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.
6-core price?
- Thread starter jamesedward
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't doubt that you're probably right about this. I'm just trying to rationalize the hope that you're wrong by at least a few bucks on the upside.
Is there any chance that having just 1 processor daughter card for the hex vs. 2 daughter cards for both the octo and dodeca would make any difference? Are these cards just a few bucks each or something more? Any other complexities in the 2-processor systems that would make them more costly to produce?
Yep.
Unfortunately, the best price users could hope for, would be the current price of the 3.33GHz Quad ($3699), as that extra is quantity pricing (published anyway), and there's no margin applied.
Even if you went to get the W3680 through retail channels, it's going to cost you ~$1100 (new). It's slightly cheaper ($3599), and you've an extra CPU. But the new CPU would only have warranty support from Intel, not Apple, and you have to do the labor yourself to swap it out (and potentially any time you've a problem it needs to be hauled in for repairs while under warranty). Because of the warranty support, it's not a good idea to sell off the original CPU IMO, as if they do a replacement, they won't swap it for you (loose the faster CPU
). User added upgrades have disappeared before in such cases ... Ebay may be an option later to save even more (or if you're willing to go with an i7-980X), but that's not the case with the W3680 right now. They're just too new, and Xeon pricing doesn't drop like the consumer parts do anyway (too little demand comparitively speaking, so the price remains higher).
Nice. I needed a good laugh.
The SP and DP systems use different chipsets (X58 for the SP systems, and 5520 - not to be confused with the E5520 CPU - for the DP systems).I don't doubt that you're probably right about this. I'm just trying to rationalize the hope that you're wrong by at least a few bucks on the upside.
Is there any chance that having just 1 processor daughter card for the hex vs. 2 daughter cards for both the octo and dodeca would make any difference? Are these cards just a few bucks each or something more? Any other complexities in the 2-processor systems that would make them more costly to produce?
As I understand it, the daughterboard cost difference for replacement parts is ~$50 (stripped).
Additional costs are in the price differences of the CPU's themselves, and the coolers (DP systems may be using narrower coolers, so not just take 1x P/N and add it 1x or 2x times as needed). I do recall separate P/N's for the coolers discussed for the 2009 systems, though I don't know if one of them is used in both SP and DP configurations (with a separate P/N only for the second cooler used in the DP systems).
Put it all together, the DP system costs are definitely higher. But assuming the ROM is also on the daughterboard, you'd only need to swap it out, along with the correct coolers and DP CPU's of your choice (ROM on the daughterboard would allow 2009 system owners to do the same thing to get the newer firmware, so long as nothing's changed on the main board that's attached to the standoffs on the inside back panel).
My predictions
On further examination ... Apple has announced 6 configurations for the 2010 MP, of which it announced prices for 3:
Quad core starting at $2499
- one W3530 2.8 GHz quad
8 core starting at $3499
- two E5620 2.4 GHz quads
12 core startling at $4999
- two X5650 2.66 GHz hexas
So where are the gaps in the lineup that the unpriced upgrades will fill?
The hardest one to figure is the SP 6-core. While it's officially listed as an upgrade from the SP quad, it looks to me that it will really be more like the first step up performance-wise from the basic 8-core (note that there is only ONE 8-core model, so no 8-core upgrade: they jump straight to the 12-core). And since the 6-core 3.33GHz W3680 costs more ($999) than the two E5620s going into the base 8-core ($774 for two), it is reasonable to figure the 6-core will be more costly than the 8-core. Moreover, it would be the only model filling in the gap between the $3499 8-core and the $4999 12-core.
So, I'm forced to concede that the 6-core will likely be in the $3700-3900 range. It could even touch $3999, but I sure hope not. I'll guess $3799 (optimistically?).
Those looking in for something between the base quad and the (only) octo will have the 4-core 3.2GHz W3365 model, with a processor cost of $562 ($268 more than the cost of the 2.8GHz base quad). I'm figuring $2999 for that model. It's one I'm likely to consider - clocks almost as fast as the 6-core, but of course with 2 fewer cores. And the 2nd fastest machine in the lineup (true?) for apps that are not fully multiprocessor enabled. Final Cut Pro, for example?
The last in the lineup is the deluxe 12-core running two W5670s at 2.93 GHz ($1440 each or $2880 for the 2 processors alone). Easily $5999, maybe a bit more.
