PDA

View Full Version : Apple Buying Up High End Penryn Processors?




MacRumors
Oct 5, 2007, 04:19 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

The Inquirer reports (http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/10/05/intel-extreme-penryn-shortage) on rumors circulating around Tokyo about Apple's interest in high end Penryn processors for their upcoming Mac Pros.

According to the rumors, Apple has "pre-booked" all the top (3.2GHz) Penryn bins for this year, leaving only "minimum quantities" for other big vendors. The 3.2GHz Penryn Xeon ("Harpertown") processors offer a faster 1600MHz bus and 12MB of L2 cache. The quad-core processors could provide Apple with an upgrade path for their current Mac Pro line which has not seen major upgrades (http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Mac_Pro) since August of 2006. Apple did introduce the 8-core Mac Pro (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/04/04/apple-releases-8-core-mac-pro/) in April of 2007, but left the existing models untouched.

By incorporating these new processors, Apple could increase the top speed Mac Pro to 3.2GHz with a 1600MHz front side bus (up from 1333 MHz). This would not be the first time Apple would have "exclusive" use of an otherwise unreleased Intel processor. The introduction of the 8-core Mac Pro used (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/04/06/apple-using-exclusive-3ghz-xeon-from-intel/) a 3.0GHz Xeon chip that was otherwise unannounced at that time. Similarly, the Penryn Xeon processors were not expected to reach 3.2GHz based on early reports (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/30/mac-pros-may-see-bus-speed-increase-with-penryn/).

The new Intel Penryn Xeon processors are due in November 2007 (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/15/intels-penryn-xeon-processors-due-in-november/).

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/05/apple-buying-up-high-end-penryn-processors/)



stoid
Oct 5, 2007, 04:21 PM
Yay for Mac Pro updates! It's about time.

crossifixio
Oct 5, 2007, 04:22 PM
That would be good news :D :apple:

badcrumble
Oct 5, 2007, 04:22 PM
Great. Now include a top-of-the-line video card as BTO.

flopticalcube
Oct 5, 2007, 04:24 PM
Apple is at the head of the queue again! Way to go :apple:!

phil83
Oct 5, 2007, 04:26 PM
Great. Now include a top-of-the-line video card as BTO.

I would like to seconded that!

Rocketman
Oct 5, 2007, 04:27 PM
Since the new Apple Mac Pro paradigm is a single primary base CPU, why not go for the best out of the gate, due to bulk ordering and pre-ordering, resulting in flatter price vs. time. Gives Apple a one year price time frame vs. a 6 month one.

The real benefit is the average cost is their true cost, so everybody else will have to pay premium cost for 6 months or so before everybody else's cost drops to Apples cost later.

They also buy bragging rights.

Rocketman

diamond.g
Oct 5, 2007, 04:30 PM
Which chipset does the MacPro use? I am having the darnedest time finding a worstation chipset or server chipset that does 1.6Ghz FSB.

nitrokev
Oct 5, 2007, 04:34 PM
Hope its early Nov as soon after Leopard as possible :)

bilbo--baggins
Oct 5, 2007, 04:34 PM
I wonder if Apple didn't bother updating the mac pro in the last year (stuff like the GPU could have been updated, even if there weren't any better processors available) because they anticipated high demand with the launch of major Universal Binary apps like CS3? Perhaps as sales level off, they'll feel more of a need to keep stimulating sales by keeping it a bit more up to date in future? Lets hope.

Adokimus
Oct 5, 2007, 04:36 PM
Great. Now include a top-of-the-line video card as BTO.

My first reaction as well. My preference is for the nvidia 8800 series.

-Ado

Rocketman
Oct 5, 2007, 04:37 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

The Inquirer reports (http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/10/05/intel-extreme-penryn-shortage) on rumors circulating around Tokyo about Apple's interest in high end Penryn processors for their upcoming Mac Pros.


Part of what that says is, "Of course, Apple could be paying a premium for this "privilege". It might also pass any such premium, multiplied by three or more, on to its unimaginably faithful flock of customers.

All is not lost. Bear in mind that, right after the 12 Nov launch of X5482, QX9650 and a few other extreme Penryns, we'll also have the "unlocked Harpertown " version for the Skulltrail dual-socket gaming monster, as well as other similar platforms that may come out from one or two Taiwanese vendors.

So, if you want your own - not Apple's iDiotised - dual socket desktop supercomputer, just grab a few of these. µ"

I am glad The Inquirer agrees we are unimaginably faithful. :)
I am glad they whine about Apple hoarding the fastest processors. :)
I am glad they are suggesting their readers focus on unimaginably short margin and fickle consumer customizable gaming systems. :)

Rocketman

Pass the Kool-Aid.

KindredMAC
Oct 5, 2007, 04:39 PM
sometimes I feel like us mac pro/power mac users have been left out in the cold when compared to the iMac group. This would be a nice update but I think 16 months between updates is way too long for a model like this. In the very least Apple should at least offer some video upgrades to the mac pro over the last year.

BornAgainMac
Oct 5, 2007, 04:41 PM
I am so glad Apple is bullying on the chip supplies. I foresaw all this to happen when they switched to Intel. They don't mess with the cheapo Celeron stuff.

pgwalsh
Oct 5, 2007, 04:48 PM
Will they be using this in the Mac Pro or Xserve or both? I'd imagine the Xserve first.

Multimedia
Oct 5, 2007, 04:50 PM
Back On The Front Burner For A Change is nice to see. :)Will they be using this in the Mac Pro or Xserve or both? I'd imagine the Xserve first.Mac Pro first for sure. Then Xserve later.

psychofreak
Oct 5, 2007, 04:51 PM
Will they be using this in the Mac Pro or Xserve or both? I'd imagine the Xserve first.

The Xserve is in dire need of an upgrade, possibly more than the MP...I guess their updates will be announced together, but the Xserve will be 'in stores starting next month'...

Eraserhead
Oct 5, 2007, 04:53 PM
Part of what that says is, "Of course, Apple could be paying a premium for this "privilege". It might also pass any such premium, multiplied by three or more, on to its unimaginably faithful flock of customers.

Well they are mainly going to professionals ;)

I suspect what Apple does is that they buy the chips from Intel for a fixed price throughout the generation, which allows them to start at a cheaper price, but gives Intel a guaranteed price for them.

~Shard~
Oct 5, 2007, 04:54 PM
Great news, as the Mac Pros are definitely overdue for a processor upgrade. Not that there has been anything to upgrade too, but still... ;)

And while they're at it, beef up the GPU options!

I wonder if Apple will stick with the FB-DIMM RAM architecture as well. I hear that technology's days are numbered... buy up some FB-DIMM modules now, they'll be worth a fortune in a few years! ;) :D

twitch
Oct 5, 2007, 05:02 PM
Chances are they'll release a new mac pro alongside leopard even if the penryns aren't ready in bulk yet.... and then just ship it a month down the road....

digitalbiker
Oct 5, 2007, 05:02 PM
Great news, as the Mac Pros are definitely overdue for a processor upgrade. Not that there has been anything to upgrade too, but still... ;)

And while they're at it, beef up the GPU options!
:D

I'll tell you I have had my Mac Pro 3.0 ghz Octo since May and it runs rings around the G5 quad. The processor performance has been more than enough in my case.

However, the GPU was old when I bought it. ATI X1900. I hope when they update the MacPro they also offer the new GPU cards for individual sale.

I don't think I am in violation of my NDA when I say the current 3.0 Ghz Octo screams under Leopard. Just simply unbelievable difference.

diamond.g
Oct 5, 2007, 05:05 PM
Great news, as the Mac Pros are definitely overdue for a processor upgrade. Not that there has been anything to upgrade too, but still... ;)

And while they're at it, beef up the GPU options!

I wonder if Apple will stick with the FB-DIMM RAM architecture as well. I hear that technology's days are numbered... buy up some FB-DIMM modules now, they'll be worth a fortune in a few years! ;) :D
Using Xeon Processors Apple has to. Until Intel switches them over to something else.

cube
Oct 5, 2007, 05:05 PM
And macrumors fails to highlight the most interesting tidbit of this article: that Apple would also be getting Yorkfields.

Bring on the minitower! No point spending so much money on a Mac Pro with obsolete CPU and RAM interface!

jrichman63
Oct 5, 2007, 05:07 PM
***** YEAH! now just bring me a great gfx card, come on baby.

monkeytap
Oct 5, 2007, 05:15 PM
these would support blu-ray right? right? :mad:

statikcat
Oct 5, 2007, 05:17 PM
If they are just now buying or talking of buying these processors I dont see how a new Mac Pro line could be ready this year. I think January (unfortunately) may be possible. How can they be ready by Octo or even Nov? If so close to January convention thing why not just wait to have a big showcase then? I think they will need time to assemble and test out any issues with this processor and Leopard.

cube
Oct 5, 2007, 05:19 PM
Please, no Blu-ray until they also have HD DVD.

