Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Analyst Speculates on iMac Delays: Quad vs Dual Core?

Tallest Skil said:
Because the six core chips don't fit into the socket for the Harpertown chips.
Click to expand...
the chip I was mentioning is still Quad Core, it is just a faster chip (3.4Ghz). I understand the 7000 series wont be used. Apple doesn't have any reason to step up to the big boys. That market (the one that doesn't have a problem dropping 50k+ on a single server) isn't kind of high end market that Apple shoots for.

bananas said:
I can see Quad-core iMacs coming soon. Like I see six-core Xeons in Mac Pros - That means the top model will be 12-core.

Soon.
Click to expand...
Dual six core Mac Pros wont happen till Sandy Bridge. Unless Apple steps up and starts using a MP board versus the DP board.
 
Tallest Skil said:
You're all assuming that people who are buying a Mac Pro have never owned a computer before...

The Mac Pro's target audience will already have monitors. My prices stand.
Click to expand...

In which case you can't make the comparison you did earlier
 
AidenShaw said:
...unless the 'general user' is running virtual machines, that is.

If you run VMs most of the time, four cores will (and more than 4 GiB of RAM) will make a big difference.




No, you shouldn't hope for that.

Hope for a proper mini-tower using cheaper, faster desktop parts. Don't put a laptop motherboard in a mini-tower.

Note what you can get for $800 in a mini-tower using desktop parts:

attachment.php



For less than $1000, you can get a Core i7 that will give the octo-core Mac Pro a scare:

Code: 
          Dell Studio XPS             Apple Mac Pro
          -------------------------   -------------------------
Price     $949                        $2799
CPU       Core i7-920 (2.66 GHz quad) Dual 2.8 GHz Quad Xeons
RAM       3 GiB 1066 MHz DDR3         2 GiB 800 MHz FB-DIMM
           (8 GiB add $250)            (8 GiB add $1500)
Disk      500 GB 7200 RPM SATA        320 GB 7200 RPM SATA
Optical   16X Superdrive              16X Superdrive
Blu-ray   $120 option                 not available
Graphics  ATI Radeon HD 3450 256MB    Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB

SPECrate 2006 Performance (Multi-core)

Integer   [B]102[/B]                         [B]98.8[/B]
Floating  [B]76.0[/B]                        [B]68.5[/B]

(For $2289 in the Dell, you get Core i7-940 (2.93GHz), 
    12 GiB, Blu-ray, 750 GB, ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB)
Click to expand...

Dell has assembled a pretty nice system in the Studio XPS and you can't beat that price.
 
jbee said:
It is extremely frustrating that Apple are so slow to realise a new MacPro system.
Click to expand...

Here here! Not even a current mac pro graphics card update in how long? now that's bad for a so called upgradeable system.

Sits on the wall with many others... waiting...
 
Tallest Skil said:
You're all assuming that people who are buying a Mac Pro have never owned a computer before...

The Mac Pro's target audience will already have monitors. My prices stand.
Click to expand...

Actually no they don't, because that doesn't make it a fair comparison. In the iMac you already have the screen in the price, in the Mac Pro you don't. So to get the same specs you have to add about 800-900 (which I'm guessing would be the price of a 24" monitor from Apple that would work with the Mac Pro, like the one for the new laptops) so in the end it would be about 1500$ difference, which can be quite a lot for some people.
 
well, the apple strategie is: let's sell old crap as long as we can sell it in a beatifull look
 
Patriks7 said:
Actually no they don't, because that doesn't make it a fair comparison. In the iMac you already have the screen in the price, in the Mac Pro you don't. So to get the same specs you have to add about 800-900 (which I'm guessing would be the price of a 24" monitor from Apple that would work with the Mac Pro, like the one for the new laptops) so in the end it would be about 1500$ difference, which can be quite a lot for some people.
Click to expand...

that would easily set apart why one is an iMac and one a Mac Pro. But I would think people who have spent the couple thousand on a Mac Pro have a monitor. To upgrade you wouldn't need an additional screen. I would also bet that lots of people won't want that big mirror screen in front of them, so not having the built in screen is a plus. But yeah though most who are in the market from Mac Pros probably have a screen to say hey its only a 300 upgrade isn't accurate when comparing them under the most basic circumstances.
 
the reasons that someone would get a mac pro over an imac with the exact same specs are (a) the mac pro is very expandable and a mac pro that is bought now could be a very "pro" machine in ten years after some relatively easy upgrades that cannot happen with the imac (b) quality of parts the fact is a server grade cpu server grade ram (and with snow lepord perhaps the gpu could be a factor) and the fact that you have an almost endless supply of options as aposed to the imac which has four or five basic versions

in relation to (a) the mac pro is a machine that more often than not would be upgraded for years instead of just getting a new machine you get a new cpu more ram bigger HHD etc.
 
