Who's anticipating buying a 2010 Mac Pro?

[VirtualRain]

Assuming the 2010's are priced in line or even better than the 2009's, who's thinking of buying one?

If they offer quad, hex, octo, and dodeca core machines, what will you be looking to buy?

What will you be upgrading from?

[bearcatrp]

Not me. Will wait for sandy bridge which is 2011. My 2008 mac pro is doing just fine now. I expect a price hike for the updated mac pro's. Which is outrageous now. :eek:

[beaker7]

will buy whatever machine has the most cores. Upgrading from 2.93 2009 Octo. The 2009 machine will join the render farm.

[Drumjim85]

My company wants to buy a few 09 versions right now, and it's killing me knowing (thinking) that there's going to be an update soon.

[Transporteur]

I'm definitely not updating.
Considering that the next generation won't be a major architecture upgrade, I'm waiting for the next big thing, probably 2011 or 2012.

[mds]

I'm just waiting to pull the trigger. I'm looking at the $2500 one. If they only add a high end BTO option, then I'll just pick up a refurb 08 or 09. Ideally they'd have a 6 core or at least core shrunk 4 core...we'll see. I'm really ready for a new machine though!!

[Icaras]

Well, I was at one point, so set on getting a new 2010 Mac Pro, but I've pretty much made up my mind that I will be waiting for the new 2010 iMac i7.

All the glum pricing talk here has ultimately swayed me over. I simply cannot justify the price of a Mac Pro (considering they continue the current pricing trends...) vs. an iMac i7 with that gorgeous 27" display.

I've priced a low end Mac Pro with an inferior compared display to over $3000. I can just find so many uses for the extra $1000 if i go iMac.

But I promised myself to at least take a close look at the new Mac Pros when they do come out, just to see my options again. But yea, I had that anticipation before, but it's all directed for an iMac now.

Edit: Btw, I am an avid ebay seller, so I have no problem in selling older machines for newer models. And due to their simplicity, iMacs are just so much easier to pack up and ship, rather than shipping lumbering towers while detailing every single upgrade and component to the buyer. Some people that are pro-Mac Pro like to argue about it's versatility as an upgradeable tower, which is a definite plus, don't get me wrong, but personally I have no problem living by with keeping an iMac for 3 years until Apple Care runs out and then painlessly selling it to refresh the entire system.

[peskaa]

Well, I just got a 2.93 Quad off Apple as a replacement for my endless dodgy 27" i7 iMac, and I'm happy with it. I can't see the 2010 Mac Pros offering much more either, and I'm expecting the GPU to work in mine which is all I'm bothered about.

[CCK]

Working on a G5 PM right now, so I'm in pretty desperate need of an upgrade, especially since my next film project is going to have a lot of stills in it and I want to do it in prores 422 and the new FCS isn't for PPC. Transferring & backing up to new HDs right now so I'll be able to (hopefully) pop them in & be ready to work on day 1. So I'll be a little disappointed if could have gotten an 08 and not missed out on anything.

[hoj]

Looking forward to new hardware. It's been a _very_ long wait for me since the current machine is a 2001 733MHz G4 Quicksilver! I imagine that it will be several ( >>2) times faster. :D

[J the Ninja]

I may buy one later on in the year, or I might just wait it out until the Sandy Bridge ones show up. I don't know. I definitely won't be getting one right away though. Still not far along enough in the whole "media student" thing to need it QUITE yet.

[telequest]

Our 2004-era dual 2.0GHz G5s have been workhorses and paid for themselves many times over. We probably should have picked up the 2008s when they came out, but waited long enough that we figured the 2009s would be a better bet. But then feedback in places like these forums convinced me that the 09s were a step backward in many respects. And the G5s have kept doing a serviceable job with Final Cut Studio, at least with standard def projects. So ... here's hoping that the 2010s will be out soon ... and an unambiguous leap forward. Then again, there's always the Refurb store with the 08s.

I do miss the old days when PowerMac updates were ALWAYS significant improvements from the previous generation (G3, G4, G5), and we never had to wait more than half a year or so for a nice speed bump ... and you had a choice of good, better or best models with prices that were pretty much proportionate to the value. It still boggles my mind that the best Pro macs available today may well be the models that were released 25 months ago.

[Pernille]

Upgrading from my G5 the moment they are available. I struck a deal with my employer. They will buy me the Mac Pro in exchange for a 12 month salary reduction. This lowers my income tax, effectively saving me 40ish % on the price of the Mac Pro.

[Magic Lantern]

They can't release a new Mac Pro fast enough for me! I am still chugging along on a dual 2.7 G5 with money ready and waiting for the upgrade. Everyday I go to the store to see if there has been a silent upgrade, I refresh Macrumors every 10 mins!

I am so tempted everyday to buy a 2009 - but I know the day after I do the 2010's will be released...

It is frustrating...

[mds]

They can't release a new Mac Pro fast enough for me! I am still chugging along on a dual 2.7 G5 with money ready and waiting for the upgrade. Everyday I go to the store to see if there has been a silent upgrade, I refresh Macrumors every 10 mins!

I am so tempted everyday to buy a 2009 - but I know the day after I do the 2010's will be released...

It is frustrating...

Maybe you can do the rest of us a favor and buy a 2009 today so we can all get a 2010 tomorrow!! :D

[student_trap]

I do think that they will be cheaper, however I don't aim to get a new mac pro for a fair while (my 2008 is still plenty fast for me!)

[jetjaguar]

i was planning on getting a 2010 but then i got a great deal on a 09 octo with a monitor .. so i couldnt pass it up .. next upgrade probably wont be until sandy bridge

[Cynicalone]

Having purchased an 09 in March. I won't be upgrading for a while.

I'm usually on a 3 to 5 year upgrade path. Usually closer to 3 years, it really depends on what Apple does with it's hardware.

[Magic Lantern]

Maybe you can do the rest of us a favor and buy a 2009 today so we can all get a 2010 tomorrow!! :D

Well if you all want to have a whip round I will happily oblige ;)

[CCK]

So ... here's hoping that the 2010s will be out soon ... and an unambiguous leap forward. Then again, there's always the Refurb store with the 08s.


If the 10s are unimpressive, I think the 08s will be hard to find.

[jamesfabin]

I'm eagerly awaiting the day they come available - I'm in need of upgrading my Original Intel Mac Pro and it's very outdated video card. I'm sticking with the Mac Pro since I used a SATA Raid card and external SATA enclosures. If the iMac offered just a couple SATA ports, I'd consider it - but since it doesn't (and I don't want to go down to Firewire 800 speed) I'll stick with the next Mac Pro.

[ildondeigiocchi]

Honestly, unless they offer some major overhaul to the case with a stunning design and insane Hardware options, I think I will skip the update. I'll probably just end up buying the high end GPU option from Apple as an upgrade for my 4870. At this point it seems highly probable that Apple will opt for the 5870.

[oban14]

The 2008 is still doing just fine for me. Probably the best value Apple ever offered, especially seeing the price/performance of the 2009s.

I'll wait until 2011 if not later.

[Techhie]

Hopefully they will have a highly clocked octad for me, I've been juggling '08s and '09s off and on since November. I need something with a GPU that can handle these 30" displays without having to shell out for a $100 adapter :rolleyes:

[nanofrog]

I need something with a GPU that can handle these 30" displays without having to shell out for a $100 adapter :rolleyes:
If it's from Apple, it will have at least one MDP, and not likely to include 2x DVI (dual link) ports for running 2x 30" displays (let alone more 30" 'ers than that :p). :(

You'd either have to use an adapter, or wait for a hack (i.e. someone to post the ROM in order to flash a PC version).

[Topper]

The 2008 is still doing just fine for me.

Yep, my feelings exactly.

I can't picture it but IF the '10 Mac Pro has some outstanding features that I just can't live without, I'll trade my '08 in on it.
.

[TheStrudel]

To those waiting for the next "tock" instead of buying on this "tick":

's computers are usually superior on the second revision. If you think of each Intel processor "tock" as a new generation (and for Mac Pro layout, it pretty much is), your "tick" (2008, 2010) computers are likely to be more reliable and have fewer issues.

That said, there aren't enough data points and 2010 machines will make the case for or against this, but I thought it was worth pointing out.

If 2010 is a price reduction and not a hike, it may be just as worth buying as the 2008s were (or are still for some people). And of course, 2009 refurbs will be available at more substantial discounts, if that's your thing.

[smacman]

I think for those that already own an 08 or 09 Mac Pro, it's fair to say that only those who are CPU constrained will benefit from the 2010 model. I have always thought that the CPU is only a small part of the performance equation on these machines. Simply adding an SSD can make things seem a lot faster.

Anyone care to further speculate on non-cpu additions to the 2010 models?

[Techhie]

Anyone care to further speculate on non-cpu additions to the 2010 models?

The RAM will likely be at the same clock because the same chipset/logic board is involved, however Apple may boost the bare minimum to 6 GB (depending on how many slots there are on the model). A new graphics card is a must, though hopefully this time Apple uses something a little less anemic. Possibly (but doubtfully) an addition of USB 3.0 to the machines, but it will still be running SATA 3 GB/s. There's not much in terms of major revision they can do without altering the logic board, so I'm going to guess it will use the same case design (no 2009-like remodels). Maybe dual-ODDs in all models? We have to look at our estimation as if profit margin was the main prerogative :rolleyes:

[VirtualRain]

I could see the new default graphics card being Nvidia's GT240 which would be a significant upgrade from the GT120 but still less than half the power of a serious gaming card.

It would be nice if they offered a GPU with dual MDP ports for those that want to use dual 24" LED ACD's.

I could also see Apple offering a BTO SSD but as usual, people would be foolish to pay the Apple tax on such an upgrade.

USB 3.0 is also a candidate as someone else suggested, but that would require logic board changes (adding the popular NEC USB3 chip) and since the new CPU's are a drop-in replacement (with a firmware microcode update) I'd be surprised if they invested in a logic board redesign when there's no other compelling reason to. If I was Apple, I'd opt to wait until Intel integrates USB3 into their ICH logic.

[nanofrog]

USB 3.0 is also a candidate as someone else suggested, but that would require logic board changes (adding the popular NEC USB3 chip) and since the new CPU's are a drop-in replacement (with a firmware microcode update) I'd be surprised if they invested in a logic board redesign when there's no other compelling reason to. If I was Apple, I'd opt to wait until Intel integrates USB3 into their ICH logic.
I hadn't looked at the component packaging previously, but it looks like you may be correct here as the NEC chip (µPD720200 (http://www.necel.com/nesdis/image/S19784EJ2V0PB00.pdf)) is a FPBGA176.

Do you happen to know the package used in the '09's?

[sOid]

Depending on the specs and pricing; me.

I really need a new desktop. I currently work with a Macbook and attached S-IPS monitor. Works fine for most of the work I do, but ever since getting a camera that shoots 21megapixel raws, it's a pain in the ass to work on.

I don't want to buy an iMac because I hate glossy screens and there are too few upgrade options available for the iMac (mainly the lack of multiple hard disks).

So, I'll buy a 2010 MP or a 2009 MP, depending on the price and specs.

[twoodcc]

i'm thinking about getting one. we'll see. but hopefully they'll be released next month

[gardinen]

Yep, I will definitely order the 2010 Mac Pro when it's available. I just cancelled my order on a new Mac Pro Quad, and I really need a new computer. So I hope they won't be to long.

[Cycom]

'09's were such a disappointment across the board. I hope Apple has some nice updates this time around...and at reasonable prices. Otherwise I'll hunt down an '08 and add whatever high end graphics cards option is introduced (hopefully a 5870).

[drummerlondonw3]

I already have a 23 display and would love the extra power a MP would offer. I will have to see but at the moment the current range is not competitive

[Cindori]

I'm jumping on the 2010 model too. :)

[MacsRgr8]

I have a 2008 Mac Pro with Radeon 4870 ATM.
Fantastic machine, never gave a hiccup.. whatever OS.. 10.5.x, 10.6.x, XP, Vista, 7.

I enjoy this Mac 2 years now, and will happily enjoy it another year if there is no reason to upgrade.
Yes, a 12 Core, > 3.0 GHz, Hyperthread enabled, SSD boot ?? (like Xserve), 1333 MHz RAM, Radeon 5890.....
OKAY!!! Those are reasons.... hehe...

TBO, I will be looking and comparing. Give Barefeats (http://www.barefeats.com/) the time to show some speed results.

But... what about.. maybe 27" or 30" (or even bigger) LED Cinema Displays to complement the "fastest Mac ever?"

[Shademaster]

The 2008 is still doing just fine for me. Probably the best value Apple ever offered, especially seeing the price/performance of the 2009s.

I'll wait until 2011 if not later.

Same for me. I am so happy with mine I think it is going to last me another 3 years. In the mean time I'll use a renderfarm if things get really hot.

[sgunes]

I am planning to get a new 2010 MacPro.
I had planned to get the 2009 Octads but it was just not worth the price.
In the meantime, I am making due with a Lifehacker Hackintosh with C2Q 2.83GHz and 8GB RAM which is comparable in speed to a MacPro quad.

As most here, I hope that they give us a decent upgrade for a fair price.

I would be very disappointed if they just use the Westmeres with a half-ass graphics card upgrade and jack up the prices like crazy.
That would deserve another Hitler rant like with the iPad.

[alphaod]

The '09 Mac Pro was the update I waited for, so I'm happy to own and be able to use for years to come; I have considered getting a few SSDs striped, another monitor, more RAM… these things cost money, so a new computer is not in the menu.

