8-Core Mac Pros have arrived.

[olemed]

Mac Buyer's Guide

Why is the Mac Buyer's Guide reporting for the Mac Pro and Cinema Displays - Buy Now! - Product just updated! That's not true at all. The displays were simply discounted (or did I miss something?) and the only upgrade to the Mac Pro was an added '8-core' - the quad-core models remain the same, so not really a true upgrade. Why provide false information?

https://buyersguide.macrumors.com//

 

[gnasher729]

You can add in pairs (obviously, since the 1 GiB standard model has two FB-DIMMs ).

Best performance comes from 4 FB-DIMMs of the same size. 6 and 8 FB-DIMMs can be slightly slower than 4 (although having more memory usually offsets having slightly slower memory). In other words, 4 GiB in four 1 GiB FB-DIMMs is better than 4 GiB in eight 512 MiB FB-DIMMs.

And you should distribute the four FB-DIMMs in the right way, to Front-1 and Front-2, not Front-1 and Back-1. That way the processors can read from all DIMMs simultaneously for double bandwidth.

 

[Paratel]

8-Core Processors

They should have called it the Octo-Core with an octpus holding the processor.... Do you think that you can upgrade the Quad-Core Mac Pro to the 8-Core just by replacing the chips???? Cost???

 

[Jarcrew]

They should have called it the Octo-Core with an octpus holding the processor.... Do you think that you can upgrade the Quad-Core Mac Pro to the 8-Core just by replacing the chips???? Cost???

Should cost about a thousand bucks and your warranty.

 

[dkoralek]

Don't forget to add $249 for Applecare to match Dell's standard 3 year warranty .

I came up with a quote about $800 lower for the Dell...



The Quadro NVS 285 is a more powerful card than the 7300 GT in the Mac Pro. If you want more video RAM, get a 256 MiB 7300 GT for $85 at Newegg (or a 512 MiB one for $99). Jacking the Dell's price by adding a Quadro FX3450 isn't legit.

Also, I priced a PW390 (single socket) with a 2.66 quad-core QX6700 and similar configuration, and got $2689. This system also uses standard DDR memory (not FB-DIMM), so even with 4 GiB of ECC RAM it's only $3119. (With 4 GiB of RAM and Applecare the Mac Pro is $3477.)

I would have pushed the RAM to the 667MHz RAM. Dell cheaps out with the default RAM on their workstations. I'd drop the floppy, but add an optical mouse to make the comparison match (btw, who actually uses a mechanical mouse these days?). I'd also think that the 690 is more comprable to the Mac Pro than the 490 (4 hard drive bays, etc.).

cheers.

 

[arn]

Why is the Mac Buyer's Guide reporting for the Mac Pro and Cinema Displays - Buy Now! - Product just updated! That's not true at all. The displays were simply discounted (or did I miss something?) and the only upgrade to the Mac Pro was an added '8-core' - the quad-core models remain the same, so not really a true upgrade. Why provide false information?

https://buyersguide.macrumors.com//

The Cinema displays are a "Buy Now"... a price drop is as good as a product update for the Cinemas.

The Mac Pro is more debatable. Certainly if you are buying an 8Core. Buy Now is correct. The rest are a little less clear.

We'll try to update it.

arn

 

[Jarcrew]

Yeah, if you want those cinema displays, there's never been a better time to buy than right now. You don't know an update's coming - they could stay like that for the next three years.

 

[Eidorian]

The Quadro NVS 285 is a more powerful card than the 7300 GT in the Mac Pro. If you want more video RAM, get a 256 MiB 7300 GT for $85 at Newegg (or a 512 MiB one for $99). Jacking the Dell's price by adding a Quadro FX3450 isn't legit.

NVS 285 = NV44 = Geforce 6200

Surprisingly the Mac Pro is still competitive. The QX6700 can hold it's own against 2 x 2 Xeon though.

 

[Killyp]

I was going to buy a MacPro, but I think I'll hold off as the 16 cores are likely to come along soon...

 

[72930]

I was going to buy a MacPro, but I think I'll hold off as the 16 cores are likely to come along soon...

THIS HAS STARTED ALREADY?!? Noooo.........

 

[Umbongo]

The Quadro NVS 285 is a more powerful card than the 7300 GT in the Mac Pro. If you want more video RAM, get a 256 MiB 7300 GT for $85 at Newegg (or a 512 MiB one for $99). Jacking the Dell's price by adding a Quadro FX3450 isn't legit.

