Mac Pro update is taking so long becuase...

[UltimaLink]

They're adding another mac to the desktop line.

This one will be called just "Mac" It will be a low end Mac Pro with a Dual Core, i3, i5, or i7 processor. The Mac Pros will have a small update with it, basically changing the insides(Making them more Superior to the Macs.) and maybe adding Blu-Ray. Really, the Mac line will be the iMac line, but in tower form so you can add storage and memory at will. There will also be parts for Macs and Mac Pros being sold so you can upgrade when you want.

You see, this will start a new era of Macs, if they do this and do it right, everyone will get one and stop using PCs.

Nah, I'm probably wrong. But it would be pretty cool if this happened.

[Hellhammer]

The "xMac" has been beaten to death. That would mean the death of Mini, iMac and Mac Pro as people would buy xMac and upgrade it. It doesn't seem possible as Apple doesn't want people to hassle with the hard drive or other things. Also, it would weaken Apple's dictator as currently you buy the display, KB and mouse from Apple when buying iMac. With xMac, you could buy them from 3rd party for much less

[WardC]

Are you REALLY so sure???

And, it will look like this:

http://blog.pixelperfectproductions.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/fakemac.jpg


Riiiiiiiiiiiiiggght.

[deconstruct60]

But it would be pretty cool if this happened.

It would be cool if I was about to go to lunch if Halle Berry.

[blinkfrog]

No.
"Apple is a mobile-device company".

[AlphaDogg]

No.
"Apple is a mobile-device company".

if apple is a mobile device company, then why are you trolling the mac pro forums?

[Queso]

Can't see it. Apple have gradually moved away from creating desktops towards portables, be they MacBooks or iPads. I can't see them confusing the remains of their desktop line with the introduction of a fourth model, however it is extremely likely that the MacPro will undergo some form of form factor redesign at next revision.

[ValSalva]

however it is extremely likely that the MacPro will undergo some form of form factor redesign at next revision.

As long as it's as classically beautiful as the current Mac Pro case. I know many are sick of the seven year old design but I still think it's the best looking case going.

[eawmp1]

Never heard this theory before for many years now. :rolleyes:

[blinkfrog]

if apple is a mobile device company, then why are you trolling the mac pro forums?
I just stated that stationary computers isn't Apple's development vector by now.

[Cindori]

http://www.hardmac.com/news/2010/07/16/rumour-some-little-tidbits-on-the-macpro-and-the-imac?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+hardmac+%28HardMac.com%29

[mism]

http://www.hardmac.com/news/2010/07/16/rumour-some-little-tidbits-on-the-macpro-and-the-imac?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+hardmac+%28HardMac.com%29


What are our thoughts on this? Is 'end of the summer' September? On the fuzzy rumour scale is this reliable or unreliable? Should I buy a refurb now? What should I have for lunch?

[Concorde Rules]

What are our thoughts on this? Is 'end of the summer' September? On the fuzzy rumour scale is this reliable or unreliable? Should I buy a refurb now? What should I have for lunch?

Buy one now. Unless the 5870 is something you want and you have enough cash to buy the 6 core processors...

[mism]

Buy one now. Unless the 5870 is something you want and you have enough cash to buy the 6 core processors...

I've read comments about the prices going up as well as staying the same, hard to really know.
I'm buying to use largely with Cinema 4D so cores will make a difference, currently looking at:

Two 2.26GHz Quad-Core which is £2553.00 (or $3299.00)

What do we think a 12 core machine will cost? Then to add further confusion a six core machine with a faster clock speed, even at the same price as the current 8 core, may be a better option. It could mean similar total Ghz but better performance on one or two core operations.

[300D]

They are waiting for the six-core CPUs and LightPeak to be available from Intel.

The last update was over a year ago except for a minor speed bump, you'd have to be dumb to buy one at this time.

[HurryKayne]

apple is a mobile device company

thats why the next ones will have a new set of wheels in order to follow you in the house just like your dog.
By the way..i think many of you saw this already
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/07/16/usb-3-0-and-faster-firewire-in-next-mac-pro-imac/
and this one too
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/07/14/apple_may_get_intels_sandy_bridge_cpus_sooner_than_expected.html.
1+1?

[Umbongo]

I've read comments about the prices going up as well as staying the same, hard to really know.
I'm buying to use largely with Cinema 4D so cores will make a difference, currently looking at:

Two 2.26GHz Quad-Core which is £2553.00 (or $3299.00)

What do we think a 12 core machine will cost? Then to add further confusion a six core machine with a faster clock speed, even at the same price as the current 8 core, may be a better option. It could mean similar total Ghz but better performance on one or two core operations.

You should expect a 12 core system to at the very least be the same price as the 2.66GHz 8 core.

[Queso]

thats why the next ones will have a new set of wheels in order to follow you in the house just like your dog.
As long as it doesn't jump up on the sofa when I'm not there and knock all the cushions on the floor that's cool. Otherwise I just hope you can turn that feature off in System Preferences.

[mism]

You should expect a 12 core system to at the very least be the same price as the 2.66GHz 8 core.

Cheers Umbongo. If that's right then it puts it at about £3700 which is roughly £1000 above what I want to pay.
So sick of this, buy now and get an old, overpriced machine, but one that is tried and trusted and lets me get on with my work at a decent speed. Or wait, clinging on to rumours, in the hope of better value and a more up to date spec.

[xgman]

With the rumor on hardmac this morning, it would seem that maybe Apple was just waiting for a better usb 3 or firewire 1200 solution to include than what may have been available till now.

And as for that lightpeak comment above, that is late 2011 at the earliest, but more realistic for 2012 adoption.

[xgman]

What are our thoughts on this? Is 'end of the summer' September? On the fuzzy rumour scale is this reliable or unreliable? Should I buy a refurb now? What should I have for lunch?

end of summer exp 9/21/10, supports the other vague September rumors, but they go on to say a few weeks or a month after would be the imac update and use the word Autumn for that. What is Autumn considered to be? Sept/Oct? Then again "back to school" season that was mentioned is late August. I guessing it will be either first or second Tues in Sept. Anyway, at least we would get a new technology for the wait in usb 3 and faster firewire. It makes me feel a bit better about the delay rather than just a speed bump or extra cores.

