Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac Pro to Get 6-Core Xeon Gulftown Processor in 2010?

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
70,363
41,967


HardMac reports that Polish website PCLab prematurely leaked performance numbers on Intel's upcoming Xeon Gulftown (Core i9). The results have since been pulled but is summarized by HardMac:
First figures indicate that this CPU is very promising. At equivalent clock speed, it is 50% faster than the corresponding quad core Xeon for parallel tasks. Despite having 50% more transistors, the CPU strongly benefits from 32-nm engraving as it drains 50% less power in idle mode and 10% less in full loading mode.
Click to expand...
According to their sources, Apple is planning on using the Gulftown processor in a future Mac Pro revision due in early 2010. When placed in a dual-processor configuration, this would give the Mac Pro 12 physical and 24 logical cores. Such massively multi-core designs have been expected for some time with under-the-hood changes in Snow Leopard specifically preparing for such a possibility.

The use of the high-end Gulftown processor in the Mac Pros make more sense now that we've seen Apple using the Core i7 processors in the iMacs. Benchmarks have shown that the performance of these high-end iMac rivals that of the entry level Mac Pros which cost considerably more. The use of Gulftown would presumably reestablish a larger performance gap between Apple's consumer and professional desktop computers.

Article Link: Mac Pro to Get 6-Core Xeon Gulftown Processor in 2010?
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/28/mac-pro-to-get-6-core-xeon-gulftown-processor-in-2010/
I hope they some models that feel like they are a good deal.

The 09 models never really felt right price to perfomance wise.

Hope we get something like the 08 pricing when we got the octocore for a steal.
 
I'll be the first to say it: I'd be really happy with an i7 Baby Mac Pro, if it actually brought the cost of a Mac Pro down to $2000.
 
Mac Pro to Get 6-Core Xeon Gulftown Processor in 2010?

Ya think?

What else were they going to do, switch to AMD? :rolleyes:
 
For a long time I have been using laptops now, but with an Apple Slate on the horizon I am re-thinking by screens. I think a tablet and a desktop Mac would make a very good setup. With the tablet you can do all the computing where no serious power is required e.g. surfing, emails and with a MacPro video and pictures editiing.
 
MacRumors said:
this would give the Mac Pro 12 physical and 24 logical cores.
Click to expand...

That would be a dream machine for certain programs. It has been coming out how much faster the iMac is now that it has moved on from the Core 2 duo, a rather outdated chip now. This is like 3 iMacs in one.
 
xDYLANx said:
Now all we need are apps that utilize the full power of all these silly cores. :)
Click to expand...

The Applications that need it already do support multiple cores. For example Logic can us any number of cores. So can Compresser, Final Cut can even use processors that are on another Mac via the network.

And then Mac OS X itself runs many processes and each of these can be on it's own core.
 
This is the news I've been waiting for! i7 was a great update for the Pro, but the CPU world has been having some fast changes thrown at us this past year.
 
I work on computer simulations. Anybody knowledgeable to answer the following?

Assuming that each computer simulation requires Y GB. The new MacPro should be able to run 24 different scenario of simulations. To make things run smoothly, it will require 24*Y GB. Am I right?

How the performance will be running the 24 different simulations on 24 single core computers (each with Y GB + required RAM for the OS) vs. that of a MacPro with (24*Y GB + required RAM for the OS)?
 
hajime said:
I work on computer simulations. Anybody knowledgeable to answer the following?

Assuming that each computer simulation requires Y GB. The new MacPro should be able to run 24 different scenario of simulations. To make things run smoothly, it will require 24*Y GB. Am I right?

How the performance will be running the 24 different simulations on 24 single core computers (each with Y GB + required RAM for the OS) vs. that of a MacPro with (24*Y GB + required RAM for the OS)?
Click to expand...
I don't know enough to give you exact performance characteristics, but 24 single-core machines with similar specs (RAM speed etc.) will out perform the Mac Pro by quite a large margin, but will also cost quite a bit more too!

It's important to note that the 24 logical threads isn't the same as having 24 cores, and having 12 cores isn't exactly the same as having 12 processors. Multi-core computing is definitely best way to get more processing power into machines than separate processors since they can share buses to memory etc., but it's important to bear in mind that they will be sharing the same RAM, hard-disks, and other hardware, so they will compete for resources in the majority of cases.

So if your simulations are completely separate (no data sharing at all) then separate machines will win hands down, and probably with fairly low-end parts, but it'll still cost you a bundle more to set-up and to run. The Mac Pro would have the advantage that you can also use it to kick the ass out of any more complex simulations, for example if you wanted to run 6 that require four threads each or even one really complex simulation.

Still a machine with 24 logical threads is appealing, my 8-thread machine is currently in the repair shop, but that doesn't really justify me looking at getting a newer one hehe, maybe when the Applecare expires :)
 
Boring is good.

Remember the days when rumors about Apple using a new chip in their machines were enticing? Once the Intel switch announcement was made four years ago, I knew these days were over; Apple would use a range of Intel processors for their line (or AMD, if they pulled far ahead), and there would be no more surprises. I considered this a great thing for Apple, as they would have a clear idea of future performance levels when designing hardware and software, and simply wouldn't have to expend energy on the question of how to obtain processors fast enough to stay competitive.

Of course Apple is going to use these chips in the Mac Pro next year. The only other option would be to discontinue the Mac Pro line entirely.
 
Have those apps aplenty. Maya 2010, RenderMan Studio, SoftImage 2010 and Nuke 5.2..... all perfectly happy to branch out into, and fully utilize any additional cores Apple is willing to put into these new Mac Pro's.
So I say bring it on... my renders are hungry for more clock cycles! :D

xDYLANx said:
Now all we need are apps that utilize the full power of all these silly cores. :)
Click to expand...
 
Morky said:
Remember the days when rumors about Apple using a new chip in their machines were enticing? Once the Intel switch announcement was made four years ago, I knew these days were over; Apple would use a range of Intel processors for their line (or AMD, if they pulled far ahead), and there would be no more surprises. I considered this a great thing for Apple, as they would have a clear idea of future performance levels when designing hardware and software, and simply wouldn't have to expend energy on the question of how to obtain processors fast enough to stay competitive.

Of course Apple is going to use these chips in the Mac Pro next year. The only other option would be to discontinue the Mac Pro line entirely.
Click to expand...

They only changed because PowerPC hit performance stagnation. Then the Cell Broadband Engine came. (But thats not really PowerPC)
 
MacRumors said:
When placed in a dual-processor configuration, this would give the Mac Pro 12 physical and 24 logical cores. Such massively multi-core designs have been expected for some time with under-the-hood changes in Snow Leopard specifically preparing for such a possibility.
Click to expand...

12 cores should not be considered massively multicore anymore. According to the following URL, Intel have stated that developers should start thinking about how they would develop for *thousands* of cores.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-9981760-64.html
 
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)

Talk about screaming fast. Wow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back