[puckhead193]

ideally I would like apple to release new MPs and MBPs the same date and get a middle line of each... should suite my mobile and everyday computing... but I'll more then likely get a mbp

[Techhie]

ideally I would like apple to release new MPs and MBPs the same date and get a middle line of each... should suite my mobile and everyday computing... but I'll more then likely get a mbp

Yeah, even looking at the equally sexy MP, I miss that beautiful unibody SOB of mine :rolleyes:

[Voltaic]

The Xeon processor performance does not justify the added cost vs. an i7. Apple used to make good Macs, now they are just glorified PCs. Proof of this is in the latest hardware issues across the product line.

I agree with what some said here, the compelling reason to buy a Mac is still the OS. Sadly, the very jewel Apple holds is being neglected as well. There has been a complete lack of innovation on the "Mac" side of Apple's business the last few years.

I have always owned Mac towers, at the current prices I can not justify ever buying one again. I may be forced to buy an iMac (once the current quality issues are resolved) even though it does not offer what I need. If Apple stays this course, I will migrate to a Hackintosh/Windows PC over the next few years, then abandon the Mac for good after 20 years. Windows if catching up fast to Mac OS. When I see "value" in current PC offerings, I just can not justify the outrageous Mac Pro prices for questionable performance advantages and hardly any real upgrade offerings:

http://www.amazon.com/Gateway-FX6831-03-Desktop-PC-Black/dp/B0031U1J2O/ref=wl_it_dp_o?ie=UTF8&coliid=I29QKOPPA3ZM04&colid=1PLSQ9LUJMOJX

[Techhie]

If Apple stays this course, I will migrate to a Hackintosh/Windows PC over the next few years, then abandon the Mac for good after 20 years.

Isn't it a bit premature to be making predictions about the course of computing for the next 20 years? :rolleyes:

[Fast Shadow]

Considering I can barely make use of the potential of my current Mac Pro, definitely not replacing it for a long time.

[nanofrog]

Isn't it a bit premature to be making predictions about the course of computing for the next 20 years? :rolleyes:
I didn't see it as a prediction for anything but Voltaic's expectation of having to switch to a PC and Windows in the near future. ;) :p

[eelpout]

Hmmm, why do people expect Mac Pro pricing do be any different with the new crop? Here we are, months after the Lynnfield iMacs were introduced and no Mac Pro price has been cut when one would think they would have been.

You expect things to get more reasonable? Really? :confused:

[Full of Win]

I am! Because then there might be some nice discount on the previous model.

[twoodcc]

well doesn't apple have a history of never lowering prices until they update the product?

[GMink]

I'll get a 2010 model if I hit the lottery, keep your fingers crossed! lol

[lemonade-maker]

I'll get a 2010 model if I hit the lottery, keep your fingers crossed! lol

Save up that money you'd spend on the lottery for the Mac Pro. Your odds are much better.

[MitchLewis]

The waiting is killing me. We started ordering equipment for our new marketing/video post-production company back in December, and everything is now in place EXCEPT the main video editing computer. While I'm waiting for the mythical 12-core Mac Pro, I've been using my older 17-inch MacBook Pro laptop for video editing. Clients sitting over my shoulder while I'm editing have to be thinking "I'm paying $XXX per hour for him to edit on a laptop?"

I NEED APPLE TO ANNOUNCE THE 12-CORE MAC PRO ASAP! PLEASE! :)

I'm waiting until March 1st and if there's no announcement, I'm ordering from their current line up. (everyone cross their fingers that the beast is introduced sooner than later)

[Doc69]

I'm getting one if I can get a dual CPU Mac Pro for under 3K. $3,300 + tax for todays low end 2.26GHz 8 core model is just too much.

Also, if they offered a single quad CPU (i7 or Xeon) for 2K, I would probably take that one instead. iMacs don't cut it since I need to add PCIe cards and HDs.

Apple once offered low end Power Macs for $1999. Bring that pricing back! For 3K, you really should be getting a top of the line Mac Pro. $4,700 for an 8 core 2.66GHz, what is that about when an 2K iMac is just as fast in single threaded applications?

[Uncle Pinny]

Our motion graphics dept in which I work should be making the jump from crapppy old dual core xp pc's to mac pro's this year (sooner rather than later). Hoping the new 2010s will be announced soon as I think we'll get the go-ahead in the coming weeks.

Can't wait. Sick and tired of trying to film res graphics on pc's that are barely able to function.

[VirtualRain]

Who thinks there might be an announcement tomorrow?

Tuesday is usually the day for new product announcements. If Apple gets a one month head-start on the sales of Gulftown as they did last year, and Intel still wants to meet a Q1 launch, then tomorrow may be the day.

Any takers? :p

[nanofrog]

Who thinks there might be an announcement tomorrow?

Tuesday is usually the day for new product announcements. If Apple gets a one month head-start on the sales of Gulftown as they did last year, and Intel still wants to meet a Q1 launch, then tomorrow may be the day.

Any takers? :p
It would certainly be nice to see, and put a lot of those waiting to buy a new system make a decision. But I've not seen the usual "new/reserved SKU's" that usually preceed new products (granted, its a MP, not an iPhone, laptop,..., but still ;)). So I'm not that confident tomorrow's the day. :rolleyes: :(

[telequest]

I'm turning blue holding my breath. But Tuesday March 2 would also be nearly a full month before the end of the quarter.

[gardinen]

I'm constantly hitting the 4GB limit of RAM of my Macbook Pro, and so I really need a new computer which I can put alot of RAM into.

[cisco0623]

I am considering it. I have been waiting about 8 years!

[kellen]

I think I will keep my 08 for a long time. Got it on End of Life when the 09's came out for a great price.

Don't think I would trade it for a 2.26 09, even at a EOL deal.

[Bucko]

Hmm.... I want to get a Gultown this Spring or Summer. I do music recording. Digital Performer. Will be getting Music software, etc. Should I wait. I have a G4, 400 Mhz. Can't do a lot of things but it's still works like a charm. 10 years old. eeh gads.... What is Sandy Bridge all about? It's getting me all curious

[Keebler]

Looking forward to new hardware. It's been a _very_ long wait for me since the current machine is a 2001 733MHz G4 Quicksilver! I imagine that it will be several ( >>2) times faster. :D

lol you'll have to put bungee cords to secure the G4 to the desk if you fire up even a 2009. :)

I have a dually g4 1.25 and it's not even fathomable as to how much faster my 09 (even my 06) is for that matter. :)

[twoodcc]

i would love for it to be announced tomorrow, but i doubt it will happen. i think next tuesday at the earliest, but one can still hope

[xgman]

I get the feeling this announcement will come sometime in March.

[twoodcc]

I get the feeling this announcement will come sometime in March.

That's a pretty safe bet. If it comes out...

[Techhie]

That's a pretty safe bet. If it comes out...


Gulftown/Arrandale are starting to seem more like delusions than inevitabilities. :rolleyes:

[Hmac]

Had to bite the bullet. Bought a 2.26ghz 8-core from B&H just now. I can put my 4870 in it, but I guess I better start shopping RAM.

[twoodcc]

Had to bite the bullet. Bought a 2.26ghz 8-core from B&H just now. I can put my 4870 in it, but I guess I better start shopping RAM.

i can't say i blame you. if you need it now, get it now. if not, you might be waiting for a long time

[davem7]

I dunno. It depends on what comes out at the end of the day, and also whether it's at a price that's right for me. I'm actually more tempted to upgrade my MacBook this year, and then the Mac Pro next year because 16 cores would really be the sweet spot for me.

[MitchLewis]

I'm currently editing video on my MacBook Pro - with clients sitting over my shoulder "trying" to watch what I'm doing....not good. I'm starting to think that Apple isn't going to release a 12-core Mac until late March. There's a change we just can't wait that long.

Anybody know of a review that compares the speeds of the three current Mac Pro models?

2.26 Ghz
2.66 Ghz (+$1400
2.93 Ghz (+$2600)

I'm trying to figure out a way to compare them to try and get the best bang for the buck. The Apple tech told me that they jump about 20% in speed for each upgrade. I'm leaning toward the 2.66 Ghz. The 2.93 is just too darn expensive.

[kellen]

If I was stuck waiting, I would just buy a 2008 and wait it out. If you really need one now, the small amount you would lose if any would be outweighed by using the computer.

Looks like Feb is over for any update to the Mac Pro.

[skyline r34]

i'm selling my 3.2GHz Mac Pro for the 2010 Mac Pro, just got a nice tax returned, can't wait to see what's next

[Hmac]

Had to bite the bullet. Bought a 2.26ghz 8-core from B&H just now. I can put my 4870 in it, but I guess I better start shopping RAM
B&H Photo sell the base 2.26 ghz 8-core/6gig for $3069. Since shipping is free and they don't charge sales tax, that makes it a little cheaper than buying a refurb of that same machine from the Apple Store, I noticed.

[Kissaragi]

Ill either be buying the 2010 mac pro base model if the price is the same or better and the specs are good. Or ill be buying a 2009 mac pro cheaper somewhere else if the price goes up.

Im hoping the base 2010 mac pro will have a 2.9 quad xeon, 6 gb of ram, 1tb hard drive,something like the 4870 as standard, for the same or similar price.

[psingh01]

Yes, I am considering one depending on the cost. My last Mac desktop was a PowerMac 9600 :eek: I've been using laptops ever since. Thinking of going back to the tower, I need more power.

[parakiet]

i'm getting pretty sharp ^^

want one.. now now now :eek:

[xgman]

Gulftown/Arrandale are starting to seem more like delusions than inevitabilities. :rolleyes:


It always seems like this just before a new release.

[jamesryanbell]

Gulftown will be worth the wait. BIG step forward.

[iDisk]

Do you realize that 1 Gulftown Chip cost $999 (6-Cores/12Threads) so dual chips (12-Cores/24Threads) will be $1,998 :eek:

So the Base Mac Pro will probably be cheaper then the current quad (but not by much) and the 12 Core machine will be Priced HIGH ($3,500 Starting Price)

Also the MAC PRO's probably won't be released until MARCH 16th or a week before.

[mds]

Do you realize that 1 Gulftown Chip cost $999 (6-Cores/12Threads) so dual chips (12-Cores/24Threads) will be $1,998 :eek:

So the Base Mac Pro will probably be cheaper then the current quad (but not by much) and the 12 Core machine will be Priced HIGH ($3,500 Starting Price)

Also the MAC PRO's probably won't be released until MARCH 16th or a week before.

What is/was the cost of the 2.66 quad currently in the base MP? I'm sures its as bit cheaper now, how about when it was released?

[voyagerd]

I'm looking to buy a 12-Core Mac Pro when they are released. I'm upgrading from a single CPU G5 that I sold this summer.

[voyagerd]

What is/was the cost of the 2.66 quad currently in the base MP? I'm sures its as bit cheaper now, how about when it was released?

The 2.66 costs $858, the 2.93 is $1286.

[Techhie]

I'm looking to buy a 12-Core Mac Pro when they are released. I'm upgrading from a single CPU G5 that I sold this summer.

The difference in speed might just be enough to warp the fabric of spacetime :rolleyes:

[Transporteur]

The 2.66 costs $858, the 2.93 is $1286.

$858 and $1286?
Those are the prices for the 5500 series.

The 2.66GHz W3520 the base Quad Pro uses is $309 on newegg, the 2.93GHz W3540 is $619.

[nanofrog]

Do you realize that 1 Gulftown Chip cost $999 (6-Cores/12Threads) so dual chips (12-Cores/24Threads) will be $1,998 :eek:

So the Base Mac Pro will probably be cheaper then the current quad (but not by much) and the 12 Core machine will be Priced HIGH ($3,500 Starting Price)

Also the MAC PRO's probably won't be released until MARCH 16th or a week before.
That's the i7-980X (they've decided not to call it the i9 series), and is a SP chip, not DP. Those will be more ($1600USD each for the top end from the information that's out; highest clock speed).

The current base Octad E5520 goes for $373USD each, and that system costs $3299USD. Deduct 2x E5520 from it's base price ($2453), then add in the new CPU price (2x), and you get $5753USD in a base configuration (same specs as the current '09's). :eek:

[beaker7]

That's the i7-980X (they've decided not to call it the i9 series), and is a SP chip, not DP. Those will be more ($1600USD each for the top end from the information that's out; highest clock speed).

The current base Octad E5520 goes for $373USD each, and that system costs $3299USD. Deduct 2x E5520 from it's base price ($2453), then add in the new CPU price (2x), and you get $5753USD in a base configuration (same specs as the current '09's). :eek:

You are comparing the current base to the proposed high-end config.

Current base: $3299 -746 (373x2, base procs) =2553.

The $1600 chips are the high end ones. 2553+3200=5753. This would be a price drop of 146 compared to current high end config which is at 5899.

[nanofrog]

You are comparing the current base to the proposed high-end config.

Current base: $3299 -746 (373x2, base procs) =2553.

The $1600 chips are the high end ones. 2553+3200=5753. This would be a price drop of 146 compared to current high end config which is at 5899.
I didn't go through and do the total cost for each model, and yes, there will be some differences due to the margin on the higher cost CPU's. It was meant to be more of a realistic estimate. Sorry that wasn't clear, as it was implied in my mind. :o Guess not. :eek: :p

It also depends on whether anything in the system will change (boards, specs,...). I don't expect it (i.e. new parts soldered to the logic board that would mean a PCB rework/redesign). Firmware related is possible (and hoped for), but that could still have some bearing on the hardware used that could change the pricing (i.e. 1333MHz DIMM's). Then there's the margin applied. ;)

[xgman]

Yeah, this is going to be one expensive upgrade, yet I will have a hard time resisting a 12 core, loaded with ram model. I wonder how much my 2008 2x3.2, 16gb ram box will be worth to sell towards this. . . . I had hoped to be able to keep it, but I think this is going to be over the top expensive to configure.

