Mac Pro Update With 6-Core Xeon Gulftown Processors Due Soon?

[iDisk]

Nor was Frazzle talking to you, but you still chose to chime in with your own 2c. Why object now that the boot is on the other foot?

Wanna take this outside? iPhone vs iPad to which Frazzles joke was referring to

Back on topic, your logic of futureproofing a machine is a flawed one imo. Trying to futureproof anything in the computing world is a really bad false economy. Given the premiums charged for cutting-edge parts (especially from Intel), maxxing out a machine with the top spec components with a view to making it last 7 years would set you back somewhere in the order of around $5k at least. On top of this, you won't even begin to tap the full potential of this machine for a couple of years (unless you work in an incredibly specialised field), so you'll be paying a huge tax for performance that you won't even benefit from for a large % of the machine's working life.

Rather than spend $5k now in a monolithic purchase designed to protect you from the inevitable upgrade path, it'd make much more sense to spend $2k on a machine now, and then sell that on (or put it to use elsehwere) and spend another $2k on a new machine 3-4 years from now. Not only will that save you money in the long run, but it will ensure that you are making much more optimal use of the computing resources available to you during your time of ownership.

Actually I did some google searches and realized that future proofing is something that only exist in the purchasers mind...... so thus my conclusion is that your correct.


I still want ACD though, I mean Apple teased us by getting ride of the 20" model and keeping the high costing 30" .... I understand getting rid of the 23" cause the 24" model was coming..... 3.5wks till 6-cores and 12-cores

 

[Voltaic]

If moving from Xeon to Core i7, I hope Apple introduce a huge price decrease in the 2010 models. I doubt they will move away from workstation grade hardware though.

I know people depend on workstation hardware that the Mac Pro offers. Their only other choice is HP or IBM type workstations. However, the 2009 model of the Mac Pro is broken in too many ways, people cannot rely on it for mission critical systems, they have been trying to find 2008 versions.

2009 model, the only real upgrades you can make is hard drives and memory. Hard drive controllers/RAID cards are too flaky on the 2009 model, fibre channel likes to cause kernel panics, firewire has problems. 2007 model wont let you even install most newer hardware from Apple such as graphics cards or hard drive controller, so that is classed as legacy now.

Apple seem to have given up on innovation and developing a decent workstation since they moved to Intel.

On the money. I would change your "seem to have" to a categorical "have". Oh, and just for fun: http://gizmodo.com/5462381/mosspuppets-epic-steve-jobs-interview?autoplay=true

 

[Frazzle]

The users with 1st gen Mac Pros approaching four years of age or dual and quad core G5s are the ones that should be drooling.

Maybe, but I'll keep my MacPro1,1 running until it dies by itself. I will not fork over more money to Apple as I feel the MacPro1,1 - in itself a great machine - has gotten the cold shoulder. Already it's being excluded from BootCamp updates, gfx card updates... for no real reason. Luckily, the vanilla hardware doesn't need any special drivers.

p.s. None of the Mac Pro had value for the money. Only the dual 1.42 GHz Power Mac G4 ($1499), the Cube ($1299), and the last revision Dual 2.0 GHz Power Mac G5 ($1799). Ever since these models were replaced it's been a rip off.

I disagree. When the first MP came out, we compared it to similarly specced HP and Dell machines. The MP1,1 did offer value for money and the internal layout of the MP was so much cleaner than the PC boxes... I still admire what Apple did there. And it does make a great Windows machine too.

 

[Anaemik]

I still want ACD though, I mean Apple teased us by getting ride of the 20" model and keeping the high costing 30" .... I understand getting rid of the 23" cause the 24" model was coming..... 3.5wks till 6-cores and 12-cores

Couldn't agree more regarding the ACD. I haven't looked into it, so I don't even know if there are companies out there producing LED backlit panels in a 30" format (apart from the really expensive panels Samsung are shipping with a 123% Adobe RGB gamut, but these are around $4k last time I checked). I assume the lack of panels is stalling the ACD updates. For anyone doing colour-critical work, I guess the only option right now is to burn a hole in your wallet with a Samsung or LaCie panel. I've been running with an HP l2335 for the last 4 years now and I'm starting to get some small issues with it. Best 23" panel I've ever worked with, and while I've been tempted by that oh-so-sexy HP Dreamworks display, it's *only* 24". Things are starting to feel cramped at 1920x1200 these days, so 30" is def. my next upgrade path. However, given that I tend to hold onto displays for longer than I hold on to computers, this is one area where I really *do* want to try to futureproof myself to some extent. With that in mind I may just take the hit on a Samsung or LaCie, because by the time Apple get round to bringing out a compatible 30" display, no doubt i'll be having to add another $100 to the price for a dual link DVI>mini Displayport connector.

