32 PM
So what do people expect to happen to PM prices?

I was hoping Apple would bring out a revamped intel version at about the same price as a 17" iMac for their low end machine for those who want a bit more grunt and to sue their own screen...

gnasher729
May 24, 2006, 06:35 PM
How much of a price difference is there going to be between Merom and Conroe? Would putting a Conroe in the iMac bump up the production costs tremendously? If not, I could still see it ending up in the iMac.

A Merom and a Conroe chip at same clockspeed will give you exactly the same performance. At the same clockspeed, Merom is likely to be slightly more expensive than Conroe. On the other hand, it uses much less power, so you wouldn't ever use Conroe in a notebook, or in a MacMini or iMac, where you want to cram the computer in the smallest possible space.

You would use Conroe in a tower, where you have plenty of space for fans and don't care about a bit more heat and noise. And there it has the advantage that you can get Conroe chips running at much higher clockspeeds or at a lower price.

SirOmega
May 24, 2006, 08:10 PM
It is highly doubtful that Apple will put SLI in their workstation Mac Pro line. Why? Because Nvidia tightly controls what chipsets SLI will run on. And right now its ONLY the Nvidia (nForce 4/5)-based motherboards. Nvidia would have to open their drivers to allow SLI to run on an suitable intel-based board (i975X). Unlikely.

ATi's Crossfire however, will work on any motherboard (supposedly - I've never tested a Crossfire rig).

And regarding the procs...

August (WWDC):
Mac Pro: Conroe XE 3GHz for 1S ($2199), Woodcrest 2S 3GHz ($2799)
(maybe) xMac: Conroe 2.66Ghz ($1599)

October 2006: (consider that these yonah-based motherboards are most likely already compatible with the Merom)
iMac: Merom 2.33Ghz (current prices)
MacBook Pro: Merom 2.33Ghz, 2.16GHz

December/January: (its quite possible we see these at thanksgiving for a Christmas buying rush, or we see them launched on or around 10.5)
MacBook: Merom 2.16/2.0Ghz (current prices) - possibly a 1.83Ghz for $899
Mac Mini: Merom 1.83/2Ghz (current prices)

darrens
May 25, 2006, 12:02 AM
MacBook Pro - Meron
iMac - Conroe
MacPro - Woodcrest

That's how Intel's positioning their chips, and that how it will be. Anyone who says different is smoking my uncle's "oregano". Only open questions are what will be in the Mac Mini and the future Macbooks. (Probably older Core Duos.)

Don't know if anyone's said this yet...

What if Apple decides to be consistent in it's naming for once. How about...

MacBook - Yonah
MacBook Pro - Merom
Mac - Conroe
Mac Pro - Woodcrest

There's a lot of difference between a Prosumer and a Workstation user...

Edit: Perhaps the iMac and Mac names are too similar - but eMac and iMac names were pretty similar too. I'll wait and see.

Catfish_Man
May 25, 2006, 01:49 AM
I think it's likely that the high end Mac Pro will use Woodcrest. A single 3Ghz Woodcrest (dual core of course) would likely be competitive with the quad on most stuff... but competitive is not a compelling upgrade. For it to be faster across the board, it'll need to remain quad.

TangoCharlie
May 25, 2006, 02:55 AM
Doubtful. The processors will be available, but with Creative Suite still not native, QuarkXPress 7 not being Dual Binary until later this summer, and other pro apps being in a similar quandry, I think WWDC is still a good bet for replacement Powermacs.

XServe, on the other hand, is a totally different story. Just look at how long it has gone untouched. We very well could see an XServe refresh in the next month or two.

Well, sort-of.... I aggree that the XServes will be next.... and with WoodCrest (Xeon) processor(s) at 1.86 and 2 GHz, but I don't think Apple is waiting for CS3.

I think the MacPro will follow not-too-long after, with WoodCrest (Xeon) as well (3GHz).
Additionally, I think Apple will boost the CPU in the iMac to Conroe (Core 2 Extreme), and the MBP to Merom (Core 2 Duo).

Apple will be one of the first (if not the first) to use the new CPU's.

Well, time will tell.:)

BenRoethig
May 25, 2006, 07:35 AM
Hmm, what do you reckon?
or even forgo Conroe altogether:
Merom - Mac mini, iMac
Woodcrest - PowerMac, xServe


Ding Ding Ding. Both the iMac and Mini will retain a common chipset with portables. Merom will be fast enough for the Mac users not to complain and save a lot of headaches due to its lower power requirements. The PowerMac is a workstation class machine and will use woodcrest across the line. Apple's way of thinking says a headless Prosumer mac will get in the iMac's way, so I don't see much room for conroe in Apple's lineup. They don't understand the prosumer enough to do so.

aswitcher
May 25, 2006, 07:40 AM
SNIP Apple's way of thinking says a headless Prosumer mac will get in the iMac's way, so I don't see much room for conroe in Apple's lineup.