[eponym]

Can't see it. Apple have gradually moved away from creating desktops towards portables, be they MacBooks or iPads.

Um, you do realize that there's more desktop models now than there were 5 years ago, right?

They haven't moved away from anything. They've just expanded.

[Bubba Satori]

"Computers are trucks. I hate trucks."

[Queso]

Um, you do realize that there's more desktop models now than there were 5 years ago, right?

They haven't moved away from anything. They've just expanded.
5 years ago? I'm commenting on the trend over nearly 20 years.

[nanofrog]

They are waiting for the six-core CPUs and LightPeak to be available from Intel.
They could wait for the W3620 and W3640 to show up, and make all of the SP systems Hex core.

The problem with that is, they'd cut into the Octad (lower end DP systems). Remember, the SP parts are cheaper, and there's not a lot of software that can really utilize n cores. Photoshop for example, is still stuck to 2 cores.

To make the DP systems all Dodeca cores, the costs would be horrible, as those particular parts are quite expensive (Hex core with 2x QPI channels = DP part). So it's far more realistic to expect at least one, though I expect 2 (to keep the pricing within the current scale) be Octad systems. Intel realized this from the beginning, and offer both Hex and Quad core parts in the 32nm DP Xeon line.

As for LP, not going to happen, unless they skip 2010 all together. The reason is, the LP parts (components board makers need to produce goods), aren't even due to ship until the ass end of this year, and they need time to get their manufacturing facilities up and running (validation testing, production test runs,...). What this means is, LP won't show until 2011.

And that's assuming it doesn't end up late. :eek: :p

And as for that lightpeak comment above, that is late 2011 at the earliest, but more realistic for 2012 adoption.
I've not seen any recent information of a delay for LP, so the parts are due out at the end of this year. Which means systems won't ship until next year (2011). 2012 would only become realistic if there's a significant delay in the parts becoming available to vendors (say Q3 or Q4 2011 before LP parts ship; basically a year behind).

2012 is significant for USB 3.0 being included in Intel chipsets though, as they've pushed this back to give LP a "leg up" IMO (allow it to get some traction in the market).

[xgman]

I've not seen any recent information of a delay for LP, so the parts are due out at the end of this year. Which means systems won't ship until next year (2011). 2012 would only become realistic if there's a significant delay in the parts becoming available to vendors (say Q3 or Q4 2011 before LP parts ship; basically a year behind).

2012 is significant for USB 3.0 being included in Intel chipsets though, as they've pushed this back to give LP a "leg up" IMO (allow it to get some traction in the market).

I just don't see it. Recent history has not shown Apple to be on the cutting edge of new motherboard based platforms. I'd love to be surprised though.

[nanofrog]

I just don't see it. Recent history has not shown Apple to be on the cutting edge of new motherboard based platforms. I'd love to be surprised though.
I was only commenting on the parts availability dictating when LP will show in general, not specifically on Mac systems.

Apple is interested however, as the first demo Intel performed was run on OS X. That means they're already developing OS X for LP simultaneously with the hardware development. The only reason for doing this, is to be able to implement LP quickly (i.e. OS X will be ready at the time an LP equipped system is).

This doesn't mean Apple would be the first system out with LP, but ready when/if they decide to do so (they could still decide to scrap it, as some unknown deficiency/issue may surface before the public is aware of it).

[Hellhammer]

They could wait for the W3620 and W3640 to show up, and make all of the SP systems Hex core.

The problem with that is, they'd cut into the Octad (lower end DP systems). Remember, the SP parts are cheaper, and there's not a lot of software that can really utilize n cores. Photoshop for example, is still stuck to 2 cores.

To make the DP systems all Dodeca cores, the costs would be horrible, as those particular parts are quite expensive (Hex core with 2x QPI channels = DP part). So it's far more realistic to expect at least one, though I expect 2 (to keep the pricing within the current scale) be Octad systems. Intel realized this from the beginning, and offer both Hex and Quad core parts in the 32nm DP Xeon line.

The quad core versions of Westmere EP aren't exactly cheap. The E56xx line is reasonably priced, being 100-200$ cheaper than Gainestown but there is HUGE gap between X56xx and E56xx series. For example, there is no 2.8GHz or 2.93GHz versions, they are jumping like bunnies. From 2.66GHz to 3.06GHz and from that to 3.46GHz.

Sure that would mean 130MHz bump in clock speed in low-end octo (assuming they keep the same pricing as E5620 costs about the same as E5520) and lower price in 2.66GHz octo but SP hexa core would be cheaper (at least 800$ for two quad core CPUs) and possibly faster due clock speed than any octo system so I don't really buy that octo point.

Why would anyone want two extra core at lower frequency for extra $? Octo would be fairly useless. It would top out at 2.66GHz, having slower clock speed than low-end hexa core would.

My guess is that Apple concentrates on hexa core by giving plenty of CPU options, but gives the option for 12-core for the people who need it. Low-end hexa core will likely be faster than base octo currently is, let alone what the W3680 would be... Then 12-core to start from 2.66GHz and likely to have only two options, that and 2.93GHz.

Sorry for confusing post, I somehow lost my point in the middle of writing so that's the result :o:p What I mean is that octo core would be fairly useless in terms of price and performance (being outperformed by hexa and 12-core being only some hundreds more. The two extra cores aren't that much increase in performance, especially when operating at low clock speed)

BTW, are the clocks of W3620/40 known? Just thinking so I didn't talk übercrap here :D I assume they are fairly high anyway, start from 2.66GHz?

[xgman]

Re: the usb 3.0 thing, this sounds like it might be doable coming up?

"While Intel is still waiting for installing USB 3.0 by default on its motherboard, many manufacturers decided to add an additional chips on their motherboards to offer USB 3.0. In this field, the best component is currently the µPD720200 chips from Renesas, however, its power consumption was too high when computer were idle.