[nSchmidt]

Do you realize that 1 Gulftown Chip cost $999 (6-Cores/12Threads) so dual chips (12-Cores/24Threads) will be $1,998 :eek:

So the Base Mac Pro will probably be cheaper then the current quad (but not by much) and the 12 Core machine will be Priced HIGH ($3,500 Starting Price)

Also the MAC PRO's probably won't be released until MARCH 16th or a week before.

Where are you getting that March 16th date?

[nanofrog]

Where are you getting that March 16th date?
The date came from an article about a leaked Intel document (here (http://www.crn.com/white-box/222001806;jsessionid=ZQGDGQCZYM44JQE1GHPSKH4ATMY32JVN)).

[nSchmidt]

How much earlier did Apple get exclusive use of the Nehalem processors before the the actual release date?

[plaxico44]

What does everyone think about for the price of the new mp?

[CXsjr]

Personally, I'd be happy to see the base with a 2.8 i7 quad core (a la iMac), with the option to upgrade to hex-core, and a top end of two hex-cores, however I fear that won't happen, and the base will kick in even more expensive than the current base model??

I'm looking to replace my aging PMG5 as I want an Intel system given support is waning for non-Intel processors. I have an iMac i7 downstairs; it was intended to replace my G5, but sadly it's waiting to go back due to the well publicised screen issues so I've decided to stick with my 30" cinema and wait for the next Mac Pro - I just hope the money doesn't burn holes in my pockets in the meantime ....

[Note to self - resist the urge to buy a Mac Pro now, wait a few weeks for the new one!!!!!]

[VirtualRain]

What does everyone think about for the price of the new mp?

I could imagine a $500 drop in prices across the board for existing models with the hex and dodeca core machines taking over top spot at a significant premium.

Without doing a lot of math, maybe something like this... :confused:
2.66 Quad -> $2000
2.93 Quad -> $2500
3.2 Hexa -> $3000-$3500
2.26 Octo -> $3000 (I'm guessing this config gets dropped actually)
3.3 Hexa -> $4000
2.66 Octo -> $4000
3.2 Dodeca -> $5000
3.33 Dodeca -> $6000

[Icaras]

I could imagine a $500 drop in prices across the board for existing models with the hex and dodeca core machines taking over top spot at a significant premium.

Without doing a lot of math, maybe something like this... :confused:
2.66 Quad -> $2000
2.93 Quad -> $2500
3.2 Hexa -> $3000-$3500
2.26 Octo -> $3000 (I'm guessing this config gets dropped actually)
3.3 Hexa -> $4000
2.66 Octo -> $4000
3.2 Dodeca -> $5000
3.33 Dodeca -> $6000

Wow really? :eek:

This totally goes against Nano's pricing predictions of continued pricing trends. :eek:

With all due respect to Nano of course, I hope that you're right :D

A quad @ $2000 would just be perfect :cool:

[nSchmidt]

I read that it's rumored to possibly come out in black. Kind of like this concept:

[Icaras]

Another thought on the Mac Pro pricing...

A simple slogan from Apple saying "The New Mac Pro, starting at $1999" would go a long way in my opinion, but unfortunately, this would contradict the ecosystem of pricing Apple has in their Mac lineup setup. If you notice the pricing differences in their desktop range, it goes (from low end Mac Mini to low end Mac Pro:

$599 - 799 - 1199 - 1499 - 1699 - 1999 - 2499

The biggest leap in pricing is from the high end iMac to the low end Mac Pro at a $500 price difference and the lowest difference is between their midrange iMacs at $200 apart. So deducting from this, I don't think the quad base Mac Pro would go down to $1999, but they could reach $2299 at the lowest, as that is a $200 price difference.

This is completely speculative based entirely on the Mac desktop pricing eco system, without any analytical breakdown of technology and cost of parts, so please take with a grain of salt :)

Edit: Looking at it at a broader perspective, only from machine to machine: from high end Mac Mini to low end iMac: $400 difference, from high end iMac to low end Mac Pro: $500. So never mind, they'll probably keep it at $2499 still.

[Icaras]

I read that it's rumored to possibly come out in black. Kind of like this concept:

Wow, get ready for the Mac Pro user backlash on that one. The professionals aren't going to like the smaller form factor of that. Say goodbye to internal hard drive expansion :(

[Hmac]

Interesting...this is kind of classic MacRumors. Dedicated users in short advance of a product upgrade start working themselves up in speculation of product specs and pricing. The downside is that the extent to which Apple doesn't meets those speculations represents the degree of Apple bashing that happens later. I worry you guys are setting yourselves up for disappointment....

[Icaras]

Interesting...this is kind of classic MacRumors. Dedicated users in short advance of a product upgrade start working themselves up in speculation of product specs and pricing. The downside is that the extent to which Apple doesn't meets those speculations represents the degree of Apple bashing that happens later. I worry you guys are setting yourselves up for disappointment....

Classic MacRumors speculation and classic impending disappointment. Yep, sounds about right. ;)

[rube740]

Interesting...this is kind of classic MacRumors. Dedicated users in short advance of a product upgrade start working themselves up in speculation of product specs and pricing. The downside is that the extent to which Apple doesn't meets those speculations represents the degree of Apple bashing that happens later. I worry you guys are setting yourselves up for disappointment....
You know...... In this thread I cried, I laughed, I cried because of joy and because of happiness. And here you come with the word dissapointment. I can put in words the feelings I'm retaining waiting for this mac. I should poke you in your eye! LOL I'm just joking

[Hmac]

Well, I hope everyone's expectations are met, but I can't think of the last time a product was introduced or upgraded and everyone on MR said "Wow, what a great deal...thank you Apple!".

[rube740]

Interesting...this is kind of classic MacRumors. Dedicated users in short advance of a product upgrade start working themselves up in speculation of product specs and pricing. The downside is that the extent to which Apple doesn't meets those speculations represents the degree of Apple bashing that happens later. I worry you guys are setting yourselves up for disappointment....
You know...... In this thread I cried, I laughed, I cried because of joy and because of happiness. And here you come with the word dissapointment. I can't put in words the feelings I'm retaining waiting for this mac. I should poke you in your eye! LOL I'm just joking

[nanofrog]

This totally goes against Nano's pricing predictions of continued pricing trends. :eek:
I'm waiting for a full list of the available parts (including quantity pricing) to get a better idea of the P/N's that would show up.

Ultimately, I can't help but see the rise in margins (mentioned not too long ago on the front page) causing the prices to stay in similar territory at best. If the value is improved, it could come with slightly higher specs without any/substantial price increases (i.e. memory is changed to 1333MHz, perhaps a slightly larger HDD, better graphics card, and hopefully an increase in clock speed). A lower price would definitely accomplish an improvement in the value, but it just doesn't seem reasonable IMO.

[rube740]

Well, I hope everyone's expectations are met, but I can't think of the last time a product was introduced or upgraded and everyone on MR said "Wow, what a great deal...thank you Apple!".

Know what it is bro. Apple is all about quality and quality Cost money. I feel What ever they release is going to be strong. I know I'm gonna be happy with it cause I'm coming from a 1.8 g5. I have 3500 ready to go and just a little more for reserve. With these new chips gettin rid of the front side bus and adding a whole new technology is going to be fun. In the mean time I'm gonna prep my studio desk for the home coming of my mac pro or what ever they gonna call it

[Techhie]

I read that it's rumored to possibly come out in black. Kind of like this concept:

http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=216282&d=1267140555


We all know that they won't shrink the the form factor, as the design is often considered the absolute best in the industry. I do however like the idea of a black anodized metal replacing aluminum as the case metal :rolleyes:

[nSchmidt]

The biggest leap in pricing is from the high end iMac to the low end Mac Pro at a $500 price difference and the lowest difference is between their midrange iMacs at $200 apart. So deducting from this, I don't think the quad base Mac Pro would go down to $1999, but they could reach $2299 at the lowest, as that is a $200 price difference.

Do you think we will see similar pricing models used in their mobile product lines?

The iPad is the first apple product that has so much attention placed on it's "low" price. Apple has never really wanted to be known for something that is "low" price. Maybe it's because no one sees a need for it.

The iPhone when released in July 2007 was 600 dollars. Two months later Apple dropped the price 200 dollars. In the email that was sent out by Steve Jobs to customers who already owned a 600 dollar iPhone. He said they were doing it to gain more market share and reach more customers. The base iPhone is now less than 100 dollars.

On Jan 27, 2009 Steve said that Apple was becoming a mobile electronics company. Is this because they have based much of their mobile electronics on lowering prices? I think so.

I think it's possible that Apple will cut prices on their mac line to gain more users. They have built the name, now's its time to gain more market share.

[Fiete5401]

I think it's possible that Apple will cut prices on their mac line to gain more users. They have built the name, now's its time to gain more market share.

I don't know why but I can't share your optimism. Maybe Apple keeps the current lineup only axes the 2.26 octo and lowers the price but the price point for the 6(12) core beasts will be hefty.

[Hmac]

I don't know why but I can't share your optimism. Maybe Apple keeps the current lineup only axes the 2.26 octo and lowers the price but the price point for the 6(12) core beasts will be hefty.
Apple's paradigm for revenue has pretty much been margin rather than volume. Given the ever-increasing cost of Intel silicone, I'd be surprised if we ever see the pro end of Apple's lineup being volume-based.

[nSchmidt]

Apple's paradigm for revenue has pretty much been margin rather than volume. Given the ever-increasing cost of Intel silicone, I'd be surprised if we ever see the pro end of Apple's lineup being volume-based.

But perhaps this is why Apple is starting to make their own chips.

[HyperX13]

my 2008 mp is faster than my 2009 so at this rate, i will wait and see

[Techhie]

my 2008 mp is faster than my 2009 so at this rate, i will wait and see

Same here, but I can't bring myself to hold onto this machine because of its lack of AppleCare. :(

[jrichie]

I am so glad I got the best deal ever mid last year :)

I swapped a 13" ali macbook [the same week they did the upgrade....] and $1000 for an 2008 2 x 2.8 quad core !!!!

The deal of the century I thought, and can't see any reason at all to upgrade it - I think it is an amazing machine that hardly ever gives me any trouble.

Windows 7 on parallels in simply amazing on it [faster than the girlfriends new 15" macbookpro in bootcamp :p]

Love it and is the best Apple product I have ever owned, and Iv'e owned a few.... so no I won't be upgrading:D

[nanofrog]

But perhaps this is why Apple is starting to make their own chips.
The aquisition of P.A. Semi was to make custom designs for the portable devices, such as iPhones and iPads. ARM is a far cry from what Intel or AMD produce for CPU's.

In this instance (portable devices), it is intended to be produced in volume (economy of scale kicks in), and that's where the majority of Apple's profit margin is made. They can actually make more money this way, as they're not paying for a 3rd party supplier's chips. It also affords them a level of control they've never had before (specific use design).

[VirtualRain]

The aquisition of P.A. Semi was to make custom designs for the portable devices, such as iPhones and iPads. ARM is a far cry from what Intel or AMD produce for CPU's.

In this instance (portable devices), it is intended to be produced in volume (economy of scale kicks in), and that's where the majority of Apple's profit margin is made. They can actually make more money this way, as they're not paying for a 3rd party supplier's chips. It also affords them a level of control they've never had before (specific use design).

Nano... what do you think of my speculation about pricing in post #95?

[Nostromo]

We all know that they won't shrink the the form factor, as the design is often considered the absolute best in the industry. I do however like the idea of a black anodized metal replacing aluminum as the case metal :rolleyes:

Yes, I'd also think this a great idea. And keep the aluminum option open for those who like it.

I hope the size stays the same. And that Apple does everything to incorporate the latest developments in regards to silent computing.

[nanofrog]

Nano... what do you think of my speculation about pricing in post #95?
It seems potentially low (on the low end SP systems), and I'm uncertain on the clocks yet. Both will depend on quantity pricing we don't have yet. :(

I've been holding off for that list, and it's driving me nutz that it's not shown up yet. Intel seems to be playing this one really close to the vest as it were (we had the list a fair bit prior to the Nehalems release).

[snouter]

Know what it is bro. Apple is all about quality and quality Cost money. I feel What ever they release is going to be strong.

Brodude, when I think strong, I'm thinking GT120 video, 640GB hard drive, 3GB ram, four ram slots and a Xeon that performs as well as a $200 i7 for $2500. :rolleyes:

I think I know what it is. :p

[snouter]

But perhaps this is why Apple is starting to make their own chips.

They have no plans or chance to compete with Intel or AMD on desktop chips. Ever.

They are starting to make ARM chips for their mobile products.

[snouter]

Apple's paradigm for revenue has pretty much been margin rather than volume. Given the ever-increasing cost of Intel silicone, I'd be surprised if we ever see the pro end of Apple's lineup being volume-based.

Shame really, because at $200 (Microcenter pricing) I feel that the i7 920 is a mind blowing chip. Out of box mine overclocked from 2.66 to 3.6GHz.

I think the i5 and i7 in the iMac is telling. I think they are about to really open up the gulf. :p There may not even be a Mac Pro under $3000 to start with this next release.

[VirtualRain]

It seems potentially low (on the low end SP systems), and I'm uncertain on the clocks yet. Both will depend on quantity pricing we don't have yet. :(

I've been holding off for that list, and it's driving me nutz that it's not shown up yet. Intel seems to be playing this one really close to the vest as it were (we had the list a fair bit prior to the Nehalems release).

