Mac Pro Announced

[Cowinacape]

FYI

Called Kingston to see if a specific memory module worked, and they indicated they do have a specific MacPro kit avaialbe (1Gig and 2Gig). The part numbers are:

KTA-MP667K2/1G KTA-MP667K2/2G

(The MP = Mac Pro)

Just thought you all would like to know.

NOTE: So far I only find one place that carry's them:
http://www.neutronexpress.com/prod....O_DESKTOP_APPLE_XSERVE_XEON_LIFETIME_WARRANTY

Kimo

For my fellow Canucks, this ram also seems to be available north of the border (US pricing though) a F.Y.I.

http://www.neutroncanada.com/prod.cfm/467490/KINGSTON/KTA-MP667K2/1G

Thanks to kbonnel for the original link!

 

[kbonnel]

I love mine

You have some valid points, but some I don't think are correct. Such as number 6. They didn't increase the price; the $2500 is actually the middle system, which has always been $2500. You have the option of using the 2.0Ghz cpu's, which lowers the cost. Also, the $2500 system, from the benchmarks out there right now, is faster than the previous top of the line Quad G5, so you are actually getting more for your money, and even more for your money if you were to compare it too the last middle of the range G5. (which is how technology works, the longer you wait, the more you get for you dough).

The whole Photoshop comparison is crap, as everybody knows that the current CS2/Photoshop are no compiled for Intel CPU's. This isn't Apples fault. If you need serious Photoshop work, then stick with the Quad G5, or build a window's box. Don't compare the new Mac Pro to a bunch of cheaper AMD's just because it can't run Photoshop as fast. (I am not bashing AMD, as I love their CPU's, and have a couple of them)

The video card isn't the best, but it is more than enough for a workstation machine where you don't need GPU power. If you need a workstation to perform GPU intensive work, Apple does provide available, albeit limited, video options. I didn't buy my Mac Pro to play games, as there aren't any out there that I want to play right now. When games become more popular, then I am sure GPU's will follow.

Of course, these are my opinions

Kimo

It's finally here...

Pros

1. Same case as old one (nice visually)
2. Quad processors across the line
3. 4 hard drives vs 2
4. 2 optical drives vs 1
5. a couple more I/O ports

Cons

1. Any dimwit knows the last 3 items should have been in the G5 design years ago
2. The Xeon CPU's are designed for servers not workstations - marginal performance improvement for way more $$$
3. Windows graphics cards won't work in it even though it is an Intel M/B - tell me that is not a deliberate abuse to OSX supporters.
4. They want you to pay $2,500 for a computer with a $50 graphics card?
5. Your choice of graphics cards are the $50 one or a $500 one or a $1,500 one. There are zillions of great cards between $50 and $500 available to PC users.
6. They increased the base price from $2,000 to $2,500. The whole rest of the world has dramatically reduced prices in the same time frame.
7. The only other choice in the product line is a laptop that you have to bolt to a desk (iMac) or a toy (Mac Mini) - complete void in the product line for the average power user. Neither of these other slugs is expandable.
8. Only has PCI-Express slots - not sure if regular PCI cards will work, I have some expensive PCI cards that do video conversion,SCSI etc.

The new Power Mac is probably great for people that render videos for a living on tight deadlines. Not sure who else it is intended for, it is way over priced for any other application.

And finally, on the posted tests to date, it only does Photoshop (under Rosetta) at the same speed as the old dual G5. i guess that there is some hope when PS is universal though. I can build an AMD Dual CPU PC that will kill this thing in Photoshop for about $500. Hell, I can build 5 of them for the price of the base unit Mac Pro.

My conclusion, Apple is out to lunch, I would feel really stupid buying one of these. They have no computer for the average power user.

 

[kbonnel]

For my fellow Canucks, this ram also seems to be available north of the border (US pricing though) a F.Y.I.

http://www.neutroncanada.com/prod.cfm/467490/KINGSTON/KTA-MP667K2/1G

Thanks to kbonnel for the original link!

If anybody finds out if they have them in stock, please post. I called neutron this morning, and they weren't sure. I don't think they do, as Kingston indicated that they are not yet released, and still in development/research.

I also called Crucial about the memory previously listed, and they indicated that they pulled the memory off the website, as their heatsinks are not "apple certified", or something like that. They have not ETA.

And to make matters worse, Apple indicated that memory won't be shipping for a week if you order it through them!!!!

