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 Update Now Possible with New Xeon E5 Chips Next Week
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree that the current case is not "perfect", and it's really due for a redesign. However, with an internal SATA card, you can easily stuff 8 drives in the Mac Pro case, as long as at least two are 2.5" drives and you relocate the DVD drive to an external enclosure. Make the SATA card 6G and you get a benefit there too over the stock SATA setup.
You can also do as I've done and get an eSATA card and/or USB3, and string external enclosures to the Mac Pro to your heart's content.
Thunderbolt is only as fast as PCI-e 2x, currently. So any need for faster than that (4x,8x, or 16x graphics cards, audio interfaces, etc) is lost on machines only equipped with thunderbolt.
Which cpu do you think will best the current 3.33 6 core single processor? The base speeds on the xeon E5 chart seems very low compared to the current models. I know raw speed isn't everything but still . . . I guess the E5-1660.
ModelCoresThreadsFrequencyL3 cacheTDPPrice Xeon E5-1620483.6 GHz10 MB130 Watt$294 Xeon E5-16506123.2 GHz12 MB130 Watt$583 Xeon E5-16606123.3 GHz15 MB130 Watt$1080
ModelCoresThreadsFrequencyL3 cacheTDPPrice Xeon E5-1620483.6 GHz10 MB130 Watt$294 Xeon E5-16506123.2 GHz12 MB130 Watt$583 Xeon E5-16606123.3 GHz15 MB130 Watt$1080
Attachments
Last edited:
Personally I'd like to see Apple to lower the spec and price of the Mac Pro. The dual Xenon processors are overkill for many people but having the top of the range desktop version of the i7 in a system that has PCIe slots for specialist cards and drive bays I think would sell in significantly higher volumes for people who want something a little better than an iMac.
More than 6 devices will require an additional SATA controller, but those come in PCI(e) so no prob.
Got me - I wasn't thinking about the front daughtercard.
In any event, 8 to 10 SATA ports are common on X79 single socket mobos.
Erm, thats what the SP systems are?
BTW the price for the i7 SB-E chips are priced pretty much the same as the Xeons, so where are the savings?
I believe that there's a basic divergence in the customer base who's interested in a tower style configuration, at least for purposes of the question of "How many drives can I stuff into it?"
The first consumer group is ... and apologies in advance for a sprinkling of hyperbola to magnify the point ...but we've all been guity of being this very person at some point ... the "Penny Pinchers" who never really ever retires their older, smaller hard drives. This user claims a need for more than 4 bays becaue they have installed a 1TB, 750GB, 500GB, 250GB plus the original 160GB drive that the Mac came with ... all still running.
The second consumer group is more typically someone who needs tons of storage, particularly with robust data repository attributes. In their view, a single spindle backed up by a single spindle "Time Machine" is simply an unacceptable risk ... even before us bothering to check to see if the current 3TB size limit of an individual HDD is even adequate. Nothing less than a couple of RAIDs will suffice for their data management vision, and each RAID that they require promptly doubles the numbers of spindles needed.
To either/both groups, there can also quite easily be a need for speed, which is where 2.5" SSDs come into play as well.
To try to satisfy 'most', then design challenge would probably entail a system that is designed to accomodate 4 * SSDs + 4 * 3.5" HDDs. That can be done with today's Mac Pro design, although not as an Apple OEM.
FWIW, another alternative that would IMO be quite interesting would be to borrow from the Apple parts bin the SSD "sticks" from the MacBook Air...and have them plugged into the motherboard almost like RAM to be used as the Mac Pro's boot partition. Unfortunately, I don't think that this is particularly lkely to see from Apple (...since the right way to do it would entail splitting off the user directories onto another logical drive, which OS X can be made to do, but isn't a default configuration...), even though this is a straightforward approach to boost hardware performance that they could then pick up in their product marketing.
-hh
Nop.. You're mixing CUDA (Nvidia proprietary framework and library for GPU calculations) and OpenCL an open standard for running calculation on any compatible calculation unit (Nvidia & AMD GPUs or any compatible CPUs).