But a Powermac that could happily lie on its side would allow them to increase powermac sales and thus reduce costs through economies of scale. Look at the success if the Mac Mini and in many cases its due to the form factor not just the price. Sure some iMac sales would be canablised but all up I think Apple would sell more Macs with a powermac that could go under your monitor or big screen TV because it has extra expandability for TV tuners and additional HDDs.

BWhaler
May 25, 2006, 10:51 AM
Sure, I am happy that we now have true speed.

But let's get back to quality. Basically ever Intel Mac that has been released this year--except for the 17" MBP--has had some form of design or manufacturing problem.

(I am not saying EVERY Mac has problems, but the lines are less than optimal.)

Apple needs to remember they are not Dell. We pay more. We expect quality. (Not heat and noise and crappy backlighting on our screens.)

BenRoethig
May 25, 2006, 11:04 AM
But a Powermac that could happily lie on its side would allow them to increase powermac sales and thus reduce costs through economies of scale. Look at the success if the Mac Mini and in many cases its due to the form factor not just the price. Sure some iMac sales would be canablised but all up I think Apple would sell more Macs with a powermac that could go under your monitor or big screen TV because it has extra expandability for TV tuners and additional HDDs.

I know, they would sell a bunch. But remember, Apple designs and sells machines according to how Steve Jobs believes the PC market should be, not how it is. In their mind, the iMac fufills the needs of all mid-range customers and anyone else is a pro who can drop down two grand minimum on a PowerMac. If Apple were to bring their sense of style to the Micro and full ATX tower market, I'd buy one in a second. Add in a free standing 17" display with a built in isight and hub, I'd pick on of those up too. Especially, if the dislay prices got closer to reality.

combatcolin
May 25, 2006, 11:13 AM
Seriously? I'll give you that you know a lot about computers but do you know anything about marketing. People in this world don't give a rats behind about what it technically just as good or faster. People hear "Quad CPUs" and they are sold. If alienware and Falcon Northwest can sell "quad" opteron setups, why wouldn't apple so the same? You really make no sense for someone who knows so much about computers. Like someone else said, It's a step backwards.

My guess will be the same setup they have right now with 2-dual systems and 1-quad system. Noone seems to care tht the Quad costs $3300, people still buy it.

Wasn't it Gil Amino who once said that Apple is a marketing company?

jiggie2g
May 25, 2006, 11:44 AM
I've been waiting for a few months for the MacBook to be released, and amongst all this anticipation I now find that there is a potential for the Merom processor to replace the current dual-core chip. Just curious, but could someone please explain the major advantages of Merom? I mean, I'm an engineer and I'm going to use Windows on the Mac 1/4 time for specific apps, but...will Merom really be worth the wait?


Yes it will be worth the wait, just take a look at at it's potential

Super Pi, All sandra tests, Cinebench, TMPG encoding, 3dmark06
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=99466

Super Pi, 3dmark01, 3dmark03, Sandra, Cinebench, 3dmark06, 3dmark05, Aquamark3, Mandelbrot benchmark
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=99342

Super Pi, Sandra, PassMark, TMPG encoding, 3dmark01, 3dmark03, 3dmark05, 3dmark06, and everything repeated at different speeds
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=98919

As for Conroe ...lookie here
Conroe Destroys Athlon FX-62 socket AM2
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=5692&page=1

Conroe at 4.2ghz
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=100628&highlight=conroe

Conroe at 4.6ghz
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=100739&highlight=conroe

Benchmarks Galore
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=99892&highlight=conroe

and that's not even counting the Conroe XE(Extreme Edition). now i know these are overclocked benchmarks , but just shows the potential of these CPU's and this will silence you mac monkeys for downplaying Conroe's significance.

I can possible see Woodcrest at the very top end model but for single socket dual core CPU's woodcrest is a waste and is just more expensive with no performance gains in that configuration. Conroe will due just fine.

jiggie2g
May 25, 2006, 12:29 PM
sorry double post

AidenShaw
May 25, 2006, 08:49 PM
But a Powermac that could happily lie on its side would allow them to increase powermac sales and thus reduce costs through economies of scale. Look at the success if the Mac Mini and in many cases its due to the form factor not just the price.

Sure some iMac sales would be canablised but all up I think Apple would sell more Macs with a powermac that could go under your monitor or big screen TV because it has extra expandability for TV tuners and additional HDDs.
I've been saying that the new Conroe mini-tower/pizza-box is a certainty.