A new version, known as µPD720200A fixes this problem. It drains only 50 mW when idle, a perfect specification for being used on notebooks. So, it is possible to have 2 USB 3.0 ports to share a bandwidth of 5 GBits/s on the same PCI Express 2.0 line
So, even if Intel does not plan to integrate USB 3.0 in its forthcoming mobile architecture, with this chips Apple will have no more excuse not to add USB 3.0 support to our Mac."

[nanofrog]

The quad core versions of Westmere EP aren't exactly cheap. The E56xx line is reasonably priced, being 100-200$ cheaper than Gainestown but there is HUGE gap between X56xx and E56xx series. For example, there is no 2.8GHz or 2.93GHz versions, they are jumping like bunnies. From 2.66GHz to 3.06GHz and from that to 3.46GHz.

Hex Core 56xx:
Xeon X5680 (3.33GHz, 130W, 6.40GT/s QPI): $1,663
Xeon X5670 (2.93GHz, 95W, 6.40GT/s QPI): $1,440
Xeon X5660 (2.80GHz, 95W, 6.40GT/s QPI): $1,219
Xeon X5650 (2.66GHz, 95W, 6.40GT/s QPI): $996

Quad Core 56xx:
Xeon X5677 (four cores, 3.46GHz, 130W, 6.40GT/s QPI): $1,663
Xeon X5667 (four cores, 3.06GHz, 95W, 6.40GT/s QPI): $1,440
Xeon E5640 (four cores, 2.66GHz, 80W, 5.86GT/s QPI): $774
Xeon E5630 (four cores, 2.53GHz, 80W, 5.86GT/s QPI): $551
Xeon E5620 (four cores, 2.40GHz, 80W, 5.86GT/s QPI): $387

Please note, that I didn't list the L series parts, as they're clocked lower, and in the case of the Hex core, it's the same price as the X5650.

As you mentioned, there's gaps in the clock speeds in the Quad core models, but it's to help push the sales of the Hex core parts (look at the pricing from the top down rather than core count). It should make some sense as to why (prevent parts from not being sold, and more importantly, also works out in terms of production capabilities - fewer P/N's means they can better meet production quotas).

As far as "price collision", there's only one instance of it, which is the $1440 mark (2.93GHz Hex and 3.06GHz Quad).

Sure that would mean 130MHz bump in clock speed in low-end octo (assuming they keep the same pricing as E5620 costs about the same as E5520) and lower price in 2.66GHz octo but SP hexa core would be cheaper (at least 800$ for two quad core CPUs) and possibly faster due clock speed than any octo system so I don't really buy that octo point.

Why would anyone want two extra core at lower frequency for extra $? Octo would be fairly useless. It would top out at 2.66GHz, having slower clock speed than low-end hexa core would.

My guess is that Apple concentrates on hexa core by giving plenty of CPU options, but gives the option for 12-core for the people who need it. Low-end hexa core will likely be faster than base octo currently is, let alone what the W3680 would be... Then 12-core to start from 2.66GHz and likely to have only two options, that and 2.93GHz.
The problem with Dodeca ONLY DP systems, is cost.

Doubling up the processor cost, you'd get:
X5670 = $2880 CPU cost alone
X5660 = $2438
X5650 = $1992

Now lets look at the current system costs:
DP systems
2.26GHz = $746 ($373 * 2), MSRP = $3299. Other costs, including profit = $2553
2.66GHz = $1916 ($958 * 2), MSRP = $4699. Other costs, including profit = $2783
2.93GHz = $2772 ($1386 * 2), MSRP = $5899. Other costs, including profit = $3127.

Just adding in the difference between the existing systems and the cost of the newer CPU's, it's not pretty for the base model @ $4545USD, and in reality, it would be a bit higher, given the drastic cost difference between processors (remember, the margin is applied to the total cost associated with it, and $1992 is noticeably higher than $746. To get a more accurate cost, take the CPU difference, and multiply it by say 0.40, then add that to the $4545.

You get $5043.40. Rounding to something a bit more fitting, you'd get $5049 USD. For a BASE model. :eek: It gets less drastic as you move up in clock speeds (i.e. $6050.20 for the top end X54670 based model, so figure a $6049 price point here; only a $1000 difference at this point), but it should be reason enough to realize that they can't just offer Dodeca's for DP models.

It would make more sense to offer a single Hex (SP), then at least one Octad as the base model to meet the price point ($3300 - 3500 target, based on the existing MP's pricing). It would have to be a pair of E5620's, as that's the closest CPU price point that would be in the right range.

The W3680 based SP system should stay at the $3699 USD price point as the current model (W3580), given the CPU's are the same cost. As it's higher, you avoid collision. User's would need to decide which is the better system for their needs between these two, just as is currently the case. A tad murkier IMO though, given the additional pair of cores in the W3680.

BTW, are the clocks of W3620/40 known? Just thinking so I didn't talk übercrap here :D I assume they are fairly high anyway, start from 2.66GHz?
I can't locate a source ATM, but that's about right.

W3620 = 2.66GHz
W3640 = 2.93GHz

This is what I'd expect, given Intel's recent clocks and number schemes any way (i.e. W3530 = 2.8GHz mark, so xx20 and xx40 would be the respective clock below and above this). ;)

[nanofrog]

Re: the usb 3.0 thing, this sounds like it might be doable coming up?

"While Intel is still waiting for installing USB 3.0 by default on its motherboard, many manufacturers decided to add an additional chips on their motherboards to offer USB 3.0. In this field, the best component is currently the µPD720200 chips from Renesas, however, its power consumption was too high when computer were idle.

A new version, known as µPD720200A fixes this problem. It drains only 50 mW when idle, a perfect specification for being used on notebooks. So, it is possible to have 2 USB 3.0 ports to share a bandwidth of 5 GBits/s on the same PCI Express 2.0 line
So, even if Intel does not plan to integrate USB 3.0 in its forthcoming mobile architecture, with this chips Apple will have no more excuse not to add USB 3.0 support to our Mac."
Cost. There's a PCB redesign involved for the main logic board, not just the additional part.

