Intel Chip Delays Suggest No New Mac Pro Until at Least Early 2012

[smali]

Why are people here crying over delays to a workstation computer?

It's not like an iPhone you chuck out every year for the latest one.

These type of machines are made to last a LONG time. Where I work there are powermac G5 towers and are still in full use every day, making a lot of money. I expect they still have years of service left.

Also if you do want to whine, why not email intel, Apple, Dell, HP etc are all stuck waiting on intel.

 

[wheezy]

Why do people get so upset when they hear a mac pro delay?

These machines use state of the art processors that are difficult to find in any other consumer products. Hence, these computers are extremely fast and do not require a refresh every six months.

What's the complaining? Is it not fast enough?

Apple's mainstream products focus on usability and aesthetics, which is why they get updated so often. The Mac Pro is a processing machine - nothing else. It provides superb processing power using chips that are neither mainstream nor updated very often.

Deal with it.

This explains it all. The MacPro will never get an update every 6-8 months.

 

[shompa]

Doesn't need it. Case designers look to it as the pinnacle of case design. I've spoke with the head case designer behind Corsair's cases (and they make beautiful aluminum cases) and he speaks very highly of the chassis that Apple uses for the Mac Pro and comments on how its not economical to do a design like that unless you are going to make high volume like Apple does.

Apple have used the same case design since 2003.

Its almost a perfect design. Completely silence. Heat zones.

But I don't understand why Apple does not update them when Intel releases new CPUs. Since Intel designs the motherboards = there is no extra work for Apple beside making sure that drivers work in the OS.

Apple only need to change the motherboard and CPU.

 

[TwitchOSX]

Haha have fun switching to a PC. Is 3-4 months really THAT long of a wait???

Not that I would want to switch to a PC (hackintosh anybody?)... BUT.. we have to buy a new computer before the end of the year... for tax reasons. This sucks. I was hoping to get a 12 core Mac Pro for the price of the 8 core Mac Pro. I was assuming when they upgrade, they will drop the quad core, and just go with an 8, 12 and 16 core setup. Dell sells 16 core machines RIGHT NOW. Now I'm going to be stuck with the current 8 core machine.

 

[shompa]

This explains it all. The MacPro will never get an update every 6-8 months.

Its not to much to ask that Apple updates MacPro with every new Xeon CPU that are released. It's just lazy Apple since Intel designs the motherboard/cpu and all other components/cooling is already in place.

Apple should also spend 10 minutes and make a single CPU macpro with ordinary i7 CPU. Would cost 1K less.

Its silly when iMacs are faster then MacPro.

 

[milo]

It's hard to believe they won't update the Mac Pro with Thunderbolt (at least) before then. It would seem to be the one Mac model where it's most needed; for graphics/video professionals with high storage/bandwidth requirements.

But then people would be whining that they updated but the CPU didn't get any faster. TB would be nice but it's probably not enough to justify a new model, especially if the upcoming chips are different enough to require further redesign.

These machines use state of the art processors that are difficult to find in any other consumer products. Hence, these computers are extremely fast and do not require a refresh every six months.

What's the complaining? Is it not fast enough?

A major complaint is that some of the MP models are slower than iMacs, some are even slower than some of the laptops.

Of course the situation with the chips is in intel's lap, but the ugliest part of the mac lineup has always been the entry level models. Apple can't upgrade on the high end, but they definitely could bump the specs of the cheapest Quad model (which was a horrible deal on release and the bang for the buck has only gotten worse since then).

On the high end the PC guys are stuck with this same delay. But on the lower end there are machines that clean the base MP's clock at a fraction of the price. Definitely need to rethink that single CPU model, it hasn't been competitive in years.

 

[*LTD*]

Why do people get so upset when they hear a mac pro delay?

These machines use state of the art processors that are difficult to find in any other consumer products. Hence, these computers are extremely fast and do not require a refresh every six months.

What's the complaining? Is it not fast enough?

Apple's mainstream products focus on usability and aesthetics, which is why they get updated so often. The Mac Pro is a processing machine - nothing else. It provides superb processing power using chips that are neither mainstream nor updated very often.

Deal with it.

Thank you for your sanity.

 

[Justinf79]

Pathetic... Apple should at least keep up with the newer video cards and release newer video cards for existing MPs...

 

[PeterQVenkman]

Why are people here crying over delays to a workstation computer?

Because they don't feel like paying 2009 prices in 2011.

These type of machines are made to last a LONG time. Where I work there are powermac G5 towers and are still in full use every day, making a lot of money. I expect they still have years of service left.

Consider yourself lucky. Our whole company used to be on G5s, they all died after 3 years, half within 2. I do not miss the G5 lemon towers at all.

Also if you do want to whine, why not email intel, Apple, Dell, HP etc are all stuck waiting on intel.

In the mean time non-Apple manufacturers offer other computers with Intel's "consumer" desktop line. They are just as fast as Apple's single processor line (or faster) and they are not expensive.

These machines use state of the art processors that are difficult to find in any other consumer products. Hence, these computers are extremely fast and do not require a refresh every six months.