To be fare some links on dell's website that lead to precision configuration pages have the 3450 as the default card and no cheaper options available, which might of confused whoever you were quoting originally.

 

[3D-Troll]

Isn't there a superduper graphics card option to enable stereoscopic 3d viewing for scientific apps?

What kind of stereo? Anaglyph you can do on a single LCD - we do this with Second Life. For passive stereo (polarized light) you just need two outputs and the filters. Active Stereo is a little more tricky. There you need the stereo connector on the graphics board. The Quadro FX 4500 has that one.

Steffen

 

[AidenShaw]

I would have pushed the RAM to the 667MHz RAM.

Same price for 1 GiB 533/667. An omission in the Dell BTO menu system. The default CPU is 1066 with 1 GiB of 533 RAM. When you select a 1333 CPU, it should switch to 667 RAM at the same price, but didn't.

I'd drop the floppy.

I usually select the 13-in-1 memory card reader ($7 extra) that fits in the floppy drive slot - I missed that this morning.

but add an optical mouse to make the comparison match (btw, who actually uses a mechanical mouse these days?).

Who actually uses the keyboard/mouse that comes in the package? I always upgrade to much better stuff anyway.

I'd also think that the 690 is more comprable to the Mac Pro than the 490 (4 hard drive bays, etc.).

Yes, the 690 is huge, so it's a better match for the Mac Pro .

"Comparable" is in the eye of the beholder. If two systems both have the features that you need, they're comparable even if one has a bunch of stuff that you don't care about.

If you want four 2.66 GHz cores, 4 GiB of ECC RAM, one 750 GB disk drive and three 500 GBs, a Quadro FX4500 with 512 MiB of VRAM - the PW 390 is comparable to the Mac Pro. (And only $6211 compared to $6382 for the Mac Pro.)

If you need 8 GiB, the Mac Pro is a better value - only $8K compared to $11K for the Dell. (The Dell would be $6900 if you bought the RAM from Crucial, the Mac Pro would be $7300. You could also save a bundle by getting drives from Newegg - Dell drops to $5100 ($4363+$740 for disks), Apple to $5600.)
____________________

In other words, any two people will probably come up with different "comparable" systems - depending on what they need. I won't put a 1394b card (or even 1394a card) in the Dell unless I need it.

 

[Jarcrew]

THIS HAS STARTED ALREADY?!? Noooo.........

Frankly, I won't settle on less than 32 cores to check my email, write my blog and listen to iTunes. It's a wonder my eMac has been able to cope with such labour-intensive tasks without melting in a heap on my desk.

 

[dkoralek]

Same price for 1 GiB 533/667. An omission in the Dell BTO menu system. The default CPU is 1066 with 1 GiB of 533 RAM. When you select a 1333 CPU, it should switch to 667 RAM at the same price, but didn't.




I usually select the 13-in-1 memory card reader ($7 extra) that fits in the floppy drive slot - I missed that this morning.




Who actually uses the keyboard/mouse that comes in the package? I always upgrade to much better stuff anyway.




Yes, the 690 is huge, so it's a better match for the Mac Pro .

"Comparable" is in the eye of the beholder. If two systems both have the features that you need, they're comparable even if one has a bunch of stuff that you don't care about.

If you want four 2.66 GHz cores, 4 GiB of ECC RAM, one 750 GB disk drive and three 500 GBs, a Quadro FX4500 with 512 MiB of VRAM - the PW 390 is comparable to the Mac Pro. (And only $6211 compared to $6382 for the Mac Pro.)

If you need 8 GiB, the Mac Pro is a better value - only $8K compared to $11K for the Dell. (The Dell would be $6900 if you bought the RAM from Crucial, the Mac Pro would be $7300. You could also save a bundle by getting drives from Newegg - Dell drops to $5100 ($4363+$740 for disks), Apple to $5600.)
____________________

In other words, any two people will probably come up with different "comparable" systems - depending on what they need. I won't put a 1394b card (or even 1394a card) in the Dell unless I need it.

I was saying comprable not in the sense that what would give me the closest thing to what I want/need. But what two machines would give the same two features (hence the optical mouse, since that's all you can get with the Mac Pro, and dropping the floppy). Didn't notice that the RAM prices were the same for both types.

cheers.

 

[AidenShaw]

NVS 285 = NV44 = Geforce 6200.