[Hellhammer]

*snip*

A wall of text, just like I expected :p

What would octo offer over hexa core? A simple, though not so accurate calculation:

2.66GHz * 6 = 15.96GHz (~600$)
2.93GHz * 6 = 17,56GHz (~800$)
3.33GHz * 6 = 19.98GHz (999$)
2.4GHz * 8 = 19.2GHz (387$*2 = 774$)

That's about 20% performance increase when all cores can fully be used. Octo would be also about 20% more expensive (~2800$ for low-end hexa - ~3400$ for octo). Well, that somehow fights again my statement that octo is useless :D BUT, that's only when all cores are used and as you know, hexa core will blow the head out of the octo in limited thread performance (less than 8 threads).

I just don't find the market for it. For couple hundreds more, you can get 3.33GHz hexa which is faster than low-end octo would be. Not to forget higher power draw in dual CPU config (130W vs 80W*2)

I think the price of low-end goes up a bit (~2800$) and includes W3620. For 3200$, you get W3640 and for 3600$ you get W3680. So simply, W3680 would just replace the low-end octo, in price and in performance (if there is no 3.06GHz or 3.2GHz W36xx). Then 12-core for about the same prices as current BTO octos are. It would be too much CPUs for Apple to handle and too many cores. 6, 8 and 12 core, too confusing! ;)

Again, sorry for confusing post, it's getting late here and all these numbers are confusing me :p I just can't find market for it and it would hassle things even more. All those prices are just my guesses so feel free to correct, this is just speculation :cool: I hope they could keep the low end at 2499$, that would make even more sense to drop the octo IMO. It's not impossible, not at all but is there need for it?

[WardC]

Could the X5677 (3.46GHz) be used in a 2009 Quad-Core Mac Pro? Or would it require new microcode like the hex-core X5680 would?

[Hellhammer]

Could the X5677 (3.46GHz) be used in a 2009 Quad-Core Mac Pro? Or would it require new microcode like the hex-core X5680 would?

Westmere EP uses B1 steppings while Gainestown uses D0 steppings so it would require a BIOS update which does not exist. Anyway, you would be paying almost 700$ for 130MHz :D

[nanofrog]

A wall of text, just like I expected :p
Because you're asking questions that need detailed facts just to explain it, let alone just to support anything. :eek: :p

What would octo offer over hexa core?
That's the real question, isn't it. ;)

For all but SMP that can utilize all the cores, the SP Hex core systems will make more sense, as little software can actually utilize the existing machines. But those that do say rendering the vast majority of the time, would benefit from the Octads, or Dodeca's, and is their biggest target IMO, given the available OS X software. At this point, budgets would be the dictating factor, as to whether or not they choose an Octad or Dodeca machine.

For those earning a living while using their systems for such work, the Dodeca actually makes sense, as they could get additional projects accomplished during a fiscal year = more profit in that year. :) But not everyone would be in the position to get one (either the budget is too limited, or the workload is insufficient to justify such a system, so the Octad would be a better choice over a SP Hexa core). One instance where the extra cores do matter. :D

That's about 20% performance increase when all cores can fully be used.
Which is exactly what occured with the Nehalem systems.

Utlimately, it all comes down to cost. Specifically what CPU's they can use to achieve their price points. Apple may actually have 4, 6, 8, and 12 core systems as a result. Yes, it's a bit confusing, but we'll have to wait and see if the MSRP targets have changed, as the information posted previously is based on keeping the MSRP in the same range as they are now, as I expect system buyers won't bite if they're increased by much more, save perhaps corporate buyers that can justify it based on a cost/performance analysis (i.e. it can produce more profit per employee than would be spent on the hardware).

[JesterJJZ]

No.
"Apple is a mobile-device company".

Odds are it would have handles. ;)

[Hellhammer]

For all but SMP that can utilize all the cores, the SP Hex core systems will make more sense, as little software can actually utilize the existing machines. But those that do say rendering the vast majority of the time, would benefit from the Octads, or Dodeca's, and is their biggest target IMO, given the available OS X software. At this point, budgets would be the dictating factor, as to whether or not they choose an Octad or Dodeca machine.

But W3680 would be faster than dual E5620 machine, even if all cores of both could be utilized (if my equation above is used though it's not that accurate and I'm too lazy to look at some actual benchmarks :D(no HT or Turbo)). Dual E5630 would already be more expensive than W3680 machine and would only provide 1GHz more than W3680 (again, using my equation above).

Knowing Apple, they would just say "Well, there is 12-core for you, it's suits you the best!" if you needed speed :D Mac Pro hasn't got much love lately so I somehow doubt Apple would start offering huge range of CPUs for Mac Pro, Apple likes to keep things simple, thus I'm sticking with 6-core + 12-core guess ;)

1999$ quad core Mac Pro would be very cool and I of course hope Apple would offer as many options as possible, I just don't believe on it :cool:

[Roman23]

Rumors are rumors.. doesn't mean its gonna happen.. personally, i could give a flying... since I am happy with what I have.. I have no need for westmere at this point.

What i am after however, is copying the microcode over and flashing it to the 2009 firmware.. I am hoping to begin this project shortly, but need assistance with the coding.


http://www.hardmac.com/news/2010/07/16/rumour-some-little-tidbits-on-the-macpro-and-the-imac?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+hardmac+%28HardMac.com%29

[Roman23]

I plan to write a flash bios program or better worded to be an efi flash utility which will ultimately flash the efi from the 2010 to the 2009, thus enabling the microcode for B1 stepping processors to run..

This is what makes me want to do this..


Could the X5677 (3.46GHz) be used in a 2009 Quad-Core Mac Pro? Or would it require new microcode like the hex-core X5680 would?

