8-Core Mac Pro with Clovertown... in November?

[slinger1968]

The Source Article Of This Thread "It'll be strictly a marketing decision from there, say insiders, as the Mac maker wrapped up hardware preparations for this brawny beast during the tail-end of the back-to-school season."

There's nothing in any of those articles that mentions the extra heat that the new CPU's will produce. I'm skeptical of marketing release type stories without bench tests to back up their claims.

Hopefully Apple has indeed already addressed the additional heat issue but I guess I'll wait for the actual benchmarks. I believe the NDA's are up tomorrow so the real data should come in soon.

 

[slinger1968]

Don't know if you saw this article, I thought I would provide it for your review.

http://reviews.cnet.com/Intel_Core_2_Extreme_QX6700/4505-3086_7-32136314.html?tag=cnetfd.mt

That's the Kentsfield chip not the Clovertown (Xeon) CPU but the benchmarks are interesting.

Just as expected the Quad cores are only going to be a big improvement for the software that can utilize them. Software will catch up with multicores, hopefully by Q2 07 when I'll be buying a new machine.

 

[sblasl]

Sorry, still trying to get up to speed on all of this intel stuff...

 

[slinger1968]

Sorry, still trying to get up to speed on all of this intel stuff...

No worries I made the same mistake just a few days ago. The naming isn't all that helpful and some of it is pretty awful... "Core 2 Extreme" is the name of this 4 core processor? Great job Intel.

 

[Multimedia]

Tiger Is Dumping Top Conroe Already

Don't know if you saw this article, I thought I would provide it for your review.

Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 - 2.66 GHz Kentsfield Review

That's Kentsfield so it's a little off topic. But you did the right thing in posting this. Not wrong.

The most interesting thing I find about this article is that Tiger is dumping top Conroe NOW for $974. I love the marketing copy on this page.. :

"Hurry!!
We're Selling Our Core2 Extreme CPUs at COST.
That's right...we're selling our complete stock of Intel Core2 Extreme processors AT COST! If you've been waiting for a price drop before making a move to the latest in CPU technology, it's time to take action now."

The More The Hype The Better I say.

That leads me to believe now more than ever it's gonna happen from Apple in two weeks.

Here's first good picture of 2.66GHz Kentsfield I've come across:

 

[Multimedia]

The Multimedia Industry Is Ready For 8-Core Mac Pros Now

That's the Kentsfield chip not the Clovertown (Xeon) CPU but the benchmarks are interesting.

Just as expected the Quad cores are only going to be a big improvement for the software that can utilize them. Software will catch up with multicores, hopefully by Q2 07 when I'll be buying a new machine.

A significant amount of multimedia related software already will use more than two cores and can be run simultaneously to easily hose an 8-core Mac Pro now.

 

[slinger1968]

A significant amount of multimedia related software already will use more than two cores and can be run simultaneously to easily hose an 8-core Mac Pro now.

Well a significant amount of 3D and video software currently uses more than 2 cores but that's still a very small segment of the overall computing market. The multi-core market can't be ignored, I'm not saying it should be, but it's still not going to appeal to the masses until the rest, the majority, of the software out there catches up.

Quad core imac's would be pointless right now but maybe they wont be in 6 months if software catches up. It's pretty clear that hardware is ahead software at the moment but it will catch up again. It's gone back and forth for as long as I can remember.

 

[Multimedia]

Quad Core iMacs Are Completely Appropriate And Anything Less Will Work Minimally

Well a significant amount of 3D and video software currently uses more than 2 cores but that's still a very small segment of the overall computing market. The multi-core market can't be ignored, I'm not saying it should be, but it's still not going to appeal to the masses until the rest, the majority, of the software out there catches up.

Quad core imac's would be pointless right now but maybe they wont be in 6 months if software catches up. It's pretty clear that hardware is ahead software at the moment but it will catch up again. It's gone back and forth for as long as I can remember.

Boy are you out of touch with reality.