~Shard~
Oct 5, 2007, 05:22 PM
I'll tell you I have had my Mac Pro 3.0 ghz Octo since May and it runs rings around the G5 quad. The processor performance has been more than enough in my case.

However, the GPU was old when I bought it. ATI X1900. I hope when they update the MacPro they also offer the new GPU cards for individual sale.

I don't think I am in violation of my NDA when I say the current 3.0 Ghz Octo screams under Leopard. Just simply unbelievable difference.

I have no doubts that's the case. Nonetheless, from a sheer time perspective, it has been over a year since we've seen a processor update so this will be a nice one. ;) And Mac Pro users definitely need some new GPU options.

Using Xeon Processors Apple has to. Until Intel switches them over to something else.

Interesting, I guess they will be using them for a little while yet then...

statikcat
Oct 5, 2007, 05:22 PM
Please, no Blu-ray until they also have HD DVD.

Apple is on the Blu-ray board. And with Microsoft being a huge HD DVD backer I would expect Apple's attention and support mostly towards Blu-ray.

~Shard~
Oct 5, 2007, 05:23 PM
Please, no Blu-ray until they also have HD DVD.

What about a Blu Ray / HD-DVD combo Superdrive? :p :D ;)

cube
Oct 5, 2007, 05:25 PM
Apple is on the Blu-ray board. And with Microsoft being a huge HD DVD backer I would expect Apple's attention and support mostly towards Blu-ray.

Apple supports both. Check the PR.

~Shard~
Oct 5, 2007, 05:25 PM
Apple is on the Blu-ray board. And with Microsoft being a huge HD DVD backer I would expect Apple's attention and support mostly towards Blu-ray.

Apple is fully backing both formats (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/apr/17hd.html) actually.

Apple is committed to both emerging high definition DVD standards—Blu-ray Disc and HD DVD. Apple is an active member of the DVD Forum which developed the HD DVD standard.

Umbongo
Oct 5, 2007, 05:25 PM
I wonder if Apple didn't bother updating the mac pro in the last year (stuff like the GPU could have been updated, even if there weren't any better processors available) because they anticipated high demand with the launch of major Universal Binary apps like CS3? Perhaps as sales level off, they'll feel more of a need to keep stimulating sales by keeping it a bit more up to date in future? Lets hope.

I would think GPU updates never came because there wasn't enough demand for them. Yes I know there are alot of users on here that want better GPUs, and certainly even more outside of the MR community, but I can easily imagine there were not enough to satisfy all parties involved (Apple, GPU manufacturer, video card manufacturer).

Maybe if Leopard had come earlier they would have invested in development earlier, or maybe they really just don't care one way or another and MP updates will always be driven by workstation platform or processor updates.

CWallace
Oct 5, 2007, 05:26 PM
The last Friday of October could be shaping up to be a major event if all the rumors come true:

Leopard.
New Mac Pros with better CPUs and (please) GPUs.
New AppleTV with larger HDDs and a DVD.
The "Mac Nano" replacing the Mac Mini in a smaller form factor.

cube
Oct 5, 2007, 05:27 PM
What about a Blu Ray / HD-DVD combo Superdrive? :p :D ;)

I am tired of these "Superdrives" which are nothing super.

The Blu-ray burners with HD DVD ROM support (and DVD-RAM) are only called Super Multi Blu drives.

So I guess something which also burned HD DVD would have to be called Super Multi Blu HD.

psychofreak
Oct 5, 2007, 05:28 PM
The last Friday of October could be shaping up to be a major event if all the rumors come true:

New AppleTV with larger HDDs and a DVD.
The "Mac Nano" replacing the Mac Mini in a smaller form factor.


Mac OS Rumors is not a real source of info, its more like a joke of crazy speculation...

~Shard~
Oct 5, 2007, 05:29 PM
The last Friday of October could be shaping up to be a major event if all the rumors come true:

Leopard.
New Mac Pros with better CPUs and (please) GPUs.
New AppleTV with larger HDDs and a DVD.
The "Mac Nano" replacing the Mac Mini in a smaller form factor.


These Penryn processors are not out until November, so I think Mac Pros at the end of October is unlikely, unless it is an announcement with a shipping date several weeks out. Of course, Apple could always have somehow got advanced copies of the chips and have had them up and running for months... :p ;)

As for a Mac nano, nah, give me a Yorkfield Mini-tower! :D :cool:

Umbongo
Oct 5, 2007, 05:29 PM
If they are just now buying or talking of buying these processors I dont see how a new Mac Pro line could be ready this year. I think January (unfortunately) may be possible. How can they be ready by Octo or even Nov? If so close to January convention thing why not just wait to have a big showcase then? I think they will need time to assemble and test out any issues with this processor and Leopard.

They will have been testing these for a long while both at Apple and Intel. Also it isn't a lengthy manufacturing process to get these ready, though no doubt there will be lengthy ship times on them.

~Shard~
Oct 5, 2007, 05:31 PM
I am tired of these "Superdrives" which are nothing super.

The Blu-ray burners with HD DVD ROM support (and DVD-RAM) are only called Super Multi Blu drives.

So I guess something which also burned HD DVD would have to be called Super Multi Blu HD.

Then it's settled - Apple will release a Super Multi Blu HD DVD RAM DL +- /?'~Superduperdrive! :D

cube
Oct 5, 2007, 05:36 PM
Then it's settled - Apple will release a Super Multi Blu HD DVD RAM DL +- /?'~Superduperdrive! :D

Super Multi drive already includes RAM, DL. +-

Apple should just use the regular name, unless they omit to add the "HD" when it also burns it.

Shouldn't be called Superduperdrive unless it also supported HD VMD and HVD.

HLdan
Oct 5, 2007, 05:37 PM
sometimes I feel like us mac pro/power mac users have been left out in the cold when compared to the iMac group. This would be a nice update but I think 16 months between updates is way too long for a model like this. In the very least Apple should at least offer some video upgrades to the mac pro over the last year.

What the heck are you talking about??? The Mac Pro is the grandpappy! 4-8 core Xeon processing, user switchable hard drives, user switchable graphics cards, option for up to 16GB of ram, 16X Superdrive, perfect gaming machine with no compromise. Most of that applies to the PowerMacs as well.

The iMac: way overdue for an update and when it came what did we get? Dual core processing on one CPU, 8X Superdrive, on-board mobility GPU, no way to upgrade hard drives, 4GB of ram max.

You were saying??:D

statikcat
Oct 5, 2007, 05:39 PM
Apple is fully backing both formats (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/apr/17hd.html) actually.

Yes, Apple will support both formats of course. They will not shut out one format. That would not be customer friendly. My point was Apple is on the Blu-ray board. They have money invested in Blu-ray technology. If you dont think this effects how Apple deals with Blu-ray over HD DVD in some reguard then you are probably wrong. :D

~Shard~
Oct 5, 2007, 05:39 PM
Shouldn't be called Superduperdrive unless it also supported HD VMD and HVD.

Don't forget PCD as well! :D :cool:

cube
Oct 5, 2007, 05:41 PM
Here's something hard: it's not superduper until it can finally read SACD.

FoxyKaye
Oct 5, 2007, 05:41 PM
The Xserve is in dire need of an upgrade, possibly more than the MP...I guess their updates will be announced together, but the Xserve will be 'in stores starting next month'...
You can say that again - we're waiting until the Penryns hit the XServes, since I absolutely refuse to pay this year's prices for last year's technology. I really hope they do concurrent releases with the press on the Mac Pro and the XServe being the "silent" update at the same time.

diamond.g
Oct 5, 2007, 05:41 PM
What the heck are you talking about??? The Mac Pro is the grandpappy! 4-8 core Xeon processing, user switchable hard drives, user switchable graphics cards, option for up to 16GB of ram, 16X Superdrive, perfect gaming machine with no compromise. Most of that applies to the PowerMacs as well.

Does OS X actually boot if you have a 8800GTX/GTS/Ultra plugged in? Cause if so then no one should be complaining about the GPU options offered. I also wondered why Apple mever replaced the X1900XT with the X1950XT. It ran cooler and was clocked higher(AFAIK).