Woodcrest will be too expensive - so instead of a crippled entry maxi-tower PowerMac (or whatever it's called) there will be a mini-tower.

I also expect to see this in a dual-purpose DVD player sized case.

For the home theatre - the Mac Media Centre Edition - place it horizontally under the TiVo and DVD player and other home entertainment components.

Pack a little foot in the box to attach for vertical mini-tower use.

aswitcher
May 26, 2006, 01:05 AM
I've been saying that the new Conroe mini-tower/pizza-box is a certainty.

Woodcrest will be too expensive - so instead of a crippled entry maxi-tower PowerMac (or whatever it's called) there will be a mini-tower.

I also expect to see this in a dual-purpose DVD player sized case.

For the home theatre - the Mac Media Centre Edition - place it horizontally under the TiVo and DVD player and other home entertainment components.

Pack a little foot in the box to attach for vertical mini-tower use.

So how good will this be compared to the current PMs and the intel iMacs performance wise?

eric67
May 26, 2006, 02:07 AM
Woodcrest is not nor will it ever see daylight in a power mac/Mac Pro. Conroe will do just fine and from most benchmarks it out performs the Athlon X2 by atleast 20% clock 4 clock. Hate to break It to you but the dual socket days are over for Desktop macs. You really think apple is gonna put is gonna put 2 $80 cpu's in a prosumer machine....not. maybe in an Xserve but not a mac pro. here's how it will break down. iMac will use Merom as it is already pin compatible with the current Core duo mobile chips. no need to change the motherboard.

MacMini / Core Duo 1.86-2.0 2MB L2

Macbook / Core Duo 2.16-2.33 2MB L2

iMac / Core 2 Duo(merom) 2.16-2.33 4MB L2

Macbook Pro / Core 2 Duo(merom) 2.1-2.33 4MB L2

Mac Pro / Core 2 Duo(Conroe) 2.4-2.67 and 2.93 XE 4MB L2

Incase you are wondering why I placed the Macbook and Macbook Pro at the same speed , please note that Core 2 has an advantage of 20% over Core 1 clock 4 clock not to mention the advantage of having double the L2 cache. The core 1 still is slated to clock up to 2.33 ghz i see the chip becoming thier new value chip(think Celeron but better) for lower end machines.
while the other predictions regarding Core and Core2 are quite obvious, and should happen in August or September, I think regarding the Mac Pro, I strongly disagree.
WoodCrest will power the Mac Pro, many reasons for this statement:
- Apple needs to replace the current quad core G5 by a machine at least equivalent, a Conroe Core 2 (single CPU 2 cores) will not be sufficient to match performance of the current Quad G5.
- In the past Apple has used hte same CPU in the Xserve and in the PowerMac, so the Xserve will be powered by hte Woddcrest, as the Mac Pro
- A Xeon WoodCrest Mac Pro could debut at 2x dual core Xeon 3GHz, making it a 4 cores computer.
- apple will not divesify too much the different types of CPU to be used in its hardware models: Core 2 is pin compatible with Core, but will feature larger cache and higher FSB clockspeed. Core 2 Merom will be in the MB Pro revision in Septembre while the iMac might quickly move to Core 2 Conroe. Xeon will power Xserve and Mac Pro.

for additional information/tidbits, please read:
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-05-16/#5499
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-05-24/#5529
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-05-02/#5439
early January 2006: Apple roadmap analysis http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-01-23/#5046

aswitcher
May 26, 2006, 04:07 AM
while the other predictions regarding Core and Core2 are quite obvious, and should happen in August or September, I think regarding the Mac Pro, I strongly disagree.
WoodCrest will power the Mac Pro, many reasons for this statement:
- Apple needs to replace the current quad core G5 by a machine at least equivalent, a Conroe Core 2 (single CPU 2 cores) will not be sufficient to match performance of the current Quad G5.
- In the past Apple has used hte same CPU in the Xserve and in the PowerMac, so the Xserve will be powered by hte Woddcrest, as the Mac Pro
- A Xeon WoodCrest Mac Pro could debut at 2x dual core Xeon 3GHz, making it a 4 cores computer.




What does this mean for likely costs and a possibility of a smaller form factor PM/MP?
Can they afford to produce a cheaper low end PM/MP?
Can they go smaller and horizontal with such chips given heat issues?

iRepublican
May 26, 2006, 06:29 AM
I've been saying that the new Conroe mini-tower/pizza-box is a certainty.


