"Speaking of which, Intel is demoing SS motherboards at this week's IDF in China, with at least some of them running 3.2 GHz quad-core Penryns."
now that's what i like to hear!
now that's what i like to hear!
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.
2007 Harpertown Stoakley-Seaburg Motherboard With New Graphics Cards 8-Core Mac Pro
- Thread starter Multimedia
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
"Speaking of which, Intel is demoing SS motherboards at this week's IDF in China, with at least some of them running 3.2 GHz quad-core Penryns."
now that's what i like to hear!
You mean "Stoakley" I imagine ?
Nobody else calls it SS or Stoakley-Seaburg like the platform is somehow called here on Macrumors.
I spotted the same thing too (with regards of the demo). I am hoping some further outlined information and details will be brought up at this event too!
Think about it though... Apple has already gotten their mitts on some stuff ahead of schedule... see our Octo 3GHz Mac Pro
Tiger is using the original Mach scheduler. Mach is (I think) coming up or just passed 20 years old. It was not designed for usage on significant quantity of multicore systems. I believe that it runs well right up until you are using all the cores. At that time, the fact that the kernel does not try to keep a thread on the same core each time it runs turns it into an 8-potato game of hot potato. Each toss of each of the potatoes(*) results in unnecessary and wasteful traffic on the memory bus.
* Each core of a Core 2 Duo shares L2 cache with the other core. Swaps between these two cores don't have as large of a penalty. This cuts the problem statistically by half.
Whether any task benefits or not from 8-core, the fact is that it will benefit more at full load when it is running a better kernel. Everybody is hoping that Leopard has this new kernel scheduler. It should already be in the current builds (it is not the kind of change you make at the last minute), but no one has confirmed whether it is.
In fact, Apple hasn't even admitted it is a problem yet.
There's a bit of a different between a low volume part only .33Ghz faster than the generally available one and a whole platform refresh. For all we know, the reason why Apple's the only one using the part is it's too hot to put a pair in a 1U server. Intel can't afford to piss of HP, Dell and IBM by giving Apple preferential treatment here because K8L is just around the corner. Intel needs to keep their server customers happy and in their camp. Apple isn't going anywhere because AMD can't give them the platform resources Intel does.Think about it though... Apple has already gotten their mitts on some stuff ahead of schedule... see our Octo 3GHz Mac Pro
Next Xeon 45 nm FSB1600
http://www.tgdaily.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31642&Itemid=135
45% more speed for bandwidth intensive applications, and a 25% acceleration for servers using Java, when compared to a current X5355 quad-core processor.
http://www.tgdaily.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31642&Itemid=135
45% more speed for bandwidth intensive applications, and a 25% acceleration for servers using Java, when compared to a current X5355 quad-core processor.
I thought Tiger's kernel was based on FreeBSD's kernel + Mach and incorporated FreeBSD's SMPng and FreeBSD's own scheduler in favor of Mach's scheduler? Can you point me to any documentation?
You're right hot-potatoing is expensive. It's still expensive on those Xeons because if you're on one of those other CPUs--or even if you're on the other die (there are two dies of dual cores on the Quad ones)--you'd be falling back to the system bus.
I am waiting for newer graphics cards too. When they update, I will probably sell/trade my MBP, even though it will hurt.
Hmm, you have a good point, in that the chipset question is out of their hands. But they could
* Produce OS X drivers for the latest generation of nVidia video cards. They're two (or one and a half, depending on how you count it) generations behind on nVidia cards, and the 1900XT doesn't cut the mustard anymore.
* Lower the price of the accessories to reflect market prices. I know I can order 4x2gb ram from OWC for about half the cost of the Apple site, but why should I have to? Same goes for hard drives.
* Lower the base price of the system.
http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn/tn2028.html#MacOSXKernelThreading
Doesn't mention CPU affinity, but the scheduler sounds like it is Mach's.
Apple don't cater for gamers, I'm sure the 1900 in their eyes is more than adequate.
Those items will always be priced above what a consumer can buy them for elsewhere, it's a business model the big vendors use for high end systems. If as a consumer you want cheaper things go buy them else where, you aren't forced to buy them from Apple.
Why? I doubt most people can build a machine with what Apple offers in the Mac Pro for less, it's still selling and no major components have dropped drastically in price to warrant such a move.
All of these things are to appease minorities in minor niches of potential mac pro customers. Apple are a big corporation not bob's computer shack trying to appease every customer.
Thanks! I guess they could change it to a better algorithm. We'll have to wait and see.
