The 2009 (Gainestown) Mac Pro: Everything We Know

[iMacmatician]

8 Core X and Quad Core X perhaps? (Whatever the X means.)

Soooooooooo, does this mean the 2.26 GHz is a mysterious 2x8 core, or, worst case scenario, that the Nehalem processors are too rich for Apple's tastes and they can only offer 1x4 core at 2.66 and have to go with 2.26 for their 8-core machine?

Egad!Probably.

It was speculated in the other thread that the quad-core model is actually a Core i7 SP model.

Plus GT120 is basically a rebranded 9500.

[Setmose]

Why do I have a hard time believing this from Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/02/apple-rumor-monday-late-edition-leaked-specs-model-numbers-a/) on tomorrow's rumored updates?

:rolleyes:

Engadget included the ironic disclaimer: "Sure, okay." So, no, they aren't taking it very seriously. :apple:

[robinp]

what's the "x" :)

So two 4-core 2.26Ghz processors? A Low end Mac Pro?

arn

Xeon?

[grue]

Xeon?

Good call.

[robinp]

Probably.

It was speculated in the other thread that the quad-core model is actually a Core i7 SP model.

Plus GT120 is basically a rebranded 9500.

Yeah I think that was me that said that, I guess I'm just wondering if they will introduce the 'xmac' thing by stealth, ie by creating a lower price point Mac Pro which only has one socket

[Tallest Skil]

These new SKUs are disgusting. That's all I have to say.:mad:

[Umbongo]

8 Core X and Quad Core X perhaps? (Whatever the X means.)

Soooooooooo, does this mean the 2.26 GHz is a mysterious 2x8 core, or, worst case scenario, that the Nehalem processors are too rich for Apple's tastes and they can only offer 1x4 core at 2.66 and have to go with 2.26 for their 8-core machine?

Egad!

Two Xeon 5520s (2.26GHz) may perform similar to the current Mac Pros on a number of tasks and Apple should be able to offer such a system for $2,000. We will just have to wait and see as everything discussed here was based on Apple's previous showings and ideology rather than wild speculation.

[Umbongo]

These new SKUs are disgusting. That's all I have to say.:mad:

No they aren't, you aren't thinking right. First of all those arent the only models. They are just the retail SKUs. The lower one could be intended to fill that gap between the current Mac Pro and iMacs, hence the 6GB of memory and 640GB drive out of the box. Solid system, no upgrades needed. The 2.66GHz is in the classic mold of minimum specs. Having a 640GB drive rather than 500GB so Apple can keep costs down. The BTO options will probably still include faster processors and such.

Really if they are correct and accurate to the components then Apple have changed their ideology towards systems in a range. It'll be all clear later :)

[hubiedubie]

Those are baseline specs. It looks like one of the following is going to be released:
- A turbo Mac Pro with 8 cores per CPU, dual CPU option (2.26, 6GB RAM baseline), up to 16 cores.
- Midi Desktop Sized "Mac Pro Lite" with quad core i7 (the 2.66 baseline).

The latter is more likely. Depends on whether the numbering scheme refers to cores per machine or cores per CPU.

[Umbongo]

Those are baseline specs. It looks like one of the following is going to be released:
- A turbo Mac Pro with 8 cores per CPU, dual CPU option (2.26, 6GB RAM baseline), up to 16 cores.
- Midi Desktop Sized "Mac Pro Lite" with quad core i7 (the 2.66 baseline).

The latter is more likely. Depends on whether the numbering scheme refers to cores per machine or cores per CPU.

The first bit is wrong. No 8 core CPUs.

Actually I see why some people are confusing things.

I'm reading those SKUs as Apple offering retail options of eight 2.26GHz cores or four 2.66GHz cores (likelyu still Xeon with space to upgrade one processor) and both should be of similar prices, finally letting the customer decide what they need?

[grue]

For what it's worth, that class of Xeon goes up to 2.53 as an option within the same TDP, I'm sure it'll be an option. I'm just laughing because I know that the resale value of my machine will stay safe now because Joe Idiot will look and think "3Ghz is faster than 2.26 Ghz"

[robinp]

The first bit is wrong. No 8 core CPUs.

Actually I see why some people are confusing things.

I'm reading those SKUs as Apple offering retail options of eight 2.26GHz cores or four 2.66GHz cores (likelyu still Xeon with space to upgrade one processor) and both should be of similar prices, finally letting the customer decide what they need?

I disagree, the 2.66 is the one filling the void between the iMac and the rest of the Mac Pro line. The 2.26 is the base config, much like the 2.8 has been up until now. There will be several CPU upgrades as BTO options.

[Umbongo]

I disagree, the 2.66 is the one filling the void between the iMac and the rest of the Mac Pro line. The 2.26 is the base config, much like the 2.8 has been up until now. There will be several CPU upgrades as BTO options.

Yeah I was thinking the 2.66GHz was an 8 core option before I reread it and I didn't go back and edit. I want to discuss all this :rolleyes: but it seems kind of pointless as if those are true Apple have changed how they do things and we will possibly see later today anyway.

It'll be interesting to see how these are marketed.

[robinp]

Yeah I was thinking the 2.66GHz was an 8 core option before I reread it and I didn't go back and edit. I want to discuss all this :rolleyes: but it seems kind of pointless as if those are true Apple have changed how they do things and we will possibly see later today anyway.

What this means is that potentially they will have a 'Mac Pro' at near the price of the old G4/G5 base config... pretty exciting for all those who've been crying out for one for years. Personally, I'm going pretty high end but exactly how high we'll (hopefully) see later on today :)

[Tallest Skil]

Update: Certain information removed in the wake of Apple Legal. There's no need to be angry, boys...

[JasO]

Update: Certain information removed in the wake of Apple Legal. There's no need to be angry, boys...

What information was removed? Everything seems there to me.

[Umbongo]

What this means is that potentially they will have a 'Mac Pro' at near the price of the old G4/G5 base config... pretty exciting for all those who've been crying out for one for years. Personally, I'm going pretty high end but exactly how high we'll (hopefully) see later on today :)


Yeah there are many options just based on those skus, two $2,000 systems with one using 8 slower cores? I mean some people are sure (I still haven't seen it confirmed) that the Xeon 3500 and Core i7 processors will work in dual socket tylersburg boards, so that may also be an option. Or maybe it is just single socket. Who knows.

[pwn247]

Everything seems to be falling into place at this point.

However, I'm still not keen on the suggestion of Core i7 CPUs inside of the Mac Pros. The i7 is still a new CPU, and Apple would have to design a whole new mainboard for the MP (a new chipset anyway). It's not like Apple to just make one computer with a specific CPU, and then go on and make all the other units with different CPUs. It just doesn't happen.

[Tallest Skil]

Everything seems to be falling into place at this point.

However, I'm still not keen on the suggestion of Core i7 CPUs inside of the Mac Pros. The i7 is still a new CPU, and Apple would have to design a whole new mainboard for the MP (a new chipset anyway). It's not like Apple to just make one computer with a specific CPU, and then go on and make all the other units with different CPUs. It just doesn't happen.

So, what, they'll use the six core Harpertown?

Yeah, right.:confused:

[robinp]

What information was removed? Everything seems there to me.

yeah what's missing?

[Tallest Skil]

yeah what's missing?

It's gone now. It's best if it remains unsaid what was ever here.

[Umbongo]

Everything seems to be falling into place at this point.

However, I'm still not keen on the suggestion of Core i7 CPUs inside of the Mac Pros. The i7 is still a new CPU, and Apple would have to design a whole new mainboard for the MP (a new chipset anyway). It's not like Apple to just make one computer with a specific CPU, and then go on and make all the other units with different CPUs. It just doesn't happen.

Both of these will be using Nehalem. Board manufacturers have had boards designed for months and months, processors were sent out in december. An 8 core 2.26GHz and 4 core 2.66GHz can use the same systemboard.

[robinp]

It's gone now. It's best if it remains unsaid what was ever here.

ok jedi

[Weepul]

It's pretty clear what got removed looking at the first post, to me.

Apple Legal on your tail, though? [citation needed] ;)

*sigh* Looks like Apple's low-balling it. In this post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=660492), Mr. X only shows 1066MHz RAM parts. That would be the 2.26, 2.4, and 2.53 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_future_Intel_Xeon_microprocessors#.22Gainestown.22_.2845_nm.29_.5B1.5D_.5B2.5D) CPUs. On the other hand, there's a 2.66 Apple part and Wiki lists that speed processor using the 1333MHz memory, so something's not quite adding up. Am I missing something in my impromptu analysis - like memory speeds being downward-compatible, or something?

I'm not going to be happy if a 2.53 Nehalem is priced like the 3.2 is now - that is to say, really really expensive. I'd have been very happy with 2x2.66 at base $2999. If indeed they are going for the 2.26/2.4/2.53 processors, I think I'm going to need to see benchmarks first. 2x2.66 and I might have pulled out the plastic today.

[Umbongo]

It's pretty clear what got removed looking at the first post, to me.

Apple Legal on your tail, though? [citation needed] ;)

*sigh* Looks like Apple's low-balling it. In this post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=660492), Mr. X only shows 1066MHz RAM parts. That would be the 2.26, 2.4, and 2.53 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_future_Intel_Xeon_microprocessors#.22Gainestown.22_.2845_nm.29_.5B1.5D_.5B2.5D) CPUs. On the other hand, there's a 2.66 Apple part and Wiki lists that speed processor using the 1333MHz memory, so something's not quite adding up. Am I missing something in my impromptu analysis - like memory speeds being downward-compatible, or something?

I'm not going to be happy if a 2.53 Nehalem is priced like the 3.2 is now - that is to say, really really expensive. I'd have been very happy with 2x2.66 at base $2999.

Ok Apple selling only 1066MHz DDR3 ECC DIMMs does not rule out Xeons (2.66GHz, 2.8GHz, 2.93GHz & 3.2GHz) using 1333MHz Memory Controllers. Infact many systems, servers especially, will be sold with memory of that speed while using those processors. Apple aren't a memory vendor so they won't want to stock two types, plus the benefits are minimal between the speeds. It also keeps cost down.

Unless I'm mistaken all it really means is 25.6 GB/s memory bandwidth per processor rather than 32 GB/s. 25.6GB/s is also the maximum between processors i.e processor A reading from processor B's memory branch.

[Weepul]

Ok Apple selling only 1066MHz DDR3 ECC DIMMs does not rule out Xeons (2.66GHz, 2.8GHz, 2.93GHz & 3.2GHz) using 1333MHz Memory Controllers. Infact many systems, servers especially, will be sold with memory of that speed while using those processors.So RAM speeds are downward-compatible?

Apple aren't a memory vendor so they won't want to stock two types, plus the benefits are minimal between the speeds. It also keeps cost down.You do realize we're talking about the computer series that used FB-DIMMs that were not only uncommon among home desktop machines, but had required custom heat sinks on them, initially only available from Apple? :p

[grue]

What information was removed? Everything seems there to me.

According to my logs, the only thing that changed was him blanking out video cards.

So if indeed Apple Legal did contact him (which is at best dubious), apparently they're sensitive about that :rolleyes:

[Umbongo]

So RAM speeds are downward-compatible?

Yes totally. I don't think they even have 16GB DIMMs running at 1333MHz yet, maybe 8GB too.

You do realize we're talking about the computer series that used FB-DIMMs that were not only uncommon among home desktop machines, but had required custom heat sinks on them, initially only available from Apple? :p

And charged huge, huge premiums for it. Basically Apple don't want to be in the memory market, I wouldn't want to be either. So they don't alter prices or stock a wide variety.

Mac Pros could support DDR3 at both 1066MHz and 1333Mhz and Unbuffered non-ECC, Unbuffered ECC and Registered ECC. Apple aren't going to want to stock 6 types so they pick the most suitable.

[Tallest Skil]

According to my logs, the only thing that changed was him blanking out video cards.

So if indeed Apple Legal did contact him, apparently they're sensitive about that :rolleyes:

Yeah, as a matter of fact, they ARE sensitive about Snow Leopard information leaking out.

It wasn't me, it was one of the contributors, so thanks for necessitating that I say more than I wanted to.

I was TRYING to keep them off track by making it look like I was the leak, not him.

[grue]

stuff I've deleted to make it easier to cover your tracks, if you so desire.

I see…

[JasO]

According to my logs, the only thing that changed was him blanking out video cards.

