PDA

View Full Version : Apple: Quad-Core Processors in New Macs




MacRumors
Mar 30, 2007, 07:45 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

MacTechNews.de (http://www.mactechnews.de/) notes an interesting blurb on Apple's Creative Suite 3 promo page (http://store.apple.com/AppleStore/WebObjects/BizCustom?qprm=78313&family=MacAdobeCS3):

http://images.macrumors.com/article/2007/03/30/quad.png

In it, Apple claims:

Every new Mac features powerful dual-core or quad-core Intel processors, the world's most advanced operating system, and more.

At this time there are no Quad-Core Intel processors being used in any Macs, however, they may simply be referring to Quad-Core Mac Pros, which do contain two Dual-Core Intel Processors. Apple UK's store had previously had a more revealing slip up (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/03/12/8-core-mac-pro-hints-at-apple-uk/) with the claims of "8-core processing power" on Mac Pros -- which they quickly corrected.

Rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2006/10/25/8-core-mac-pro-with-clovertown-in-november/) of Apple's use of Quad-core processors began in November 2006, with expectations that an 8-Core Mac Pro was coming soon.

digg this (http://digg.com/apple/Apple_Quad_Core_Processors_in_New_Macs)



Blue Velvet
Mar 30, 2007, 07:46 AM
Four on the floor. Nice. :)

Father Jack
Mar 30, 2007, 07:47 AM
Some where over the rainbow

FJ

Small White Car
Mar 30, 2007, 07:49 AM
Eh. I think this is just a clumsy reference to the current dual-dual MacPros.

Which is not to say there won't be 8-core MacPros soon...I think there will be within the next few weeks.

But I don't think this has anything to do with that at all. It's just imprecise writing.

Littleodie914
Mar 30, 2007, 07:50 AM
Hmm. It's nice to think this is a legitimate slip-up, and we really are expecting quad-core Mac's, but the way I see it... If you call a single Core 2 Duo a dual-core, why wouldn't two of them be quad-core?

Evangelion
Mar 30, 2007, 08:00 AM
Fact: Quad-core MacPro's are on their way. It's only a matter of time.

Fact: The text specifically says that it's talking about dual-core and quad-core PROCESSORS, not systems.

Conclusion: Apple will release MacPro's qwth quad-core CPU's in the immediate near future. But, of course, we knew this all along.

Hmm. It's nice to think this is a legitimate slip-up, and we really are expecting quad-core Mac's, but the way I see it... If you call a single Core 2 Duo a dual-core, why wouldn't two of them be quad-core?

Because the text in question talks about quad-core PROCESSORS, not systems. Even if you have two dual-core processors, you do NOT have quad-core processor. You simply have a quad-core system.

synth3tik
Mar 30, 2007, 08:00 AM
Four on the floor. Nice. :)



wonderfully put:D

ready2switch
Mar 30, 2007, 08:24 AM
I think it can be read several ways, and is intended to be.

For those that demand "where is this quad-core Mac?" they can point to their dual-dual core. Yes, it says processor, which is technically not correct, but it's close enough to get by for now.

It also is handy for when they do update to a quad-core processor in the Mac Pros, which I think is coming soon [read next few weeks], because they won't have to go back and change all of the copy on their site.

It's a bit misleading at the moment, but I think it will be completely accurate in the near-future. :D

Cappy
Mar 30, 2007, 08:29 AM
People are deluding themselves if they don't think there will be quad-core Macs. This isn't the old days where Apple could surprise everyone because no one knew what was going on with PPC processors. Intel publishes roadmaps that don't get altered at the last second.

For Apple to not have quad-core Macs would mean that Apple doesn't think it has a market for those(which I find hard to believe), Apple is waiting for a big event to release them, or that Apple is having problems on the inside. I would guess it's at least my second thought and maybe a little of the third. The big event would be a Leopard release so the OS can take advantage of the cores efficiently. By a little of the 3rd idea I'm thinking that I doubt Apple wanted to wait this long for Leopard to be released.

I really have no doubts though that quad-core Macs will be here.

slughead
Mar 30, 2007, 08:31 AM
what's the freakin holdup on 8 core mac pros?

We know all they have to do is buy the freakin things and throw them into the boxes; why don't they at least OFFER the chips as a BTO.

I have a friend who's in the market for one and has been waiting since november

junker
Mar 30, 2007, 08:39 AM
So, this is a bit of a tangent but -

Are programs really yet able to take advantage of the multicore processors?

I thought I'd read somewhere that few programs were able to (truely) utilize the power yet in the multi procssor/core processing. That most computers would just shuffle/seperate processes to seperate cores (allocate each to its own core) as opposed to one program fully using all core/processors. (ok, That's a bit of an exaggerated and oversiplified statement, but hopefully you get where I'm going)

Being able to run on and fully utilize, are two seperate concepts.

Maybe this CS3 is the one of the first, but does anyone know?

As for the original topic here, sounds like it's a mistype by some noob in marketing. Though *of course* we'll soon see a quad processor soon.

brianus
Mar 30, 2007, 08:42 AM
Fact: Quad-core MacPro's are on their way. It's only a matter of time.

Fact: The text specifically says that it's talking about dual-core and quad-core PROCESSORS, not systems.

Conclusion: Apple will release MacPro's qwth quad-core CPU's in the immediate near future. But, of course, we knew this all along.

Fact: in advertisements, technical subtleties are often glossed over.
Fact: if they go with dual quad-cores in the next Mac Pros, they'd be 8-core systems, something Apple would want to trumpet (rather than simply saying, 'quad-core processor' as opposed to 'system')
Fact: Apple is very secretive and tries to avoid releasing product details before they're announced
Conclusion: this ad refers to the current systems only, and means nothing.

Rocketman
Mar 30, 2007, 08:43 AM
what's the freakin holdup on 8 core mac pros?


Die shrink, speed bump, and temperature reduction.

Rocketman

johnee
Mar 30, 2007, 08:49 AM
How well can osx handle multiple cores?

BenRoethig
Mar 30, 2007, 08:55 AM
They've already changed the wording to multi-core.

How well can osx handle multiple cores?

It's designed from the beginning for them. On the OS level, cores are treated no different than seperate CPUs.

bearbo
Mar 30, 2007, 08:58 AM
Hmm. It's nice to think this is a legitimate slip-up, and we really are expecting quad-core Mac's, but the way I see it... If you call a single Core 2 Duo a dual-core, why wouldn't two of them be quad-core?

because a single core 2 duo IS a dual-core processor, however TWO quad-core IS NOT a quad processor

Fact: in advertisements, technical subtleties are often glossed over.
Fact: if they go with dual quad-cores in the next Mac Pros, they'd be 8-core systems, something Apple would want to trumpet (rather than simply saying, 'quad-core processor' as opposed to 'system')
Fact: Apple is very secretive and tries to avoid releasing product details before they're announced
Conclusion: this ad refers to the current systems only, and means nothing.

in marketing, that's called bait and switch, and if apple doesn't currently offer quad processor, it's illegal

Noiseboy
Mar 30, 2007, 08:58 AM
How well can osx handle multiple cores?

I think it's a fairly safe bet that Leopard is being designed to run multiple cores even more than Tiger does at present.
I wish I needed/could afford one:eek:

bearbo
Mar 30, 2007, 08:59 AM
They've already changed the wording to multi-core.

it still says quad-core

Evangelion
Mar 30, 2007, 09:00 AM
Fact: if they go with dual quad-cores in the next Mac Pros, they'd be 8-core systems, something Apple would want to trumpet (rather than simply saying, 'quad-core processor' as opposed to 'system')

They are talking about processors here, not systems. Since they are talking about processors, it's natural that they talk of number of cores per processor, as opposed of number of cores per system. And it clearly refers to dual-core and quad-core processors. And fact remains that we will see quad-core processors in Macs sooner or later.