[nanofrog]

But W3680 would be faster than dual E5620 machine, even if all cores of both could be utilized (if my equation above is used though it's not that accurate and I'm too lazy to look at some actual benchmarks :D(no HT or Turbo)). Dual E5630 would already be more expensive than W3680 machine and would only provide 1GHz more than W3680 (again, using my equation above).

Knowing Apple, they would just say "Well, there is 12-core for you, it's suits you the best!" if you needed speed :D Mac Pro hasn't got much love lately so I somehow doubt Apple would start offering huge range of CPUs for Mac Pro, Apple likes to keep things simple, thus I'm sticking with 6-core + 12-core guess ;)

1999$ quad core Mac Pro would be very cool and I of course hope Apple would offer as many options as possible, I just don't believe on it :cool:
Just using your own calculations,

2.66GHz * 6 = 15.96GHz (~600$)
2.93GHz * 6 = 17,56GHz (~800$)
3.33GHz * 6 = 19.98GHz (999$)
2.4GHz * 8 = 19.2GHz (387$*2 = 774$)
The Octad is close to the W3680 in terms of performance, even though it's 2 fewer cores. But the system should actually be cheaper (look at the actual MSRP, as you have to account for profit margin). Granted, this is only applicable with SMP software that can actually utilize all the cores, not capped (true n cores).

For usage other than this, the Octad won't make as much sense, as fewer cores would benefit from the faster clock speeds (i.e. Photoshop, email, browsing, word processing, spreadsheets,...). Things like Handbrake (capable of n cores IIRC) for example, would need to be analyzed in terms of % of the time spent.

In some cases (i.e. Handbrake or After Effects = more than 50% of the time spent), then more cores could be of benefit, as those systems would shave enough time that additional projects could be taken on during the year, meaning more profit for that year.

[Hellhammer]

In some cases (i.e. Handbrake or After Effects = more than 50% of the time spent), then more cores could be of benefit, as those systems would shave enough time that additional projects could be taken on during the year, meaning more profit for that year.

But then you should jump for the 12-core anyway as it's a lot faster than octo is :p

I guess the time will show us... If Apple could just decrease their ridiculous profits and have reasonably priced BTO options! :eek:;)

[Roman23]

Apple is all about the big bucks.. and I don't see them lowering their stupid, ridiculous bto pricing at all.. remember: the mac pro's are not consumer based machines.. hence why they will not lower the pricing.. unless enough people bitch about it, then maybe.. but i don't see that happening.


But then you should jump for the 12-core anyway as it's a lot faster than octo is :p

I guess the time will show us... If Apple could just decrease their ridiculous profits and have reasonably priced BTO options! :eek:;)

[Mac'nCheese]

It would be cool if I was about to go to lunch if Halle Berry.

You can have as many lunches with her as you want. I think it would be cooler to bang her.

[nanofrog]

But then you should jump for the 12-core anyway as it's a lot faster than octo is :p
Ideally, I agree (no budget limitations, just based on performance). Unfortunately, budgets are a major issue for most, especially if they're independents or SMB sized entities. And keep in mind, this is a specific type of usage (primarily SMP that is 50% or better of the time spent on the system, and that can utilize n cores, not fixed, even if it's fixed to 8 cores).

The n core aspect may be more of an issue, as some software that can currently utilize 8 physical cores may actually be shown to be fixed (presumed to be n as it currently runs on the current core limit), not truly n cores afterall. Hopefully this won't be the case, but it's possible.

[Hellhammer]

Apple is all about the big bucks.. and I don't see them lowering their stupid, ridiculous bto pricing at all.. remember: the mac pro's are not consumer based machines.. hence why they will not lower the pricing.. unless enough people bitch about it, then maybe.. but i don't see that happening.

Neither do I. That was just pathetic hoping. Apple loves the profit. Actually, that's the only thing they care about

Ideally, I agree (no budget limitations, just based on performance). Unfortunately, budgets are a major issue for most, especially if they're independents or SMB sized entities. And keep in mind, this is a specific type of usage (primarily SMP that is 50% or better of the time spent on the system, and that can utilize n cores, not fixed, even if it's fixed to 8 cores).

The n core aspect may be more of an issue, as some software that can currently utilize 8 physical cores may actually be shown to be fixed (presumed to be n as it currently runs on the current core limit), not truly n cores afterall. Hopefully this won't be the case, but it's possible.

True. The octo would be good for ~3300$ segment as W3680 will likely settle for ~3700$. However, IF there will be a Xeon version (W3660?) of the rumored i7-970 (six core @3.2GHz) for $800ish, that would solve the octo issue as it provides the exact same 19.2GHz (again, using my inaccurate calcs :p) and would likely go for ~3400$ in Mac Pro. I should have included this in my ealier posts already but I forgot, as usual :D

[Chilla Frilla]

No.
"Apple is a mobile-device company".

Odds are it would have handles. ;)

I lol'd. :D

[Roman23]

What do you think about all this hype about the 2010 mac pro?? Do you think one will come out? I am putting 100 dollars up on a bet that we won't see an update for a long time, possibly in the NEAR future.


I lol'd. :D

[dgookin]

They're adding another mac to the desktop line


What a "Mac" might look like:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/Macintosh_classic.jpg

[Queso]

What a "Mac" might look like:
Except that the modern equivalent of that is one of these

http://images.apple.com/euro/imac/images/design_hero1_20091020.jpg

[Roman23]

I;'d really like to know


What a "Mac" might look like:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/Macintosh_classic.jpg

[Chilla Frilla]

Odds are it would have handles. ;)

What do you think about all this hype about the 2010 mac pro?? Do you think one will come out? I am putting 100 dollars up on a bet that we won't see an update for a long time, possibly in the NEAR future.

Honestly, it's VERY hard to tell right now because there has been nothing (news) at all the past few months.

Apple is either going to skip it completely and wait until the next architecture or they'll update it this Tuesday the 20th, which is all I'm hoping for. Then again, we've all hoped for something the past 7 months and haven't seen anything new regarding the Mac Pro.