So if indeed Apple Legal did contact him (which is at best dubious), apparently they're sensitive about that :rolleyes:

Thanks, guess I missed that. Oh well, something new is getting added, thats all we know... =D

[grue]

Thanks, guess I missed that. Oh well, something new is getting added, thats all we know... =D

Unfortunately, it's not likely to be the one damned thing I wanted :(

[Umbongo]

Unfortunately, it's not likely to be the one damned thing I wanted :(

What did you want?

[grue]

What did you want?

GTX 260 Core 216 (or better) video option. It hurts having a first-rate workstation and third-rate video card (though a 4870 would only be second-rate I guess)

[Umbongo]

GTX 260 Core 216 (or better) video option. It hurts having a first-rate workstation and third-rate video card (though a 4870 would only be second-rate I guess)

Yeah I totally understand that. I'm disappointed by what is effectively looking like an 8600GT. The 4670 is a much better card all round.

[grue]

Yeah I totally understand that. I'm disappointed by what is effectively looking like an 8600GT. The 4670 is a much better card all round.

Yeah, I have an 8800GT right now it and it is by far the biggest bottleneck in my system for gaming performance, and of course CUDA will be a huge benefit for my work once that goes hot, so I want the fastest card I can get at that point.

[Weepul]

And charged huge, huge premiums for it. Basically Apple don't want to be in the memory market, I wouldn't want to be either. So they don't alter prices or stock a wide variety.I see your point. My perspective was that Apple would want to offer the "correct" RAM for each machine at their ridiculous markup, and would be very happy to sell it to less-savvy customers for disgusting profit. When the "correct" RAM can now overlap with other models, though, it makes sense to simplify.

Mac Pros could support DDR3 at both 1066MHz and 1333Mhz and Unbuffered non-ECC, Unbuffered ECC and Registered ECC. Apple aren't going to want to stock 6 types so they pick the most suitable.
So there's hope yet. Still, I'm afraid 2x2.26/etc. and 1x2.66/etc. makes a lot of sense. It just makes me wonder what they'll do with their "8 cores now standard" marketing. They have different processor options for the 15" and 17" MBPs so it's not unreasonable they'd have two sets of processor options for the new Mac Pros.

Gotta keep my hopes low. :p

[Umbongo]

I see your point. My perspective was that Apple would want to offer the "correct" RAM for each machine at their ridiculous markup, and would be very happy to sell it to less-savvy customers for disgusting profit. When the "correct" RAM can now overlap with other models, though, it makes sense to simplify.


So there's hope yet. Still, I'm afraid 2x2.26/etc. and 1x2.66/etc. makes a lot of sense. It just makes me wonder what they'll do with their "8 cores now standard" marketing. They have different processor options for the 15" and 17" MBPs so it's not unreasonable they'd have two sets of processor options for the new Mac Pros.

Gotta keep my hopes low. :p

Well Apple can still spin it, just a little differently than they have previously. A 2.26GHz x 8 system might be as good as the current Mac Pros for many things while costing a lot less and a 2.66GHz single processor will offer more performance in many areas.

[robinp]

I am really rather intrigued about the 2 SKU's that are listed... it seems Apple are positioning the Mac Pro as a slightly lower end bit of kit. Weird

[grue]

I am really rather intrigued about the 2 SKU's that are listed... it seems Apple are positioning the Mac Pro as a slightly lower end bit of kit. Weird

Global economy sucking wind, etc etc perhaps.

When the Mac Pro came out, it was cheaper than PC counterparts. Maybe Apple wants to recapture that concept.

Then again, it's Apple, so making sense and making pro customers happy aren't generally high priorities.

[Umbongo]

I am really rather intrigued about the 2 SKU's that are listed... it seems Apple are positioning the Mac Pro as a slightly lower end bit of kit. Weird

Just remember these are just retail options. Expect processor options up to 3.2GHz and 48GB of memory. It wouldn't suprise me to learn Apple's market research has led to a $2,000 eight core system that is targetted at digital content creators.

[robinp]

Just remember these are just retail options. Expect processor options up to 3.2GHz and 48GB of memory. It wouldn't suprise me to learn Apple's market research has led to a $2,000 eight core system that is targetted at digital content creators.

yeah that's what I was thinking initially, but the 1066 ram is getting me worried

[Amethyst]

With these spec (8core 2.26 , 4core 2.66 + GT120), May be, new mac pro will cost around 1999-2200

[kevink2]

Tax refund is on the way. The wait is getting agonizing... :mad:

I wouldn't even be able to buy an Apple mouse with my refund, unfortunately :(

I'm only netting $25 combined federal/state.

[grue]

With these spec (8core 2.26 , 4core 2.66 + GT120), May be, new mac pro will cost around 1999-2200


I'd file that under NFL, and I'm not talking about football :D

[grue]

I wouldn't even be able to buy an Apple mouse with my refund, unfortunately :(

I'm only netting $25 combined federal/state.

Good for you, seriously. That means you're not one of the folks giving the government an interest free loan of YOUR money. That's to be commended.

[Umbongo]

With these spec (8core 2.26 , 4core 2.66 + GT120), May be, new mac pro will cost around 1999-2200

I'd expect $1,999 for the 8 core and $2,399 or $2,499 for the 4 core.

[robinp]

I'd expect $1,999 for the 8 core and $2,399 or $2,499 for the 4 core.

other way around I think! The 8 core will be more expensive than the 4 core for certain

[Amethyst]

Can mac pro with 8-core 2.26 and 4-core 2.66 will have same price point

may be $1999 or $2499

[Amethyst]

Last expectation

from new high-end iMac price at $2199

i think mac pro must have $2499 price-point

[Umbongo]

other way around I think! The 8 core will be more expensive than the 4 core for certain

Two 2.26GHz Xeon 5520s cost $746 ($373 each) and one Xeon 5550 costs $958.

[robinp]

Two 2.26GHz Xeon 5520s cost $746 ($373 each) and one Xeon 5550 costs $958.

but I don't think that will have any impact on what Apple actually charges... we'll find out soon enough with any luck!

[Umbongo]

but I don't think that will have any impact on what Apple actually charges... we'll find out soon enough with any luck!

Well Apple can do weird things. My ideas are based on the following:

2006 Mac Pro = $2500 with $1,400 in processors.
2008 Mac Pro = $2800 with $1,600 in processors.

so my prediction was:
2009 Mac Pro = $3000 with $1900 in processors.

So following that I would expect a single Xeon 5550 system to cost $500 less than the $3,000 (similar downgrade reduction in the past). The specs being suggested for the 8 core 2.26GHz should position it on the lower end, I'd love to see a $1,999 price point and think it is possible.

Really though the prices could be all over the place. All I can really say with real confidence is both will be between $1999 and $2,799. maybe they will have the same price even.

[Amethyst]

New iMac Using GT 120
High-end using GT 130


Newswire--------------------------------------------------
The new 24-inch 2.93 GHz iMac, for a suggested retail price of $1,799 (US), includes:

-- 24-inch widescreen LCD display;
-- 2.93 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor with 6MB shared L2 cache;
-- 4GB 1066 MHz DDR3 SDRAM expandable to 8GB;
-- NVIDIA GeForce GT 120; with 256MB GDDR3 SDRAM memory;
-- 640GB Serial ATA hard drive running at 7200 rpm;
-- a slot-load 8x SuperDrive with double-layer support (DVD+/-R
DL/DVD+/-RW/CD-RW);
-- Mini DisplayPort for video output (adapters sold separately);
-- built-in AirPort Extreme 802.11n wireless networking & Bluetooth
2.1+EDR;
-- built-in iSight video camera;
-- Gigabit Ethernet port;
-- four USB 2.0 ports;
-- one FireWire 800 port;
-- built-in stereo speakers and microphone; and
-- the Apple Keyboard, Mighty Mouse.

[8CoreWhore]

Down

[Umbongo]

Oh wow, let me digest the ****tyness.

haha terrible terrible options. What a joke.

[robinp]

I was right, and they are both ****ing expensive

[rhett7660]

No Mac Pros today. So perhaps that is what the 24th is for?

http://store.apple.com/us_smb_78313/browse/home/shop_mac/family/mac_pro

[seisend]

NEW MAC PRO IS HERE : NO JOKE !

http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/mac_pro?mco=NDE4Mzg0MQ

[Amethyst]

$2499 for one-processor mobo
$3299 for dual-processor mobo

apppleeee

[robinp]

can't believe how expensive they are... **** ****ing bloody hell

[NoNameBrand]

Wow. The Canadian prices are slightly out-of-line with what I was expecting. A refurb 8x2.8 might be in my future. Will have to see some benchmarks.

[JasO]

ehhh.... http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/mac_pro?mco=MTE2NjQ


it's an update nonetheless.

[Fomaphone]

i just ordered mine!!

[Umbongo]

$3,300 for a system with two $375 processors? Haha.

[robinp]

i just ordered mine!!

what did you go for? I'm stuck trying to work out what config

[grue]

4870 won't work in my machine.

Thanks again for another assrape, Apple. :mad:

[Setmose]

Gotta love the love that Apple gets from Intel.

Yup. It's pricey.

Yeah, I wanna see benchmarks.

So over the next couple of weeks I can start my serious configuration calculations. :apple:

[rylin]

Ugh.
Time to look for refurbs.
The new MPs are baaaad value.

[JasO]

Ugh.
Time to look for refurbs.
The new MPs are baaaad value.


agreed.

AU$4499 and AU$5899 or $5799 one of those.

Either way, damn stupid prices. Economy has screwed me over nicely. :mad:

[8CoreWhore]

What a rotten joke! The first should be 1599USD and the second 1999USD!

[Trev311]

What a rotten joke! The first should be 1599USD and the second 1999USD!

No kidding. Why would they make it so they have a different number of memory slots? Only 8 GB on the low end? What are they trying to stop people from buying low and adding in third-party memory? WTF!

[grue]

What a rotten joke! The first should be 1599USD and the second 1999USD!

I don't think you and reality have been properly introduced. What possible reason would there be to drop prices that much? So they can stop turning a profit altogether?

[8CoreWhore]

Only 4 RAM slots in the 2500USD 4 core.

[Umbongo]

What a rotten joke! The first should be 1599USD and the second 1999USD!

Totally agree, god I've been defending Apple for almost two an a half years on the Mac Pro pricing to people who didn't get it. Now they go and do this. I'm quite shocked.

[Umbongo]

I don't think you and reality have been properly introduced. What possible reason would there be to drop prices that much? So they can stop turning a profit altogether?

2006 Mac Pro - $2,499 Two 2.66GHz dual core ($690 per processor) $1,119 + processors
2008 Mac Pro - $2,799 Two 2.80GHz quad core ($797 per processor) $1,205 + processors

2009 Mac Pro - $2,499 One 2.66GHz quad core ($284 per processor) $2,215 + processor
2009 Mac Pro - $3,299 Two 2.26GHz quad core ($373 per processor) $2,553 + processors

They have gone from good pricing to ridiculous.

[robinp]

the performance of the top of the line model (8 corre 2.93) isn't even that great an improvement over the previous top of the line:

http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html

and the old model is half the price... hmm

[grue]

2006 Mac Pro - $2,499 Two 2.66GHz dual core ($690 per processor) $1,119 + processors
2008 Mac Pro - $2,799 Two 2.80GHz quad core ($797 per processor) $1,205 + processors

2009 Mac Pro - $2,499 One 2.66GHz quad core ($284 per processor) $2,215 + processor
2009 Mac Pro - $3,299 Two 2.26GHz quad core ($373 per processor) $2,553 + processors

They have gone from good pricing to ridiculous.

1. New logic board design.

2. New memory.

3. Greed.

4. Apple hates pro customers. The only customers they give a rat's ass about are the trend-following idiots who'll buy a new machine every time there's a minor tweak.

[8CoreWhore]

That's it! I'll get 4 Mac Mini's and string them together!http://prometheus.med.utah.edu/~bwjones/C1940305979/E1084323015/index.html
i7 Hackintosh here I come!

[Umbongo]

1. New logic board design.

2. New memory.

3. Greed.

4. Apple hates pro customers. The only customers they give a rat's ass about are the trend-following idiots who'll buy a new machine every time there's a minor tweak.

1 and 2 should have little impact, obviously 3 and 4 have come in to play heavily.

[galstaph]

the performance of the top of the line model (8 corre 2.93) isn't even that great an improvement over the previous top of the line:

http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html

and the old model is half the price... hmm


I think we need benchmarks, not apple's to really see if this is the case. I'm sure by the end of today or the week someone will have done that.

