Xserve Refresh?

[MacRumors]

On anonymous reader reports that a recent Xserve order has received an Order Status update to say "Replaced with new product" with estimated ship time of August 23. The online Apple store still gives shipping estimates for stock Xserves at "within 24 hours."

Any additional reports of similar Xserve orders would be appreciated.

[Sun Baked]

Look's like Apple is going to finally take advantage of the low power variants.

However, a switch to dual core in these machines would really make them move quick in the cluster niche.

[Platform]

Wonder if Virginia Tech will upgrade if they go Dual core ?

[Toe]

Xserves are really starting to lag behind the PowerMacs. Especially if the PMs are supposed to be getting a speed bump next month.

Currently, Xserves are dual-2.3, while PowerMacs are dual-2.7.

Last I heard, dual-core PPCs max at 2.5 GHz right now, but four of those would collectively be 10 GHz, compared to the Xserve's current "mere" 4.6 GHz.

[Freg3000]

Where do people think the xServe falls into the transition to x86? At the beginning or towards the end?

[TrumanApple]

Originally Posted by Toe

Xserves are really starting to lag behind the PowerMacs. Especially if the PMs are supposed to be getting a speed bump next month.

Currently, Xserves are dual-2.3, while PowerMacs are dual-2.7.

Last I heard, dual-core PPCs max at 2.5 GHz right now, but four of those would collectively be 10 GHz, compared to the Xserve's current "mere" 4.6 GHz.

2x 2.5 ghz processors does NOT mean they are equal to a 5ghz processor. That would only be the case in the perfect world where all instructions could be executed in parallel and already knew how to be divided up. For example... to preform (A*B)+7.... you have to finish multiplying A*B before you can add 7... you cant do both at the same time... (wow that was a bad example... but still works)

[Mord]

i'd predict dual dual core 2.2GHz 970MP's with the low end a single dual core 2.2GHz, it would match what AMD is currently offering with the opteron.

[Bear]

Originally Posted by Freg3000

Where do people think the xServe falls into the transition to x86? At the beginning or towards the end?

Towards the later half of the switchover I would say.

I also suspect that even after everything has been switched over to Intel processors there will probably be one G4 Powerbook and one G5 PowerMac that will probably be available for an additional several months. Much like there was an OS 9 bootable PowerMac model available for several months after everything else switched to OS X boot only.

[Makosuke]

The XServe is in an interesting spot relative to the x86 transition. On one hand, a lot of XServes are basically running whatever services Apple ships with it--fileserver, print server, webserver, directory services, etc. For those users, you could switch to x86 today and nobody would know the difference. On the other hand, for these users, if the PPC is performing equal to or better than whatever x86 chip would replace it, there's also zero reason to change.

On the other hand, there are people with specialized clustering or single-purpose apps. If these apps are already set up to take advantage of the G5's vector unit, or just designed by companies that are slow moving, folks aren't going to be too anxious to switch. Furthermore, if, as some special-purpose high-end benchmarks have shown, the G5 is on the leading edge of performance for certain specific kinds of apps, there's not much reason to change over until that's no longer true, as application compatibility isn't a big deal.

For this reason, I'd guess the XServe will be the last of Apple's machines to go x86. If IBM can offer Power-based servers for specific market segments, certainly Apple could as well.

[Toe]

Originally Posted by TrumanApple

2x 2.5 ghz processors does NOT mean they are equal to a 5ghz processor. That would only be the case in the perfect world where all instructions could be executed in parallel and already knew how to be divided up. For example... to preform (A*B)+7.... you have to finish multiplying A*B before you can add 7... you cant do both at the same time... (wow that was a bad example... but still works)

Of course, which is why I said "collectively" (just adding up the GHz). OTOH, two slow processors can often result in more speed than one fast one, since a big process will hog all of a single processor, but a dual machine still has another processor free to do other things.

But, more to the point, a machine with four 2.5 GHz processors is almost always going to be faster than one with two 2.3 GHz processors, no?