Nvidia is the main force in GPU calculation thanks to the widespread adoption of CUDA in the scientific community, but Apple has pushed for an open standard with OpenCL (that they initiated), that AMD finally backed once their own proprietary system had become irrelevant since nobody used it. All hardware vendors offer compatibility but that doesn't mean they're helping moving it forward. (Nvidia hasn't brought to OpenCL the extensive library of function that make CUDA so attractive).
Apple was first in implementing it in Snow Leopard.
::want:::
Seriously this is excellent news and I hope it's true. While I can't afford a Mac Pro right now, I def want to get one in next few years. And if this news is true then it means we'll see the Mac Pro line live on.
I love the idea of a high quality, professional grade desktop tower with lots of upgrade potential (video, RAM, storage). iMacs and laptops don't offer that. While I'm not a "professional" in terms of needing a powerful machine, I'd like one that can handle anything I throw at it like high graphic gaming, music production, running folding@Home, running multiple programs, and of course terabytes of storage!
While I don't think iOS gadgets are "toys" per se, I do get what others are saying about Apple seemingly more focused on iPads and iPhones than Mac Pros and desktop computers. Keep in mind that part of Apple's recent success, huge cash reserves, and growing market share are due to the iPhone and iPads...all that money and new customers means Apple can continue to develop and support Mac Pros if they choose. They really have the market's attention and massive amounts of cash to do what they want. To me that means even if Mac Pros and desktops make up a very small part of Apple's business profits, they can well afford to keep making and selling them on the strength of the iOS device successes.
Seriously this is excellent news and I hope it's true. While I can't afford a Mac Pro right now, I def want to get one in next few years. And if this news is true then it means we'll see the Mac Pro line live on.
I love the idea of a high quality, professional grade desktop tower with lots of upgrade potential (video, RAM, storage). iMacs and laptops don't offer that. While I'm not a "professional" in terms of needing a powerful machine, I'd like one that can handle anything I throw at it like high graphic gaming, music production, running folding@Home, running multiple programs, and of course terabytes of storage!
While I don't think iOS gadgets are "toys" per se, I do get what others are saying about Apple seemingly more focused on iPads and iPhones than Mac Pros and desktop computers. Keep in mind that part of Apple's recent success, huge cash reserves, and growing market share are due to the iPhone and iPads...all that money and new customers means Apple can continue to develop and support Mac Pros if they choose. They really have the market's attention and massive amounts of cash to do what they want. To me that means even if Mac Pros and desktops make up a very small part of Apple's business profits, they can well afford to keep making and selling them on the strength of the iOS device successes.
I would like to see Apple add more drive bays (8) with 6gb/s interface connectivity and built-in Hardware RAID. I'm tired of purchasing external crap. They also need to include more USB ports and more than one Thunderbolt port.
I realize that adding more drive bays would make the machine larger, but who cares? It's a big machine already and clients expect it. And last, but not least, include a blu-ray drive already!
I realize that adding more drive bays would make the machine larger, but who cares? It's a big machine already and clients expect it. And last, but not least, include a blu-ray drive already!
The 6-core processors are both superior to it. The 4-core beats it at most things, even some of the best multi-threaded software.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/523?vs=142
I'd actually be surprised if Apple even offered the 1660. It just makes no financial sense for the consumer. $700+ for a 3% processor performance increase over the 1650? Nah. They also didn't use the top options available in 09 so there is precedent. The E5-2600s don't appear to have huge turbo boost performance from using less cores so only the higher end ones will be much use for those whose workflow doesn't benefit from high core counts.
I tend to gravitate towards raw speed first and core count 2nd, but I can't see going less that 6 cores total. The cache is also going to figure into things more now. I don't know why Intel caps the raw speed so low. These things run stable at much higher speeds on overclocked PC's. Recently someone set a new record on an Ivy Bridge cpu at 7 ghz. You would think we would be a stock 4ghz by now. I know the Xeons are capable of 4+ 100% stable. Intel has no competition, so I guess they hold back.
re original article
"...specs that had gone stale while waiting for Intel to release updated processors..."
waiting on intel - so what else is new
intel - what happened to you? - you used to be the bomb
"...specs that had gone stale while waiting for Intel to release updated processors..."
waiting on intel - so what else is new
intel - what happened to you? - you used to be the bomb
Apple has very coarse Intel options for a product on the razor's edge of EOL so will simply be upgraded the easiest and most profitable selection and be left on the price sheet for a good 2 years.
