Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac Pro Arrived! Pics Included
- Thread starter Laslo Panaflex
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
motulist said:If this rig could talk it would say "Kill me! Please! I can't live like this!"
True, that would seem to be a reasonable caption for what that poor Mac Pro must be thinking.
FireArse said:If I only order the one drive, is the second drive 'flap' still visible?
Congrats on the Mac - I called Apple UK for Student Discount - they're only giving 8%. On my Dual 2GHz G5, I got 15.9%
Still, need to find out what discount Regent's Street are offering with an NUS card. Does anyone know if the Retail stores in the UK have them in?
F
Use the NUS online store or access the apple store from your institution, its about 17%
G5 Quad Is An Excellent Mac Not "Obsoleted" By Mac Pro This Classic Runs Classic
But mostly I am just enthusiastic about trying to help others not make mistakes. I agree with you the Quad G5 is still a viable platform and am thinking about getting a second one to solve my immediate core shortage problem. But I may get the Merom MBP instead if they get the MB's easy HD change feature in the next design. I dont' think the Mac Pro is worth that much more money by the time you spend a lot for a little RAM. Hopefully early adopter demand will drive down those high prices by next year.
I figure the Tigerton OctoMac Pro will have some additional technical advantages that are worth waiting for as well. I am not one to want to do an off-the-reservation processor upgrade either. And, now that I get the big picture on 10.5, I want Leopard on board as well.
I love the Mac Pro's expandability. Wish we had all that. But as far as speed goes, I doubt it's much faster than ours - esp in light of Apple's own comparison charts. I don't consider even 50% faster to be much of a gain for me. I did one of those benchmark tests -GeekBench - Quad G5 was like 260 and the Mac Pro 298. 15% faster at most. So I'm not shaking in my boots at all.
Again my sincerest apologies for yelling Dual Clovertown was a sure thing. Can anyone tell me why Clovertown should be used instead of Kentsfield if they both can only be used in one socket motherboards? Now I'm confused.
Tigerton for sure in Spring '07 with Leopard on board. Still expensive. But worth it to have 8 cores in one Mac. $3999 I'm willing to pay for base. Anyone with me on that kind of price for 8 cores inside next Spring with Leopard? Or is everyone else here thinking that is too much money for an Eight Core Mac Pro?
Well just let me tag with thank you.
Thanks for the Props. Yeah I get carried away sometimes like that Clovertown 100% sure thing - Duh. I am surprised to learn Clovertown is not multi-processor capable. I thought that was the main difference between Kentsfield and Clovertown. Now I don't know what the difference is except that Clovertown will be much more expensive.dante@sisna.com said:
But mostly I am just enthusiastic about trying to help others not make mistakes. I agree with you the Quad G5 is still a viable platform and am thinking about getting a second one to solve my immediate core shortage problem. But I may get the Merom MBP instead if they get the MB's easy HD change feature in the next design. I dont' think the Mac Pro is worth that much more money by the time you spend a lot for a little RAM. Hopefully early adopter demand will drive down those high prices by next year.
I figure the Tigerton OctoMac Pro will have some additional technical advantages that are worth waiting for as well. I am not one to want to do an off-the-reservation processor upgrade either. And, now that I get the big picture on 10.5, I want Leopard on board as well.
I love the Mac Pro's expandability. Wish we had all that. But as far as speed goes, I doubt it's much faster than ours - esp in light of Apple's own comparison charts. I don't consider even 50% faster to be much of a gain for me. I did one of those benchmark tests -GeekBench - Quad G5 was like 260 and the Mac Pro 298. 15% faster at most. So I'm not shaking in my boots at all.
Again my sincerest apologies for yelling Dual Clovertown was a sure thing. Can anyone tell me why Clovertown should be used instead of Kentsfield if they both can only be used in one socket motherboards? Now I'm confused.
Tigerton for sure in Spring '07 with Leopard on board. Still expensive. But worth it to have 8 cores in one Mac. $3999 I'm willing to pay for base. Anyone with me on that kind of price for 8 cores inside next Spring with Leopard? Or is everyone else here thinking that is too much money for an Eight Core Mac Pro?
