Apple's Processor Options for Early 2012 Mac Pro Begin to Firm Up

[ThorsHammer]

Uhhhh... i already have a dual 2.5ghz G5. I want something with higher clock speed. QUOTE]

This is a good link to compare CPUs. The new ones aren't on the list yet but it'll give you an idea of the differences.

On the older CPUs you can see that the Highest end Single CPU is equivalent to th low end dual cpu. The second dual cpu in 50% faster.

Sorry forgot the link:
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/

 

[verstaerker]

consider taking advantage of parallel processing features available via x-grid

could you explain this further?

 

[florianuhlemann]

I hope this is in the right spot..

People seem to be waiting for the mac pro to be released within days somehow, i believe, and this won't happen, unfortunately.

I've checked release dates of xeon processor lines and it seems apple needs 1,5-2 months after the xeon release until the new macpro series is released. and this means we may expect a new mac pro sometime around end of april, beginning of may. or am i wrong here?

 

[Umbongo]

I hope this is in the right spot..

People seem to be waiting for the mac pro to be released within days somehow, i believe, and this won't happen, unfortunately.

I've checked release dates of xeon processor lines and it seems apple needs 1,5-2 months after the xeon release until the new macpro series is released. and this means we may expect a new mac pro sometime around end of april, beginning of may. or am i wrong here?

No you aren't wrong. People are just overly emotional and irrational about it all.

There seems to be a fair bit of belief that Apple always get parts first and are a huge priority so Mac Pros must be tomorrow! Ignoring that its only ever been the case once with the Mac Pro (Mar 09)and that coincided with the worst value for money Mac Pros, no more top processor choices, weird memory set-up, limited memory speeds, and a serious audio decoding bug. I'm sure the list goes on.

 

[AidenShaw]

production precedes release

I hope this is in the right spot..

People seem to be waiting for the mac pro to be released within days somehow, i believe, and this won't happen, unfortunately.

I've checked release dates of xeon processor lines and it seems apple needs 1,5-2 months after the xeon release until the new macpro series is released. and this means we may expect a new mac pro sometime around end of april, beginning of may. or am i wrong here?

Intel usually ships CPUs to manufacturers a month or two before the "release date", so that manufacturers can have models ready to sell on the "release date".

The "release date" is the "first retail sale date", not the date when production starts.

 

[jjhoekstra]

Uhhhh... i already have a dual 2.5ghz G5. I want something with higher clock speed. Doesnt Alienware sell an overclocked like 6ghz machine!? Also.. this sucks because we HAVE to buy a new Mac before the end of the year (tax reasons) so I'm gonna have to get the current $3499 machine.

I have one of those old "electrical heaters". Even my Core Duo Mac Air runs circles around it!

 

[florianuhlemann]

Intel usually ships CPUs to manufacturers a month or two before the "release date", so that manufacturers can have models ready to sell on the "release date".

The "release date" is the "first retail sale date", not the date when production starts.

so then again you're saying the new mac pro should already be on the market?

but still, apple released the mac pro updates 1-2 months after the market release dates...

 

[dagomike]

so then again you're saying the new mac pro should already be on the market?

but still, apple released the mac pro updates 1-2 months after the market release dates...

There have been exceptions.

Still though Apple's release schedule isn't based on just getting Intel chips. There are other factors than just the CPU. I thought I remember speculation on the GPUs and there is the matter of Thunderbolt and updated 6 Gb/s SATA. And that's what we know Apple should be adding. There could be more things in play.

Basically no one knows, but the fact that Xeon E5 CPUs are shipping is the first encouraging news in quite a while.

 

[AidenShaw]

so then again you're saying the new mac pro should already be on the market?

No, I'm saying what I said - Intel's M.O. is to start shipping production chips to hardware partners 4-8 weeks before the "release date", so that systems can be manufactured and be ready for sale on the "release date".

The partners would have had prototype and pre-production samples months before that, so that motherboard and system designs could be tested.

Intel also manufactures prototype and pre-production systems to give to software partners. I had a DP Woodcrest system 3 months before the release so that we could optimize our software for the release. (It was in a SuperMicro tower workstation case, and had a motherboard without any brand markings, and a nice "Confidential Property of Intel" sticker on the front.)

but still, apple released the mac pro updates 1-2 months after the market release dates...