Isn't it a given that the XEON parts will have a 1:1 relationship with the i7-970 (3.2GHz) and i7-980 (3.3GHz) which are the talk of the town? Are you expecting lower clocked variants?

On the pricing, I'm predicting a price drop ($500) on the existing CPU's - we all know there's plenty of room for such a drop and they've done some surprising price drops on other products in the last year or so. Do you think that's unlikely?

Hopefully we will know soon.

[snouter]

Here is the elephant in the room.

Could apple build it? Would it have the margins? Would you buy it?

$1800

i7 of some sort in the 2.8 to 3.2GHz range
6 ram slots
1TB hard drive
some video card that cost more than $20 wholesale

[Hmac]

I agree that the Mac Pro is in the process of becoming a very rarified atmosphere. Looks like Apple will be redefining the term "power user". The question is whether or not Apple will open up the mid-range, essentially putting iMac guts into some kind of mid-range but expandable tower. If not, it might give a rather chilling meaning to Steve Jobs' proclamation that Apple is now a "mobile device company".

[nanofrog]

Isn't it a given that the XEON parts will have a 1:1 relationship with the i7-970 (3.2GHz) and i7-980 (3.3GHz) which are the talk of the town? Are you expecting lower clocked variants?
Intel's supposed to release 3x 6 core Gulftowns (SP models, so there will be SP Xeons from them as well).

i7-980X, and it's equivalent Xeon are to release March this year (I've seen both March 16th, Q1, and even H1 2010). The i7-970X is to release Q3 2010 (W3675?), and a faster chip in Q1 2011 (presume 3.46GHz; perhaps i7-990X for the consumer part, and either W3685 or W3690 for the Xeon equivalent).

So there will only be 1x SP Xeon that would be possible (W3680). We also know the quantity pricing; $999USD.

It's the DP parts I'm unsure of (exact pricing, but if it follows with the Nehalems, follow the model numbers).

I found a leaked chart of the P/N's with clocks (no prices though). For example, the E5620 is 2.4GHz. Assuming it's the same price as the E5520, there's a speed boost. But without pricing, we can't be sure on that, as the DP line is separating from the SP lineup to fill enterprise requirements.

http://i.cmpnet.com/crn/graphics/web/embedded/xeon_roadmap.JPG

On the pricing, I'm predicting a price drop ($500) on the existing CPU's - we all know there's plenty of room for such a drop and they've done some surprising price drops on other products in the last year or so. Do you think that's unlikely?
No, I don't think a price drop is likely. At best, the pricing will carry over, but users get an additional pair of cores per CPU.

But Intel has to pay for the die shrink, and the enterprise market is where thier real profits come from. They've not been lowering the pricing in this market. The value comes from the performance increase.

I expect a mix of 45nm, and 32nm parts, so some of the current models' CPU P/N's may be recycled, otherwise dropped. If this were to happen, it would leave only one SP model, and cost that of the 3.33GHz unit now ($3699USD), assuming there's no increase in margins or other changes that push the price (i.e. graphics card; the RAM speed is still 1066MHz; such items could also lower it, but I'm not expecting that, as it would be consumed as a margin increase IMO). Please understand, the 45nm parts would apply to the SP systems only, as there's no alternatives that would allow for more than a single clock speed if only 32nm parts are used.

DP systems I expect to be 32nm exclusively (wide range of P/N's available; please note, not all are 6 core parts, some are still Quad core).

If the pricing increases from Intel, either Apple's pricing has to increase to cover the difference, or the clocks will be lowered to meet the target MSRP's.

The lack of a quantity price sheet is really making this hard to figure. :eek: :p

Hopefully we will know soon.
I hope so. :)

[AdamGT3]

Well, I just got a 2.93 Quad off Apple as a replacement for my endless dodgy 27" i7 iMac, and I'm happy with it. I can't see the 2010 Mac Pros offering much more either, and I'm expecting the GPU to work in mine which is all I'm bothered about.

Did they do a deal on the Pro as I am in the same situation re an iMac?

[VirtualRain]

Nano: I wasn't clear... I'm expecting a $500 price drop on existing 45nm Apple Mac Pro systems. I don't expect Intel to adjust prices but Apple may.

Apple can't afford to kill off all the 45nm systems just yet, although it may clean house a bit... thus it really has to lower the price on existing 45nm systems or include some unknown goodie to call it new 2010 product.

[nanofrog]

Nano: I wasn't clear... I'm expecting a $500 price drop on existing 45nm Apple Mac Pro systems. I don't expect Intel to adjust prices but Apple may.
If they're going to offer more than one model SP system, they'll have to use 45nm parts, as there's no 32nm replacements.

Now it's possible that they could offer a price reduction on them, but I wouldn't bet on it (it would cut into the LGA1156 iMacs, especially if it were $500USD).

Apple can't afford to kill off all the 45nm systems just yet, although it may clean house a bit... thus it really has to lower the price on existing 45nm systems or include some unknown goodie to call it new 2010 product.
They won't go with that many different CPU's. They currently only offer 6x total (3x per system; SP and DP). If they continue to keep it at this quantity, then there would have to be 2x 45nm Quads available. As per the DP systems, they could stick with 45nm parts to clear out any excessive remaining stock (they could have been caught with their pants down, as the contracts may have been signed before the economic meltdown). But if this didn't happen, then going 32nm would be what we see.

I do see 45nm as a posibility, assuming it was:
1. Planned (particularly to flush out the lines, as Apple would have been aware of Intel's intentions well prior to the public, and I'd expect that to have been before they even recieved shipments of the current parts).
2. Left over stock is really high.

[Ricko101]

Hey guys, I need your help.

I was dead set on waiting for the new MP, by I just came across a 2008 3.2 Octo with 16MB ram and 3.5 TB for $3300!
That fits by budget perfectly. It also has 1 year left on AppleCare.

What should I do ????!!!

[NoManIsland]

Ricko101, I would go for it. I have the 2.8 2008 and it's brilliant; better than a 2009 for my tasks - the top of the line 3.2 with all those upgrades for that price is an awesome deal :)

Wait, I've changed my mind: don't go for it and tell me where to get it :p

[Ricko101]

Ricko101, I would go for it. I have the 2.8 2008 and it's brilliant; better than a 2009 for my tasks - the top of the line 3.2 with all those upgrades for that price is an awesome deal :)

Wait, I've changed my mind: don't go for it and tell me where to get it :p

:D
I think I will. I doubt I can achieve the same specs with the 2010 for that price...

[VirtualRain]

If they're going to offer more than one model SP system, they'll have to use 45nm parts, as there's no 32nm replacements.

Now it's possible that they could offer a price reduction on them, but I wouldn't bet on it (it would cut into the LGA1156 iMacs, especially if it were $500USD).


They won't go with that many different CPU's. They currently only offer 6x total (3x per system; SP and DP). If they continue to keep it at this quantity, then there would have to be 2x 45nm Quads available. As per the DP systems, they could stick with 45nm parts to clear out any excessive remaining stock (they could have been caught with their pants down, as the contracts may have been signed before the economic meltdown). But if this didn't happen, then going 32nm would be what we see.

I do see 45nm as a posibility, assuming it was:
1. Planned (particularly to flush out the lines, as Apple would have been aware of Intel's intentions well prior to the public, and I'd expect that to have been before they even recieved shipments of the current parts).
2. Left over stock is really high.

I did some more reading and analysis this evening.

As per your comments, and what I've read elsewhere, the initial Gulftown desktop launch in Q1 will be limited to just one variant... the i7-980 at 3.3GHz. The i7-970 at 3.2GHz is not due until Q3. I couldn't find any info on Xeon parts but I guess we have to assume there will be a SP and DP Xeon equivalent to the i7-980.

Given the following existing price points:
Quad 2.66 -> $2500
Quad 2.93 -> $2900
Quad 3.33 -> $3700
Octo 2.26 -> $3300
Octo 2.66 -> $4700
Octo 2.93 -> $5900

Option A: Apple could just keep the lineup the same and inject the following Gulftown models at relative price points...
SP Gulftown -> $4500
DP Gulftown -> $6500 (:eek:)

Option B: Gulftown systems replace top-end Nehalems at old price points (more cores for the same money)...

EOL Quad 3.33 -> $3700 -> Replaced with SP Gulftown
EOL Octo 2.93 -> $5900 -> Replaced with DP Gulftown
Other models unchanged

Option C: Lower prices across the line, trim the lineup, and inject new Gulftown models (similar to my original proposal and what I'd do if I was Mac Pro product manager for a day)

Quad 2.66 -> $2500 -> $2200
Quad 2.93 -> $2900 -> $2600
Quad 3.33 -> $3700 -> EOL
New SP Gulftown Model -> $3500
Octo 2.26 -> $3300 -> EOL
Octo 2.66 -> $4700 -> $4300
Octo 2.93 -> $5899 -> $5300
New DP Gulftown Model -> $6000

Basically, I'd eliminate the top end quad in favor of a hexa core and eliminate the low end Octo which has no reason for living any longer and replace it with a new flagship DP Gulftown vessel.

Now if my pipe dream comes to fruitiion, then there will be a million threads titled "Should I get the 3.3GHz Hexa or the 2.66GHz Octo". I'm not looking forward to the endless debates on that front! :p :D Actually, that would be a no-brainer in my opinion. Even if they were priced the same, I'd take 6 cores at 3.3GHz over 8 at 2.66Ghz any day. Hence my pricing on the SP Gulftown, can't be right. :confused: :o :(

So what's everyone betting on?

[twoodcc]

well i sure hope that pricing is way off. right now we can get 8 cores for $3300, which is still very high in my book. i want that price to go down, not up

[nanofrog]

I couldn't find any info on Xeon parts but I guess we have to assume there will be a SP and DP Xeon equivalent to the i7-980.
There are; check the chart in the last post I made on page 5.
SP Xeon = W3680
DP Xeon = X5680

Given the following existing price points:
Quad 2.66 -> $2500
Quad 2.93 -> $2900
Quad 3.33 -> $3700
Octo 2.26 -> $3300
Octo 2.66 -> $4700
Octo 2.93 -> $5900

...
Option B is close I think.

To clarify, here's what I'm guessing ATM (just following current clocks, sans quantity pricing - following current pricing, and hopefully no increase):

SP Systems:
Nehalem (Quad) 2.66 (W3520) -> $2500
Nehalem (Quad) 2.93 (W3580) -> $2900
Gulftown (Hexa) 3.33 (W3680) -> $4500

DP Systems:
Gulftown (Octo) 2.66 (E5640) -> $4700
Gulftown (Octo) 2.93 (X5670) -> $5900
Gulftown (Dodeca) 3.33 (X5680) -> $6500

EOL'ed systems:
Quad 3.33 -> $3700
Octo 2.26 -> $3300

[snouter]

well i sure hope that pricing is way off. right now we can get 8 cores for $3300, which is still very high in my book. i want that price to go down, not up

8 slower cores @ 2.26

6 faster cores @ 3.33

no question which one I'd be more interested in

[VirtualRain]

There are; check the chart in the last post I made on page 5.
SP Xeon = W3680
DP Xeon = X5680


Option B is close I think.

To clarify, here's what I'm guessing ATM (just following current clocks, sans quantity pricing - following current pricing, and hopefully no increase):

SP Systems:
Nehalem (Quad) 2.66 (W3520) -> $2500
Nehalem (Quad) 2.93 (W3580) -> $2900
Gulftown (Hexa) 3.33 (W3680) -> $4500

DP Systems:
Gulftown (Octo) 2.66 (E5640) -> $4700
Gulftown (Octo) 2.93 (X5670) -> $5900
Gulftown (Dodeca) 3.33 (X5680) -> $6500

EOL'ed systems:
Quad 3.33 -> $3700
Octo 2.26 -> $3300

Yep, that's a possibility too... My Option A pricing with Option B EOL. I can't imagine too many opting for the Octo 2.66 though. Most people would probably choose the 6 core over the entry 8 core.

[sgunes]

On one hand I am waiting with bated breath for the new MacPros, OTOH every day of delay may mean additional technology from possibly Nvidia Fermi (4XX series)/ATI 5XXX to SATA3 and USB3.

If Apple does not deliver on the technological front, I think many here will go for the Hackintoshes. The new Gigabyte motherboards that you can Kakewalk (http://www.insanelymac.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=195248) will accept the 6-core Westmeres (http://www.giga-byte.com/Products/Motherboard/Products_Overview.aspx?ProductID=3304).

With the money you save (by not drinking the Kool-Aid) you can get boot SSD's and 12GB memory. If you can overclock some, you will be faster than the Apple hexacore and in many apps probably get close to the dual-hexacores.

[Fiete5401]

TSP Systems:
Nehalem (Quad) 2.66 (W3520) -> $2500
Nehalem (Quad) 2.93 (W3580) -> $2900


I don't hope that this rather pessimistic prognosis will become reality.
People will grab their pitchforks if Apple would release the MP10 with the exact same processor specifications as the 09s. :eek:

[twoodcc]

8 slower cores @ 2.26

6 faster cores @ 3.33

no question which one I'd be more interested in

i know, but i don't want to pay more than the current 8 core price. if anything, i wanna pay less

[Dr.Pants]

I don't hope that this rather pessimistic prognosis will become reality.
People will grab their pitchforks if Apple would release the MP10 with the exact same processor specifications as the 09s. :eek:

And especially if the daughterboards in the '10 MacPro for 45 nm CPUs don't have microcode for the 32 nm CPUs. Which may be likely if stock is still high.

Personally I want a price drop, since some bozo got it into their head that 8 threads makes it priced like a dual-processor machine.