So while I wrote all that mea culpa Epitaphic firgures out I was right to begin with?epitaphic said:
Well just let me tag with thank you.
G5 PowerMacs Are Obsolete & Will Not Be Supported As Of January 2007 100% Certainty
Now I know you're joking. And I have to laugh with you. The idea that G5's are "obsolete" and "won't be supported" for many years to come is patently absurd. The idea leaves me speechless. Or is that writerless?
If G5 Quads become "worthless crap" soon, Sign me up for 10 when they do. I would love to smell their stench in my office for the rest of my life in exchange for access to a whole buch of them worthless pieces of crap. But I love you Liske for posing such a joke. Thanks for the Yucks. Glad you think the Quad is a "nice box". How Quaint.
You're breaking my balls here Liske. (South Park reference) ROTFLMAO.Liske said:
Now I know you're joking. And I have to laugh with you. The idea that G5's are "obsolete" and "won't be supported" for many years to come is patently absurd. The idea leaves me speechless. Or is that writerless?
If G5 Quads become "worthless crap" soon, Sign me up for 10 when they do. I would love to smell their stench in my office for the rest of my life in exchange for access to a whole buch of them worthless pieces of crap.
But I love you Liske for posing such a joke. Thanks for the Yucks. Glad you think the Quad is a "nice box". How Quaint.
dante@sisna.com said:
Multimedia said:So while I wrote all that mea culpa Epitaphic firgures out I was right to begin with?
lol! there is an edit button you know...
so what are you going to do? jump on an 8 core in jan or wait another six months for 12, possibly 16 or more cores? there's always something bigger and better knocking on the door!
whatever said:
I don't see any logic behind this. So far Apple has generally been using the fastest chips available (or close to it). Why would Apple wait 6 months to use new chips? If they don't use the latest and greatest they'll get killed in comparisons to other available computers.
I'll Jump On Board For 8 In January Build Your Own Conroe Now Only $420 At Fry's
But also interested in Merom MBP with MB easy swapable HD feature in new design.
All The Intel Processors' Numbers And Specs - Scroll down to bottom for Core 2 List.
Here's Fry's New Ad For a 2.13 GHz 2 MiB L2, 1066 MHz FSB Conroe with Motherboard today:
Jump on 8 in January. Since I have 4 now, don't need Mac Pro now. Thinking of a second Quad G5 if I can find a bargain.epitaphic said:lol! there is an edit button you know...
so what are you going to do? jump on an 8 core in jan or wait another six months for 12, possibly 16 or more cores? there's always something bigger and better knocking on the door!
But also interested in Merom MBP with MB easy swapable HD feature in new design.All The Intel Processors' Numbers And Specs - Scroll down to bottom for Core 2 List.
Here's Fry's New Ad For a 2.13 GHz 2 MiB L2, 1066 MHz FSB Conroe with Motherboard today:
Attachments
milo said:
OK.. but I'm really doubting there will be a model 'higher' than the Mac Pro.
Sure we might see a tablet design (low probability), or a niche cube-type (low probability), but for the Prosumer.. that's it.
kevin.rivers said:
Cloverton = Two Socket Max, Fall 2006
Tigerton = unlimited Sockets Max, MId year 2007.
whatever said:
IBM didn't have a competitor breathing down their neck and eating their lunch in a market where they had 98% dominancy for over a decade.
I believe you are mistaken on that. This is a dynamic time in the processor industry that is causing a ton of churn. Think about it. Intel announced woodcrest/Xeon 5100 <30 days ago. They have stated on no uncertain terms that Clovertown is coming Fall 2006. Clovertown isn't a clock bump, it's a core bump. That's an order of magnitude improvement that usually took them a year or more to do (See Paxville to Tulsa in the Xeon 7xxx line) and they're doing is in mostly likely 5 months.