They were state of the art a long time ago. They may not need a refresh, but certainly a price drop would reflect reality.

What's the complaining? Is it not fast enough?

The single processor machines are not. Certainly not for $2500. This machine is a joke:

http://store.apple.com/us_smb_78313/configure/MC560LL/A?select=select&product=MC560LL/A

$2500 for a computer outdistanced by the iMac, MacBook Pro, and much of the windows el-cheapos out there.

The dual processor (8-12 core) models remain blistering fast and very competitive on price, however. Especially considering the incredible interior design of the Mac Pro.

It provides superb processing power using chips that are neither mainstream nor updated very often.

There is no significant reason to buy a single processor mac pro other than ECC, which many haven't found necessary in their work at all.

Deal with it.

A lot of people in the CG industry did exactly that. They switched to windows. And the sky didn't fall. They just got their work done faster at half the price.

 

[RalfTheDog]

It is Apple's fault. Why won't Apple invent a real time machine, go to the future when the chips are available, then violate causality by shipping the future chips back to us?

So much for Apple's wonderful customer service, they will not even break the laws of physics for us!

 

[iBug2]

But then people would be whining that they updated but the CPU didn't get any faster. TB would be nice but it's probably not enough to justify a new model, especially if the upcoming chips are different enough to require further redesign.




A major complaint is that some of the MP models are slower than iMacs, some are even slower than some of the laptops.

Of course the situation with the chips is in intel's lap, but the ugliest part of the mac lineup has always been the entry level models. Apple can't upgrade on the high end, but they definitely could bump the specs of the cheapest Quad model (which was a horrible deal on release and the bang for the buck has only gotten worse since then).

On the high end the PC guys are stuck with this same delay. But on the lower end there are machines that clean the base MP's clock at a fraction of the price. Definitely need to rethink that single CPU model, it hasn't been competitive in years.

The only Mac Pro which is not considerably faster than the top of the line iMac is the quad core 2.8. Indeed anyone not needing PCI-e and more RAM+internal storage wouldn't buy that Mac Pro and instead would get an iMac.

And I agree. The lower end Mac Pro hasn't been a good value since 2009 models were introduced.

----------

The dual processor (8-12 core) models remain blistering fast and very competitive on price, however. Especially considering the incredible interior design of the Mac Pro.


A lot of people in the CG industry did exactly that. They switched to windows. And the sky didn't fall. They just got their work done faster at half the price.

I wonder if Apple is actually selling any single processor Mac Pro's since 2009. iMacs did compete quite well with those machines since then. I mean I purchased an 8 Core in 2008 and I paid 2500$ for it, and today it's faster than the 2500$ low end Mac Pro which has 4 cores.

But I don't think anyone switched from Macs to Windows in CG industry because of this. CG was always PC dominated due to a lot of software and plugins being unavailable for OS X to begin with.

 

[HelveticaRoman]

This is precisely why Apple has no credibility any more in the professional markets. It's not the time between product updates but the lack of clarity. Would anyone bet their house - or their business - that Apple will indeed refresh the MacPro line, or will they just EOL it as they have most of their other Pro offerings?

 

[iBug2]

This is precisely why Apple has no credibility any more in the professional markets. They expect everyone to hang on, on the off-chance they are still in the game? The corporate world is also taking note, as Apple prepares to graze the enterprise market for their iPads - at least until they get bored with that as well.

Any more? Do you remember a time where Apple actually renewed their Pro machines more frequently than processor upgrades?

 

[Akzel]

More than a year with the same GPU, the pathetic amount of RAM... They could've shown they still care, even if a little, but spec bumping the GPUs and other stuff, like RAM memory, or even putting a small SSD in there. Or should I believe that 2010 processors cost the same thing in the last few months of 2011?..

 

[PeterQVenkman]

But I don't think anyone switched from Macs to Windows in CG industry because of this. CG was always PC dominated due to a lot of software and plugins being unavailable for OS X to begin with.

My whole company, my former company, and three other local firms did all within the same year. The CG industry is dominated by different platforms at different levels, with game development, Visual FX, and motion graphics being the big splits I'm familiar with (no idea on arch vis, I suspect windows ).

Our local firms were mainly motion graphics, which were predominantly macintosh until Windows 7 came out.

 

[evilcat]

I wonder if Apple is actually selling any single processor Mac Pro's since 2009. iMacs did compete quite well with those machines since then. I mean I purchased an 8 Core in 2008 and I paid 2500$ for it, and today it's faster than the 2500$ low end Mac Pro which has 4 cores.

I am using a quad 2.4 iMac at work and the one thing that lets it down considerably is the storage. When testing sites, I have 4 virtual machines open (XP IE6, XP IE7, XPIE8 and Windows 7 IE9), all my regular software, etc. and the thing crawls. It's not the CPU usage, that stays low. It's not the RAM, which still has 1.5Gb free. It's the disk. Reading and writing everything from one disk (especially when each virtual machine's hard disk is essentiality a 20Gb file, and Windows constantly reads / writes from that file) kills the machine.

