Intel's Penryn Xeon Processors Due in November

[MacRumors]

TheRegister.co.uk reports that the first Intel Penryn chips will be formally launched on November 11th. The report apparently comes from Intel's own website for dealers.

The first of the Penryn processors will be Xeon CPUs and come in 2.00GHz, 2.33GHz, 2.50GHz, 2.66GHz, 2.83GHz, 3.00GHz and 3.16GHz speeds with 1333MHz frontside buses. The 45nm chips are expected to be Quad-Core chips with 12MB of L2 cache.

Apple currently uses Xeon (server-class) processors in their Mac Pro computers. According to our Buyer's Guide the Mac Pro was last updated to an 8-Core configuration in April of this year. However, the base Quad-core configurations have not been updated since their first release in August 2006.

The current Mac Pros offer Quad-Core configurations of 2.0GHz, 2.66GHz, and 3.0GHz (65nm, 4MB L2 Cache per Processor) and a 8-Core configuration at 3.0GHz (65nm, 8MB L2 Cache per Processor).

Article Link

 

[Eidorian]

Hopefully Apple will get them early...

I need a Mac and I want Leopard!

 

[samh004]

So the top end speed increases by only 160MHz, but it's a real quad-core, has a larger cache and is 45nm, so uses less power and generates less heat ?

 

[darwen]

I think they need to slow down their updates on the Mac Pro's. They are trying to keep the computer competitively matched in speed but they are killing the resale value with the shorter shelf life since the intel switch.

 

[Eidorian]

So the top end speed increases by only 160MHz, but it's a real quad-core, has a larger cache and is 45nm, so uses less power and generates less heat ?

Define "real quad core".

I think they need to slow down their updates on the Mac Pro's. They are trying to keep the computer competitively matched in speed but they are killing the resale value with the shorter shelf life since the intel switch.

What Mac Pro update? It's still stuck in August 2006.

 

[NewbieNerd]

Define "real quad core"..

4 cores on a single chip, as opposed to to 2 dual-core chips

 

[iSee]

Would these be a downgrade for the MacPro?
I'm not sure what the "server-class" CPUs they are currently using provide that these Penryn chips lack, if anything.

These have a bigger cache, faster clocks, and a faster front-side bus, so it's hard to imaging that these wouldn't be an upgrade, right?

 

[Eidorian]

4 cores on a single chip, as opposed to to 2 dual-core chips

It's still 2 x 2 in Penryn.

 

[jesteraver]

12 MB of cache and 1333 MHz of FSB *drools*

I can't wait to see that in a notebook / imac, feel the burn.

Lucky Mac Pro users. Also the DDR3 will be amazing.

Oh well, next Mac for me is probably 2010.

 

[Multimedia]

Tuesday November 13

I think they need to slow down their updates on the Mac Pro's. They are trying to keep the computer competitively matched in speed but they are killing the resale value with the shorter shelf life since the intel switch.

I believe that was meant with extreme sarcasm.

All signs point to Tuesday November 13. God knows I've been plenty wrong before. But there's always hope.

 

[overcast]

I think they need to slow down their updates on the Mac Pro's. They are trying to keep the computer competitively matched in speed but they are killing the resale value with the shorter shelf life since the intel switch.

I'm praying that is sarcasm.

 

[iSee]

I think they need to slow down their updates on the Mac Pro's. They are trying to keep the computer competitively matched in speed but they are killing the resale value with the shorter shelf life since the intel switch.

Wow!!!! You are a unique individual. I think you may be the only person on the planet (really, any being at all, no matter where/what they are) that thinks Mac Pro updates are coming too fast!

 

[Cuyahoga]

I think they need to slow down their updates on the Mac Pro's. They are trying to keep the computer competitively matched in speed but they are killing the resale value with the shorter shelf life since the intel switch.

Lyndsey Nagle: Do I detect a note of sarcasm?
Professor Frink: (With sarcasm detector) Are you kidding? This baby is off the charts mm-hai.
Comic Book Guy: Oh! A SARCASM DETECTOR, that's a REAL useful invention!
[Sarcasm detector explodes]

But...really?

 

[RealMcCoy]

I need Speed ;o)

I need more speed ! Hmmm ... or was it crack ? ;o)

 

[plumbingandtech]

12 MB of cache and 1333 MHz of FSB *drools*

I can't wait to see that in a notebook / imac, feel the burn.

Lucky Mac Pro users. Also the DDR3 will be amazing.

Oh well, next Mac for me is probably 2010.

I doubt this will be the final bus speed and cache if they choose to put this in a macbook pro.

Others can chime in though I may be wrong.

 

[Eidorian]

12 MB of cache and 1333 MHz of FSB *drools*

I can't wait to see that in a notebook / imac, feel the burn.

Lucky Mac Pro users. Also the DDR3 will be amazing.

Oh well, next Mac for me is probably 2010.

More like 3/6 MB, 800/1066 MHz, and DDR2/3. Right?

 

[BKKbill]

Hopefully Apple will get them early...

I need a Mac and I want Leopard!

I need an iMac and it has to have Leopard. Still waiting.

 

[Eidorian]

I need an iMac and it has to have Leopard. Still waiting.

Ugh the iMac...

 

[danielwsmithee]

It's still 2 x 2 in Penryn.

Lets clear this up a little.

The current configurations are
Quad 2 + 2
Octo (2x2)+(2x2)

The new Penryns are still (2x2)+(2x2). There are benchmarks already showing that they get 20-30% better performance at the same clock speed.

 

[BKKbill]

Ugh the iMac...

Please. We all have our needs and wants.

 

[Mac Enroe]

Just on time!

I was just about to go for a 2,66 with the ati gpu, I´m sure we'll get mac pro updates late november (or sooner). With Leopard out by then it's worth the wait!

 

[Multimedia]

No Reason To Think The Specs Will Be Less

12 MB of cache and 1333 MHz of FSB *drools*...

Lucky Mac Pro users. Also the DDR3 will be amazing.

Looks about right.

I doubt this will be the final bus speed and cache if they choose to put this in a macbook pro.

Others can chime in though I may be wrong.

How do yo think Apple is going to be able to reduce the embedded cache size and FSB speed when they get their motherboards from Intel as well?

More like 3/6 MB, 800/1066 MHz, and DDR2/3. Right?

Not! Why would you even imagine such lame down dumbing which is not even possible on the cache and certainly not the RAM either. Only the 1066 FSB might be a distant possibility. But I don't see why Apple would want/need to slow the FSB down by 1/5th - especially when the goal is to eclipse the current breed of MPs.

 

[Eidorian]

Not! Why would you even imagine such lame down dumbing which is not even possible on the cache and certainly not the RAM either. Only the 1066 FSB might be a distant possibility. But I don't see why Apple would want/need to slow the FSB down by 1/5th - especially when the goal is to eclipse the current breed of MPs.

*face palm*

Santa Rosa Refresh and Montevina

 

[Squonk]

GREAT! Just in time for those late holiday shoppers!!!

When are mobile versions supposed to be available?

 

[Multimedia]

Fast 2x2+2x2 Is Fine With Me

Lets clear this up a little.

The current configurations are
Quad 2 + 2
Octo (2x2)+(2x2)

The new Penryns are still (2x2)+(2x2). There are benchmarks already showing that they get 20-30% better performance at the same clock speed.

I don't have a problem with that. We can only receive what is bleeding edge possible guys. I'll be happy to take 20-30% better performance @ 3.16GHz x 8 cores any time they're ready with the tech. Very exciting going into 2008 like gangbusters.