Kimo

 

[Cowinacape]

For those still playing along with the ram game at home, CanadaRam is advertising the new ram on their site now

http://canadaram.com/macram.html

$311.00 for 2x512 - Available now (?)
$479.00 for 2x1gig - In stock Aug. 12th
$1006.00 for 2x2gig - Taking orders

All in CDN $

No, I do not have any connection to Canadaram.

 

[bloodycape]

It's finally here...
My conclusion, Apple is out to lunch, I would feel really stupid buying one of these. They have no computer for the average power user.

I think you might be wrong. I think Apple will bring a tower with a the Core 2 Duo to fill the gap.

Can anyone tell me how good the Quadro is and if it really cost $1,500 retail or if that is the price apple is charging? Besides 512mb of GFX memory doesn't always mean it is better. Many windows gamers and video people will tell you, that a 256mb card with a higher gpu clock will give you better performance and fps than a 512mb with a lower clock.

 

[kbonnel]

FYI

http://www.datamem.com has the 512MB Dimms in stock for $125, and they said they would be getting the 1GB sticks in tomorrow (8/11). The 1GB sticks are $189.

I ordered the 1GB kit (2x512), so hopefully that will be enough. If not, then crap, guess I will have to buy more.

Kimo

 

[artpease]

UPDATE on Crucial Memory!

macenforcer,
Well, after all that fuss last night about the Mac Pro Crucial P/N for the 2x1gb Kit being CT576475, I received my shipping notice and invoice and they are shipping me CT2KIT12872AF667.

So as you said, "It is the SAME exact memory".

Of course, we'll see what shows up in the box...

UPDATE
Just received this memory. Because it looked so different than Apple, I rechecked Crucial website and Mac Pro memory is no longer available. I called Crucial Tech Support and asked if it was OK to install.

THEY SAID NO! and gave me an RMA.

It also appears that Kingston has pulled their part number also.

I had called RamJet on Monday after the announcement and they said it would be next week before they would have any information.

 

[Grokgod]

Aha! Crucial pulled the memory because it didnt meet Apple specs!

Wow, So I DID make the right choice by getting the 2 gigs of ram with my MacPro when I ordered and there so many that said NO.

This way I get 2 gigs so I acan get some work done and be able to wait till Crucial gets their stuff together and gets Apple approved!

I wonder who is making Apple's ram for the MAcpros then?

 

[aswitcher]

It's finally here...

My conclusion, Apple is out to lunch, I would feel really stupid buying one of these. They have no computer for the average power user.

I agree in that Apple have widened the Gap between Mini and Pro. I think thats deliberate to allow them to slot a Core 2 Duo machine in.

If they weren't going to do that then they should have produce a Core 2Duo model of the Pro for the low end or a single Xeon model like they bhad for the early part of their G5 line.

I hope this machine will appear at Paris, which is far enough away to get production up on the C2D half sized model.

 

[Eidorian]

I agree in that Apple have widened the Gap between Mini and Pro. I think thats deliberate to allow them to slot a Core 2 Duo machine in.

If they weren't going to do that then they should have produce a Core 2Duo model of the Pro for the low end or a single Xeon model like they bhad for the early part of their G5 line.

I hope this machine will appear at Paris, which is far enough away to get production up on the C2D half sized model.

That or Apple will just put Merom into the iMac and call it a day...

 

[aswitcher]

That or Apple will just put Merom into the iMac and call it a day...

Which would be disappoiting because;

I want dual HDDs - especially now we have Time Machine coming.
I want to run my LCDTV - much better for me to have a headless Mac for that.
I want to run my sound through my TV or surround sound not my Mac.
I want 4 ram slots for cheaper ram or more ram latter for work horse studd like HD video etc.
I want to be able to upgrade to Bluray without having to buy a new machine.
Slots give me better options for HDTV recording.

and

I think other people want to source their own video cards and upgrade them easily.
Replace HDDs with 10,000rpm ones.
Use slots for other more fringe things.

 

[artpease]

Aha! Crucial pulled the memory because it didnt meet Apple specs!

Wow, So I DID make the right choice by getting the 2 gigs of ram with my MacPro when I ordered and there so many that said NO.

This way I get 2 gigs so I acan get some work done and be able to wait till Crucial gets their stuff together and gets Apple approved!

I said no because I didn't want (4) 512s...I wish I had them now!

 

[milo]

Architechture was never the issue, Device drivers are.

Actually, architecture was an issue with previous macs, don't know if it still is. For a while, mac cards needed to be physically different. In more recent generations, the cards could usually be the same but usually had different firmware. Hopefully with the new intel systems that won't even be necessary.