If I had to predict what a 2014 MacPro would look like, it would be a device with multiple mobile processors in a lower than current TDP all in. If Apple simply makes sure they have a device for prosumers, niche server farms, and content creators, they can check that box without much engineering or financial risk, for a line which is a "dimming flicker in time and space" portion of their balance sheet.
MacPro is the hobby. So keep hobbiests alive!
Rocketman
If I had to predict what a 2014 MacPro would look like, it would be a device with multiple mobile processors in a lower than current TDP all in. If Apple simply makes sure they have a device for prosumers, niche server farms, and content creators, they can check that box without much engineering or financial risk, for a line which is a "dimming flicker in time and space" portion of their balance sheet.
MacPro is the hobby. So keep hobbiests alive!
Rocketman
No you don't. If you have a 24" 2006 iMac, that's the 2nd intel chip for Macs. Your iMac was released later in 2006. It has a Core2Duo chip. The first Intel chip in 2006 Macs was CoreDuo. These were only used in the early 2006 iMacs.....which 21" was the largest size.
Anyway, I hope this upgrade pans out. If a new MacPro comes out before the next iMac, I may be tempted to get it, instead. It all depends on pricing, though.
As for a possible redesign, do you think apple may incorporate black glass into the case design? It would have no functional purpose other than aesthetics...but it could look cool, if done right. I have it pictured in my mind and wish I could actually illustrate it and post here.
Why don't Apple just have a "business" division. That way they can parse their marketing for iPads vs Power Desktops.
ps: I know they stopped making servers which was the end of any official business division, but believe me Pro Audio is dominated by Mac Pros.
I GET that Apple want to project the image of "future". I get that killing the desktop IS the future. I get all of it. I understand losing the word "computer" from Apple. The word "computer" from a marketing perspectivescreams "past".
However for content creators; we will be the small group that will use Desktops for at least another 10 years.
I use 64 gig of RAM. I run 4 screens. I run 6 SSD drives. I use all of this to the max.
So I ask again, why not just have a business division?
best,
SvK
ps: I know they stopped making servers which was the end of any official business division, but believe me Pro Audio is dominated by Mac Pros.
I GET that Apple want to project the image of "future". I get that killing the desktop IS the future. I get all of it. I understand losing the word "computer" from Apple. The word "computer" from a marketing perspectivescreams "past".
However for content creators; we will be the small group that will use Desktops for at least another 10 years.
I use 64 gig of RAM. I run 4 screens. I run 6 SSD drives. I use all of this to the max.
So I ask again, why not just have a business division?
best,
SvK
Last edited:
I'm still holding on to the crazy dream of seeing a modular desktop come between the iMac and the Pro; the consumer-level power of the iMac without the attached display and some sort of expansion capability (interchangeable GPU?), in the $1000-1500 price bracket?
Not going to happen, I know.
Not going to happen, I know.
A recent article:
"To Beat the Law of Large Numbers, Apple Must Expand Its Product Line"
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1329397/
I agree. Apple does not want to put all it's eggs in one basket contrary to some opinions, so maybe the MP will and should live on.
Who the hell cares about USB3? Thunderbolt is what I've been waitng for in the Mac Pro line
Throwing my hat in; I think we'll see a Sandy Bridge E with the 2 dead cores activated for Apple's new Mac Pro. I think you'll see 8 core Sandy Bridge E processors - so upto 16 core monsters. The form factor will be the same too, because of heat issues and a slip up when Apple posted a Thunderbolt RAID next to a Pro. Oh, yeah, this will happen very soon. Maybe before the end of the month.
They tried a headless mid-range desktop and it was a massive failure in terms of sales.
Last edited: