What will be in 2007 Powermacs?

timmillwood said:

Processor? 2x quad core 3.0Ghz 64-bit processor
Hard Drive? 2x 1 Terabyte fibre channel drives
Ram? 8 Slots 4GB per slot totaling 32Gb
Optical? Blue-Ray
Graphics? Quad SLI 1GB cards totaling 4GB graphics memory

40" displays 3360x2160 resolution

Click to expand...

i think that's a bit over the top.

I don't think intel will have quad core's by then.

hdd-maybe

RAM- i believe 64 bit only supports 16 GB. need to check though.

Optical-agree

graphics-over the top but possible.


if anything, that will by a high end machine.

yankeefan24 said:

i think that's a bit over the top.

I don't think intel will have quad core's by then.

hdd-maybe

RAM- i believe 64 bit only supports 16 GB. need to check though.

Optical-agree

graphics-over the top but possible.


if anything, that will by a high end machine.

Click to expand...

iirc it's actually somewhere around 16TB

16TB is correct, although i doubt we will be seeing that anytime soon

I'm buying a Mac Pro/Powermac next easter (saving up bigtime at the moment so I can get a screamer) and I'm loving the specs I'm seeing so far

ucscc10 said:

16TB is correct, although i doubt we will be seeing that anytime soon

Click to expand...

I wonder if we ever will see it. Seems like with 64 it processors memory limits will not be hit in my life time. Even on 32bit machines 3-4 gigs of ram seems like more than enough for the next 5 years. I know we can all think of exceptions but unless hard drives get allot faster I just don't see the benefit.

vamp07 said:

I wonder if we ever will see it. Seems like with 64 it processors memory limits will not be hit in my life time. Even on 32bit machines 3-4 gigs of ram seems like more than enough for the next 5 years. I know we can all think of exceptions but unless hard drives get allot faster I just don't see the benefit.

Click to expand...

You may be right, but everytime I hear this I think back to a quote made in my lifetime... "640k should be enough for anybody"

(granted, it was made by someone who I consider to be very shortsighted...)

In 2007

Megapixel iSights
GPS in laptops
Quadcore processors
PowerMac with reconfigured design to accomodate more ram - would be nice
802.11n wireless
UWB?
HDMI
OLED external displays on computers

aswitcher said:

In 2007

Megapixel iSights
GPS in laptops
Quadcore processors
PowerMac with reconfigured design to accomodate more ram - would be nice
802.11n wireless
UWB?
HDMI
OLED external displays on computers

Click to expand...

Don't forget the G6 will be out....

Scottyk9 said:

You may be right, but everytime I hear this I think back to a quote made in my lifetime... "640k should be enough for anybody"

(granted, it was made by someone who I consider to be very shortsighted...)

Click to expand...

What could make it happen is wanting to do something with the computer that could use it. Maybe something in AI could cause us to want/need it.

ucscc10 said:

16TB is correct, although i doubt we will be seeing that anytime soon

Click to expand...

Actually I think it is about 16 exabytes.

If were talking theoretical, ye... anything is possible, but realistically spoken I think the stock entry level systems will have:


2x 3Ghz Intel cpus (meron most likely)
1 gig of memory, upgradeable to 8gigs (possible 16 if its a more server orientated chipset design)
2x 16lane PCIe, 2x4lane PCIe
Single ATI x1900, 512megs of ram, option for second graphics card, not sure if they will be able to work together (aka NVidia SLI), depends on what OS 10.5 allows.

1x 500gig SATA HDD, 3 SATA 300 ports available (possible 1 eSATA, hardware raid possibly)
802.11n
2x gigabit Ethernet
Bluetooth 2.0
Possible blue-ray

I don’t see Apple trying something really revolutionary, they will want to get the Intel transition done before they go completely new case designs or anything.

Lollypop said:

2x 3Ghz Intel cpus (meron most likely)
1 gig of memory, upgradeable to 8gigs (possible 16 if its a more server orientated chipset design)
2x 16lane PCIe, 2x4lane PCIe
Single ATI x1900, 512megs of ram, option for second graphics card, not sure if they will be able to work together (aka NVidia SLI), depends on what OS 10.5 allows.

