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.
Apple Introduces New Mac Pro with Nehalem Xeon Processors
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Regardless, my point still holds: until there's literally an empty CPU slot that's merely waiting to be populated, the design configuration has more than one (set of) boards that have to be designed, fabbed, inventory managed, etc. Classical Fixed + Variable costs apply.
Fair enough, but the broader lifecycle implications are that if Mac Pros can receive "easy" CPU upgrades, then this is repeating the same lifecycle issues that Apple had with the 7500-9500 series, which ultimately resulted in fewer sales for Apple. Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
Not my point. My point was that any swag that only takes one variable into account isn't going to be as good as one that takes more macro-variables into account. I'll freely admit that my $500 is 'spaghetti thrown against the wall', but its primary intent was to illustrate that non-trivial factors exist that were being ignored.
The problem with this statement is that generally assumes that the Mac Pro is merely another consumer machine, rather than it being in a different market segment that has different customers for which the economic downturn may be affecting differently.
For example, while Christmas sales for Apple were generally flat (only up 9%), the reality in business orders for durable goods is that they've been down for the 6th month in a row, and are reportedly off -37% ... but since they're dropping at -5% per month for the last couple of months, if we were to annualize the current slope, it suggests that this ongoing retraction in Enterprise could very easily be looking at a -55% to -60% decline for 2009 alone.
Profit, or simply break even? (aka: "not lose our shirt")
Given the magnitude current economies uncertainties, I'm more inclined to lean to the latter. YMMV. In any event, sales reports in another 6 months will contain the first good answer for us both.
An interesting question. That's why I'm waiting for relevant-to-me benchmarks as well as Snow Leopard before making my own personal decision as to what my path forward is going to be, and what will be my ROI.
Suggest that instead of simply accepting the sphaghetti that I threw against the wall as gospel, that you instead accept its premise and try to sort out the swags for Fixed + Variable costs of development & manufacturing for the 'before' and 'after' and plug those in with different assumptions on past vs. future sales figures.
This is really the right way to do this; you may very well find out that my spaghetti was too low on the wall.
FWIW, I'm of the opinion that this assumption is bad.
Specifically, you're assuming that Apple was actually paying Intel's street price for the old Xeons...I think you need to test that assumption.
Afterall, we do know that with Apple's history now of being first on the block with new Intel CPU releases, Apple undoubtedly has a "special relationship" with Intel of some sort.
Furthermore, since Dell wasn't really able to touch the price of the older Mac Pro, the 'Occam's Razor' (simplest explanation) as to why this would be would be that Intel had given Apple a healthy price cut on that CPU (at least) in order to help close the deal on the PPC --> Intel transition (vs AMD), which could have now expired.
Since the "Dell markup" to the old Mac Pro was roughly $1000, a decent SWAG to work from for a hypothetical Intel incentive to Apple would be for there to have been a negotiated $500 discount per old CPU. This sort of horse-trading and manouvering happens constantly in business, which is why it is naive to try to simplify something to just the Engineering department and open literature.
-hh
Intel has not in the past provided much choice of I/O controllers. The X58 right now can only be paired with the ICH10 or ICH10R. I guess it's possible Apple created their own and over subscribed the DMI link, but the simpler answer would be Apple is using a Xeon-specific MCH (odd Intel is still calling it an MCH) that supports more lanes. The X58 plus new ICH combination would blow chunks for a dual socket workstation/server class system.
If I bought a Single 2.66GHz Quad-Core, can I upgrade to the Dual CPU buy simply changing the daughter boards to upgrade?
Like the previous poster mentioned, is all the rest of the computer identical?
What kind of pricing are we talking about in changing the daughter boards?
Also, if i got the Dual 2.26 Quad-Core, is the processors easily upgradable to a faster one?
(almost tool-less such as unclipping and clipping in processors)
On X58, the "northbridge" is now the IOH (Input Output Hub), and pairs with the ICH (Input-output Controller Hub; how's that for confusing duplicate naming?)
So on previous-generation desktops and laptops, you had the MCH (or GMCH if it had integrated graphics,) and the ICH. Now you have the IOH and ICH.
On servers/workstations, the southbridge is generally referred to as the ESB (or "Enterprise South Bridge",) even when it's basically the same chip as the desktop/laptop ICH. The latest (well, before the new Mac Pro, anyway) ESB, the ESB2-E, is the equivalent of the desktop ICH6, plus better LAN, a server BMC (Baseboard Management Controller,) and a PCI bridge component.
