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 Pros have arrived.
- Thread starter arcsbite
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
[$16.775 "order"]
It's even more fun to go to Sun Microsystems and build up a super computer.
SGI is fun too.
I was able to build up a $57M super computer based off of I think 50 Origin systems.
DAMN. And I traded my '02 Merc Cougar in for $15,000
Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid.
One of the first to ship though. We've been over this haven't we...
Being the only supplier of Macs, a short backlog won't hurt Apple's sales. We'll see a lot of pre-ordering and groans as usual. Then the massive rush to post shipping information, unboxing, and the obvious dissection of said hardware.
Why not a MacBook Pro update? The 17 inch MacBook Pro was released at NAB last year.
I was hoping that they would drop the prices on the dual cores. Do you think that they will go down any time soon or should I purchase them now? I've been thinking about buying a 2.66 mac pro for a while.
About Mac Pro but off topic
Has anyone ever purchased a Mac Pro through the Select or Premium Developer program discount?
I was curious wheither or not you receive the identical hardware and software as if purchased through the normal Apple store.
For instance, Does the developer Mac Pro include iLife'06 and the other bundled software like the regular Mac Pro?
Also does the system come with the Leopard Beta preinstalled or does it come with Tiger and allow the purchaser to install the Leopard Beta as a second boot option?
Has anyone ever purchased a Mac Pro through the Select or Premium Developer program discount?
I was curious wheither or not you receive the identical hardware and software as if purchased through the normal Apple store.
For instance, Does the developer Mac Pro include iLife'06 and the other bundled software like the regular Mac Pro?
Also does the system come with the Leopard Beta preinstalled or does it come with Tiger and allow the purchaser to install the Leopard Beta as a second boot option?
congratulation to all of u who bought the Macpro quad 2.66
the decision not to wait proved to be a winner
I think a new thread should start now "16 cores...early 2008"
Yup. I'm going out next week and buying one. I figure its obvious the June release will be the v1.0 "new" Mac Pro and given Apple's track record with v1.0 of *anything* it will be a disaster.
Yeah but the 15" versions were announced Jan to ship Feb/March. No such announcement has happened this year.
Just wait and see......there will be no MBP announcements. I hope i eat my words but i doubt i will.
The Octo Core MPs would be very good for the Fold @ Home project though.
I've tried running them software on my MBP but i just get the feeling its too weak to make any real difference. Now the 3.0 Quad Cores however.......
Unlikely, but possible. I suspect Apple was going to need the 8 cores to demonstrate the video stuff at NAB. So, they need to get the machines on the market and available. That is why we have a quiet horsepower release, and not a major revision. It is possible that other devices are awaiting Leopard drivers.
That is a very 'newbie', uninformed remark.
the point of @home
The point of the @home projects is that thousands of modest machines can do more work than dozens of very powerful systems.
However, I'd never run any @home type project on a laptop - heat kills computers, and these busy jobs really keep the CPUs on the warm side.
The point of the @home projects is that thousands of modest machines can do more work than dozens of very powerful systems.
However, I'd never run any @home type project on a laptop - heat kills computers, and these busy jobs really keep the CPUs on the warm side.
Is Mac OS ready for 8 core, or is this premature?
I notice the benchmarks don't show too great an improvement over the quad-core Intels.
Is it possible Apple wanted to hold this back until Leopard?
Do we know if Mac OS has been updated to properly schedule threads on these cores so that they are not bouncing around and blowing the cache and memory bus?
I notice the benchmarks don't show too great an improvement over the quad-core Intels.
Is it possible Apple wanted to hold this back until Leopard?
Do we know if Mac OS has been updated to properly schedule threads on these cores so that they are not bouncing around and blowing the cache and memory bus?
Buy a couple PS3s....cheaper(only is you buy like 4 or 5) and you'll see better results
Many *applications* don't scale well - but it's common that one can run multiple copies of applications and get a big boost from an octo.
I coined the term "multi-threaded workflow" to describe this in another Macrumors thread.
So what if Handbrake can only use four processors - simply run two copies of Handbrake in parallel and use all eight in an octo-core.
An octo-core might not be a good investment for someone Photoshopping one image. If you're batch processing thousands of images through Lightroom however, an octo is worth twice the price of a quad.