 

[Umbongo]

I think Steve is an idiot for not making a Mac Pro with an X58 + i7 combination already. It'd slot nicely in between the iMac and Mac Pro, and offer something that neither has, eg:

* X58 is a better chipset than the P55 and the "i7"s the iMac has as a high end option
* Probably cheaper. $1599 would be easy even with the fancy Mac Pro case
* No need for the ECC RAM the workstations have, thus lower prices

!! Please!

If all else since the old Power Macs were more like fancy desktops than full blown workstations, they could just call it a PowerMac i7 lol. I'd be down with that

And it'd keep the snobby "Mac Pro" owners happy! We wouldn't be treading on their pride with our inferior machines!

The price has nothing to do with the components. The single socket Xeons cost the same as the Core i7 socket 1366 processors at the same speeds and the difference in cost to Apple for ECC memory is no doubt negligible. The price starts at $2,499 to put it above the iMac and because they have managed to sell previous Mac Pros at that price.

This comes up every time there is a new Mac Pro thread, but changing to Core i7 offers no real benefit for anyone.

 

[ildondeigiocchi]

The price has nothing to do with the components. The single socket Xeons cost the same as the Core i7 socket 1366 processors at the same speeds and the difference in cost to Apple for ECC memory is no doubt negligible. The price starts at $2,499 to put it above the iMac and because they have managed to sell previous Mac Pros at that price.

This comes up every time there is a new Mac Pro thread, but changing to Core i7 offers no real benefit for anyone.

I have to disagree with you on this one. Offering a system apart from the Mac Pro based on a Intel X58 with a Core i7 processor would open up a whole new market for people who have always wished to buy a Mac Pro but never had the money and have had to settle for the iMac in turn. Let's face not everyone has the money to buy a Mac Pro. So not only would this price drop result in lower prices for consumers but would attract many customers.

 

[Anaemik]

The price has nothing to do with the components. The single socket Xeons cost the same as the Core i7 socket 1366 processors at the same speeds and the difference in cost to Apple for ECC memory is no doubt negligible. The price starts at $2,499 to put it above the iMac and because they have managed to sell previous Mac Pros at that price.

This comes up every time there is a new Mac Pro thread, but changing to Core i7 offers no real benefit for anyone.

Out of curiousity, what's your source for this? Unless I'm misunderstanding your comparison, I see a large price disparity. Using Scan.co.uk as an example, a 2.66Ghz i7 920 Bloomfield retail is ~£210, while a 2.66Ghz Xeon Gainestown retail is ~£730. The Gainestown is, to my knowledge, the Xeon equivalent of the Bloomfield, which means either Scan are really ripping us off, or I'm missing something important.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

I think Steve is an idiot for not making a Mac Pro with an X58 + i7 combination already. It'd slot nicely in between the iMac and Mac Pro, and offer something that neither has, eg:

* X58 is a better chipset than the P55 and the "i7"s the iMac has as a high end option
* Probably cheaper. $1599 would be easy even with the fancy Mac Pro case
* No need for the ECC RAM the workstations have, thus lower prices

I like your thinking!

If all else since the old Power Macs were more like fancy desktops than full blown workstations, they could just call it a PowerMac i7 lol. I'd be down with that

And it'd keep the snobby "Mac Pro" owners happy! We wouldn't be treading on their pride with our inferior machines!

What about a smaller case, and call it the MacMini Pro?

 

[afrowq]

Guys, this isn't about MacBook Pros -- the topic is Mac Pro desktops.

What's a desktop? I only know laptops and imacs. You mean Apple makes a professional computer?

I kid of course, but you wouldn't know it from many of the responses on this thread.

 

[Mal]

OK, so I'm going to go out on a limb here and make a very unusual prediction (for me). Apple's been all about smashing prices recently, from the MacBook (small price drop) to the iPad (huge difference from predicted) and all sorts of other changes in the other lines (and incidentally, I'm expecting some price drops on the laptops come the next update, though nothing too major), so…

I'm predicting that come March, we'll see updates to the Mac Pro that place the starting price at $1799. That'll be for a single-processor system, Quad-Core if the chips are still available (as they have done in the past, keep an old model but price it cheap so you have a low entry point). The true entry model then, the dual-processor, will start at $2499, or perhaps (assuming the above portion was true) a single-processor, hexacore system at $2299 and the dual-processor, 12-core system at $2799.