Fact: Apple is very secretive and tries to avoid releasing product details before they're announced

Yeah, it's not like we have never seen Apple or someone else spill the beans on upcoming Apple hardware. No sirree....

Conclusion: this ad refers to the current systems only, and means nothing.

I find your conclusion to be wrong. We all know that it's only a matter of time before we get quad-core processors in Macs, so why is it so hard to admit that they might have had a case of "premature specification" here? It wouldn't be the first time.

mark88
Mar 30, 2007, 09:05 AM
It's sucks that Apple are still charging the same price for the current Mac Pros that they were charging in August 2006.

There's no way I'm paying that much for a half year old product that has been rumoured to be upgraded since the end of last year.

Infrared
Mar 30, 2007, 09:10 AM
Hmm. It's nice to think this is a legitimate slip-up, and we really are expecting quad-core Mac's, but the way I see it... If you call a single Core 2 Duo a dual-core, why wouldn't two of them be quad-core?

For the same reason you wouldn't refer to
four bats as a pair of two-headed bats :)

Cheers.

bearbo
Mar 30, 2007, 09:10 AM
has anyone gone to an apple store lately, do you see them demo-ing CS3 on there?

i find it funny how apple say "Test Drive a Mac and Creative Suite 3" just on the lower part of the page in question... when CS3 isn't even released yet:rolleyes:

Keebler
Mar 30, 2007, 09:11 AM
It's sucks that Apple are still charging the same price for the current Mac Pros that they were charging in August 2006.

There's no way I'm paying that much for a half year old product that has been rumoured to be upgraded since the end of last year.

well, it makes perfect business sense not to change prices UNTIL the new products ship. Sure, they are risking hard core macrumors folks NOT buying until new ones are released, but alot of people out there don't know about it and even if they did, some people need it for business so they get started now instead of waiting.

as for the half year old, i kind of hear you, but those machines still kick some serious booty and they will for a long, long time.

bearbo
Mar 30, 2007, 09:11 AM
For the same reason you wouldn't refer to
four bats as a pair of two-headed bats :)

Cheers.

or a quad-head bat;)

brianus
Mar 30, 2007, 09:13 AM
They are talking about processors here, not systems. Since they are talking about processors, it's natural that they talk of number of cores per processor, as opposed of number of cores per system. And it clearly refers to dual-core and quad-core processors. And fact remains that we will see quad-core processors in Macs sooner or later.

No, they are not talking in fine-grained technicalese in advertisements. They don't do that. "Quad-core Intel processors" is just shorthand to address the fact that one of their product lines happens to have four cores in it. It's not bait-and-switch, it's simplification. You guys will just grasp at any straw, won't you..

I find your conclusion to be wrong. We all know that it's only a matter of time before we get quad-core processors in Macs, so why is it so hard to admit that they might have had a case of "premature specification" here? It wouldn't be the first time.

Gimme a break. Of course we all know quad-core processors in Mac Pros are a matter of time; I am not contesting that, I'm contesting the idea that this silly little ad has anything to do with it.

longofest
Mar 30, 2007, 09:17 AM
If you look at Apple's Mac Pro (http://www.apple.com/macpro/) page, it claims that the Mac Pro is "Quad Core". And remember the Power Mac G5 "Quad"?

This is just marketing. While I agree that it is dubious of Apple to use these terms interchangeably and muddy the waters like that, in this case, Apple is talking about the total numbers of cores in the system rather than the cores per chip.

EDIT: I see that they explicitly say "quad core processors" in the ad. I still think that is a marketing slip-up rather than anything else, due to Apple's heavy use of the "Quad Core" term in other references to their pro desktop products.

twoodcc
Mar 30, 2007, 09:17 AM
i think it's a slip-up.....and they are coming soon :apple:

bearbo
Mar 30, 2007, 09:18 AM
No, they are not talking in fine-grained technicalese in advertisements. They don't do that. "Quad-core Intel processors" is just shorthand to address the fact that one of their product lines happens to have four cores in it. It's not bait-and-switch, it's simplification. You guys will just grasp at any straw, won't you..

Quad-core intel processors is a long way from a product with 4 cores in it.

gimME a break


Gimme a break. Of course we all know quad-core processors in Mac Pros are a matter of time; I am not contesting that, I'm contesting the idea that this silly little ad has anything to do with it.
apple is simply being very not careful in this case, just like the UK leak... and this is simply not the right thing to do, ethically or legally.

if they don't offer quad-core processor, don't advertise for it

brianus
Mar 30, 2007, 09:18 AM
If you look at Apple's Mac Pro (http://www.apple.com/macpro/) page, it claims that the Mac Pro is "Quad Core". And remember the Power Mac G5 "Quad"?

This is just marketing. While I agree that it is dubious of Apple to use these terms interchangeably and muddy the waters like that, in this case, Apple is talking about the total numbers of cores in the system rather than the cores per chip.

QED, ma brotha :D

bearbo
Mar 30, 2007, 09:20 AM
If you look at Apple's Mac Pro (http://www.apple.com/macpro/) page, it claims that the Mac Pro is "Quad Core". And remember the Power Mac G5 "Quad"?

This is just marketing. While I agree that it is dubious of Apple to use these terms interchangeably and muddy the waters like that, in this case, Apple is talking about the total numbers of cores in the system rather than the cores per chip.

Mac pro's page does say quad core, but it only says dual-core processor when they refer to processor... they have not refer to anything as quad-core processor anywhere else except the CS3's page

belovedmonster
Mar 30, 2007, 09:20 AM
Theres only 3 letters of the alphabet anyone need remember when it comes to the release date of the new quad cores, and those letters are N, A and B.

NAB is when they will release the new pro systems, its as simple as that.

Mr.damien
Mar 30, 2007, 09:20 AM
Hmm. It's nice to think this is a legitimate slip-up, and we really are expecting quad-core Mac's, but the way I see it... If you call a single Core 2 Duo a dual-core, why wouldn't two of them be quad-core?

Ok, no problem. So If I follow your mind, where are the mac pro dual core ? (ie with only one CPU :rolleyes: )

brianus
Mar 30, 2007, 09:21 AM
Quad-core intel processors is a long way from a product with 4 cores in it. gimME a break

A technical fact which the average consumer doesn't give a whit about.

apple is simply being very not careful in this case, just like the UK leak... and this is simply not the right thing to do, ethically or legally.

No, it's not "just like the UK leak", because the UK leak was a leak (or a mistake, but I think it was a leak) -- it was information about an upcoming product. This, on the other hand, is just an imprecise description of a current product.

longofest
Mar 30, 2007, 09:22 AM
Mac pro's page does say quad core, but it only says dual-core processor when they refer to processor... they have not refer to anything as quad-core processor anywhere else except the CS3's page

see my edit above

AidenShaw
Mar 30, 2007, 09:22 AM
They don't do that. "Quad-core Intel processors" is just shorthand to address the fact that one of their product lines happens to have four cores in it. It's not bait-and-switch, it's simplification.

The terms "CPU" and "Processor" are ambiguous - for example, you use "CPU affinity" tools to assign threads to cores.

"Core" and "socket" are unambiguous.

