Everything you listed is solid state. Nothing mechanical.You're talking about dual 2xGPUs, 1Gbps+ PCIe SSD, 64GB of RAM, 6x TB ports and etc.
Steve had a cow over IBM PPC not achieving a Ghz target. This is STILL below 3 Ghz.
Everything you listed is solid state. Nothing mechanical.You're talking about dual 2xGPUs, 1Gbps+ PCIe SSD, 64GB of RAM, 6x TB ports and etc.
This is at least $2.5K with the least RAM and SSD assuming they'd do multiple SKUs. I'd suspect it'll be $5k for the standard SKU and max'ed out $10K SKU.
23901 - 21980 = 1912
EDIT: Unless I'm not understanding something correctly?
Everything you listed is solid state. Nothing mechanical.
Steve had a cow over IBM PPC not achieving a Ghz target. This is STILL below 3 Ghz.
Thats What I am wishing too.... but this is Apple.
One wonders though if a Dual processor 24 core beast is in development
Agreed. This is a systems engineering approach. Schiller emphasized devs need to use Open CL. That API and its sisters will be GPGPU goodness makers.Here's what's up -- lack of significant advancements in CPU technology is a real restriction.
Apple's decided that the big leap forward in the new generation of Mac Pros will come from the GPU side.The important part is that on a GPU test it would obliterate any out of the box Mac ever, probably by an order of magnitude. From here on out, it's all eggs in the GPU basket.
If the software creators don't take advantage of the dual workstation GPUs, it won't do anyone any good. If they do, then it'll make this new Mac Pro wipe the floor with the old model in real world use.
Since the performance is only incrementally more and the size is substantially less and it is a single chip machine, I suspect this will be under $2k price point. A Mac-Mini x2 of sorts.
The question becomes, what about dual chip versions?
If the software creators don't take advantage of the dual workstation GPUs, it won't do anyone any good. If they do, then it'll make this new Mac Pro wipe the floor with the old model in real world use (not Geekbench).
Here's what's up -- lack of significant advancements in CPU technology is a real restriction. There just isn't much to do other than add more cores, and all those cores are hot, which then comes at the expense of clock speed. It's a tricky balance.
In light of that, Apple's decided that the big leap forward in the new generation of Mac Pros will come from the GPU side. Geekbench is a CPU-only test, so you're not seeing the important part. The important part is that on a GPU test it would obliterate any out of the box mac ever, probably by an order of magnitude. From here on out, it's all eggs in the GPU basket.
If the software creators don't take advantage of the dual workstation GPUs, it won't do anyone any good. If they do, then it'll make this new Mac Pro wipe the floor with the old model in real world use (not Geekbench).
Of course, you can always add GPUs to the old model. But it's the change in philosophy that I'm commenting on.
Ok? I'm not sure what you're trying to say about the mechanical part since I didn't say anything. Did you mean to say the solid state would cost more?
As for GHz, it means nothing. It hasn't meant anything for several years now. All the focus is on multiple cores and GPUs with compute capability. There are GPUs that can do 10x of the computation that a CPU can do in several areas.
This single 12-core 2.7Ghz beats the crap out of two 6-core 3.06GHZ CPUs.
The benchmarks look kind of...underwhelming.
I was in San Clemente last weekend. Of course I am dreaming.I think you're dreaming.
For example the processors could be running only at their base speeds. Plus who's to say that these machines will actually ship with these processors. Beyond that any Magericks release would be running as a beta with all of the debug code included.
.....We chatted with John Poole of Primate Labs, who highlighted the substantial improvements in many single-core measures and in memory performance, suggesting that lower multi-core scores later in the Integer Performance testing run could be indicative of thermal issues.
Article Link: Apple's New Mac Pro Begins Showing Up in Benchmarks
Save a world of problems now, Apple, and add one inch diameter. "Naaaah. We want it thin!"
Thats What I am wishing too.... but this is Apple.
One wonders though if a Dual processor 24 core beast is in development