[Hmac]

Ah...now this thread is beginning to feel more typical of a MacRumors thread...

:)

[Nadav35]

In case many don't know I currently own a 3.0(close to 3.2) 2008 Harpertown mac pro and I have really just begun to expand its capabilities. I am looking to add maybe an SSD drive to my system and for what I use my pro machine for it is plenty fast if not really fast for my needs.

Looking at Nano's pricing based on option B, it seems that for a majority of the end users such as myself, the gulftown based mac pro is going to be out of the price range for most people. It begs to ask the question.. If one ads better hardware to an 08 based mac pro does it really matter when comparing to the gulftown? Right now, I use my mac pro for everyday tasks. I really have no business of my own which uses pro apps, though I am familiarizing myself with the pro market and the pro apps, as I plan to eventually work for Apple - always good to have experience to help customers make a educated buying decision.

Given the predicted pricing, will the 2009's make for a better option for those coming from a 2006/2007 mac pro? Although I have a 2008 model, it really going to be much more significant to upgrade to the 2010 Gulftown mac pro for everyday tasks?

I guess you could say I treated my mac pro purchase as a PC with the ability to tinker and expand and allow it to grow with my needs. I do see the EFI64 advantage here at least if Apple decides to release the radeon 5870 to work in a 2010 mac pro. So, really for basics and tinkering + expanding, is it really worth my time to try and get a 2010? Based on my current income, I could afford maybe, JUST MAYBE 3000 dollars. But, the way I see it based on the pricing grids - the hex core 2010 gulftowns are just going to be simply too expensive even for me.

[NoManIsland]

In case many don't know I currently own a 3.0(close to 3.2) 2008 Harpertown mac pro and I have really just begun to expand its capabilities. I am looking to add maybe an SSD drive to my system and for what I use my pro machine for it is plenty fast if not really fast for my needs.

Looking at Nano's pricing based on option B, it seems that for a majority of the end users such as myself, the gulftown based mac pro is going to be out of the price range for most people. It begs to ask the question.. If one ads better hardware to an 08 based mac pro does it really matter when comparing to the gulftown? Right now, I use my mac pro for everyday tasks. I really have no business of my own which uses pro apps, though I am familiarizing myself with the pro market and the pro apps, as I plan to eventually work for Apple - always good to have experience to help customers make a educated buying decision.

Given the predicted pricing, will the 2009's make for a better option for those coming from a 2006/2007 mac pro? Although I have a 2008 model, it really going to be much more significant to upgrade to the 2010 Gulftown mac pro for everyday tasks?

I guess you could say I treated my mac pro purchase as a PC with the ability to tinker and expand and allow it to grow with my needs. I do see the EFI64 advantage here at least if Apple decides to release the radeon 5870 to work in a 2010 mac pro. So, really for basics and tinkering + expanding, is it really worth my time to try and get a 2010? Based on my current income, I could afford maybe, JUST MAYBE 3000 dollars. But, the way I see it based on the pricing grids - the hex core 2010 gulftowns are just going to be simply too expensive even for me.

Given your usage patterns, a 3.0 Ghz 2008 MP is well above your needs and will serve you well for a good long time. Don't get caught up in the "shiny" factor :p

[mmomega]

Just picked up a mid-model 15" at christmas and I don't even come close to pushing it to the limit. I have a powerful desktop if I need something beefy, absolutely no reason to get an i5-i7 laptop to surf the net or email with and I wish more people would listen and absorb the advice from people on the forums when they say you are not going to NEED the processing power of a quad core laptop , now I know there is that low % of users that would but for the VAST majority of users the current MBP will last yrs until you need the upgrade. An i5 would be not much more than a hey look what i got purchase. Its like buying a corvette to drive back and forth to the video store in traffic.

[nanofrog]

Yep, that's a possibility too... My Option A pricing with Option B EOL.
We're really not that far apart in potential offerings. The lack of a quantity price list is a major Achilles heel though, and I'd be absolutely amazed if there's price cuts that happen with the 2010 models.

I can't imagine too many opting for the Octo 2.66 though. Most people would probably choose the 6 core over the entry 8 core.
Yeah, if the price difference is that small, it would push buyers to go for the Dodeca core unit. But there will likely be a larger gap here, as there's no margin added for the additional cost of the CPU's.

I don't hope that this rather pessimistic prognosis will become reality.
People will grab their pitchforks if Apple would release the MP10 with the exact same processor specifications as the 09s. :eek:
They won't have a choice if they wish to offer more than one Quad in the lineup. The reason is, the W3680 (3.33GHz) is the ONLY 32nm SP Xeon that will be available in time.

In case many don't know I currently own a 3.0(close to 3.2) 2008 Harpertown mac pro and I have really just begun to expand its capabilities. I am looking to add maybe an SSD drive to my system and for what I use my pro machine for it is plenty fast if not really fast for my needs.
As I've indicated to you before, keep what you've got. Getting a newer machine at this point is a bad move. More money, no usable benefit.

[iBotz]

Im waiting and hopefully it'll have up to 12 cores. I want the 12 core and 12 gigs of ram and a good GPU. Still, the 2009's are tempting, Im betting sometime in March. Stupid iPad taking up a press conference. LOL JK

[tekboi]

Well, it looks like my Powermac g4 will soon be dying on me. I want to wait until march to see what apple does with it's "pro" lineup. If they hike up the price, i'm hunting for a 2008 model. Hopefully they do some major improvements and price adjustments (lowering).

[Umbongo]

For those of you talking about potential processors you seem to have missed that every chip used by Apple right now will have been replaced by the launch of Gulftown.

Intel's single socket line at the time of the 2010 Mac Pro would be the following at the same price points Apple currently use:

W3530 - 2.80GHz x4, 45nm, 1066MHz
W3565 - 3.20GHz x4, 45nm, 1066MHz
W3680 - 3.33GHz x6, 32nm, 1066Mhz

Logical prices for these systems and what you can expect elsewhere would be $1,500, $2,000 and $2,500. At $500 apple tax it's perhaps bearable, at $1,000 its ridiculous again. An 8-core/12-core line isn't going match the quad one because of the move to 32nm so with Apple being how they are I think them dropping the SP line is plausible. Especially with the iMacs having more power now. I doubt they will ever just leave it to users to decide what they need, they want to market specs towards people and have it all fit nicely in their little bubble.

[Fiete5401]

You can already order the i7 980x here in Germany:

http://www.hardmac.com/news/2010/03/01/pre-order-your-intel-xeon-core-i7-hexa-core

I found prices ranging from 963,35 € to 1099,- €.
http://www.heise.de/preisvergleich/a490109.html (german)

Found nothing on the new Xeons yet.

[Umbongo]

You can already order the i7 980x here in Germany:

http://www.hardmac.com/news/2010/03/01/pre-order-your-intel-xeon-core-i7-hexa-core

I found prices ranging from 963,35 € to 1099,- €.
http://www.heise.de/preisvergleich/a490109.html (german)

Found nothing on the new Xeons yet.

Intel's NDAs have been locked down tight the last couple of launches. No competition = no need to talk about it. Probably won't get any real details until the launch.

[CCK]

Since it seems likely that they'll still have SP in the base model, any thoughts on if they'd up the ram slots?

At the very least, if the pricing remains roughly the same (hope not) - if the base is faster than 2.66, more ram slots, audio FIX and perhaps a better graphics card. I won't (at least) be eyeing my pitchfork.

[Fiete5401]

Since it seems likely that they'll still have SP in the base model, any thoughts on if they'd up the ram slots?

Wouldn't that result in a new motherboard design? Seems unlikely since new mb design cost money :apple: could hog on.

At the very least, if the pricing remains roughly the same (hope not) - if the base is faster than 2.66, more ram slots, audio FIX and perhaps a better graphics card. I won't (at least) be eyeing my pitchfork.

2.8 GHz, better graphics and internal hardware raid and I would be very pleased. But I still have my pitchfork only one arms lenght away!

[nanofrog]

Intel's single socket line at the time of the 2010 Mac Pro would be the following at the same price points Apple currently use:

W3530 - 2.80GHz x4, 45nm, 1066MHz
W3565 - 3.20GHz x4, 45nm, 1066MHz
W3680 - 3.33GHz x6, 32nm, 1066Mhz
I've been waiting for the quantity pricing before considering the faster clocked parts for the Quand core SP's. But I do think it's possible. ;)

[Umbongo]

I've been waiting for the quantity pricing before considering the faster clocked parts for the Quand core SP's. But I do think it's possible. ;)

Those prices are $284, $562 and $999. Same as the current parts.

[nanofrog]

Those prices are $284, $562 and $999. Same as the current parts.
:cool: I hadn't gone back and looked, as I've been waiting for the 32nm pricing (figured I'd pull the data all at once). :eek: Yeah, I was being a little lazy here. :o :p

[Phantom Gremlin]

Intel's single socket line at the time of the 2010 Mac Pro would be the following at the same price points Apple currently use:

W3530 - 2.80GHz x4, 45nm, 1066MHz

My prediction is $2500 entry level Mac Pro with the W3530. Meaning a slight speed bump. They will also increase RAM to 6 GB and disk to 1000 GB. Or not!

with Apple being how they are I think them dropping the SP line is plausible.

I hope you're wrong about Apple dropping SP machines. That would make the entry level Mac Pro very very expensive.

[Wild-Bill]

I hope it has the ATI Radeon 5870 as an option.

[nanofrog]

My prediction is $2500 entry level Mac Pro with the W3530. Meaning a slight speed bump. They will also increase RAM to 6 GB and disk to 1000 GB. Or not!
I think you're asking too much from Apple for $2500. :eek: The speed bump would be possible, but not RAM + HDD capacity + GPU (I realize you didn't mention this, but it's along the same lines, and would be in Apple's best interest to do so IMO). Something would have to be cut (RAM capacity and/or HDD capacity to that size).

2.8GHz Quad, 3GB RAM, 750GB HDD, and perhaps a GT130 (http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gt_130_us.html) (75W rather than 50W of the GT120 (http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gt_120_us.html)) for the current base model SP price. Remember, Apple will want a low power card to fit their Green initiative. It also assumes that they'll stick with nVidia OEM graphics solutions for base systems.

[grue]

FML.

Apple is replacing my 2007 8x3.0 under warranty…

…with a 2.26 + 4870 :(

I'm sure it'll arrive about 2 hours before they update the machines and the entry level dual-processor machine will stomp all over it :(

[VirtualRain]

I think you're asking too much from Apple for $2500. :eek: The speed bump would be possible, but not RAM + HDD capacity + GPU (I realize you didn't mention this, but it's along the same lines, and would be in Apple's best interest to do so IMO). Something would have to be cut (RAM capacity and/or HDD capacity to that size).

2.8GHz Quad, 3GB RAM, 750GB HDD, and perhaps a GT130 (http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gt_130_us.html) (75W rather than 50W of the GT120 (http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gt_120_us.html)) for the current base model SP price. Remember, Apple will want a low power card to fit their Green initiative. It also assumes that they'll stick with nVidia OEM graphics solutions for base systems.

I'm not sure what he's proposing is out of line. I suspect 1TB drives have come down a lot in the last year although I don't know exactly how much. Memory hasn't moved much so that's probably a difficult one to double without eating into margins while I imagine it wouldn't be too difficult for Apple to drop in a GT220 for what it cost them for a GT120 last year.

The big unknown is whether Apple has recovered enough of the tooling and design costs on the 2009 platform to pass some savings along in the form of lower prices on the 2010 models which will largely be a carry-over from last year. I'm expecting they can and will, based simply on other recent price cuts we've witness on some of their other products... which is why I can see a $300-$500 drop for comparable systems this year.

[nanofrog]

I'm not sure what he's proposing is out of line. I suspect 1TB drives have come down a lot in the last year although I don't know exactly how much. Memory hasn't moved much so that's probably a difficult one to double without eating into margins while I imagine it wouldn't be too difficult for Apple to drop in a GT220 for what it cost them for a GT120 last year.
I'm figuring on ~$50 - 60USD for an HDD at most (quantity pricing). Margins on drives aren't 40% (to generate a retail drive price for comparitive purposes), which is why I don't think 1TB will be available as standard in the base models. It would be nice, but I won't expect it, so I still think it's more likely to continue to be an upgrade (though the additional cost should drop).

Also consider, if 1TB became standard in the base model, the only capacity options would be 1.5 and 2TB.

As per RAM, the newer parts don't all have the capability to run 1333MHz, so sticking with 1066MHz simplifies the parts bin. As the prices have come down, it will either allow them to obtain higher margins, or offer them the potential to pass some savings on to customers.

Graphics: Apple wants low power (can run off of the PCIe power with no additional power cables needed), and even the GT150 consumes 141W (according to nVidia's specifications). Since the slot can only provide 75W, that would be the upper limit, and the GT130 is at the max of this limit. They could chose to change here, but I don't expect this to happen. Keeping the power consumption to 75W or less, means a short list of candidates.

The big unknown is whether Apple has recovered enough of the tooling and design costs on the 2009 platform to pass some savings along in the form of lower prices on the 2010 models which will largely be a carry-over from last year. I'm expecting they can and will, based simply on other recent price cuts we've witness on some of their other products... which is why I can see a $300-$500 drop for comparable systems this year.
I'm leaning towards the idea of higher margins and lower costs will balance out into similar pricing as the '09 systems. Value could be added however, by such things as a slight increase in clock speed (i.e 2.8GHz rather than 2.66GHz for the same budget).

What you also have to keep in mind, is the sales quantity of the MP's aren't at the levels the other products are (namely the device market), and will work against price drops. The economy of scale just isn't there comparitively speaking.