Let's say I'm a consumer who just bought a $150 EyeTV Hybrid digital broadcast TV Tuner-recorder software package so I can play HDTV on my 24" iMac. And let's say I decided I'd like to archive my HD broadcast recordings on that iMac. I can tell you with no uncertain terms that if that consumer does not have 4 cores in that iMac, he/she can forgetabout it. Moreover, I can say with absolute 100% metaphysical certainty that if he/she has four cores in an iMac TODAY, that he/she will find that they can only run the compression software that will accomplish that MENIAL TASK in very limited serial fashion.

In other words you don't know what you are writing about at all. I apologize for my anger. But it really chafes my hide whenever I read a post written by someone who has never tried to crush television programming so it can be stored in a reasonable size on large HDs and/or DVDs for viewing later. mp4 files are the 21st Century equivalent of a 20th Century VHS tape or DVD collection.

The job is not only slow and arduous, the consumer software, Toast 7.1 and Handbrake UB, is also 4 core ready and would hose a 4-core iMac in about oh say 5 seconds from the beginning of executing two processes.

The level of ignorance about the state of consumer software technology and the mass market for 4-core processor hardware technology today on this front is frightening to me.

You could not be more mistaken about your opinion stated above than about anything you have ever misunderstood. I have almost a year of experience in this exercise and I can tell you that it is nothing less than a full time job due to lack of appropriate hardware. The software is WAY ahead of the hardware and of that I have no doubt.

 

[slinger1968]

The most interesting thing I find about this article is that Tiger is dumping top Conroe NOW for $974. I love the marketing copy on this page.. :

"Hurry!!
We're Selling Our Core2 Extreme CPUs at COST.
That's right...we're selling our complete stock of Intel Core2 Extreme processors AT COST! If you've been waiting for a price drop before making a move to the latest in CPU technology, it's time to take action now."

I find bad marketing annoying but I have to admit that I'm way outside the loop of the general consumer.

"it's time to take action now" Why? because the chips are only going to get cheaper?

"So order an Intel Core2 Extreme processor AT COST today!"... because Intel is cutting the prices to retailers and tomorrow this same price for the consumer will be above cost?

It's only $949 at newegg.

I buy what I want/need/can afford. Sometimes that's way ahead of the tech curve and sometimes it's not.

Sorry, but I hate stupid marketing.

Boy are you out of touch with reality.

Let's say I'm a consumer who just bought an EyeTV Hybrid so I can play HDTV on my 24" iMac. And let's say I decided I'd like to archive my HD broadcast recordings on that iMac.

Try reading what you are responding too. I'm fully aware of the consumer software that's available, but I also know the general consumer is not going to be archeiving HD broadcast recordings on their iMac.

I clearly was discussing quad core chips' appeal to the masses, and I'm correct that most software out isn't written for more than 2 cores.

Sure you and others have uses for quad core and more processors but don't act like a complete idiot and try and convince us that most people do. It's just stupid.

I'm all for advancing technology but I also understand that most poeple don't ever push their computers to the limit. You are a small niche, stop acting like you are an average Mac consumer.

 

[Multimedia]

When The Hardware Catches Up Consumers WILL Be Archiving HD Broadcasts On Their iMacs

Try reading what you are responding too. I'm fully aware of the consumer software that's available, but I also know the general consumer is not going to be archeiving HD broadcast recordings on their iMac.

I clearly was discussing quad core chips' appeal to the masses, and I'm correct that most software out isn't written for more than 2 cores.

Sure you and others have uses for quad core and more processors but don't act like a complete idiot and try and convince us that most people do. It's just stupid.

I'm all for advancing technology but I also understand that most poeple don't ever push their computers to the limit. You are a small niche, stop acting like you are an average Mac consumer

I could not disagree with you more. So let's leave it at that.

 

[slinger1968]

I could not disagree with you more. So let's leave it at that.

Then show me the data that backs up your claim that the average consumer is archeiving HD broadcast recordings on their iMac.