Intel doesn't force its hardware partners to release on day 1.

Apple can choose to release whenever it wants to. And, since it's common that new Intel CPUs are in short supply at the beginning, Apple may simply chose to wait a while for Intel's supply to match demand. (...and there's nothing wrong with that)

 

[florianuhlemann]

Thanks for the nice insight. Might have gotten your post a little wrong there. I apologize.
So, back then to waiting. But it's one thing we all do quite well, as Apple users! XD

No, I'm saying what I said - Intel's M.O. is to start shipping production chips to hardware partners 4-8 weeks before the "release date", so that systems can be manufactured and be ready for sale on the "release date".

The partners would have had prototype and pre-production samples months before that, so that motherboard and system designs could be tested.

Intel also manufactures prototype and pre-production systems to give to software partners. I had a DP Woodcrest system 3 months before the release so that we could optimize our software for the release. (It was in a SuperMicro tower workstation case, and had a motherboard without any brand markings, and a nice "Confidential Property of Intel" sticker on the front.)




Intel doesn't force its hardware partners to release on day 1.

Apple can choose to release whenever it wants to. And, since it's common that new Intel CPUs are in short supply at the beginning, Apple may simply chose to wait a while for Intel's supply to match demand. (...and there's nothing wrong with that)

 

[xgman]

Apple could choose to announce now with a little lead time for quantity. There are a lot of people starting to think this may never come. We'll see......

 

[CraigJ]

Yes, I think you are missing a lot.

Although the Mac Pro looks like a nice machine to have, it still seem crazy to me to drop 4-5k on a machine that will be outperformed by a MacBook Pro or iMac a year or a year and a half later for a fraction of the price.

And that's not even considering the MBP and iMac both come with keyboard, mouse or trackpad, monitor and speakers.

I see it as you're not really paying for the power, but for having that power 1/1.5 year in advance. And it seems like people buying Mac Pros don't upgrade every year, a lot of them plan to keep theirs for like 5 years, so it doesn't make sense to me.

For the same price, you could buy the best iMac every year and resell it, and you would end up:
1) Having a more powerful machine on average
2) Paying less
3) Always having a warranty
4) Getting the cool new stuff first (Thunderbolt, 27" IPS display, FaceTime HD...)

So unless you work requires you to have power that can't be achieved with a high-end iMac/MBP right now, and that you also upgrade/change your Mac Pro every 2 years or less, I see no point in buying it.

Am I missing something?

First, the only MP comparable to the iMac is the entry level quad core machine, and that should be compared to the top end i7 iMac with the extra memory. Since the MP is easily expandable I would get memory from Crucial, and an SSD from Newegg, and a monitor from Dell - U2412 probably. This isn't completely Apples to Apples, but here is what I came up with:

Mac Pro - Quad core, 1TB HD, 4GB RAM $2,500
24GB RAM from Crucial - $325
256 Crucial SSD - $300
2 x 24" Dell U2412 IPS LED monitors - $630
Mac Pro total: $3,755

iMac - 27" i7 with extra video memory, 256GB SSD and 1TB HD - $2,899
16GB RAM from Crucial - $240
iMac total - $3,050

So for an extra $700 you get:
1 expandability - add HDs, Video card, etc.
2 more screen real estate than a single 27" screen
3 theoretically better performance for things like virtualization
4 theoretically better longevity of components when left on 24/7

But there are some cons
1 noise
2 power consumption
3 where to put the big ass tower

Bottom line - it depends on your needs. I use Macs professionally, and the ability to add a couple of HDs to the machine for redundancy, add an additional card for potentially up to 6 monitors etc is something I need. The Mac Pro is also more suitable as a "server" machine meaning I can set up shares and services for others in my office and coming in over the VPN, and leave it running 24/7.

Personally I'm watching this very closely, and I want to see the benchmarks for the new Mac Pros (assuming there are some - if there aren't it's an iMac for me) vs the new iMacs. I suspect from what I've read that the new Mac Pros will once again outperform the new iMacs. I purchase machines on an assumed 5-year active life and typically replace each machine every 4 or so years. So even at $3700, that cost amortized over the 5 year life of the machine is only $750 a year or $63 a month. vs $608/year, $51/month for the iMac. When viewed this way the additional $700 is nearly immaterial especially since it's all depreciated / expensed anyway.