Bring on WWDC and price-cuts! Or so we hope.
yes we do! and maybe one day i'll upgrade my mac pro?
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 Slashing Prices on Xeon Quad Core (Clovertown) Processors
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
yes we do! and maybe one day i'll upgrade my mac pro?
I completely agree but an Apple compter is a premium brand and because of this is stil more expensive than a whitebox system but comparing it to Dell, HP and Compaq Apple has made progress in selling a product that is cost competitive and full of value added features which the other system do not have (e.g. Mac OSX, iLife, etc).
I agree with the Mac vs the Dell option the reason I ended up buying a 20" iMac was for the reason it was nearly AU$600 cheaper than a similar spect Dell.
The main point I was trying to make that event though there has been significant a drop in overall Mac prices after the Intel transition I doubt with Intel dropping the price of it's Xeons there's going to be very little chance that Apple will pass these saving onto the general public. According to serveral internet sources (Thinksecrets being one) Apple is already getting a very decent discount across the board for using Intel.
Yet they're still paying *more* for the cpu's than they used to during the PPC era. Still, we don't know this for sure...
Which means Apple will keep their prices the same until they upgrade their machines with entirely new processors.
Yes, most probably. Euro prices *might* drop, because of the currency exchange ratio...
It's bulk price, per 1.000 ...
But generally prices seem to hover around bulk prices in the retail market anyway.
Not much will happen in the Apple line until there are faster processors released to replace the current line. Then you can probably buy the current line at a cheaper blow out price or really cheap refurbs.. but even that will only last so long unless then Apple enstates a new cheaper line. Either way wont happen until new processors replace the current ones at the current price point first.
So the real question is .. when is Intel releasesing NEW processors for new Mac Pros? Unless the whole line becomes 8 core at next revision? And maybe the bottom line will become 2.6 dual. I guess a few things could happen.
So the real question is .. when is Intel releasesing NEW processors for new Mac Pros? Unless the whole line becomes 8 core at next revision? And maybe the bottom line will become 2.6 dual. I guess a few things could happen.
It would be nothing like the PPC->x86 transition.
There would probably be some minor low level (at device driver or below) changes necessary to support subtle differences between the chips and chipsets.
It would be on the order of the differences between an ImacIntel and a MacIntel Pro - almost all the codes the same, but you need a few tweaks to properly support low level differences.
To properly support some of the architectural differences between the chips takes more effort, but that is more of a performance tuning issue than a "works correctly" issue.
When a CPU boots, it starts up in a legacy mode that's compatible with early systems (for example, boot a DOS floppy on an 8-core Clovertown system). The fancy stuff doesn't turn on until the OS or secondary/tertiary boot loaders specifically enable the features. Those people "running" hacked OSX on AMDs aren't getting the full performance that's possible from the chips.
There absolutely are single-socket Xeons.
A "Xeon" is whatever Intel feels like putting the "Xeon" marketing label on - therefore the Xeon 3000 series are absolutely single socket Xeons.
There are no single socket variants of Woodcrests or Clovertowns, and no dual socket variants of Conroe and Kentsfield - but if Intel calls it a "Xeon" then it's a "Xeon".
________________
In other words, "Xeon" is a meaningless name - so any argument about what is or is not a true Xeon is kind of pointless .
A "Xeon" is whatever Intel feels like putting the "Xeon" marketing label on - therefore the Xeon 3000 series are absolutely single socket Xeons.
There are no single socket variants of Woodcrests or Clovertowns, and no dual socket variants of Conroe and Kentsfield - but if Intel calls it a "Xeon" then it's a "Xeon".
________________
In other words, "Xeon" is a meaningless name - so any argument about what is or is not a true Xeon is kind of pointless
.
Just like they have to redo Windows to run on AMD CPUs, right?
Actually, there's a lot of code in Windows that has been redone for AMD chips.
That whole bizarre HyperTransport serial bus NUMA memory stuff doesn't work well without a lot of extra code.
Also, Intel VT and AMD-V are different, so support for the hardware virtualization mode has some different code paths depending on whether it's an Intel or AMD chip.