I just keep thinking Apple has considered the 980x Xeon variant due to the major increases in performance we've seen from benchmarks compared to Quad Core models. That's what leads me to believe they still might update it. Only time will tell what they will do.

[deconstruct60]

I just keep thinking Apple has considered the 980x Xeon variant due to the major increases in performance we've seen from benchmarks compared to Quad Core models. That's what leads me to believe they still might update it. Only time will tell what they will do.

The 980x doesn't work because it is justs one offering. They need 3 : base , better, best with it topping out at 3.3. Going to i7 extreme doesn't help because there aren't 3 variants of the same basic technology available there either. Core i only solves the problem if you want to use older or even more crippled versions. That is it.

Not only has intel not shipped 3620 and 3640 they haven't shipped i7 variants of them either. There are rumors there will be a hard clocked, slightly slower, marginally cheaper non extereme version of 980x version coming (970 ? ) but it hasn't hit the streets yet. Intel is dribbling out the rest of the Westmere class CPUs relatively slowly. If they can't hit the $2,400 entry level price point for a Mac Pro they aren't going to ship.








... past 7 moths haven't seen anything new.


Eh? Intel didn't even announce and ship the Westmere updates (i.e. 56xx , 3600 , and the lone 890x ) that are available till March. Anyone who was expecting anything before then was in fantasy land.

[deconstruct60]

I've not seen any recent information of a delay for LP, so the parts are due out at the end of this year. Which means systems won't ship until next year (2011). 2012 would only become realistic if there's a significant delay in the parts becoming available to vendors (say Q3 or Q4 2011 before LP parts ship; basically a year behind).

Your forgetting that the new chip parts have to catch the product design cycle. Next years product development are already in motion now. If the parts don't come and look extremely stable yesterday, they aren't going to make the cut.

Same thing happened for USB 3.0. They parts were out about year before showed up in any real volume. Don't see how light peak is going to be any different. It too isn't going to be purely a hardware addition that you plug in and it magically works just with solely new hardware.

[rhett7660]

I don't think the Mac Pro or the iMac will be discontinued or not updated. Steve has already said they are like "trucks" and you still need them to do the heavy lifting.

I just think we will have longer spans of no updates to them.

[nanofrog]

True. The octo would be good for ~3300$ segment as W3680 will likely settle for ~3700$. However, IF there will be a Xeon version (W3660?) of the rumored i7-970 (six core @3.2GHz) for $800ish, that would solve the octo issue as it provides the exact same 19.2GHz (again, using my inaccurate calcs :p) and would likely go for ~3400$ in Mac Pro. I should have included this in my ealier posts already but I forgot, as usual :D
I'd be utterly shocked if they suddenly swap out for Enthusiast Desktop parts (i7 LGA1366, no matter the core count). The cost is the same between those and the SP Xeons, so any shortcomings in part range exists in both lines (ECC is the distinguishing feature). It would also mean that Apple would then have to carry non-ECC memory as well, reducing their buying power (quantity purchases), potentially increasing their parts costs and adding complexity to the assembly process (now they have to make sure the correct memory is installed).

As per a W3660, I've not seen or heard anything, and expect we'd have by now (W3690 @ 3.43GHz is scheduled, but even later).

They need 3 : base , better, best with it topping out at 3.3.
Exactly. To keep 3 models in the SP systems, they either have to wait on the W3620 and W3640, or use existing W35xx parts in the lower systems (i.e. W3530 @ 2.8GHz, and W3550 @ 3.06GHz) for the base and mid-level systems. The W35xx parts will allow the existing MSRP's to remain without a loss in margin.

We'll have to wait and see, but I'm not sure how much more buyers would be willing to take in terms of price increases, even if they're getting more system.

Your forgetting that the new chip parts have to catch the product design cycle. Next years product development are already in motion now. If the parts don't come and look extremely stable yesterday, they aren't going to make the cut.
To me, this was implied. :o If a part's not ready (have to carry on with an existing part, as vapor doesn't cut it :p), or deemed unsuitable, it's skipped. Even if it means carrying on a product with older parts (i.e. C2D and a discrete GPU used in laptops by Apple).

Same thing happened for USB 3.0. They parts were out about year before showed up in any real volume. Don't see how light peak is going to be any different. It too isn't going to be purely a hardware addition that you plug in and it magically works just with solely new hardware.
The earlier USB 3.0 chips had issues, such as high power consumption. There's still bandwidth issues with the PCIe lane configuration IIRC (not enough lanes to reach full band), but I expect will be corrected in the next generation.

As per LP, there's definitely a software side to the equation, not to mention any bridge devices that might be needed (depending on what the user wants to connect via LP).

[Chilla Frilla]

The 980x doesn't work because it is justs one offering. They need 3 : base , better, best with it topping out at 3.3. Going to i7 extreme doesn't help because there aren't 3 variants of the same basic technology available there either. Core i only solves the problem if you want to use older or even more crippled versions. That is it.

Not only has intel not shipped 3620 and 3640 they haven't shipped i7 variants of them either. There are rumors there will be a hard clocked, slightly slower, marginally cheaper non extereme version of 980x version coming (970 ? ) but it hasn't hit the streets yet. Intel is dribbling out the rest of the Westmere class CPUs relatively slowly. If they can't hit the $2,400 entry level price point for a Mac Pro they aren't going to ship.









Eh? Intel didn't even announce and ship the Westmere updates (i.e. 56xx , 3600 , and the lone 890x ) that are available till March. Anyone who was expecting anything before then was in fantasy land.

I meant anything new regarding the Mac Pro.


What Apple can always do is keep the same 4 and 8 core variations out right now and just add 6 and 12 core options under the processor upgrade section when you choose to configure one. For example it could be:

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/9650/screenshot20100716at113.png


One 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon (Selected as Base Model)
One 3.33GHz Six-Core Intel Xeon [Add $800.00]

[Roman23]

I have high hopes that this can be accomplished, but under low key.. think of the possibility of flashing the efi firmware over to the 2009?? No need for a 2010 mac pro as one can go and get a B1 stepping processor and just install it. This is what Apple should really give to us, and not make us get a whole new box.. the way I see it, this is a minor upgrade. Its not like the Penryn to Nehalem - no.. its more like: Nehalem to Nehalem extreme.. u get my point?!


