PDA

View Full Version : Woodcrest June 26th. XServe Too?


MacRumors
Jun 14, 2006, 07:05 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

TGDaily reports that Intel has announced a press conference (http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/06/13/core_to_launch_on_26_june/) on June 26th, presumably to officially launch its Xeon 5100 processor, aka "Woodcrest." The Xeon 5100 will be available in 6 versions according to the site, ranging from 1.6 to 3.0 GHz using 1066 and 1333 MHz Front Side Busses. All models will sport 4 MB of L2 cache.

An unverified MacRumors source had previously reported that their XServe shipment had been put on hold due to a back order of parts, and according to Apple the parts would not arrive until June 26th. This would seem to indicate that Apple plans on announcing its Intel-based XServe on or around June 26th. Of note, ThinkSecret has previously reported (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/05/20060531215206.shtml) that the XServe was not due for release until July.

Exact specifications of the rumored Intel-based XServes are still unknown.

iGary
Jun 14, 2006, 07:08 AM
Bring em' on. Can't wait.

They are still gonna call them Xeon?

TheMasin9
Jun 14, 2006, 07:08 AM
i want a super fast xserve

j_maddison
Jun 14, 2006, 07:09 AM
No mention of the Powermac at the moment then. Could a 1.6ghz Woodcrest be used in an imac? I know its unlikely, but just curious to know if it could

Jay

bigandy
Jun 14, 2006, 07:09 AM
ooooh :)

Macnoviz
Jun 14, 2006, 07:11 AM
Can these be combined like in the current quad powermac? I heard they couldn't, but didn't get that confirmed

weitzner
Jun 14, 2006, 07:14 AM
awesome. that will leave just one more PowerPC macintosh.

mattyrocks
Jun 14, 2006, 07:15 AM
thank god for that, the sooner the better for me. i sure hope this is true

MIDI_EVIL
Jun 14, 2006, 07:21 AM
New PowerMac in August then?

Think this is a good indication?

Rich.

BJNY
Jun 14, 2006, 07:21 AM
I'd like an Xserve that's taller, same depth as Xserve RAID, and quieter. This would allow it to fit into standard rack cases, and appeal to the video & music crowd as well as this photographer.

BornAgainMac
Jun 14, 2006, 07:43 AM
We have the current XServe running Oracle 10g at work and has been an excellent server. I look forward to this revision because we plan to purchase more of these. They provide a good cost / performance ratio.

runplaysleeprun
Jun 14, 2006, 07:43 AM
What a lovely birthday gift from Intel. I wonder if it will come to my doorstep in a basket of fruit or something. Maybe with some apples.

iBunny
Jun 14, 2006, 07:44 AM
I beleive that a Dual 3GHz Woodcrest (so 4 cores and a total of 12GHz of horsepower under the hood) Would be an exceptional high end Powermac replacement. It might be 4500$.... but it also might be worth it...

Think about this...

Woodcrest is the high end version of Conroe (Core 2) offering approx 20% more performance over conroe....

It is showed that Conroe (Core 2) Chips already outpace the G5, even at lower frequencies.... I cant immigane How powerful Quad 3GHz Woodcrest Cores would be... And to pair it up with 4 or 8 GB of FBDIMM.... we will have a monster.

miniConvert
Jun 14, 2006, 07:52 AM
Those FSB's are getting nippy! I hope Intel can keep up with the new pace they've set themselves.

I'm itching for something with dual Woodcrests. My current dual Xeon (old architecture) 3.6GHz workstation suddently feels old :( It's not nice knowing that something so vastly superior is about to arrive!

jholzner
Jun 14, 2006, 08:16 AM
I'd like an Xserve that's taller, same depth as Xserve RAID, and quieter. This would allow it to fit into standard rack cases, and appeal to the video & music crowd as well as this photographer.

The Xserves are starndard 1U in height and do fit standard 1U racks.

RichP
Jun 14, 2006, 08:17 AM
Hmm..would have always thought the x-serve would be the last machine to go intel...

...need...quad..mac pro...!

sam10685
Jun 14, 2006, 08:24 AM
we need a hapta-core powermac. (5 cores)

brianus
Jun 14, 2006, 08:29 AM
The Xserves are starndard 1U in height and do fit standard 1U racks.

I imagine he was referring to its depth, which is too large for some racks (which is not to say it's nonstandard). Hence the requirement that it be larger than 1U, to fit the components that would otherwise be spread out in that very deep 1U. I sympathize; our XServe is by a very large margin the deepest component in our rack. We could have gotten something a lot smaller otherwise.

amac4me
Jun 14, 2006, 08:46 AM
Eagerly waiting for WWDC :rolleyes:

crees!
Jun 14, 2006, 08:59 AM
I imagine he was referring to its depth, which is too large for some racks (which is not to say it's nonstandard). Hence the requirement that it be larger than 1U, to fit the components that would otherwise be spread out in that very deep 1U. I sympathize; our XServe is by a very large margin the deepest component in our rack. We could have gotten something a lot smaller otherwise.