So,when is it going to be released? :)

AidenShaw
May 26, 2006, 07:38 AM
So how good will this be compared to the current PMs and the intel iMacs performance wise?
Conroe will be significantly faster than Merom, which is significantly faster than the Yonah in the iMacIntel.

Conroe will run at faster clock rates than Merom, and will have a 1066 MHz FSB compared to 667 MHz in Merom. There will also be an Extreme version at even faster clocks.

There are many reports that the MB/iMacIntel/MBP are neck-to-neck with the dual core PowerMacs in many cases.

Merom and Conroe should be even faster - probably beating the dual-core PMG5 on everything except highly optimized AltiVec code. They may even beat the G5 at AltiVec, since Core 2 has a much improved SSE with multiple SSE execution units.

In other words, that sleek DVD-player sized pizza-box would be more than a match for the low-end PM.

aswitcher
May 26, 2006, 07:41 AM
Conroe will be significantly faster than Merom, which is significantly faster than the Yonah in the iMacIntel.

Conroe will run at faster clock rates than Merom, and will have a 1066 MHz FSB compared to 667 MHz in Merom. There will also be an Extreme version at even faster clocks.

There are many reports that the MB/iMacIntel/MBP are neck-to-neck with the dual core PowerMacs in many cases.

Merom and Conroe should be even faster - probably beating the dual-core PMG5 on everything except highly optimized AltiVec code. They may even beat the G5 at AltiVec, since Core 2 has a much improved SSE with multiple SSE execution units.

In other words, that sleak DVD-player sized pizza-box would be more than a match for the low-end PM.


Sounds very promising. What about price, can they do an entry level for the same price as a 17" iMac? What about heat for a smaller box?

AidenShaw
May 26, 2006, 07:49 AM
What does this mean for likely costs and a possibility of a smaller form factor PM/MP?
Intel has historically charged quite a bit more both for Xeon processors and Xeon chipsets to support them. A Woodcrest PM would need to be about $500 to $800 more than a PM to preserve Apple's margins. (Woodcrest also uses a new kind of memory called FB-DIMMs - and most people realize that it will take a while for the price to drop to the levels of DDR2 memory.)

Can they afford to produce a cheaper low end PM/MP?
Can they afford not to?

There's a huge price, size and feature gap between the MiniMacIntel and the PowerMac. All the other Intel vendors will have dual-core 64-bit Conroe mini-towers in the $800-$1200 range.

Will Apple get many switchers when the choice is between a Mini and a Maxi for a couple thousand? (especially if the Mini stays 32-bit Yonah...)

Can they go smaller and horizontal with such chips given heat issues?
You can get DVD-player sized minitowers and pizza boxes with dual-core Pentium 4 today.

It is *much* easier to cool a home-stereo sized box than a thin laptop....


http://www.embeddedautomation.com/images/mTheaterHD_350px.jpg

Or even smaller

http://www.stealthcomputer.com/photos/albums/401/thumb_fanless_slim_hand1.jpg
http://www.stealthcomputer.com/littlepc_p4_401X.htm

AidenShaw
May 26, 2006, 07:55 AM
So,when is it going to be released? :)
Wikipedia says that Conroe will be released on 23 July. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_2_microprocessors)

How convenient that WWDC'07 is soon after... :cool:

iGary
May 26, 2006, 08:04 AM
Wikipedia says that Conroe will be released on 23 July. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_2_microprocessors)

How convenient that WWDC'07 is soon after... :cool:

4MB of L2 Cache. :eek:

aswitcher
May 26, 2006, 08:19 AM
Can they afford not to?

There's a huge price, size and feature gap between the MiniMacIntel and the PowerMac. All the other Intel vendors will have dual-core 64-bit Conroe mini-towers in the $800-$1200 range.

Will Apple get many switchers when the choice is between a Mini and a Maxi for a couple thousand? (especially if the Mini stays 32-bit Yonah...)




It all makes sense and the chips appear to be timing right for such a release...but this is Apple and they at times tend to defy the obvious choice for their own marketing reasons. Anyway, I hope you are right because this really would be a great machine for my home server for the next 4-5 years if they can bring it out under the current PM costs. Even a basic speced out entry level PM with ram and a few minor upgrades is $4500 AUD...and I dont want to spend more than $2K-$3K, which is why a second rev intel iMac is my current choice...but I dont need the iMacs screen really.

BenRoethig
May 26, 2006, 08:32 AM
So how good will this be compared to the current PMs and the intel iMacs performance wise?