Unless you look very, very closely at internal structures - you can't tell if a dual core system has two single core sockets or a single dual-core socket. A "core" is everything that we've always called a "CPU" or a "processor".

Just look at all of the references to the octo-core Mac Pro on these pages - everyone knows that refers to a two socket system with four cores per socket.

Or look at headlines like AnandTech upgrades and tests Octo-Core ‘Clovertown’ Apple Mac Pro (http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/anandtech_upgrades_and_tests_octo_core_clovertown_apple_mac_pro/).

What's most important is the total number of cores in the system. The number of sockets is much less relevant for performance.

And if we really want to get into mind-numbing pedantics - isn't the octo-core MacPro really a dual-dual-dual MacPro, not a dual-quad MacPro?

Mr.damien
Mar 30, 2007, 09:33 AM
Fact: in advertisements, technical subtleties are often glossed over.
Fact: if they go with dual quad-cores in the next Mac Pros, they'd be 8-core systems, something Apple would want to trumpet (rather than simply saying, 'quad-core processor' as opposed to 'system')
Fact: Apple is very secretive and tries to avoid releasing product details before they're announced
Conclusion: this ad refers to the current systems only, and means nothing.

FACT: so where are the dual core only Mac Pro ? humm ? Don't see them at the apple store.

bearbo
Mar 30, 2007, 09:35 AM
A technical fact which the average consumer doesn't give a whit about.
i don't give a whit about what average consumer give a whit about. the fact is apple misused the word "quad-core processor" and is not right. and the fact is apple mislead the consumer, average or not, intentionally or not


No, it's not "just like the UK leak", because the UK leak was a leak (or a mistake, but I think it was a leak) -- it was information about an upcoming product. This, on the other hand, is just an imprecise description of a current product.
you honestly think this is NOT a mistake?
it's INACCURATE (NOT IMPRECISE), but that doesn't make not a mistake
and it's inaccurate enough, that it's a description of a upcoming product.
see my edit above
while i agree that they didn't intentionally say that "oh, we have the quad-core processor, aka octo core mac, come here and buy one", but they did make sounding very close to that.
and also i'm more or less trying to let brianus see that Quad-core processor is NOT currently offered my Apple in Mac Pro or any Apple product, and saying Quad-core processor is not equivalent as saying a product w/ 4 of those cores in there:rolleyes:

Small White Car
Mar 30, 2007, 09:42 AM
I find your conclusion to be wrong. We all know that it's only a matter of time before we get quad-core processors in Macs, so why is it so hard to admit that they might have had a case of "premature specification" here? It wouldn't be the first time.

Because IF it was really "premature specification" it would say 8-core system!

Do you really think that the day the 8-core MacPros come out they're NOT going to call them that? Of course not...the number "8" will be all OVER the damn page, I am sure.

This is just sloppy writing, not "premature anything."

Mgkwho
Mar 30, 2007, 09:43 AM
People should call up Apple and ask them about it...I want to know what they say. :D

-=|Mgkwho

Zwhaler
Mar 30, 2007, 09:56 AM
I can't see two dual core Meroms in any of the low end macs, I think this is a misunderstanding, just like that thing that said "Meet the new Macs" which turned out to be nothing. Well I thought this meant that all macs will have a quad core option, but I think this is a reference to the Mac Pro.

4np
Mar 30, 2007, 10:00 AM
Quadcore MacBook Pro's! ;) Nah... is not gonna happen :)

Tehy
Mar 30, 2007, 10:09 AM
Interesting... I'm sure we will see upgrade soon :)

sinisterdesign
Mar 30, 2007, 10:16 AM
yup, dual quad cores are coming soon. i believe it will be called "Oct", but that just looks like an abbv for October to me. hmmm.

i still vote for an eight-core Mac Pro & Leopard combined promo entitled "Octopussy". think jobs will go for it?!?

Lynxpro
Mar 30, 2007, 10:16 AM
Fact: in advertisements, technical subtleties are often glossed over.
Fact: if they go with dual quad-cores in the next Mac Pros, they'd be 8-core systems, something Apple would want to trumpet (rather than simply saying, 'quad-core processor' as opposed to 'system')
Fact: Apple is very secretive and tries to avoid releasing product details before they're announced
Conclusion: this ad refers to the current systems only, and means nothing.


But why stop at 8 core systems? Why not have a special version of the Mac Pro with 4 processor slots on it for a total of 16 cores? I would think that would be a step in getting even more attention from the pro market...

Hell, once IBM/Sony start cranking out higher yields for the Cell processor, a Cell processor(s) daughter card/expansion card would also probably be a success for multimedia applications and scientific data crunching...not to mention running PS3 games. :)

SeanMcg
Mar 30, 2007, 10:19 AM
it still says quad-core
See image

wildmac
Mar 30, 2007, 10:19 AM
Theres only 3 letters of the alphabet anyone need remember when it comes to the release date of the new quad cores, and those letters are N, A and B.

NAB is when they will release the new pro systems, its as simple as that.

Nope four letters. WWDC. or MWSF

bearbo
Mar 30, 2007, 10:25 AM
See image

you aren't looking at the right place

zebra451
Mar 30, 2007, 10:32 AM
Quad core Mini!
AWESOME! I can't wait. Now that will be one screamin' machine!

Thor74
Mar 30, 2007, 10:32 AM
Well, this settled it. I became tired of the waiting/guessing game, and just purchased a used single 1.8 G5 for about $800 to get me by in my home office until the new Mac Pros finally (I want to say here sarcastically "If ever") comes out. My Dual 2.0 G5 is now at the office as the work machine. Sigh, soooo not a big deal, but we Mac nuts like to focus on these thigns I guess. The "get me by" purchase of the older G5 was definate buzz kill. :rolleyes:

Clive At Five
Mar 30, 2007, 10:32 AM
But why stop at 8 core systems? Why not have a special version of the Mac Pro with 4 processor slots on it for a total of 16 cores? I would think that would be a step in getting even more attention from the pro market...

Because the softawre can't effectively use 16 cores.

-Clive

liv4Mac
Mar 30, 2007, 10:34 AM
But why stop at 8 core systems? Why not have a special version of the Mac Pro with 4 processor slots on it for a total of 16 cores? I would think that would be a step in getting even more attention from the pro market...

My thoughts exactly, Why not four processor slots especially with their new cooling system ever since G5's

AidenShaw
Mar 30, 2007, 10:36 AM
Because the softawre can't effectively use 16 cores.

-Clive

How about 32 socket systems...128 cores!

IBM plans new top-end Xeon servers this year (http://news.com.com/IBM+plans+new+top-end+Xeon+servers+this+year/2100-1010_3-6171667.html)

AidenShaw
Mar 30, 2007, 10:40 AM
My thoughts exactly, Why not four processor slots especially with their new cooling system ever since G5's

You do realize that today only Netburst CPUs are available for 4 socket systems, right?

Do you think that the "new cooling system" could handle four 150-watt sockets? ;)

liv4Mac
Mar 30, 2007, 10:49 AM
Do you think that the "new cooling system" could handle four 150-watt sockets? No, but I'm certain that they can design a cooling system that is suitable for four sockets. Dont you think?

Shagrat
Mar 30, 2007, 10:51 AM
or a quad-head bat;)

...or half an octo headed bat...

Ok This post is getting silly. It started out quite well, but is just silly now....

(etc.etc.)

junkster
Mar 30, 2007, 10:56 AM
So, this is a bit of a tangent but -

Are programs really yet able to take advantage of the multicore processors?