I wish they had a RAM delete option. You're stuck buying 4x1GB RAM anyway if you want to open it up properly.
Anyone Wavering? AidenShaw Has My Resolve Weakening
Aiden points out that the Cinebench score at BareFeats.com shows the 8 core to be more than 2x faster than the Quad G5. Most members think SS and Penryn won't happen before end of year 2007. So I'm starting to weaken about waiting for more than what's out now. Can anyone here please slap me silly and order me to keep waiting please?
Aiden points out that the Cinebench score at BareFeats.com shows the 8 core to be more than 2x faster than the Quad G5. Most members think SS and Penryn won't happen before end of year 2007. So I'm starting to weaken about waiting for more than what's out now. Can anyone here please slap me silly and order me to keep waiting please?
i don't know, i think he has a point. you keep saying how bad you need 8-cores.....and now they are here. sure, they'll always be better machines next year......but you won't live forever, now will ya?
Aiden points out that the Cinebench score at BareFeats.com shows the 8 core to be more than 2x faster than the Quad G5. Most members think SS and Penryn won't happen before end of year 2007. So I'm starting to weaken about waiting for more than what's out now. Can anyone here please slap me silly and order me to keep waiting please?
I think this applies to us all, we are not getting any younger..You might not be 100% happy with the machine, but overall is is really worth letting valuable months/years slip away while you wait for the "right time" to buy..?
Just a thought.
I have the cash, and was ready to buy whatever the REV2 MP's are. The 8-core mac was not it. I don't consider that a refersh either, frankly I have no clue what apple is thinking anymore. If were gonna see hardware in June, October, or January. So I'm waiting on WWDC, and my tax return.
riding the teeter-totter of desire...
I just don't think you can go wrong with buying now. If you can stress 4 cores, you will see some immediate improvement, and it may even be drastic improvement, depending on your work flow.
You will very likely get a speed bump when you upgrade to Leopard.
If something incredibly sexy comes out, you can do a trade-in. We all know Macs keep their value (refurb PB G4 same $$ as refurb MBP?), and especially after Leopard, the resale for this 8-core will remain high.
in the mean time, you can max out ram, run some multi-core aware virtual OSes, add an external Blu-Ray drive, and have one heck of a good time with 3.0GHz Clovertowns that no one else has... Who knows, it might even tide you over to Nahalem, when Intel will really know what they are doing with the quad core chips.
Skip the die-shrink. Get use the best available now, and when true quad chips arrive, if they offer a significant performance boost, then all you've lost is the price difference between the new one, and what you can sell this one for (and months of agonizing waiting). Surely getting to use it all that in-between time is worth that cost!
But i'm probably just trying to convince myself...
I'm hoping to rent a few cores to my work, so they might subsidize costs for me. if that comes through, then i see no reason to hold back on the Ocho.
I'd love to hear more from people who have them tho!
I just don't think you can go wrong with buying now. If you can stress 4 cores, you will see some immediate improvement, and it may even be drastic improvement, depending on your work flow.
You will very likely get a speed bump when you upgrade to Leopard.
If something incredibly sexy comes out, you can do a trade-in. We all know Macs keep their value (refurb PB G4 same $$ as refurb MBP?), and especially after Leopard, the resale for this 8-core will remain high.
in the mean time, you can max out ram, run some multi-core aware virtual OSes, add an external Blu-Ray drive, and have one heck of a good time with 3.0GHz Clovertowns that no one else has... Who knows, it might even tide you over to Nahalem, when Intel will really know what they are doing with the quad core chips.
Skip the die-shrink. Get use the best available now, and when true quad chips arrive, if they offer a significant performance boost, then all you've lost is the price difference between the new one, and what you can sell this one for (and months of agonizing waiting). Surely getting to use it all that in-between time is worth that cost!
But i'm probably just trying to convince myself...
I'm hoping to rent a few cores to my work, so they might subsidize costs for me. if that comes through, then i see no reason to hold back on the Ocho.
I'd love to hear more from people who have them tho!
Bearlake, or no?
I have my own "should I wait" issue right now.
It's time to upgrade the home workhorse system - currently a P4 2.6 GHz, 400 MHz bus, 2 GiB RDRAM. It's adequate for most things, but the 2 GiB RAM limit is much too low when trying to run a couple of VMs. (I also have a quad Kentsfield and a dual Netburst Xeon for heavier work.)
I've been looking at a 975X motherboard, but wondering if the upcoming Bearlake P35 or X38 would be worth waiting for. (Supports 1333 MHz FSB, DDR3 memory).