Also, notice Apple's design of the processor in the Mac Pro. It's CPU/Heat sink are in one big block and you take it off by taking off the heat sink. They could easily offer a quad core upgrade kit that is installable in the field because of their design. This could be something the'd let the genius bar do.
I don't expect a major case redesign, but I'd expect them to add new options to the BTO page to include clovertown when it comes out.
Tigerton will also have a new chipset.
Since Clovertown is just 2 Woodcrest on one CPU it have to share the FSB. So the performance will be much slower than Tigerton(which comes with a complete new Plattform and memory architecture)
WAY faster memory connections to the chipset.
So if you really want to get most of 8 cores you have to wait for Tigerton!
Since Clovertown is just 2 Woodcrest on one CPU it have to share the FSB. So the performance will be much slower than Tigerton(which comes with a complete new Plattform and memory architecture)
WAY faster memory connections to the chipset.
So if you really want to get most of 8 cores you have to wait for Tigerton!
epitaphic said:I'd hazard a guess that's when the Mac Pros will see a completely new case design. June 07 is looking really good, Leopard + many,many cores! That should cut down FCP rendering from 8 hours to 2
Keep in mind though that the Xeon MP/7xxx Series processors cost an order of magnitude more than Xeon 5xxx.
$1000 vs $5899
I don't really see how so many cores will cut down render times. Is FCP built to multi-process? I do't think so. Multiple cores (to me) means, a little bit of threading that OS X can handle, and being able to run multiple apps with little to no speed hits as the OS spreads them across multiple cores. But one job is not parallel processed.
milo said:
One of the things that Apple will push is that their OS is superior to Windows. So sure a Dell may have a slightly faster chip, but if it's crippled by the OS, what's the sense.
I don't want to start a flame-war, but the new Intel Xeon chipsets support 4 channel memory access, which means you can double your memory bandwidth just by adding 2 more DIMMs.Multimedia said:See how it feels with one. It's ain't gonna be slow.
In the laptops, no. They're soldered on to the logic board so Apple can fit them into thinner cases. In the iMac and Mac Mini, yes. They're socketed in those two Macs. It's an adventure to open them though. Much more so for the iMac.weeag said:
Looks like a nice machine. Can't wait till Adobe is native.
I do think the G5 interior is sexier, though.
(I'm obviously biased.)
I do think the G5 interior is sexier, though.
(I'm obviously biased.)
yellow said:
I'm not talking about a higher model, I'm talking about a midrange model between the cube and tower. Right now there is NO "prosumer" model. Mini is very consumer, Pro is very pro. They need something in the midrange.
yellow said:
FCP is absolutely set to multi-process. Rendering video is one of the easiest things to optimize for multiple cores. Simplest case, just have the app split your movie into eight chunks and have each core plug away on their own.
whatever said:
Apple has ALWAYS pushed that. It's a nice argument for mac, but it will never compensate for slower machines, especially machines that run at HALF the speed of the competition! We're not talking about "slightly faster", this is double the cores. Eight core machines will be big news, and Apple looks like a laggard if they don't add support right away. There's no real reason not to, the chips swap into the same motherboard. Not to mention that if Apple will need to offer them or else people will just buy the cheapest Pro and swap in clovertons themselves.
Eidorian said:
Maybe you didn't notice, but this thread is about the Pro. And yes, they are socketed in the Pro, I'd guess they'd be the easiest to swap in any mac.
iGary said:I do think the G5 interior is sexier, though.
Why? How is a ton of wasted space and less expansion sexier? It's even ugly inside the G5 with that big plastic chunk.
milo said:
The Mac Mini is designed to be a gateway (not the brand name) computer that helps people switch to the Apple brand easily, or for existing users who have a monitor that they don't want to part with. No attached monitor given its purpose.
The Mac Pro is obviously for pros who may want 1 or 8 monitors -- again, no attached monitor.
The iMac is a fantastic prosumer computer. VERY fast, lots of i/o ports (although not very expandable with extra HDs and slots.) I think Apple captures the different market needs quite well.