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.
Intel Debuts Xeon 5600 Series Processors Appropriate for Mac Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Lynnfield also has higher Turbo Boost when using all four cores as well when compared to Bloomfield.
Would you elaborate?
I don't know. I agree with you that it's been a few years (especially for the Cinema Displays, it's been since 2003!), but the design is flawless! Apple has developed an impressive system built around the logic/mother board and its components. The seamless design and access for the RAM, internal hard drives, fans, cooling system - it is quite impressive. As for cosmetics, maybe a few differences here and there, but normally Apple makes changes with their design when it benefits their function, not just the form. The perforated aluminum enclosure is utilized primarily for it's cooling factor(s). However, using a little black on the shell would be a nice tie in to the black utilized on the iMac's and MacBook lines.
Question: I know since the 2009 Mac Pro lineup that the memory controllers have changed on the system, thus meaning you can't drop in a new processor into the socket. Is this true with the latest Xeon based Intel processor? How much of the logic/motherboard has changed with the advent of each Intel processor since the Mac Pro's introduction a few years back?
Trust me I agree with you. People always see me as an Apple hater on here. I am not. I am just upset with the way Apple has moved. Computer are no longer what Apple does. Apple runs iTunes and the AppStore and its surrounding products. Everything else is secondary.
I think its safe to say though with the Mac Pro's it will be just like all the other models. So close to being amazing, yet so far.
well if they do, they must take all the suggestions and then make darn sure that they don't implement any of them.
I just pray for the day that OSX.x will run on any PC without hacks or hackintoshes. Imagine the possibilities.
Or maybe he is holding off on these because he know you can get flash on them.
Not to go off topic but the whole Flash debate on both ends. The "Kill Flash" and "iPad needs Flash!" people need to understand that Flash is more than just an embedded movie player. Its a computer environment which is directly dependent on the people coding the content. Flash inherently allows itself to be the beast it is on machines but also thats what allows it to be so versatile. I don't see mobile Flash being the right thing to do until a Mobile Flash environment is developed. On that same note, HTML5 will NOT kill flash because flash is more than what most people here see. If anything maybe Silverlight will.
well if they do, they must take all the suggestions and then make darn sure that they don't implement any of them.
My motto at Apple. Its the sweetest hive in town, but at the end of the day I am still just a drone.
If you actually bothered to read any of the Intel release material you'd realize that over half of the Xeon 5600 CPUs introduced today are 4 core models not 6. This isn't just about adding 2 cores across the board. Part of this is moving to 32nm from 45nm (presumably cheaper at same clock rate, core number). More virutalization support, power savings, among a few other things.
There is very good probability that only the top end MacPro config will get a 6 core. Those folks who tend to buy those also tend to have a very high density of apps that can consume more "horsepower" relatively easily.
Even for 6 cores and multithreaded it will be most so whether the I/O bandwidth has been saturated. If it hasn't ( 3 or 6 memory controllers is sufifcient) then more cores will work. MacPro have been multicore for many, many years now. If higher end apps are still purely single threaded (even for specialized high computation sections) seriously should consider dumping them. That software vendor is not responsive. Fortunately that isn't the case for the majority of them.
It won't happen because of what OSX is. OSX is the gateway to the Mac world. Once Apple licenses OSX out people won't need to buy Mac stuff. You could get your $400 USD HP and throw OSX on it. Instead of spending $1000+ on a Mac with equal or lesser specifications. OSX is the gateway drug to Macdom! Unfortunately, OSX is amazing but you also have to keep in mind... Windows Seven is pretty damn impressive.
It's interesting to see harvested 4-core Gulftown parts. Hopefully Intel will move Lynnfield and Clarksfield on down to 32nm with an optical shrink.
The CPU designer thinks in terms of the maximum clock rate, and intends the whole chip to operate at that rate all the time. In the old days, to improve battery longevity (or, alternately, to reduce electromigration or fan noise) the CPUs were set up to throttle down the clock when activity was low.
Now, because Intel can't meet its thermal guidelines and/or can't get enough current into the package and/or are having local heating issues due to their inability to properly floorplan, instead it always operates at a low clock speed, but sometimes it can "turbo boost" (some of the chip) to the clock speed that the CPU designers had intended in the first place.
When CPU designers are designing the chip, all we think about is that maximum speed. We simulate everything to that cycle time. There's no "turbo" kicking in. When we're done with the design, if we didn't make our power budget (rare) we'd have to specify a lower maximum clock rate. Intel's turned that into a "feature."
Fair enough, but aren't we moving away or redefining the definition of "computer" in the first place? It seems Apple is transitioning (slowly) to a different platform, and it looks as if Apple's ideal situation would be touch-based Pro-tools running on powerful iPad-like devices. It's quite a ways off, but I'm not surprised Apple is so hell-bent on their iPhone and iPad devices to in due course cover all the bases (or eventually having Macbook Pros look more like iPads, etc.)
And it's beyond me to figure out to what the pronouns "that"
and "this" refer.
Please type a few more words so that we can understand what you
are thinking.
Touch based Pro Tools? Why? If you are sitting behind a Console or even a Digi 003 Console a touch ProTools would mean nothing. I really think at this point in the game touch is a consumer level OMGWTFTHISISAMAZING factor.
If Apple wants to reinvent the desktop, they need to reinvent it from start to finish. Which I think they are starting to do!
There is nothing inherent to the 2009 CPUs that keeps them from being upgraded. Unless Apple sodered the CPUs to the daughterboard (which I doubt) there no reason can't drop in another CPU. You will piss away your warrantee most likely. But other than Apple not wanting aftermarket socket stuffing, there is nothing inherently prohibiting that.
The CPUs and memory being shoveled onto a daughtercard is Apple's (which other folks have had in other contexts for similar reasons) idea. It isn't inherent in the CPU/memory in a single package design. Apple did it to conceptually make getting at memory upgrades easier. Pull the daughter card out and then zero obstructions to getting to the memory slots.
That actually raises the cost of the finished product and would also be done by making box taller. It is a well reasoned compromise to hold the hieght and just the width in a more clever manner while still maintaining clean accessibility inside.
Close!
I design, maintain, and manage a large Macintosh environment for a major conglomerate (entertainment division).
So I essentially take out the trash all day.
I want your perspective on the folloowing. I've been guaranteed 2.66 GHz from my Core i5 750 at full load on all four cores. Under certain occasions depending on how those four cores are all loaded it can boost to 2.8 GHz. (Given recent BIOS updates I can force that x21 multiplier 100% of the time regardless.)
Should Intel market my processor at 2.66 GHz or 2.8 GHz?
This is disregarding the usual load balancing and Turbo Boost to increase performance for single/dual threaded applications. (3.2 GHz for those tasks.)
Risky! So far so good, though. I think what will be quite telling is how far developers can take the iPad. It looks like Apple and developers alike have big plans for it. It will be interesting to see where we'll be in two years.
So you're a sysadmin at a media company. Then I was right (except the street address).