Nah, he said same depth. He's talking about the height.
I'd like an Xserve that's taller, same depth as Xserve RAID, and quieter. This would allow it to fit into standard rack cases, and appeal to the video & music crowd as well as this photographer.

longofest
Jun 14, 2006, 09:02 AM
Can these be combined like in the current quad powermac? I heard they couldn't, but didn't get that confirmed

Woodcrest can, Conroe cannot. That is why Woodcrest now looks more likely to be used in the Mac Pro.

brianus
Jun 14, 2006, 09:03 AM
Nah, he said same depth. He's talking about the height.

He said same depth as XServe RAID. XServe RAID is 18" deep; XServe itself is 28" deep. That can make a big difference.

BJNY
Jun 14, 2006, 09:05 AM
I'd like an Xserve that's taller, same depth as Xserve RAID, and quieter. This would allow it to fit into standard rack cases, and appeal to the video & music crowd as well as this photographer.

I imagine he was referring to its depth, which is too large for some racks (which is not to say it's nonstandard). Hence the requirement that it be larger than 1U, to fit the components that would otherwise be spread out in that very deep 1U. I sympathize; our XServe is by a very large margin the deepest component in our rack. We could have gotten something a lot smaller otherwise.

He said same depth as XServe RAID. XServe RAID is 18" deep; XServe itself is 28" deep. That can make a big difference.

Thank you brianus for the assist :)
To be even more concise...
I want Xserve: 3U to 4U tall, same depth (18") as the Xserve RAID, and quiet, to fit into [travel] cases manufactured by Thermodyne or SKB.

Mac Fly (film)
Jun 14, 2006, 09:30 AM
"ThinkSecret has previously reported that the XServe was not due for release until July." :D :D :D :D :D

weitzner
Jun 14, 2006, 09:59 AM
we need a hapta-core powermac. (5 cores)

hepta means 7. penta is 5.

ezekielrage_99
Jun 14, 2006, 10:19 AM
I think we will see a new Intel PowerMac in july.... well I hope so :cool:

It might be probably because the next Apple event is in San Diego July 4-7 ;)

Apple Corps
Jun 14, 2006, 10:27 AM
Can these be combined like in the current quad powermac? I heard they couldn't, but didn't get that confirmed

You are probably thinking about Conroe.

adamfilip
Jun 14, 2006, 10:40 AM
I think apple should also release Xserve desktop units
similar to the powermac

but taller to hold more storage

boncellis
Jun 14, 2006, 10:41 AM
What's the difference between a 1.6 Woodcrest and a 1.6 Conroe besides a dual processor configuration? If the lower-end PowerMac replacement has a dual core 1.6 Conroe or something similar, what's the purpose of the 1.6 Woodcrest? Would Apple put two dual core 1.6 Woodcrests in an enclosure and call it a low end Quad? Seems unlikely.

it5five
Jun 14, 2006, 10:46 AM
I don't think they will be putting the 1.6 (either conroe or woodcrest) in any of the Mac Pros.

But, to answer the question, there is no difference between a 1.6 conroe and a 1.6 woodcrest, except the dual configuration. There are just some people on here that want the more expensive/"better sounding" chip without regard to cost/any increase in performance. :rolleyes:

danielwsmithee
Jun 14, 2006, 10:48 AM
With Woodcrest being available more then a month ahead of Conroe it could be a good idea for Apple to split the Professional line into a Pro and Pro-sumor line.

Pro - Full Tower more HD bays.
Quad 3.0 Ghz $2,999
Quad 2.6 Ghz $2,599

Pro-Sumor - Mini tower
Dual 2.6 Ghz $1999
Dual 2.0 Ghz $1499

The prices may be off a little bit. The top one could be more expensive but you all get my drift. Then they could leave the focus of WWDC on Leopard where it belongs. If they annonce a new high end Mac Pro at WWDC it could overshadow the OS announcments that could be really important to get into the press.

ChrisA
Jun 14, 2006, 10:52 AM
What is the typical xsere used for. Who are Apple's customers for this?

I assume these are used for more then just serving files to a small workgroup. A G4 would be enough for that. Do people actually run DBMSes on Apple hardware?

bbrosemer
Jun 14, 2006, 10:55 AM
I want to replace my desktop with an Xserve

nagromme
Jun 14, 2006, 11:05 AM
It seems possible to me that Apple would add a top-end dual-dual Woodcrest Mac Pro in addition to the PowerMac G5 line now, even before Conroe is ready. It would probably be priced above the current machines anyway.

And then they can bring on lower-cost Conroe Mac Pros when that chip is ready--much like they intro'd the MacBook Pro and then later brought out other MacBooks. At that time the G5s can be discontinued (or more likely, quietly offered on the side for Photoshop users with immediate needs).

I see no evidence of this happening, but it sounds possible so let me dream :)

ChrisA
Jun 14, 2006, 11:06 AM
What's the difference between a 1.6 Woodcrest and a 1.6 Conroe besides a dual processor configuration? If the lower-end PowerMac replacement has a dual core 1.6 Conroe or something similar, what's the purpose of the 1.6 Woodcrest? Would Apple put two dual core 1.6 Woodcrests in an enclosure and call it a low end Quad? Seems unlikely.

