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.
Mac Pro to Use Custom Intel CPU? More Details on Mac Mini and Time Capsule
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I find it very hard to believe that Apple will switch to a new CPU after only about 6 years on one processor. Unless it has some kind of backwards compatible mode.
1984-1994 (10 years): Motorola 68k Chips
1994-2005 (9 years): PowerPC Chips
2006-Now (5 years so far): Intel Chips
My guess is that Apple will stay on the x86 architecture for a while. Maybe until 2014 or 2015, if past changes mean anything.
1984-1994 (10 years): Motorola 68k Chips
1994-2005 (9 years): PowerPC Chips
2006-Now (5 years so far): Intel Chips
My guess is that Apple will stay on the x86 architecture for a while. Maybe until 2014 or 2015, if past changes mean anything.
i think that depends on if you use it for business and can profit from it. Any new MP will be worth it imho. I can't see them not putting out something that will surpass the current MP lineup benchmarks. Or maybe they'll drop the price and add thunderbolt etc...
I know i'm tempted - last one I bought was 09 and I need processing power.
Time will tell...
I find it very hard to believe that Apple will switch to a new CPU after only about 6 years on one processor. Unless it has some kind of backwards compatible mode.
1984-1994 (10 years): Motorola 68k Chips
1994-2005 (9 years): PowerPC Chips
2006-Now (5 years so far): Intel Chips
My guess is that Apple will stay on the x86 architecture for a while. Maybe until 2014 or 2015, if past changes mean anything.
They've been on the same ISA for the past six years and nothing about this rumor suggests that is changing.
All Macs
Almost any Mac could/would benefit from being larger. I have a 17" Intel MacBook Pro & 17" PPC PowerBook that require me to carry a full sized keyboard to have a numeric keypad. So my 6 1/2 pound laptop is now upt to 71/2 - 8 pounds. With the Apple BlueTooth keyboards now not having a numeric keypad included means that even if the space was made available Steve Jobs would not allow a numeric keypad to be included. HP can fit a numeric keypad into a 15" laptop & Apple can not do it even with a 17". Throw those speakers away or remove the optical drive or some other thing.
I'm glad that I don't like to use the track pad on my Mac laptops. Having to carry a separate keyboard puts the track pad in an odd location most of the time. This then has me carry my Kensington trackball a a couple of pounds to cover that misplaced trackpad. I'm up to 9 - 10 pounds at the lightest. That little bit that is saved on making the Mac laptop smaller & prettier makes my Mac laptop weigh in at many pounds more than we usually talk about a laptop weighing. That also means that my computer bag must be bigger. Oh how I like these smaller prettier Macs. Just don't do that to my Intel Mac Pro. Having the cables out of sight there makes things look prettier but hard to work on. Please no smaller. Larger is better in this case.
Almost any Mac could/would benefit from being larger. I have a 17" Intel MacBook Pro & 17" PPC PowerBook that require me to carry a full sized keyboard to have a numeric keypad. So my 6 1/2 pound laptop is now upt to 71/2 - 8 pounds. With the Apple BlueTooth keyboards now not having a numeric keypad included means that even if the space was made available Steve Jobs would not allow a numeric keypad to be included. HP can fit a numeric keypad into a 15" laptop & Apple can not do it even with a 17". Throw those speakers away or remove the optical drive or some other thing.
I'm glad that I don't like to use the track pad on my Mac laptops. Having to carry a separate keyboard puts the track pad in an odd location most of the time. This then has me carry my Kensington trackball a a couple of pounds to cover that misplaced trackpad. I'm up to 9 - 10 pounds at the lightest. That little bit that is saved on making the Mac laptop smaller & prettier makes my Mac laptop weigh in at many pounds more than we usually talk about a laptop weighing. That also means that my computer bag must be bigger. Oh how I like these smaller prettier Macs. Just don't do that to my Intel Mac Pro. Having the cables out of sight there makes things look prettier but hard to work on. Please no smaller. Larger is better in this case.
I find it very hard to believe that Apple will switch to a new CPU after only about 6 years on one processor. Unless it has some kind of backwards compatible mode.
1984-1994 (10 years): Motorola 68k Chips
1994-2005 (9 years): PowerPC Chips
2006-Now (5 years so far): Intel Chips
My guess is that Apple will stay on the x86 architecture for a while. Maybe until 2014 or 2015, if past changes mean anything.
No one has suggested otherwise. A custom chip does not imply a new architecture.
Is QPI a prerequisite for having more than one socket? I thought it had more to do with getting quicker access to memory.