Depends on the Task. Like Aidenshaw said, Conroe is going to be quite a bit faster since it is built for the desktop environment. Like the current Core Duo Macs, they are going to be quite a bit faster than PPC macs in most tasks. Notice I said most. SSE3 is in no way, shape, or form the equal of Altivec. A few highend professional programs desiged specifially for the strengths of PPC970 series are going to run slower on Intel Macs.

heisetax
May 26, 2006, 08:44 AM
Someone correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't Merom the notebook/portable chip, whereas Conroe is the desktop chip? Why would they put Merom in an iMac??


The reason for going with the Intel CPUs was to cut power usuage. The iMac is basically a modified laptop that only runs from AC power. Thus the need for a lower powered chip. But as others have mentioned, if the heat can be kept down, then the Conroe could be used.

Currently the iMac cpu was downgraded from a server class cpu to a prtable class cpu. Only time will tell if the iMac makes it back to the desktop class.

Bill the TaxMan

AidenShaw
May 26, 2006, 09:27 AM
SSE3 is in no way, shape, or form the equal of Altivec. A few highend professional programs desiged specifially for the strengths of PPC970 series are going to run slower on Intel Macs.
While I agree that hand-optimized AltiVec on the PMG5 will probably keep up with generic SSE on Core 2, I wouldn't be surprised that once similar SSE optimizations are made Intel chips will prevail even there.

The "problem" with SSE is not that the SSE instruction architecture is inherently weaker than AltiVec.

The problem has been that the SSE implementations did not have the dedicated vector arithmetic units that the PPC chips have had.

That changes with Core 2 - there are three dedicated 128-bit execution units, which allow a core to do up to 8 single precision floating point operations per cycle (or 4 doubles).

http://www.intel.com/technology/magazine/pix/ic_fig5.jpg
http://www.intel.com/technology/magazine/computing/core-architecture-0306.htm


The days of "AltiVec good - SSE bad" are over.

BenRoethig
May 26, 2006, 10:00 AM
The reason for going with the Intel CPUs was to cut power usuage. The iMac is basically a modified laptop that only runs from AC power. Thus the need for a lower powered chip. But as others have mentioned, if the heat can be kept down, then the Conroe could be used.

Currently the iMac cpu was downgraded from a server class cpu to a prtable class cpu. Only time will tell if the iMac makes it back to the desktop class.

Bill the TaxMan

Having a chip supply and the fact that most programs are already optimized for x86 may have played a factor too.

jiggie2g
May 26, 2006, 10:41 AM
while the other predictions regarding Core and Core2 are quite obvious, and should happen in August or September, I think regarding the Mac Pro, I strongly disagree.
WoodCrest will power the Mac Pro, many reasons for this statement:
- Apple needs to replace the current quad core G5 by a machine at least equivalent, a Conroe Core 2 (single CPU 2 cores) will not be sufficient to match performance of the current Quad G5.
- In the past Apple has used hte same CPU in the Xserve and in the PowerMac, so the Xserve will be powered by hte Woddcrest, as the Mac Pro
- A Xeon WoodCrest Mac Pro could debut at 2x dual core Xeon 3GHz, making it a 4 cores computer.
- apple will not divesify too much the different types of CPU to be used in its hardware models: Core 2 is pin compatible with Core, but will feature larger cache and higher FSB clockspeed. Core 2 Merom will be in the MB Pro revision in Septembre while the iMac might quickly move to Core 2 Conroe. Xeon will power Xserve and Mac Pro.

for additional information/tidbits, please read:
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-05-16/#5499
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-05-24/#5529
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-05-02/#5439
early January 2006: Apple roadmap analysis http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-01-23/#5046

Another reason not to trust the French..lol , this guys at Hard Mac is a moron
He calls the Merom less powerful but someone for got to tell him that it is the same freakin' core as Conroe. Please explain to me why everyone keeps thinking or wanting a conroe in a iMac , this will not happen , for apple to do this it would have to overhaul the iternals of the entire case and it would run too hot , remember the iMac G5 running at a lower FBS for heat reasons. If you are Apple why would u spend millions of dollars revamping the case and design when a simple chip swap to merom will do the same. Merom is most test sees no performance hit vs. conroe even will the reduced FSB. as for woodcrest it may be in the high end Mac Pro only , for Apple to use woodcrest in the whole pro line would be a wast as Woodcrest is more expensive then Conroe and has no advantade in single cpu configurations.

I will stick to my guns on this one.