From my experiance in the past,the ONLY reason you ever for with multiple processors is because you already have the fastest processor you can get and need more speed. Make little sense to use two slower processors. But now days there is a reason: If you have two (or four) processors you can shut down one or more of them to save power

Still I don't see the point of two low-end Woodcrest chips in one box. I think they will release a quad core machine but with high-end 3Ghz chips.

I'm typing this on a 3.6Ghz dual Xeon Linux system. Linux is very Macintosh-like and gives a good previce of what the new Power macs might be like. I'd like to buy a mac like this system it is very fast and I'm also running two virual machines inside VMWare

puuukeey
Jun 14, 2006, 11:11 AM
moore's theory.

idea_hamster
Jun 14, 2006, 11:13 AM
Now I don't follow the processor thing religiously, but I don't recall hearing that the first generation of any of the 64-bit processors would run at 3Ghz.

If it's true that Woodcrest is coming out both (i) ahead of schedule, and (ii) "over-powered," then I think we have really gotten our first dose of "this is what it's like to work with Intel."

Of course, just "ahead of schedule" is freakin' amazin'. :D

tristan
Jun 14, 2006, 11:29 AM
Strangest part of this rumor...

People are still ordering Xserves?:eek:

Stridder44
Jun 14, 2006, 11:37 AM
Strangest part of this rumor...

People are still ordering Xserves?:eek:


HA! I feel your confusion. PowerPC fanboys I guess (or people that need a G5 server).

danielwsmithee
Jun 14, 2006, 11:40 AM
Now I don't follow the processor thing religiously, but I don't recall hearing that the first generation of any of the 64-bit processors would run at 3Ghz.If I recall correctly intel already demo'ed Woodcrest at 2.93 Ghz and stated that they would be releasing at 3 Ghz during their demo. The same was also true with Conroe, they demoed at 2.6 Ghz but said the Extreme Edition would be running at 2.93.

What is the typical xsere used for. Who are Apple's customers for this?

I assume these are used for more then just serving files to a small workgroup. A G4 would be enough for that. Do people actually run DBMSes on Apple hardware?The biggest market for Xserves are scientific computing clusters and render farms.

boncellis
Jun 14, 2006, 11:48 AM
...Still I don't see the point of two low-end Woodcrest chips in one box. I think they will release a quad core machine but with high-end 3Ghz chips.

Exactly my point. I'm sure someone somewhere will find it useful, but if Woodcrest is more expensive than Conroe as predicted, well...I just don't get it.

Like you, I think Apple will release another Quad, but it will be high-end--not 1.6 or 1.8 GHz.

macgeek2005
Jun 14, 2006, 11:53 AM
They're making a Quad 3Ghz, and it'll be bumped to Quad 3.2Ghz at the beginning of 2007, and it'll be Octa 3.sumthin Ghz by spring 2007. Yup. :)

idea_hamster
Jun 14, 2006, 12:09 PM
If I recall correctly intel already demo'ed Woodcrest at 2.93 Ghz and stated that they would be releasing at 3 Ghz during their demo. The same was also true with Conroe, they demoed at 2.6 Ghz but said the Extreme Edition would be running at 2.93.
Thanks -- but I think it's still nice for something to arrive ahead of schedule. How late is IBM's 3.0Ghz G5 now? :confused:

Even if the Power architecture is theoretically better, it doesn't help if they don't arrive. This is making the big switch look like it's already paying off.

shawnce
Jun 14, 2006, 12:12 PM
Could a 1.6ghz Woodcrest be used in an imac?

For what purpose? You thinking 2 x 1.6GHz Woodcrest in an iMac? If not then why Woodcrest?

Why put a server targeted chip in a low end desktop when it will gain you near zero increase in performance (actually at 1.6GHz it will lose you performance) and only raise bill of materials costs.


Woodcrest = server targeted (large thermal/power operating range, higher price, uses expensive chipset)
Conroe = desktop targeted (average thermal/power operating range, low/medium price, uses low cost chipset)
Merom = laptop / small form factor trageted (low thermal/power operating range, low/medium price, uses low/medium cost chipset)


Conroe, Woodcrest and Merom have basically identical cores and hence very nearly identical performance when operating at the same clock rate, thermal envelope and similar FSBs. The main differences is the socket supported, on die cache sizes and of course supported thermal/power envelope (reflected in clock rates supported and power throttling points).

shawnce
Jun 14, 2006, 12:17 PM
Folks should review...

List of Intel Core microprocessors (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_microprocessors) (used in current MacIntels)

List of Intel Core 2 microprocessors (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_2_microprocessors)

List of Intel Xeon microprocessors (pointed at Woodcrest) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Xeon_microprocessors#.22Woodcrest.22_.2865_nm.29)

Also for good coverage on what Core 2 is...

