Apple probably won't take a step backwards. If anything they will drop single socket only models and go back to dual socket boards only.
Im hoping for a base level mac pro with a single nehalem 2.9 quad core.
Apple probably won't take a step backwards. If anything they will drop single socket only models and go back to dual socket boards only.
Im hoping for a base level mac pro with a single nehalem 2.9 quad core.
Im hoping for a base level mac pro with a single nehalem 2.9 quad core.
IIRC they won't be producing most of the Xeon 3xxx series after the 16th. That will limit Apple's options as far as single socket systems go.
Anyone else care to shed some light on this?
There are 3 price points, just as with Core i7. $284, $562 and $999.
The latest revisions will be 2.8GHz x 4 @ 45nm, 3.2GHz x 4 @ 45nm and 3.33GHz x 6 @ 32nm.
2.8 GHz won't come to life in a MP since the W3530 (2.8 GHz) and the W3565 (3.2 GHz) are the only cpus without Turbo Boost within this family.
Ifwants the MPs to still have TB after the update the options are W3540 (2.93 GHz), W3550 (3.06 GHz), W3570 (3.2 GHz) and W3580 (3.33 GHz).
Not sure where you read that but it isn't correct.
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=41313
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=39721
There are 3 price points, just as with Core i7. $284, $562 and $999.
The latest revisions will be 2.8GHz x 4 @ 45nm, 3.2GHz x 4 @ 45nm and 3.33GHz x 6 @ 32nm.
Could Apple still hold their preferred customer status with Intel and release Mac Pros early tomorrow?
Looks like another no update Tuesday!
I guess we are looking at the 16th at the earliest now, maybe the Intel exclusivity deal is over?
Looks like another no update Tuesday!
I don't understand how we can get an update when the new processors aren't even announced yet. Under the NDA Apple can't say a thing, right? I understand that worked a deal last time, but I wouldn't expect anything until Intel actually announces the CPUs.
Because last year, Apple got special treatment and had Intel chips earlier than any other PC vendor out there, and they were able to ship the 09 Mac Pro's ahead of Intel's shipping schedule.
Because last year, Apple got special treatment and had Intel chips earlier than any other PC vendor out there, and they were able to ship the 09 Mac Pro's ahead of Intel's shipping schedule.
Or alternatively they broke the NDA and launched early. It hasn't been revealed what happened, but people at Dell and HP were reported to be shocked.
And they TOTALLY screwed it.
Took them 10 month to get their software play well with the new chips.
A little more time in the labs would have been much better than a premature release.![]()
A single socket system with the next generation CPUs would mean that the new generation Mac Pro would be slower than the current dual processor system.
I don't think people would like to see that.
But a new single socket system with 6 cores would be faster than Apple's current 4 core single socket system..
And they TOTALLY screwed it.
Took them 10 month to get their software play well with the new chips.
A little more time in the labs would have been much better than a premature release.![]()
SP and DP models aren't that different. For the LGA1366 Xeons, the only difference board wise is the chipset, which accommodates either single (X58) or dual (5520) QPI channels. There's differences in firmware as well, but that's code, not electronic components.Let me throw an idea out for discussion. Many people suggest that Mac Pros are low volume compared to most of Apple's other products, that it's a "nuisance" for Apple to keep making them. So what if, for 2010, Apple kept only the SP Mac Pro, and dropped the DP Mac Pro?
Let's assume that Apple sticks to Xeon type silicon, but SP only. Why not? It simplifies their R&D and manufacturing, and Intel gives them 6 cores "real soon now" which realistically should be enough for 90% of Mac Pro users.
Or would the Mac Pro people be devastated and inconsolable over such a development?
It may only be about their own though.Plausible thought. I hadn't thought about that, but I doubt it would be in Apple's nature to break an NDA, since they themselves are like Nazis when it comes to their own NDS![]()
This is becoming far too common IMO with both computers vendors and consumer electronics in general. They're in too much of a hurry to get a product shipped (regain profits), so product validation testing isn't anywhere close to thorough.Hey, that could totally have been the case. Premature release = premature hardware and software integrity. Didn't think of that either. Anything is possible.
Plausible thought. I hadn't thought about that, but I doubt it would be in Apple's nature to break an NDA, since they themselves are like Nazis when it comes to their own NDS
Hey, that could totally have been the case. Premature release = premature hardware and software integrity. Didn't think of that either. Anything is possible.