Westmere EP uses B1 steppings while Gainestown uses D0 steppings so it would require a BIOS update which does not exist. Anyway, you would be paying almost 700$ for 130MHz :D

[Roman23]

Is this the upgrade from the w3580? It makes very good sense that this would be the upgrade from the w3580 as I have a hunch the w3680 is a single socket processor just like mine.


But W3680 would be faster than dual E5620 machine, even if all cores of both could be utilized (if my equation above is used though it's not that accurate and I'm too lazy to look at some actual benchmarks :D(no HT or Turbo)). Dual E5630 would already be more expensive than W3680 machine and would only provide 1GHz more than W3680 (again, using my equation above).

Knowing Apple, they would just say "Well, there is 12-core for you, it's suits you the best!" if you needed speed :D Mac Pro hasn't got much love lately so I somehow doubt Apple would start offering huge range of CPUs for Mac Pro, Apple likes to keep things simple, thus I'm sticking with 6-core + 12-core guess ;)

1999$ quad core Mac Pro would be very cool and I of course hope Apple would offer as many options as possible, I just don't believe on it :cool:

[Hellhammer]

Is this the upgrade from the w3580? It makes very good sense that this would be the upgrade from the w3580 as I have a hunch the w3680 is a single socket processor just like mine.

Yeah it is. It's the same as i7 980X but with ECC support.

[Roman23]

I really think these processors should be treated as drop in replacements for what we have now, and not the significant overhaul of a new box at all.. I really think this after looking at the specs and seeing that these chips ALL fit our 2009 sockets perfectly..

Try putting in a Harpertown cpu inside a clovertown mac pro or woodcrest? You see what I am getting at?

Thats why I don't really see this as a significant overhaul, but rather just upgrade chips for our existing mac pros - once the microcode has been flashed to the 2009 that is.. and for all I know, my bootrom has a B08 at the end of it.. and who knows. Possibly, I might be able to already use B1 stepping.. idk..


Yeah it is. It's the same as i7 980X but with ECC support.

[Hellhammer]

I really think these processors should be treated as drop in replacements for what we have now, and not the significant overhaul of a new box at all.. I really think this after looking at the specs and seeing that these chips ALL fit our 2009 sockets perfectly..

Try putting in a Harpertown cpu inside a clovertown mac pro or woodcrest? You see what I am getting at?

Thats why I don't really see this as a significant overhaul, but rather just upgrade chips for our existing mac pros - once the microcode has been flashed to the 2009 that is.. and for all I know, my bootrom has a B08 at the end of it.. and who knows. Possibly, I might be able to already use B1 stepping.. idk..

Harpertown was nothing more but a die shrink from 65nm to 45nm and provided quad core as standard. That situation is pretty similar to this, Westmere is just a die shrink of Nehalem, from 45nm to 32nm. Harpertown, Clovertown and Woodcrest all used LGA 771, just like Westmere and Nehalem use LGA 1366.

It's unlikely that this will be more than just a spec bump but has any Mac Pro update been more? Yeah, we did get new internal design along with previous update but that's pretty much it. A new design ain't needed.

We are getting what we want, faster computer for same $ and more options. Everything else we get is extra. Overhaul isn't needed and what would it bring? The case is fine, the internal design is fine, there isn't anything major to overhaul.

We don't know is it possible to flash the EFI to support B1 steppings, it hasn't been done before as far as I know. Even if it was, most people would just buy the new one anyway if they are in market for one as it ends up costing the same as buying '09 system and buying CPU(s) for that. EFI flashing isn't something that everyone does and it's unlikely that it will find its way to news and become popular, already due the fact that a new CPU is nearly a grand.

[Roman23]

Do you think its going to happen, or not? So far we have no valid proof or any substantial evidence that a 2010 mac pro is going to come out.. and as you said, nothing more than a die shrink - I've thought about this all along.. but you have to admit that these would make excellent drop in replacements for our current 09 systems.

As for efi flashing? If you have the brain and the knowledge - ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE. I am sure someone will come up with it.. and for all I know I may already have the proper stepping because my bootrom and firmware is different than everyone elses.. B08 could be that difference.. IDK and right now I couldn't afford the lowest of the line w36xx series chip.

What ever happened to the days of being a processor and upgrading your motherboard? I know Intel has always been expensive compared to AMD, Cyrix etc... I remember vivdly my AMD K6-2 was like 150 dollars back then and the intel equivalent was like 250.00..

And today processors are exceeding the cost of a whole system - doesn't make sense at all.. although, you have to admit I did get a great deal on the w3580 for under 600 dollars..


Harpertown was nothing more but a die shrink from 65nm to 45nm and provided quad core as standard. That situation is pretty similar to this, Westmere is just a die shrink of Nehalem, from 45nm to 32nm. Harpertown, Clovertown and Woodcrest all used LGA 771, just like Westmere and Nehalem use LGA 1366.

It's unlikely that this will be more than just a spec bump but has any Mac Pro update been more? Yeah, we did get new internal design along with previous update but that's pretty much it. A new design ain't needed.

We are getting what we want, faster computer for same $ and more options. Everything else we get is extra. Overhaul isn't needed and what would it bring? The case is fine, the internal design is fine, there isn't anything major to overhaul.

We don't know is it possible to flash the EFI to support B1 steppings, it hasn't been done before as far as I know. Even if it was, most people would just buy the new one anyway if they are in market for one as it ends up costing the same as buying '09 system and buying CPU(s) for that. EFI flashing isn't something that everyone does and it's unlikely that it will find its way to news and become popular, already due the fact that a new CPU is nearly a grand.

[Hellhammer]

Do you think its going to happen, or not? So far we have no valid proof or any substantial evidence that a 2010 mac pro is going to come out.. and as you said, nothing more than a die shrink - I've thought about this all along.. but you have to admit that these would make excellent drop in replacements for our current 09 systems.