MacMini / Core 1 Duo 1.86-2.0ghz 2MB L2

Macbook / Core 1 Duo 2.16-2.33ghz 2MB L2

iMac / Core 2 Duo(merom) 2.16-2.33ghz 4MB L2

Macbook Pro / Core 2 Duo(merom) 2.1-2.33ghz 4MB L2

MacPro / Core 2 Duo(Conroe) 2.4-2.67 and 2.93ghz XE 4MB L2(this may vary)

MacPro Quad (Woodcrest) 2x 3.0ghz / 2x 4MB L2

BenRoethig
May 26, 2006, 12:12 PM
MacPro / Core 2 Duo(Conroe) 2.4-2.67 and 2.93ghz XE 4MB L2(this may vary)

MacPro Quad (Woodcrest) 2x 3.0ghz / 2x 4MB L2

I'm hoping they're all woodcrest with a dual socket 5000x chipset for upgrade reasons. However, the top machine would make a very good prosumer Mac.

jiggie2g
May 26, 2006, 12:41 PM
I'm hoping they're all woodcrest with a dual socket 5000x chipset for upgrade reasons. However, the top machine would make a very good prosumer Mac.


Apple will not put out 3 Quads , did not do it with the G5 (when the chips were actually cheaper). It is simply not cost effective for Apple. Unless you are willing to pay a starting Price of $2499 , $2899 , $3299 that would very well be the price of 3 Quads. Those Dual socket Motherboards cost atleast $499USD. Personally I am waiting for the ATI RD600+RS600 chipset or I may settle on the Intel 975X depending on release dates. Conroe E6600(2.4ghz) OC'd to 3.6ghz :D. I can't wait till July.

Also consider that Kentsfield (Intel Quad Core) will be out 1QT 2007 just in time for Macworld SF so it would be good timing to ship by mid Feb. So I would see a 2nd Gen MacPro being 2 Quad Core Models with a Dual Quad.

AidenShaw
May 26, 2006, 09:34 PM
Also consider that Kentsfield (Intel Quad Core) will be out 1QT 2007 just in time for Macworld SF so it would be good timing to ship by mid Feb. So I would see a 2nd Gen MacPro being 2 Quad Core Models with a Dual Quad.
Some of you gals just aren't recognizing the pattern here, are you? There's multi-core single socket mobile/low-power (Merom), there's multi-core single socket desktop (Conroe), there's multi-core dual-socket workstation/server (Woodcrest), and there's multi-core multi-socket server (Tulsa).

Kentsfield is the quad-core follow-on to Conroe, therefore you'll see it in Aiden's new quad-core MiniTower/media-centre-pizza-box. (Yes! A quad-core media centre - transcode anything to anything in real time!)

Clovertown is the quad-core follow-on to Woodcrest, therefore you'll see it in the maxi-tower octo-core (dual socket quad core) PM (or whatever the Lord God Jobs calls it) line.

But keep dreaming about Tigerton, the Tulsa follow-on. That will be the hexadecimal Mac - 16 cores. (4 cores per chip, 4 sockets per motherboard)

iBunny
May 27, 2006, 07:53 AM
I Deffinatly think that their will be multiple versions of the MacPro as well as an updated iMac. Intel Conroe processor is very fast, affordable, and still run very cool. According to Intel, Conroe is approx 40% faster than Yonah (Current Core Duo) at the same clock speed. While Merom is only 20% Faster than Yonah.

Meroms Will probly be put in Mac Mini's, and All the Notebooks. It makes sense.

The Updated iMacs will probably have a 1.8GHz - 2.2GHz Conroe Processor. They run cool enough still, while offering superior performance over the current core duo's.

We will Probably 3 versions of the MacPro (like this was for the G5)

We will have a Single Conroe 2.4GHz - 2.6GHz as our entry level Mac Pro.

We will have a Single Conroe XE 2.93GHz for our High End Mac Pro.

And a Dual Socketted - Dual Woodcrest 3GHz Workstation. This will be the most powerful of the bunch, and alot more expensive. This way, people who have a Quad G5 can use this as a replacement. Sure, One Dual Core Conroe probly will beat a Quad G5 in most things, applications which are heavly multithreaded and thrive off multiple cores still may be better on a Quad G5. Apple already is using 4 cores... I dont see why their highest end machine, wouldnt have at least 4 cores. Since Conroe is not dual socket capable, Their only choice is to use woodcrest. Which is fine, woodcrest is going to be superior to Conroe due to the fact that the FSB is increased from 1066 to 1333 and you can have More than one physical chip, as well with more ram.

I reckon that a Dual - Dual Core Woodcrest @ 3GHz / 1333FSB and 4GB of FBDIMM might costs us $4000. But thats ok :)

AidenShaw
May 27, 2006, 08:55 AM
We will Probably 3 versions of the MacPro (like this was for the G5)

- We will have a Single Conroe 2.4GHz - 2.6GHz as our entry level Mac Pro.