I saw this test, http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1062/1, and among other things there was a DivX encoding test:
(See first attached image, or http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1062/8)
Hmmm. The 1333MHz memory bus is about 2 minutes faster on an hour and a half job.
Time to go ahead an push the buy button for the 975, not going to wait 6 months for 2 minutes.
Bearlake is nice, but I don't need the added PCIe.v2 lanes, and it has the same 8 GiB max RAM limit as the 975. Plus, DDR3 memory will probably be going for a premium at first.
___________________________
One other thing, I'll be putting an E6400 (2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo) processor in it to start (only $222 at newegg). Or maybe an E6300 for $185.
I'll replace that with a faster quad Kentsfield after the price plummets when Penryn is released, and then maybe a quad Penryn when their price drops due to Nehalem. With Intel, if you're happy with 90% of the performance, you can get by for 50% of the price.
___________________________
I have my own "should I wait" issue right now.
It's time to upgrade the home workhorse system - currently a P4 2.6 GHz, 400 MHz bus, 2 GiB RDRAM. It's adequate for most things, but the 2 GiB RAM limit is much too low when trying to run a couple of VMs. (I also have a quad Kentsfield and a dual Netburst Xeon for heavier work.)
I've been looking at a 975X motherboard, but wondering if the upcoming Bearlake P35 or X38 would be worth waiting for. (Supports 1333 MHz FSB, DDR3 memory).
I saw this test, http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1062/1, and among other things there was a DivX encoding test:
(See first attached image, or http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1062/8)
Hmmm. The 1333MHz memory bus is about 2 minutes faster on an hour and a half job.
Time to go ahead an push the buy button for the 975, not going to wait 6 months for 2 minutes.
Bearlake is nice, but I don't need the added PCIe.v2 lanes, and it has the same 8 GiB max RAM limit as the 975. Plus, DDR3 memory will probably be going for a premium at first.
___________________________
One other thing, I'll be putting an E6400 (2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo) processor in it to start (only $222 at newegg). Or maybe an E6300 for $185.
I'll replace that with a faster quad Kentsfield after the price plummets when Penryn is released, and then maybe a quad Penryn when their price drops due to Nehalem. With Intel, if you're happy with 90% of the performance, you can get by for 50% of the price.
___________________________
Attachments
Aiden points out that the Cinebench score at BareFeats.com shows the 8 core to be more than 2x faster than the Quad G5. Most members think SS and Penryn won't happen before end of year 2007. So I'm starting to weaken about waiting for more than what's out now. Can anyone here please slap me silly and order me to keep waiting please?
Ummm, I'm the guy who repeatedly suggested you pull the trigger in 11-06 on a Cloverfield upgrade Octo MacPro, then you would have been into it for 6 months already, and by the time something really compelling came out you would have been into it for a bit more than a year, and ready to resell it to a like minded soul to upgrade to the new one. I still think you will keep the G5 for many years, if for nothing else, the backward compatibility.
Maybe what you need is not a faster computer, but a DVD jukebox and a script to process them in batches 24/7.
Rocketman
Aiden points out that the Cinebench score at BareFeats.com shows the 8 core to be more than 2x faster than the Quad G5. Most members think SS and Penryn won't happen before end of year 2007. So I'm starting to weaken about waiting for more than what's out now. Can anyone here please slap me silly and order me to keep waiting please?
Well MM regardless of what you do, I am pushing the "buy now" button on Tuesday the 24th. Tuesday is supposedly the first Intel price drop date on the Cloverton 3.0 GHz.
I doubt Apple will pass on the discount but changes usually get announced on Tuesday, and I thought that I would wait just in case.
Besides, I was hoping that Apple might also update the Cinema displays by chance.
I've waited long enough, probably too long now and I know I am going to see a huge boost in productivity on this machine as is.
So go ahead MM, take the plunge.
I think that it's a safe bet that Apple's prices for the 8 core reflected the lower prices - and they'll simply accept the reduced margins for the few machines shipped between intro and the price drop.
Or, more likely, Apple is getting them at the dropped price from the outset. This is common - you can usually get a single CPU at your local DIY shop for less than Intel's official "quantity 1000" price.
So I'm starting to weaken about waiting for more than what's out now. Can anyone here please slap me silly and order me to keep waiting please?
How can you buy with the video card options unchanged from 8/06?
The MP in any form is still a great value, but the age of the video cards has kept me waiting for an update.
Santa Rosa is rolling out already and pretty much must be on Macs within the next two months. It'd be disgraceful if Apple updated the iMac line with new video card options and kept the MP stuck in Q2 2006.
- Status