Mac Pro Suitable Nehalem (Core i7) Processors Due in 1st Quarter 2009

[BenRoethig]

...at NAB Conference in Las Vegas in April??

http://www.nabshow.com/2009/attendee/contentCreation.asp

Factor in Apple's tardiness with new tech and something coinciding with NAB in April sounds very plausible. Unless, Jobs wants talk about the new architecture in a keynote.

 

[kromekat]

It'll be 2 years since I bought the first 8-core 3Ghz in April 2009, and I really hope to be able to buy it's successor around the same time - it's a great machine, and really opened a new world of power and possibilty with my 3D rendering work, particularly for GI animations, but I could still use a speed boost now - the current lineup doesn't offer me any significant gains, so I do hope that they come up with a decent spec pro machine next year! - too much time spent on domestic/consumer stuff I guess.

Adam

 

[mchalebk]

I have read much about how these processors are much more expensive than the current MacPro processors at the same clock speed. I have not, however, read anything about how the new design might affect the cost of supporting circuitry. For instance, I believe I read that the Nehalem design includes an on-chip memory controller. Presumably that would eliminate the need for an external memory controller, which might offset the higher cost of the processors somewhat.

Anybody have any feel for the possibility that the higher cost of the processor might be offset somewhat in other ways due to the advanced design of the processor?

 

[dr. shdw]

I have read much about how these processors are much more expensive than the current MacPro processors at the same clock speed. I have not, however, read anything about how the new design might affect the cost of supporting circuitry. For instance, I believe I read that the Nehalem design includes an on-chip memory controller. Presumably that would eliminate the need for an external memory controller, which might offset the higher cost of the processors somewhat.

Anybody have any feel for the possibility that the higher cost of the processor might be offset somewhat in other ways due to the advanced design of the processor?

About the same price. The boards are expensive regardless. I'm sure Apple gets massive discounts on the processors anyways.

 

[BenRoethig]

I have read much about how these processors are much more expensive than the current MacPro processors at the same clock speed. I have not, however, read anything about how the new design might affect the cost of supporting circuitry. For instance, I believe I read that the Nehalem design includes an on-chip memory controller. Presumably that would eliminate the need for an external memory controller, which might offset the higher cost of the processors somewhat.

Anybody have any feel for the possibility that the higher cost of the processor might be offset somewhat in other ways due to the advanced design of the processor?

Desktop versions are about the same as their predecessors. The xeon variants are actually going to be more expensive as it appears that adding additional quick path links to be much more expensive than adding Multi-CPU support to traditional front side bus technology.

Core i7 920 2.66ghz: $284 (Also Known as Xeon W3520)
Core 2 Q9450 2.66ghz $316

Core i7 940 2.93ghz $562 (also known as xeon W3540)
Core 2 Q9650 3.0ghz $530

Core i7 965EE 3.2ghz $999 (also known as Xeon W3570)
Core 2 Qx9770 3.2gh $1399

Xeon x5550 2.66hz $958
Xeon E5430 2.66ghz $455

Xeon x5560 2.8ghz $1172
Xeon E5452 2.8ghz $797

Xeon x5570 2.93ghz $1386
Xeon X5472 3.0ghz $958

Xeon w5580 3.2ghz $1600
Xeon x5482 $1279

 

[Chopper3]

In a professional capacity I've been trialing

these specific processors for a couple of weeks now (in another manufacturers kit). I obviously can't give too much away but I can say that no-matter how long you'll have to wait for a MP with them in it'll be worth it. Unless you work in a silent office anyway...

 

[iMacmatician]

What's the estimated time frame for the mobile versions to arrive? In about a year from now?

Q3/Q4 2009 for quad-core (Clarksfield) and January 2010 for dual-core (Auburndale).

They use more power...

Which isn't much of a problem in the iMac since it already uses 55 W dual-cores.

 

[mudenza]

They use more power...

True, though this might be more relevant to the MacBook Pros.

 

[Digital Skunk]

Could we see a new case design?!?! I am sick to death of the current look that has been around for AGES!!!!

Seriously... who thinks new case designs?