I'm hopeful, but I've tempered my hopes with recent history directly related to the MP's (specifically the '07's in terms of what was offered that was different from the '06's, and the '09's in terms of pricing), not other products.

[DoFoT9]

Those prices are $284, $562 and $999. Same as the current parts.

:cool: I hadn't gone back and looked, as I've been waiting for the 32nm pricing (figured I'd pull the data all at once). :eek: Yeah, I was being a little lazy here. :o :p


:eek:!!!!

is this finally some confirmation of prices nano!!!!! ??????

*excited*

too bad i dont need/want a new MP (or any MP lol).

[Fiete5401]

Graphics: Apple wants low power (can run off of the PCIe power with no additional power cables needed), and even the GT150 consumes 141W (according to nVidia's specifications). Since the slot can only provide 75W, that would be the upper limit, and the GT130 is at the max of this limit. They could chose to change here, but I don't expect this to happen. Keeping the power consumption to 75W or less, means a short list of candidates.

Quick research:
GeForce GT 220 -> 58W Maximum Graphics Card Power (W)
GeForce GT 240 -> 69W

[DoFoT9]

Quick research:
GeForce GT 220 -> 58W Maximum Graphics Card Power (W)
GeForce GT 240 -> 69W

idle or load?

[Fiete5401]

idle or load?

These numbers seem to be to max power draw of these cards at load. Nvidia states nothing else.

[DoFoT9]

These numbers seem to be to max power draw from these cards at load. Nvidia states nothing else.

ahh wow. not too bad! thanks :D

[Umbongo]

:eek:!!!!

is this finally some confirmation of prices nano!!!!! ??????

*excited*

too bad i dont need/want a new MP (or any MP lol).

The prices on those SP parts have been known for ages. The 3.2GHz part has been out since October.

[DoFoT9]

The prices on those SP parts have been known for ages. The 3.2GHz part has been out since October.

serious? i donno what nano was saying - perhaps he was referring to a different value (per thousand?).

[nanofrog]

Quick research:
GeForce GT 220 -> 58W Maximum Graphics Card Power (W)
GeForce GT 240 -> 69W
I was looking at OEM solutions, and went from the bottom up. When I saw 141W for the GT150, it made me apprehensive about other possiblilities (200 series; nor did I see any OEM versions; i.e. search OEM GT120,... and you'll get a page on nVidia's site).

Looking at the GT210 and GT220, they were originally meant to be OEM only. Both are the intro/low end of the series (GT240 = mid range). Street prices on the GT220 are ~$75USD (some less with MIR's). So it could be a possiblility.

The prices on those SP parts have been known for ages. The 3.2GHz part has been out since October.
I was refering to the 32nm parts. Until recently, we didn't know how many SP 32nm parts were coming, core count, clocks, or release dates (i.e. there's only going to be the W3680 initially for an SP part, with 2 additional parts staggered over time).

I had stumbled on some information a while back (prior to the Intel leak that gave the March 16 release date) that there would be 4 core parts in the 32nm line, and figured that this might be the case for both SP and DP parts (higher efficiency is desired afterall...). The chart I found indicates otherwise for the SP line, though it is valid for the DP line.

At that point, I wanted to wait for the 32nm pricing, and hadn't gone back to check the 45nm SP parts pricing (containing the newer part numbers) out of convenience (and I figured it could cause additional confusion with even more constant changing of expected/possible pricing).

[CCK]

idle or load?

Read this on an early review.

"The maximum power that will be pulled by the GeForce GT 220 is 58 Watts."

Does anyone think that it is a possibility that they could be doing more to the line than what's being projected here? Forgive my ignorance on these matters, I'm just going by the buyers guide and the widespread disappointment in the 09s, The only other time that an update took longer than a year was for the 09s. Granted they're waiting for the gulftowns, but still???

Since I've transfered and backed up to bigger, faster HDs, ordered a new monitor and completely reorganized my office while waiting for it, I hope it's more than a speed bump for the SP.

[VirtualRain]

Like I said above, I could see a 1TB drive, possibly 6GB of RAM (but that's a stretch) and a GT220 in the standard config.

Given the new CPU's are drop-in replacements for the old, I can't imagine any other changes to the main-board or chassis as they would all incur unnecessary added expense on Apple's part.

It would be nice to see some new display options accompany the 2010 Mac Pros?!?!

As for the lingering wait... In doing some reading today about Apple's discontent with Intel's lack of support for 3rd party chipsets (eg. Nvidia) with the mobile i5/i7 line, it may be the case that the reason we haven't heard anything yet about the Gulftown Mac Pro's is because Intel and Apple are no longer on best of terms and thus no 30-day head start for Apple this time around with the new Xeons. Apple may be in the same boat as everyone else and unable to launch products based on the new chips until March 16th (the rumored GA date for Gulftown).

[snouter]

As for the lingering wait... In doing some reading today about Apple's discontent with Intel's lack of support for 3rd party chipsets (eg. Nvidia) with the mobile i5/i7 line, it may be the case that the reason we haven't heard anything yet about the Gulftown Mac Pro's is because Intel and Apple are no longer on best of terms and thus no 30-day head start for Apple this time around with the new Xeons.

Great, Apple is just going to pick a fight with everyone. :rolleyes:

Nokia, HTC! On guard! Our lawyers will be in touch!

Adobe! So 20th century, and they just produce piss poor products don't they?

Internets! Better without Flash!

Intel! Who needs CPUs! We are APPLE!

Apple needs to be on guard. Even their most loyal customers would acknowledge a love hate relationship with the company, which mean, it could tilt in hate's favor if they are not careful.

[VirtualRain]

Great, Apple is just going to pick a fight with everyone. :rolleyes:

Nokia, HTC! On guard! Our lawyers will be in touch!

Adobe! So 20th century, and they just produce piss poor products don't they?

Internets! Better without Flash!

Intel! Who needs CPUs! We are APPLE!

Apple needs to be on guard. Even their most loyal customers would acknowledge a love hate relationship with the company, which mean, it could tilt in hate's favor if they are not careful.

LOL! :D Thanks for that!

However, in this case, Apple does have some support in taking exception to Intel's latest ploy to force their under performing integrated GPU's on everyone. By not granting companies like Nvidia QPI licenses, they are forcing Apple and other's back to the dark days of the GMA950 which was probably the worst GPU ever made.

More here... http://www.macrumors.com/2009/12/07/apple-to-skip-intel-arrandale-demands-alternative-chip/

[MSM Hobbes]

LOL! :D Thanks for that!

However, in this case, Apple does have some support in taking exception to Intel's latest ploy to force their under performing integrated GPU's on everyone. By not granting companies like Nvidia QPI licenses, they are forcing Apple and other's back to the dark days of the GMA950 which was probably the worst GPU ever made.

More here... http://www.macrumors.com/2009/12/07/apple-to-skip-intel-arrandale-demands-alternative-chip/

Curious too about how the "2010 release" of USB 3.0 and even Intel's LightWire might be playing in what is released, when, to who, etc. also.

[snouter]

However, in this case, Apple does have some support in taking exception to Intel's latest ploy to force their under performing integrated GPU's on everyone. By not granting companies like Nvidia QPI licenses, they are forcing Apple and other's back to the dark days of the GMA950 which was probably the worst GPU ever made.

I agree, it's low down and dirty.

Except, it's not stopping Apple from using whatever video card they want, and what do people really expect from integrated graphics anyhow? My gf just bought a Dell laptop with an i5 and integrated graphics only. Handles all HD video and audio pretty well. She'll never game or model in 3d with it, so she's cool with it.

Now if it stops Apple from using Nvidia's Optimus, then that is extra stinky. Can Apple bypass the Intel integrated graphics? I know the chipset is a different story.

Of course, Apple did not like being beholden to Motorola and IBM and the PPC consortium, so, when they switch to x86 do they throw AMD a bone? No, they get in bed with Intel and then get mad when they find themselves without options or leverage. Let's look at Intel's history? Oh, less than spotless, eh?

There is no question that Intel CPUs are boss right now, but AMD has ATi and no doubt AMD would have benefitted if Apple would have been willing to put AMD chips in a few things like the base MacBook and the Mac Mini at least.

Apple gave the monopolistic Intel a monopoly and got monopolized.

[arogge]

I'm waiting until Apple figures out how to invest in certified workstation graphics, so that I can buy the same NVIDIA and ATI graphics cards that Windows and Linux users enjoy.

[grue]

I'm waiting until Apple figures out how to invest in certified workstation graphics, so that I can buy the same NVIDIA and ATI graphics cards that Windows and Linux users enjoy.

Why not contact ATI and NVIDIA? It's up to them.

[arogge]

Why not contact ATI and NVIDIA? It's up to them.

I tried that already, and the problem is that they look at the market and see nobody significant in the Mac segment. It's too expensive to do concurrent development for both Windows/Linux and the few Mac users who might use their products, so nothing gets done.

Apple used to offer the workstation graphics with the G5 PowerMacs, but then dropped it and went back to gaming cards. The workstation card was overpriced and outdated, and few people will buy that when you could buy a Linux box and get a better graphics card for less. It's going to take Apple to put some money into supporting the workstation products and the ISV certifications for something to get done about this problem. There is a workstation card available for the Mac now, but it's nothing like the wide selection of both NVIDIA QuadroFX and ATI Fire cards that work with the rest of the market.

[grue]

I tried that already, and the problem is that they look at the market and see nobody significant in the Mac segment. It's too expensive to do concurrent development for both Windows/Linux and the few Mac users who might use their products, so nothing gets done.

Apple used to offer the workstation graphics with the G5 PowerMacs, but then dropped it and went back to gaming cards. The workstation card was overpriced and outdated, and few people will buy that when you could buy a Linux box and get a better graphics card for less. It's going to take Apple to put some money into supporting the workstation products and the ISV certifications for something to get done about this problem. There is a workstation card available for the Mac now, but it's nothing like the wide selection of both NVIDIA QuadroFX and ATI Fire cards that work with the rest of the market.

Apple clearly felt it wasn't in their best interests to subsidize the production of Mac versions, presumably nobody was buying them. Sucks, but that's how it is in a minority market.

[VirtualRain]

All this multi-threading from a single CPU!!! :eek: :D

http://www.fudzilla.com/images/stories/2010/Cebit/asrock890gx_runssixcore.jpg

Link (http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/17896/1/)

[DoFoT9]

All this multi-threading from a single CPU!!! :eek: :D

http://www.fudzilla.com/images/stories/2010/Cebit/asrock890gx_runssixcore.jpg

Link (http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/17896/1/)

wow! i cant even count that high! sooo many cores....arggh :D

[Mr. Anderson]

I've been running on a quad G5 at home for over 4 years now - its been acting up lately, so I'll be dropping some cash on the 12 core when its out. Any new estimates on the date?

D

[VirtualRain]

I've been running on a quad G5 at home for over 4 years now - its been acting up lately, so I'll be dropping some cash on the 12 core when its out. Any new estimates on the date?

D

I think all eyes are on March 16th.

[Icaras]

I think all eyes are on March 16th.

As much as I'd like to believe that, I just have a gut feeling Apple will not update the MP or any Mac for that matter this month.

Because unfortunately, I think all eyes are on the iPad really :(

[VirtualRain]

As much as I'd like to believe that, I just have a gut feeling Apple will not update the MP or any Mac for that matter this month.

Because unfortunately, I think all eyes are on the iPad really :(

Last year, if I recall correctly, there wasn't any fan-fare or announcement about the Mac Pro update. Just a fairly quiet update to the store and product pages on Apple.com. I don't even think it made the home page. If that's the kind of low-key update we can expect again this year, it shouldn't be impacted by anything else going on at Apple.

[Icaras]

Last year, if I recall correctly, there wasn't any fan-fare or announcement about the Mac Pro update. Just a fairly quiet update to the store and product pages on Apple.com. I don't even think it made the home page. If that's the kind of low-key update we can expect again this year, it shouldn't be impacted by anything else going on at Apple.

I am definitely HOPING.... Actually, hopefully they can stick the Mac Pro in one of the small thumbnail graphics at the bottom.

Hell, Aperture is on there, so yea, let's pray for a March 16 date!

[TheStrudel]

Last year, if I recall correctly, there wasn't any fan-fare or announcement about the Mac Pro update. Just a fairly quiet update to the store and product pages on Apple.com. I don't even think it made the home page. If that's the kind of low-key update we can expect again this year, it shouldn't be impacted by anything else going on at Apple.

That is the kind of update you can expect this year and indefinitely for the Mac Pro. 2008 was like that too. The only time they'll even get more than a press release on the internet is if they're released concurrently with a big ticket item that does get its own event. For example, if they updated all the desktops at once.

I don't think it's as dead as many people on the forum do, but it certainly won't get announcements because it neither wants nor needs that kind of PR push. Certainly I'd rather they put resources into improving it than marketing it, because everybody who needs to know about it already does.

[twoodcc]

That is the kind of update you can expect this year and indefinitely for the Mac Pro. 2008 was like that too. The only time they'll even get more than a press release on the internet is if they're released concurrently with a big ticket item that does get its own event. For example, if they updated all the desktops at once.

I don't think it's as dead as many people on the forum do, but it certainly won't get announcements because it neither wants nor needs that kind of PR push. Certainly I'd rather they put resources into improving it than marketing it, because everybody who needs to know about it already does.

well maybe if they get updated at WWDC

[Umbongo]

That is the kind of update you can expect this year and indefinitely for the Mac Pro. 2008 was like that too. The only time they'll even get more than a press release on the internet is if they're released concurrently with a big ticket item that does get its own event. For example, if they updated all the desktops at once.