I think I'll buy the octo, it may be 700 more canadian for the base (edu store 3399 vs 2699) but if the improvement IS better I'm gonna buy it for sure... or if there is not large gain, see if there are any great deals on a 3.2 kickin' about

I use maxwell render (shown in their performance rating), 1.7x isn't too much better but it is a good increase.... looking at the 4870 as an upgrade though... maybe better to get the gt 120 and save some $$ though...

[Trev311]

1. New logic board design.

2. New memory.

3. Greed.

4. Apple hates pro customers. The only customers they give a rat's ass about are the trend-following idiots who'll buy a new machine every time there's a minor tweak.

Screw them with their new memory. 2X1 GB DDR3 1066 ECC from newegg is $68

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148243

So the base has ~210 in memory, plus you know they buy bulk and get it for cheaper. This is all about the last two options you put.:mad:

[rastersize]

Well at least the ATi 4870 is compatible with Mac Pro '08. We'll see if it's any good in 5-7 weeks (that's the shipping time here in sweden at least), though I'm going to wait to hear about it's loudness.

[Setmose]

the performance of the top of the line model (8 corre 2.93) isn't even that great an improvement over the previous top of the line:

http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html

and the old model is half the price... hmm

Whoa. Let's catch our breath here. The pricing is insanely bad, I agree.

But think of Apple's previous tricks of using 2-generations back models as the "baseline" for performance comparisons to try to blur the lackluster incremental performance gains.

Here, finally, they have gone head-to-head with the old top-of-line to new top-of-line and I think the performace gains are quite respectable: 1.5x to 1.7x.

The gaming benchmarks are particularly sweet, and do not include Boot Camp Windows configurations. Let's see what Bare Feats come up with.

Also -- no Snow leopard, which is what these machines should really be running. Maybe I'll wait until Snow Leopard. By then some price drops may be in order given the global economy. Remember iPhone. Apple is not above shaking down the giddy early adopters and then dropping the price dramatically.

All in all I'm happy to see these babies arrive and want to see the serious benchmarking begin. But again, without Snow Leopard it's not all that relevant. :apple:

[robinp]

I think we need benchmarks, not apple's to really see if this is the case. I'm sure by the end of today or the week someone will have done that.

I think I'll buy the octo, it may be 700 more canadian for the base (edu store 3399 vs 2699) but if the improvement IS better I'm gonna buy it for sure... or if there is not large gain, see if there are any great deals on a 3.2 kickin' about

I use maxwell render (shown in their performance rating), 1.7x isn't too much better but it is a good increase.... looking at the 4870 as an upgrade though... maybe better to get the gt 120 and save some $$ though...

yes but that benchmark is for the 2.93Ghz not the 2.23... I think you'll find that the new bottom 8 core, is about as fast as the old 3ghz, but actually way more expensive. Damn so much for waiting

[robinp]

Whoa. Let's catch our breath here. The pricing is insanely bad, I agree.

But think of Apple's previous tricks of using 2-generations back models as the "baseline" for performance comparisons to try to blur the lackluster incremental performance gains.

Here, finally, they have gone head-to-head with the old top-of-line to new top-of-line and I think the performace gains are quite respectable: 1.5x to 1.7x.

The gaming benchmarks are particularly sweet, and do not include Boot Camp Windows configurations. Let's see what Bare Feats come up with.

Also -- no Snow leopard, which is what these machines should really be running. Maybe I'll wait until Snow Leopard. By then some price drops may be in order given the global economy.

All in all I'm happy to see these babies arrive and want to see the serious benchmarking begin. But again, without Snow Leopard it's not all that relevant. :apple:

yes I agree if they used the same price points as before, but what we have here is paying twice as much for a computer that is 1.7 times as quick... not great really

[frimple]

I want to know if Tallest Skil bought one on release day as promised.

[Setmose]

yes I agree if they used the same price points as before, but what we have here is paying twice as much for a computer that is 1.7 times as quick... not great really

Well, 1.7x is not so far from 2x. And that should jump up to what, 3x or 3.5x under Snow Leopard, according to what Tallest Skil has written? :apple:

[grue]

Well, 1.7x is not so far from 2x. And that should jump up to what, 3x or 3.5x under Snow Leopard, according to what Tallest Skil has written? :apple:

yeah, because he was -so- spot on about these ;)

[Trev311]

Did they lower the cache sizes too? The 2009 models say 8 MB L3 cache but don't mention the L2 which on the 2008 was 12 MB.

I wouldn't mind going for the low end 4-core but I would need WAY more ram than 8 GB. This and the price and quite frustrating.

[BenRoethig]

What a rotten joke! The first should be 1599USD and the second 1999USD!

I think they just went from 30 to like 60% margins. Nice to have a monopoly isn't it?

[tom.]

Totally agree, god I've been defending Apple for almost two an a half years on the Mac Pro pricing to people who didn't get it. Now they go and do this. I'm quite shocked.

Exactly the same here, I thought they would at least offer 2 x 2.66 Quad Nehalem at the same price point

[BenRoethig]

I don't think you and reality have been properly introduced. What possible reason would there be to drop prices that much? So they can stop turning a profit altogether?

The CPUs are much cheaper last time.

I want to know if Tallest Skil bought one on release day as promised.

At these prices, he'd have to sell his house first. (Assuming he has a house)

[KBS756]

Was expecting the heavy price, but was also expecting more on the graphics end .... does anyone think they may add one gfx card higher (non workstation) in the near future?... also does anyone think there'll be a 30in led display by the end of this month? Thanks in advance

http://www.buy.com/prod/crucial-4gb-ddr3-sdram-memory-module-4gb-2-x-2gb-1066mhz-ddr3-1066-pc3/q/loc/101/206763179.html

lastly would this be the right ram for the comp?

[robinp]

The CPUs are much cheaper last time.



At these prices, he'd have to sell his house first. (Assuming he has a house)

unlikely, he's 18

[Ploki]

SO.
hows the quadcore nehalem versus octocore penryn?? :)

[grue]

unlikely, he's 18

That explains so very, very much

[robinp]

basically, I should have got the 3.2ghz 8 core back in november. It is the same price (well, a little cheaper in fact) as the new 2.23ghz 8 core and was probably a little quicker for most things. Damn

edit- and even more gutting is that you can't get edu discount on refurb, so I'm stuck getting the over priced crap they just released

[frimple]

At these prices, he'd have to sell his house first. (Assuming he has a house)

I believe he's been saving for some time expecting a over $5k investment. I just imagine that the let down of the actual product is so great that he isn't going to bother. Still only one PCI x16 slot, 4 drive bays... meh.... infact this whole revision is a lot of meh....

I'm interested in seeing what this will do to the prices on previous generations. Refurb store has a 3.2 for $4099, nothing in clearance.

Does anyone know if the single processor model is just missing a processor in it's socket? Also, is that a riser board for processor and memory off the mainboard?

[NoNameBrand]

The CPUs are much cheaper last time.

They aren't though - the 2.26 and 2.66 GHz chips that they're using in the base model are cheaper than the chips in the old base model!

The price increases for the higher clocked chips are perfectly reasonable, but the base prices should be much, much less than they are (~$800 CDN).

If nothing else, they should have kept the price points they had last time (per CPU) - now we have a quad at the same price as the old eight-core model. Even if the performance is very comparable between the new quad and old eight (based on this thread and others), the perception of value is completely shot.

[grue]

I'm interested in seeing what this will do to the prices on previous generations. Refurb store has a 3.2 for $4099, nothing in clearance.


I'm guessing my 8x3.0 Gen I with AppleCare is going to be pretty damned handy in terms of resale. With any luck I can sell it and buy an 8x2.8 Gen II for around the same price, so I don't keep getting buttraped on video card choices just because I have EFI32.

[Umbongo]

I believe he's been saving for some time expecting a over $5k investment. I just imagine that the let down of the actual product is so great that he isn't going to bother. Still only one PCI x16 slot, 4 drive bays... meh.... infact this whole revision is a lot of meh....

I'm interested in seeing what this will do to the prices on previous generations. Refurb store has a 3.2 for $4099, nothing in clearance.

Does anyone know if the single processor model is just missing a processor in it's socket? Also, is that a riser board for processor and memory off the mainboard?

It has two PCI-E 2.0 x16 slots, one is occupied by the base GPU.

[NoNameBrand]

LOL

I just did a price comparison, and the Mac Pros are cheaper in Canada than the US.

Canadian Mac Pro base prices, in US dollars:
quad 2.66: $2254.94
octo 2.26: $2954.99

That makes me think of it as good value now. Almost. :D

[8CoreWhore]

That explains so very, very much

Yeah, it explains why your prostate's about to explode and mine's not.

[grue]

LOL

I just did a price comparison, and the Mac Pros are cheaper in Canada than the US.

Canadian Mac Pro base prices, in US dollars:
quad 2.66: $2254.94
octo 2.26: $2954.99

That makes me think of it as good value now. Almost. :D

$2,892.36 and $3,792.41 here. Apple Australia can lick me where I pee.

[grue]

Yeah, it explains why your prostate's about to explode and mine's not.


My prostate's fine, it's my willingness to continue being an Apple customer that's having trouble.

[frimple]

Yeah, it explains why your prostate's about to explode and mine's not.

Whaa..?

[NoNameBrand]

$2,892.36 and $3,792.41 here. Apple Australia can lick me where I pee.

Wow. Apple sure gets you down-under. So to speak.

[grue]

Wow. Apple sure gets you down-under. So to speak.

Whenever possible, I buy machines in the US and bring them back here for a variety of reasons:

1. It's cheaper.
2. It means my money doesn't go to Apple Australia, which is universally regarded as the most useless company ever by those who have dealt with them and don't depend on them to sign their paycheque.

[Tallest Skil]

I was in a Physics lab during the announcement. I have just now had a chance to look it over.

Here is my response:

UTTER NONSENSE. COMPLETE, BAFFLING, BLASPHEMOUS NONSENSE.

What IS this?! Where do they get off?! What gives them the RIGHT to do this?!

Who in the... what in the... why.

Why. That's all. No more, no less. WHY.

WHY would they do this?

This tells us several things:

1. I was RIGHT. They COULD NOT fit the full Tylersburg into the current case. Why the didn't just make it longer, I'll never know.
2. I was RIGHT. They chose two 16x and two 4x over four 16x slots.
3. I was HALF-RIGHT. They put one DVI and one Mini DisplayPort on their graphics cards, meaning I only have to buy ONE adapter to use both of my displays.
4. We were SORT OF RIGHT. AirPort is still optional, for whatever unjust reason.
5. I was RIGHT. SATA SuperDrives, and faster, too.
6. I was RIGHT. No Blu-ray. :D
7.

In addition:

1. I was WRONG. 640GB standard instead of 500GB. I don't feel too bad. :D
2. I was WRONG. Radeon 4870 instead of GTX 260. The 4870 is slightly slower, apparently.
3. I was WRONG. NO Quadro option AT ALL. Strange...
4. I was WRONG. Four FireWire 800 instead of just two. Again, I don't feel bad about being wrong. :cool:

In addition, I was COMPLETELY right about the Mac Mini, so that is awesome.

I hope that these two threads show my critics that, while I am pessimistic, I'm generally RIGHT. Cool. This thread can be sent to the annals of history now. :D

Addendum:

That explains so very, very much

Mhmm...:confused:

Yeah, it explains why your prostate's about to explode and mine's not.

Very nice. :cool:

Addendum addendum:

Yes... Oh, yes... I'm still getting one today. I'll post specs once I have made my final decision on them, but I'm pretty sure I know what I'm getting.

[robinp]

basically, I don't believe the performance increase of nehalem = price increase. Totally shafting us

[grue]

4. We were SORT OF RIGHT. AirPort is still optional, for whatever unjust reason.

Because a lot of corporate and government research labs (you know, the places that buy these in a lot larger quantities than Apple fanboys who just want bragging rights) won't allow workstations to have wireless systems in them, for security reasons.

Same reason Apple would be out of their minds to implement an iSight in the 30" Cinema Display.

[frimple]

I hope that these two threads show my critics that, while I am pessimistic, I'm generally RIGHT. Cool. This thread can be sent to the annals of history now. :D


Well on shear count if you move your half right to half wrong and sorta right to not totally wrong I think your ratio is 60:40 ;)


Addendum addendum:

Yes... Oh, yes... I'm still getting one today. I'll post specs once I have made my final decision on them, but I'm pretty sure I know what I'm getting.