~Shard~
Oct 5, 2007, 05:43 PM
Yes, Apple will support both formats of course. They will not shut out one format. My point was Apple is on the Blu-ray board. They have money invested in Blu-ray technology. If you dont think this effects how Apple deals with Blu-ray over HD DVD in some reguard then you are probably wrong. :D

I better understand your point now, didn't quite get it the first time. I'd agree with that.

overcast
Oct 5, 2007, 05:45 PM
Please, no Blu-ray until they also have HD DVD.
!!!

diamond.g
Oct 5, 2007, 05:47 PM
Yes, Apple will support both formats of course. They will not shut out one format. That would not be customer friendly. My point was Apple is on the Blu-ray board. They have money invested in Blu-ray technology. If you dont think this effects how Apple deals with Blu-ray over HD DVD in some reguard then you are probably wrong. :D

Ah, so that is why you can burn HD DVD in FCS and not Blu-Ray!! ;)

statikcat
Oct 5, 2007, 05:50 PM
Ah, so that is why you can burn HD DVD in FCS and not Blu-Ray!! ;)

I am sure there is a good reason.. I had read something about it awhile ago reguarding Blu-ray and Leopard and more Apple approve/friendly Blu-ray drives coming. I am not 100% sure though. Maybe someone has a more informed answer.

cube
Oct 5, 2007, 05:52 PM
Yes, Apple will support both formats of course. They will not shut out one format. That would not be customer friendly. My point was Apple is on the Blu-ray board. They have money invested in Blu-ray technology. If you dont think this effects how Apple deals with Blu-ray over HD DVD in some reguard then you are probably wrong. :D

What money invested? They wanted Apple on the board. Apple is also a member of the DVD Forum. Nothing says Apple has a preference.

statikcat
Oct 5, 2007, 05:57 PM
Apple is on the Blu-ray Board of Directors. Excuse me if I am wrong but does this not mean you have a good amount of stock investment? There is a difference between being active on DVD forums and investing money in BLu-ray. Apple may never show an advantage to one over the other .. but it is in their best interest for Blu-ray to prevail the format war because of this. Either way Apple wins to an extent because any HD format period = money for them in sales in various reguards.

cube
Oct 5, 2007, 05:59 PM
What stock? These are industry standards organizations, not companies.

statikcat
Oct 5, 2007, 06:05 PM
Well reguardless being active on forums and being on a Board of Directors is two completely different positions/things..

Anyway, back to topic :)

suneohair
Oct 5, 2007, 06:09 PM
I am ready.

CWallace
Oct 5, 2007, 06:11 PM
The Mac Pro is a pretty amazing system even as old as it is. I have the HP equivalent running Windows XP 64 at work and I certainly never lack for performance.

I do echo the desires/complaints of those who wish Apple had a "middle system" between the iMac and the MacPro. Something that could take two slimline optical drives and three or four 3.5" (or even 2.5") HDDs with either a Core 2 Duo or Core 2 Extreme (4-way).

The iMac is a nice general use system, but it's annoying to have a FireWire slimline optical drive to do CD/DVD copies and needing an external HDD/NAS for storage. Yet the cost of just the base Mac Pro is more then an iMac 24".

suneohair
Oct 5, 2007, 06:12 PM
These Penryn processors are not out until November, so I think Mac Pros at the end of October is unlikely, unless it is an announcement with a shipping date several weeks out. Of course, Apple could always have somehow got advanced copies of the chips and have had them up and running for months... :p ;)

As for a Mac nano, nah, give me a Yorkfield Mini-tower! :D :cool:

Not quite. OEMs get chips well before their street date. As Apple has done iwth other chips, and other OEMs do it too. Dell was shipping C2D machines before the CPU street date. You will see other manufacturers shipping Penryn machines before months end.

My point is that Apple is in no way bound my the street date of those CPUs. They will be able to get them out before if they are done with them.

bommai
Oct 5, 2007, 06:14 PM
Technology wise, Bluray is superior to HD-DVD.

Take raw storage. Bluray single layer is 25 GB, HD-DVD is 15GB. Double layer is common on both formats 30GB and 50GB. Bluray has scaled to 8 layer 200GB disks already (prototyped). There is a 3-layer 51GB HD-DVD and that's about it.

Now, let us look at transfer rate. Bluray (as in movies) has a peak transfer rate somewhere north of 50Mbit/sec. HD-DVD is limited to about 30Mbit/sec total. I own a PS3 and I can monitor the bitrate while playing movies. I have seen 40+ Mbit/sec for video (H.264) and 6+ Mbit/sec for audio. I have one Bluray disk that has 13.9Mbit/sec audio (5.1 channel 24-bit/96kHz PCM).

While both HD-DVD and Bluray support the same codecs (MPEG2, MPEG4-AVC aka H.264, and microsoft VC-1), the user interface and navigation is done in java (BD-J) in bluray and a microsoft technology called HDi in HD-DVD. Most HD-DVD movies use VC-1 also not AVC. Since Apple has a lot riding on AVC, I think it is in Apple's interest to pursue Bluray.

Microsoft has a lot more input into HD-DVD compared to bluray. I think they are doing this to spite Sony and to also not allow any disk technology to mature.

I would really like bluray to win!!

pgwalsh
Oct 5, 2007, 06:35 PM
Back On The Front Burner For A Change is nice to see. :)Mac Pro first for sure. Then Xserve later.

The Xserve is in dire need of an upgrade, possibly more than the MP...I guess their updates will be announced together, but the Xserve will be 'in stores starting next month'...

I'm think xserve first on this one, but we will see.

law guy
Oct 5, 2007, 06:39 PM
Glad to hear it. Apple's sales strategy is working. I'm going to upgrade from my dual G4 power mac soon. I might go to a well-equipped 24" iMac, but now that it has a shiny, super-windexed patio door of a screen cover, I'm solidly in the separate display camp. I may have been here anyway, but it does seem an option has been foreclosed because of that undesirable "feature".

I am looking forward to upgraded Mac Pros and Nov would be great. And displays too, Apple? Cinemas with built-in iSight and a price drop would be a wonderful early Christmas present.

Wild-Bill
Oct 5, 2007, 07:04 PM
I know a LOT of us have been waiting for an updated Mac Pro. Can I get an AMEN that we actually have a rumor about our future product for a change??

Now, if Apple can only manage to NOT screw up the video card options (which they could likely do...[iMac...])

Give us the 8800GTX Apple, for the love of all humanity!!!!!

DON'T SCREW THIS UP STEVE!

If Apple doesn't screw up the video card options, they've got my $money$. Plus a little more for Logic Studio and iWork 08. Probably Final Cut Express too. :apple:

mrkramer
Oct 5, 2007, 07:23 PM
I do echo the desires/complaints of those who wish Apple had a "middle system" between the iMac and the MacPro. Something that could take two slimline optical drives and three or four 3.5" (or even 2.5") HDDs with either a Core 2 Duo or Core 2 Extreme (4-way).


well the article did say something about Apple buying up Yorktown processors too. arn't those the desktop processors? If they are and that is correct about Apple buying them there is no where else for them to go than to a new mid range tower.

cohibadad
Oct 5, 2007, 07:27 PM
I agree. Updated Mac Pro with 8800 and it's a done deal for me.

babboxy
Oct 5, 2007, 07:31 PM
Thank You DELL for not shipping my "H2Owhatever" in time... thank you for letting me hang for a month before telling me that I'll have to wait another month...I go so far to say thank you for not giving me my money back for 2 months .... BECAUSE NOW THANKS TO YOU - DELL - I HAVE A CHANCE TO BUY THIS :D:D :D

ThunderLounge
Oct 5, 2007, 07:59 PM
Has anyone else considered this?

A year ago, the Clovers were coming out in November.

Last March, all of a sudden the Mac Pros saw a processor (in terms of speed) that hadn't been speculated.

This coming November, again comes a new processor model.

Could it take until March again before it ships?

Note that the only difference is we "know" about the purchase of the "next better than the release" ahead of time. Last time it wasn't speculated if I remember correctly.

Maybe, just maybe (and believe me I'm hoping) Apple is finally gaining the trust/respect/power with Intel to be fortunate on deals like this, and perhaps earlier than one would anticipate?

After all, the holiday shopping season is coming up.

twoodcc
Oct 5, 2007, 08:00 PM
Yay for Mac Pro updates! It's about time.

yeah it is about time. hope they release them around Leopard

!ˇ V ˇ!
Oct 5, 2007, 08:09 PM
Super Multi drive already includes RAM, DL. +-

Apple should just use the regular name, unless they omit to add the "HD" when it also burns it.

Shouldn't be called Superduperdrive unless it also supported HD VMD and HVD.

SuperDrive = DVD±DL R/RW/ROM | CD±r/RW/ROM

UltraDrive = Blu-Ray50 R/RW/ROM | HD-DVD25 R/RW/ROM | DVD±DL R/RW/ROM | CD±r/RW/ROM (might include a RAM option as required).

