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.
8-Core Mac Pro (Clovertown)
- Thread starter plinden
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well if the content is crap, who cares to watch? Content of TV is more important to me. I'd rather see a fascinating news show or program over rabbit ears than watch the Today Show in HD.
This wasn't clear the first time. You sounded like a crazed American Idol fan with your original post. And HD broadcasts are nothing new...
you know what? since my dinosaur of a desktop (3yr old 
3Ghz P4 HT that can't even run a retail 3DSMax without me getting fatal exception blue screen of death errors on winxpsp2) the time value of money says that a new Mac Pro Quad Core machine is still worth more now than a Mac Pro Octo Core machine in the future. Reason is I need a much more viable means of work NOW, not later. I can always upgrade, and besides, the new chips will probably be rather pricey, therefore causing a rise in the current mac pro price? I'm no analyst so don't flame me if i'm wrong.
Besides I'm a young full sail student that just got an educational loan to purchase a computer and a camera.... and maybe an ipod Don't try to give me the "if you wait" lecture, either.
3Ghz P4 HT that can't even run a retail 3DSMax without me getting fatal exception blue screen of death errors on winxpsp2) the time value of money says that a new Mac Pro Quad Core machine is still worth more now than a Mac Pro Octo Core machine in the future. Reason is I need a much more viable means of work NOW, not later. I can always upgrade, and besides, the new chips will probably be rather pricey, therefore causing a rise in the current mac pro price? I'm no analyst so don't flame me if i'm wrong. Besides I'm a young full sail student that just got an educational loan to purchase a computer and a camera.... and maybe an ipod
Don't try to give me the "if you wait" lecture, either.
The current Mac Pro and even the Core Duo 2 iMacs are both amazing upgrades
to what most people were running 2 years ago.
Generally, I recommend waiting for those who already have a working OSX Tiger
machine.
However, if you NEED a new Pro workstation, the Mac Pro will pay for itself
in productivlty.
We also don't know how cool these new quad core processors will run.
At least we do know that the current Mac Pro is extemely quiet with power to spare.
to what most people were running 2 years ago.
Generally, I recommend waiting for those who already have a working OSX Tiger
machine.
However, if you NEED a new Pro workstation, the Mac Pro will pay for itself
in productivlty.
We also don't know how cool these new quad core processors will run.
At least we do know that the current Mac Pro is extemely quiet with power to spare.
Millions Watch Today and The First Weekday Morning 3 hours of LIVE HD is NEWS
Millions watch that crap so your opinion of it is irrelevant to the market forces.
This is NEW because it is on a 3 hour weekday morning telecast. That makes it NEW and NEWS. Nothing about content. I NEVER watch American Idol. You are judgemental.scottlinux said:
Millions watch that crap so your opinion of it is irrelevant to the market forces.
suneohair said:
At worst, it slowed performance down by few percent. At best, it gave substantial boost in performance. And multitasking-tests clearly benefitted from HyperThreading. That said, Intel dropped it, because it apparently consumed too much power. But we might see HT in some future Intel-CPU's at some point, you never know.
HT as such is not a bad idea. Sun UltraSparc T1 uses such a scheme extensively.
drsmithy said:
On the server side.
Nevertheless, ok. Windows did it first.
drsmithy said:
Couldn't be farther from the truth. I have no problem with Microsoft or Windows, evident by the fact that I've ran their operating systems for the last 10 years. I have a problem with all the crap they're putting in Vista, but otherwise - Win2k and XP Pro have left me primarily trouble-free.
zero2dash said:
Plenty of people ran NT on their desktops.
Admission of your mistakes is a good step in becoming a better person.
zero2dash said:
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
XP runs well on Quad Core Mac Pros
Agreed.
Don't forget the new MacPros where XP runs very well (minus the MB chipset/SATA issue where there is a workaround.) It recognizes all four cores and seems very stable.
--HG
drsmithy said:
Agreed.
Don't forget the new MacPros where XP runs very well (minus the MB chipset/SATA issue where there is a workaround.) It recognizes all four cores and seems very stable.
--HG
drsmithy said:
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
brianus said:
Point of total (and obnoxious) pedantry here -- XP and W2K3 Server aren't strictly the same codebase; The latter was a huge rewrite job with some fairly significant internal changes.
XP 64bit is based on W2K3, and Vista originally started out on the XP code base and then was scrapped, and was started over using the W2K3 codebase.
It doesn't invalidate your point in any way and the latter is most definitely descended from the former, but unlike previous products they weren't released in parallel. I mention it purely because I find it interesting, and it's also an example of how Windows is "evolving", so to speak.
brianus said:
This is very common on both sides of the divide. Many Mac-only people seem to think Windows is still stuck in the Win9x days, and many of the Windows-only types seem to think MacOS is still in the 8.x days.
I guess it's a little like when your friend has kids and you don't see them for a few years, and you're surprised that instead of still being little kids they're teenagers...
kingtj said:
I got this great response this morning from my IT snob:
"Where in that linked article does it say 64bit? I see 65 nm, but not 64 bit. Duct taping two 32 bit cores together may get you Mac 64 bit processing... great for drawing cool pictures."
Anyone have a link that shows that Clovertown is 64 bit? Please help me to defeat this PC IT ogre
aricher said:
Why not get it from The Horses Mouth over at intel (PDF Warning)
They specifically state that Clovertown is a multi-core packaging of Woodcrest which is a 64 bit processor.
Hate it when IT people act like morons and give the rest of us a bad name.
aricher said:
Straight from the horse's mouth at Intel (Clovertown supports EM64T), and again at Intel (5100 series supports EM64T), and once more from Intel (Xeon is 64bit, mentions Woodcrest).
Took me about 10 seconds. Your "friend" is either a troll or supremely ignorant -- especially when you bear in mind this is the same hardware that Windows runs on. Apple pretty much supplies a nice case and the OS at this point.
Edit: too slow... I was busy with RL in the background... ah, well...
Summer 2007 8 Cores x 2 For 16 Core Mac Pros Will Happen Beyond Is Anyone's Guess
Not sure about beyond 8 which can be paired into a 16 core Mac. Perhaps. Too far out to tell although it is casually mentioned in the roadmap.RedTomato said:
No crystal ball is needed...
I've heard that as attendees we'll find a Kentsfield and a pair of Clovertowns taped under our seats at the keynote .
The next versions of the roadmaps will be discussed at the Intel Developer's Forum a week from Tuesday in the City By The Bay.Multimedia said:
I've heard that as attendees we'll find a Kentsfield and a pair of Clovertowns taped under our seats at the keynote
.brianus said:
I think you're a bit arse-about-face there. Someone else has already pointed out the differences between XP and Windows 2003 aren't trivial, so I won't go into that. However, if you're sufficient vintage, you should remember the "outrage" when someone demonstrated that you could turn NT 4 Workstation into NT 4 Server (including the boot and login screens) just by changing a few Registry settings (although the part that usually doesn't get said is that those Registry settings then triggered a whole range of different tuning settings for the scheduler, memory management, etc). NT 3.5 & 3.51 were the same, and IIRC, NT 3.1 didn't even have a "Server" version.
drsmithy said:
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Quite a few bits of XP Pro functionality can be enabled in XP home with some minor hex editing, too.
And of course, NT started as a reimplementation of VMS for a failed Intel RISC CPU...