Although often on higher-end systems, there are sometimes one or more extra PCI bus control chips. (Intel's server motherboard roughly equivalent to the previous Mac Pro, the S5400SF, has the 5400 MCH, and ESB2-E I/O Controller Hub; the four-way server S7000FC4UR has the 7300 MCH, ESB2-E I/O Controller Hub, plus two PCI Express Expander chips.
I'm not a marketing guy, but based on prior system terminology, and current X58 terminology, the likely naming would be IOH and ESB.
Nobody knows for sure yet. Knowing Apple, I doubt it will be possible to purchase the daughter boards legitimately at all. In all likelihood, they will only be willing to sell/distribute them to authorized service centers explicitly for use in repairs. Heck, they weren't even willing to sell the Mac Pro 802.11n card other than "to authorized service centers for the sole purpose of said dealer installing in a Mac Pro"; to prevent people from putting them in older iMacs and MacBook Pros that only came with 802.11g cards.
And, it is also possible that the mainboard *IS* different between the single and dual socket models; preventing the single-to-dual upgrade at all.
As for upgrading procs in the dual socket system; again, knowing Apple, it shouldn't be too difficult. Especially with the procs now on a daughter card.
new mac pro
Has anyone already received any new mac pro version? Please post benchmarks as soon as possibile!
Has anyone already received any new mac pro version? Please post benchmarks as soon as possibile!
It would appear that the answer is probably 'Yes'.
So long as Apple is the only supplier, it probably won't be cheap. However, if the CPUs are socketed (LGA1366) then you should be able to upgrade your existing CPUs on your existing daughterboard. This doesn't alleviate the 1 vs 2 sockets question, though.
This also appears to be a 'Yes'...but don't expect the bare CPUs to become instantly cheap overnight.
However, this all has the potential to be a good news - bad news item, since IMO it seems to be forming to be a repeat of the old Mac 7500-8500-9500 scenario:
CPUs on daughterboards can allow for relatively cheap upgrades for consumers (good), but Apple ends up selling fewer systems, so future systems end up costing more (bad).
-hh
Has anyone already received any new mac pro version? Please post benchmarks as soon as possibile!
No one will get theirs until at least March 9th.
I've been following your thread on "everything we know". I'm excited for you and can't wait to hear about the machines performance versus the early 2008 models.
Cool, thanks!
I'll test out whatever people want me to; I'm getting a 4870 and a GT 120, so we'll see how that goes to begin with.
I'll be glad to help as well. I'm getting:
Two 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xe
16GB (8x2GB)
ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
One 18x SuperDrive
Apple Mighty Mouse
APPLE KEYBD/USERS GUIDE-ITA.
Country Kit Mac Pro-INT
Only prob is that i'll have to wait at least another week
It was a great explanation if it wasn't dealing with computers prices.
If you are talking affordability, then yes computer are more affordable then the were 5 years ago - even Apple's. But that is not what point I was trying to make. The price for computers has consistently trended down for, except for Apple. Sure they trended down from the II series (IIcx, IIci, IIfx etc.) to the PowerMac 6xxx,7xxx,8xxx series, to the PM G3, G4, G5, but then starting with the Mac Pros they have trended UP. Again while the rest of the industry continues the trend down.
But if you won't concede that Consumer Price Index has nothing to do with a "Computer Price Index" then I give up... Those are the number you need to look at.
At the end of the day you can rationalize performance and value any way you want to, real world performance is the bottom line.
As posted before, take the time to read this http://www.macintouch.com/reviews/efix/ in terms of performance, then go here http://www.expresshd.com/p137/Express-PC-Q9550/product_info.html to determine "real" market value.
By the way, the Macintouch.com benchmarks were done with 4GB or RAM, the new EFI-X dealer, EpressHD.com, is selling theirs for $1,400 with 8GB of RAM and larger HD.
If ExpressHD can sell a system that outperforms, or stays close to (non natively I might add), the 2.8GHz Octa Mac Pro at less than 1/2 the price and using off the shelf parts, why can't Apple offer a better system at more competitive prices?
As posted before, take the time to read this http://www.macintouch.com/reviews/efix/ in terms of performance, then go here http://www.expresshd.com/p137/Express-PC-Q9550/product_info.html to determine "real" market value.