Into the Core: Intel's next-generation microarchitecture (http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/core.ars)

ModestPenguin
Jun 14, 2006, 12:23 PM
hepta means 7. penta is 5.

totally pwned.

Sorry. I had to.

Fabio_gsilva
Jun 14, 2006, 12:31 PM
Provided that woodcrest clock starts at 1.6 ghz, would it be possible to put one of those new chips in a new iMac?

Would it represent an advantage over conroe or meron??

Fabio_gsilva
Jun 14, 2006, 12:33 PM
No mention of the Powermac at the moment then. Could a 1.6ghz Woodcrest be used in an imac? I know its unlikely, but just curious to know if it could

Jay

Sorry, i didnt saw you are questioning this too...

ChrisA
Jun 14, 2006, 12:41 PM
Strangest part of this rumor...

People are still ordering Xserves?:eek:

You would have to know the anser to my question about "What do peole DO with xserves" to know if buying a G5 Xserve make sense. If they are serving files to a small workgroup of mac clients then even the G5 is overkill. For the file serve use case all the machine has to do is keep the Ethernet "pipe" fully filled up.

notjustjay
Jun 14, 2006, 12:42 PM
Provided that woodcrest clock starts at 1.6 ghz, would it be possible to put one of those new chips in a new iMac?

Would it represent an advantage over conroe or meron??

Hmm... that sounds to me kinda like asking if I could upgrade my sports car performance by dropping in one of those new Mack truck engines...

macaddict06
Jun 14, 2006, 12:47 PM
Strangest part of this rumor...

People are still ordering Xserves?:eek:
Duh. Not to flame you...BUT, the XServe G5 is still a DAMN good machine. Plus, if a new one comes out in less than a month, Apple will either upgrade the ones that were bought or will give a discount on orders (Remember a year or two ago when the cost of a PMG5 and a 23" Cinema display together fell something like $700? People recieved rebates for the difference).
Further, just because new chips are out does not make the XServe G5 any less powerful in and of itself. Some network admins would MUCH rather run RISC over CISC, and they can get that in a G5, won't get it in an x86-based server.
So yes, people are still ordering, and with good reason.

shawnce
Jun 14, 2006, 12:53 PM
Provided that woodcrest clock starts at 1.6 ghz, would it be possible to put one of those new chips in a new iMac?

Would it represent an advantage over conroe or meron??

No. It would likely result in a slower more expensive and hotter system (nosier) then if Apple placed a Merom or Conroe in the system (note the first generation Meroms are pin compatible with current iMac mother boards... cheap for Apple to upgrade). Also Apple isn't going to make a 2 x Woodcrest (Quad core) iMac anytime soon and in many consumer situations such a system would perform more poorly then a higher clocked dual core system.

Apple could place a 2.3 GHz Merom in the top end iMac that would yield about a 40% advantage over the current top end iMac (Core Duo) while a dual core 1.6GHz Woodcrest would be likely be 10+% slower then the current top end iMac (Core Duo).

Fabio_gsilva
Jun 14, 2006, 12:55 PM
No. It would likely result in a slower more expensive and hotter system (nosier) then if Apple placed a Merom or Conroe in the system (note the first generation Meroms are pin compatible with current iMac mother boards... cheap for Apple to upgrade). Also Apple isn't going to make a 2 x Woodcrest (Quad core) iMac anytime soon and in many consumer situations such a system would perform more poorly then a higher clocked dual core system.

Apple could place a 2.3 GHz Merom in the top end iMac that would yield about a 40% advantage over the current top end iMac (Core Duo) while a dual core 1.6GHz Woodcrest would be likely be 10+% slower then the current top end iMac (Core Duo).

Thanks for the clarification...:)
Slowly I'm learning...

Macnoviz
Jun 14, 2006, 12:57 PM
hepta means 7. penta is 5.


I think Octo- en Hexacores are more likely

Or maybe Googoltriplexcores

brianus
Jun 14, 2006, 01:20 PM
Some network admins would MUCH rather run RISC over CISC

Why? Isn't that just a computer sciencey debate? What real world difference does it make?

MacsRgr8
Jun 14, 2006, 01:39 PM
HA! I feel your confusion. PowerPC fanboys I guess (or people that need a G5 server).

Nice to hear some real Intel fanboys around... :rolleyes:

The G5 is still a very fast CPU. Great CPU for in the Xserve or Power Mac.
Nothing being PowerPC-fanboy about regarding an Xserve G5 as a good price/performance investment, same goes for the Quad G5, especially if you need power NOW, with real apps running natively NOW (which specifically goes for Mac OS X Server...)
;)

j_maddison
Jun 14, 2006, 03:03 PM
For what purpose? You thinking 2 x 1.6GHz Woodcrest in an iMac? If not then why Woodcrest?

Why put a server targeted chip in a low end desktop when it will gain you near zero increase in performance (actually at 1.6GHz it will lose you performance) and only raise bill of materials costs.