Dual core is dead!

Straight from the horses mouth:

http://www.macblogz.com/2008/11/19/quad-core-imacs-in-january-snow-leopard-drops-in-q1-of-2009/

Apple's director of engineering of Unix Technologies Jordan Hubbard reveals that Apple's next operating system will drop in the first quarter of 2009 (so between now and april) taking advantage of a multicore future.

If you read his presentation slides (http://www.macblogz.com/Media/2008/11/hubbard_talk.pdf) you'll see exactly where Apple is heading in terms of developing it's new Operating System around the new Intel chips. Pages 108-117 details how Unix are predicting the rise of ever faster GPU's and Intel's multicore Configurations Penryn, Nehalem and the Larrabee integrated GPU-CPU with the potential of 16 cores or more. Multicore multithreading is very much on Unix's minds and from this recent presentation it shows that they're very much incoporating the next Operating System into this and they're not relying on software applications to take advantage of the multicore processors but are depending on the central operating system to do so.

With the Imac having the majority consumer market share of the Apple computers, I have a feeling that Snow Leopard will be released with the current Imac market in mind, and will take full advantage of the quad-core setup. I would find it plausible that Apple will be very tempted to release them both at the same time - a complete re-launch of their flagship new quad core Imacs and a Snow Leopard that takes full advantage of the quad technology plus new graphic cards to boot, probably the NVIDIA GeForce 9400M as rumors have circulated. Furthermore the quad-core setup pretty much fills the gap of the "missing mid-tower" mac, since a quad core is a desktop chip rather than the dual-core ones of the present Imac. In this way I can see Apple still selling the old Imacs alongside the new ones.

A new Snow Leopard and a new Imac I think will most certainly cannibalize Mac Pro sales, where prosumers like me and pro's will reconsider buying a Mac Pro if the Imac performance is close to the professional tower at an affordable price. So I reckon new Mac Pros's will come out probably in the 3rd or 4th quarter of 2009 using Nehalem chips looking towards 12-16 cores. With the new Intel chips dropping in price nearly by the day I definitely see Apple releasing a new Imac line that is in essence very affordable, maybe even cheaper than the present Imacs, especially with the economic downturn and the dwindling sales of it's desktop computers. I can see this happening sooner rather than later since Intel's chips are moving very fast and I think nearly all Mac computers are facing stiff competition from PC's that have already incoporated the new chips. However I might be totally wrog in this because the Mac mini's are supposed to be the "affordable" macs.

To catch the imagination of consumers in the downturn I can also see the Imac getting a real revamp in design. I think the Mac mini too will get a revamp internally and externally and probably be sold as a very basic mac setup, because I can only see the Imac getting bigger screens and with the power of quad core and an Operating System built around multiprocessors, the Imac will be perfect to run multiple programmes at the same time and thus become a far more integrated and powerful media/work centre.

From the presentation you get the impression that Unix are really trying to catch the Zeitgeist here and they are very aware of the multicore future that they feel they've failed to take advantage of. It almost seems as if the quad-core is the bare minimum that Unix will be developing for so I am quite convinced that quad cores will start to become standard in all Mac computers since Snow Leopard will be optimized for it.


And now for a pinch of salt.
 
bananas said:
I can see Quad-core iMacs coming soon. Like I see six-core Xeons in Mac Pros - That means the top model will be 12-core.

Soon.
Click to expand...

The 6-core Xeons are only the "MP" Xeons; made for systems with 4 or more sockets. While it is theoretically possible that someone could make a dual-socket system with those chips, it would be ridiculously expensive.

The fastest 6-core Xeon is the X7460, at 2.66 GHz on a 1066 MHz front side bus at a whopping $2800 a piece. (Compared to the 4-core X5492 at 3.4 GHz on a 1600 MHz front side bus at about $1500 a piece.) Two quad-cores give you the equivalent of 27.2 GHz for $3000 ($110/GHz,) compared to two 6-core chips giving you the equivalent of 32 GHz for $5600 ($175/GHz.) And those are just the processor costs.