Perhaps the customizations just involve adding more PCIe lanes & dual socket support to future 1155 parts? From what you say though doing that doesn't sound easy... so it's likely I'm completely off base
.Short for th Intel Mac Pro.
If Apple waits the normal refresh cycle there will not be a new Intel Mac Pro untilthe end of this year or the early part of next year. I'm not sure they ever did a real upgrade in under 12 months.
If Apple waits the normal refresh cycle there will not be a new Intel Mac Pro untilthe end of this year or the early part of next year. I'm not sure they ever did a real upgrade in under 12 months.
Don't you see - this is going to raise the height of the garden walls
Custom CPUs could mean the end of Hackintoshes. If Apple gets custom CPUs with custom instructions - they could make it virtually impossible to run Apple OSX on affordable, configurable hardware.
It's not about adding options, it's about locking things down.
Custom CPUs could mean the end of Hackintoshes. If Apple gets custom CPUs with custom instructions - they could make it virtually impossible to run Apple OSX on affordable, configurable hardware.
It's not about adding options, it's about locking things down.
Perhaps, but for that to work Apple would have to drop support for existing Macs that use standard, off the shelf Intel CPUs.
Given the small number of successful Hackintosh installs, I doubt Apple is that worried about them. Look at extremely small Psystar's sales figures, for example. What was it? A few hundred sold?
A good many people might be interested in going the Hackintosh route. Some of them might actually try. Some will succeed, but become frustrated with being unable to deal with updates, etc. A few will run them successfully. I really don't see it being something the masses will ever be able to easily master, and thus the number will likely never be huge.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)
Waiting and wanting an Airport Extreme or possibly a time capsule-though they are a higher jump in price than I'd wish.
That AWBS and TC rumor is nice.
Waiting and wanting an Airport Extreme or possibly a time capsule-though they are a higher jump in price than I'd wish.
That AWBS and TC rumor is nice.
QPI connects CPUs to I/O Hubs. So only one link is needed on a single CPU system.
Is that still going to be the case with Sandy Bridge Xeon's?
In the current MacPros the I/O Hub connect by the QPI is little more than a PCIe hub. So they need 2x QPI for a dual machine in the current configuration.
With the Sandy Bridge Xeons this CPUs direct links to PCIe, DMI & FDI instead of going via QPI to connect to these buses. In that case it would seem that QPI will only be used for CPU to CPU connections. So instead of needing 2x QPI for a dual CPU machine wouldn't these only need 1x QPI for a Dual and 2x for a Quad?
Which would go some way to explain why the E3 Xeons don't have QPI, being single processor they don't need it.
Seeing MacPro's tend to be pre-announced by about a month, Apple have been know to get early access for High end stuff like this and we aren't likely to see a 4CPU Mac Pro, I'd be honestly shocked if this "Custom" was anything other Early E5's.
Now a A5 in there as well could be interesting with super low power it could be used for LOM and maybe a low power mode that supported Time machine like function. Allow network access to files without troubling power expensive Xeons.
Maybe we'll see a mid level MacPro with Thunderbolt
Z68 Core i7 2600K Motherboard with Graphics Card thunderbolt and SSD would blow away most MacPros currently on offer.
Could be called the Mac Mini Pro. FCPX, Logic and Aperture users would eat these up, pair it up with external thunderbolt hard drives and a Mac 24" Screen and you would have some serious power.
There's not much need for MacPros as it is now anyway.
I'd use these as offline edit stations and keep Superduper MacPros for the online guys
Z68 Core i7 2600K Motherboard with Graphics Card thunderbolt and SSD would blow away most MacPros currently on offer.
Could be called the Mac Mini Pro. FCPX, Logic and Aperture users would eat these up, pair it up with external thunderbolt hard drives and a Mac 24" Screen and you would have some serious power.
There's not much need for MacPros as it is now anyway.
I'd use these as offline edit stations and keep Superduper MacPros for the online guys
No way Apple will pay what would be a large premium for a relatively small quantity of custom chips. As others have said, Apple will just be getting the first offerings of chips soon to be released in quantity but available exclusively to Apple during the ramp-up period.
Sounds good. But the discount from current refurb prices would have to be pretty steep for me to be interested.
You mean this?
http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/intel-unveils-knights-corner-50-core-server-chip-2010061/
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/new...nights-corner-in-20122c-exascale-in-2018.aspx
Maybe, but that's big leap. Not impossible, but it seems a little far-fetched.
Some of these replies are silly, custom cpu doesn't mean an architecture change like from powerPC to intel x86. It doesn't mean the end of hackintoshes, most all hackintoshes are made using cpu models that have never been released in a mac anyways. It's likely just a variant of the next sandy bridge xeon that apple will get access to before anyone else.
