Mac Pros May See Bus Speed Increase With Penryn

[MacRumors]

Intel's latest roadmap reportedly includes higher front side bus speeds for Penryn-based Xeons, according to DailyTech.

The site lists 3 processors slated to include a 1600 MHz front side bus, up from today's 1333 MHz front side bus, 2 of which are quad-core. The E5472 and E5462 are clocked at 3.0 GHz and 2.8 GHz respectively, and will feature Penryn's 12 MB L2 cache previously described.

Since transitioning to Intel, Apple has elected to put the highest-end Xeon 51xx ("Woodcrest") and 53xx ("Clovertown") series processors in its Mac Pro line. Quad-core Penryn-based Xeons will be using the 54xx numbering scheme, and are expected to be used by Apple.

Apple has also twice used unreleased processors in its products, so a Penryn based Xeon based on the new bus speed faster than 3.0 GHz should not be discounted at this time.

Article Link

[ehurtley]

Well, these are the next update in Intel's product lineup that the Mac Pro is part of. So this is an obvious one.

That's the fun of moving to Intel. We know for certain, months in advance, what is coming down the pipeline. The only thing we don't know is when Apple will release it. (The G5 was close, but we didn't knowwith even 75% certainty that Apple was going to even use it until they announced it. With this, we can be about 99% certain that, unless Apple decides to switch to AMD or something, Penryn will be the next Mac Pro.)

And, again, because Apple likes having the top-of-the-line, even unannounced top-of-the-line, parts, it can be pretty certain that Apple will be using the 1600 MHz bus parts exclusively.

With the Xeon Penryns moving to a 1600 MHz bus, while the desktop chips will be staying on the 1333 MHz bus, I hope this gives Apple enough of a differentiation factor to release a desktop based on the desktop Core 2 chips. While Santa Rosa is a nice upgrade, I'd much rather have seen a P35-and-Conroe-with-optional-Kentsfield based iMac. (i.e. using the just-released desktop chipset, with desktop Core 2 Duos standard, and a built-to-order option of Core 2 Quad.)

I honestly don't care if they do it in the iMac, or in a new headless mini-tower, I just want desktop-level components in a Mac desktop. (Not laptop, not workstation.)

[Roller]

Originally Posted by ehurtley

I honestly don't care if they do it in the iMac, or in a new headless mini-tower, I just want desktop-level components in a Mac desktop. (Not laptop, not workstation.)

I'd go for a mini-tower to fill the gap between the current Mac Pro workstations (too big, too expensive for many) and the iMac (no way to swap the video card or hard drive.)

[twoodcc]

well I hope apple uses them, and starts as soon as they're released, if not sooner

[dmw007]

Looking forward to seeing Penryn & the Seaburg chipset in the Mac Pro, I might be tempted enough to buy one then.

[KindredMAC]

I really don't care what goes in it I just want to see a change to the design of the from factor at this point. The G5 look is really out dated now and looking über unsexy when compared to everything else.

[macintel4me]

The iPhone, iPod, AppleTV rumors are interesting, but the Mac Pro info is what is engaging for me. The enclosure hasn't seen a major update in years, the internals haven't been updated on over a year and it isn't price competitive now. The day the updated Mac Pro is released in Oct or Nov, I'm putting down my credit card and buying one of these bad boys; 8-core, great video card, RAID 0 HDDs, ports galore, Leopard, iLife '08 all in a silent beast ready and waiting for it's appropriate seductive 30" 160dpi LCD companion.

[brianus]

Originally Posted by KindredMAC

The G5 look is really out dated now and looking über unsexy when compared to everything else.

Compared to what? The other "..Pro" product also has the aluminum look, and the iMac has just joined it. And I haven't seen anything in the PC world that looks "sexier".

[KindredMAC]

Originally Posted by brianus

Compared to what? The other "..Pro" product also has the aluminum look, and the iMac has just joined it. And I haven't seen anything in the PC world that looks "sexier".

You're kidding right?
I've never been impressed with the cheese grater.

I've always hated the fact that if you had a light source in front of the G5, you can see the fans spinning inside.

It's about time to get back to something that isn't so industrialized.

[brianus]

Originally Posted by KindredMAC

You're kidding right?
I've never been impressed with the cheese grater.

I've always hated the fact that if you had a light source in front of the G5, you can see the fans spinning inside.