You heard it here first!

jW

 

[afrowq]

These days the Mac Pro almost feel like an afterthought from Apple. Lost and nearly forgotten in the glare of the touch generation.
How far will Apple pull out of the pro market I wonder....

BINGO

 

[Icaras]

OK, so I'm going to go out on a limb here and make a very unusual prediction (for me). Apple's been all about smashing prices recently, from the MacBook (small price drop) to the iPad (huge difference from predicted) and all sorts of other changes in the other lines (and incidentally, I'm expecting some price drops on the laptops come the next update, though nothing too major), so…

I'm predicting that come March, we'll see updates to the Mac Pro that place the starting price at $1799. That'll be for a single-processor system, Quad-Core if the chips are still available (as they have done in the past, keep an old model but price it cheap so you have a low entry point). The true entry model then, the dual-processor, will start at $2499, or perhaps (assuming the above portion was true) a single-processor, hexacore system at $2299 and the dual-processor, 12-core system at $2799.

You heard it here first!

jW

I think you went too far out on the limb there. You're forgetting that your comparing the consumer market to the professional market.

There will be no price drop on the new Mac Pro. Most definitely not under $2000.

 

[Umbongo]

I have to disagree with you on this one. Offering a system apart from the Mac Pro based on a Intel X58 with a Core i7 processor would open up a whole new market for people who have always wished to buy a Mac Pro but never had the money and have had to settle for the iMac in turn. Let's face not everyone has the money to buy a Mac Pro. So not only would this price drop result in lower prices for consumers but would attract many customers.

You misunderstand. The hardware in the single processor Mac Pro is barely different from all those $1000 odd 2.66GHz Core i7 desktops. It isn't the cost of workstation components that put it at $2,499, but rather Apple's desire to maintain their ecosystem of mini > iMac > Mac Pro. Apple could sell the current Mac Pro for $1,499 if they wanted to, but they don't.

Out of curiousity, what's your source for this? Unless I'm misunderstanding your comparison, I see a large price disparity. Using Scan.co.uk as an example, a 2.66Ghz i7 920 Bloomfield retail is ~£210, while a 2.66Ghz Xeon Gainestown retail is ~£730. The Gainestown is, to my knowledge, the Xeon equivalent of the Bloomfield, which means either Scan are really ripping us off, or I'm missing something important.

The processors in the single socket Mac Pro are Xeon 3500s which have the same price as the the Core i7 processors. Scan don't stock them but you can get them for £225 in the UK. At retail the Xeons tend to be slightly higher priced just because of the lower demand. This confusion has been going on since they came out.

 

[Magaman]

This is killing me, I need a new desktop and have been waiting I'm at the point of just building a new windows machine, but really want to get rid of all windows machines in the house.

 

[Brixtone]

Here's hoping they release an i-series "low" end model and Xeon for top end. I want a tower so badly, but don't need the power of a Xeon processor in it.

Hear, hear. I don't need the power or cost of the Xeon processor. I was beginning to fear the only way to get an affordable Mac audio workstation was to build a Hackintosh.

 

[Icaras]

This is killing me, I need a new desktop and have been waiting I'm at the point of just building a new windows machine, but really want to get rid of all windows machines in the house.

Last christmas marked the end of PCs in our household as we got an iMac to replace a Dell laptop. Suffice to say, I'm very happy with a PC free home

 

[Techhie]

Couldn't agree more regarding the ACD. I haven't looked into it, so I don't even know if there are companies out there producing LED backlit panels in a 30" format (apart from the really expensive panels Samsung are shipping with a 123% Adobe RGB gamut, but these are around $4k last time I checked). I assume the lack of panels is stalling the ACD updates. For anyone doing colour-critical work, I guess the only option right now is to burn a hole in your wallet with a Samsung or LaCie panel. I've been running with an HP l2335 for the last 4 years now and I'm starting to get some small issues with it. Best 23" panel I've ever worked with, and while I've been tempted by that oh-so-sexy HP Dreamworks display, it's *only* 24". Things are starting to feel cramped at 1920x1200 these days, so 30" is def. my next upgrade path. However, given that I tend to hold onto displays for longer than I hold on to computers, this is one area where I really *do* want to try to futureproof myself to some extent. With that in mind I may just take the hit on a Samsung or LaCie, because by the time Apple get round to bringing out a compatible 30" display, no doubt i'll be having to add another $100 to the price for a dual link DVI>mini Displayport connector.

