Nehalem EP (Xeon) Processors 'Ridiculously fast'

[AidenShaw]

Could Apple limit server class components to the xserve only and downgrade the MP?

No.

The Mac Pro isn't really "server class" - it simply uses the version of the Core processor that's designed for dual-socket motherboards.

Dual socket systems are usually found in low end servers and workstations. Desktops are single socket. With the quad-CPU chips that we now have, that means that downgrading the Mac Pro to desktop parts would limit it to 4 CPUs.

Of course, CPUs and motherboards for dual-socket systems are quite a bit more expensive than single-socket ("desktop") parts.

Which is why there's a big hole in the Apple lineup for a single socket mini-tower that uses desktop parts!

 

[kabunaru]

The Mac Pro IS a workstation, hello???

Desktop CPUs = Workstation power now.

 

[commander.data]

Desktop CPUs match Workstation CPUs now in power and are cheaper.

Apple has little reason to switch to desktop processors. Why downgrade? Intel's desktop lineup doesn't allow dual processor configurations so any move to desktop processors will be a downgrade in light of Grand Central coming to Snow Leopard to take advantage of parallelism. The only exception to the dual processor desktop rule is Skulltrail, but that is a one-off Extreme Edition. You can't base a product line on only a single CPU option, which just happens to also be the most expensive consumer desktop CPU that Intel sells.

Similarly, moving to desktop processors and cutting the Mac Pros prices holds little logic. If you want to create a value proposition in the Mac Pro, it already exists. I don't believe there is any company, Dell, HP, etc., that offers a dual processor workstation configuration at the Mac Pro's price. I'm pretty sure that anything that comes close uses lower-model 1333MHz FSB Xeons with DDR2 667 FB-DIMMs instead of the 1600MHz FSB Xeons with DDR2 800 that Apple uses in the Mac Pro. Granted Apple seriously skimps of the Mac Pro's GPUs, but I doubt anything beats it for raw CPU power at it's price, at least before Nehalem came out. And even with Nehalem, there is no rush to switch to Core i7. Mac Pros already offer similar CPU power and they might as well wait 2 months and go dual Nehalem Xeons. Otherwise I'm sure people will complain about the Mac Pro being stuck on single processor Core i7 and not dual Nehalem Xeons.

And while it is true that while Xeons, consumer desktop processors, and mobile processor may all emerge from the same silicon wafer, their optimization is quite different. Mobile chips are obviously tuned and binned for lowest power consumption at a given clock speed while desktop parts are choose for clock speed scalability. Dual Processor Xeons undergo a much more rigorous burn-in and testing phase to ensure that it's stable and produces error free data. Similarly, the entire Xeon platform from chipset, to memory, and BIOS/EFI is tuned and warrantied for stability. FB-DIMMs may be slow, but they are able to detect 2-bit errors and correct 1-bit errors while desktop RAM couldn't care less and would just save the errors to the HDD. Most of the time it won't matter, but sometimes it does. Admittedly, most Mac Pro users may not need such reliability, but Apple has chosen to make the Mac Pro a premium product and advertise OS X and Macs based on stability, and Xeon processors reflect that.

 

[Digital Skunk]

Desktop CPUs = Workstation power now and at an afffordable price without the overkill of a server chip for the general population that does want an expandable tower.

Put in some clarity for you but otherwise totally agree.

p.s. To those that don't quite get it, we aren't asking for a cheaper Xeon based Mac Pro, we are asking that Apple use ordinary desktop CPUs and motherboards to shave $1000 off the Mac Pro price in either another desktop version, or a BTO bottom barrel Mac Pro.

Right now, there are three laptop models, and one and a half desktop models. With a super Apple TV that Apple has NO IDEA what to do with. Apple needs more desktops models... PERIOD.

 

[TuffLuffJimmy]

Desktop CPUs = Workstation power now.

What? and Server CPU's are still better. Why are you so against better processors, especially when there's room, enough air circulation and enough heat sinks?

 

[AidenShaw]

What? and Server CPU's are still better. Why are you so against better processors...?

Please quantify "better". A Q9650 and an E5450 seem to be the same (12 MiB L2, 3.0 GHz, 1333 MHz bus) as far as I can tell.

In my experience and reading, it seems that there's very little difference between a Xeon and a desktop CPU other than the Name, the Price, and the fact that some Xeons will work in dual-socket motherboards.

In fact, check out the 3000-series uni-socket Xeons - and try to find anything at all that differentiates these from the desktop chips (other than the price and name).