 

[thereubster]

Could Kentsfield be part of the plan?!

OK to swerve this thread back on topic, what if Apple is planning to unleash a massive multi-core assault and fill that big middle gap in the lineup at the same time?
Here's the theory;
January Macworld Steve unveils the 8 core Mac Pro, no surprises there, shows off the massive power using Leopard demo's etc. Great for Pro's (like Multimedia and myself) but not much use to the average guy. Prices stay the same or even rise slightly, after all, we are talking 8 cores here. Previously you needed to spend $7-8k to get that kind of power. But what if the one more thing was a Kentsfield Mac Pro (using the C2Q6600), a i975 Mb with DDR2 ram, etc, etc . Sloting into that $1400-2000 zone? I dont see this competing with the iMac, esp. since you get a 24" screen with your $2000 iMac. It's just another choice. Use the same case, make it black or something, but you now have
Mac Mini 2 cores
iMac 2 cores + Widescreen display
Mac Prosumer 4 cores + upgradeable
Mac Pro 8 cores for ultimate power.

Sounds good......

 

[Multimedia]

Consumers Are Not Archiving HD On Their iMacs Because They Can't

Then show me the data that backs up your claim that the average consumer is archeiving HD broadcast recordings on their iMac.

I never made such a claim. You completely misunderstand my meaning. I wrote that whole scenario to refute your opinion Software is behind Hardware and show that the opposite is true.

They aren't. That's my whole point. They aren't because they can't because the hardware is too weak. That was the entire point of my above post. That's why all these 8, 16 and then 32 core processors are so needed ASAP.

 

[Multimedia]

Yeah Let's Get Those Kentsfield Mac Pros Rolling Off The Line ASAP

OK to swerve this thread back on topic, what if Apple is planning to unleash a massive multi-core assault and fill that big middle gap in the lineup at the same time?
Here's the theory;
January Macworld Steve unveils the 8 core Mac Pro, no surprises there, shows off the massive power using Leopard demo's etc. Great for Pro's (like Multimedia and myself) but not much use to the average guy. Prices stay the same or even rise slightly, after all, we are talking 8 cores here. Previously you needed to spend $7-8k to get that kind of power. But what if the one more thing was a Kentsfield Mac Pro (using the C2Q6600), a i975 Mb with DDR2 ram, etc, etc . Sloting into that $1400-2000 zone? I dont see this competing with the iMac, esp. since you get a 24" screen with your $2000 iMac. It's just another choice. Use the same case, make it black or something, but you now have
Mac Mini 2 cores
iMac 2 cores + Widescreen display
Mac Prosumer 4 cores + upgradeable
Mac Pro 8 cores for ultimate power.

Sounds good......

I'm with you there. Not new that there is a small group here that can't understand why the Conroe card isn't being played yet. Kentsfield has got to be coming to a Mac Pro soon, iMacs next Spring and then Kentsfield's successor Bloomsfield in the 2008 iMacs later. Then in 2009 let's see 8-core Yorkfield in that year's iMacs please.

 

[toddicus]

OK to swerve this thread back on topic, what if Apple is planning to unleash a massive multi-core assault and fill that big middle gap in the lineup at the same time?
Here's the theory;
January Macworld Steve unveils the 8 core Mac Pro, no surprises there, shows off the massive power using Leopard demo's etc. Great for Pro's (like Multimedia and myself) but not much use to the average guy. Prices stay the same or even rise slightly, after all, we are talking 8 cores here. Previously you needed to spend $7-8k to get that kind of power. But what if the one more thing was a Kentsfield Mac Pro (using the C2Q6600), a i975 Mb with DDR2 ram, etc, etc . Sloting into that $1400-2000 zone? I dont see this competing with the iMac, esp. since you get a 24" screen with your $2000 iMac. It's just another choice. Use the same case, make it black or something, but you now have
Mac Mini 2 cores
iMac 2 cores + Widescreen display
Mac Prosumer 4 cores + upgradeable
Mac Pro 8 cores for ultimate power.