Look for a used Samsung 305T. They have accurate colors, are cheap (if you look, picked up mine as a second 30" for $500), and they have a standard 3 year hardware warranty attached to the serial number.

 

[Bafflefish]

One of the biggest problems with hyperthread is the shared resources. If you have a computation that is heavy L2/L3 cache usage, hyperthreads will almost certainly result in worse performance due to excessive cache conflicts.

If the computation is relatively cache light, then hyperthreads will appear almost as if you had extra cores.

In real world workflows/applications, due the pros outweigh the cons? In my experience, hyperthreads is a marketing hype. Ever wonder why AMD doesn't implement hyperthreads?

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Intel-i7-nehalem-cpu,2041-5.html is an interesting article on pentium 4 hyperthreads versus nehalem. Intel has put bandaids on shared resources like the instruction reorder buffer, load/store buffers, the execution units, and cache memory by making them bigger.

Oh, you're definitely correct. Cache conflicts are definitely a concern, and it has been that impact (negatively) on performance that has helped to sway some people into disabling hyperthreading (that actually makes me curious - on a PC you could simply go into the BIOS and disable SMT, but how would it be disabled on the new i7 860-based iMacs or the Mac Pros?)

I'll have to see if I can find it, but I remember reading an article, possibly at AT, that basically gave a decent glimpse into the background of Nehalem, including the return of Hyperthreading. It was basically stated that Intel had planned for larger cache sizes, but then during development decided to have cache sizes remain unchanged. This is just my opinion (as I clearly have no knowledge of Intel's design philosophy - someone like cmaier who has actually worked in this field could probably give a much more educated response), but I'd imagine that Intel had already committed to implementing SMT again, and possibly had based that original planning on even larger cache sizes than what they ultimately went with.

 

[ts1973]

Look for a used Samsung 305T. They have accurate colors, are cheap (if you look, picked up mine as a second 30" for $500), and they have a standard 3 year hardware warranty attached to the serial number.

... or the new Dell U2711, a little less pixels than a 30" (it's 16:9) but reportedly very good.

 

[mafy]

Mac Pro Price Increase

Hi,

I am a new to the Forum. I am waiting patiently for a new Mac Pro. Is it
my imagination or when they updated the Apple site on Sunday, did the price go up by a couple hundred dollars? I thought maybe they changed something already and we didn't catch it.

Also, does anyone have a monitor calibration device preference? I do Photoshop work and want to make sure I can calibrate the screen for fine art printing.

Thanks

 

[puckhead193]

how much of a difference will these processors make? By the time a new mac pro/mbp come out, I won't even be using it as HS sports are over late may/early june
Apple you gotta give me something.... i'm begging!

 

[PeterQVenkman]

I think you went too far out on the limb there. You're forgetting that your comparing the consumer market to the professional market.

There will be no price drop on the new Mac Pro. Most definitely not under $2000.

That's one way for Apple to price themselves out of the small business/pro market.

 

[Bafflefish]

how much of a difference will these processors make? By the time a new mac pro/mbp come out, I won't even be using it as HS sports are over late may/early june
Apple you gotta give me something.... i'm begging!

How much of a difference? It honestly depends on what you do. If it's general light professional usage, probably not very much.

Remember, at the moment, the majority of multithreaded applications are still only truly optimized for dual core systems, with some having been updated to support triple core and quad core systems.

I like to look at it this way: if you're on a quad core system now, and whatever you're currently doing is putting all four physical cores under load or nearly under load, then you would see a benefit from a six-core system, because it would mean two additional physical cores to help ease the system strain.

If you have a dual-core system and currently have times where both cores stay at load, then I'd say maybe just wait for the six-core systems to debut, and pick one of the current revisions once they've dropped in price.

If you have a quad-core system and no where near having all four cores remaining under load for significant periods of time, then I'd say just hold on.

Just my $.02 though

 

[Anaemik]

Look for a used Samsung 305T. They have accurate colors, are cheap (if you look, picked up mine as a second 30" for $500), and they have a standard 3 year hardware warranty attached to the serial number.

Actually looks like a really solid display. Thanks for the heads up! Do you have the + version (S-PVA vs S-IPS), and how does it compare to your HP?

 

[Icaras]

That's one way for Apple to price themselves out of the small business/pro market.

You mean, price the Mac Pro so high that professionals will actually leave Apple? If that's what you mean, then yea, I agree.