Woodcrest = server targeted (large thermal/power operating range, higher price, uses expensive chipset)
Conroe = desktop targeted (average thermal/power operating range, low/medium price, uses low cost chipset)
Merom = laptop / small form factor trageted (low thermal/power operating range, low/medium price, uses low/medium cost chipset)


Conroe, Woodcrest and Merom have basically identical cores and hence very nearly identical performance when operating at the same clock rate, thermal envelope and similar FSBs. The main differences is the socket supported, on die cache sizes and of course supported thermal/power envelope (reflected in clock rates supported and power throttling points).

Thanks, thats pretty much the explanation I was looking for. I was wondering if there was a performance advantage to be had from using a Woodcrest chip at a lower clock rate over a higher clocked Conroe. I didn't know, so I asked the question. thanks

Jay

MacFan25863
Jun 14, 2006, 03:51 PM
If it's true that Woodcrest is coming out both (i) ahead of schedule, and (ii) "over-powered," then I think we have really gotten our first dose of "this is what it's like to work with Intel."

Of course, just "ahead of schedule" is freakin' amazin'. :D


I agree! Its really amazing..we have had more speed increases and new technologies on the Mac in the past 6 months than we've had in the past 3 years!

hulugu
Jun 14, 2006, 05:50 PM
Why? Isn't that just a computer sciencey debate? What real world difference does it make?

Simply put, if you have code that only runs on RISC processors a CISC processor is going to be a problem. Not everything has been, or will be, translated to UB especially in the near-future.

I can't think of any examples, but I'm sure that a RISC processor is still necessary for some applications given that up until just this year, Apple was only using RISC with the PowerPC.

danielwsmithee
Jun 14, 2006, 07:06 PM
Simply put, if you have code that only runs on RISC processors a CISC processor is going to be a problem. Not everything has been, or will be, translated to UB especially in the near-future. That is true no matter what processor type you are switching between. Whether you are using RISC or CISC has no impact on this. Code written for a G5 will not run a SPARC even though they are both RISC machines.

The concept of RISC and CISC is very outdated. Any modern processor you look at is in some ways RISC and in other ways CISC. Modern compilers hide the difference even when it does exist. x86 Machines use to be solely CISC now each CISC instruction is broken down into multiple RISC instructions that run on each of the processing units. The PowerPC's atlti-vec instructions would likely be considered CISC instructions.

There are reasons for wanting a G5 processor, but the fact that it is a RISC processor has little influence.

andrewag
Jun 14, 2006, 07:16 PM
I wouldn't mind a bit more of a variety in the specs. Maybe some lower end ones for apps like basic webservers etc.

With the Intel transition, I hope that Apple keep the hardware up to date. The Xserve slipped quite a bit next to its PowerMac sibling.

andrewag
Jun 14, 2006, 07:17 PM
I agree! Its really amazing..we have had more speed increases and new technologies on the Mac in the past 6 months than we've had in the past 3 years!

Apple have simply jumped over to Intel at the right time. A couple years ago they were going nowhere.

Shintocam
Jun 14, 2006, 08:25 PM
What is the typical xsere used for. Who are Apple's customers for this?

I assume these are used for more then just serving files to a small workgroup. A G4 would be enough for that. Do people actually run DBMSes on Apple hardware?


XServes are used in pretty much the same way as any Linux cluster. They make great webservers and database servers, but they are particularly well suited to multiprocessor data crunching. We have a small XServe cluster that we use for biology applications such as genome analysis etc....where you are running multithreaded applications etc...They scale well - similar to a linux cluster, but price for performance is extremely high even for the G5 XServes, particularly at academic prices. Companies like SUN have a hard time competing on price/performance and with the switch to the new chips, it's going to be even more difficult (even though ironically now the two companies are using the same architecture).

IscariotJ
Jun 15, 2006, 03:26 AM
Companies like SUN have a hard time competing on price/performance and with the switch to the new chips, it's going to be even more difficult (even though ironically now the two companies are using the same architecture).

Slightly OT, but Sun's Galaxy servers offer excellant price/performance. I installed a pair of X4100's ( dual dual-core Opteron's, 8GB RAM ) running Solaris10x86/Oracle for an ISP performing traffic shaping on 200,000 customers. The load very rarely went above 1.

I would be very interested to see how the new Xserves will compare running the same software.

Core Trio
Jun 15, 2006, 07:17 AM
No mention of the Powermac at the moment then. Could a 1.6ghz Woodcrest be used in an imac? I know its unlikely, but just curious to know if it could

Jay


I wouldnt really be efficient, the power consumption is high, the cost is higher than Merom or Conroe, and im sure the heat output of a server class chip is far greater than that of the chip currently housed inside the "laptop-on-a-stand" that is the current iMac.

DharvaBinky
Jun 15, 2006, 09:07 AM
What's the difference between a 1.6 Woodcrest and a 1.6 Conroe besides a dual processor configuration?