Sorry, I didn't catch that - the 7300 does have more guts. Nvidia's internal clocks/pipelines/memory have lots of possibilities.

So, maybe we should compare using the FX4500 ?

(One of the best features of the NVS 285 is the heat sink - it's silent, it has no fan.)

 

[ThunderLounge]

The time you've already spent waiting is what's know as a sunk cost. Meaning, the time you've spent waiting is irretrievable. According to economic theory, sunk costs shouldn't be factored into buying and spending decisions at all, the only thing that counts is what's the best decision you can make from your current position that leads to the best outcome.

... ...

This is about the best reply I've seen to the "when to buy" and "should I wait" questions.

Thumbs up.

In addition, what other facets of ones lives are planned or acted upon what "might" happen in the next 6 months? If you want it, and need it, buy it.

If you're not in the market at the time, or can't afford one anyway, there's no room to complain about it because you can't buy it anyway.

I honestly figured we wouldn't see the availability of the new chips (either as BTO or upgraded line, whatever it would be) until after CS3 was shipping. A nice surprise on a Wednesday, really. So now one can also question whether they get a single 30" display, or two 23" displays (saving $1, lol) to go along with it.

Now if Adobe would hurry up with CS3, all will be well and it will be time to upgrade.

 

[Eidorian]

Sorry, I didn't catch that - the 7300 does have more guts. Nvidia's internal clocks/pipelines/memory have lots of possibilities.

So, maybe we should compare using the FX4500 ?

It should be overall the same card only with hardware acceleration for CAD. The standard GeForce line is designed for gaming.

The FX4500 is derived off of the 7800GTX

 

[Multimedia]

Add 4GB At A Time Not 2GB With Two 2GB Sticks For Only $480

Apple's RAM prices are reasonably competitive for the required FB ECC DIMMS with the required oversized heat spreaders.

Not.

Sure you can save a bit buying from the better known 3rd parties.

Yes. Only save $1,140 when you add four 2GB sticks from a third party. Just a bit.

When you configure your machine, keep in mind that you need to add RAM in groups of 4 DIMMS

4X512 4X1GB or 4X2GB

Not.

For most people, there's little point in buying the stock RAM only to store it for all eternity when you replace it with 3rd party 1 GB sticks.

No. You can leave the two 512MB sticks in there until you add your last set of 2GB sticks.

In reality, the minimum RAM configuration for these machines should be 4X1GB

No it shouldn't. The 1GB it comes with + four 2GB sticks for a total of 9GB should be the miniumum for an 8 core Mac Pro. No one should be adding 1GB sticks any more. And you only have to add in two sticks at a time not four. 2GB sticks are now as inexpensive as $240 each — same as two 1GB sticks. So each incremental 4GB addition is only $480 from a third party not the $700 Apple wants for four 1GB sticks while saving two slots for more later. The smallest quantity of 2GB sticks Apple lets you buy is 4 for $2,100 vs. 4 from third parties for $960 saving you $1,140.

You sure about that? If you're correct, then a 3GB config is not possible. My understanding is you have to add pairs, i.e., 21512, 2X1GB, 2X2GB.

Yes a 3GB config is possilbe. But please revisit your thinking. The idea of putting in 1GB sticks is really outdated and slot wasteful. Since 2GB sticks cost the same as two 1GB sticks, why waste valuable RAM slots putting in 1GB sticks any more — particularly with 8 RAM hungy cores in play? Add 4GB at a time for less than $500. With 8 cores inside it is recommended, by those in the know, you have at least 1GB for each core. So adding 8GB to the 1GB it comes with gives you a total of 9GB with two more slots left for 4 more later.

I think adding RAM with 1GB sticks is really shortsighted and obsolete thinking. Please consider only adding pairs of way less expensive 2GB sticks from day one not from Apple.

BTW FYI: Many reports have demonstrated that mixing sizes among the RAM pairs does not penalize performance more than a very small single digit percentage that is less than 4.

 

[oogje]

Memory Warranty

3rd party memory tends to have a limited lifetime warranty. Is memory purchased with the machine from Apple guaranteed beyond the optional 3 year Apple Care extension?

 

[Anonymous Freak]

I was going to buy a MacPro, but I think I'll hold off as the 16 cores are likely to come along soon...

Sorry, we're at least a year from 16-cores. Probably more like late 2008.

 

[Amdahl]

What is the difference between having two Dual Core chips and one Quad-Core chip? Would the cheaper Mac Pros be as efficient (in terms of cost and power), perhaps even more efficient with only one?