2. The Xeon CPU's are designed for servers not workstations - marginal performance improvement for way more $$$

The xeon is what allows four cores. Conroe would be cheaper but only two cores, probably slower than a quad G5. Four cores instead of two is WAY more than a marginal improvement, it approaches double the speed if your app is ready for it.

3. Windows graphics cards won't work in it even though it is an Intel M/B - tell me that is not a deliberate abuse to OSX supporters.

Is that just speculation or has it been confirmed? And if they don't work, is that a permanent situation or just a delay on drivers?

4. They want you to pay $2,500 for a computer with a $50 graphics card?

It's all about BTO. That's just the base model, get whatever you want. And there's no jump from 50 to 500, they have cards that are $150 and $300 upgrades.

6. They increased the base price from $2,000 to $2,500. The whole rest of the world has dramatically reduced prices in the same time frame.

That's the price of the stock model. You can take it down to $2124 if you want to go cheaper, which I believe is about what the last base model cost (it was more than $1999). Not to mention that for the same price you're getting a quad instead of a dual. That's a damn good deal. And if you price out quad PC's, you're looking at the same price range as well - Dell hasn't dramatically reduced prices for their xeon quads.

I agree that the product line could use a midrange product for people with moderate power needs.

The new Power Mac is probably great for people that render videos for a living on tight deadlines. Not sure who else it is intended for, it is way over priced for any other application.

Audio and music guys will go nuts for this box, it's a dream come true. But yeah, it's a premium product. Nobody's going to buy one to surf the web.

And of course rosetta is slow. This box isn't for people who are still waiting for universal apps. Photoshop users might as well wait to upgrade until it's native, by then there will probably be an even faster machine.

My conclusion, Apple is out to lunch, I would feel really stupid buying one of these. They have no computer for the average power user.

Apple is out to lunch because it's not the machine for YOU? This is an absolutely killer machine for pro users who want a ton of power. I hope that an additional midrange model is on the way. I'm optimistic they'll have a cheap midtower with conroe fairly soon.


Here's a benchmark question - does the xeon 2.0 beat the G5 quad on universal benchmarks? Apologies if that's already been posted.

 

[combatcolin]

If you want a normal computer to which you attach the display of your choice from Apple then theres either the very cheap and limited Mac Mini or the insanely powerful and "How Much??" Mac Pro.

So yes, Apple is out to Lunch.

I don't want an iMac and i don't want a bloody Laptop as a desktop machine.

I want an affordable, expandable and upgradable Mac.

And as Apple can't sell me one im having to self build a Core Duo 2 PC system.

Not what a really want to do, but Apple have nothing to offer me.

I am no longer effected by the "Reality Force Field", my mortage, bills and debt come 1st.

 

[aswitcher]

Be nice if they also put in one of thos great upscaling DVD chips, to upsacel DVD to 720p/1080p.

 

[MacsRgr8]

If you want a normal computer to which you attach the display of your choice from Apple then theres either the very cheap and limited Mac Mini or the insanely powerful and "How Much??" Mac Pro.

So yes, Apple is out to Lunch.

I don't want an iMac and i don't want a bloody Laptop as a desktop machine.

I want an affordable, expandable and upgradable Mac.

And as Apple can't sell me one im having to self build a Core Duo 2 PC system.

Not what a really want to do, but Apple have nothing to offer me.

I am no longer effected by the "Reality Force Field", my mortage, bills and debt come 1st.

Yep, I totally agree.
I think it's great that the top-end is a Quad. Also for the mid-level having a Quad is fine with me.
But I really miss a Conroe Desktop Mac.

Why couldn't Apple have built a Core 2 Duo Conroe 2.66 GHz?

Why a lower-clocked Quad instead of a higher clocked Dual?

If you really need 4 cores, you'll buy a high-end Mac Pro anyway.
But most of us who love a fast Mac at home with a 23" ACD attached to it, now have to get a Quad without hardly ever using it. Having a higher clocked Dual would have been a faster Mac in the home-user experience, and probably very affordable too.

 

[Eidorian]

Which would be disappoiting because;

I want dual HDDs - especially now we have Time Machine coming.
I want to run my LCDTV - much better for me to have a headless Mac for that.
I want to run my sound through my TV or surround sound not my Mac.
I want 4 ram slots for cheaper ram or more ram latter for work horse studd like HD video etc.
I want to be able to upgrade to Bluray without having to buy a new machine.
Slots give me better options for HDTV recording.

and

I think other people want to source their own video cards and upgrade them easily.
Replace HDDs with 10,000rpm ones.
Use slots for other more fringe things.