A bigger issue for multi-core notebooks is "Can programs take advantage of multi-core processors without causing the fan to get very loud and dropping battery life by 50%."

My MacBook C2D runs cool and has great battery life, until I run something that gets both cores really going. Then the fan revs way up and battery charge estimates drop down into the 90 minute range. If I turn off one of the cores (a preference) then this doesn't happen.

Rot'nApple
Mar 30, 2007, 11:02 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

MacTechNews.de (http://www.mactechnews.de/) notes an interesting blurb on Apple's Creative Suite 3 promo page (http://store.apple.com/AppleStore/WebObjects/BizCustom?qprm=78313&family=MacAdobeCS3):

http://images.macrumors.com/article/2007/03/30/quad.png

In it, Apple claims:



At this time there are no Quad-Core Intel processors being used in any Macs, however, they may simply be referring to Quad-Core Mac Pros, which do contain two Dual-Core Intel Processors. Apple UK's store had previously had a more revealing slip up (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/03/12/8-core-mac-pro-hints-at-apple-uk/) with the claims of "8-core processing power" on Mac Pros -- which they quickly corrected.

Rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2006/10/25/8-core-mac-pro-with-clovertown-in-november/) of Apple's use of Quad-core processors began in November 2006, with expectations that an 8-Core Mac Pro was coming soon.

I think it is the latter part in MacRumors article... "however, they may simply be referring to Quad-Core Mac Pros, which do contain two Dual-Core Intel Processors." that is correct.

Apple confuses their self, the following link, http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wa/RSLID?mco=2CB5E8C0&nclm=MacPro, comes under the header "Quad Core: Up to 3.0Ghz" and then in the heart of the page next to the Intel Xeon processor image Apple states "Dual-Core Intel Xeon up to 3Ghz - Every Mac Pro offers the incerdible power of two 64-bit Dual-Core... ...choose the processor speed - 2Ghz, 2.66Ghz, or 3Ghz"

of course 2 64-bit Dual-Core or 2 x 2 = 4 or Quad Core...

at least that's how I'm seeing it... it's just Apple "speak" making things confusing.

But don't get me wrong... an actual dual Quad Core Power Mac announcement soon for a total of 8 core Mac is not a bad thing!!!:D

Clive At Five
Mar 30, 2007, 11:10 AM
How about 32 socket systems...128 cores!

IBM plans new top-end Xeon servers this year (http://news.com.com/IBM+plans+new+top-end+Xeon+servers+this+year/2100-1010_3-6171667.html)

Good grief. Like I said, though... "Because the softawre can't effectively use [128] cores."

Servers waste cycles left and right. You'd only need half the cores of big servers if the software knew what to do with it all... So much wasted energy. Not that I'm an environmentalist or anything, but there's nothing wrong with saving energy where we can.

-Clive

macjackpro
Mar 30, 2007, 11:11 AM
The two apps I know of and work with can take advantage or four cores: Logic and Stata. Stata can be ordered for one, two, or four core systems. I don't know about other apps.




So, this is a bit of a tangent but -

Are programs really yet able to take advantage of the multicore processors?

I thought I'd read somewhere that few programs were able to (truely) utilize the power yet in the multi procssor/core processing. That most computers would just shuffle/seperate processes to seperate cores (allocate each to its own core) as opposed to one program fully using all core/processors. (ok, That's a bit of an exaggerated and oversiplified statement, but hopefully you get where I'm going)

Being able to run on and fully utilize, are two seperate concepts.

Maybe this CS3 is the one of the first, but does anyone know?

As for the original topic here, sounds like it's a mistype by some noob in marketing. Though *of course* we'll soon see a quad processor soon.

Clive At Five
Mar 30, 2007, 11:19 AM
By the way, the reason I believe this slip-up to be of the "leak" nature is because it mentions dual and quad cores... tha Apple Store only sells dual-dual-core Mac Pro models. Thus every system is a quad-core comprised of dual-ccore proessors... There is no choice... yet.

I'm sure someone has to have said this already... right?

-Clive

diamond3
Mar 30, 2007, 11:19 AM
Could this possibly mean that the imac could have a bto 4 core processor. It says "Every new mac features powerful dual-core or quad-core processors. Just a thought. I've seen bigger stretches in this forum before, but maybe thats how they plan on filling the gap between the iMac and Mac Pro???

k2k koos
Mar 30, 2007, 11:23 AM
I think it is a bit of a typo myself...
PROCESSORS should have read PROCESSING.....

Then they would have been accurate.. that said, the ammount of cores WILL increase, and probably before spring is over :-):apple:

psychofreak
Mar 30, 2007, 11:29 AM
Servers waste cycles left and right..... So much wasted energy. Not that I'm an environmentalist or anything, but there's nothing wrong with saving energy where we can.

Or folding with it...

Clive At Five
Mar 30, 2007, 11:31 AM
Could this possibly mean that the imac could have a bto 4 core processor. It says "Every new mac features powerful dual-core or quad-core processors. Just a thought. I've seen bigger stretches in this forum before, but maybe thats how they plan on filling the gap between the iMac and Mac Pro???

The iMac would require:

1) a Xeon compatable Mo-Board/chipset for the iMac -or- Quad-core chips that are socket-compatable with current systems (niether of which exist, BTW).
2) significant cooling enhancements to prevent the CPU from melting a hole in the back of the case. "Melted SATA cables... Yay!
3) A stubborn Apple, refusing, once again, to give consumers what they want: a mid-range prosumer tower.

So far, only criterion #3 has been met.

-Clive

SeanMcg
Mar 30, 2007, 11:35 AM
you aren't looking at the right place

I see what you mean, although it is odd that they would use one term above and another down below. c'est la vie

longofest
Mar 30, 2007, 11:39 AM
Because the softawre can't effectively use 16 cores.

-Clive

Eh... yes and no. Scientific apps can definitely use 16 cores in a heartbeat. Same thing with rendering and encoding tasks. Other more mainstream apps though definitely are less likely to use more cores.

Also, Apple most likely hasn't tuned its scheduler to run on so many cores, so the OS itself probably has diminishing returns with increased core counts.

Multimedia
Mar 30, 2007, 11:45 AM
This is old news since Tuesday. Just another example of marketing deliberately leaking a hint of what's about to be. With the iPhone premiering June 11, That SteveNote is gonna be one hell of a jam packed set of new products in one two hour super SteveNote. :eek:

Maybe this portends we'll get most of the new line introduced in May. I sure hope this points toward Kentsfield iMacs or better still, a new Kentsfield consumer-tower line of just plain Macs. :eek:

Littleodie914
Mar 30, 2007, 11:47 AM
For the same reason you wouldn't refer to
four bats as a pair of two-headed bats :)

Cheers.Haha fair enough. That made my afternoon :)

patch
Mar 30, 2007, 11:57 AM
This just in! The sun will dissappear tonight!

But seriously, the UK store leak was more significant than this... This rumor is no more interesting to me than a sack of potatoes.

bearbo
Mar 30, 2007, 12:11 PM
I
of course 2 64-bit Dual-Core or 2 x 2 = 4 or Quad Core...


Quad Core does not equal to Quad-Core Processor

Mgkwho
Mar 30, 2007, 12:26 PM
Nope four letters. WWDC. or MWSF

WWDC has 3 different letters in it.

With the iPhone premiering June 11...

I don't think anyone believes that rumor. To me it doesn't make sense to start a contract in the middle of the month when existing ones are month to month. Plus, WWDC doesn't seem like an appropriate forum seeing as at present time most can't develop for the iPhone.