I'm guessing base line 8core and waiting to buy the 3.2's from aftermarket?

[liquidtrend]

Yes... Oh, yes... I'm still getting one today. I'll post specs once I have made my final decision on them, but I'm pretty sure I know what I'm getting.

i was very curious on this. it sucks that theyre going with the nehalems IMO. wish you coulda been right about the newer chipset.

and considering that i think you are right about tylersburg...then they will have to wait for a complete redesign until they can release a newer chipset than the nehalems huh?

[Tallest Skil]

Because a lot of corporate and government research labs (you know, the places that buy these in a lot larger quantities than Apple fanboys who just want bragging rights) won't allow workstations to have wireless systems in them, for security reasons.

Yep, you're right. That's the same reason that the current... wait... Penryn model (:p) didn't have it. Makes sense.

Same reason Apple would be out of their minds to implement an iSight in the 30" Cinema Display.[/QUOTE]

I don't know about that... ;)

i was very curious on this. it sucks that theyre going with the nehalems IMO. wish you coulda been right about the newer chipset.

and considering that i think you are right about tylersburg...then they will have to wait for a complete redesign until they can release a newer chipset than the nehalems huh?

HUH? is right. I have no idea what you're saying.

Look, they ARE using Nehalem (Gainestown) and Tylersburg now. They're just not using a FULL Tylersburg board.

Tylserburg has TWELVE DIMM slots, and the Mac Pro only has eight... MAX.

I KNEW that they couldn't fit all twelve in the same case.

I commend them, however, on how they DID redesign it. It's a masterpiece of engineering... but they've hit their limit, evidenced by the fact that they couldn't fit all the DIMM slots in there.

[ChrisTheFeral]

I was in a Physics lab during the announcement. I have just now had a chance to look it over.

Here is my response:

UTTER NONSENSE. COMPLETE, BAFFLING, BLASPHEMOUS NONSENSE.

What IS this?! Where do they get off?! What gives them the RIGHT to do this?!

Who in the... what in the... why.

Why. That's all. No more, no less. WHY.

WHY would they do this?

This tells us several things:

1. I was RIGHT. They COULD NOT fit the full Tylersburg into the current case. Why the didn't just make it longer, I'll never know.
2. I was RIGHT. They chose two 16x and two 4x over four 16x slots.
3. I was HALF-RIGHT. They put one DVI and one Mini DisplayPort on their graphics cards, meaning I only have to buy ONE adapter to use both of my displays.
4. We were SORT OF RIGHT. AirPort is still optional, for whatever unjust reason.
5. I was RIGHT. SATA SuperDrives, and faster, too.
6. I was RIGHT. No Blu-ray. :D
7.

In addition:

1. I was WRONG. 640GB standard instead of 500GB. I don't feel too bad. :D
2. I was WRONG. Radeon 4870 instead of GTX 260. The 4870 is slightly slower, apparently.
3. I was WRONG. NO Quadro option AT ALL. Strange...
4. I was WRONG. Four FireWire 800 instead of just two. Again, I don't feel bad about being wrong. :cool:

In addition, I was COMPLETELY right about the Mac Mini, so that is awesome.

I hope that these two threads show my critics that, while I am pessimistic, I'm generally RIGHT. Cool. This thread can be sent to the annals of history now. :D

Addendum:



Mhmm...:confused:



Very nice. :cool:

Addendum addendum:

Yes... Oh, yes... I'm still getting one today. I'll post specs once I have made my final decision on them, but I'm pretty sure I know what I'm getting.



What do you think, is the Australian price justifiable? I can get $400 off. That's roughly, $3,330 USD at this point in time (4 March, 2009.) Consider shipping and the dollar, do you think it's a reasonable price?

[m1stake]

A word of warning:

The final month may be upon us, but be ready for a Mac Pro with MacBook Air internals. These updates always seem to underwhelm.

Haha, Apple! Haha! This is a pretty good joke you've got going here!

EDIT:

Anybody have any idea what a GT120 is? I couldn't care less as if I buy one of these I'll get a 4870 with it, but curiosity must be satisfied.

EDIT2: When you buy preinstalled software, do you get a retail disk of that software as well? For $50 I might be kind of open to getting iWork.

[sumowax]

If you had to go with....

The older single quad 2.8GHz
The newer single quad 2.66GHz
The newer single quad 2.93GHz

...which one would you pick? Considering the 8Gb vs 32Gb of ram potential of the older model also.

[bradleykavin]

is this machine worth it? i feel like the difference in speed wont be much, and this new machine doesnt "feel" new....

compare this machine to a standard 2.8 8 core with 2 gigs memory, etc.....

[BenRoethig]

So, I just priced it out in a configuration that I would buy. I left out display and wifi. $50 wifi and a $230 increase over a Dell ultra-sharp is not unreasonable for getting a webcam and LED backlight in return.

2.66ghz bloomfield quad core (2499)
6GB of memory (150)
Radeon 4870 (200)
$2850

More or less your average Core i7 machine with ECC support. Dell will give you more or less the same configuration for $1550. Granted, they have to be using the using the Tylersburg DP Northbridge with all the configurations (assuming its not on the tray) and memory prices could very greatly depending on whether its registered or unbuffered ECC memory, though it seems to be he much cheaper unbuffered verity by the upgrade prices. Still, the 2.66ghz bloomfield costs half of what the 2.83ghz Harpertown did and the prices I've seen on the dual socket x58 boards aren't that much more than the 5400 boards. Either Apple has jacked up the margins significantly or they had some sort of discount deal with intel for Xeons and because of Apple using nvidia chipsets, intel is now making them pay full price.

[grue]

If you had to go with....

The older single quad 2.8GHz
The newer single quad 2.66GHz
The newer single quad 2.93GHz

...which one would you pick? Considering the 8Gb vs 32Gb of ram potential of the older model also.


Older 2.8, no questions asked.

[grue]

I don't know about that... ;)

I do. A very large percentage of ACD30 sales go to the aforementioned research labs in my experience (granted that's anecdotal), and they rarely allow cameras around sensitive stuff.

However, Apple has shown time and time again that they really don't give a god damn about real world usage and will go and do stupid stuff in the name of making something look pretty.

[Setmose]

If the OS supports 4870 I wonder if it will be possible to put an X2 version in there? :apple:

[robinp]

Older 2.8, no questions asked.

more to the point, if you are thinking about the new 2.93 quad, then just buy an old 2.8 8-core. That will undoubtedly be quicker

[Ploki]

Come on, SOMEONE ANSWER ME :D

Base early 2008 (8x2,8) VS Base 2009

same price, what about specs? do they match up or dows the early 08 octo crush the 4core nehalem?

What if you consider snow leo which is multicorewhore?

[Umbongo]

Anybody have any idea what a GT120 is?

GT120 = 9500GT = 8600GT

[Infrared]

2006 Mac Pro - $2,499 Two 2.66GHz dual core ($690 per processor) $1,119 + processors
2008 Mac Pro - $2,799 Two 2.80GHz quad core ($797 per processor) $1,205 + processors

2009 Mac Pro - $2,499 One 2.66GHz quad core ($284 per processor) $2,215 + processor
2009 Mac Pro - $3,299 Two 2.26GHz quad core ($373 per processor) $2,553 + processors

They have gone from good pricing to ridiculous.

From my other post:

Prices before and after:

Early 2008:
4 x 2.8GHz ($2,299) (£1,399) ($1.64 = £1)
8 x 2.8GHz ($2,799) (£1,712) ($1.63 = £1)
8 x 3.0GHz ($3,599) (£2,202) ($1.63 = £1)
8 x 3.2GHz ($4,399) (£2,701) ($1.63 = £1)

Early 2009:
4 x 2.66GHz ($2,499) (£1,899) ($1.32 = £1)
4 x 2.93GHz ($2,999) (£2,299) ($1.30 = £1)
8 x 2.26GHz ($3,299) (£2,499) ($1.32 = £1)
8 x 2.66GHz ($4,699) (£3,619) ($1.30 = £1)
8 x 2.93GHz ($5,899) (£4,579) ($1.29 = £1)

[iMacmatician]

I hope that these two threads show my critics that, while I am pessimistic, I'm generally RIGHT. Cool. This thread can be sent to the annals of history now. :D:cool:

I'm even more optimistic about pessimism now!

basically, I don't believe the performance increase of nehalem = price increase. Totally shafting usWhich is basically the other half of the Nehalem vs. Core 2 performances. Even if you do get "2x performance," you don't pay the same price.

[BenRoethig]

Come on, SOMEONE ANSWER ME :D

Base early 2008 (8x2,8) VS Base 2009

same price, what about specs? do they match up or dows the early 08 octo crush the 4core nehalem?

What if you consider snow leo which is multicorewhore?

In apps that will take advantage of the extra cores, most likely, the latter.

[Ploki]

Woohoo! :D

also apps that take advantage of RAM. :D
i cant believe it has the same ram limit as friggin mbp !?

[BenRoethig]

:cool:
I'm even more optimistic about pessimism now!

I don't think even the most pessimistic could have imagined what happened today.

[Infrared]

Well, 1.7x is not so far from 2x.

Yes, but in computing one expects performance gains at little or no
cost. More than a year has passed and we should expect more for
the same money. It's called "progress" :)

[bradleykavin]

i think this release is a rush release, due to the lack of updates on the mac pro...


i think i might wait another six months or so... i think the next update will be THE update... new body style, etc..

when we got the new macbook and macbook pros, it was an event..a big deal..a big change... this new mac pro, is not a big change..

also, i think apple is aware that consumers dont understand the idea of virtual cores... even though i do believe a large portion of mac pro buyers are professionals who might understand, none the less. i am torn...i might just not by this model.... i cant see the 8 core machine, being priced the way it is, being WORTH the price. this doesnt feel right to me... can someone elaborate either in my favor or prove me wrong? dont you guys feel like this update is just a quick update? i mean the 30 in display is still the same, wtf?!

[sumowax]

more to the point, if you are thinking about the new 2.93 quad, then just buy an old 2.8 8-core. That will undoubtedly be quicker

Where can I get a good price on one?

[DantesAID]

Hey guys,

What happened ?:) Where are those 16cores XEONs ? I thought new macPros will have new 8cores CPUs,1 single CPU = 8cores.

and whats up with all those prices. I just checked official apple site and the moment if u get Two 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon the price jumps to $6,919.00, are u kidding me........

What do they think at Apple, that all of us split cocaine everyday and thats how we make our $$$...

[grue]

even though i do believe a large portion of mac pro buyers are professionals who might understand, none the less.


I assure you, most of them are just people who buy a tool and know nothing about it.

[m1stake]

The $2500 starter is basically what I would go to Micro Center and buy all the parts for if I wanted to replace my PC. Not so bad. Unfortunately, that PC would be something like $1800 retail.

Here's what I'm considering:

Single Quad 2.66 ($500 for your 2.93 upgrade? LOL)
6GB
(Considering a third party RAID card again because of the dip in price, I'm betting on a sub $2,000 employee purchase price in May)
640GB HDD, Depending on what brand it is I'll probably sell it and buy some drives that don't suck.
HP 2475W 24" Screen (Thanks nano!)
AirPort
Maybe iWork 09
Apple Care (It's cut in half for the purchase programs, $125 isn't bad)

$3197 retail without the screen.

God damn, I've got half a mind to just but the 2.8 and throw a 4870 in there.

[kevink2]

Is intel dropping the existing CPUs, forcing an early apple upgrade?

Maybe the better upgrade is waiting on snow leopard?

[mdk100]

I waited for a new system until MacWorld, but went ahead afterwards and bought an 8-core Mac Pro. My old PC had died, so I had to have something. I'm not sorry now, though I was worried about it for a while. I don't run any professional applications or memory-constrained apps, so I think the 8-core will last me a long time. I got it for $2600 total, so not bad when you consider the $200-300 in taxes normally. I got twelve months no payments or interest, and anticipate the memory prices on the old units to be lower, so I don't feel too bad! :D ...and it should still run Snow Leopard for another punch in performance!