It's time for the UltraDrive.

MacFly123
Oct 5, 2007, 08:09 PM
Anyone think we will see a new case design this time??? :) or next??? :(

What are really the chances of Blue Ray or HD DVD really???

CWallace
Oct 5, 2007, 08:10 PM
Maybe, just maybe (and believe me I'm hoping) Apple is finally gaining the trust/respect/power with Intel to be fortunate on deals like this, and perhaps earlier than one would anticipate?

Could very well be.

When the new iMac offered a 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo Extreme (Mobile) option, many (myself included) believed this was the 2.6GHz part overclocked. Yet but a few weeks later (if that), Intel offered the 2.8GHz part to the world, so Apple had it first.

Dagless
Oct 5, 2007, 08:18 PM
Apple should just buy out Intel and be done with it.

Erasmus
Oct 5, 2007, 08:25 PM
Why are people hoping for the 8800GTX? Come on, we can do better than that...

If this thing is going to be released in December/January (MWSF probably) then we're looking at the NEXT generation of GPUs being out. How about the "ATI Radeon HD2950", which is apparently made on a 55 nm process, and according to The Inquirer, has better performance than the HD 2900, and uses a lot less power.

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/10/01/ati-rv670-beat-r600

Two of those, with dual quad core 3.2 GHz Xeons and 4-8 GB RAM would certainly be one fast, fast machine.

Put one or two in a smallish box with a 3.33GHz Yorkfield and 4 GB RAM, and you suddenly have a minitower perfect for gaming, or anything else.

EDIT:
Apple should just buy out Intel and be done with it.

Too true, too true. That would certainly be amusing... I think Windows would die very quickly.

Donnacha
Oct 5, 2007, 08:31 PM
The Mac Pro is a pretty amazing system even as old as it is. I have the HP equivalent running Windows XP 64 at work and I certainly never lack for performance.
Wow, with that kind of processing power at your disposal, you could probably manage to run Vista.

irishgrizzly
Oct 5, 2007, 08:33 PM
Why are people hoping for the 8800GTX? Come on, we can do better than that...

cos people are used to being let down with apples GPU offers :rolleyes:

CWallace
Oct 5, 2007, 08:38 PM
Wow, with that kind of processing power at your disposal, you could probably manage to run Vista.

Vista runs quite well on it. No doubt the 8GB helps. :p

cohibadad
Oct 5, 2007, 08:38 PM
cos people are used to being let down with apples GPU offers :rolleyes:

and unfortunately that is an understatement

aapl.jlo
Oct 5, 2007, 08:40 PM
How much faster can you get!!!?

One question:Will it be the same in the way of a Dual Processor or is it just so it doesn't need to be?

astroboi
Oct 5, 2007, 08:40 PM
Why are people hoping for the 8800GTX? Come on, we can do better than that...

How about the "ATI Radeon HD2950"

How about a Geforce 9800? The next generation is supposedly coming by the end of the year (http://www.beyond3d.com/content/news/230).

CWallace
Oct 5, 2007, 08:42 PM
Apple should just buy out Intel and be done with it.

Intel is worth about $10 billion more then Apple at the moment, so they'd need to sell a few more iPhones... :)

OMGWTFBBQ
Oct 5, 2007, 08:52 PM
Finally a rumor about the Mac Pro.... yeesh.

(I registered just to say that)

Wild-Bill
Oct 5, 2007, 08:55 PM
Why are people hoping for the 8800GTX? Come on, we can do better than that...
.. How about the "ATI Radeon HD2950"

Uhh.... No. The review I read said it offered no significant performance over the x2900. It's only positive trait was that it supposedly will use less power.

Regardless, the nVidia 8800GTX stomps the crap out of the x2900xt. And the 8800GTS 640 meg also beats it. But the 8800 GTX beats the 2900xt badly.

Object-X
Oct 5, 2007, 09:15 PM
We want them all! I love it. Sorry Dell. :apple:

macintel4me
Oct 5, 2007, 09:50 PM
finally the Mac Pro hits the radar screen

about friggin' time!!!!!!!!!

deputy_doofy
Oct 5, 2007, 09:57 PM
You know, my dp g5 2.3 is already more power than I need, but these new Mac Pros are sounding extremely tempting. Ok, I guess it's technolust. :p

applemacman
Oct 5, 2007, 10:20 PM
I guess I need to start thinking of things to sell to get a new macpro :) I'll miss my macbook pro :(

pimentoLoaf
Oct 5, 2007, 10:23 PM
To hell with me getting an iMac -- I'll take one of these MacPro screamers instead.

KindredMAC
Oct 5, 2007, 10:23 PM
From what I've been reading in articles and reviews, as well as hearing from forums across the web I don't think ATI cards are a good choice right now for Apple to offer in a powerhouse machine. People are having a lot of overheating issues and not seeing much quality increase over an NVIDIA card.

In the Mac Pro's next revision, I would love to see a GeForce 8600/8800 (256MB/320MB) be the standard, followed by a much cheaper Quadro FX 4500 (512MB) and lastly, but most importantly bring in the bug guns with a Quadro FX 5500 with 1GB on the card.

xpisnotforme
Oct 5, 2007, 10:47 PM
What if the main reason behind apple never/rarely offering semi-half-decent GPU's is because of image. What if Apple is actually trying to separate itself from being attached to gamers?

Now the handful of EA games released and outdated smash hits do not count: )

I'm not saying it's remotely true, but thinking from that perspective seems interesting sometimes to entertain.... Top end Imac (24" extreme) and mac pro have chokingly disparite GPU's and NO ability to upgrade at any cost. hmmmmm

overcast
Oct 5, 2007, 10:58 PM
Technology wise, Bluray is superior to HD-DVD.

Take raw storage. Bluray single layer is 25 GB, HD-DVD is 15GB. Double layer is common on both formats 30GB and 50GB. Bluray has scaled to 8 layer 200GB disks already (prototyped). There is a 3-layer 51GB HD-DVD and that's about it.

Now, let us look at transfer rate. Bluray (as in movies) has a peak transfer rate somewhere north of 50Mbit/sec. HD-DVD is limited to about 30Mbit/sec total. I own a PS3 and I can monitor the bitrate while playing movies. I have seen 40+ Mbit/sec for video (H.264) and 6+ Mbit/sec for audio. I have one Bluray disk that has 13.9Mbit/sec audio (5.1 channel 24-bit/96kHz PCM).

While both HD-DVD and Bluray support the same codecs (MPEG2, MPEG4-AVC aka H.264, and microsoft VC-1), the user interface and navigation is done in java (BD-J) in bluray and a microsoft technology called HDi in HD-DVD. Most HD-DVD movies use VC-1 also not AVC. Since Apple has a lot riding on AVC, I think it is in Apple's interest to pursue Bluray.

Microsoft has a lot more input into HD-DVD compared to bluray. I think they are doing this to spite Sony and to also not allow any disk technology to mature.

I would really like bluray to win!!
When comparing different codecs, bitrate has absolutely NOTHING to do with image quality. Considering Sony STILL insists on filling up 50GB with the ancient MPEG2 codec and uncompressed PCM audio. While HD DVD is using the highly efficient VC-1 codec and achieving equal to superior transfers. Beyond overall "theoretical" storage capacity Blu-Ray has no advantage over HD DVD. In fact, currently HD DVD beats Blu-Ray in capacity by 1GB. You show me those 200GB discs from Blu-Ray outside of some super secret laboratory. When they are actually on the market from consumers, then you can say they have the advantage. From the current crop of HD DVD titles, it's pretty clear that more capacity is NOT needed. Stop spreading your nonsense.

Erasmus
Oct 5, 2007, 10:58 PM
Uhh.... No. The review I read said it offered no significant performance over the x2900. It's only positive trait was that it supposedly will use less power.

Regardless, the nVidia 8800GTX stomps the crap out of the x2900xt. And the 8800GTS 640 meg also beats it. But the 8800 GTX beats the 2900xt badly.

Which review was that? A link would be nice.

I know it sucks to be using The Inquirer as a resource, but...

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/10/03/nvidia-admits-defeat-g92-vs

So, yeah, the 8800GTX or Ultra will totally cane the HD2950, but you could get two for less money than the fast nvidias, while staying within [i]sane[i] power requirements, and simultaneously completely blitzing the performance of a single 8800Ultra.

I think 2 HD2950's would be a good choice for Apple. Maybe AMD have found and fixed the problems with the R600 for the RV670?

overcast
Oct 5, 2007, 11:08 PM
Which review was that? A link would be nice.

I know it sucks to be using The Inquirer as a resource, but...