It's about time to get back to something that isn't so industrialized.

Why? With the Mac Pro continuing to be positioned as an out-of-reach-to-the-consumer, "workstation" machine, an 'industrial' look is more appropriate now than ever (whereas in the G4 and early G5 days, there were still some lower priced, lower spec'd machines). You still haven't identified what's "out of date" about it either.. what do you imagine it's competing with?

[Pressure]

Originally Posted by brianus

Why? With the Mac Pro continuing to be positioned as an out-of-reach-to-the-consumer, "workstation" machine, an 'industrial' look is more appropriate now than ever (whereas in the G4 and early G5 days, there were still some lower priced, lower spec'd machines). You still haven't identified what's "out of date" about it either.. what do you imagine it's competing with?

I would say it looks state of the art compared to a Dell or HP workstation...

[Umbongo]

Originally Posted by ehurtley

Well, these are the next update in Intel's product lineup that the Mac Pro is part of. So this is an obvious one.

I wouldn't say it it was obvious, as there are only two processors that Apple would likely use, 2.8GHz and 3GHz, which I wouldn't think offer enough difference for a whole line.

I think they would struggle to upsell .2Ghz (x8), just a 7.4% theoretical performance increase for what would likely be $400-500 (Apple's pricing). They may, as I've speculated a couple of times in the MP&PM subforum, have access to the 5482 3.2GHz versions, which would give them a much better chance on the upsell and in that case I think it more likely. I could even see them foregoing having a lower speed downgrade in such a case.

The 1333MHz FSB Penryn Xeon range however is far more filled out, cheaper* too ($100 less for 2.83GHz, $150 less for 3GHz), and we haven't seen the real performance differences between the two yet. Apple could likely make more far more profit here and with a 2.83GHzx8 base system, 2.33Ghz downgrade and 3.16GHz highend maintain similar pricing differences to the current 2GHz and 3GHz quad upgrades while remaining competative with other dual Xeon workstation vendors.

On a personal level, I hope you are right, in addition I hope Intel continue to use Apple as a showcase and that they have 3.2GHz 1600MHz FSB Penryns as an option really putting the MP out there as a solid workstaion choice regardless of the software/OS you will be running.

I also would like to see this enable enough seperation between pro and consumer systems for Apple to fit a Core 2 Quad range in to their offerings, whether it be Kentsfield or waiting for Yorkfield. I'm not sure a $1,199, $1,499 and $1999 lineup at 4x2.4Ghz, 4x2.66GHz and 4x3GHz (with similar base GPU to the MP and 2GB of RAM on a solid x38 systemboard) would hurt Apple's iMac sales. I would think if anyone could balance such a thing in to their product range Apple could.

*I've based my prices on Intel's per 1000 unit prices for the sake of comparrison, although Apple no doubt get them far cheaper than that, I would think prices are still in proportion to each other across processor lines.

[Wild-Bill]

Well whenever Apple decides to give the Mac Pro a much overdue update, I certainly hope they offer current and powerful graphics card options. The Mac Pro is severely dated in the video card department. However, judging by Apple's recent inclusion of the ATI HD 2400 and 2600 Pro cards in the new iMacs, I tend to think they'll screw up this refresh too.

[MikeL]

Originally Posted by KindredMAC

I really don't care what goes in it I just want to see a change to the design of the from factor at this point. The G5 look is really out dated now and looking über unsexy when compared to everything else.

I could care less what it looks like. It'll sit under my desk, just as my G4 and G5 did. The problem with the G5 was that the case was huge, and the internal expansion was small. The MPs are much better in this regard. That's all I really care about.

My guess is that most MP customers will take function over form.

[QuantumLo0p]

Seriously, this has been an issue for a while now. My trusty DP G5 2.7 (actually, all the PowerMac G5's) all they way through the current Mac Pro have absolutely poor FW800 performance.

FW800 RAID will not perform as it should. The only useful purpose for a FW800 port on a PowerMac/MacPro is to free up a FW400 or USB 2.0 port.

This is pitiful considering the scope of the intended user and the price these systems command.

NOT ACCEPTABLE APPLE. PLEASE FIX IT.

Sorry for being nasty but this really ticks me off. We can only hope...

[Pressure]

Originally Posted by QuantumLo0p

Seriously, this has been an issue for a while now. My trusty DP G5 2.7 (actually, all the PowerMac G5's) all they way through the current Mac Pro have absolutely poor FW800 performance.