Sounds good......

I'd have to say my opinion is this is very unlikely. Apple has stuck with the four squares of producst, pro, consumer in desktop and portable for years. A sub mac pro without a xeon wouldn't fit into that model. While you could certainly make nice Mac out of a quad-core Core2 extreme I just don't see it happening. I think the only way we'll see conroe/kentsfield in Macs is if they some how got the components needed small enough and cool enough to cram into all sizes of iMacs (if they don't fit in the smallest, they won't go in any, keeps them all the same), and I don't think that will happen.

I never cease to be amazed though, everytime Steve gives a keynote I feel like he announces stuff I just wouldn't have thought of. So, maybe there is a chance, just not sure what they'd call it, or who it'd be targeted at. My gut says it won't happen.

 

[thereubster]

I'd have to say my opinion is this is very unlikely. Apple has stuck with the four squares of producst, pro, consumer in desktop and portable for years. A sub mac pro without a xeon wouldn't fit into that model. While you could certainly make nice Mac out of a quad-core Core2 extreme I just don't see it happening. I think the only way we'll see conroe/kentsfield in Macs is if they some how got the components needed small enough and cool enough to cram into all sizes of iMacs (if they don't fit in the smallest, they won't go in any, keeps them all the same), and I don't think that will happen.

I never cease to be amazed though, everytime Steve gives a keynote I feel like he announces stuff I just wouldn't have thought of. So, maybe there is a chance, just not sure what they'd call it, or who it'd be targeted at. My gut says it won't happen.

I have to say that I would have always agreed with you in the past. Apple just didnt seem to want to play in the mainstream desktop PC arena before. But if the Mac Pro goes 8 core (which is inevitible IMO) then there is a big yawning gap between the iMac and the Mac Pro, both price wise and performance wise. I dont understand why Apple seems content to leave it empty. Is it because there is no money to be made there?
I beleive that Kentsfield will allow them to fill it with a powerful machine that still allows them some profit margin. The 8 core Mac Pro will be a true professional workstation, with a price to match. It makes sense to slot something in a bit lower, esp. if the commodity price is lower for Apple (DDR2 ram instead of FB-Dimms, etc)
just an idea I had, feel free to rip it to shreads.

 

[jsw]

Then show me the data that backs up your claim that the average consumer is archeiving HD broadcast recordings on their iMac.

I archive HD broadcast recordings on my Rev A mini Core Duo, both OTA ones via the Hybrid and ones via the FireWire connection on my cable box.

FWIW, it works just fine. I'd assume the main reason the average customer isn't doing this is a lack of an HD cable box or the lack of realization that a FW cable turns their Mac into a DVR.

There are numerous uses for 4,8,16,etc. cores... but HD recording doesn't even begin to stress the two in the mini.

 

[paulvee]

Most pros I know don't measurebate about specs on forums all day, every day - yes, once in a while they do, but most of the time they're...doing work...

 

[toddicus]

I have to say that I would have always agreed with you in the past. Apple just didnt seem to want to play in the mainstream desktop PC arena before. But if the Mac Pro goes 8 core (which is inevitible IMO) then there is a big yawning gap between the iMac and the Mac Pro, both price wise and performance wise. I dont understand why Apple seems content to leave it empty. Is it because there is no money to be made there?
I beleive that Kentsfield will allow them to fill it with a powerful machine that still allows them some profit margin. The 8 core Mac Pro will be a true professional workstation, with a price to match. It makes sense to slot something in a bit lower, esp. if the commodity price is lower for Apple (DDR2 ram instead of FB-Dimms, etc)

I think when they introduce cloverton it will be the top option. Probably two clovertons at 2.66 Ghz making the machine about 2,999 even 3,299. Making it the top machine, like the quad was with dual-core G5s. I don't think quad-core chips will sweet the line right away. So the base Mac Pro would stay the same, possibly even come down in a few months (even if only slightly) with probable price drops with quad-cores on the market.

this would make the gap between 24" imac and mac pro (dual 2 Ghz) not quite as big as if they were all 8-core mac pros

 

[Multimedia]

By Archive I Mean Crush 4.4GB Originals To 2.7GB DVD Images To 350MB mp4 Archive File

I archive HD broadcast recordings on my Rev A mini Core Duo, both OTA ones via the Hybrid and ones via the FireWire connection on my cable box.