Hyperthreading? If so, 2xWoodcrests would appear to OS X as 8 cores. Too bad it's a shared FSB, no matter how fast it is. :mad:

I had actually heard that Apple was going to depart from 100% stock Intel components for the xServe and/or Mac Pro and that this departure was going to be a custom chipset that used Apple's point to point interconnect to make the FSB a switched fabric, but appear as a standard shared bus to the CPUs...

Did I dream that? I don't recall waking up with crusty pants... ;)

SPUY767
Jun 15, 2006, 10:08 AM
My cluster suddenly looks underpowered. :-(

ChrisA
Jun 15, 2006, 12:28 PM
Simply put, if you have code that only runs on RISC processors a CISC processor is going to be a problem. Not everything has been, or will be, translated to UB especially in the near-future.

I can't think of any examples, but I'm sure that a RISC processor is still necessary for some applications given that up until just this year, Apple was only using RISC with the PowerPC.

I don't think it matters much. I have code here that runs interchangably on both i386 and SPARC. and either Linux or Solaris. From my point of view there is far more difference betwen the three operating systems (Linux, Solaris 10 and "older Solaris versions like 6") then between the SPARC and i386. The gcc compiler does it's job pretty much without me having to think mach about it. As for the differences between OSes. GNU "Auto tools" helps to make that resonably easy too.

That said, I KNEW I wanted my code to be portable and so I make it easy on myself by using only development tools that are present on all platforms. Porting between sets of development tools is hard work and in some cases parts need to be rewritten. I use X11 because that is common to all platforms but if I wanted to use Mac's native graphic it would be a re-write. But as is I'd bet my stuff would "just work" on either a G4/5 or Intel mac.

In summary it is the software environment in which the code is developed and runs that matters a LOT more then the type of CPU.

ChrisA
Jun 15, 2006, 12:44 PM
Too bad it's a shared FSB, no matter how fast it is.

The overall memory bandwidth depends on the speed of the bus times the probibility that the data is NOT is cache plus the speed of the cache times the probibility that the data item is in cache. If you can double the probibility of a cache hit then you have almost doubled the effective memory bandwidth. These new processors have huge caches and likely very high cache hit ratios. So you can't directly compare FSB speeds you need to multiply the FSB speed by the chance that the some data is on the other side of the bus.
Typically hit ratios are very high, on the order of 90%

Analysis id even harder because that while a cache miss does mean that one tread is "stalled" waiting for a cache line to be filled from RAM it may be that some other thread is not stalled and the processor can continue to do usfull work and so the over all prograss of work on the machine is not slowed. So sped depend on what you are doing that dy with your computer.

That said, of course faster is better.

fervor
Jun 15, 2006, 01:09 PM
I had a development server fry on me yesterday and wound up ordering an XServe as a replacement. I called a reseller friend of mine, had him check for availability - nothing until the week of the 26th. Wound up ordering an 'off the rack' configuration which his distributor had 4 of in the entire country. I would wait, but for what we're doing on that development server, even the G5 is way overkill.

I'm hoping we see an Intel XServe that week! That'd be friggin' awesome. I have big RAID/fiber channel to two XServes that I've been putting off until the Intel XServes hit.

By the looks of the XServe inventory channels, I'd say something is going on.

-bob

bradc
Jun 15, 2006, 03:42 PM
Exactly ^^^^ I got the same thing, I tried to order two Xserves & an Xserve RAID and everything was going to be late and coming from all over, so I said screw it and I figure I can wait.

MacNemesis
Jun 15, 2006, 07:59 PM
Strangest part of this rumor...

People are still ordering Xserves?:eek:

Just remember that OS X server isn't unversal yet.

081440
Jun 15, 2006, 08:15 PM
Just remember that OS X server isn't unversal yet.


It'll be released with the new Xserve, Why release it early? (They'll probably offer a cross-grade disk for people who just bought it, like they did for the pro applications)

brianus
Jun 15, 2006, 08:49 PM
It'll be released with the new Xserve, Why release it early? (They'll probably offer a cross-grade disk for people who just bought it, like they did for the pro applications)

Hmm.. splains why 10.4.7 still isn't out despite weeks of "release imminent" rumors and relatively bug free seeds. They'll do the same as they did with 10.4.4; wait for the introduction of a new product to release a new edition of the OS.

DHagan4755
Jun 15, 2006, 09:44 PM
Working under the assumption that the Mac Pro will use Woodcrest, is there any sign that the Power Macs are getting held up/drying up til the 26th?

Multimedia
Jun 17, 2006, 07:03 AM
Working under the assumption that the Mac Pro will use Woodcrest, is there any sign that the Power Macs are getting held up/drying up til the 26th?Almost any model you want going back 3 years is available at the refurb page of the online Apple Store (http://apple.com/store). Scroll down lower right column RED TAG with the white word SAVE is the link to the refurb page. Quads went refurb in early February and are still there for only $2799. :)

zac4mac
Jun 17, 2006, 08:43 AM
MM - it's SAVE on the tag..

Odd, no picture link to XServes on the Store page, but they are listed on the left sidebar. Also, all but the "Ultimate" config shows shipping "within 24 hrs."