Quad Core does not equal to Quad-Core Processor

Apple's website disagrees with you: "Every new Mac features powerful dual-core or quad-core Intel processors..." see (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wa/RSLID?nclm=MacAdobeCS3)?

-=|Mgkwho

Kingsly
Mar 30, 2007, 12:31 PM
To quote an unknown German raidoman on the morning of D-Day:

"Sie Kommen"

fall3n
Mar 30, 2007, 12:35 PM
The way I see it they are refering to "Every Mac". So, every mac now comes with a C2D processor. The Mac Pro however can have two C2D processors making it a quad-core processor. The wording is just really confusing.

Basically...

MacBook, MacBook Pro, Mac Mini, iMac all come with a single C2D processor.

Mac Pro comes with dual C2D processors.

If it read like how some people are suggesting in this thread then every Mac would have dual processors or quad processors. It's a simple case of horrible writting.

eric67
Mar 30, 2007, 12:43 PM
This is old news since Tuesday. Just another example of marketing deliberately leaking a hint of what's about to be. With the iPhone premiering June 11, That SteveNote is gonna be one hell of a jam packed set of new products in one two hour super SteveNote. :eek:

Maybe this portends we'll get most of the new line introduced in May. I sure hope this points toward Kentsfield iMacs or better still, a new Kentsfield consumer-tower line of just plain Macs. :eek:

it is indeed an old news.
hardmac.com has published 2 article about hte Xeon Quad Core 5355, demonstrating how to install such CPU in current Mac Pro and what is the impact of doubling cores on performance level:
http://www.hardmac.com/articles/70/
http://www.hardmac.com/articles/72/

concerning an iMac powered by a Xeon, it is already possible thanks to Low Voltage / Low Power Xeon released recently by Intel. But there are at least 2 problems:
- need an entirely new motherboard (so a serious revision of current iMac hardware)
- not cost effective, as current iMac logic board use the same hardware basis than the MB Pro.

I also think that there is room for a Conroe powered mini tower, as the iMac will mostly for cost and design remains similar to the MB Pro hardware.

mooncaine
Mar 30, 2007, 12:46 PM
wonderfully put:D

I agree. And on the floor is right where it'd be.

bearbo
Mar 30, 2007, 12:48 PM
Apple's website disagrees with you: "Every new Mac features powerful dual-core or quad-core Intel processors..." see (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wa/RSLID?nclm=MacAdobeCS3)?
have you read this thread at all
those very words that you quoted from the apple website, are precisely what was this discussion over. we don't agree with apple's wording at the very least... so you cant use those wording to "prove me wrong":rolleyes:

if apple's website refer to the current quad core (dual dual-core processor) mac pro, they should change their wording to NOT say quad-core processor.

if apple's website refer to the upcoming quad-core processor (octo core) mac pro, bring it on.

The way I see it they are refering to "Every Mac". So, every mac now comes with a C2D processor. The Mac Pro however can have two C2D processors making it a quad-core processor. The wording is just really confusing.
but two Xeon (not C2D) processors don't make a quad-core processor.

50548
Mar 30, 2007, 12:48 PM
i don't give a whit about what average consumer give a whit about. the fact is apple misused the word "quad-core processor" and is not right. and the fact is apple mislead the consumer, average or not, intentionally or not


Sorry, but what you say is plain bogus. Typos happen all the time...that's why all companies put a disclaimer that they may happen, and that they do not constitute a legal offer as such.

Mgkwho
Mar 30, 2007, 12:53 PM
I give up. The way it is worded to me leaves no room for interpretation. "Quad core intel processor[s]" sure sounds like one thing to me. Yes, grammatically it can apply to all of their computers and not specifically the MacPro. And that assures us all that whoever wrote it mistyped.

But they word stuff like that all time time; it doesn't apply to some computers, and to some it does.

-=|Mgkwho

Bregalad
Mar 30, 2007, 12:56 PM
Marketing people don't understand - It's that simple. They're asked to write something with limited understanding of the technology. Picking apart words written by an ad person is less than useful.

At the same time Intel has had 4-core processors for some time now and Apple will undoubtedly use them eventually. I expect they're waiting for all the other pieces to come together: CS3, Leopard, lower power 4-core processors.

Now on the topic of whether a 6 month old computer is still worth the same amount it was on the day of introduction, my answer is a categorical "No" provided any of the suppliers of the components have introduced a better part. The mere existence of better parts causes a computer to depreciate. Every computer is subject to this rule, but not every manufacturer treats it the same way.

Most PC manufacturers change components within days or weeks of a new part becoming available and/or discount machines with the older parts in them. Apple sticks with the same old parts and the same old price for 4-8 months at a time. While this certainly makes Apple a more profitable company, it ignores the reality of depreciation. The only time I ever buy a Mac is when it's first introduced or when it's discontinued, provided the discount is big enough. A few years ago old stock was often a better deal, but recently it's gone to ridiculous extremes in the opposite direction. Apple, for some reason well beyond my comprehension, asks more for a refurbished G5 than they do for a newer Intel based version of the same model, a machine their own marketing claims is several times faster.

SeanMcg
Mar 30, 2007, 12:57 PM
it is indeed an old news.
hardmac.com has published 2 article about [the] Xeon Quad Core 5355, demonstrating how to install such CPU in current Mac Pro and what is the impact of doubling cores on performance level:
http://www.hardmac.com/articles/70/
http://www.hardmac.com/articles/72/
...

I'd be interested to see them (or anyone) try similar experiments comparing CS2 to CS3, or whatever comparison, to see if CS3 truly does make good use of 4 cores. They've shown that there's no need to wait until Apple releases such a system.

bearbo
Mar 30, 2007, 12:58 PM
Sorry, but what you say is plain bogus. Typos happen all the time...that's why all companies put a disclaimer that they may happen, and that they do not constitute a legal offer as such.

Bogus? :confused: a bit too fast to jump onto conclusion aren't you, have to launch attack to make yourself feel secure?

if you had one extra or one short 0 on the price (e.g. $4000 as $400), that's offer... but the case of fabricating a whole thing that you don't have is not typo. if it were typo, they would have corrected it by now.

i'm glad you apologized tho.

Multimedia
Mar 30, 2007, 01:02 PM
it is indeed an old news.
hardmac.com has published 2 article about hte Xeon Quad Core 5355, demonstrating how to install such CPU in current Mac Pro and what is the impact of doubling cores on performance level:
http://www.hardmac.com/articles/70/
http://www.hardmac.com/articles/72/

concerning an iMac powered by a Xeon, it is already possible thanks to Low Voltage / Low Power Xeon released recently by Intel. But there are at least 2 problems:
- need an entirely new motherboard (so a serious revision of current iMac hardware)
- not cost effective, as current iMac logic board use the same hardware basis than the MB Pro.

I also think that there is room for a Conroe powered mini tower, as the iMac will mostly for cost and design remains similar to the MB Pro hardware.I'm thinking a new iMac design for better cooling and a divorce from the MBP motherboard on to Kentsfield-Conroe for both iMac and a headless mini-tower. Why not give customers a choice of All-In-One or an affordable alternative to the Mac Pro in a smaller headless floor based dual monitor capable tower with one or two vancant PCIe slots?

Turkish
Mar 30, 2007, 01:10 PM
Why not give customers a choice of All-In-One or an affordable alternative to the Mac Pro in a smaller headless floor based dual monitor capable tower with one or two vancant PCIe slots?

Because most people do not want a tower or headless machine. They want all in one.