FWIW, it works just fine. I'd assume the main reason the average customer isn't doing this is a lack of an HD cable box or the lack of realization that a FW cable turns their Mac into a DVR.

There are numerous uses for 4,8,16,etc. cores... but HD recording doesn't even begin to stress the two in the mini.

Of course the HD doesn't stress any Mac as weak as a 500MHz G4. It's the compression process that does all the stressing. Toast can easily use both cores of the mini and may use up to 4 cores in a Mac Pro. And Handbrake will also use both cores of the mini and over 2 on the MP. The archiving is what eats cores - not the recording.

Are you converting the 4.4GB 42 minute after editing out the commercials "hour" to a maxiumum quality 2.6GB DVD image so Handbrake can crush that down to a 350MB mp4 file on your mini? Try that and report how long it takes. Takes about 2-3 hours on a Quad. Direct exports from EyeTV2 look like c**p. I am striving for quality in my archives, not stuff that I can't watch due to poor quality results any other way.

Please tell us more about what comes out of your cable box's FW port and how you are able to record that to begin with.

 

[amaxware]

Opposite direction

Anyone hear of Apple going the opposite direction with the Xeon.
i.e. how about a single dual-core?

 

[OdduWon]

Someone give multimedia 8 cores please. so he will have more time to bring the know.
you rock

 

[amaxware]

opposite direction

To be more clear...
Mac Pro with 1 dualcore Xeon?

A whole line of Mac Pro's then
2 cores
4 cores
8 cores

 

[Multimedia]

Single Dual-Core Offering Mac Pro Class Computer Is History

Anyone hear of Apple going the opposite direction with the Xeon.
i.e. how about a single dual-core?

To be more clear...
Mac Pro with 1 dualcore Xeon?

A whole line of Mac Pro's then
2 cores
4 cores
8 cores

Single Dual Core is out of the question. We're way past wanting-needing less than 4-cores. Xeon are made to be used in pairs. What you probably mean is discussed above - a single 4-core Kentsfield processor in a Conroe motherboard. Some of us hope that will be a sub $2k offering next year.

More like:
4 cores 2006
8 cores 2007
16 cores 2008
32 cores 2009
64 cores 2010

 

[slinger1968]

I wrote that whole scenario to refute your opinion Software is behind Hardware and show that the opposite is true.

Well try reading what you are responding to, before you get your panties in a bunch. I was clearly talking about most software for the masses, not all software. Most software is currently behind the hardware because most software is not written for more than 2 cores yet.

They aren't. That's my whole point.

Well, You are wrong, most software is behind the current hardware. The hardware is only still weak for a small niche market of power users. You are a power user but the majority of people out there, especially iMac buyers are not using their computers for the same tasks. Read any of the computer hardware sites and the reviews on the quad core processors. They all say that these are currently enthusiast or power level parts not aimed at the general consumer.

They aren't because they can't because the hardware is too weak. That was the entire point of my above post. That's why all these 8, 16 and then 32 core processors are so needed ASAP.

The hardware is only weak for a small niche group of power users. It's rediculous to think that the average user is doing 3D modeling or high powered video processing. It's just silly.

I have a dedicated bittorrent/music playing computer for live uncopywritten music. I've downloaded/uploaded over 1 terabyte of data and have specific computing needs for this. I'm just smart enough to recognize that my usage isn't normal.

Again, Read any of the computer hardware sites and the reviews on the quad core processors. They all say that these are currently enthusiast or power level parts not aimed at the general consumer.