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/10/03/nvidia-admits-defeat-g92-vs

So, yeah, the 8800GTX or Ultra will totally cane the HD2950, but you could get two for less money than the fast nvidias, while staying within [i]sane[i] power requirements, and simultaneously completely blitzing the performance of a single 8800Ultra.

I think 2 HD2950's would be a good choice for Apple. Maybe AMD have found and fixed the problems with the R600 for the RV670?
First of all you are using The Inq as a source. Secondly, you are using results from that ridiculous "benchmark" tool. Take a look at ANY real world game benchmarks and you will see that the 8800GTX absolutely slaughters anything ATI has.

greenmeanie
Oct 5, 2007, 11:12 PM
Why not go for the 512 meg or higher version why live in the past?

QUOTE=KindredMAC;4288619]From what I've been reading in articles and reviews, as well as hearing from forums across the web I don't think ATI cards are a good choice right now for Apple to offer in a powerhouse machine. People are having a lot of overheating issues and not seeing much quality increase over an NVIDIA card.

In the Mac Pro's next revision, I would love to see a GeForce 8600/8800 (256MB/320MB) be the standard, followed by a much cheaper Quadro FX 4500 (512MB) and lastly, but most importantly bring in the bug guns with a Quadro FX 5500 with 1GB on the card.[/QUOTE]

ThunderLounge
Oct 5, 2007, 11:40 PM
In the Mac Pro's next revision, I would love to see a GeForce 8600/8800 (256MB/320MB) be the standard, followed by a much cheaper Quadro FX 4500 (512MB) and lastly, but most importantly bring in the bug guns with a Quadro FX 5500 with 1GB on the card.

A 5500 would be very nice, but they would probably charge more for it than the base price of the machine. :(

Just look at the 4500 upgrade available now.

I checked a couple sites and (excluding 1 card which was "on sale", and half the price of everyone else), a 5500 right now was over 2,000. They'll probably come down, but not at the Apple store.

Erasmus
Oct 5, 2007, 11:54 PM
First of all you are using The Inq as a source. Secondly, you are using results from that ridiculous "benchmark" tool. Take a look at ANY real world game benchmarks and you will see that the 8800GTX absolutely slaughters anything ATI has.

The RV670 has not been released yet...

Just because the R600 did not perform as well as it was supposed to does not mean that derivatives such as the RV670 will also be crap. And considering the ATI products are half the cost of the Nvidia ones, put two in Crossfire, and they will "slaughter" anything Nvidia has.

i, Podius
Oct 6, 2007, 12:17 AM
The last Friday of October could be shaping up to be a major event if all the rumors come true:

Leopard.
New Mac Pros with better CPUs and (please) GPUs.
New AppleTV with larger HDDs and a DVD.
The "Mac Nano" replacing the Mac Mini in a smaller form factor.


AppleTV with larger HDD and a DVD... that would be, uh, a Mac Mini?

"Mac Nano" Mac Mini in a smaller form factor... that would be, uh, an AppleTV?


What if the main reason behind apple never/rarely offering semi-half-decent GPU's is because of image. What if Apple is actually trying to separate itself from being attached to gamers?

Now the handful of EA games released and outdated smash hits do not count: )

I'm not saying it's remotely true, but thinking from that perspective seems interesting sometimes to entertain.... Top end Imac (24" extreme) and mac pro have chokingly disparite GPU's and NO ability to upgrade at any cost. hmmmmm


Whilst I tend to dismiss the "mid-tower" idea, here's a different perspective for you: Apple chose to put such a terrible video card in the new iMacs to ensure that gamers would avoid it, and thus still be potential customers when they unveil a new class of mid-tower Macs that are geared towards (or at least, appealing to) gamers. Complete speculation on my part, and frankly, I'll just be happy if the new Mac Pros come out before November 23 (my birthday)...

Umbongo
Oct 6, 2007, 12:32 AM
From what I've been reading in articles and reviews, as well as hearing from forums across the web I don't think ATI cards are a good choice right now for Apple to offer in a powerhouse machine. People are having a lot of overheating issues and not seeing much quality increase over an NVIDIA card.

In the Mac Pro's next revision, I would love to see a GeForce 8600/8800 (256MB/320MB) be the standard, followed by a much cheaper Quadro FX 4500 (512MB) and lastly, but most importantly bring in the bug guns with a Quadro FX 5500 with 1GB on the card.

THe 4500 and 5500 Quadro FX cards have been replaced with the 4600 and 5600 models offering 768mb and 1.5gb of memory. With the high cost of the FX 5600 (~$3000) it's unlikely Apple will offer it.

Wild-Bill
Oct 6, 2007, 12:46 AM
And considering the ATI products are half the cost of the Nvidia ones, put two in Crossfire, and they will "slaughter" anything Nvidia has.

I'd like to see where you saw that ATI cards cost 50% less than nVidia cards.....:confused:

Also, there is no "crossfire" nor any "SLI" in a Mac Pro. None.

ksz
Oct 6, 2007, 12:48 AM
When comparing different codecs, bitrate has absolutely NOTHING to do with image quality. Considering Sony STILL insists on filling up 50GB with the ancient MPEG2 codec and uncompressed PCM audio. While HD DVD is using the highly efficient VC-1 codec and achieving equal to superior transfers. Beyond overall "theoretical" storage capacity Blu-Ray has no advantage over HD DVD. In fact, currently HD DVD beats Blu-Ray in capacity by 1GB. You show me those 200GB discs from Blu-Ray outside of some super secret laboratory. When they are actually on the market from consumers, then you can say they have the advantage. From the current crop of HD DVD titles, it's pretty clear that more capacity is NOT needed. Stop spreading your nonsense.
I really hope we don't perpetuate the asinine Blu Ray vs HD-DVD debate here. Nevertheless, Hitachi made an interesting announcement today about a 4-layer 100GB Blu Ray disc that may be compatible with existing players through only a firmware change. The disc may come on the market soon, but don't ask me to define 'soon'.

http://www.dailytech.com/Hitachi+Develops+100GB+Bluray+Disc+Compatible+With+Existing+Drives/article9173.htm

hollywoodmacguy
Oct 6, 2007, 12:51 AM
now, if :apple: would just release new cinema displays to go with these new mac pros! :rolleyes:

viltsu
Oct 6, 2007, 02:15 AM
Man, I´m waiting for these new Mac Pros so much!! I hope they´ll release those around this year. I can´t wait any longer, otherwise, I´ll have to buy the 'old' model, which is also fast.

Mozutaka
Oct 6, 2007, 03:22 AM
now, if :apple: would just release new cinema displays to go with these new mac pros! :rolleyes:

If they don't I'm getting a Samsung. No way am I paying Apple's premium on more old stuff.

Similarly, if there's no 8800, no base RAM increase and no Blu-Ray option, I'll probably buy a missile instead and launch it at Jobs. :p

offwidafairies
Oct 6, 2007, 05:50 AM
Go Apple! Guess there's a lot of spare $ floating around

Erasmus
Oct 6, 2007, 05:57 AM
I'd like to see where you saw that ATI cards cost 50% less than nVidia cards.....:confused:

Also, there is no "crossfire" nor any "SLI" in a Mac Pro. None.

Mate, have you had a look at any of the articles I've linked to? I know the Inq is a crappy site, but they say that the RV670 will only be like 250 bucks. The 8800 Ultra is like 600 bucks, and apparently, the performance of the two different cards is very similar.

And why can there not be crossfire in a Mac Pro? If they are going to be redesigned for new processors, with higher FSB's, maybe PCI Express 2, etc, why is Crossfire impossible? Maybe it will be supported by Leopard?

Wolf Am I
Oct 6, 2007, 06:07 AM
can't wait to switch from XP to a Mac Pro once Leopard is out... I dearly hope the Mac Pro update is very close to the release of Leopard, my studies demand a laptop... and I can't take much more of Photoshop running so slow if another application is open.

I wouldn't consider it a loss not to have blu-ray or HD-DVD... (but Planet Earth would definitely look super nice) Isn't it only a benefit to those who have external cinema displays? I'd hardly say the market is not established enough for it to be worth the price jump (maybe $250 more for including it)... right now anyway

Erasmus
Oct 6, 2007, 06:15 AM
can't wait to switch from XP to a Mac Pro once Leopard is out... I dearly hope the Mac Pro update is very close to the release of Leopard, my studies demand a laptop... and I can't take much more of Photoshop running so slow if another application is open.

I wouldn't consider it a loss not to have blu-ray or HD-DVD... (but Planet Earth would definitely look super nice) Isn't it only a benefit to those who have external cinema displays? I'd hardly say the market is not established enough for it to be worth the price jump (maybe $250 more for including it)... right now anyway

This could be a stupid question, but you do realise that the Mac Pro is not a laptop right, and is not even close to portable at all? If your studies require a laptop, then you're looking for a MacBOOK Pro...