For those interested, it's still available on the Amazon site with free shipping: http://www.amazon.com/Apple-MA970LL-Quad-Core-Processors-SuperDrive/dp/B000VR4F2Q/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1236096795&sr=8-1

[robinp]

Where can I get a good price on one?

where are you? I'm sure there are any number of places that still have them in stock... here's one to start: http://www.jigsaw24.com/default.aspx?t=ITEMS&v=&vbc=&vc=&p=1WG-DESKSC-APPPL-MACPFC-CORE2.8CC

[Umbongo]

Is intel dropping the existing CPUs, forcing an early apple upgrade?

Maybe the better upgrade is waiting on snow leopard?

No I don't think so. Apple have actively managed to get processors early.

[Tesselator]

I assure you, most of them are just people who buy a tool and know nothing about it.

I dunno... I bought my MacPro v1.1 and didn't know anything other than it had Xeons in it.

Of course I soon upgraded it myself to x5355 procs, 8Gig RAM, and flashed a decent graphics card. Selling off the old; I ended up with an 8 core 2.66, 8Gigs, 1TB 3Drive RAID0 + 1TB single, and a 8800 Nvidia all for just under $3k.

I think Apple blew it on the prices too but 16 virtual cores sounds like fun. Maybe if we all boycott the new units till they drop $300 off of both they'll get it and do it??

BTW, anyone know specifically what processor numbers they're using?

[LimaOhioJoe]

Older 2.8, no questions asked.

I am a Mac enthusiast with LITTLE (ok, almost none) tech savvy, so pls be kind to this honest question: Today I expect delivery of a Apple store 2008 refurb single cpu 2.8 MacPro that I bought last week.

Buyers Lament being what it is, I have been following this thread daily and
now am wondering if :

1.. my decision to get the above was just rookie dumb luck...I think I know the answer to this....

2. if for some reason I would want to sell the above machine ...which is doubtful but not impossible...would this refurb now, considering todays MacPro's news, be even more desirable?

Now remember I barely know the difference between a front size bus and
bus sized front....

[Infrared]

Did they lower the cache sizes too? The 2009 models say 8 MB L3 cache but don't mention the L2 which on the 2008 was 12 MB.

I believe the cache situation may be as described here:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3448&p=4

But do correct me if I'm wrong.


I wouldn't mind going for the low end 4-core but I would need WAY more ram than 8 GB. This and the price and quite frustrating.

Yes. Also, another CPU cannot be added to the 4-core system.
The existing chip cannot be used in a dual socket configuration.

[bradleykavin]

Is intel dropping the existing CPUs, forcing an early apple upgrade?

Maybe the better upgrade is waiting on snow leopard?

very possible. I think we need to look at the business aspect of apple, as this move doesn't seem very consumer oriented. Remember how they released the new macbook and macbook pro? This release, should have been something similar, especially for the new mac pro (the damn exterior is near what, 4 years old now?).

I think I am going to upgrade the memory I have in my current computer, and wait this out. I would not be surprised if this ends up being like the last mac pro situation. They release mac pros, then update them to all have 8 cores in 2008. I also believe the next version will have a major exterior re-design, something that I would be very unhappy with if I in fact bought this computer.

I think it comes down to whether or not your willing/can wait a while for the new one. I just do not see the new mac pros being worth what they are being offered at.

I also think that the pro users who buy machines to do cinema work for the most part, have no idea what type of computer their buying. They just know its the "Fastest mac". When they look and see the new mac pro has a slower clock speed, and the same amount of cores, it could deter a user from buying the machine. If i knew little about computers, and went to the apple site this morning, I would have laughed to myself and said "wtf, apples retarded."

This update of the mac pro reminds me of the release of the macbook air. Useless, and would have been more beneficial for apple to wait, and get it right, then pull something out of their ass. Apple hasnt even changed the mac pro portion of the website entirely (still some pictures from the previous model). This is an indicator apples being sloppy on this one, which isnt like apple......

I apologize for any grammatical/spelling errors, I am in a rush to school (pretty ironic).

[sumowax]

where are you? I'm sure there are any number of places that still have them in stock... here's one to start: http://www.jigsaw24.com/default.aspx?t=ITEMS&v=&vbc=&vc=&p=1WG-DESKSC-APPPL-MACPFC-CORE2.8CC

Sorry. I'm currently in the U.S.A

[Setmose]

No I don't think so. Apple have actively managed to get processors early.

Yes, and not even the 3.2 GHz Gainestowns. They probably paid a premium for that, and they are passing along the cost. That means there are several immediate bump-ups coming for Mac Pro, at a minimum the 3.2 GHz. I'm going to have to think seriously about waiting for the Snow Leopard version.

I think we are starting to miss Steve Jobs having his hands on the day-to-day decision making. :apple:

[robinp]

Sorry. I'm currently in the U.S.A

well try the amazon link that someone else posted

[ildondeigiocchi]

Does the new Mac Pro even have SLI?

[nanofrog]

Hey guys,

What happened ?:) Where are those 16cores XEONs ? I thought new macPros will have new 8cores CPUs,1 single CPU = 8cores.

and whats up with all those prices. I just checked official apple site and the moment if u get Two 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon the price jumps to $6,919.00, are u kidding me........

What do they think at Apple, that all of us split cocaine everyday and thats how we make our $$$...
8 core CPU's are Beckton, which isn't out yet.

The new models surprised me, as I'm finding myself disappointed. :( Base model is underpowered, and ~$500USD more. To bump it to what was expected is just too much $$$. It seems the value that was once the MP, is now gone. :rolleyes: :( :(

$4,899.00 for 2x 2.66GHz and an HD4870? :eek: Ouch. :apple:

[Tesselator]

It seems the value that was once the MP, is now gone. :rolleyes: :( :(

$4,899.00 for 2x 2.66GHz and an HD4870? :eek: Ouch. :apple:

Too true. Very sad! :(

Anyone know what specific model number procs are actually being used?

[bvk]

Dumb question, but I'm confused as well - are these new Nehalem processors just that much better on their own to justify a single 2.6 as the base model?

I have to buy one to replace my '06 model, which was a 4 core 2.6 in 2 duals, I'm very disappointed that I'm stuck with 2.6 GHz again. But hopeful there'll be a big difference in it being a single 4 core processor.

Maybe I'll just buy an iMac & save a ton of cash :mad:

[Umbongo]

Yes, and not even the 3.2 GHz Gainestowns. They probably paid a premium for that, and they are passing along the cost. That means there are several immediate bump-ups coming for Mac Pro, at a minimum the 3.2 GHz. I'm going to have to think seriously about waiting for the Snow Leopard version.

I think we are starting to miss Steve Jobs having his hands on the day-to-day decision making. :apple:

Oh don't doubt Steve had a hand in this.

[Umbongo]

Dumb question, but I'm confused as well - are these new Nehalem processors just that much better on their own to justify a single 2.6 as the base model?

I have to buy one to replace my '06 model, which was a 4 core 2.6 in 2 duals, I'm very disappointed that I'm stuck with 2.6 GHz again. But hopeful there'll be a big difference in it being a single 4 core processor.

Maybe I'll just buy an iMac & save a ton of cash :mad:

A single 2.66GHz nehalem is a lot faster than your 2.66GHz.

[ceres]

Man, pricing is just brutal even in the EURO Zone.
The Quad Machine is particularly disappointing bc there is no justification for the price. The E3 Xeon is cheap.
Also, still no eSATA, included wireless or more than 4 HDD trays and other stuff that should be there in 2009.
The 4870 is very welcome but should be available with 1 Gig of Memory.
It really shows that the Early 08 Model was a very good value impossible to DIY for the same $$$.

[Tesselator]

Dumb question, but I'm confused as well - are these new Nehalem processors just that much better on their own to justify a single 2.6 as the base model?

I have to buy one to replace my '06 model, which was a 4 core 2.6 in 2 duals, I'm very disappointed that I'm stuck with 2.6 GHz again. But hopeful there'll be a big difference in it being a single 4 core processor.

Maybe I'll just buy an iMac & save a ton of cash :mad:

The new 2.66 will be very close to two times the speed of the 06' version 2.66 (quad to quad). A little more for some things and a little less for others.

http://images.apple.com/macpro/docs/MacPro_CS3_Report.pdf
http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html

[nanofrog]

Too true. Very sad! :(

Anyone know what specific model number procs are actually being used?
Yes. :)

X5550 = 2.66GHz part
E5520 = 2.26GHz part

Here's a link (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-product-roadmap-2009,6384.html) to the Xeon 5500 series parts. (Scroll down a bit). ;)

[Eidorian]

A single 2.66GHz nehalem is a lot faster than your 2.66GHz.Good lord Intel is charging on those dual socket Nehalems.

[Tallest Skil]

Does the new Mac Pro even have SLI?

Tylersburg supports it, so it could very well be possible in WINDOWS only.

[Tesselator]

Yes. :)

X5550 = 2.66GHz part
E5520 = 2.26GHz part

Here's a link (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-product-roadmap-2009,6384.html) to the Xeon 5500 series parts. (Scroll down a bit). ;)


Thanks man!!!

[m1stake]

The 2.66 in the single is a 3500 series chip according to Apple's site.

[KBS756]

Does anyone know where the cheapest place to get 16GB (8x2GB) for the new nehalem mac pro is? dont wanna spend 500 with apple if its cheaper elsewhere (but lookin round i havent seen cheaper) thanks in advance

[kuep]

Yes. :)

X5550 = 2.66GHz part
E5520 = 2.26GHz part

Here's a link (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-product-roadmap-2009,6384.html) to the Xeon 5500 series parts. (Scroll down a bit). ;)

# 8-core: Two 2.26GHz, 2.66GHz or 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon 5500 series processors
# Quad-core: One 2.66GHz or 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon 3500 series processor

:confused:

[Eidorian]

The 2.66 in the single is a 3500 series chip according to Apple's site.Oh snap, talk about markup for that single socket Xeon. Yes it's there.

[Horst]

Yes, but in computing one expects performance gains at little or no
cost. More than a year has passed and we should expect more for
the same money. It's called "progress" :)

Amen, bro.

There should be a big sticker on the new Mac Pros, saying 'Rev. A, guinea pigs only' .

Can't wait to see some barefeats comparisons, but I guess there'll be little to no performance gains unless one spends an insane amount of money.

[frimple]

Does anyone know where the cheapest place to get 16GB (8x2GB) for the new nehalem mac pro is? dont wanna spend 500 with apple if its cheaper elsewhere (but lookin round i havent seen cheaper) thanks in advance

That depends on if you want registered memory or not. The egg doesn't have any registered DDR3 ATM.

[BenRoethig]

Does the new Mac Pro even have SLI?

The chipset has that capability, but its currently dormant.

[iMacmatician]

Amen, bro.

There should be a big sticker on the new Mac Pros, saying 'Rev. A, guinea pigs only' .

Can't wait to see some barefeats comparisons, but I guess there'll be little to no performance gains unless one spends an insane amount of money.Nehalem does give a lot of performance, but as you say they are more expensive.

[Fomaphone]

what did you go for? I'm stuck trying to work out what config

Two 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
8GB (4x2GB)
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB
Two 18x SuperDrives
Apple Mighty Mouse
Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad (English) and User's Guide
AirPort Extreme Wi-Fi Card with 802.11n
Apple Mini DisplayPort to DVI Adapter

$4,222.00 With Student ADC, before NYS sales tax

[nanofrog]

The 2.66 in the single is a 3500 series chip according to Apple's site.
I'll have to look at that one. IIRC, the Workstation parts have not released yet.

Those are what I wanted. Settled for an i7-920 to tide me over until they release, as I acquired all the other parts.

It was driving me crazy to not be able to do anything, as all of it is useless without a CPU. :D :p
Does anyone know where the cheapest place to get 16GB (8x2GB) for the new nehalem mac pro is? dont wanna spend 500 with apple if its cheaper elsewhere (but lookin round i havent seen cheaper) thanks in advance
For the '08 or '09 model?

I ask, as the '09 only has a maximum of 3 channels per CPU. If this is what you're looking for, Crucial has been offering DDR3 Unbuffered ECC DIMM's for awhile. Pricing isn't terrible either.