Click to expand...

No, no, no! Merom is a mobile chip. You don't want that in a Power Mac. The Power Mac/ Mac Pro should feature Conroe a desktop chip.

Conroe Core Duo
E8?00 (Due late '06/early '07) - 3.33 GHz (4 MB L2, 1333 MHz FSB, Extreme Edition)
E6800 - 2.93 GHz (4 MB L2, 1066 MHz FSB)
E6700 - 2.67 GHz (4 MB L2, 1066 MHz FSB)
E6600 - 2.40 GHz (4 MB L2, 1066 MHz FSB)
E6400 - 2.13 GHz (2 MB L2, 1066 MHz FSB)
E6300 - 1.86 GHz (2 MB L2, 1066 MHz FSB)
E4200 - 1.66 GHz (2 MB L2, 800 MHz FSB)

Is Conroe 64bit?

Here is the problem.

YOu can't go quad unless you use a xeon chip. Unless intel releases a special Pentium D for apple. So they will have to use the same chip that is in the x serve for the desktop. Problem there.

So we might just see dual core pentium Ds and thats it.

dpaanlka said:

Is Conroe 64bit?

Click to expand...

Yes

MacTruck said:

So we might just see dual core pentium Ds and thats it

Click to expand...

According to Intel "Conroe offers 40% more performance at 40% less power than the Pentium D 950.". So we'll see Core Duo Conroe's hopefully, instead of Pentium Ds. Conroe will also be priced at the same points as the Pentium D.

Intel's Quad (Kentsfield) should be released early '07, but it's nothing to worry about really as not all MP aware apps can fully use four cores.

BlizzardBomb said:

No, no, no! Merom is a mobile chip. You don't want that in a Power Mac. The Power Mac/ Mac Pro should feature Conroe a desktop chip.

Conroe Core Duo
E8?00 (Due late '06/early '07) - 3.33 GHz (4 MB L2, 1333 MHz FSB, Extreme Edition)
E6800 - 2.93 GHz (4 MB L2, 1066 MHz FSB)
E6700 - 2.67 GHz (4 MB L2, 1066 MHz FSB)
E6600 - 2.40 GHz (4 MB L2, 1066 MHz FSB)
E6400 - 2.13 GHz (2 MB L2, 1066 MHz FSB)
E6300 - 1.86 GHz (2 MB L2, 1066 MHz FSB)
E4200 - 1.66 GHz (2 MB L2, 800 MHz FSB)

Click to expand...

Sorry... my bad, I agree, definitely Conroe, NOT Merom.

Sorta of topic, but any idea if the Mac OS currently supports something like NVidia's SLI or ATI's Crossfire? It sort of came to me yesterday while driving back home, everyone has been moaning about the weak performance of openGL, stuff like SLI is becoming very popular as well, what’s the chance that Apple will do a serious rewrite of OpenGL for 10.5 to increase overall speed, entice the gamers and give so kick ass performance for their pro apps via SLI or Crossfire?

If that happens, I definitely see dual graphics cards being a popular BTO option in the PowerMacs or Mac Pro’s, or whatever they will be called.

I'm interested in why any one needs more then 16 gigs of ram in the first place... I mean does any one on her even have 8 gigs? 12? Unless your doing insane graphics rendering it seems like 5 is were the 98% of users would max out. I think 3-4 is were my idea zone would be. Cause I'm weird and like to Surf the net and chat while I'm doing Adobe work, and working with RAW smoothly is a bitch with no ram.

Lollypop said:

Single ATI x1900, 512megs of ram, option for second graphics card, not sure if they will be able to work together (aka NVidia SLI), depends on what OS 10.5 allows.

Click to expand...

Which Application makes use of SLI? Yes there are some games (with the correct patches) which make full use of the technology, wht Pro apps will use this? (released and unreleased)?

I think the new mactowers are going to ship with a gfx card with 128mb (no sli)