The people with multi-threaded workflows will understand this. If you don't understand it, you should probably buy an iMac or the Kentsfield Mini-Tower that Apple will announce next Tuesday.
~Re: Us vs. UK Adobe CS3 Suite price diff.
the main reason that Itunes is being investigated - and by association s will the record companies that supply itunes if SJ's assertions are true - is because EU rules on freedom of movement of good and service prohibit practices which artificially keep prices higher in one EU country vs. another, whilst at the same time preventing people from being able to shop in another EU state to gain the cheaper price - which is what Apple is doing. The EU Commission could reasonably investigate adobe if they are pricing differently between member states, but no because they charge more in the EU than in US.
Personally I'm going to be giving my cc details to a trusted friend in the US to order the download and serial off the US web-site if I ever decide to upgrade to CS3. But since aperture got stable, I've been sing that for 99% of my RAW work and see very little need to go to Photoshop (beyond what I already have in CS2) unless I need to print. And I see printing becoming less of chore since I now have a shiny new Apple-TV to display my 1dsMk2 (family snaps)!
And BTW those new "Ocho's" rock. They might be expensive, but imagine how fast those things are going to do H.264 encoding. Once I start to see <real time encoding benchmarks for Handbreak conversions for those bitches, then http://images.macrumors.com/vb/images/smilies/blackapple.gif will get my order.
the main reason that Itunes is being investigated - and by association s will the record companies that supply itunes if SJ's assertions are true - is because EU rules on freedom of movement of good and service prohibit practices which artificially keep prices higher in one EU country vs. another, whilst at the same time preventing people from being able to shop in another EU state to gain the cheaper price - which is what Apple is doing. The EU Commission could reasonably investigate adobe if they are pricing differently between member states, but no because they charge more in the EU than in US.
Personally I'm going to be giving my cc details to a trusted friend in the US to order the download and serial off the US web-site if I ever decide to upgrade to CS3. But since aperture got stable, I've been sing that for 99% of my RAW work and see very little need to go to Photoshop (beyond what I already have in CS2) unless I need to print. And I see printing becoming less of chore since I now have a shiny new Apple-TV to display my 1dsMk2 (family snaps)!
And BTW those new "Ocho's" rock. They might be expensive, but imagine how fast those things are going to do H.264 encoding. Once I start to see <real time encoding benchmarks for Handbreak conversions for those bitches, then http://images.macrumors.com/vb/images/smilies/blackapple.gif will get my order.
It is not I who is lacking in understanding.
I am not talking about whether applications can fully utilize all the cores.
I am asking whether Mac OS 10.4 has been designed to avoid shifting a SINGLE thread between all 8 cores, or whether it knows it should keep it on the same core each time it runs.
The reason I ask is this: It is NO problem with a dual core; they share cache and don't have to go to the bus.
It is a MILD problem with the 2 x Dual core. If it pongs, it is ping-ponging over to the only other cache/chip on the memory bus.
It is SERIOUS problem on the 2 x 2 x Dual core, which is what an Intel quad core is(two Core 2 Duos duct-taped together). There are essentially 4 caches, and 4 chips on the same memory bus. If the OS is not taking steps to prevent thread ponging, performance degradation results.
Windows XP has some issues with this; Vista corrected them.
Has Mac OS been similarly fixed? My suspicion is it has not been fixed, and it explains the relatively poor benchmarks and why there was such a long delay to release this machine. The fixes are in Leopard, and Leopard was supposed to be out by now.
It might not be nothing, but the superdrives are 16x now. Maybe they have blu-ray built in?
Or not, maybe they have always had 16x superdrivese
Or not, maybe they have always had 16x superdrivese
It might not be nothing, but the superdrives are 16x now. Maybe they have blu-ray built in?
Or not, maybe they have always had 16x superdrivese
Always been 16x since PowerMac days
But buying the PS3s means i'm just buying them for the project because i just don't see myself playing that console. The Quads however would be fun to use and with a X1900 XT you can actually play some decent games.
I think OSX 10.4 handles 8 cores just fine.
If you dig through the performance specs you will see there are several software benchmarks, particularly the 3D rendering and video encoding software, that test nearly 2X faster than the 3.0 Ghz quad.
Also there is a note that specifies that the performance tests were run on pre-production quad core chips back in July of 2006. Apple has had plenty of time to address any glaring issues with the performance of these chips on Tiger.