[nanofrog]

Two 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
8GB (4x2GB)
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB
Two 18x SuperDrives
Apple Mighty Mouse
Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad (English) and User's Guide
AirPort Extreme Wi-Fi Card with 802.11n
Apple Mini DisplayPort to DVI Adapter

$4,222.00 With Student ADC, before NYS sales tax

Nice discount :), though still a little high IMO. :(

[Setmose]

If it supports the HD 4870, would we be able to stick a stock HD 4870 X2 in there? They are both 2-slots wide. Wouldn't most of the driver calls be the same, leaving the X2 to divide up the internal processing as it sees fit? It will be supported in Boot Camp Windows, but what about OS X Leopard? Or does the Mac version 4870 have a special ROM? Any speculation welcome. :apple:

[Fomaphone]

If it supports the HD 4870, would we be able to stick a stock HD 4870 X2 in there? They are both 2-slots wide. Wouldn't most of the driver calls be the same, leaving the X2 to divide up the internal processing as it sees fit? It will be supported in Boot Camp Windows, but what about OS X Leopard? Or does the Mac version 4870 have a special ROM? Any speculation welcome. :apple:

i believe the power supply wouldn't be able to handle it, or at least that there aren't available aux. power cables

Nice discount :), though still a little high IMO. :(

yeah, i saved about a thousand bucks but i had hoped to be able to get the RAID card or the 2.93ghz for this amount of money, but i NEED a machine and this is more than capable of editing 1080p ProRes

i got te 1tb drive so that i can do a software raid with my existing 1tb drive and the extra 2gb of RAM from apple so that i'll have 2gb sticks across the board when i order more third party.

still have to purchase an APC UPS and eBay applecare.

[robinp]

Two 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
8GB (4x2GB)
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB
Two 18x SuperDrives
Apple Mighty Mouse
Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad (English) and User's Guide
AirPort Extreme Wi-Fi Card with 802.11n
Apple Mini DisplayPort to DVI Adapter

$4,222.00 With Student ADC, before NYS sales tax

I've been trying to find out what discount I would get with student ADC in UK, but no one seems to be able to tell me. Really annoying. How do you go about ordering once you're a member?

[odinsride]

I wanted a new Nehalem Mac Pro so bad before today. I am severely disappointed by the prices for what they're offering, so forget it. No thanks, Apple. :mad:

[KBS756]

I'll have to look at that one. IIRC, the Workstation parts have not released yet.

Those are what I wanted. Settled for an i7-920 to tide me over until they release, as I acquired all the other parts.

It was driving me crazy to not be able to do anything, as all of it is useless without a CPU. :D :p

For the '08 or '09 model?

I ask, as the '09 only has a maximum of 3 channels per CPU. If this is what you're looking for, Crucial has been offering DDR3 Unbuffered ECC DIMM's for awhile. Pricing isn't terrible either.

Apple lets u build the new 09 one with 8 slots filled with 2 gb each so thats tge one i am asking about thx

[Setmose]

i believe the power supply wouldn't be able to handle it, or at least that there aren't available aux. power cables

Well, it can handle 4 of the Nvidia cards as that is BTO option. But I don't know what the power spec is for 4870 X2. I could see that cables might be a problem if 4870 X2 expects to plug an additional power cable onto the motherboard. I would have to look at that.

I'm talking specifically about making the 4870 X2 the only graphic card in there. :apple:

[tokyorose]

Howdy,

I was waiting for six months for this to come out. Obviously this release is very disappointing and I will not be giving Apple my money.

Would anyone here be able to suggest a parts configuration so that I could build something comparable myself?

Which motherboard, power supply, case, cpu's ram?

I think a little list, situated somewhere between the current and last rev's technology would be a very illuminating and useful for the folks here.

I am right in the middle of a 60 shot fully cg project starring Cheech and Chong... I am working on it alone on a 2ghz dual opeteron and single frame renders in Mental Ray are taking anywhere between an hour to five... I really need to get something figured out.

[m1stake]

I'll have to look at that one. IIRC, the Workstation parts have not released yet.

Those are what I wanted. Settled for an i7-920 to tide me over until they release, as I acquired all the other parts.

It was driving me crazy to not be able to do anything, as all of it is useless without a CPU. :D :p

Upper left hand corner under "Processing." (http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html)

Go figure :/

[m1stake]

Howdy,

I was waiting for six months for this to come out. Obviously this release is very disappointing and I will not be giving Apple my money.

Would anyone here be able to suggest a parts configuration so that I could build something comparable myself?

Which motherboard, power supply, case, cpu's ram?

I am right in the middle of a 60 shot fully cg project starring Cheech and Chong... I am working on it alone on a 2ghz dual opeteron and single frame renders in Mental Ray are taking anywhere between an hour to five... I really need to get something figured out.

If you don't really know what you're doing, you might want to give a store like Micro Center or Fry's a call, depending on which one is more local for you. They can help you choose the parts best for you.

Oops, double post. ;p

[nanofrog]

i believe the power supply wouldn't be able to handle it, or at least that there aren't available aux. power cables
I would think power would be a problem as well. :(

As I understand it, the board still only provides 2x 6 pin PCIe power connectors.

yeah, i saved about a thousand bucks but i had hoped to be able to get the RAID card or the 2.93ghz for this amount of money, but i NEED a machine and this is more than capable of editing 1080p ProRes

i got te 1tb drive so that i can do a software raid with my existing 1tb drive and the extra 2gb of RAM from apple so that i'll have 2gb sticks across the board when i order more third party.

still have to purchase an APC UPS and eBay applecare.
I know how you feel... Expensive to get what you need, but I assume you certainly have the justification. As long as it makes you money, it will be well worth it.

You can always upgrade to hardware RAID at a later time. ;)
Apple lets u build the new 09 one with 8 slots filled with 2 gb each so thats tge one i am asking about thx
I haven't yet had a chance to look that closely at it. I was more interested in pricing/basic specs. :eek: :p

Either way, Crucial is currently offering DDR3 in both Unbuffered and Registered variants. Other sites may have updated their sites to coincide with today's release. (Haven't looked yet).
Howdy,

I was waiting for six months for this to come out. Obviously this release is very disappointing and I will not be giving Apple my money.

Would anyone here be able to suggest a parts configuration so that I could build something comparable myself?

Which motherboard, power supply, case, cpu's ram?

I think a little list, situated somewhere between the current and last rev's technology would be a very illuminating and useful for the folks here.

I am right in the middle of a 60 shot fully cg project starring Cheech and Chong... I am working on it alone on a 2ghz dual opeteron and single frame renders in Mental Ray are taking anywhere between an hour to five... I really need to get something figured out.
You might want to start a new thread. ;)

Prepare to be patient though, as last I looked (a few days ago), I couldn't get enough details on any of the DP boards. None of the manufacturer sites I looked at had anything posted yet. All I could find were SKU's/extremely basic descriptions on a couple of sites, such as provantage.

I plan to do this research myself, as I might need to swap the workstation board I installed this weekend if it doesn't prove to do what I need, though I think it will. :D

[nanofrog]

Upper left hand corner under "Processing." (http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html)

Go figure :/

Thanks. :)

Boy, did they get greedy. :eek: The Xeon 3500 series parts are at the same pricing as the Core i7's! :rolleyes:

Hopefully they'll be available now, as I want one (W3570). I'd be able to return the i7-920 I bought. :D

[m1stake]

Pardon my ignorance, but is there a tangible difference?

On the up side, the memory prices aren't terrible anymore.

[Eidorian]

Pardon my ignorance, but is there a tangible difference?Apple is making a killing in profits since the 3500 Series is just another label for the current i7 9xx line.

The 2.66 GHz i7 920 hovers between $229-279 on a good day.

[Setmose]

Well, it can handle 4 of the Nvidia cards as that is BTO option. But I don't know what the power spec is for 4870 X2. I could see that cables might be a problem if 4870 X2 expects to plug an additional power cable onto the motherboard. I would have to look at that.

I'm talking specifically about making the 4870 X2 the only graphic card in there. :apple:

Bare Feats has 4870 X2 running under Vista 64 Ultimate in Harpertown 8-core 3.2 Mac Pro:

http://www.barefeats.com/harper19.html

Obviously, the card fits and runs ok with the Mac Pro power supply. Specifically they tested this version: Sapphire Radeon HD 4870 X2 100251SR (2GB GDDR5).

So I think we are really close to the possibility of support for it under OS X. If Leopard now has ATI/AMD 4xxx support, it is just a case of exactly what is included there.

I think I just rescued some enthusiasm from this mess! :apple:

[tokyorose]

Unfortunately, that was my first post so I wont be able to start a new thread till I hit 20 (unlikely)

The Frys in my area are populated by cretins.

Before I start to research, what would be an estimated total for a self built computer with comparable spec to the mid range of the last iteration of Mac Pro's. How about the 2.66 of todays offering?

I would greatly appreciate any advice.


I would think power would be a problem as well. :(

As I understand it, the board still only provides 2x 6 pin PCIe power connectors.


I know how you feel... Expensive to get what you need, but I assume you certainly have the justification. As long as it makes you money, it will be well worth it.

You can always upgrade to hardware RAID at a later time. ;)

I haven't yet had a chance to look that closely at it. I was more interested in pricing/basic specs. :eek: :p

Either way, Crucial is currently offering DDR3 in both Unbuffered and Registered variants. Other sites may have updated their sites to coincide with today's release. (Haven't looked yet).

You might want to start a new thread. ;)

Prepare to be patient though, as last I looked (a few days ago), I couldn't get enough details on any of the DP boards. None of the manufacturer sites I looked at had anything posted yet. All I could find were SKU's/extremely basic descriptions on a couple of sites, such as provantage.

I plan to do this research myself, as I might need to swap the workstation board I installed this weekend if it doesn't prove to do what I need, though I think it will. :D

[apolloa]

Well you can all go and buy your new toy's now eh? :D
But I see NO quadro? On a workstation class product? And what the fudge cake is with Apple, they update their entire desktop range, timecapsule and wireless rotuers, speed bumps it's laptops without so much of a speckle of glamour?
Is it changing times for Apple now?

[nanofrog]

Pardon my ignorance, but is there a tangible difference?

On the up side, the memory prices aren't terrible anymore.
Yes. :) ECC support is ENABLED in the W35xx parts. :D
Apple is making a killing in profits since the 3500 Series is just another label for the current i7 9xx line.

The 2.66 GHz i7 920 hovers between $229-279 on a good day.
Hence the "greed" comment. ;) :D

ECC support is the only difference.
Bare Feats has 4870 X2 running under Vista 64 Ultimate in Harpertown 8-core 3.2 Mac Pro:

http://www.barefeats.com/harper19.html

Obviously, the card fits and runs ok with the Mac Pro power supply. Specifically they tested this version: Sapphire Radeon HD 4870 X2 100251SR (2GB GDDR5).

So I think we are really close to the possibility of support for it under OS X. If Leopard now has ATI/AMD 4xxx support, it is just a case of exactly what is included there.

I think I just rescued some enthusiasm about this mess for myself. :apple:
Nice to know Rob got it running. :D I would have thought power would be an issue.

I'll have to read through his review. Thanks for the link. :)
Unfortunately, that was my first post so I wont be able to start a new thread till I hit 20 (unlikely)

The Frys in my area are populated by cretins.

Before I start to research, what would be an estimated total for a self built computer with comparable spec to the mid range of the last iteration of Mac Pro's. How about the 2.66 of todays offering?

I would greatly appreciate any advice.
:cool: No problem. :)

I'll start a thread then to git it started. :D (Please give me a little time though). ;)

[jjahshik32]

Oh my ******** LORD!!!!!! I just looked at the apple website and saw this!!! OMG!! its finally out!!

Are these available in stores yet???

[Tesselator]

yeah, i saved about a thousand bucks but i had hoped to be able to get the RAID card or the 2.93ghz for this amount of money, but i NEED a machine and this is more than capable of editing 1080p ProRes


I know how you feel... Expensive to get what you need, but I assume you certainly have the justification. As long as it makes you money, it will be well worth it.

You can always upgrade to hardware RAID at a later time. ;)



I have a Mac Pro v1.1 (first generation) that I upgraded myself to x5355 2.66 quad processors and a 3-drive internal (soft) RAID-0. It edits 1080p quite smoothly! It's one of the main things I do with my Mac. 3D rendering and video editing. On the Soft RAID I get a little over 300MB/s sustained average over the outer 80% of the platter surfaces. That's like 3 maybe 4 streams in real time.

I'm sure the new 8-core boxes are faster but just so you know... ;)

[nanofrog]

Oh my ******** LORD!!!!!! I just looked at the apple website and saw this!!! OMG!! its finally out!!

Are these available in stores yet???
Have you seen the specs and prices though? :eek: :p

[BenRoethig]

Apple is making a killing in profits since the 3500 Series is just another label for the current i7 9xx line.

