Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New Xeon Chips for the Mac Pro?

These are based on Nehalem micro-architecture. The chips coming in Q4 will be based on Sandy Bridge. These new CPUs start from 774$ and that only gets you a 1.73GHz 6-core! The prices are simply way too high for Mac Pro. It also uses a different socket (LGA 1567) so that would require Apple to redesign the logic board and doing it twice in relatively short period of time (now and then again when Sandy Bridge hits).

In the end, these chips could only be used in the ultimate Mac Pro, which probably has the smallest market too.
 
Intel announces new Xeon E7 CPUs 10 cores & 20 threads

For those of us that need the most power we can get for things like CAD and high-end 3D art programs, you should check out the just announced Intel Xeon E7 family with 10 cores and 20 threads. You can find more on various sites such as engadget and a youtube video.

They look to be freaking awesome and something I would love to have for my art development. Hopefully at least one of these versions will make it into a new Mac Pro soon. Apple should have all it needs for a MAJOR Mac Pro update with their thunderbolt/USB 3.0 spec, new Lion OS, hopefully new graphic card support from all major vendors and now these new Xeon CPUs.

If Apple does not support the Mac Pro better with processors like this and graphics cards too, I will be forced to look elsewhere as they really need to get things moving now. While the market is low for high-end systems from $8-12 thousand, those like myself that actually have a use for it is a must have.
 
These are clearly aimed at the high end or server market. Something Apple is no longer part off.

Well it never really was.

I would have to agree with cherry, these are meant for QuadProc machines not DP Mac Pro's,

It would be stunning to see one, but as HH mentioned the cost would be astronomical. Not even the strongest Apple lover would be able to justify the cost increase to the end user.
 
cherry su said:
These chips are mainly for 4+P systems, not DP systems.
Click to expand...
In the past, this was correct. But this time around, it's a bit more confusing (single through 8 CPU's on one board).
  • E7-2800 family can work in single and dual-processor systems.
  • E7-4800 family supports up to 4-processor configurations.
  • E7-8800 family is aimed at up to 8 CPU sockets.
This is stated in the link provided by Hellhammer.
MacFanJeff said:
They look to be freaking awesome and something I would love to have for my art development. Hopefully at least one of these versions will make it into a new Mac Pro soon. Apple should have all it needs for a MAJOR Mac Pro update with their thunderbolt/USB 3.0 spec, new Lion OS, hopefully new graphic card support from all major vendors and now these new Xeon CPUs.

If Apple does not support the Mac Pro better with processors like this and graphics cards too, I will be forced to look elsewhere as they really need to get things moving now. While the market is low for high-end systems from $8-12 thousand, those like myself that actually have a use for it is a must have.
Click to expand...
These will not be used by Apple at all (way out of the MP's league), so you will have to look to other vendors if you want systems based on any of these processors.

They're going to be expensive as well, so you've been warned. :p

Behemecoatyl said:
$4,616 per?

$11,500 base price anyone?
Click to expand...
It would depend on the family within the E7 series, but they're certainly not going to be cheap.

Look at it this way; if you wanted a system consisting of 8x E7-8870's, the quantity pricing for the CPU's alone is $36,928 USD. :eek: Contrast it with the lowest model (E7-2803), a pair would only cost $1548 USD (keeping it to all sockets filled). Then you've the rest of the system to deal with... ;)

So comparisons of a computer vs. a decent sports or luxury car in terms of price (not an exotic, but a cluster built from them would) wouldn't be uncalled for IMO. :D
 
And anyone who is thinking they can use multiple 10-core CPU's should be considering a render/processing farm utilising these Xeons instead of consolidating them into a single computer and being limited to only two CPU's.
 
Vylen said:
And anyone who is thinking they can use multiple 10-core CPU's should be considering a render/processing farm utilising these Xeons instead of consolidating them into a single computer and being limited to only two CPU's.
Click to expand...

Precisely, that's sort of what I do right now with Xeons. Typically, I use a very high-end computer around 8-12 thousand for my main design and development. Then, that one is augmented further with 3 other computers that are setup as my render "nodes" which are on a CAT 6e ethernet system. I also have two NAS boxes with around 14TB of storage.

These are the sort of systems I really need and can use with my software. While they not need to be that extreme, I can use every bit of power you can throw at me regardless. That is why I hope the Mac Pro gets at least some major updates. Otherwise, I will most likely just build another cube box myself like in the Maximum PC Dream Machine 2010 with these new Xeons along with 2 or 3 nVidia GTX 590 or better cards in SLI for their "CUDA" cores.

Apple use to be in the ultra high-end designer phase back in the day, but their Mac Pros are sadly lacking now for anything close to the sheer power needed for 3D and CAD high-end work. They also need a fully 64bit OS with no 32bit at all. I was hoping Lion would be that way, but looks like they still are going the boot to 64 route.
 
Vylen said:
And anyone who is thinking they can use multiple 10-core CPU's should be considering a render/processing farm utilising these Xeons instead of consolidating them into a single computer and being limited to only two CPU's.
Click to expand...

I disagree 100%. Render farms are great for final renders...but not for the time-intensive iterative work. My setup is this: I use a 2009 MacPro for my primary work...and then I have 3 macs for a render farm.

But look...there are lots of creatives who spend $10k a year on camera gear or 30k per year on video gear. There absolutely IS a market for 8-12k computers, though I admit I'm in a minority.

I'll also hasten to add that GPUs are quickly changing the game and will make iterative rendering far, far faster.
 
MacFanJeff said:
Precisely, that's sort of what I do right now with Xeons. Typically, I use a very high-end computer around 8-12 thousand for my main design and development. Then, that one is augmented further with 3 other computers that are setup as my render "nodes" which are on a CAT 6e ethernet system. I also have two NAS boxes with around 14TB of storage.