They updated all the desktops at the same time last year, so it needs even more than that. The 2007 Mac Pro wasn't announced with anything more than a press release as NAB began IIRC. Really there is nothing much to say about Mac Pros. They just keep moving forward with expected technology.

[MitchLewis]

I keep pushing my purchase deadline back farther and farther. The latest "plan" it to wait until March 16th....but no later. :)

Previously it was February 15th (due to Mac World) and then March 1st and now the 16th.

The clients are starting to roll in, I need something other than my laptop to edit on. Come on Apple, please release something soon.

[Cycom]

March 16th sounds good to me. It'll be a low-key update, as all Mac Pro updates are....unless it gets a significant case redesign or such.

*crosses fingers for ATI 5970*

[beaker7]

*crosses fingers for ATI 5970*

LOL.

[snouter]

They just keep moving forward with expected technology.

generous :p

[mattbatt]

Well, I think I may have some of you beat: I've been running on a 2003 dual 2.0 that just died (again).

I am definitely looking at the 6 or 12 core model.

Slight side note: G5 users, I have done research and noticed a high rate of motherboard failures especially for my model. Last year my motherboard died (mac was out of warranty), and Apple and I worked out an agreement for the fix. Barely one year later, the same thing happens, now Apple says I'm on my own. I think there should of been a recall.

I have written a letter and will continue doing so. I just can't believe an $800.00 motherboard only lasts one year.

I assume you Intel users have less problems? (G5's ran hot and heat is not good for electronics)

[hosko]

I currently have a 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Book Pro which I have been using for Final Cut and Aperture, however its just not quick enough. I originally bought it so I could be mobile however I never really use those programs when I'm on the road. I mostly only check emails and surf the web.

The 27" i7 iMac could possibly work however the glossy screen is rubbish for precise colour work and I'd like to be able to put a HD capture card in and crank the ram up. So that leaves me with a Mac Pro as the only option. I'm thinking of getting an iPad as well so I can completely get rid of the MBP and still be able to check email and surf the web on the road.

Quick question. Apple charges way to much for Ram and the like as options on their website. I know to get ram from crucial however what are people doing for the graphics cards. Are most people flashing newer cards to work or are just using apples options but getting them from else where?

I work for a large broadcaster here in Australia, so have access to Avid edit suites so this is for home use as well as some projects I do on the side. I'd like to be able to do some gaming (especially if team fortress is coming to mac) so I'll be running Windows 7 on it as well. I'll also be doing a little bit of Cinema 4d on it as well.

[citizen7]

seriously, aside from logic pro and I don't know what, is a 12 core machine even useful? I want to use photoshop at top speed, but it's 32 bit! will snow leopard's distributive abilities be able to work some magic ?

and what other apps out there will be able to make use of such wondrous speeds?
anyone?

i am considering a business lease, for three years, and i want the latest greatest mac pro, since that is what I am gonna pay for, but I am wondering if I can just go for the least powerful model since it seems like I won't even be able to use all that power for what I want to do.....it'll save me some loot!:cool:

[snouter]

I want to use photoshop at top speed, but it's 32 bit! will snow leopard's distributive abilities be able to work some magic ?

64-bit mostly lets an app use more memory.

and what other apps out there will be able to make use of such wondrous speeds?
anyone?

most 3d apps - Studio Max, Maya, Cinema 4d, etc
A lot of video encoding programs

On my i7 I routinely compress video, FTP files and surf the web without much of a sweat.

You are touching on a relevant point though, a lot of people don't really need all these cores and would benefit more from faster CPUs, more ram and SSDs.

[codymac]

seriously, aside from logic pro and I don't know what, is a 12 core machine even useful?

Yes - it would be nice to have the additional cores to dedicate to virtual machines.

[Kissaragi]

And as time goes on more and more programs will use those cores. In 2 years time youll be glad you have 12.

Sure there will be a quad core in the line up tho, for non pros like me that just want a fast upgradable computer.

[nanofrog]

And as time goes on more and more programs will use those cores. In 2 years time youll be glad you have 12.

Sure there will be a quad core in the line up tho, for non pros like me that just want a fast upgradable computer.
Software development cycles, particularly professional ones, may not be that fast.

I'm thinking at least 5 years myself.

[VirtualRain]

Software development cycles, particularly professional ones, may not be that fast.

I'm thinking at least 5 years myself.

Agreed, Quad cores have been around for at least 3-4 years and there's very little software that can fully utilize four cores. It's like 9 women can't have a baby in 1 month... some tasks just don't lend themselves to parallelism. :p

Gimme a 6GHz dual core! :D

[nanofrog]

Agreed, Quad cores have been around for at least 3-4 years and there's very little software that can fully utilize four cores. It's like 9 women can't have a baby in 1 month... some tasks just don't lend themselves to parallelism. :p
Yep. Some things just won't benefit from parallelism, and potentially tie up system resources if it were attempted.

For example, using all the cores to run a word processing application would be a waste, as it has to wait on user banging away on the keyboard for input, but now all the cores are occupied, unless the controller frees up some cycles. :rolleyes: Talk about latency... :eek: :D :p

[Techhie]

Well, with buying the 17" MBP my budget has sunk to a measly $1,900, hopefully we can add to that before a new box comes out :rolleyes:

Does anyone have spare change? :p

[DoFoT9]

Agreed, Quad cores have been around for at least 3-4 years and there's very little software that can fully utilize four cores. It's like 9 women can't have a baby in 1 month... some tasks just don't lend themselves to parallelism. :p

Gimme a 6GHz dual core! :D

nice analogy ;)

go grab a few of them POWER7 CPUs im sure they will work for you nicely :D

[sgunes]

Agreed, Quad cores have been around for at least 3-4 years and there's very little software that can fully utilize four cores. It's like 9 women can't have a baby in 1 month... some tasks just don't lend themselves to parallelism. :p

Gimme a 6GHz dual core! :D

Dang, I was trying to get 9 women pregnant on a monthly schedule so there would be a baby every month for 9 months. :D

[DoFoT9]

Dang, I was trying to get 9 women pregnant on a monthly schedule so there would be a baby every month for 9 months. :D

you're....keen? no.. clever?? nope... stupid! thats the one :D :p

who would want to do that :p

Yep. Some things just won't benefit from parallelism, and potentially tie up system resources if it were attempted.

For example, using all the cores to run a word processing application would be a waste, as it has to wait on user banging away on the keyboard for input, but now all the cores are occupied, unless the controller frees up some cycles. :rolleyes: Talk about latency... :eek: :D :p
lol nano your jokes are funny in the sense that only people that know what their stuff will understand it ;) i like that :D

[juan370Z]

any clue if this new mac pro would be an amazing refresh? additionally what specs you guys think would come with the mac pro? should i wait?

[Fiete5401]

any clue if this new mac pro would be an amazing refresh? additionally what specs you guys think would come with the mac pro? should i wait?

There are 8 pages of pure speculation about this question. Feel free to read them.

[hosko]

any clue if this new mac pro would be an amazing refresh? additionally what specs you guys think would come with the mac pro? should i wait?

The only thing I would say is that the lowest end Mac Pro should outperform the highest end iMac. Its stupid if it doesn't, but then again it is apple we are talking about.

[Bubba Satori]

Agreed, Quad cores have been around for at least 3-4 years and there's very little software that can fully utilize four cores. It's like 9 women can't have a baby in 1 month... some tasks just don't lend themselves to parallelism. :p

Gimme a 6GHz dual core! :D

Multithreading of single apps is only part of the rational of quad or octo cores.

The other big reason is the huge performance boost you get when you are running many cpu intensive apps and plugins, even if they are all only single or dual core aware in their threading architecture.

[grue]

The only thing I would say is that the lowest end Mac Pro should outperform the highest end iMac. Its stupid if it doesn't, but then again it is apple we are talking about.

I'm reasonably sure that Apple can look at their financial success, and decide they don't really care what crybaby fanboys on forums think.

They don't care what we want, they care what they can make money from.

[Hmac]

They don't care what we want, they care what they can make money from.

If they're making money (and they are) then perhaps the "we" you're referring to isn't representative of Apple's market.

[grue]

If they're making money (and they are) then perhaps the "we" you're referring to isn't representative of Apple's market.

Very true. Apple is a consumer electronics company that does some pro stuff. We're not a big part of their strategic vision, I suspect.

[nanofrog]

Multithreading of single apps is only part of the rational of quad or octo cores.

The other big reason is the huge performance boost you get when you are running many cpu intensive apps and plugins, even if they are all only single or dual core aware in their threading architecture.
Of course multitasking is another reason, but for many, perhaps a Quad and closing stuff out is a better solution than an Octad with applications sitting dormant (loaded, then sit there for hours before used again).

It comes down to specifics of course. ;)

[shabbasuraj]

I'm reasonably sure that Apple can look at their financial success, and decide they don't really care what crybaby fanboys on forums think.

They don't care what we want, they care what they can make money from.

yup. hence the strictly phone appstore focus by SJ.

MacSLOWs will be EOL'ed this fall. sux . but heck we can have PRO PHONES.. at least.

[NoManIsland]

yup. hence the strictly phone appstore focus by SJ.

MacSLOWs will be EOL'ed this fall. sux . but heck we can have PRO PHONES.. at least.

Seriously? Apple comes out with one generation of Mac Pro which is overpriced and underspeced and everyone goes all Chicken Little?

[NoManIsland]

Honestly, I think Apple is going to surprise us this time round with an improved cost to performance ratio. I don't think we'll see a big price drop, but I think they're going to come to the table with seriously improved specs.

[ildondeigiocchi]

Seriously? Apple comes out with one generation of Mac Pro which is overpriced and underspeced and everyone goes all Chicken Little?

Apple's 2009 systems are extremely expensive. I can't complain because I got mine as a replacement for my faulty 2008 system which failed on me. I think the problem is Apple should've started their pricing with the 8-core 2.26 model at the base price. Then things would have been more reasonable.

[TheStrudel]

Seriously? Apple comes out with one generation of Mac Pro which is overpriced and underspeced and everyone goes all Chicken Little?

Yeah, they are. It's funny because the model before it was acclaimed. One data point does not make a trend. At least wait for 2010 models to shatter your dreams before the gnashing of teeth, right?

[Eric S.]

Very true. Apple is a consumer electronics company that does some pro stuff. We're not a big part of their strategic vision, I suspect.

Agree with that. Pro level computers continue to descend Apple's priority list.

[TennisandMusic]

The only issue I can see with the 2010 Mac Pro will be the cpu's that will be used. Apple is in a bit of a hard place as the Gulftown's seem VERY expensive. And in some cases will perform tasks slower than the i7 iMac (when 6 cores are not needed). Not exactly a great PR move for them, as people will scream about that sort of thing, even though it's unjustified really.

I think Apple might be better off making a dual Gulftown a high end machine, make a dual quad 2.8 the "base" version, improve the mobo's, and return the 2008 level of value to the machines.

That could be oversimplifying it, but looking at the cost of the chips, I just can't even guess what Apple will do.

[VirtualRain]

The only issue I can see with the 2010 Mac Pro will be the cpu's that will be used. Apple is in a bit of a hard place as the Gulftown's seem VERY expensive. And in some cases will perform tasks slower than the i7 iMac (when 6 cores are not needed).

Where are you hearing this from? The initial Gulftown parts are clocked at 3.3GHz (3.6GHz Turbo Boost)... faster than a 2.8GHz (3.46GHz Turbo) i7 iMac .

[nanofrog]

Where are you hearing this from? The initial Gulftown parts are clocked at 3.3GHz (3.6GHz Turbo Boost)... faster than a 2.8GHz (3.46GHz Turbo) i7 iMac .
The W3680 is the only SP Xeon 6 core that will be available.

Any other SP 2010 MP models will have to use existing parts in the 45nm SP Xeon (35xx family). So those using the 35xx parts should be on par with matching clocks (i.e. 2.8GHz clock speed to replace the W3520).

There will be 2x others, but they've staggered release dates.

The DP Xeons OTOH, will have Quad and Hex core parts manufactured on the 32nm process (fall 56xx P/N's).

[TennisandMusic]

Where are you hearing this from? The initial Gulftown parts are clocked at 3.3GHz (3.6GHz Turbo Boost)... faster than a 2.8GHz (3.46GHz Turbo) i7 iMac .

I read some benchmarks. If the base gulftown is 3.3ghz though, obviously those benchmarks would have been on a pre production part. If that's the case, then disregard what I said.

But still...the costs I read for the i7 980x (the gulftown cpu), is 1500 bucks....for the retail cpu alone. That's a fortune considering the base mac pro right now has a 200-300 dollar cpu. I'm just wondering what they will do.

[Techhie]

But still...the costs I read for the i7 980x (the gulftown cpu), is 1500 bucks....for the retail cpu alone. That's a fortune considering the base mac pro right now has a 200-300 dollar cpu. I'm just wondering what they will do.

It's been speculated that the 980x will only be used in much higher end SP (it doesn't have the connections to be used in DP) systems to justify the cost, however it seems to me that $1,500 would be a make the resulting box a bit too steep in price to make me choose it over DP systems with more cores.

[twoodcc]

It's been speculated that the 980x will only be used in much higher end SP (it doesn't have the connections to be used in DP) systems to justify the cost, however it seems to me that $1,500 would be a make the resulting box a bit too steep in price to make me choose it over DP systems with more cores.

wait, i thought the gulftown we've been discussing all this time is a 6-core processor, and that the next mac pro, if it ever comes out, will have 2 of these processors in it for 12 cores total (real - 24 logical) or did i miss something?