The 6-core chips have their place; but it's not in dual-socket systems. (Yet.)
 
krimz said:
Dell has assembled a pretty nice system in the Studio XPS and you can't beat that price.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the Core i7 is a total game-changer. For nearly all uses, the mid-line i7 (2.83 GHz,) out benchmarks a dual socket 3.2 GHz system. (Like the Mac Pro.) For "media" uses, it is at least equal.

And according to Anand, the i7 architecture should improve things in the workstation and server space even more. I'm not buying another Mac until they have an i7-architecture chip in them. It's that simple. (Not to mention the rumored 8-core server-class i7-architecture chips. First you take a chip that at 4 cores outpaces the Mac Pro, then you slap in two of those chips with 8 cores each? That would just be pure media encoding bliss.)
 
simbaman said:
Furthermore the quad-core setup pretty much fills the gap of the "missing mid-tower" mac, since a quad core is a desktop chip rather than the dual-core ones of the present Imac.
Click to expand...

Two comments:

  1. There are quad core mobile chips, so it's not correct that all quads are desktop
  2. An all-in-one Imac cannot "fill the gap" of the missing mini-tower.

While a quad i7 Imac could lessen the performance gap that exists today, some people want some internal expandability (2 or 3 3.5" hard drives, second optical, a real graphics card), and some just don't like all-in-ones.

Instead of putting a hot i7 in the Imac, it would be better to add a mini-tower to the lineup.
 
+++

Particularly in this day & age of increasing recessional woes, exactly what Apple will or will not do, strongly connects to Apple's maximizing/optimizing it's cash flow.

Computer $ales are dependent upon several factors, including:
the product,
the price
AND
the available spending cash in the pockets of ALL potential Computer Consumers.

Professional, prosumer, "consumer"...
Heavy Users, Business, Hobbyists, Home, Starbucks...

One easily Quantifiable Factor one cannot deny is that:
the overall Available Spending Cash has not only significantly diminished throughout '08 (roughly 2.5 Million Americans lost their Job in '08),

Additionally (as we can see from the daily data reports),
within the U.S., the E.U. and Asia, et cetera,
significant numbers of Jobs are continuing to vanish in '09, right as we speak...

And it is THAT Diminishing Available Money Factor which cannot be overlooked,
even as one is constantly juggling the potential Product Specs of their dream iMac or a NewMac... !

It is exactly because of the dwindling numbers (ergo money supply in ALL the pockets) of Pros, Prosumers & Joe 6-PACKERS, that the overall Computer (MAC, PC, ETC.) Sales have indeed significantly dropped in '08, and will continue to drop in '09.

+++

Most Former Buyers NOW fall into these major identifiable categories:

* The "rich" but not-as-rich anymore

* The beginning to look over their shoulder before parting with their dough

* The formerly able to purchase luxuries and conveniences
and who are now focussing upon bare essentials.

During Recession, Almost Everyone "cuts back" because

they either have no choice

or,

they feel that they'd better do so...

+++

The Number (and therefore Demand) of bonafide computer buyers has decreased: the available Money Pie to slice up has shrunk; ergo, Computer Co's have to offer More Tempting Wares than they had, OR, their share of Today's Shrinking Pie shall not be optimized.

How to Tempt?

2 Biggies are:

Give more bang for the buck.. !

Ask for less buck for the bang.. !

+++

I'm a Pro-Wannabe; a Prosumer, as it were.

If I'd my druthers, I'd be doing Video and Music at a more higher-end level,
than what I dabble with now. But I'd need/want superior HardWare.

Through Forums such as these, it's easy to garner "info" and understanding
about what makes a computer fly, and, why.

My Dual-Processor Maxed Out G4 Tower, finally bit the bullet.

If money were zero object, I'd have a maxed-out MACPro and MacBookPro,

But not at Those prices.. !!!

So, I'm looking for more bang for my buck.. like,
a quad-core iMac (24") - 8G RAM allowability would be sweet.

Prices of 20" iMacs - with lesser processors & lesser 'speeds' should invitingly drop.. so that the people who "want a MAC" can get their MAC.

Cannabalize.. Shmannabalize..

(Who on this Forum was already using that buzzword before Wu?)

With Available Money ergo Sales, Dropping,
not only do Consumers "think different",
the Manufacturer :apple: Must also Roll with The Punches.

MacPro's?

EITHER Something New! :apple: at similar existing prices or lowered,
AND Drop! the prices on the existing line..

ELSE Just Drop! the prices on the existing line!