These are the sort of systems I really need and can use with my software. While they not need to be that extreme, I can use every bit of power you can throw at me regardless. That is why I hope the Mac Pro gets at least some major updates. Otherwise, I will most likely just build another cube box myself like in the Maximum PC Dream Machine 2010 with these new Xeons along with 2 or 3 nVidia GTX 590 or better cards in SLI for their "CUDA" cores.

Apple use to be in the ultra high-end designer phase back in the day, but their Mac Pros are sadly lacking now for anything close to the sheer power needed for 3D and CAD high-end work. They also need a fully 64bit OS with no 32bit at all. I was hoping Lion would be that way, but looks like they still are going the boot to 64 route.
Click to expand...


MacFanJeff, I agree with you on the whole. You lost me on your last sentence. Because the latest MacPro and MacBook Pro both boot in 64bit...and even older systems run all optimized apps in 64 bit.
 
IceMacMac said:
I disagree 100%. Render farms are great for final renders...but not for the time-intensive iterative work. My setup is this: I use a 2009 MacPro for my primary work...and then I have 3 macs for a render farm.

But look...there are lots of creatives who spend $10k a year on camera gear or 30k per year on video gear. There absolutely IS a market for 8-12k computers, though I admit I'm in a minority.

I'll also hasten to add that GPUs are quickly changing the game and will make iterative rendering far, far faster.
Click to expand...
Yep back in the day we budgeted all workstations at around 12k each. Lately its been a cakewalk buying Mac Pros due to the low cost. I welcome the high-end again...as long as all apps take advantage of it course :)
 
mBox said:
Yep back in the day we budgeted all workstations at around 12k each. Lately its been a cakewalk buying Mac Pros due to the low cost. I welcome the high-end again...as long as all apps take advantage of it course :)
Click to expand...

Totally get what you're saying, but I think that's the first time I've seen anybody say Mac Pros have a low cost:D
 
JustSomeDude said:
Totally get what you're saying, but I think that's the first time I've seen anybody say Mac Pros have a low cost:D
Click to expand...

Apple's dual processor Mac Pros are priced extremely competitively.

It's only the single processor configs that are overpriced when compared to Sandy Bridge options (heck, even the previous gen i7's were cheaper with the same performance!)

I blame Intel for the pricing scheme on single processor only Xeons, but I blame Apple for using non-dual capable Xeons as opposed to using the core i7 in the lower tier mac pros.
 
Meaning of Low Cost...

When you work for a corporation, you have to budget almost 2 to 3 years in advance. Its not my fault that when I started here, the budget was close SGI status which back in the day was insane. So yes, now that its 2011, the budget is still set to to 1998 pricing thus making Mac Pros presently "low cost" ;)

Hahaha yea I know, politics of budgeting :)
 
PeterQVenkman said:
Apple's dual processor Mac Pros are priced extremely competitively.

It's only the single processor configs that are overpriced when compared to Sandy Bridge options (heck, even the previous gen i7's were cheaper with the same performance!)

I blame Intel for the pricing scheme on single processor only Xeons, but I blame Apple for using non-dual capable Xeons as opposed to using the core i7 in the lower tier mac pros.
Click to expand...

One of the reasons that the single processor versions are expensive is that Apple has a single design which is meant to be dual processor so the single processor version has a larger power supply, case etc than it really needs. I don't think the Xeon chips are significantly more expensive than their i7 equivalents.

Apple also do have a large mark-up as well. They may be competitive on list price with the dual processor systems but Dell will significantly discount so that the real price will be much below Apples.
 
Gonk42 said:
...They may be competitive on list price with the dual processor systems but Dell will significantly discount so that the real price will be much below Apples...
Click to expand...
After many years with Dell as 3D workstations, were done with them. We started using BOXX a few years and havent looked back.
 
MacFanJeff said:
I wouldn't touch pre-built boxes from anyone for my 3D art unless just used in my render farm. For my main systems I fully custom build like the Maximum PC Ultimate computer or something close like here:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/guides/2011/03/ars-system-guide-march-2011-edition.ars/4
Click to expand...

Here's a custom build from Maingear:
Dual Hexacore @3.46GHz!
Liquid cooling for both CPUs.
Intel® S5520SCR Xeon™ Workstation Board
96GB (12x8GB) Crucial DDR3-1066 ECC
2xRadeon 6990
Asus Xonar Essence STX
LSI MegaRAID SATA/SAS 9260-8i SATA 6G
250GB Intel 510 SSD SATA III
2TB WD Caviar Black 7200rpm
12X LG SuperMulti Blu-ray
1.5KW Silverstone Strider
23" Samsung MD230X6 1920x1080 6-panel Surround LCD Monitors
Microsoft Sidewinder Mouse and Keyboard
Creative Gigaworks T3 Multimedia Speakers

This is the stuff one-upmanship is made of :cool:

$23,300

can't forget the Labor and Phone Support with 3 Year Hardware Warranty
 
Last edited:
mBox said:
That sounds great but try and put that in a corporate budget. Large corporations want to see warranty and service agreements attached to a major purchase.
Click to expand...

Actually, many do not care. For the really big guys like ILM, Lucas, Cameron, etc. these would be toys. Most of their stuff is either fully custom designed by their own inventions or other. But any serious studio, even game studios, have their own IT department and could care less about warranty and such. I got to see the Lucas area and it was AWESOME. All they had to do was pick up the phone, punch a button and their own IT guys would come in and solve the issue the artist was having instantly. So companies like them and game studios simply could care less about such trivial matters.

For me, I'm my own boss and tech support so it's whatever I want to do too. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back