[Techhie]

Unless I missed something, consumer grade intel chips don't support dual processor configs.

If they don't plan on making a server edition of the chip with the right hookups, it kind of presents a problem for the 12-core idea :confused:

[DoFoT9]

Unless I missed something, consumer grade intel chips don't support dual processor configs.

If they don't plan on making a server edition of the chip with the right hookups, it kind of presents a problem for the 12-core idea :confused:

correcto, only the Xeons support dual CPUs afaik

[TennisandMusic]

It's been speculated that the 980x will only be used in much higher end SP (it doesn't have the connections to be used in DP) systems to justify the cost, however it seems to me that $1,500 would be a make the resulting box a bit too steep in price to make me choose it over DP systems with more cores.

Well yeah, I think it's assumed that we are talking about the xeon version of these chips for the Mac Pro. The processor used in the quad core MP, and the i7 920 are basically identical, but just rebadged. And the DP versions have the extra interconnect.

My apologies, I wasn't clear about any of that. I was just, as I said above, assuming that everyone knew in general what we were talking about.

But yeah, gonna be an interesting refresh for sure. I'd really like to see some better features, like 6 ram slots per cpu, usb3, etc.

[scottrichardson]

For what it's worth, 99.9% of MOST people's computing experience on a Mac Pro barely makes use of the potential power these current '09 machines have.

All of you clamouring for a new model need to ask yourselves how more cores are going to help you? The real benefits, from any new model, will probably come from USB3/GPU options etc.

The 'snappiness' of the system isn't limited by the hardware these days, but the software - and we all know, that the software barely makes use of the cores - or, when it does, it's only during a long processing task anyway or working with audio in a sequencer in real time.

As a designer, I'd sure love my mac to be even faster, but honestly, none of my design/web software comes close to making use of all the power I have in my 8 core 2.93Ghz Mac Pro. In fact, I don't think software will be able to make full use of this machine for another couple of years, once developers are more capable of writing for multiple threads and harnessing the power of Apple's new Grand Central and Open CL etc etc.

It's sure nice to have the latest and greatest Mac Pros sitting on your desk (trust me I usually buy the latest and greatest), but this machine is no faster (in feel) than the 2008 Mac Pro I had, and the 2006 one before it. They're all about as snappy as the last. Time for the software to catch up ;)

[TheStrudel]

For what it's worth, 99.9% of MOST people's computing experience on a Mac Pro barely makes use of the potential power these current '09 machines have.

All of you clamouring for a new model need to ask yourselves how more cores are going to help you? The real benefits, from any new model, will probably come from USB3/GPU options etc.

The 'snappiness' of the system isn't limited by the hardware these days, but the software - and we all know, that the software barely makes use of the cores - or, when it does, it's only during a long processing task anyway or working with audio in a sequencer in real time.

As a designer, I'd sure love my mac to be even faster, but honestly, none of my design/web software comes close to making use of all the power I have in my 8 core 2.93Ghz Mac Pro. In fact, I don't think software will be able to make full use of this machine for another couple of years, once developers are more capable of writing for multiple threads and harnessing the power of Apple's new Grand Central and Open CL etc etc.

It's sure nice to have the latest and greatest Mac Pros sitting on your desk (trust me I usually buy the latest and greatest), but this machine is no faster (in feel) than the 2008 Mac Pro I had, and the 2006 one before it. They're all about as snappy as the last. Time for the software to catch up ;)

That's all because the software is so very behind the hardware. I can think of two applications, off the top of my head, that I can coax into using all 8 of my cores. That's Handbrake and Compressor. These days I find myself wanting my applications to be able to use all my RAM...anybody who's finding the CPU lacking is usually taking the wrong perspective, unless they're already running Intel SSDs or faster for the boot drive.

That said, I think most people on this forum are looking to the 2010 Mac Pro for features like a Radeon 5870 or USB 3. I still eagerly await the next release of FCS, myself.

[VirtualRain]

We all know the best upgrade you can make to your workstation is SSD's! :p :D

[xxdaix]

I have been following this thread for weeks now I have got to the point of check daily for news

Has any one got any idea as to what day they are going to release the 2010 Mac Pro? its got to be soon right? this week maybe?

I have a MBP which is on its last legs everytime I turn it on I hope it will boot up as there is a problem with the graphics card, which came from a problem with the right hand side fan dying, So now when I boot her up I get nasty diagonal lines going across the screen right up until the sign in page by which time it sorts itself out.

As a freelance video editor, who depends on his Mac this is very worrying.
Hence the looking forward to a new Mac Pro tower.

Another question. I keep reading on this thread, that the 2008/09 8 core machines are not been used to there full potential by there owners as the software is still behind the times and cannot utilize all 8 cores.

As I use Final Cut Pro daily, increasingly with HD footage, will I see a massive difference between a new 2010 machine or should I go for an older machine for example a 8 core 2.8ghz (which if I can find the right machine on Ebay will have more RAM and more Hard disk space)

My budget is about £2.5k GBP and thats top wack, if I live on baked beans on toast for 2 months.:)

Cheers Dai

[Umbongo]

I have been following this thread for weeks now I have got to the point of check daily for news

Has any one got any idea as to what day they are going to release the 2010 Mac Pro? its got to be soon right? this week maybe?

The 2006 Mac Pro came 6 weeks after the processors were launched, 2008 was 8 weeks, 2009 was 4 weeks prior. The new processors come out next week. Apple's products are normally announced on a Tuesday. Certain options, usually graphics card upgrades, can delay shipping.

[VirtualRain]

The 2006 Mac Pro came 6 weeks after the processors were launched, 2008 was 8 weeks, 2009 was 4 weeks prior. The new processors come out next week. Apple's products are normally announced on a Tuesday. Certain options, usually graphics card upgrades, can delay shipping.

There's really no technical reason why the new Mac Pro's cannot be announced and even start shipping as soon as the new processors are released. But we shall soon know for sure.

[CCK]

I have been following this thread for weeks now I have got to the point of check daily for news

Has any one got any idea as to what day they are going to release the 2010 Mac Pro? its got to be soon right? this week maybe?

I have a MBP which is on its last legs everytime I turn it on I hope it will boot up as there is a problem with the graphics card, which came from a problem with the right hand side fan dying, So now when I boot her up I get nasty diagonal lines going across the screen right up until the sign in page by which time it sorts itself out.

As a freelance video editor, who depends on his Mac this is very worrying.
Hence the looking forward to a new Mac Pro tower.

Another question. I keep reading on this thread, that the 2008/09 8 core machines are not been used to there full potential by there owners as the software is still behind the times and cannot utilize all 8 cores.

As I use Final Cut Pro daily, increasingly with HD footage, will I see a massive difference between a new 2010 machine or should I go for an older machine for example a 8 core 2.8ghz (which if I can find the right machine on Ebay will have more RAM and more Hard disk space)

My budget is about £2.5k GBP and thats top wack, if I live on baked beans on toast for 2 months.:)

Cheers Dai

I think many of us are in the same boat as far as holding off a desperately needed upgrade.

Seems like most people are hoping for an announcement on the 16th, which is when the new processors come out & is incidentally on a Tuesday.

Seems like the consensus (for me since I'm a video person also) is that lower cores with a higher clock speed is the way to go.

For me it's hard to drop the $2500 on an 08 (soon to be 2 year old comp), when I'm expecting/hoping for higher clock, better graphics, a comp that is up to date (audio bug fixed etc.) and enough ram to at least be able to start using it right away (6Gb). If there's nothing by the 16th, I'm thinking of the 2.93 Quad & just putting 2Gbs ram in the 4th slot for the time being. (a refurb - ((US sorry)) - is right around my $2500 limit.

[xxdaix]

CCK

are you saying that something like this would be very useful to a fellow video editor?
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Mac-Pro-3-0-8-core-10Gb-Ram-1TB-X-2-more_W0QQitemZ110504273648QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_Computing_Apple_Desktops_CV?hash=item19ba9166f0

Not sure how much it is in Dollars.

Dai

[nanofrog]

There's really no technical reason why the new Mac Pro's cannot be announced and even start shipping as soon as the new processors are released. But we shall soon know for sure.
It depends on whether or not Intel's been able to get the parts in the system builders hands prior to the announced release date (things are kept quiet due to NDA restrictions). Then there's lag time for the vendors to get systems made (assembled), packaged and shipped.

There's a lot in the timing that can go wrong though (delays), so it's not likely that you can ship a system on the day the CPU's it uses are announced. :(

[alent1234]

It depends on whether or not Intel's been able to get the parts in the system builders hands prior to the announced release date (things are kept quiet due to NDA restrictions). Then there's lag time for the vendors to get systems made (assembled), packaged and shipped.

There's a lot in the timing that can go wrong though (delays), so it's not likely that you can ship a system on the day the CPU's it uses are announced. :(

Intel has been producing these CPU's for months. Just like the Core i series. they started producing them almost 6 months ago and only announced them in January.

i can't remember the last time Intel has done a paper launch. ATI and Nvidia are another story

[VirtualRain]

It depends on whether or not Intel's been able to get the parts in the system builders hands prior to the announced release date (things are kept quiet due to NDA restrictions). Then there's lag time for the vendors to get systems made (assembled), packaged and shipped.

There's a lot in the timing that can go wrong though (delays), so it's not likely that you can ship a system on the day the CPU's it uses are announced. :(

In this case, it's a microcode update for Apple to support these processors, and it would be unusual for Intel not to provide this in advance so system integrators could announce products at the same time, but stranger things have happened. We shall know soon enough.

[Umbongo]

Intel has been producing these CPU's for months. Just like the Core i series. they started producing them almost 6 months ago and only announced them in January.

i can't remember the last time Intel has done a paper launch. ATI and Nvidia are another story

The Xeon 5400 series was launched November 11th, Dell were the first to offer systems the week before Christmas.

[xgman]

This waiting is killing me. March 16th can't get here soon enough, not that it guarantees an Apple release, but with the nda off, chances are better at least.

[Phantom Gremlin]

As I use Final Cut Pro daily, increasingly with HD footage, will I see a massive difference between a new 2010 machine or should I go for an older machine for example a 8 core 2.8ghz (which if I can find the right machine on Ebay will have more RAM and more Hard disk space)

Why do you need an 8-core machine at all? Wouldn't a 4-core machine be a terrific improvement over an MBP which has (at most) 2 cores?

Will the (probably slight) overall speed improvement of 8 cores warrant living on baked beans for months? Not to me, it wouldn't. BTW IMO an excellent alternative to beans is Ramen noodles. Don't know how popular they are on the other side of the pond.

If you are unhappy with the price/performance of the entry level Mac Pro, you might consider buying a 4-core iMac instead.

[CCK]

CCK

are you saying that something like this would be very useful to a fellow video editor?
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Mac-Pro-3-0-8-core-10Gb-Ram-1TB-X-2-more_W0QQitemZ110504273648QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_Computing_Apple_Desktops_CV?hash=item19ba9166f0

Not sure how much it is in Dollars.

Dai

That would be more than adequate, & would be about $3,000 US. Though in all honesty, I would not be the one to talk to about a used machine, as I personally like to buy new so I know what I'm getting & it is covered by warranty. - Did not look to see if it still had :apple: care. -

I think that even the base 4 core 2.66 would be more than adequate, especially if your used to working on a MBP, but the new release is sooo close????

Why do you need an 8-core machine at all? Wouldn't a 4-core machine be a terrific improvement over an MBP which has (at most) 2 cores?

Will the (probably slight) overall speed improvement of 8 cores warrant living on baked beans for months? Not to me, it wouldn't. BTW IMO an excellent alternative to beans is Ramen noodles. Don't know how popular they are on the other side of the pond.

If you are unhappy with the price/performance of the entry level Mac Pro, you might consider buying a 4-core iMac instead.

Highly disagree with the use of an imac for video if it is the main function of the comp. Having to deal with a single FW port is not an option for video pro/semipro/ serious amateur IMO.

[CCK]

I can think of two applications, off the top of my head, that I can coax into using all 8 of my cores. That's Handbrake and Compressor. These days I find myself wanting my applications to be able to use all my RAM...anybody who's finding the CPU lacking is usually taking the wrong perspective, unless they're already running Intel SSDs or faster for the boot drive.


Does Compressor use all the cores as is, or do you have to tweak it somehow.

I've heard that FCP can only use 1.5 Gb of ram, do you know if this is true???

[zedsdead]

Does Compressor use all the cores as is, or do you have to tweak it somehow.

I've heard that FCP can only use 1.5 Gb of ram, do you know if this is true???

For compressor to take advantage of everything you need to set up a cluster with Qmaster and select that instead of "This Computer" when submitting a batch.

I am not sure about FCP, but it only uses about 25% of my processor when rendering a timeline which is pathetic.

[CCK]

For compressor to take advantage of everything you need to set up a cluster with Qmaster and select that instead of "This Computer" when submitting a batch.

I am not sure about FCP, but it only uses about 25% of my processor when rendering a timeline which is pathetic.

Thanks.

Any news on a new FC, I need to upgrade to use pro res so probably can't wait, but it'd be nice to be able to utilize those processors.

[grue]

For compressor to take advantage of everything you need to set up a cluster with Qmaster and select that instead of "This Computer" when submitting a batch.

I am not sure about FCP, but it only uses about 25% of my processor when rendering a timeline which is pathetic.

Final Cut itself is in desperate need of a top to bottom rewrite.

[twoodcc]

so will tomorrow be the day? or just another tuesday?

[DoFoT9]

so will tomorrow be the day? or just another tuesday?

another tuesday :p