In addition, support for MMX/SSE/3DNOW! and other incompatible extensions are chip-specific.
Apple's Mac Pro is the real price point winner when compared to similar systems from Dell and others (even if focus just on hardware).
Apple seldom drops prices on a particular product and only does so if they cannot provide a system bump in a reasonable timeframe (think PPC G4 days). Usually Apple simply gives you better technology or more "things" (memory, disk, etc.) at the existing price point. Doing price drops on existing and then bringing out new stuff at a higher price point doesn't make sense for Apples business model and limited product lines. It is better for them to keep products at nearly fixed pricing and build products that can match that price point given the technology available at the time.
EDIT:
I should better state what I meant in this sentence... dropping prices on existing products as they age doesn't really fit with Apple model instead the keep product prices constant and periodically they update the product family with new technology, etc. keeping the same price points (for minor updates they replace the top end with a new top end model at the same price point and then shift the existing ones down a price point dropping the old low end model).
So folks expecting Apple to drop prices on existing models... it isn't going to happen like you often see from other vendors (who are more directly competing against each other in a commodity market). Apple is going to bring in new technology across the whole family when the component cost and availability allows for it and/or bring in a new top end model at the price point of the existing top end and shift the other models down one in the price point range.
A "Xeon" is whatever Intel feels like putting the "Xeon" marketing label on - therefore the Xeon 3000 series are absolutely single socket Xeons.
There are no single socket variants of Woodcrests or Clovertowns, and no dual socket variants of Conroe and Kentsfield - but if Intel calls it a "Xeon" then it's a "Xeon".
In other words, "Xeon" is a meaningless name - so any argument about what is or is not a true Xeon is kind of pointless
Intel could have also easily made a single socket 771 chipset for the 5000 xeon series. They choose not to because they didn't see a point in doing, so. Those who needed such a machine would choose a Core 2 Duo and P965/975x combo. The again they didn't count on Apple eccentricities.
I'm assuming that the X3220 is the same as the Q6600 (also a Kentsfield), which is dropping in price to $266 on July 22 when the Q6700 is released.
I'm planning on building something around that time (hopefully); nice Q6600 system with 4 gigs of ram, many other bells and whistles + a 22" LCD for $1300...1/2 the price of a 2.6 Mac Pro. As much as I want the Mac Pro...I'd much rather save the $$.
Apple will never drop the base price, they will hopefully bump the specs of the base or offer some better BTO options. Instead of a Quad 2.66 maybe we will get a SS-8 core 2.66, with at least a 320, 250 gig Apple come on.
If anything they keep trying to get it higher. It's already up $900 since the G4 days.
False. The RAM prices have dropped by roughly half of what they charged a year ago (for the macbook line anyway). The baseline Macbook is now $999 before taxes on the student site, while having a faster processor and twice the standard RAM.
Personally I still hope...
Personally I hope that Apple does the following in the near future...
1) Keep the Mac Mini about the same (minor speed bump, etc.) and ideally move its price point to start at $499 (currently $599).
2) Keep the iMac about the same style of kit with an update to the new laptop/small-form-factor chipset and at the same price points.
3) Bring out a "mini" tower with 2 PCIe slots (16 lane and at least 8 lane), and dual core (possibly only dual), one drive bay, one optical bay, and use desktop class chipset and processors. Price it starting around 1,300 or even maybe 1,500 with a few models or follow the BTO paradigm of the Mac Pro.
4) Keep the existing Mac Pro price points but add more BTO options (processor options, video options (likely dependent on Leopard), etc.)
Item 3 could generate a good up sell from the iMac to the mini tower of course it would have negative affect of the Mac Pro but by limiting the mini tower or pricing it high enough it would still push folks to buy Mac Pros.
I know if item 3 happened that around here we wold purchase 2x the number of Macs we currently do given that the iMac and Mac mini (mini is close but not good enough) just doesn't serve our needs and the Mac Pro is priced just high enough to limit purchasing the Mac Pro as a general developer system or second/third developer system.... however the Mac Pro is well priced for a workstation class developer system which we do purchase for many developers (aka as their main system).
Personally I hope that Apple does the following in the near future...