Having even ope extra internal disk would make all the difference. Having up to 5 like the Pro (if you use an optical bay) would eliminate all of the I/O blocking.

My point is, for heavy users with more than two disk-heavy processes on the go, that extra CPU speed is meaningless if your iMac has only one disk drive. Therefore, for most pro users, the iMac is not suitable.

 

[bretm]

Did you read the article? Intel is delayed on the chips -- not much Apple can do about that.

Whether or not Mac Pro is "back burner" is still up for debate, but this article gives no support to either side of that argument.

Certainly the Mac Pro sells less units than the others, but I can't imagine they did Final Cut Pro X with the expectation that movie editors would use iMacs.

I suppose the delay gives me a bit more time to try to save up $5000 to purchase a nicely equipped Mac Pro. Then again, I'm probably not gonna get one of those until I start making a whole lot more money.

Actually I think their expectation is completely that. No support for external monitoring. A set single window interface. No connection whatsoever to the previous FCP 7. They've pretty much cut the cord. FCP X is definitely designed for MacBook Pros and iMacs first, with the iPad version probably in the works. They didn't downscale the app and the price so that people would run out and buy a $4k MacPro to run it. I wouldn't be surprised if this is the last MacPro refresh for a long time. My guess is either it's going to be the last chip speed bump with thunderbolt added. Or it will be a MacMini "PRO." The new Cube basically.

 

[G4er?]

While Apple is waiting on Intel it could market an i7 XMac.

 

[Craigy]

My 1st gen Mac Pro still keeps up with my new 17 MBP. Quite impressive for such an old machine.

 

[adrian.oconnor]

Having even ope extra internal disk would make all the difference. Having up to 5 like the Pro (if you use an optical bay) would eliminate all of the I/O blocking.

My point is, for heavy users with more than two disk-heavy processes on the go, that extra CPU speed is meaningless if your iMac has only one disk drive. Therefore, for most pro users, the iMac is not suitable.

If only Intel would invent a super-fast interconnect that Apple could use in its computers. That way, you could add extra disks to the iMac... We could even give it a silly name, like Thunder Bolt

Even if the price of the TB enclosure is too much for you to swallow, you can add prety-fast FW800 drives, like the WD MyBook Studio. They work really well.

 

[Bubba Satori]

Just build a screaming fast i7 box for $1200.
Who needs dual Xeons or a useless base single core Xeon
with 3GB of memory and a *rap video card for $2,500?

Apple doesn't care about trucks.

 

[Topper]

If AMD's 7000 series is out before Intel's new CPU's then it will be incredibly likely that Apple will use the 7000 series as they will continue to update their other machines to the 7000 series later in the year.

That is a pleasant thought, thank you.
I'll have nice dreams tonight of a Mac Pro with a 7970....unless The Rapture takes me out before that.

 

[Astro7x]

Can you imagine the whining if Apple did that?

"That's it - a measily Thunderbolt port!"

And then there'd be the whining when Apple updates it in a few months with new CPUs. "How dare they? The just updated the Mac Pros! I thought I'd have the newest one for longer than that!"

----------


You have a very narrow opinion on what a professional is.

Exactly, put a minor update on a MacPro followed by a major one, and people will be pissed.

Not that I would want to switch to a PC (hackintosh anybody?)... BUT.. we have to buy a new computer before the end of the year... for tax reasons. This sucks. I was hoping to get a 12 core Mac Pro for the price of the 8 core Mac Pro. I was assuming when they upgrade, they will drop the quad core, and just go with an 8, 12 and 16 core setup. Dell sells 16 core machines RIGHT NOW. Now I'm going to be stuck with the current 8 core machine.

What do you need so many cores for anyway? When the 12 core machines came out they were so expensive I got the 8 core model, works just fine.

 

[gugy]

Well Apple is tied to Intel on this one to release a new update MacPro.
I just hope alongside new machines they bring new ACDs with matte screen. Especially a 30"+

 

[adrian.oconnor]

Not that I would want to switch to a PC (hackintosh anybody?)... BUT.. we have to buy a new computer before the end of the year... for tax reasons. This sucks. I was hoping to get a 12 core Mac Pro for the price of the 8 core Mac Pro. I was assuming when they upgrade, they will drop the quad core, and just go with an 8, 12 and 16 core setup. Dell sells 16 core machines RIGHT NOW. Now I'm going to be stuck with the current 8 core machine.

What's the Dell 16-core workstation? I didn't realise 8-core workstation CPUs were available yet (except the new AMD chips announced last week, but those don't really compete with Intel's latest chips in terms of pure performance).

Also, don't be surprised if the new entry level Mac Pros don't jump as much as you'd like -- they could still be 4 or maybe 6 core. If you want to know why, go look at Intel's price list for Xeon chips. They start at expensive and quickly go beyond ridiculous as you add cores/megahertz. The i5/i7 chips are currently vastly superior in terms of price/performance, but you don't get so much expandability (for RAM) or the ability to add two processors.