In sum, here's my best guess for now, in ascending order:
Quad core starting at $2499
- one W3530 2.8 GHz quad - ANNOUNCED
Quad core upgrade at $2999
- one W3565 at 3.2 GHz quad (upgrade to base quad, guess)
8 core starting at $3499
- two E5620 2.4 GHz quads - ANNOUNCED
6 core "upgrade" at $3799
- one W3680 at 3.33 GHz hex (essentially an upgrade to the base octo, guess)
12 core startling at $4999
- two X5650 2.66 GHz hexas - ANNOUNCED
12 core upgrade at $5999 (or more?)
- two W5670s at 2.93 GHz (upgrade to base 12 core, guess)
On further examination ... Apple has announced 6 configurations for the 2010 MP, of which it announced prices for 3:
Quad core starting at $2499
- one W3530 2.8 GHz quad
8 core starting at $3499
- two E5620 2.4 GHz quads
12 core startling at $4999
- two X5650 2.66 GHz hexas
So where are the gaps in the lineup that the unpriced upgrades will fill?
The hardest one to figure is the SP 6-core. While it's officially listed as an upgrade from the SP quad, it looks to me that it will really be more like the first step up performance-wise from the basic 8-core (note that there is only ONE 8-core model, so no 8-core upgrade: they jump straight to the 12-core). And since the 6-core 3.33GHz W3680 costs more ($999) than the two E5620s going into the base 8-core ($774 for two), it is reasonable to figure the 6-core will be more costly than the 8-core. Moreover, it would be the only model filling in the gap between the $3499 8-core and the $4999 12-core.
So, I'm forced to concede that the 6-core will likely be in the $3700-3900 range. It could even touch $3999, but I sure hope not. I'll guess $3799 (optimistically?).
Those looking in for something between the base quad and the (only) octo will have the 4-core 3.2GHz W3365 model, with a processor cost of $562 ($268 more than the cost of the 2.8GHz base quad). I'm figuring $2999 for that model. It's one I'm likely to consider - clocks almost as fast as the 6-core, but of course with 2 fewer cores. And the 2nd fastest machine in the lineup (true?) for apps that are not fully multiprocessor enabled. Final Cut Pro, for example?
The last in the lineup is the deluxe 12-core running two W5670s at 2.93 GHz ($1440 each or $2880 for the 2 processors alone). Easily $5999, maybe a bit more.
In sum, here's my best guess for now, in ascending order:
Quad core starting at $2499
- one W3530 2.8 GHz quad - ANNOUNCED
Quad core upgrade at $2999
- one W3565 at 3.2 GHz quad (upgrade to base quad, guess)
8 core starting at $3499
- two E5620 2.4 GHz quads - ANNOUNCED
6 core "upgrade" at $3799
- one W3680 at 3.33 GHz hex (essentially an upgrade to the base octo, guess)
12 core startling at $4999
- two X5650 2.66 GHz hexas - ANNOUNCED
12 core upgrade at $5999 (or more?)
- two W5670s at 2.93 GHz (upgrade to base 12 core, guess)
Sure but that is basically what Apple does when you do a CTO upgrade. Order a 2TB drive -- do you get any credit for the 1TB drive you don't get? No. They charge you the full cost of a 2TB drive. Same for RAM and video cards.
But I've always been able to ignore that since I can swap the hard drive (or ram) out later on my MacBook Pro or PowerMacs.
It's a little bit more of a problem with a non or hard to replace part like a $400 CPU.
Thanks for the reasoned responses here. Just a WAG but I'll guess $3699 for the Hex MP. . That just doesn't seem to be "worth it" (for me) on a price/performance basis.
JMO, but it's REALLY looking like the only value-buy in the MP lineup will be in the base Quad at a list of $2499. Discounts will vary ~~~~~
Minor thread hijack: Is it reasonable to assume that the 2.93GHz i7 imac would be just a bit faster (~5% ish) at video rendering (not gaming) than the 2.8 GHz MP?
I have put my mac desktop purchase on hold until the final MP pricing and reviews are released. MP or i7 imac.............. ????
cheers
JohnG
. That just doesn't seem to be "worth it" (for me) on a price/performance basis. JMO, but it's REALLY looking like the only value-buy in the MP lineup will be in the base Quad at a list of $2499. Discounts will vary ~~~~~
Minor thread hijack: Is it reasonable to assume that the 2.93GHz i7 imac would be just a bit faster (~5% ish) at video rendering (not gaming) than the 2.8 GHz MP?
I have put my mac desktop purchase on hold until the final MP pricing and reviews are released. MP or i7 imac.............. ????
cheers
JohnG
Don't forget Apple buys in bulk, so the price is going to be slightly lower then whats listed.