[stingerman]

It's going to be a while before an Intel processor can replace the 970. The big issue to 970 users is a suitable FMA and Altivec replacement. I think the Xserve will be the last to go Intel if at all. Remember when the G5 was released, it was supposed to go across the line. But, IBM admitted later that Apple never let them in on their consumer Mac line. So Apple never intended for the G5 to go across the board. They always intended for the Intel processor to take over for the G4 while the G5 stays in their Pro systems.

That is my opinion. However, three years from now who knows what the processor landscape will look like and it is nice to know that Apple has the option to go in any direction.

[Toe]

Originally Posted by Makosuke

For this reason, I'd guess the XServe will be the last of Apple's machines to go x86. If IBM can offer Power-based servers for specific market segments, certainly Apple could as well.

Did Apple ever say they were going to move everything to Intel?

Isn't it possible that they'll use whatever processor makes the most sense for the machine in question? Couldn't we have Intel-based laptops and minis and G6-based Xserves and PowerMacs?

[Mord]

the powermac and xserve will switch when intel had a pentium M based xeon.

[backspinner]

The main reason cited for switching to Intel is the performance per power ratio. In the Xserve this is not so much a problem.

[Platform]

Originally Posted by backspinner

The main reason cited for switching to Intel is the performance per power ratio. In the Xserve this is not so much a problem.

Well not really a problem because they can just put a billion fans running at 10.000rpm to cool it but still.........if they consume less power = less heat = possible to cram more chips inside the unit

[machan]

Originally Posted by Toe

Did Apple ever say they were going to move everything to Intel?

isn't that what steve said in the keynote? everything to intel by the end of 2007. that's what i thought he said....

[Toe]

Originally Posted by machan

isn't that what steve said in the keynote? everything to intel by the end of 2007. that's what i thought he said....

Steve says a lot of things.



Really, though, maybe he did say that. But he has been known to switch up from time to time. Like saying Apple wouldn't produce CRT Macs anymore, or that they wouldn't sell cheap iPods, or they wouldn't sell sub-$500 computers. And so on...

[Toe]

Hey arn! The pic of the Xserve on http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/ is a G4.

See the holes in the G5?
http://www.apple.com/pr/products/xserve/xserve.html

[rendezvouscp]

Steve said that this was a transition, and in the PPC to Intel picture we started with all PPC and transitioned to all Intel.

Let's hope the Xserves get a refresh before Paris.
-Chase

[satty]

Originally Posted by rendezvouscp

...
Let's hope the Xserves get a refresh before Paris.
...

To quote Rick in Casablanca:

We'll always have Paris

[w_parietti22]

Originally Posted by Freg3000

Where do people think the xServe falls into the transition to x86? At the beginning or towards the end?

end or never.

[ipacmm]

Originally Posted by rendezvouscp

Let's hope the Xserves get a refresh before Paris.

I hope that they do get updated because I am in the market for a few more Xserve's.

[longofest]

The reason why the XServes are still using the 2.3 Ghz processors is definitely due to heat, and probably a little also due to cost. In order to put dual 2.7's, or anything above what they have for that matter, they would have to implement liquid cooling. Praise Apple Engineers all day, but it would be one hell of a feat to get liquid cooling in a 1U server. They would almost definitely have to go to 2U or larger...

[dernhelm]

And just when it looked like they were abandoning my old buddy here. Seems like Xserve gets very little press from either the Mac press or even Apple itself. It would be great if they got a dual-core chip in these babies, but if the date is Aug 23, my guess is that you are only looking at a slightly faster version of the same ol' same ol'.

BTW - I don't think heat is that big a problem in the Xserves. Have you heard these things? I think they are 40% fan 60% computer parts. :-) Not that it matters beside all the noise in a normal computer room.

Besides IBM can place a full Power5 in a 1U enclosure. It can't be that hard.

[dernhelm]

Originally Posted by w_parietti22

end or never.

I'm hoping never.

But I'm betting on Itanic chips in them sometime late 2007.