+++

I thank you all for your time and interest! :D

+++
 
AidenShaw said:
Two comments:

  1. There are quad core mobile chips, so it's not correct that all quads are desktop
  2. An all-in-one Imac cannot "fill the gap" of the missing mini-tower.

While a quad i7 Imac could lessen the performance gap that exists today, some people want some internal expandability (2 or 3 3.5" hard drives, second optical, a real graphics card), and some just don't like all-in-ones.

Instead of putting a hot i7 in the Imac, it would be better to add a mini-tower to the lineup.
Click to expand...


Ah, the dream of every Mac gamer... A quad core mini tower with multi GPUs, super fast memory, and internal raid.

They missed their opportunity on this one a few years back when they were so hep to announce how EA and other gaming companies had come back to the Mac. If they announced a killer gaming system then, they would have carved out a slice of that niche for themselves. They did not, because it simply is not a space they care to be in. For whatever reason.

I'm not saying there is not opportunity here, I'm simply saying that this is apparently one of those things that SJ and Apple "said no" to. I doubt they will start saying "yes" now simply because Intel has some chips that wouldn't really fit into any of their existing models. Apple is not obligated to use every chip Intel makes in some product or another. Maybe they just give these chips a pass.
 
deze said:
Here here! Not even a current mac pro graphics card update in how long? now that's bad for a so called upgradeable system.
Click to expand...

and why that ? because there is no market for updates with ever so dropping mac pro sales
and with less 3rd party expansions available why bother with an "upgradable computer" at all
thus even less hardware

unless apple seriously does something we all know it's going to end up with a iMac + laptops-only apple
 
WATCHDOG said:
+++

[SNIP]

+++

I thank you all for your time and interest! :D

+++
Click to expand...

if apple gave away computers every one would have one apple does not sell based on market share they make the best product they can and then put a price on it if they tried to go cheap they would turn in to compaq
 
dohardthings said:
if apple gave away computers every one would have one apple does not sell based on market share they make the best product they can and then put a price on it if they tried to go cheap they would turn in to compaq
Click to expand...
The more enlightened community of Mac users isn't going to put up forever with the ever increasing disparity of Apple hardware and suck it up for Apple's style and design.

We are heading toward iMacs and laptops only from Apple.
 
dohardthings said:
if apple gave away computers every one would have one apple does not sell based on market share they make the best product they can and then put a price on it if they tried to go cheap they would turn in to compaq
Click to expand...

"they make the best product they can"

i nearly ruined my screen.. keep those jokes to the community forum
 
dohardthings said:
if apple gave away computers every one would have one apple does not sell based on market share they make the best product they can and then put a price on it if they tried to go cheap they would turn in to compaq
Click to expand...

Wow, try some punctuation next time. :)

Apple does not "make the best product they can and then put a price on it." If that were true we would have Firewire on the Macbook. :cool: Apple targets certain market segments, then they design a product to maximize their profit in that segment. If they don't feel they can compete in a certain market, or they don't think the profit margin will be high enough, they don't go after it.

Eidorian said:
We are heading toward iMacs and laptops only from Apple.
Click to expand...

And according to this blogger, we might not have iMacs for much longer:

http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/12/18/beginning-end-apple-imac
 
NYCMacFan said:
Also, there is so much talk of an "imminent" imac upgrade, who would buy? I realize the average buyer doesn't troll macrumors or applesider, but almost anyone with friends that are mac people has got to be hearing to wait...
Click to expand...
My entire windows system is melting down, including the monitor. I am waiting for an LED-backlit iMac with which to replace it. I don't particularly care about any other internals upgrade. <shrug>
 
+++

dohardthings said:
if apple gave away computers every one would have one apple does not sell based on market share they make the best product they can and then put a price on it if they tried to go cheap they would turn in to compaq
Click to expand...
+++

Since the Willow turns it's back on inclement weather,
Might not the Apple also?

I cannot easily imagine an Apple,
As it slowly sinking beneath the surface,
Blubbering, "Let not anyone forget that we gave it our Best Shot!"

For, comma, that kind of 'noble failure' is no success at all..

As with the unfortunate-to-some Demise
Of the once-upon-a-time 'nifty' Commodore Amiga,
People Shrugged, and then, they soon quickly moved on..

"Nay," I say, "with Apple not Blinking in the face of an Economic Storm..!"

Almost every major manufacturer
Is seriously slowing down their projected "roadmaps" of Product & Price,
For the sake of survival aka sales..

When the Money is simply not there,
something, somehow, somewhere,
has to give..

+++
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back