We all want that but I doubt Apple is going to do it. Merom is an easy choice for the iMac. Conroe is one as well. It's just much easier to go with Merom due to socket compatibility.

 

[rickag]

If you want a normal computer to which you attach the display of your choice from Apple then theres either the very cheap and limited Mac Mini or the insanely powerful and "How Much??" Mac Pro.

So yes, Apple is out to Lunch.

I don't want an iMac and i don't want a bloody Laptop as a desktop machine.

I want an affordable, expandable and upgradable Mac.

And as Apple can't sell me one im having to self build a Core Duo 2 PC system.

Not what a really want to do, but Apple have nothing to offer me.

I am no longer effected by the "Reality Force Field", my mortage, bills and debt come 1st.

It's nice to see the xMac topic lives on. Hopefully, some day Apple will respond.

 

[BenRoethig]

If you want a normal computer to which you attach the display of your choice from Apple then theres either the very cheap and limited Mac Mini or the insanely powerful and "How Much??" Mac Pro.

So yes, Apple is out to Lunch.

I don't want an iMac and i don't want a bloody Laptop as a desktop machine.

I want an affordable, expandable and upgradable Mac.

And as Apple can't sell me one im having to self build a Core Duo 2 PC system.

Not what a really want to do, but Apple have nothing to offer me.

I am no longer effected by the "Reality Force Field", my mortage, bills and debt come 1st.

I agree 100%. Apple could make such a machine by simply putting a conroe in the existing mac pro case. Lets look at the price difference here:
5000x $500
P965: $150

2x 2.0ghz Xeon $632
Core 2 Duo E6400 $224


That's not even taking into account Apple's expensive memory. Apple could make an affordable 2.1ghz Conroe MacPro while keeping similar margins easily for $1299.

 

[milo]

If you want a normal computer to which you attach the display of your choice from Apple then theres either the very cheap and limited Mac Mini or the insanely powerful and "How Much??" Mac Pro.

I agree that apple needs a midrange machine.

But you assume that apple won't release this machine in the future (if you think about it, it wouldn't really make sense to release it at the same time as the pro). I'll bet they do. Time will tell.

I agree 100%. Apple could make such a machine by simply putting a conroe in the existing mac pro case.

But they might as well make a smaller case, even cheaper, with a bit less expansion. They need to have a completely different motherboard anyway. I'd love to see the midrange box be as affordable as possible, and while a Pro in the big case would save some money, an economy case would save more.

 

[combatcolin]

I agree that apple needs a midrange machine.

But you assume that apple won't release this machine in the future (if you think about it, it wouldn't really make sense to release it at the same time as the pro). I'll bet they do. Time will tell.

COMBATCOLIN CAN PREDICT THE FUTURE!!

I can, i really can!



Just wait until the day after i shell out £500 on a self-build Core Duo 2 PC and then see what some black polo-shirted neo hippie who lives a million miles from the UK where it never rains decides to release at the same price as the iMacs.

It will happen!

 

[elsiedee]

It's all about BTO. That's just the base model, get whatever you want. And there's no jump from 50 to 500, they have cards that are $150 and $300 upgrades.

No, they don't. The base card is a NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT. For $150 you can get 2 of them. For $300 you can get 3 of them. But to get a different card, the ATI Radeon X1900 XT, you have to spend $350. There's no mid-range offering.

 

[JoshRtek]

Just got my Mac Pro by Fedex today. Filled the three open drive bays with some old Western Digital SATA-I 250 gig drives. Apparently you can software-RAID 0 an odd number of drives...

Also took my NEC ND-3500 DVD+-RW drive in the second optical slot; works fine...

The standard 1.0 gig of RAM could be better...going to get some more once I can afford to. Still haven't gotten around to testing speed yet...

 

[gnasher729]

I agree 100%. Apple could make such a machine by simply putting a conroe in the existing mac pro case.

No they couldn't. There is a huge difference in the design of a motherboard for Conroe and for Woodcrest. For starters, Conroe cannot handle the memory chips used by Woodcrest.

 

[BenRoethig]

No they couldn't. There is a huge difference in the design of a motherboard for Conroe and for Woodcrest. For starters, Conroe cannot handle the memory chips used by Woodcrest.

4 regular DIMM slots could easily fit where those risers are.