Second my bet is it will end up being between the 4 and 8 core machines. More then likely closer to the 8 core pricing, since the 8 and 6 both use Westmere. Or at least thats my hope, I was leaning towards the 6 core, but if it's more then the 8 I'll be going 8.
Second my bet is it will end up being between the 4 and 8 core machines. More then likely closer to the 8 core pricing, since the 8 and 6 both use Westmere. Or at least thats my hope, I was leaning towards the 6 core, but if it's more then the 8 I'll be going 8.
The speed difference is huge though - 2.4 v. 3.33
The dual quad core will probably be faster at compressing and rendering, but slower in almost everything else in your day to day tasks.
The single processor has the 4 ram slot limitation as well.
Argh.
Nope it probably won't as 6x3.33 (20) > 8*2.4. (19.2)
The only reason to chose the 8 core would be if you need more then 16GB now or more then 32GB in the future. For tasks that stress up to 6 cpu's the 6 core will be around 45% faster.
If the price from the 6core is near that of the 8 core i doubt they will sell many 8 cores. So the price of the 6 core will probably be significantly higher then the 8 core. Just under 4k$ i suspect
I'm don't really know all that much about CPU speeds and calculations but here's a question:
If the 6 and 8 core machines are pretty much comparable when it comes to speed, then whats the hole point in having these two options to choose from? taking in account that its always better to have the option to expand up to 32GB in the future with the 8-core.
is the soon to be updated 2 x 2.4 Westmere xeon comparable to the 2 x 2.66 Nehalem? Or is it more like the 2 x 2.26 macpro.
This would be the case if all applications would be coded to take advantage of all 8 cores, unfortuantly this is not the case. Most programs use only one or two threads. This means that for these applications the 6-core at 3.33 GHz would run in circles around the 2.4 Ghz 8-core model. If you had an application that did take full use of all the 8 cores then yes you would get comparable results, howerver in the real world this is not the case.
And while it would seem 32GB would always be better than 16 GB when it comes to memory, you normally have to do pretty intense computing to need more than 16 GB of memory. I am not saying it aint usefull to some but to most people 16 GB will be sufficent for the next 2-3 years
On topic: I really hope that the 6-core wont be more expensive than the 8 core, because if it lands at 3499$ I will be able to justify it, if it gets more expensive I will have to say iMac.
I am also really curious about noise. My brother has a Mac Pro 1.1 and the noice from the fans is insane. It is the one thing that really puts me off buying a Mac Pro.
And while it would seem 32GB would always be better than 16 GB when it comes to memory, you normally have to do pretty intense computing to need more than 16 GB of memory. I am not saying it aint usefull to some but to most people 16 GB will be sufficent for the next 2-3 years
On topic: I really hope that the 6-core wont be more expensive than the 8 core, because if it lands at 3499$ I will be able to justify it, if it gets more expensive I will have to say iMac.
I am also really curious about noise. My brother has a Mac Pro 1.1 and the noice from the fans is insane. It is the one thing that really puts me off buying a Mac Pro.
You don't really have to do intense computing to find a use for more than 16GBs of RAM. You just need to have multiple big applications open and running. The same goes for core utilisation.
It may be a more of a problem, but it's one that we don't have the power to solve really. Just b/c we've worked around "Apple Math" in the past doesn't mean it went away... it's just catching up w/ us.
I too always do my own upgrades, but even still we pay twice (even if we get a slightly better value by keeping the OEM parts) -- once for the stock RAM, drive, card, and then again the replacement. You can't really sell the stock drive or RAM to lower your upgrade costs b/c if you need to have the unit serviced you need to reinstall since Apple doesn't guarantee the return of 3rd party upgrades. By the time you are ready to sell your machine the OEM drives, RAM etc are pretty much worthless.
Agree, it's harder to replace the CPU, and probably not cost efficient either. But Apple has us in a cage. Personally, I'm married to Mac if only b/c I have such a huge investment in Mac s/w and 20 years experience & I'm not going to Hackintosh b/c one burp could cost me a day or more work. I don't like it but how do you fight reality w/o turning into Don Quixote?
fyi.. on the Dell site, upgrading from i7 to the 6-core 3.33 will cost you about $1000, so i think it will be about that much to upgrade from the 4-core maybe a little less.
Here's the basic Dell with the 980x chip and ati5870, i know it's not the Xeon, but does not make much diff.