...Which is definitely NOT what this rumour is about.

Although an eight core MBP would certainly be nice, but won't happen for a few years yet.

KindredMAC
Oct 6, 2007, 07:27 AM
Although an eight core MBP would certainly be nice, but won't happen for a few years yet.

Yeah, would be nice if the heat goes out in the house this winter.....
GATHER AROUND THE 8CORE MACBOOK PRO CHILDREN TO STAY WARM!!!!!!!!!

Erasmus
Oct 6, 2007, 07:36 AM
Yeah, would be nice if the heat goes out in the house this winter.....
GATHER AROUND THE 8CORE MACBOOK PRO CHILDREN TO STAY WARM!!!!!!!!!

I would expect that in 2-3 years 8 core mobile CPUs will be available that use less power than today's Meroms. I would expect that soon after we will be looking at 80 core mobile CPUs with very, very low TDPs.

diamond.g
Oct 6, 2007, 07:55 AM
The RV670 has not been released yet...

Just because the R600 did not perform as well as it was supposed to does not mean that derivatives such as the RV670 will also be crap. And considering the ATI products are half the cost of the Nvidia ones, put two in Crossfire, and they will "slaughter" anything Nvidia has.

Mate, have you had a look at any of the articles I've linked to? I know the Inq is a crappy site, but they say that the RV670 will only be like 250 bucks. The 8800 Ultra is like 600 bucks, and apparently, the performance of the two different cards is very similar.

And why can there not be crossfire in a Mac Pro? If they are going to be redesigned for new processors, with higher FSB's, maybe PCI Express 2, etc, why is Crossfire impossible? Maybe it will be supported by Leopard?

Intel AFAIK has no workstation chipset that support Crossfire. The one workstation chipset they do have only supports SLI (Skulltrail) and that may not even make an Apple debut. AMD has to price their parts cheaper. They came out almost a year too late, and the performance sucked quite badly. From what I am seeing it wouldn't take much for Nvidia to beat AMD (in way of a price drop).

Genghis Khan
Oct 6, 2007, 08:11 AM
intel are all over AMD at this point...quite frankly their management have made awesome decisions regarding C2D architecture and GPU's

AMD are looking old hat atm and, as intels only competition, need to come up with something soon to keep in competition with them

diamond.g
Oct 6, 2007, 08:13 AM
intel are all over AMD at this point...quite frankly their management have made awesome decisions regarding C2D architecture and GPU's

How so?

Pressure
Oct 6, 2007, 10:01 AM
First of all you are using The Inq as a source. Secondly, you are using results from that ridiculous "benchmark" tool. Take a look at ANY real world game benchmarks and you will see that the 8800GTX absolutely slaughters anything ATI has.

Actually, in workstation applications that use shaders for rendering and computing the ATI offerings has a performance advantage.

Of course you may be thinking in the context of games, which is understandable, but I doubt the majority of people buy a Mac Pro for its gaming capabilities.

Wolf Am I
Oct 6, 2007, 11:42 AM
This could be a stupid question, but you do realise that the Mac Pro is not a laptop right, and is not even close to portable at all? If your studies require a laptop, then you're looking for a MacBOOK Pro...

...Which is definitely NOT what this rumour is about.

Although an eight core MBP would certainly be nice, but won't happen for a few years yet.

Yeh, that's what I meant. Macbook Pro. hmm... I'm an idiot. I hope they update the Macbook Pro though... Mac Pro's, as you have observed, are not portable.

SirOmega
Oct 6, 2007, 11:54 AM
The rumor is credible, even if the source is the Inq.

It makes sense because Apple got access to the QC 3Ghz chip before it was released, and it could happen again here (not necessarily before its released, but they could get a majority of the product when its relesaed).

I can also see Apple aggressively pushing out XCode updates that support SSE4 to dramatically increase performance of their creative applications. The demo Intel did with Divx encoding and cutting the time by 50% or whatever it was shows that SSE4 and Penryn can open a can of whoopass on encoding style functions.

What I'm more interested in is how cheap the slower penryns will be...

2.5GHz QC - $316
2.0GHz QC - $209

What I'd really like to see is the Mac Pro bottom end of the line get cheaper - for comparison the DC 2.0GHz current Xeon chip that goes into the slowest MacPro is currently priced at $316.

This itself has a few implications. First is that it looks like Apple may drop dual core chips entirely and have all boxes be quad cores. Because you can get a quad-core chip for $209 at minimum, there is no reason to use dual core.

The other possibility with this decision is that we might see Apple ship a Mac Pro with only one socket populated and (hopefully) lower the price. Its fesiable that Apple could ship a $1899 Mac Pro with a single QC chip at 2.33Ghz. Will Apple? I dunno, I'd like it, and those who want a mini-tower Mac could start to bite at this (though consider that the expensive FB-DIMMs the MPs use are going to be obsolete a year from now when Nahelem is released with an integrated DDR3 memory controller).

The other possibility is that instead of lowering prices slightly, Apple moves up the slowest chip speed to 2.5Ghz, and offers 2.5, 2.83 and 3.2Ghz (all quad core) options. They'd keep their current price points and just have faster speeds. Sadly, I think this is the route they go. All MacPros become 8-core, with the cheapest going for $2200. I will say than an 8-core, 2.5Ghz box would be one hell of a deal. Even if I had to throw another $500 on it to get to 4GB of RAM.

BenRoethig
Oct 6, 2007, 04:14 PM
Which chipset does the MacPro use? I am having the darnedest time finding a worstation chipset or server chipset that does 1.6Ghz FSB.

The current Mac Pro uses the Intel 5000x chipset. The penryn xeons will come with a new chipset codenamed seaburg. Seaburg will have many of the same features as the x38 desktop chipset including dual GPU support.

Erasmus
Oct 6, 2007, 07:30 PM
All I know is I want one.

Although I might have to wait until I leave Uni. I'm not sure I could justify buying one now, especially not when I've just gone and bought a MBP a few months ago.

Oh well, I'm sure by the end of 2010 MP's will be ~4 times faster than they are now. Quad Larrabees with both CPU and GPU compatible cores on them? Yum yum!

TurboSC
Oct 6, 2007, 09:01 PM
if apple releases a major iPhone update, Leopard, announce new slim macbookpros and gobble up and offer these processors, they will rule the world.

Nugget
Oct 6, 2007, 10:17 PM
if apple releases a major iPhone update, Leopard, announce new slim macbookpros and gobble up and offer these processors, they will rule the world.

Maybe not the whole world, but they'll certainly be putting the hurt on my wallet. :)

diamond.g
Oct 6, 2007, 10:35 PM
The current Mac Pro uses the Intel 5000x chipset. The penryn xeons will come with a new chipset codenamed seaburg. Seaburg will have many of the same features as the x38 desktop chipset including dual GPU support.

SLI/Crossfire? Or just plain dual GPU?

Rocketman
Oct 6, 2007, 11:06 PM
Apple is at it's core a "bleeding edge" technology company. That is why the advanced OS's eschew so much "recently new" technology.

By "risking an order" for Intel chips beyond the common to the high end, they could have been screwed, much like with Motorola. But Intel seems to be focused on improving yields generally. :)

Apple likes Intel because they deliver what they promise and do so in quantity. They have a reasonably fast progression of speed, but more importantly are wiling to target features of import to Apple. Power and Temperature, and cores/multi-tasking.

Rocketman

Billion$ in the bank = Flash and CPU chips galore!

MagnusVonMagnum
Oct 6, 2007, 11:52 PM
What if the main reason behind apple never/rarely offering semi-half-decent GPU's is because of image. What if Apple is actually trying to separate itself from being attached to gamers?


Wouldn't they have to first be attached to gamers to need to be separated from them? Apple has a reputation of NOT supporting games. They couldn't be any more separated if they tried, IMO.

Given they now have a Windows boot option, not to mention Parallels and Fusion with increasing gaming support with every new update, I think they should really start offering some reasonable GPU options to try and bring in more switchers. Apple sells hardware, not just software. Why not get more gamers from the Windows platform interested in Apple hardware while they're at it? More to the point, what's wrong with gaming? Windows is known for gaming. Does that mean it's any less professional in other areas? I don't know why so many Apple users don't like gaming on the Mac other than believing somehow that Apple must know better somehow since they don't tend to support it much. I think Apple is missing out on a LOT of potential sales in the long run by taking this ignore the obvious approach. I know I haven't purchased a new Mac because I'm waiting for a decent GPU option that isn't old already at the time I buy it.