The 2.66 GHz i7 920 hovers between $229-279 on a good day.

vs. $690 for the 2.83ghz E5440 in the previous generation. x58 DP chipset is a bit more expensive, but memory is less expensive. If there wasn't some kind of discount that Apple is no longer getting, they might be making close to double on the new machines. So, either intel is now making them pay the same as Dell does (assuming they weren't) or Apple is taking the pro user for a ride with 50 or 60% margins.

[jjahshik32]

Have you seen the specs and prices though? :eek: :p

I think we were too overly expecting too much, but its a very good improvement over the last gen mac pros. I mean I dont mind 2x more speed than the last gen mac pro for just $300 more (and the higher end mac pros havnt been really benchmarked yet).

[m1stake]

I think we were too overly expecting too much, but its a very good improvement over the last gen mac pros. I mean I dont mind 2x more speed than the last gen mac pro for just $300 more (and the higher end mac pros havnt been really benchmarked yet).

The 2.93Ghz 8 core 2009 isn't even twice as fast as the 3.2Ghz 8 core 2008. While we've known this for months ever since Nehalem came out, the idea was that the 8 core 2.66 would be the same price or $200 more.

What's really scary about this comparison is that I bet the single 2.66 09 model is slower or identical to the 8 core 2008.

[nanofrog]

vs. $690 for the 2.83ghz E5440 in the previous generation. x58 DP chipset is a bit more expensive, but memory is less expensive. If there wasn't some kind of discount that Apple is no longer getting, they might be making close to double on the new machines. So, either intel is now making them pay the same as Dell does (assuming they weren't) or Apple is taking the pro user for a ride with 50 or 60% margins.
I'm not sure, but it doesn't seem to coincide with Apple's statement of "reduced margins". ;) :rolleyes:
I think we were too overly expecting too much, but its a very good improvement over the last gen mac pros. I mean I dont mind 2x more speed than the last gen mac pro for just $300 more (and the higher end mac pros havnt been really benchmarked yet).
Check out the performance (http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html) page.

They're using the 3.2GHz '08 as the baseline, and comparing it to the 2.93GHz '09 model.

I don't see the 2.26GHz model beating the 2.8GHz '08 myself, but I would like to see the comparison. ;)

[jjahshik32]

I'm not sure, but it doesn't seem to coincide with Apple's statement of "reduced margins". ;) :rolleyes:

Check out the performance (http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html) page.

They're using the 3.2GHz '08 as the baseline, and comparing it to the 2.93GHz '09 model.

I don't see the 2.26GHz model beating the 2.8GHz '08 myself, but I would like to see the comparison. ;)

I guess we'll have to wait for barefeats to do the job.

[Setmose]

I'm not sure, but it doesn't seem to coincide with Apple's statement of "reduced margins". ;) :rolleyes:

Check out the performance (http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html) page.

They're using the 3.2GHz '08 as the baseline, and comparing it to the 2.93GHz '09 model.

I don't see the 2.26GHz model beating the 2.8GHz '08 myself, but I would like to see the comparison. ;)

http://www.barefeats.com/nehal01.html

Based on our extrapolations from Apple's published performance tests, the "early 2009" 2.26GHz 8-core will equal the "early 2008" 3.2GHz 8-core on many benchmarks and the "early 2009" 2.66GHz 8-core will beat it on all benchmarks. In other words, you don't have to spend $6K+ on the 2.93GHz version to beat the fastest "early 2008" Mac Pro.

:apple:

[nanofrog]

http://www.barefeats.com/nehal01.html

Based on our extrapolations from Apple's published performance tests, the "early 2009" 2.26GHz 8-core will equal the "early 2008" 3.2GHz 8-core on many benchmarks and the "early 2009" 2.66GHz 8-core will beat it on all benchmarks. In other words, you don't have to spend $6K+ on the 2.93GHz version to beat the fastest "early 2008" Mac Pro.

:apple:
Thanks for the link. I need to read through it, as I really want to see how the 2.26GHz part stacks up. :)

[jjahshik32]

I just called my local apple store and none have any of the new macs available in store...

Anyone here have any of the new macs available in their stores as of today??

[KBS756]

http://www.barefeats.com/nehal01.html

Based on our extrapolations from Apple's published performance tests, the "early 2009" 2.26GHz 8-core will equal the "early 2008" 3.2GHz 8-core on many benchmarks and the "early 2009" 2.66GHz 8-core will beat it on all benchmarks. In other words, you don't have to spend $6K+ on the 2.93GHz version to beat the fastest "early 2008" Mac Pro.

:apple:

This is why i dont get why so many people are so offended with the prices (they are high but not astronomically) i was expecting a price bump when this was adopted anyway..., was hoping for a higher graphics option though one with 1gb+ of memory but underworkstation ... oh well ... I am actually happy that i could not afford a mac pro a month ago when i wanted to get one, its looking like i will be able to afford ordering one within a week now and with the performance upgrades with the cpu I will be quite happy. (wonder if there will be any other graphics cards coming out though ... that i could upgrade to down the road). On a side note does anyone know when we'll be seein a 30in led ACD? most had said with a mac pro release ... Thx in advance

[nanofrog]

This is why i dont get why so many people are so offended with the prices (they are high but not astronomically) i was expecting a price bump when this was adopted anyway..., was hoping for a higher graphics option though one with 1gb+ of memory but underworkstation ... oh well ... I am actually happy that i could not afford a mac pro a month ago when i wanted to get one, its looking like i will be able to afford ordering one within a week now and with the performance upgrades with the cpu I will be quite happy. (wonder if there will be any other graphics cards coming out though ... that i could upgrade to down the road). On a side note does anyone know when we'll be seein a 30in led ACD? most had said with a mac pro release ... Thx in advance
I looked at the extrapolations. Hard to tell, but I'm not sure 2.26GHz parts will quite make it, as equal performers to the 2.8GHz Harpertowns.

I'd prefer to wait for Rob to finish up the actual comparison. Hard numbers beats extrapolations any day. ;) :D

[Schrei]

I got to feel with you apple people.
Seems the older versions of mac pro are a bargin now.
Single Nehalem xeon processor? whats the point of that anyway? Way to expensive ram. Also extremely bad options for ram configuration. 6x1gb ? wtf is with that. Isnt the point of ddr3 the tripple channel ?

Im also really disapointed at the graphic card selection. All the rest of the world is playing with cuda and their 4870 x2, quadros, dont get me started on teslas. Here there is virtually no progress.
I really thought apple will make something really impressive this time as well, but this was a complete miss.

[Setmose]

I looked at the extrapolations. Hard to tell, but I'm not sure 2.26GHz parts will quite make it, as equal performers to the 2.8GHz Harpertowns.

I'd prefer to wait for Rob to finish up the actual comparison. Hard numbers beats extrapolations any day. ;) :D

Remember that you stand to get a significant performance boost when you slap on Snow Leopard. :apple:

[BenRoethig]

I'm not sure, but it doesn't seem to coincide with Apple's statement of "reduced margins". ;) :rolleyes:

Reduced margins was so last year. 2009 is super high margins.

[Chaos123x]

Meh, I'm keeping my 2.8ghz octo.

These updates seem crappy.

Yeah yeah they might be faster.

But on paper they look slower and they cost more.

I can't justify upgrading in my head.


Could wait for Barefeats to do it's thing, but by that time the price of the 2008 machines will drop.

[Setmose]

I got to feel with you apple people.
Seems the older versions of mac pro are a bargin now.
Single Nehalem xeon processor? whats the point of that anyway? Way to expensive ram. Also extremely bad options for ram configuration. 6x1gb ? wtf is with that. Isnt the point of ddr3 the tripple channel ?

Im also really disapointed at the graphic card selection. All the rest of the world is playing with cuda and their 4870 x2, quadros, dont get me started on teslas. Here there is virtually no progress.
I really thought apple will make something really impressive this time as well, but this was a complete miss.

4870 X2 may be supported, just not CTO from Apple. I've sent a note to Rob at Bare Feats asking for clarification on that. It's already working and massively benchmarked by Bare Feats in Boot Camp -- see my earlier post. :apple:

[DCIFRTHS]

I'm confused about the memory speeds on the new Mac Pro. Hopefully someone can help me...

The speed that is currently offered is 1066. Why did Apple not choose the faster 1333 memory speeds?

Also, I was under the impression that each new CPU could access up to 3 channels (DIMM slots), and if 3 slots are populated, this would give the best performance. Is this correct? Why is Apple offering 8 memory slots, and will performance be affected by the amount of memory modules used?

Thanks!

[nanofrog]

Remember that you stand to get a significant performance boost when you slap on Snow Leopard. :apple:
Currently, it's improved hardware though. We should get a performance boost regardless of Snow Leopard. :eek: That one will just sweeten the deal. :p For an extra $129 or so. ;)
Reduced margins was so last year. 2009 is super high margins.
LOL! :D Apparently... :rolleyes: ;)

[NoNameBrand]

This is why i dont get why so many people are so offended with the prices (they are high but not astronomically) i was expecting a price bump when this was adopted anyway...

I, for one, was expecting the 8x2.66 model to be where the 8x2.26 model is in terms of price. When I saw the 8x2.26 model number last night, I hoped that it would be at the previous 8x2.8 price, with the 4x2.66 at the 4x2.8 price (I guess it is in the US (??), but we got price increases in Canada).


Remember that you stand to get a significant performance boost when you slap on Snow Leopard. :apple:

Why wouldn't Snow Leopard apply equally to the last bunch of Mac Pros? they're all multi-core 64-bit systems.

[iMacmatician]

I'm confused about the memory speeds on the new Mac Pro. Hopefully someone can help me...

The speed that is currently offered is 1066. Why did Apple not choose the faster 1333 memory speeds?Is it because they have the 2.27 GHz CPU, which is DDR3-1067 rated?

[Setmose]

I, for one, was expecting the 8x2.66 model to be where the 8x2.26 model is in terms of price. When I saw the 8x2.26 model number last night, I hoped that it would be at the previous 8x2.8 price, with the 4x2.66 at the 4x2.8 price (I guess it is in the US (??), but we got price increases in Canada).




Why wouldn't Snow Leopard apply equally to the last bunch of Mac Pros? they're all multi-core 64-bit systems.

Grand Central is optimal on Nehalem hyper-threading architecture. :apple:

[DoFoT9]

I, for one, was expecting the 8x2.66 model to be where the 8x2.26 model is in terms of price. When I saw the 8x2.26 model number last night, I hoped that it would be at the previous 8x2.8 price, with the 4x2.66 at the 4x2.8 price (I guess it is in the US (??), but we got price increases in Canada).




Why wouldn't Snow Leopard apply equally to the last bunch of Mac Pros? they're all multi-core 64-bit systems.

everywhere got price increases. i guess that is because of the economy and because the updates in terms of performance are better then before..

[NoNameBrand]

Grand Central is optimal on Nehalem hyper-threading architecture. :apple:

Is it really? Or is this just "conventional wisdom"?

The last version of hyperthreading gave a 20-30% boost compared to turning it off. I assumed hyperthreading was already accounted for in the benchmarks between Nehalem and earlier Xeons.

[Chaos123x]

hmmm people are poor the economy is bad.


Lets increase the prices.

[Umbongo]

Is it because they have the 2.27 GHz CPU, which is DDR3-1067 rated?

The X5520 (2.26), W3540 (2.93) and W3520 (2.66) have 1066MHz memory controllers so yes. The difference is an extra 25% memory bandwidth with 1333MHz DIMMs.

[Eidorian]

hmmm people are poor the economy is bad.


Lets increase the prices.While true even the few machines that they convince someone to buy are going to make record profits.

[Umbongo]

Is it really? Or is this just "conventional wisdom"?

The last version of hyperthreading gave a 20-30% boost compared to turning it off. I assumed hyperthreading was already accounted for in the benchmarks between Nehalem and earlier Xeons.

There are benchrmarks out there with it on and off.

[nanofrog]

I'm confused about the memory speeds on the new Mac Pro. Hopefully someone can help me...

The speed that is currently offered is 1066. Why did Apple not choose the faster 1333 memory speeds?

Also, I was under the impression that each new CPU could access up to 3 channels (DIMM slots), and if 3 slots are populated, this would give the best performance. Is this correct? Why is Apple offering 8 memory slots, and will performance be affected by the amount of memory modules used?