CalfCanuck
Mar 30, 2007, 01:10 PM
So much pointless discussion about whether this refers to the current Mac Pro - of course it doesn't!

In the second "panel" on the linked page (why don't people actually GO and look at what they are talking about) it shows the text:

"Every new Mac features powerful dual-core or quad-core Intel processors, the world's most advanced operating system, and more."

Then directly below, under the current Mac Pro, it lists:

"Recommended configuration: Two 3.0GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon".

They explictily use Quad-core and Dual-Core - this is merely a slip up confirming the obvious new systems that will be announced ASAP. Note this is on a brand-new page for the just announced CS3 that also is not currently shipping - this page will be up for the next few years.

The Intel Quad-cores are a fact of life - as noted many times above, the discussion since before the new year is merely WHEN we'll see them on the Mac Pro. ALL top-end future Intel Macs will be at least Quads (see the related Intel announcement on page 1).

Discussing who will be the next president after Bush or Prime Minister after Blair is NOT some sort of insider political leak that catches us by surprise! Everyone knows the changes are coming, just as everyone knows we'll have a MP with Quad-cores quite soon.

pedrodelafiesta
Mar 30, 2007, 01:10 PM
I ordered a new mac pro with apple 2 days ago and they said it wouldnt ship till april 12th, but that i would be happy when it did ship. When quized they gave no further info. Either new specs or new operating system. this is uk.
:)

theheadguy
Mar 30, 2007, 01:10 PM
It's called sloppy writing... There are 4 cores in every Mac Pro. Simple as that. Not everyone at Apple is a genius, they can phrase things incorrectly, also. :rolleyes:

Kwill
Mar 30, 2007, 01:12 PM
Drop four of them 3Ghz+ in a box I'll even be happy for a while past the 8-core Intel silicon released next year. ;)

Peace
Mar 30, 2007, 01:19 PM
It's obvious this is being misread

Look here :

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wa/RSLID?mco=2CB5E8C0&nclm=MacPro

It says "Quad-Core : Up to 3 Ghz"

The Dual-Core is in reference to the iMac,MBP and MacBook.

Don't even know why this discussion is even here..

We will see the "8-Core" sometime between next Tuesday and NAB.

AidenShaw
Mar 30, 2007, 01:30 PM
Because most people do not want a tower or headless machine. They want all in one.

Sales figures disagree with you - far more box+monitor systems are sold than all-in-ones.

Chris Bangle
Mar 30, 2007, 01:30 PM
I ordered a new mac pro with apple 2 days ago and they said it wouldnt ship till april 12th, but that i would be happy when it did ship. When quized they gave no further info. Either new specs or new operating system. this is uk.
:)



whoa. that sounds good to me. especially as the nab event is the 11th i think.

fall3n
Mar 30, 2007, 01:35 PM
have you read this thread at all
but two Xeon (not C2D) processors don't make a quad-core processor.

Of course it doesn't and that's exactly what I mean when I say the wording is really confusing and horribly written, because they refer to having 2 processors that are Dual Core Xeon as a "quad-core" system.

wtfk
Mar 30, 2007, 01:44 PM
At this time there are no Quad-Core Intel processors being used in any Macs, however, they may simply be referring to Quad-Core Mac Pros, which do contain two Dual-Core Intel Processors.

What's not specific about "quad-core Intel processors?"

Lycanthrope
Mar 30, 2007, 01:46 PM
I'm pretty certain that Apple employ some of the finest advertising people that money can buy and this is a very deliberate ploy to further wet our appetites and whip up a frenzy. Jobs knows very well that all us saddos are screaming for the new Pro and I guess that's just the way he likes to play it :)

I wouldn't be suprised if the "slip" on the UK site wasn't part of an orchestrated strategy. We are talking about Apple here folks not some provincial super-markey chain...

Turkish
Mar 30, 2007, 01:49 PM
Sales figures disagree with you - far more box+monitor systems are sold than all-in-ones.

That might just be because that is what is most available to most PC buyers from HP, Dell, Sony, etc. ;)

I'm talking on the Mac end. Most people I have switched to the Mac want to get away from towers and separate monitors.

Sales figures from Apple (iMac sales versus the rest of the line) confirm this.

digitalbiker
Mar 30, 2007, 02:17 PM
That might just be because that is what is most available to most PC buyers from HP, Dell, Sony, etc. ;)

I'm talking on the Mac end. Most people I have switched to the Mac want to get away from towers and separate monitors.

Sales figures from Apple (iMac sales versus the rest of the line) confirm this.


This argument just doesn't make sense. Apple has never had another option until the mini came out. The mini was a big success initially but has waivered lately because the technology is already old and overpriced. So how can you make a statement like "iMac sales versus the rest of the line".

If Apple made a Mac mini tower with a price point between the mini and the mac pro, it would sale like hotcakes.

I have been a mac user since 1985 and I can't tell you how many times I have heard people get outraged at having to by a completely new monitor everytime they want to upgrade a mac.

bearbo
Mar 30, 2007, 02:26 PM
It's obvious this is being misread

Look here :

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wa/RSLID?mco=2CB5E8C0&nclm=MacPro

It says "Quad-Core : Up to 3 Ghz"

The Dual-Core is in reference to the iMac,MBP and MacBook.

Don't even know why this discussion is even here..

We will see the "8-Core" sometime between next Tuesday and NAB.

that page you linked did not say "Quad-Core", it said "Quad Core"...

whenever there's "Quad-Core" or "Dual-Core" (notice the dash), it's used right before processor(s), as an adjective, to describe the processor(s), while "Quad Core" or "Dual Core" are used as noun.

again, if you've read the discussion here at all, you will notice people have already pointed out the difference between "Quad Core" and "Quad-Core processor".. just because a machine has 4 of those chips, doesn't make those 4 chip a Quad-Core processor.

i dont mean to be sarcastic, just to be clear.

suneohair
Mar 30, 2007, 02:31 PM
Whether or not this is a slipup... I don't know. Apple could use better wording however.

"quad-core intel processors" implies "a quad-core intel processor" is un use. Simple as that.

They should say "Every new Mac features powerful dual-core Intel processors in single or dual configurations, the world's most advanced operating system, and more."

Or: "Every new Mac features one or two powerful dual-core, the world's most advanced operating system, and more."

Not as elegant mind you, but saying "quad-core intel processor" is very misleading. These are "quad-core intel processors": http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010340343%201050706986%201050925864&name=Clovertown

There is also a Core 2 Quad.

Alpinism
Mar 30, 2007, 02:46 PM
about 2 more weeks & 2 days. Cant wait !!! cc on hand ready to buy ! :cool:

zac4mac
Mar 30, 2007, 02:54 PM
This URL is the same as the one at the beginning I think... says quad-core Intel processing, not processor(s)

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wa/RSLID?mco=134626B8&nclm=MacAdobeCS3

AidenShaw
Mar 30, 2007, 02:57 PM
...this is a very deliberate ploy to further wet our appetites and whip up a frenzy.

...but you "whet" an appetite ;)

2. to make keen or eager; stimulate: to whet the appetite; to whet the curiosity.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/whet

lazyrighteye
Mar 30, 2007, 03:02 PM
or a quad-head bat;)

8-legged system?

dernhelm
Mar 30, 2007, 03:12 PM
8-legged system?

SpiderMac.

I like it.