If intel produced a real quad core, the difference would be that the single quad would run faster than the 2 duals. However, there is no difference with Intels current line up. AMD's Barcelona will be the first true quad.

For performance, mostly you don't need any programming interface, Apple just needs to avoid moving threads to different cores without good reason, especially to different cores on different chips.

Yes, but for now, OS 10.4 doesn't do this. That means the 8-core Mac is going to run a lot of things SLOWER than the 4-core or 2-core Mac does. It is even possible to have a single core run faster than the 8-core.

 

[AidenShaw]

Yes, but for now, OS 10.4 doesn't do this. That means the 8-core Mac is going to run a lot of things SLOWER than the 4-core or 2-core Mac does. It is even possible to have a single core run faster than the 8-core.

Does OSX have an API to set hard/soft affinity?

 

[Amdahl]

Does OSX have an API to set hard/soft affinity?

10.4 doesn't. It would be very nice of 10.5 to add one, but as the other poster said, it isn't necessary if the kernel is smart enough to try to provide affinity itself. When posters here fantasize about smooth multicore operation facilitated by a divinely inspired OS, this is what they are dreaming of.

Without affinity, each additional cache added to a system increases the drag on performance. 8-core has 4 caches. 8-cache(same as core years ago) has historically been the point in SMP where you can really see what a system is made of, both hardware and software.

 

[CalfCanuck]

InDesign CS2 experience

We bought two 3GHz Mac Pros for two girls in the office and they both refused to switch from their G5 PowerMacs, because they have been brainwashed into thinking that Adobe's CS2 would be slower. I got into several arguements with them over this, but just threw my hands up in the sky and walked away. And from what I'm hearing this is the norm else where. Designers aren't switching over until CS3.

What's funny is that their new machines have more memory and they both have dual 23" ACDs, but since the G5 only has one DVI port the second monitor sits on their desks off.

I'm about to give up the fight and wait for CS3, but if anyone knows of a good benchmark site about CS2 on Mac Pro, please let me know.

Since this thread is getting so long I haven't read through all 17 pages since you posted to find if this question had been answered. I did see the great link to barefeats comparing PS CS2 on the MP to Quad-G5's on page 8, however - send this to your collegues.

Here's my experience with In Design CS2 in particular. I have a major, complicated book heading to press in a couple of weeks that's been in development for 10 months. It's 240 pages, about 500 linked photos / graphics and probably 10,000 frames in the file - every page has lots of unique elements, so this is not just flowing text for 20 pages!

I travel and have to be productive in multiple locations, so my pre-Intel days were based around a tricked out PB G4 – I took the speed hit when I was back in my office to allow a seamless transition to the road. With the lagging speed of the Powerbooks I finally did incorporate a G5 desktop into the equation, but I ran 2 systems back at my office (with a shared 24" KVM switching setup). 90% of my apps stayed on the PB, and I only used the G5 for the heaviest 3 or 4 applications. This compromise made it easy to prep for travel.

The introduction of the Intel MBP produced interesting issues. I bought one the first generations models (to test the compatibility of my own multimedia applications) and also tricked it out with 2GB RAM, upgraded graphics card, various unsuccesful attempts to get a FW 800 Expresscard working, etc. But I had heard that ID CS2 was buggy, slow, and crashed a lot, so I avoided using most of the CS2 programs beyond PS on the road. As 2006 progressed, this became more of a problem. I finally shifted the ID workflow exclusively over to the MBP in Nov 2006.

Haven't had an ID crash since the switch. Had a bad patch in late Feb 2007 when my OTHER programs seemed to be crashing left and right, but an update of MS Office fixed that. The worst were Word, Excel, Safari, Firefox and Entourage. But ID never joined the crowd. I'm sure the ID crashes other users report are true, but this must be due to whatever ID functions they are using rather than the complexity or size of file.

As for speed, I've been pleased. With the size of my file, of course, you sometimes get a spinning ball (at seemly random times) for 10 seconds. And with 3 GB of linked files, I rarely select the "High Quality Display" option – that really slows things down when moving thorough the document! But I doubt my file is a typical ID layout.

Hope that helps!

PS - The new 8-core MP's and the release of 10.5 will finally cause me to bite on the MP line. After my project heads off to the printers, it's time to upgrade my equipment and software, and the demands of Aperture for my extensive image collections are just too great for the MBP.