Looks like my next desktop Mac will be a while down the road. Just got an MBP 2.0 in March and it's slowly replacing my G5DP2.0. Still haven't figured out closed lid ops with my 23"ACD on XP...

Z

xUKHCx
Jun 17, 2006, 01:49 PM
Almost any model you want going back 3 years is available at the refurb page of the online Apple Store (http://apple.com/store). Scroll down lower right column RED TAG with the white word SALE is the link to the refurb page. Quads went refurb in early February and are still there for only $2799. :)

**** that is so cheap, if only the UK refurb store was as well stocked and had them at those prices, i would snap one up considering that is only 29% more than my Rev.A iMac G5. (which is currently being repaired for leaking and bulding capcaitors and extremly excessive fan noise, and big dark patches on the screen). I wish i had a quad, i know how you enjoy yours Multimedia, am jealous as i could definately use the multitasking power of a quad. I thrash my iMac day and night.

When i finish Uni i am definately going to buy as close to fully spec'd Mac Pro as i can afford (by then hopefully my business will have crossed the threshold to buy it tax free).

topgunn
Jun 26, 2006, 09:36 AM
Today is the 26th. Is anything interesting going to happen?

crees!
Jun 26, 2006, 09:49 AM
Today is the 26th. Is anything interesting going to happen?
It's quite possible my farts will smell like roses. So that would be interesting.

j_maddison
Jun 26, 2006, 09:50 AM
Today is the 26th. Is anything interesting going to happen?

I was thinking the exact same thing. I've been checking the site every few hours to see if an announcement is imminent or has happend

Jay

SheriffParker
Jun 26, 2006, 10:14 AM
The Apple store is busy updating! :eek:

They will be back within the hour....

cheffrey
Jun 26, 2006, 10:14 AM
I was thinking the exact same thing. I've been checking the site every few hours to see if an announcement is imminent or has happend

Jay

Well, looks like the Online Apple Store is down for some updates. SOMETHING is coming.

j_maddison
Jun 26, 2006, 10:15 AM
Well, looks like the Online Apple Store is down for some updates. SOMETHING is coming.

Really? Bugger I've been looking in the wrong place!

I'll keep my eyes peeled after the footie finishes ;)

twoodcc
Jun 26, 2006, 10:16 AM
Today is the 26th. Is anything interesting going to happen?

well today is monday, so maybe something will happen tomorrow

dpclark
Jun 26, 2006, 10:18 AM
Uk Store Down *woot*

cheffrey
Jun 26, 2006, 10:30 AM
Really? Bugger I've been looking in the wrong place!

I'll keep my eyes peeled after the footie finishes ;)


LOL. Probably going to be the intro of the Mac Pro. Any other ideas, peeps?

mwswami
Jun 26, 2006, 10:34 AM
http://images.apple.com/r/store/backsoon/title_backsoon.gif

:D :D :D :D

j_maddison
Jun 26, 2006, 10:34 AM
LOL. Probably going to be the intro of the Mac Pro. Any other ideas, peeps?

The new video iPod I hope. I hope to goodness its not a new shuffle because I convinced my friend to buy one on saturday!

Jay

j_maddison
Jun 26, 2006, 11:19 AM
OK the store is back up, but I can't see anything different about it??

Jay

Toe
Jun 26, 2006, 03:40 PM
Well that's really annoying, Dell has announced a whole line of servers based on the Xeon 5100 (http://www.dell.com/content/topics/topic.aspx/global/products/pedge/topics/en/9g_familypage?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz). For example, here are the specs (http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/pedge_2950?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz&~section=specs#tabtop) on one. Note the processor.

Maybe Apple is waiting until tomorrow... they like to announce things on Tuesday. Yeah, that's it.

FF_productions
Jun 26, 2006, 04:08 PM
Something might happen tommorow, I doubt they'd release something at the end of the day, it's usually early in the morning, and they release stuff on tuesdays.

Aperture
Jun 26, 2006, 04:30 PM
So what was up with the Store Update? And yeah, I agree. If they are going to release a new XServe soon then its either going to be tomorrow or at the Expo in August. I'm getting up early tomorrow to check the Apple Store.:D

Kevin

Multimedia
Jun 26, 2006, 08:35 PM
So what was up with the Store Update? And yeah, I agree. If they are going to release a new XServe soon then its either going to be tomorrow or at the Expo in August. I'm getting up early tomorrow to check the Apple Store.:D

KevinIt's the day Intel releases Woody not Apple.

Aperture
Jun 26, 2006, 08:38 PM
It's the day Intel releases Woody not Apple.

I'm aware. But Apple is going to release a new XServe with the WoodCrest chip.

Kevin

Toe
Jun 26, 2006, 09:06 PM
It's the day Intel releases Woody not Apple.
The day Intel releases a new chip, Dell releases new computers based on it. Why not expect Apple to follow suit? ;)

AidenShaw
Jun 27, 2006, 08:16 AM
The day Intel releases a new chip, Dell releases new computers based on it. Why not expect Apple to follow suit? ;)
For the moment, Apple has no multi-socket Intel systems for sale.