Intel® Core i7-980X processor(12MB L3 Cache, 3.33GHz)
12GB Tri-Channel DDR3 SDRAM at 1066MHz - 6 DIMMs
750GB 7200 RPM SATA Hard Drive
ATI Radeon HD 5870 1GB GDDR5
16X DVD+/-RW Drive
$2600
The MP is expensive... i am surprised they didn't do some price cutting with this announcement.
Intel® Core i7-980X processor(12MB L3 Cache, 3.33GHz)
12GB Tri-Channel DDR3 SDRAM at 1066MHz - 6 DIMMs
750GB 7200 RPM SATA Hard Drive
ATI Radeon HD 5870 1GB GDDR5
16X DVD+/-RW Drive
$2600
The MP is expensive... i am surprised they didn't do some price cutting with this announcement.
Why do people persist in using the same old i7 to Xeon comparisons? If you need ECC then it does make a difference. If you don't need ECC then there's a decent chance the MP wasn't intended for you.
Even aside from the technical differences, they have a different pricing structure from Intel.
Yes, the MP is expensive. It's just a crappy way to build an argument, unless you're in that gap that Apple isn't addressing. And if you are, that horse has been well kicked anyways. (this would be the "I really don't need a MP but I want one and they are too expensive for me" crowd)
I understand that people want things they may not -really- need. I'm typing this from my 980x box right now, and I'm mostly enjoying it for encoding my video collection.. and home videos.
There aren't serious improvements to the architecture, you can just compare clock speed. It's 6% faster than the 2.26GHz and 10% slower than the 2.66GHz.
I would think Apple offer it for no more reason that to have a cheaper dual processor system, although with Apple that really only means more memory.
hey settle down there brentsg... no i am not trying to start that argument, if you notice i have a 2008 MP, so i already voted with my money.
this discrepancy is actually much larger than when i bought my machine, the PC/MP prices were more inline in 2008. however the 6 core seems way way out of whack... adding ram and the 5870 would make it a $2000 difference with the dell... and yes most people do not need ECC.
now that apple has a 5870 driver, that dell would make a great hackintosh
hey settle down there brentsg... no i am not trying to start that argument, if you notice i have a 2008 MP, so i already voted with my money.
this discrepancy is actually much larger than when i bought my machine, the PC/MP prices were more inline in 2008. however the 6 core seems way way out of whack... adding ram and the 5870 would make it a $2000 difference with the dell... and yes most people do not need ECC.
now that apple has a 5870 driver, that dell would make a great hackintosh
But you are, and you still are. And yes, 2008 was THE year for Mac Pro bargains. But seriously, the current architecture is MUCH better for professional tasks (ie computation intensive) than the Core 2 Duo was.
You are simply comparing Dell i7 prices to Apple Xeon prices. That is flawed.
And seriously, Dell? I hadn't had my hands one one in years but I recently helped a friend select a PC. His new Dell was shipped to my house and I set everything up for him. For sure it was a good price for great specs. But quality? No. Everything reeked of the cheapest possible construction. Flimsy case, super thin and SHARP metal inside the case. You could easily slice a hand upgrading a component. The power supply was tiny, so very little headroom if any.. etc, etc.
why do fan-boys always keep wanking about how good and fine the mac pro is on the inside/outside...slicing your hand on the inside of a DELL machine, common man, keep it serious will ya, I'm not saying you couldn't slice your hand on a DELL, but then again you could also slice your hand on a piece of paper. And as if the inside of the mac pro case is a justification for the outrageous pricing! MacPro's are hilariously overpriced, no mater how much fan-boys try and look for lame excuses. point blank.
I don't really agree with people who say the case is the reason for the so called "over pricing." And in fact, I don't even consider the new Mac Pros over priced compared to a similar Dell workstation.
I went on Dells website, got the base dual processor workstation with a 64 bit OS and put dual six-core 2.66 GHz CPUs in it. The other stuff included in the computer is as follows:
2GB DDR3 1066 MHz
512MB NVIDIA Quadro NVS 420
250GB Hard Drive
That is all for the dell workstation. How much does Dell charge for this? A whopping $5400!!!
Now a 2010 Mac Pro with dual 2.66 GHz processors and the following:
6GB DDR3 1333 MHz (more and faster RAM)
ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB (better GPU)
1TB Hard Drive (bigger hard drive)
How much? $5000.
Most people complaining about price are talking about the single processor model, which is "over priced".
Well then.... nevermind haha. Thats still there just incase people were wondering about DP systems, which are definitely useful for people who need the CPU power.