Santa Fe's GPU isn't exactly stellar, for example, but it would certainly help something like the Macbook at least run CURRENT games at acceptable rates (whereas it's wholly incapable of running most of the current high-end games right NOW with that ancient GMA 950 thing). People seem to think that would cut into MacBookPro sales, but that kind of thinking means they should get rid of high-end iMacs too since it might cut into MacPro sales. A purchase is a purchase, IMO and a HAPPY customer is one that comes back. One that feels he was ripped somehow is not as likely to come back (look at the uproar over iPhone and the price CUT...something that would normally make people feel happy made them very angry because they felt they had been had).

Asking Apple to release a Mac with an up-to-date GPU isn't asking for the impossible, just for them to keep their graphics on top instead of everything but graphics, which seems to be their current approach. What good is a 20% faster CPU if the graphics processor is 100% behind the competition? 3D performance is more important than some seem to realize. It's not good for just gaming either. So I get a little sick of when certain people on here dismiss it so readily with nothing but an "Apple knows best" type response to explain their negative opinion about graphics cards.

Eidorian
Oct 7, 2007, 12:00 AM
Santa Fe's GPU isn't exactly stellar, for example, but it would certainly help something like the Macbook at least run CURRENT games at acceptable rates (whereas it's wholly incapable of running most of the current high-end games right NOW with that ancient GMA 950 thing). People seem to think that would cut into MacBookPro sales, but that kind of thinking means they should get rid of high-end iMacs too since it might cut into MacPro sales.
Once again, it's Santa Rosa.

Umbongo
Oct 7, 2007, 03:19 AM
SLI/Crossfire? Or just plain dual GPU?

There was talk of Crossfire, but I've not seen anything confirmed. With Skulltrail supporting both SLI and Crossfire and being based off of stoakley/seaburg it may be that they don't bother offering it. Of course Apple could use a modified version of Skulltrail to suit their needs and get multiple linked GPU support, but it's probably unlikely.

Mac Kiwi
Oct 7, 2007, 04:35 AM
Yes! New render boxes a coming. :D....with tasty new cards though please Steve.


The ATI cards let you you enable dual planes which is great for 3d apps.I am pretty sure the Nvidia cards only allow dual planes in the Quadros,or thats how it used to be.

ktlx
Oct 7, 2007, 07:03 AM
SLI/Crossfire? Or just plain dual GPU?
I don't think anyone not covered by an NDA knows. There are some claiming the next workstation class Xeon chipset will support SLI because the Skulltrail demos included it. However, the sites that have delved into the Skulltrail motherboards claim Intel is using an nVidia MCP as a bridge to provide SLI.

I tend to be skeptical about SLI and conflicted about Crossfire. nVidia has better graphics cards right now and I believe if Intel had the licensing agreements in place, they would first implement it in the systems gamers buy and not workstation chipsets. They're going to make money on SLI with P35 and X38 class chipsets, not 5000X class chipsets. However, since Intel already supports Crossfire on their desktop platforms, I don't see why they wouldn't eventually bring it to their workstation platform.

As for Apple, I'm skeptical they will support either. The reviews I've read say SLI and Crossfire only make any sense if you're already buying the top of the line graphics card for gaming. Apple has always been very focused on aesthetics and I just can't see them building a system with two 8800 GTX or HD 2900XT cards. You'd never be able to quiet down the system without complex water cooling. Being relatively quiet has been such an important property of Apples for so long, I just can't believe they'd toss it just to say they provide SLI or Crossfire support.

I'm dubious about those people who insist that Apple is missing any significant sales by leaving out better graphics cards and SLI or Crossfire. Of the people I know willing to fork out the money for an 8800 GTX or an HD 2900XT, none want to purchase a prebuilt system, let alone one from Apple. They all build their own systems by acquiring parts. Based on my reading of AnandTech, ArsTechnica and TomsHardware, that seems consistent. The market for those cards is relatively small to begin with, based on sales reports, and the number of those in the market for those cards and willing to buy prebuilt systems is far smaller. I have this feeling that the number of people who really are unwilling to buy a Mac Pro because it includes an X1900XT but not either an 8800 GTS/GTX/Ultra or HD 2900 Pro/XT is so small it's not worth mentioning.

I think Apple is ignoring the 8800 GTS/GTX/Ultra and HD 2900 Pro/XT cards purely from a financial standpoint. I cannot believe they'd sell any measurable additional Mac Pros to cover the driver development costs so they won't bother until the next refresh that will only run under Leopard.

AidenShaw
Oct 7, 2007, 08:19 AM
are wiling to target features of import to Apple. Power and Temperature, and cores/multi-tasking.

Power consumption and multi-core is important for Intel for servers and other markets independently of any demand from Apple.

Besides, Apple is using the 150watt TDP Clovertowns in the octo, when all the other makers waited for the newer 120 watt parts.

~Shard~
Oct 7, 2007, 09:51 AM
esides, Apple is using the 150watt TDP Clovertowns in the octo, when all the other makers waited for the newer 120 watt parts.

Interesting, I didn't know that. So with the same thing happen with these Penryn chips then? Apple will implement the first iteration they can get their hands on while the rest of the market may wait for a slightly more efficient version?

Macinposh
Oct 7, 2007, 12:18 PM
However, since Intel already supports Crossfire on their desktop platforms, I don't see why they wouldn't eventually bring it to their workstation platform.


If I remember it right,Intel made those decicions and production developments before AMD aquired Ati, I think they will be reluctant to support that decision in the future platforms. But who knows?


I have a question.

I tried to search,but couldnt find any info (if that has ever been verified..) about the penryns compatability of the present xeon mother boards?

Their fsb apparently is 1600mhz, so is there any possibility to of the penryns being backwards compatible with the present macpros mobs?

I mean,if they arent, I have to start to look for some cheap clovertons so i could upgrade my MP before they dissapear from the market...
:)

EagerDragon
Oct 7, 2007, 12:41 PM
If they are just now buying or talking of buying these processors I dont see how a new Mac Pro line could be ready this year. I think January (unfortunately) may be possible. How can they be ready by Octo or even Nov? If so close to January convention thing why not just wait to have a big showcase then? I think they will need time to assemble and test out any issues with this processor and Leopard.

They been testing the chip for months, they can assemble the entire machine, set ithem aside until the chips arrive. Load the chips, run a test, pack them and ship them. The can load a million chips in a month, assuming they plan to sell that many.

Umbongo
Oct 7, 2007, 02:10 PM
If I remember it right,Intel made those decicions and production developments before AMD aquired Ati, I think they will be reluctant to support that decision in the future platforms. But who knows?


I have a question.

I tried to search,but couldnt find any info (if that has ever been verified..) about the penryns compatability of the present xeon mother boards?

Their fsb apparently is 1600mhz, so is there any possibility to of the penryns being backwards compatible with the present macpros mobs?

I mean,if they arent, I have to start to look for some cheap clovertons so i could upgrade my MP before they dissapear from the market...
:)

There are 1333MHz FSB Penryns too, but in theory the 1600MHz ones should also work.

Multimedia
Oct 7, 2007, 03:26 PM
I tried to search,but couldnt find any info (if that has ever been verified..) about the penryns compatability of the present xeon mother boards?

Their fsb apparently is 1600mhz, so is there any possibility to of the penryns being backwards compatible with the present macpros mobs?

I mean,if they arent, I have to start to look for some cheap clovertons so i could upgrade my MP before they dissapear from the market...
:)I think that would be very inadvisable. While you can do that to the dumb motherboard in the original MP, getting Stoakley-Seaburg onboard the new one will be as valuable as the change to Quad Penryn processors - not to mention much better video.There are 1333MHz FSB Penryns too, but in theory the 1600MHz ones should also work.But should anyone attempt that path? I don't think so. Will wind up being much slower than if you sell what you have and buy the new. I think it'll cost you more to attempt the Penryn "upgrade" than it will for you to sell what you have and buy the new one.

MagnusVonMagnum
Oct 7, 2007, 07:39 PM
Once again, it's Santa Rosa.

Since when does MacBook (not MBP) have Santa Rosa? They put it in the MBP (which has its own GPU), but Macbook and MacMini are Intel GMA 950, which is terribly out of date and can't run many CURRENT games, let alone future ones.

Meanwhile, the Mac Pro is the flagship Mac and it SHOULD have the latest and greatest graphics cards available for it. Any computer that costs over $2000 in 2007 should have a pretty high-end card in it, IMO. The MacPro's GPU is a sore spot just as it is a sore spot with ALL Macs save perhaps the MBP, which is about where it should be, IMO.