I hope not. It's very effective and works better than any Mac case that I have ever used... it's right up there with the Quicksilver G4 and the Cube, but that's as far back as I can go.

I fear a redesign of the Mac Pro case since I know Apple will undoubtedly remove FW400 and add more USB ports in it's place. Then give us only 1 FW800 port and tell us to daisy chain. 😡

OR, if they do redesign, then give it the innards of the HP Blackbird 002.

 

[coffey7]

I can't wait to have one of these new sweet running Processors.

 

[tonyl]

Could we see a new case design?!?! I am sick to death of the current look that has been around for AGES!!!!

Seriously... who thinks new case designs?

I think the current case is excellent, except it can be really dusty sometimes.

 

[emulator]

How can Apple honestly put the moniker "Pro" on a computer whose video card is two full generations out of date, with a hard drive smaller than those in $500 PCs?

apple has never put out a pro machine that used todays technology. The Pro moniker meant for the user (not the computer) who can feel special about a $4000 machine that could be had for $2000 with much better specs. 🙂

 

[Kusakun]

Apple started with the glassy glossy finish in the other computers. I believe they are going to do something in the Macpro. I hope not but... We have to wait and see.

 

[iMacmatician]

The Pro moniker meant for the user (not the computer) who can feel special about a $4000 machine that could be had for $2000 with much better specs. 🙂

Show me the workstation that beats the Mac Pro in specs for half the price. 🙂

 

[Digital Skunk]

apple has never put out a pro machine that used todays technology. The Pro moniker meant for the user (not the computer) who can feel special about a $4000 machine that could be had for $2000 with much better specs. 🙂

Show me the workstation that beats the Mac Pro in specs for half the price. 🙂

Yes please do. Not to mention that the Mac Pro isn't $4000, is it me or do most posters that want to talk price NOT have the ability to actually count/add/subtract/etc?

p.s. Please make sure you put the proper XEON chips in your specs, as well as tool-less upgrades.

 

[BenRoethig]

Yes please do. Not to mention that the Mac Pro isn't $4000, is it me or do most posters that want to talk price NOT have the ability to actually count/add/subtract/etc?

p.s. Please make sure you put the proper XEON chips in your specs, as well as tool-less upgrades.

Not everyone who considers the Mac Pro are looking a xeon workstation. A lot of them look that way because of the complete lack of a desktop in Apple's offerings.

 

[shawmanus]

Nehalem with Quick Path Interconnect and IMC should show huge improvement over harpertown when it comes to server tasks. In all Core I7 reviews, only tasks where nehalem was not impressive compared to core 2 duo have been gaming.

I wish apple would use desktop core i7 or equivalent single socket xeon processor. It has tremendous bandwidth( 25.6GB/s), quad core wit hyperthreading ( 8 virtual cores) and since it supports DDR3, Apple could have used low powered/latency to build a killer workstation. But apple would never go that road.

 

[PCMacUser]

Yes please do. Not to mention that the Mac Pro isn't $4000, is it me or do most posters that want to talk price NOT have the ability to actually count/add/subtract/etc?

p.s. Please make sure you put the proper XEON chips in your specs, as well as tool-less upgrades.

We all know that the Mac Pro has a very fast server CPU. I think the point the other poster was trying to make was that this is the only thing about it that seems to be 'pro'.

I have a great deal of certainty that my 1-2 year old homebuilt PC, which cost me about half the price of a Mac Pro, would comfortably beat the standard spec Mac Pro in every non-CPU benchmark you could throw at it. And let's face it - there's a lot of stuff people do with a computer that doesn't require a superfast CPU.

Having said that - bring on the Nehalem! 🙂 I thought about upgrading my PC with one, but that idea went out the window when I saw the price.

 

[Setmose]

How About Graphics Card Driver Support ?!

It would be great if Snow Leopard came with a new effort from Apple to ensure that the latest, hottest graphics cards will always be supported on both OS X and Windows. Apple doesn't have to do more than that to reach out to gamers.

 

[kaks]

It would be great if Snow Leopard came with a new effort from Apple to ensure that the latest, hottest graphics cards will always be supported on both OS X and Windows. Apple doesn't have to do more than that to reach out to gamers.