1) Keep the Mac Mini about the same (minor speed bump, etc.) and ideally move its price point to start at $499 (currently $599).
2) Keep the iMac about the same style of kit with an update to the new laptop/small-form-factor chipset and at the same price points.
3) Bring out a "mini" tower with 2 PCIe slots (16 lane and at least 8 lane), and dual core (possibly only dual), one drive bay, one optical bay, and use desktop class chipset and processors. Price it starting around 1,300 or even maybe 1,500 with a few models or follow the BTO paradigm of the Mac Pro.
4) Keep the existing Mac Pro price points but add more BTO options (processor options, video options (likely dependent on Leopard), etc.)
Item 3 could generate a good up sell from the iMac to the mini tower of course it would have negative affect of the Mac Pro but by limiting the mini tower or pricing it high enough it would still push folks to buy Mac Pros.
I know if item 3 happened that around here we wold purchase 2x the number of Macs we currently do given that the iMac and Mac mini (mini is close but not good enough) just doesn't serve our needs and the Mac Pro is priced just high enough to limit purchasing the Mac Pro as a general developer system or second/third developer system.... however the Mac Pro is well priced for a workstation class developer system which we do purchase for many developers (aka as their main system).
I do like #3 - and always have. I think Apple can sell a lot more boxes if they offer a 'headless iMac' or 'mini tower' to cater to those who want more power than a Mac mini, more flexibility on monitor size than the iMac offering but not wanting t folk ove the big bucks for a Mac Pro. I know hte 'Prosumer' argument has been bouncing around for a while - but I do see a gap in the Mac product line that could be filled with a mid-range tower.
I can hope, can't I....?
I know there are plenty of people out there would would STILL go for a Mac Pro, regardless of the existence of a midrange prosumer model, so it's not like it's completely threatened.
Remember that $10k Mac Pro system that was supposed to materialize with the non-existent FCP HD Extreme 'thinksecret' speculated on for NAB?
Maybe they just got confused with which Tuesday/which rumors...
4.7Ghz IBM Power6, would have made a nice $10K Mac Pro
Due to go on sale June 6th (just in time for that 'one last thing' annoucement at WWDC) IBM's POWER6 flies the coop at 4.7GHz
Ah, this is like old times with the stagnant G4 "supercomputer", lol.
Meanwhile for about the price of an Octo MacPro, you can get a watercooled/tricked-out pulsating LED, dual highend GPU, 3.73Ghz supergameboy Dell:
http://www.electronista.com/articles/07/05/22/dell.xps.720.h2c/
Back to the old Ghz wars, w00t!
I'm just waiting for that new era mantra from Steve-0, 'and one more other last thing' at WWDC, the Apple exclusive early release of Intel's 2.4Ghz quad 45nm Peyryn CPU, on the early release updated for Pey-otie-ryn Santa Rosa platform- Macbook Pro with 2k res. LED backlight...wicked bright pulsating colors screen?
Intel price list?
Where do you find this information? I'd like to have a reliable source for current CPU prices.
Where do you find this information? I'd like to have a reliable source for current CPU prices.
I don't think you can call it a "premium" brand. It would be a premium brand if, for the same setup, the cost was reasonably greater. But, we know that similarly setup Windows machines cost about the same, the crucial point being that if we add the features that are on the Mac, we end up paying the same amount. The premium only exists when a particular computer is a great deal more expensive than several other models with the same stats.
As for Intel's prices, Apple may not lower the price of their hardware, but if they bundle more software, give us more RAM, HD space, better Superdrives, whatever, then Apple is passing on some benefit to its customers. It doesn't have to come in the form of cheaper hardware, it can come in the form of a better bundled package.
That was true a few months ago but not today. Right now you can get a "mainstream" Santa Rosa laptop from Lenovo for the same price as a MacBook, with options for discrete graphics and up to 4 GB memory. I don't necessarily have a problem with Apple's strategy since nobody's forcing me to switch to Mac. Apple will still get my money with the gadgets as long as they're compatible with Windows. I still want Apple to succeed for the sake of competition but I just won't fall for the halo crap.