Erasmus
Oct 7, 2007, 07:41 PM
Just throwing this out there, but even if the new platform does not support SLI or Crossfire, would one of those double cards still work? A newer as yet to be released version of the 7950 GX2?

flopticalcube
Oct 7, 2007, 07:41 PM
Since when does MacBook (not MBP) have Santa Rosa? They put it in the MBP (which has its own GPU), but Macbook and MacMini are Intel GMA 950, which is terribly out of date and can't run many CURRENT games, let alone future ones.

Meanwhile, the Mac Pro is the flagship Mac and it SHOULD have the latest and greatest graphics cards available for it. Any computer that costs over $2000 in 2007 should have a pretty high-end card in it, IMO. The MacPro's GPU is a sore spot just as it is a sore spot with ALL Macs save perhaps the MBP, which is about where it should be, IMO.

Eldorian was correcting the previous poster, MagnusVonMagnum, who was looking forward to Santa Fe.

Eidorian
Oct 7, 2007, 09:31 PM
Eldorian was correcting the previous poster, MagnusVonMagnum, who was looking forward to Santa Fe.And proving that it's not the first time.

#232 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4220829&postcount=232)

#233 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4220850&postcount=233)

MagnusVonMagnum
Oct 7, 2007, 09:41 PM
Ah, so in other words you had nothing of importance to say, just had to correct a typo/memory thing rather than deal with actual substance (i.e. the lack of current GPUs in Macs). I'll try and remember to ignore your posts from now on.

Eidorian
Oct 7, 2007, 09:45 PM
Ah, so in other words you had nothing of importance to say, just had to correct a typo/memory thing rather than deal with actual substance (i.e. the lack of current GPUs in Macs). I'll try and remember to ignore your posts from now on.It was nothing more then a simple correction.

Apple does need to upgrade the remainder of their hardware to the Santa Rosa platform in order to benefit from the GMA X3100 or move to a cheap discrete solution.

Macinposh
Oct 8, 2007, 01:03 AM
I think that would be very inadvisable. While you can do that to the dumb motherboard in the original MP, getting Stoakley-Seaburg onboard the new one will be as valuable as the change to Quad Penryn processors - not to mention much better video.

Hmm,havent seen yet any tests between clov+current mobo and penryn+ss so I wont comment on that.
And what do you mean video? Video trans/decoding or that the SS will support GPUs better? Havent yet heard anything about the upcoming cards to SS macpros. If the history repeats itself,we´ll get the same bloody cards they have now...
And most importantly,dont need the vidcards that bad,so it is a non issue at the moment for me.




But should anyone attempt that path? I don't think so. Will wind up being much slower than if you sell what you have and buy the new. I think it'll cost you more to attempt the Penryn "upgrade" than it will for you to sell what you have and buy the new one.

I can live with just doubling the cores.. I have the opportunity to rid my self of the old proc´s by selling them or reusing them myself. That way the price hit would be small. And for tax reasons (and well of the general selling hassle) I dont consider selling the machine really an option.

But,have to see to what kind of prices the processors drop to.

Cheers!

diamond.g
Oct 8, 2007, 06:50 AM
Since when does MacBook (not MBP) have Santa Rosa? They put it in the MBP (which has its own GPU), but Macbook and MacMini are Intel GMA 950, which is terribly out of date and can't run many CURRENT games, let alone future ones.

Meanwhile, the Mac Pro is the flagship Mac and it SHOULD have the latest and greatest graphics cards available for it. Any computer that costs over $2000 in 2007 should have a pretty high-end card in it, IMO. The MacPro's GPU is a sore spot just as it is a sore spot with ALL Macs save perhaps the MBP, which is about where it should be, IMO.
Well if you go on what others say here the X1900XT is a great card. Able to run games like Crysis without breaking a sweat all at the native resolution of a 30" ACD. ;)

Just throwing this out there, but even if the new platform does not support SLI or Crossfire, would one of those double cards still work? A newer as yet to be released version of the 7950 GX2?

The GX2 type cards sould work because AFAIK the system sees it at one card. The question is if OS X will recognize that there is more than one chip on the card and actually do womething with it.

Erasmus
Oct 9, 2007, 04:20 AM
Well if you go on what others say here the X1900XT is a great card. Able to run games like Crysis without breaking a sweat all at the native resolution of a 30" ACD. ;)

I think someone's exaggerating...
...But it is a bunch better than an X1600 ;)

The GX2 type cards sould work because AFAIK the system sees it at one card. The question is if OS X will recognize that there is more than one chip on the card and actually do womething with it.

Cheers. Surely this will be possible in Leopard. Would be pretty stupid for Apple not to put it in. I mean, multi GPU GPUs are the way of the future. Or at least one of the ways of the future.

diamond.g
Oct 9, 2007, 07:58 AM
I think someone's exaggerating...
...But it is a bunch better than an X1600 ;)



Cheers. Surely this will be possible in Leopard. Would be pretty stupid for Apple not to put it in. I mean, multi GPU GPUs are the way of the future. Or at least one of the ways of the future.

Well until Microsoft moves to EFI support in their consumer operating system, or Apple becomes the leader in consumer operating systems (whichever happens first) I don't see Apple really going through that much effort. It also seems the video card manufacturers don't really have much of an incentive to make their cards EFI compatible. Especially since the consumer Mac has non upgradeable video hardware. And those that buy MacPros are probably less likely to buy a 8800 type card("too expensive").

kebuttke
Oct 9, 2007, 08:56 AM
i hope there is some truth in the speculation on this forum, cuz im looking very closely at finally getting my dream machine, at it would anger me more than the iphone debacle to find out a month after buying a mac pro that they upgraded it.

Macinposh
Oct 9, 2007, 08:59 AM
And those that buy MacPros are probably less likely to buy a 8800 type card("too expensive").


On the contrary.

All the people I know that have (10-15?) G5/MP money has been a non-issue.


The computer is been paid by the clients in the long run as it is a production tool. That the computer has cost 2 or 5 grand hasnt affected the purchase decision.

But, people have allso bought only what they have needed. I think of the forementioned people about half would have bought that card, If it would have been aviable. Now they are using x1900/quadras.

-hh
Oct 9, 2007, 10:01 AM
Ah, so in other words you had nothing of importance to say, just had to correct a typo/memory thing rather than deal with actual substance ...

The bigger problem is that for those of us who don't stay on top of all of the CPU development stuff, you waste our time to go figure out that you weren't talking about YA option, but was merely a "typo" due to your own damn laziness.

My thanks to Eidorian for taking the time to point out this recurring error, as it has saved me from an "exercise in futility" Google search to find out what the bleep an Intel "Sante Fe" supposedly was.


I'll try and remember to ignore your posts from now on.

Arrogance while being flat-out wrong is such an endearing quality.

And "MagnusVonMagnum" ... goodness me! Can you make up a more egotistically pompus handle? :rolleyes:

Nah, he's not "Over-compensating" for any personal shortcomings :-)

-hh

Wild-Bill
Oct 9, 2007, 10:14 AM
And those that buy MacPros are probably less likely to buy a 8800 type card("too expensive").

You couldn't be more wrong. One of the major factors in waiting for a new Mac Pro revision versus buying one now has been the video card options.

diamond.g
Oct 9, 2007, 10:42 AM
On the contrary.

All the people I know that have (10-15?) G5/MP money has been a non-issue.


The computer is been paid by the clients in the long run as it is a production tool. That the computer has cost 2 or 5 grand hasnt affected the purchase decision.

But, people have allso bought only what they have needed. I think of the forementioned people about half would have bought that card, If it would have been aviable. Now they are using x1900/quadras.

You couldn't be more wrong. One of the major factors in waiting for a new Mac Pro revision versus buying one now has been the video card options.

I conceed, my 8800 comment was incorrect.

But it seems like no one has countered the rest of my post. Which I was sure that someone would. I would love to see more options in video cards, but that may or may not be in the cards. The best chance for MacPro users right now seems to be the upcomming rev of cards (G92, RV670, etc).

Mac Kiwi
Oct 10, 2007, 03:56 AM
I conceed, my 8800 comment was incorrect.

But it seems like no one has countered the rest of my post. Which I was sure that someone would. I would love to see more options in video cards, but that may or may not be in the cards. The best chance for MacPro users right now seems to be the upcomming rev of cards (G92, RV670, etc).


There will be a decent new card in the Mac Pros,but its usually the model previous to the latest and greatest for gaming in the PC world.Apart from the Quadros that is.


As for more options I cannot see that happening unfortunately.Myself I would like a mid range Quadro as an option or a Fire GL maybe.


I would love to know how many Quadros they have actually sold for Mac Pros.I am guessing not that many,or no where near as many as they could sell if they also offered a mid range 3d card thats for sure.