Peace
Mar 30, 2007, 03:23 PM
that page you linked did not say "Quad-Core", it said "Quad Core"...

whenever there's "Quad-Core" or "Dual-Core" (notice the dash), it's used right before processor(s), as an adjective, to describe the processor(s), while "Quad Core" or "Dual Core" are used as noun.

again, if you've read the discussion here at all, you will notice people have already pointed out the difference between "Quad Core" and "Quad-Core processor".. just because a machine has 4 of those chips, doesn't make those 4 chip a Quad-Core processor.

i dont mean to be sarcastic, just to be clear.

Trust me..After Apple found the "accident" on the Apple UK site that said "8-Core" and took it down Apple would have done the same in this case.

bankshot
Mar 30, 2007, 03:24 PM
Nothing to see here, move along. Remember, this was written by a marketing person who neither knows, nor cares about the difference between "2 dual-core" and "quad-core". It's all the same to them: 4 cores.

Of course, if the blurb had been written by a technical person, it'd probably read something like this:

Every new Mac features dual-core Intel processors ranging from a single 1.66 GHz Yonah T1300 with 2 MB shared L2 cache for a total of 2 CPU cores, to two 3.0 GHz Xeon 5160 processors with 4 MB shared cache per dual-core CPU for a total of 4 CPU cores; Mac OS X 10.4.9 build 8P2137 featuring Darwin 8.9.0 at its core; and more.

:D

AidenShaw
Mar 30, 2007, 03:26 PM
Every new Mac features dual-core Intel processors ranging from a single 1.66 GHz Yonah T1300 with 2 MB shared L2 cache for a total of 2 CPU cores, to two 3.0 GHz Xeon 5160 processors with 4 MB shared care per dual-core CPU for a total of 4 CPU cores; Mac OS X 10.4.9 build 8P2137 featuring Darwin 8.9.0 at its core; and more.

But what speed is the front side bus ????


EXCELLENT !!

simie
Mar 30, 2007, 03:44 PM
It's referring to 2 dual core CPU's, Xserve is classed as Quad-Core. Apple also class the Mac Pro as Quad-Core.

Workstation or Mobile?
The modern microprocessor has evolved to become much better equipped to handle graphics and multimedia applications. The Dual-Core Intel Xeon processors in the quad-core Mac Pro systems or the Intel Core 2 Duo in the MacBook Pro delivers all the horsepower you need to speed through your most demanding video, motion graphics, and audio projects. It takes the right mix of technology to fulfill the specific needs of any creative workflow, but whether that’s a mobile setup or a desktop configuration, your creativity is no longer confined to one or the other.

Taken from http://www.apple.com/pro/techniques/beyondprint/index2.html

Quad-core 64-bit Xeon processing up to 3.0GHz. Delivering up to five times the performance of Xserve G5,3 the new Xserve comes with two power-efficient Dual-Core Intel Xeon 5100 processors, each with a dedicated frontside bus running at 1.33GHz.

Taken from

http://images.apple.com/xserve/pdf/Xserve_DataSheet12202006.pdf

arn
Mar 30, 2007, 04:19 PM
Apple changed the text:

Every new Mac features powerful dual-core or quad-core Intel processing

Redneck1089
Mar 30, 2007, 05:21 PM
Apple changed the text:

That's the same as it was before, isn't it?

Mgkwho
Mar 30, 2007, 05:55 PM
wooo lets close the thread now.

-=|Mgkwho

EagerDragon
Mar 30, 2007, 06:07 PM
The quad chips been out a while and now we have 2, not one slip. If it was not a slip, and instead it was was creative PR, why they changed the wording?

I could be wrong, but I go with a dual processor 4 cores each (for a total of 8 cores) within the month. You can disagree, but the truth will be known in due time.

Umbongo
Mar 30, 2007, 06:37 PM
That's the same as it was before, isn't it?

No. Before it said processors, and as those who aren't trying to link every single thing apple writes with product releases or super secret hidden messages it was obviously just a typo or misunderstanding from someone in marketing, or the person who typed it up for the system.

Also for those saying the current Mac Pro isn't worth it, none of the major components have dropped drastically in price since release and it is still very much worth it if you disregard the fact 8 core Mac pros are very likely to be available soon.

Infrared
Mar 30, 2007, 07:13 PM
It's referring to 2 dual core CPU's, Xserve is classed as Quad-Core. Apple also class the Mac Pro as Quad-Core.

Workstation or Mobile?
The modern microprocessor has evolved to become much better equipped to handle graphics and multimedia applications. The Dual-Core Intel Xeon processors in the quad-core Mac Pro systems or the Intel Core 2 Duo in the MacBook Pro delivers all the horsepower you need to speed through your most demanding video, motion graphics, and audio projects. It takes the right mix of technology to fulfill the specific needs of any creative workflow, but whether thatís a mobile setup or a desktop configuration, your creativity is no longer confined to one or the other.

Taken from http://www.apple.com/pro/techniques/beyondprint/index2.html

Quad-core 64-bit Xeon processing up to 3.0GHz. Delivering up to five times the performance of Xserve G5,3 the new Xserve comes with two power-efficient Dual-Core Intel Xeon 5100 processors, each with a dedicated frontside bus running at 1.33GHz.

Taken from

http://images.apple.com/xserve/pdf/Xserve_DataSheet12202006.pdf

And then we have this:

"The fifth-generation Xserve is designed with the quad-core
64-bit Intel Xeon processor"

http://www.apple.com/education/erate/

Cheers.

k2k koos
Mar 30, 2007, 09:14 PM
I think it is a bit of a typo myself...
PROCESSORS should have read PROCESSING.....

Then they would have been accurate.. that said, the ammount of cores WILL increase, and probably before spring is over :-):apple:

DARN I AM GOOD!!!! :-)

dante@sisna.com
Mar 31, 2007, 01:40 AM
Nothing to see here, move along. Remember, this was written by a marketing person who neither knows, nor cares about the difference between "2 dual-core" and "quad-core". It's all the same to them: 4 cores.
:D

That is probably not true -- any marketing person at Adobe or Apple would care very much and would absolutely know the difference. I have worked at this level of enterprise marketing.

Folks in Marketing at this level are VERY skilled, technically knowledgable, and very focused on their work.

Just an FYI to dispell an untrue myth.

Seriously.

DeVizardofOZ
Mar 31, 2007, 08:19 AM
with Quadcore processors... probably not:rolleyes: . Qcores are using too much juice.

Umbongo
Mar 31, 2007, 10:01 AM
That is probably not true -- any marketing person at Adobe or Apple would care very much and would absolutely know the difference. I have worked at this level of enterprise marketing.

Folks in Marketing at this level are VERY skilled, technically knowledgable, and very focused on their work.

Just an FYI to dispell an untrue myth.

Seriously.

But they are still human and mistakes happen. I doubt this went through many levels of proofing.

brianus
Mar 31, 2007, 10:21 AM
Dude, bearbo.. are you autistic or something? I don't know how else to explain your extreme literalism. Everyone gets that there is a difference between quad-core processors and quad cores in a system, and everyone gets that Apple presently offers the latter but not the former. What you don't get is that that's irrelevant in the eyes of advertising people and the general public, and that the CS3 ad was obviously not written with highly technically literate types like yourself in mind. Have you no concept of writing for an audience?

I mean seriously, how do you survive in life taking every single letter of a piece of advertisement as though it were supposed to be literal fact, all well thought out and intentional?

brianus
Mar 31, 2007, 10:25 AM
That is probably not true -- any marketing person at Adobe or Apple would care very much and would absolutely know the difference. I have worked at this level of enterprise marketing.

Folks in Marketing at this level are VERY skilled, technically knowledgable, and very focused on their work.

Just an FYI to dispell an untrue myth.