FW800 RAID will not perform as it should. The only useful purpose for a FW800 port on a PowerMac/MacPro is to free up a FW400 or USB 2.0 port.

This is pitiful considering the scope of the intended user and the price these systems command.

NOT ACCEPTABLE APPLE. PLEASE FIX IT.

Sorry for being nasty but this really ticks me off. We can only hope...

Do you have any numbers you can share with us?

And this really belongs in a thread for itself. Tried to google for "Mac Pro firewire performance" and found zero hits that mentioned anything about lacking FireWire800 performance.

[elliottbayman]

I'm only interested in replacing my Dual G4 if I can get a huge increase in speed. My current machine is only lacking when it comes to encoding video but does everything else as fast as it ever did. I would like to encode a one hour video in a few seconds or minutes rather than hours. Now that HD content is becoming more prevalent it seems I will need even more power. How many more years should I wait to get a new Mac Pro?

[KindredMAC]

Originally Posted by Pressure

Do you have any numbers you can share with us?

And this really belongs in a thread for itself. Tried to google for "Mac Pro firewire performance" and found zero hits that mentioned anything about lacking FireWire800 performance.

I don't know so much about performance as I know there is an issue with the FireWire bus on the PMG5's.

With my PMG5 Dual Core 2GHz at home, I have my iPod (3G) hooked up to my FW800 port with a FW800 dock connector and my iSight hooked up to the FW400 port. If the iSight is turned on, the iPod will start clicking as if the HD is going bad. I found out after searching the data banks on Apple that the FW bus gets "corrupt" so to speak and the only way to reset it is to turn the machine off, unplug it from the wall for 10 seconds and then replug it back in.

It's a such a PIA that I don't even bother having my iSight plugged in unless I really need it and then I make sure that the iPod isn't hooked up at the same time.

I don't know if the same problem holds true for the Mac Pros though...

And yes, to Brianus, I own the model that I don't care for the looks of. I love the power and expandability of it, just can't stand the front of it. Anybody else's cat get their claws hung up in the holes on the front when they try to swat at the DVD tray as it pulls back in??? Drives me up the frickin wall I tell you!

[macintel4me]

Originally Posted by QuantumLo0p

Seriously, this has been an issue for a while now. My trusty DP G5 2.7 (actually, all the PowerMac G5's) all they way through the current Mac Pro have absolutely poor FW800 performance.

FW800 RAID will not perform as it should. The only useful purpose for a FW800 port on a PowerMac/MacPro is to free up a FW400 or USB 2.0 port.

This is pitiful considering the scope of the intended user and the price these systems command.

NOT ACCEPTABLE APPLE. PLEASE FIX IT.

Sorry for being nasty but this really ticks me off. We can only hope...

Sounds like good fodder for yet another class action lawsuit against Apple, Inc.

[TheMechanic]

Originally Posted by KindredMAC

I really don't care what goes in it I just want to see a change to the design of the from factor at this point. The G5 look is really out dated now and looking über unsexy when compared to everything else.

Well, the MacPro is a pro machine and I'd say that pros don't care much about the look of it. They want it's power.
And BTW all towers are ugly with all of the cables coming out of them. But the current MP is far sexier than everything I've seen on the PC market.

[Rocketman]

The MacPro's product line advantage is infinite upgradeability. That all passes along processor and bus updates.

A double depth mini with graphics upgrade and HD upgrade would be a good product addition. Same MacBook throwaway motherboards. Mac-si concept. Time Machine compatible.

Rocketman

[zwida]

Originally Posted by KindredMAC

You're kidding right?
I've never been impressed with the cheese grater.

I've always hated the fact that if you had a light source in front of the G5, you can see the fans spinning inside.

It's about time to get back to something that isn't so industrialized.

To each his own, I guess. I've always been happy with the cheese grater. It's a nice complement to the 30" Apple Cinema Display sitting next to it.

[zap2]

I'm a fan of the Mac Pro look, although I can see it get an update soon.


It is after all from 2003.

[Wild-Bill]

Ditch the FW800 Apple and give us eSATA. That is the way forward.

[macintel4me]

Originally Posted by Wild-Bill

Ditch the FW800 Apple and give us eSATA. That is the way forward.

I'll second that. eSata is double the throughput of properly working FW800.