- We will have a Single Conroe XE 2.93GHz for our High End Mac Pro.
Note that the Conroe is a completely different motherboard and chipset from the Woodcrest. And it's a cheaper CPU and chipset.

Apple will need to fill the hole between the mini and the maxi-tower, especially since Woodcrest will probably push the price of the maxi-tower up $500 or more.

(insert Aiden's standard "there will be a 64-bit dual-core Conroe Mini-tower/Pizza-box" claim here)


The Updated iMacs will probably have a 1.8GHz - 2.2GHz Conroe Processor. They run cool enough still, while offering superior performance over the current core duo's.
Possible, but a Conroe iMac would need a new motherboard, and larger power supply and fans. Merom is a drop-in, and cooler.

I don't picture a noisy iMac coming out.


I reckon that a Dual - Dual Core Woodcrest @ 3GHz / 1333FSB and 4GB of FBDIMM might costs us $4000. But thats ok :)
One big advantage of FB-DIMMs is that more memory slots are possible. Note the following from a Dell workstation (http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/precn_690?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz&~section=specs#tabtop) order menu:

o 64GB, DDR2 SDRAM FBD Memory, 533MHz, ECC (16 DIMMS) [add $49,500]
o 32GB, DDR2 SDRAM FBD Memory, 533MHz, ECC (8 DIMMS) [add $26,500]
o 32GB, DDR2 SDRAM FBD Memory, 533MHz, ECC (16 DIMMS) [add $5,500]
o 16GB, DDR2 SDRAM FBD Memory, 533MHz, ECC (4 DIMMS) [add $14,500]
o 16GB, DDR2 SDRAM FBD Memory, 533MHz, ECC (8 DIMMS) [add $2,650]
o 8GB, DDR2 SDRAM FBD Memory, 533MHz, ECC (4 DIMMS) [add $1,150]
o 8GB, DDR2 SDRAM FBD Memory, 533MHz, ECC (8 DIMMS) [add $1,200]
o 4GB, DDR2 SDRAM FBD Memory, 533MHz, ECC (4 DIMMS) [add $400]
o 2GB, DDR2 SDRAM FBD Memory, 533MHz, ECC (2 DIMMS) [Included in Price]

(For a 1066 MHz bus, you run pairs of 533 MHz FB-DIMMs.)

BTW, that Dell "Precision Workstation 690" maxi-tower (about PMG5-sized) configured with

o Dual dual-core 3.73 GHz Xeons
o 4 GiB FB-DIMM
o 500 GB SATA drive
o 128 MiB Quadro FX550 dual DVI

is $5608.

BenRoethig
May 27, 2006, 09:15 AM
Note that the Conroe is a completely different motherboard and chipset from the Woodcrest. And it's a cheaper CPU and chipset.

Apple will need to fill the hole between the mini and the maxi-tower, especially since Woodcrest will probably push the price of the maxi-tower up $500 or more.

According to Apple, an iMac is good enough...acording to Apple. If you're going to have a pizza box, which basically is an iMac, it is.

AidenShaw
May 27, 2006, 11:19 AM
According to Apple, an iMac is good enough...acording to Apple. If you're going to have a pizza box, which basically is an iMac, it is.
Is it OK to stack your DVD player, TiVo and 7.1 audio amplifier on top of the iMac?

...according to Apple.

jiggie2g
May 27, 2006, 01:32 PM
I Deffinatly think that their will be multiple versions of the MacPro as well as an updated iMac. Intel Conroe processor is very fast, affordable, and still run very cool. According to Intel, Conroe is approx 40% faster than Yonah (Current Core Duo) at the same clock speed. While Merom is only 20% Faster than Yonah.

Meroms Will probly be put in Mac Mini's, and All the Notebooks. It makes sense.

The Updated iMacs will probably have a 1.8GHz - 2.2GHz Conroe Processor. They run cool enough still, while offering superior performance over the current core duo's.

We will Probably 3 versions of the MacPro (like this was for the G5)

We will have a Single Conroe 2.4GHz - 2.6GHz as our entry level Mac Pro.

We will have a Single Conroe XE 2.93GHz for our High End Mac Pro.

And a Dual Socketted - Dual Woodcrest 3GHz Workstation. This will be the most powerful of the bunch, and alot more expensive. This way, people who have a Quad G5 can use this as a replacement. Sure, One Dual Core Conroe probly will beat a Quad G5 in most things, applications which are heavly multithreaded and thrive off multiple cores still may be better on a Quad G5. Apple already is using 4 cores... I dont see why their highest end machine, wouldnt have at least 4 cores. Since Conroe is not dual socket capable, Their only choice is to use woodcrest. Which is fine, woodcrest is going to be superior to Conroe due to the fact that the FSB is increased from 1066 to 1333 and you can have More than one physical chip, as well with more ram.