Well, i dont think its that hard to support all the graphics cards, as Nvidia and ATI come up with just a single download for all their graphics card. Meaning (well at least with what i remember from nvidia) just download their dominator drivers for any card and install them.

Not to mention you get to buy any card you want at any price you find it. So they would stop limiting and charging you an arm and a leg for one. But they wont do it....🙂

 

[Umbongo]

Well, i dont think its that hard to support all the graphics cards, as Nvidia and ATI come up with just a single download for all their graphics card. Meaning (well at least with what i remember from nvidia) just download their dominator drivers for any card and install them.

Not to mention you get to buy any card you want at any price you find it. So they would stop limiting and charging you an arm and a leg for one. But they wont do it....🙂

They won't do it because the market is very, very small and would require full time engineers to develop OSX drivers and they don't need to offer every graphics card out there to sell Mac Pros.

 

[diamond.g]

I think the Mac Pro is a pretty sweet rig, but I still don't understand the downside to offering a single socket version with the latest Nehalem, it would still be seen as 8 cores (and perform like one in most cases). Plus when thy do finally move to the DP board they can call the system a 16 "core" system (since that is probably how OS X would see it).


Does anyone know how OS X handles Hyperthreading?

 

[Digital Skunk]

Not everyone who considers the Mac Pro are looking a xeon workstation. A lot of them look that way because of the complete lack of a desktop in Apple's offerings.

Very true, but matching/besting the Mac Pro spec for spec at half the price is what he said.

Apple's tower lineup IMHO is non existent for the average user. Nothing wrong with the iMac if it suits your needs, but when it comes to longevity and upgradeability..... not so much.

I have a great deal of certainty that my 1-2 year old homebuilt PC, which cost me about half the price of a Mac Pro, would comfortably beat the standard spec Mac Pro in every non-CPU benchmark you could throw at it. And let's face it - there's a lot of stuff people do with a computer that doesn't require a superfast CPU.

Of course. Anyone considering the Mac Pro and not looking for CPU performance is wasting their cash. Unless you are coding/decoding video and working with CPU intensive/RAM hogging tasks the Mac Pro is simply over kill.

Other than that you'll want it for workstation class graphics at a workstation class price. The tower is worth the expensive price tag (when it's up to date) and isn't bested easily, let alone at half the price spec for spec.

The best thing Apple can do for the Pro user is offer a barebones Mac Pro. Just give me the GFX card and motherboard with CPUs in it and let me stuff it with HDD, RAM, Optical, and so forth. And on the consumer end, offer a Mac Pro with desktop CPUs and not the expensive server class ones.

 

[BenRoethig]

I think the Mac Pro is a pretty sweet rig, but I still don't understand the downside to offering a single socket version with the latest Nehalem, it would still be seen as 8 cores (and perform like one in most cases). Plus when thy do finally move to the DP board they can call the system a 16 "core" system (since that is probably how OS X would see it).

The downside is that it messes up Apple's nice and tidy product arraignment where the iMac handles all the users in the $1000-$2000 range. Anyone who isn't well served by the iMac is obviously making a full length feature film and needs a $2300+ workstation anyhow.

Does anyone know how OS X handles Hyperthreading?

That is the question. I don't honestly know because its never been used with a CPU with HT.

Very true, but matching/besting the Mac Pro spec for spec at half the price is what he said.

Apple's tower lineup IMHO is non existent for the average user. Nothing wrong with the iMac if it suits your needs, but when it comes to longevity and upgradeability..... not so much.

Ah, yes. The iMac reminds me of its limitations daily. And I wouldn't exactly call the the ones looking for a tower average, the average user is already pretty well served. The above average user aka prosumer is the one who's hurting. Apple seems to think that you're either just checking your email or George Lucas.

 

[mjteix]

Does anyone know how OS X handles Hyperthreading?

That is the question. I don't honestly know because its never been used with a CPU with HT.

On the contrary, Apple's original Intel-based Dev Transition Kit used a 3.6GHz Pentium 4 with Hyperthreading enabled.