We rarely have any valid proofs of an update but we still see them several times a year. For example, there was not even a single piece of news about new Mini before it was true. Sandy Bridge is way too long wait so if Apple wants to keep Mac Pro alive, they will update it soon. Low-end 2010 Mac Pro is already going to be ~50% faster because it's 6-core at same clock speed as current quad is. Apple might be waiting for more W36xx chips to come as W3680 is too expensive for low-end.

As for efi flashing? If you have the brain and the knowledge - ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE. I am sure someone will come up with it.. and for all I know I may already have the proper stepping because my bootrom and firmware is different than everyone elses.. B08 could be that difference.. IDK and right now I couldn't afford the lowest of the line w36xx series chip.

Of course it is but it may not be that simple and you will likely need access for both, 2009 and 2010 Mac Pro. It's not impossible but it might be too much work to be worth it. You could just sell you current for around ~1900$ and put less than 1000$ towards new one. That's couple hundreds more than the cheapest W36xx would be.

Unless you have hacked your FW already, you have the same. As far as I can tell, your CPU uses the same D0 steppings as the CPUs Apple offers. I'm not sure has anyone tried it as the cheapest option is 999$ W3680.

And today processors are exceeding the cost of a whole system - doesn't make sense at all.. although, you have to admit I did get a great deal on the w3580 for under 600 dollars..

High-end CPUs have and will always be expensive. You can grab a quad core for less than 100$ nowadays (Phenom x2 and then enable the two extra cores) and mainstream quads go for around 200 bucks. After a year or so, six-core goes for the same $ and then 8-core goes for the same $... etc.

[Roman23]

I know this is a general question.. but in from what you have seen so far as being nothing but empty air(rumors) with no evidence or proof, do you honestly think they will come out with the 2010 or is Apple really changed and steve has changed to the point that the iphone and itoys are more important to Apple?

I really do so a sharp shift in apple lately.. they are more consumer now then pro, and it seems that although they will continue to update the pro software, they might not do so with the hardware(just my opinion).

As for my bootrom firmware? What is yours? I still think my B08 revision might already have the B1 capability though.. as you said, one of us will have to get a low end w36xx series chip and try it out.


We rarely have any valid proofs of an update but we still see them several times a year. For example, there was not even a single piece of news about new Mini before it was true. Sandy Bridge is way too long wait so if Apple wants to keep Mac Pro alive, they will update it soon. Low-end 2010 Mac Pro is already going to be ~50% faster because it's 6-core at same clock speed as current quad is. Apple might be waiting for more W36xx chips to come as W3680 is too expensive for low-end.



Of course it is but it may not be that simple and you will likely need access for both, 2009 and 2010 Mac Pro. It's not impossible but it might be too much work to be worth it. You could just sell you current for around ~1900$ and put less than 1000$ towards new one. That's couple hundreds more than the cheapest W36xx would be.

Unless you have hacked your FW already, you have the same. As far as I can tell, your CPU uses the same D0 steppings as the CPUs Apple offers. I'm not sure has anyone tried it as the cheapest option is 999$ W3680.



High-end CPUs have and will always be expensive. You can grab a quad core for less than 100$ nowadays (Phenom x2 and then enable the two extra cores) and mainstream quads go for around 200 bucks. After a year or so, six-core goes for the same $ and then 8-core goes for the same $... etc.

[Roman23]

Is Apple the only company that does this crap by keeping their customers in the dark about updates and stuff? In the PC world, this seems to be non-existant though.


We rarely have any valid proofs of an update but we still see them several times a year. For example, there was not even a single piece of news about new Mini before it was true. Sandy Bridge is way too long wait so if Apple wants to keep Mac Pro alive, they will update it soon. Low-end 2010 Mac Pro is already going to be ~50% faster because it's 6-core at same clock speed as current quad is. Apple might be waiting for more W36xx chips to come as W3680 is too expensive for low-end.



Of course it is but it may not be that simple and you will likely need access for both, 2009 and 2010 Mac Pro. It's not impossible but it might be too much work to be worth it. You could just sell you current for around ~1900$ and put less than 1000$ towards new one. That's couple hundreds more than the cheapest W36xx would be.

Unless you have hacked your FW already, you have the same. As far as I can tell, your CPU uses the same D0 steppings as the CPUs Apple offers. I'm not sure has anyone tried it as the cheapest option is 999$ W3680.



High-end CPUs have and will always be expensive. You can grab a quad core for less than 100$ nowadays (Phenom x2 and then enable the two extra cores) and mainstream quads go for around 200 bucks. After a year or so, six-core goes for the same $ and then 8-core goes for the same $... etc.

[Hellhammer]

I know this is a general question.. but in from what you have seen so far as being nothing but empty air(rumors) with no evidence or proof, do you honestly think they will come out with the 2010 or is Apple really changed and steve has changed to the point that the iphone and itoys are more important to Apple?

I doubt it. Mini got some love a week after iPhone 4 announcement. We have seen at least one reliable rumor of new Mac Pro, that was the ATI 5870 and GTX 480 rumor.

As for my bootrom firmware? What is yours? I still think my B08 revision might already have the B1 capability though.. as you said, one of us will have to get a low end w36xx series chip and try it out.

What you mean by B08? I don't even have a Mac Pro but as I said, as far as I can tell your CPU uses D0 steppings

Is Apple the only company that does this crap by keeping their customers in the dark about updates and stuff? In the PC world, this seems to be non-existant though.

This does exist in PC world as well but PC companies release new models much often than Apple does and everytime something new comes, every manufacturer puts it in their products. For example, Intel, NVidia and AMD are quite bitchy about their upcoming products. They do tell some details about the technology etc but don't talk about different models or details we are interested in, such as clock speeds, prices, TDPs etc...

Apple is famous of its system. Other companies are not able to do such things as it requires the smallest possible amount of people that can have access for future plans. It's also the fun thing about Apple, you never know what to see