By the way, the Macintouch.com benchmarks were done with 4GB or RAM, the new EFI-X dealer, EpressHD.com, is selling theirs for $1,400 with 8GB of RAM and larger HD.
If ExpressHD can sell a system that outperforms, or stays close to (non natively I might add), the 2.8GHz Octa Mac Pro at less than 1/2 the price and using off the shelf parts, why can't Apple offer a better system at more competitive prices?
Specifically : NO, I am not. I am "assuming" that Apple MAKE US PAY about Intel's list price for the cpus. I'm using Apple's list prices and Intel's list prices. This is as good an estimate as an imaginary $500 increase in costs or a previous imaginary "deal" of $500 less per cpu, based on an imaginary Dell markup of roughly $1,000, that has perhaps expired if ever existed.
One explanation that I find simple enough is that Apple wants to generate more profit from the juicer segment of the market: the workstations. Especially when they have probably one month advantage before the competition starts offering equivalent models. That's common practice.
That'll be helpful, there are a bunch of questions on Mac Pro performance comparisons, do you want to make a new thread on this when you get your Mac Pros?
"The 2009 (Gainestown) Mac Pro Performance: Everything We Know"
You really want to know why? Well, those people don't spend a dollar on OSX research, hardware research (firewire? bluetooth?), compatibility issues & software/Os integration research, merging different hardware together (MAC, APPLE TV, IPHONE, IPOD) into a lifestyle, CUSTOMER CARE...
You know, I don't even understand those people who pay for Photoshop, final cut, after effect.. I mean, you can download them for free on the internet, why the hell should I pay a 100000% more if I can have the same exact thing at almost no cost? It's a mistery for me...
Because people deserve to be paid for their work.
Oh, your math is wrong, too. It would be ∞% more, as you're comparing any cost to no cost.
Ehmm... That was Ironic... Read the post better next time..
And actually it's wouldn't be ∞% more. You have to count the internet connection cost
Ehmm... That was Ironic... Read the post better next time..
I'm reading that you don't understand why we can't all just pirate the applications we want instead of buying them.
And actually it's wouldn't be ∞% more. You have to count the internet connection cost
You're stealing software but you're not stealing Internet? Bit of irony there, eh?
What part of "irony" you don't understand?
The one where I criticise someone who's asking why buying a mac pro when there are NON-apple computer that cost less than a real Mac pro and can run osx smoothly...
...Or the one where I state IRONICALY that I don't understand why do people pay for software instead of downloading it? (after I just explained why you shouldn't buy non-apple hardware that runs osx: Because people deserve to be paid for their work.. [Wich is kind of saying "You shouldn't illegaly download programs, you should buy them, Because people deserve to be paid for their work.]):
Maybe i wasn't clear enough last time, so i'll shout it to you: IT WAS IRONY. I WAS MAKING FUN OF A PREVIOUS POST.
I will clear it more for you, in case you still don't understand. I do pay for my software, and I do buy original Mac hardware.
Wait, I will repeat it in case you skipped some line:
I do pay for my software, and I do buy original Mac hardware.
Because they don't have to. They know that most Mac users won't switch to windows or go the hackentosh route. Whatever Apple chooses to sell their computers for, the faithful will pay.
Please explain how?
Hey guys, How does Apple get these processors without Intel releasing them properly?
The cards performance is outstanding! The Nahalem card really packs a boost to the new Mac Pro. Would they be able to introduce these into the Macbook Pro's? Maybe 17" without the beautiful long life battery?
YoshiKing
Hey guys, How does Apple get these processors without Intel releasing them properly?
The cards performance is outstanding! The Nahalem card really packs a boost to the new Mac Pro. Would they be able to introduce these into the Macbook Pro's? Maybe 17" without the beautiful long life battery?
YoshiKing
Think of it this way. In 2005, the C.E.O. of the last company that still used chips competing with Intel's architecture called up Intel's C.E.O. and asked for a partnership.
Apple and Intel have a great relationship. Apple got the Core 2 Xeons early, too. Apple challenged Intel to shrink the physical size (not manufacturing process) of a processor while keeping the power the same. They took up the challenge and the MacBook Air was born.
Probably the part where you've mistaken it for sarcasm. Had you said sarcasm, I would have agreed with you. Irony makes absolutely no sense in this situation.