Seriously.

Here's a question -- what's the significance of the difference between a quad core processor and dual dual-cores, to the average CS3 user? Particularly if Apple is providing a general description of their product line, rather than a machine-by-machine breakdown? The significance is nil. Just because they are aware of technical differences doesn't mean they feel every single one is important enough to point out (see Bankshot's post for what these blurbs would look like if they did)

Nitromaster
Mar 31, 2007, 10:31 AM
Fact:There will be quad core processors in macs,
It mightnt be any time soon and may not be for another 20 years,

CalfCanuck
Mar 31, 2007, 12:04 PM
Fact:There will be quad core processors in macs,
It mightnt be any time soon and may not be for another 20 years,

Here's the page from Intel about their CURRENT line of Quad-core processors for servers and workstations. The Mac Pro line falls into the workstation category, and the fastest processors for this line are CURRENTLY Quad-Core, in the Xeon and Core 2 Quad families.

http://www.intel.com/quad-core/index.htm?iid=serv_body+quadcore

The onlye reason we don't seen Quad-cores in systems shipping today is that the MP line is almost 8 months old and "past" it's sell by date. Note that the Macrumors Buyers Guide has the MP line as "Don't Buy - Updates Soon":

http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/

i3iz
Mar 31, 2007, 12:10 PM
I doubt this went through many levels of proofing.

Apparently you have never worked with copy writers or editors. I guarantee this had 100 revisions and this was either a rare mistake (a one in a million), a foreshadowing to create buzz, or a purposeful phrasing to dumb it down for the consumer.

Multimedia
Mar 31, 2007, 12:25 PM
Isn't it wonderful that Apple pays attention to MacRumors.com and fixes grammatical errors when we spot them? ;)

Processors
Processing

A core by any other name is still a core.

shawnce
Mar 31, 2007, 12:29 PM
Here's the page from Intel about their CURRENT line of Quad-core processors for servers and workstations. The Mac Pro line falls into the workstation category, and the fastest processors for this line are CURRENTLY Quad-Core, in the Xeon and Core 2 Quad families.

Actually the fastest (for one definition of fastest) Intel processor in the workstation space is the dual-core Xeon 5160.

bearbo
Apr 1, 2007, 02:10 PM
Dude, bearbo.. are you autistic or something? I don't know how else to explain your extreme literalism. Everyone gets that there is a difference between quad-core processors and quad cores in a system, and everyone gets that Apple presently offers the latter but not the former. What you don't get is that that's irrelevant in the eyes of advertising people and the general public, and that the CS3 ad was obviously not written with highly technically literate types like yourself in mind. Have you no concept of writing for an audience?

I mean seriously, how do you survive in life taking every single letter of a piece of advertisement as though it were supposed to be literal fact, all well thought out and intentional?
do you understand the concept of technical writing? apparently not. technical writing emphasis greatly on the accuracy of the content, regardless the targeted audience. targeted audience is significant in determine the presentation and amount of information.

for instance, it's good technical writing to say both "using two dual-core processor" and "using most advanced technology", with the former being target to more technical person, and the latter toward less technical person, while saying "using quad-core processor" would be incorrect, regardless which target audience is this to, because the information content is simply false.

plus, that page is supposed to be a technical description, if it's inaccurate technical description, then it has failed on so many more levels before the targeted audience is even considered.

just because someone doesn't care, doesn't give you the right to false advertise.

kirkbross
Apr 1, 2007, 02:20 PM
Has anyone considered that The Menagerie was actually the pilot and later split into two episodes?

...live in a world of 72 original Star Treks? I don't think so! I don't want to live in that world...

50548
Apr 1, 2007, 03:29 PM
Bogus? :confused: a bit too fast to jump onto conclusion aren't you, have to launch attack to make yourself feel secure?

if you had one extra or one short 0 on the price (e.g. $4000 as $400), that's offer... but the case of fabricating a whole thing that you don't have is not typo. if it were typo, they would have corrected it by now.

i'm glad you apologized tho.

I said your statement was BOGUS. I didn't attack anyone, so chill out.

As for typos, this is not OFFER, this is INVITATION TO TREAT in most jurisdictions. And yes, it WAS corrected.

bkpr
Apr 2, 2007, 08:20 PM
I ordered a Mac Pro in the first week of February. Still hasn't arrived. Is this normal? I got a few BTO options: 160GB HDD, Bluetooth + WiFi, ATI X1900.

I'm hoping they are holding off because a new model is just around the corner...

Multimedia
Apr 2, 2007, 08:25 PM
I ordered a Mac Pro in the first week of February. Still hasn't arrived. Is this normal? I got a few BTO options: 160GB HDD, Bluetooth + WiFi, ATI X1900.

I'm hoping they are holding off because a new model is just around the corner...If you're hoping that, why didn't you wait to order the update model instead?

rloechner
Apr 2, 2007, 09:07 PM
I ordered a Mac Pro in the first week of February. Still hasn't arrived. Is this normal? I got a few BTO options: 160GB HDD, Bluetooth + WiFi, ATI X1900.

I'm hoping they are holding off because a new model is just around the corner...


personally, i would have called at the end of February week 2 :)

bkpr
Apr 3, 2007, 04:12 AM
If you're hoping that, why didn't you wait to order the update model instead?

Because my old G4 is hangin' on by a thread, and a current Mac Pro would do me just fine. Also, I was waiting for the Macworld just passed for an announcement.

Now that I've waited over 6 weeks, (and my G4's still going), I'd rather wait for a new one if it's just around the corner. Otherwise, I'd still be happy with a current model, as long as a newer machine is not annouced two weeks later.

Also, I've called several times -- am ordering at cost price through a friend reseller here in Oz -- he's reply is "I'll only know how far away it is when the courier arrives with it". What can a wigga do?

Mac.Jnr
Dec 16, 2007, 11:38 PM
because im geting a imac this christmas i was gonna buy the 24 inch 2.4 version but they i want the quad core because it better and faster ? early march??

Eidorian
Dec 16, 2007, 11:39 PM
because im geting a imac this christmas i was gonna buy the 24 inch 2.4 version but they i want the quad core because it better and faster ? early march??I wouldn't expect to see a quad core iMac until later in 2008.

Mr. Mustard
Dec 17, 2007, 12:48 AM
won't it take a tidal wave to keep the quad-core cool in a laptop?

iW00t
Dec 17, 2007, 01:33 AM
because im geting a imac this christmas i was gonna buy the 24 inch 2.4 version but they i want the quad core because it better and faster ? early march??

An iMac more powerful than the current POS overpriced Mac Pros.

iLike!

FF_productions
Dec 17, 2007, 01:33 AM
won't it take a tidal wave to keep the quad-core cool in a laptop?

Well I never thought they'd have 2 processors in a laptop and now its the standard.

Technology changes, Quad Core processors will soon come out and they won't run hot, hell they may run cooler than the current processors.

Steven Ballmer
Dec 17, 2007, 08:43 AM
Where do I start?
Hardware?!!
They should really leave hardware alone, we do, and we do quite well!

diamond.g
Dec 17, 2007, 08:53 AM
Well I never thought they'd have 2 processors in a laptop and now its the standard.

Technology changes, Quad Core processors will soon come out and they won't run hot, hell they may run cooler than the current processors.

2nd half of 2008. Quad Core Penryn's are slated to need 45W of power. Nehalem doesn't look to be any better (in first revision) needing 45/55W for the quad core version. So while they will be relativley cool they will bust the current 25/35W TDP Apple is currently enjoying.