Thanks!
As Umbongo indicated, 1066 is what the CPU's support. The 2.93GHz part, OTOH, does use the 1333 variety.

As for the 8 memory slots, my guess is they didn't have the room for more. There's other Core i7 boards that have done the same per se, (4 DIMM slots), and one of them is shared. That is, 1 channel has 2 DIMM slots, and the other two are 1 DIMM/channnel. Now double this up for the additional CPU. This would make sense, as to how it's wired at least. ;)

[Tesselator]

There are benchrmarks out there with it on and off.

Link us up bro!

[jjahshik32]

While true even the few machines that they convince someone to buy are going to make record profits.

Yea this is the reason why Apple raised prices.. you have to in a bad economy for businesses.

Even small businesses raise a little in their products that they sell and in this case Apple's Mac Pros are equivalent in the inflations.. I wished the 2.66ghz was $3299 though..*sigh*

I can sell my 15" 2.53ghz mbp and still have to shell out $2800 more for the 2.66ghz mac pro. :(

[carolhayes]

I'm not sure, but it doesn't seem to coincide with Apple's statement of "reduced margins". ;) :rolleyes:

Check out the performance (http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html) page.

They're using the 3.2GHz '08 as the baseline, and comparing it to the 2.93GHz '09 model.

I don't see the 2.26GHz model beating the 2.8GHz '08 myself, but I would like to see the comparison. ;)

How long will it take to run the benchmarks. I have to return the 2.8 at some point so I need to know if its the same as the 2.26. Any ideas?

[Salavat23]

I was really looking forward to the new Nehalem Mac Pros, but am very dissapointed.

For a quad core 2.66ghz Nehalem (basically identical to the Core i7 920), 3GB of ram, and mere GT 120, you pay nearly $3000. Not to mention that for the quad, you are limited to 8GB of ram, and you can only run one DVI/VGA monitor with the standard video card.

Sorry, but thats pathetic. You can easily build a sub-$1000 dollar PC that matches that computers performance, and allows for more memory expandibility (up to 24GB instead of the Q-MacPros 8GB) and of course a greater choice of other hardware.

However, the 8-core Nehalem Mac Pro is indeed worth the price IMO if you are already willing to shell out close to $4000. You get up to 32GB ram expandibility, and faster CPUs.

The 2008 Mac Pros were actually worth the price for what you got. I'm afraid I cannot say the same for these.

[Tallest Skil]

Hey, guys... um...

Apple's scalping 1066MHz RAM for the Mac Pro.

Would the Gainestown model be able to use third-party 1333MHz? It doesn't look like Apple is doing those proprietary heat sinks anymore, so is it possible for OWC to offer 1333MHz RAM down the line? Would that play nice with existing 1066, or would you have to swap all the RAM at once?

Just want to know for my purchase.

[Salavat23]

Would the Gainestown model be able to use third-party 1333MHz? It doesn't look like Apple is doing those proprietary heat sinks anymore, so is it possible for OWC to offer 1333MHz RAM down the line? Would that play nice with existing 1066, or would you have to swap all the RAM at once?

Just want to know for my purchase.

Thats not possible because the QPI is locked. You could put in 1333MHz ram, but it would only run at 1066MHz.

[Anonymous Freak]

To follow up:

According to tech specs, it has two x16 slots and two x4 electrical slots; all x16 physical. All PCI Express 2.0. So the x4 lanes have doubled in speed compared to the previous Mac Pro. (On the previous model, the x4 lanes were only PCI Express 1.1.)

[Umbongo]

This is why i dont get why so many people are so offended with the prices (they are high but not astronomically) i was expecting a price bump when this was adopted anyway..., was hoping for a higher graphics option though one with 1gb+ of memory but underworkstation ... oh well ... I am actually happy that i could not afford a mac pro a month ago when i wanted to get one, its looking like i will be able to afford ordering one within a week now and with the performance upgrades with the cpu I will be quite happy. (wonder if there will be any other graphics cards coming out though ... that i could upgrade to down the road). On a side note does anyone know when we'll be seein a 30in led ACD? most had said with a mac pro release ... Thx in advance

Consider it like this:

The only thing that really changed is the processors, the single socket 2.66GHz/2.93Ghz will also have a logicboard that is cheaper. The old Mac Pro had two $800 processors, the new one has two $375 processors but costs $500 more. The single socket system costs $300 less but is using one $300 processor. The price issue is Apple going from great value to poor value. I'm sure Dell and HP's dual socket offerings will be similar to Apple, it is just disappointing to see. The poor GPU options and limit of 4/8 memory slots is also sucky.

[Tallest Skil]

Thats not possible because the QPI is locked. You could put in 1333MHz ram, but it would only run at 1066MHz.

Well, that's a pile of crap. :p

Ah, well. That just means that third party RAM will start out cheaper and get even cheaper more quickly.

[rylin]

The single socket system costs $300 less but is using one $300 processor.

No, it costs $500 more.
Love,

/ The other side of the pond.

[Umbongo]

No, it costs $500 more.
Love,

/ The other side of the pond.

:(

[Chaos123x]

This update is a early April fools joke right?

[m1stake]

This update is a early April fools joke right?

Nope.

Dear Power Users,

We're tired of selling things to you. Why don't go go buy a nice X58 and two GTX 295's and never talk to us again.

Apple

[Eidorian]

Nope.

Dear Power Users,

We're tired of selling things to you. Why don't go go buy a nice X58 and two GTX 295's and never talk to us again.

AppleCheaper than a Mac Pro...

[apolloa]

Consider it like this:

The only thing that really changed is the processors, the single socket 2.66GHz/2.93Ghz will also have a logicboard that is cheaper. The old Mac Pro had two $800 processors, the new one has two $375 processors but costs $500 more. The single socket system costs $300 less but is using one $300 processor. The price issue is Apple going from great value to poor value. I'm sure Dell and HP's dual socket offerings will be similar to Apple, it is just disappointing to see. The poor GPU options and limit of 4/8 memory slots is also sucky.

Why do you think the single CPU MPro will have a cheaper motherboard? It'll be the same mother board across the range, ANY dual socket board pretty much can run with one CPU in it. And why are you all moaning? Are you really that surprised the price has gone up? look at the new Mac Book.....

[rylin]

:(

What's worse is yesterday, the systems were basically at purchase parity.
There was less than a $100 difference between buying in the US and buying in Sweden, which means that I could have actually bested Apple's price by a few bucks by selling to the US.

Today is a bleak, bleak day.
To put things in perspective.. it's costs more to buy one locally than it does for me to fly to NYC, buy a MP and return.
I hate it when that happens, even though I want to take a new trip to NYC.

Having to check the MP on a cattle class flight would suck, to say the least.

[rylin]

Why do you think the single CPU MPro will have a cheaper motherboard? It'll be the same mother board across the range, ANY dual socket board pretty much can run with one CPU in it. And why are you all moaning? Are you really that surprised the price has gone up? look at the new Mac Book.....

The single socket mobo is not the same as the dual socket one.
There's most definitely a noticeable price difference -- don't try to pretend otherwise.

[m1stake]

Cheaper than a Mac Pro...

Exactly. Where is the value? I have decided to wait on passing final judgments until seeing some apples to apples benchmarks, but it really seems as if the 2008 is the way to go.

[nanofrog]

How long will it take to run the benchmarks. I have to return the 2.8 at some point so I need to know if its the same as the 2.26. Any ideas?
After getting the system, I'd guess a week. Ultimately it depends on what else he has to get done, but I'd think this is high priority for him. ;) :D
Hey, guys... um...

Apple's scalping 1066MHz RAM for the Mac Pro.

Would the Gainestown model be able to use third-party 1333MHz? It doesn't look like Apple is doing those proprietary heat sinks anymore, so is it possible for OWC to offer 1333MHz RAM down the line? Would that play nice with existing 1066, or would you have to swap all the RAM at once?

Just want to know for my purchase.
As mentioned, the multiplier is locked. The only thing you can do, is over clocking. Increase the BCLK frequency and the voltages, provided it's actually possible.

Personally, I wouldn't bet on it. :apple:

Perhaps someone will write a 3rd party app that would allow you to do this. But for now, assume you're stuck with stock settings.

[Umbongo]

Why do you think the single CPU MPro will have a cheaper motherboard? It'll be the same mother board across the range, ANY dual socket board pretty much can run with one CPU in it. And why are you all moaning? Are you really that surprised the price has gone up? look at the new Mac Book.....

I'm not moaning, I'm explaining why people feel this is a poor update and as someone else has said, the boards are different as they are using two different types of Xeons now and the Xeon 3500s can not run on dual socket boards.

[Chaos123x]

how much would it cost to buy the 2.93ghz and replace the 2.26ghz Procs with them?

Is it even possible?

[Umbongo]

how much would it cost to buy the 2.93ghz and replace the 2.26ghz Procs with them?

Is it even possible?

They are like $1,600-$1,700 right now, but they aren't released. The lowest you will probably see them is $1400.

[Justinm59]

is it a good idea just to go with the old 2.8ghz? I'd save $1000 compared to the new low end 8 core.

[Fomaphone]

was my $4600 best spent on the 2009 octo 2.66 (8gb RAM, GPU upgrade, 1tb HD. 2x superdrives. airport) or should i sell it when it arrives without opening the box and buy a refurb 2008 octo 3.2?

[m1stake]

is it a good idea just to go with the old 2.8ghz? I'd save $1000 compared to the new low end 8 core.

After waiting for this thing for a year and six months, I really don't want to do that. But, I'm fairly convinced that I would have been smarter to buy the 2008 model back in November when Apple was doing it's biannual reseller deals. Hindsight is 20/20 I suppose.

[Umbongo]

was my $4600 best spent on the 2009 octo 2.66 (8gb RAM, GPU upgrade, 1tb HD. 2x superdrives. airport) or should i sell it when it arrives without opening the box and buy a refurb 2008 octo 3.2?

The 8 core 2.66GHz system is a great choice and a better option that the older 3.2GHz, I certainly would prefer that over a 3.2GHz.

[Tallest Skil]

Hey, why does barefeats.com not exist anymore? I want benchmarks! :D

[voyagerd]

Lets hope ZDnet.de updates their Mac Pro overclocking utility. There is no way I could afford anything over 2.26GHz.

[BenRoethig]

This update is a early April fools joke right?

The jokes is sure on us and Apple is seriously laughing their tails off. They know we only have two choices, pay them whatever fee they command or leave for windows.

[nanofrog]

I'm not moaning, I'm explaining why people feel this is a poor update and as someone else has said, the boards are different as they are using two different types of Xeons now and the Xeon 3500s can not run on dual socket boards.
The architecture is definitely different, and can't be considered on a 1:1 clock scale any longer.

It would assume at this point, Apple is using a different board in the Quad core versions, and it would only have a single socket. The DP boards would allow a single processor to operate, even the W35xx parts. :eek: (Intel did nicely with QPI). ;)
how much would it cost to buy the 2.93ghz and replace the 2.26ghz Procs with them?

Is it even possible?
It would be possible, but not cost effective. Assuming you mean to upgrade later down the road, I doubt the prices will drop much below what we'd se in around Sept., provided it follows the same pattern as the Harpertowns did. The current economy may change this however. Not really sure at this point.

If you are serious about getting the new model, and can swing it, I'd go for the 2.66 at purchase, as it would be cheaper in the long run. (Or 2.93 if your needs warrant it). ;)
is it a good idea just to go with the old 2.8ghz? I'd save $1000 compared to the new low end 8 core.

was my $4600 best spent on the 2009 octo 2.66 (8gb RAM, GPU upgrade, 1tb HD. 2x superdrives. airport) or should i sell it when it arrives without opening the box and buy a refurb 2008 octo 3.2?
Justinm59 & Fomaphone: Wait for benchmarks on the new base model first before making a quick decision. I don't think we'll have to wait too long for Rob at barefeats (http://www.barefeats.com/nehal01.html) to post. :)

[BenRoethig]

Hey, why does barefeats.com not exist anymore? I want benchmarks! :D

I think Apple bankrupted them this time around.

[Umbongo]

The architecture is definitely different, and can't be considered on a 1:1 clock scale any longer.

It would assume at this point, Apple is using a different board in the Quad core versions, and it would only have a single socket. The DP boards would allow a single processor to operate, even the W35xx parts. :eek: (Intel did nicely with QPI). ;)

ehurtley said they wouldn't, so I took his word for it. Close to as official as we have right?