Therefore, they're not really "late" if Intel releases new chips for a system model that Apple doesn't produce.

What will be interesting is when Merom ships - these chips are a drop-in replacement for the Yonah chip in the MiniMacIntel, the iMacIntel, and the laptops.

If Dell/HP/Lenovo/Asus/Acer/... all have Merom notebooks on announcement day, and Apple doesn't - then Apple will be a slow adopter.

Right now, though, the lack of fat binary professional apps means that one could make a reasonable case that it's too early to drop the PowerPC high end systems. New Intel chip or not, it could just be too early to move to quad core Intel systems.

brianus
Jun 27, 2006, 08:31 AM
Right now, though, the lack of fat binary professional apps means that one could make a reasonable case that it's too early to drop the PowerPC high end systems. New Intel chip or not, it could just be too early to move to quad core Intel systems.

Which server apps aren't universal binary yet? As far as I know the only major professional apps that haven't been ported yet are those of Adobe CS, so I don't see that being an issue for servers, or workstations that don't require Adobe stuff. It seems to me the logical thing to do would be to produce the Mac Pros but keep selling the PowerMacs for those who need them, until CS3 ships. Similar to what was done with the last generation of PowerMac G4's after the introduction of the G5. There's no need to hold up two entire product lines because one piece of third-party software isn't ready yet.

Jo-Kun
Jun 28, 2006, 03:59 AM
wich server app is not universal... well the biggest one so far: OSX Server itself doesn't run on Intel... so as long as that isn't solved, there will be no Intel based Xserves... o and someone mentioned: no picture of the xserve next to other models in he middle listing this is not new it's like that for at least one year... xserves is something the focus less on in the applestore because that's not the same public who buys them as other Apple prods...

brianus
Jun 28, 2006, 09:51 AM
wich server app is not universal... well the biggest one so far: OSX Server itself doesn't run on Intel... so as long as that isn't solved, there will be no Intel based Xserves...

Obviously Apple will release the Intel version of OS X Server to coincide with the release of the Intel XServe. Kinda ludicrous to suggest that would be holding them up. Server is just the regular OS X with a few extra goodies thrown in (and the GUI interfaces to those goodies, such as Server Admin, Workgroup Manager, etc, are already universal); there is nothing to be "solved" -- it is beyond all doubt that Apple already has working copies of the Intel OS X Server running. The only reason it hasn't been released yet is that there's no official server hardware to run it on (they're not gonna bother putting it out there for iMacs and minis).

EagerDragon
Jun 28, 2006, 06:51 PM
I heard the power consuption is low for the chips under 3 GHZ, at those speed under 3GHZ, how does it compare to the current top of the line Yonah and could they use these chips in the Mac Book Pros???

Would be sweet if temps are about the same or lower. With the extra cache it may really fly.

~Shard~
Jun 29, 2006, 12:01 PM
Core 2 Duo chips have been delayed according to this (http://www.digitimes.com/bits_chips/a20060629A2007.html).

MacSA
Jun 29, 2006, 12:06 PM
Core 2 Duo chips have been delayed according to this (http://www.digitimes.com/bits_chips/a20060629A2007.html).

Only by four days lol.

This is an interesting quote from the article:

Meanwhile, graphics core chipsets to support those processors - the G965 and entry-level Q963 - will also be introduced on July 27, the sources noted.

So does that mean that if, hypothetically speaking, the MacBook and Mini which use the GMA950, were to get Core 2 chips, they would also get these better G965 IG?

Orange-DE
Jun 29, 2006, 02:33 PM
On TomsHardware.de (Germany) I found yersterday an comparision between an Dual (2xdual) Woodcrest system and one powered by an AMD Opteron.
(http://business.thgweb.de/2006/06/26/intel-core-2-xeon-woodcrest-server-workstation-prozessor/)
The article says, the Woodcrest-system was delivered by INTEL for testing.
Given the rumors that Apple had outsourced the developement of the MacPro to Intel, and given the similarities of the "air-condition" in both the G5 PowerMac and this prototype, it COULD be the next MacPro in an ugly computercase. I am pretty shure about it, because INTEL founded an research-departement right there in Munic, where also TomsHardware is located.:cool:

mwswami
Jun 29, 2006, 06:35 PM
On TomsHardware.de (Germany) I found yersterday an comparision between an Dual (2xdual) Woodcrest system and one powered by an AMD Opteron.
(http://business.thgweb.de/2006/06/26/intel-core-2-xeon-woodcrest-server-workstation-prozessor/)
The article says, the Woodcrest-system was delivered by INTEL for testing.
Given the rumors that Apple had outsourced the developement of the MacPro to Intel, and given the similarities of the "air-condition" in both the G5 PowerMac and this prototype, it COULD be the next MacPro in an ugly computercase. I am pretty shure about it, because INTEL founded an research-departement right there in Munic, where also TomsHardware is located.:cool:

Here is the above article in English (http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/06/26/xeon_woodcrest_preys_on_opteron/).