I reckon that a Dual - Dual Core Woodcrest @ 3GHz / 1333FSB and 4GB of FBDIMM might costs us $4000. But thats ok :)


I agree with you on the Power Mac part but I think u are confused about the Meroms performance.

Conroe is not 40% faster than Core Duo it is 20%. As Merom and Woodcrest are because they are the same core(i don't know how many time i've explained this). When intel said 40% they ment Conroe will be 40% faster then the P4(which sucks) and Merom will be 20% faster then Core Duo(yonah) which is are bout the same edge Conroe has over AMD 64(20%). Intel only compared Merom to Yonah because they are both Mobile chips and merom is the replacement for yonah.

Yonah = AMD 64 in terms of performance

Conroe/Merom/Woodcrest > AMD 64/Yonah by 20%

As far as the Bus is concerned many benchmarks and have already proven that Conroe/Merom are Equal in terms of performance , both over clock similary and Merom is not bandwidth starved by the reduced FSB. They all seem to perform within 3-5% of one another depending on apps. 1333 FSB will only be necessary when going very high on clock speed well over 3ghz or Multi- CPU/Quadcore.

The woodcrest 1333 chipset is not truely 1333. it's a dual 667. the 2 cpu's, which is what woodcrest is meant for, will both have their own 667 bus, so no sharing, but not high speed either. it's that way for reliability

AidenShaw
May 29, 2006, 09:09 AM
The woodcrest 1333 chipset is not truely 1333. it's a dual 667. the 2 cpu's, which is what woodcrest is meant for, will both have their own 667 bus, so no sharing, but not high speed either. it's that way for reliability

The Intel 5000 chipset (for Xeon 5100 CPUs) front side bus is a pair of 1066 MT/s or a pair of 1333 MT/s, not two at 667 MT/s.

If the bus is double pumped, the frequency of the bus clock is half the frequency of the data. If quad pumped, the bus clock is 1/4 of the data frequency. Data frequency is almost always used in the spec sheets, not the bus clock frequency. For the Intel 5000, the FSB clock is 266 MHz (1066 MT/s) or 333 MHz (1333 MT/s) - the multiplier is 4, making it a quad-pumped bus.

http://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/datashts/31307101.pdf
The MCH supports 1066 MHz FSB which is a quad-pumped bus running off a 266 MHz system clock, and a point to point DIB processor system bus interface. Each processor FSB supports peak address generation rates of 533 Million Addresses/second.

Both FSB data buses are quad pumped 64-bits which allows peak bandwidths of 8.5 GB/s (1066 MT/s). The MCH supports 36-bit host addressing, decoding up to 64 GB of the processor’s memory address space.
The term DIB means Dual Independent Bus, referring to a separate FSB per socket.

Each socket has its own FSB to the Northbridge, similar to the structure of the G5.

Figure 1.1 on page 23 from: http://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/datashts/31307101.pdf

dante@sisna.com
Jun 9, 2006, 01:09 PM
3.0ghz Conroe = 3.6ghz G5 when you add the 20% advantage. plus the shared L2 , now do u still think this is a down grade. you really think that Quadstill looks so good now.

Okay, I read the report, and I'll say it again: YES that dual Conroe IS a downgrade over the current Quad when using highly processor intensive applications combined with a multitasking (ie 10 or more app's open) environment. The current Quad, especially under Leopard, will easily outproduce this Dual Conroe.

DJO

trekbody
Aug 8, 2006, 09:51 AM
Woodcrest is not nor will it ever see daylight in a power mac/Mac Pro. Conroe will do just fine and from most benchmarks it out performs the Athlon X2 by atleast 20% clock 4 clock. Hate to break It to you but the dual socket days are over for Desktop macs. You really think apple is gonna put is gonna put 2 $80 cpu's in a prosumer machine....not. maybe in an Xserve but not a mac pro. here's how it will break down. iMac will use Merom as it is already pin compatible with the current Core duo mobile chips. no need to change the motherboard.

MacMini / Core Duo 1.86-2.0 2MB L2

Macbook / Core Duo 2.16-2.33 2MB L2

iMac / Core 2 Duo(merom) 2.16-2.33 4MB L2

Macbook Pro / Core 2 Duo(merom) 2.1-2.33 4MB L2

Mac Pro / Core 2 Duo(Conroe) 2.4-2.67 and 2.93 XE 4MB L2



Dude, you've got to be feeling sheepish today. This posting became a joke yesterday.