Oh, and by extension do all the rest of the Apples suck, since they're not even using desktop quality parts - they have laptop chips inside?

 

[kabunaru]

To those that don't quite get it, we aren't asking for a cheaper Xeon based Mac Pro, we are asking that Apple use ordinary desktop CPUs and motherboards to shave $1000 off the Mac Pro price in either another desktop version, or a BTO bottom barrel Mac Pro.

Then they need to make the iMac cheaper and discontinue the Mac Mini.
Who knows what will Apple do? Maybe at MacWorld 2009 we will see our dream "Mac Pro".

 

[Eidorian]

I think there are more reasons to have a server class chip than just running a server. If you are doing any sort of computational work, having a server class chip severely reduces the errors that are created during computation that wouldn't matter in the same way as errors created in a program surfing the internet would. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that many jobs that are run on a server could be just as easily run on a desktop and in those cases you would benefit from a server processor.

That's more of a side effect then the processor itself. You're talking about error-correcting code RAM of course.

Please quantify "better". A Q9650 and an E5450 seem to be the same (12 MiB L2, 3.0 GHz, 1333 MHz bus) as far as I can tell.

In my experience and reading, it seems that there's very little difference between a Xeon and a desktop CPU other than the Name, the Price, and the fact that some Xeons will work in dual-socket motherboards.

In fact, check out the 3000-series uni-socket Xeons - and try to find anything at all that differentiates these from the desktop chips (other than the price and name).

Oh, and by extension do all the rest of the Apples suck, since they're not even using desktop quality parts - they have laptop chips inside?

It's a good thing that Intel call sell the quality of Xeon processors over Core 2.

 

[tenks]

That's more of a side effect then the processor itself. You're talking about error-correcting code RAM of course.

It's a good thing that Intel call sell the quality of Xeon processors over Core 2.

I think you're the only one of the few who grasp all of this. To everyone else, forget what you have been marketed to, desktop should be this, server should be that.... The bottom line in this generation, the Nehalem 45nm generation, THEY ARE ALL THE SAME CHIP! I've already said this. The only exception is the Beckton chip, which will have a different socket because it will be a 4/8 core chip with a QUAD channel FB-DIMM memory controller. And like someone pointed out, this will be a REALLY expensive chip and the Mac Pro is by no means a server, and will not need the power that Beckton brings. Beckton benefits in 4s+ designs. Do you really see apple putting out a 4 socket, 16-32 core MacPro? Thats a joke..

And going back to it being all the same chip this gives apple a choice. Unlike the past, there is no need for a memory controller so their isnt a huge need to have multiple chipsets. The chips themselves with be different internally here and there (I.e. beckton) but they still plug into the X58 chipset because they all talk to the x58 the same way, through QPI. So this generation you can have a "desktop" class board (because it uses X58) that is made with 2 sockets and pop in two whatever Intel decides to call Gainestowns. Intel pr department is simply telling you what to think and believe by its branding process. This time around, a Mac Pro is a Mac Pro using Intel chips and thats all you should care about... it doesnt matter what the box or sticker says on the chip because literally they are the same chip. I cant say that enough.

On another note, skulltraill 2 wont be as much as an extreme/one off as it was the first time around. Unless Intel makes it that way. It will still use the standard "desktop" x58 and it wont have a different socket either. With that being said it should be cheap or cheaper I should say....its just if Intel decides to price Gainestown as an overexpensive Xeon or similar to the IDENTICAL TWIN BROTHER desktop bloomie...

Which draws me to this ultimate conclusion which Ive hinted at. Intel's PR department will ultimately decide whats going in your Mac Pro as far as it being a desktop chip or a server/workstation chip. Intel could easily brand Gainestown as high end desktop chip, and then you'd finally have your desktop Mac tower. But then on the flip side, Intel could brand it as a Xeon and then you all think you have this crazy server class workstation. This is really funny to me. Hahaha

 

[Eidorian]

I think you're the only one of the few who grasp all of this. To everyone else, forget what you were have been marketed to, desktop should be this, server should be that. The bottom line in this generation, the Nehalem 45nm generation, THEY ARE ALL THE SAME CHIP! I've already said this. The only exception is the Beckton chip, which will have a different socket because it will be a 4/8 core chip with a QUAD channel FB-DIMM memory controller.

And going back to it being all the same chip this gives apple a choice. Unlike the past, there is no need for a memory controller so their isnt a huge need to have multiple chipsets. The chips themselves with be different internally here and there (I.e. beckton) but they still plug into the X58 chipset. So this generation you can have a "desktop" class board (because it uses X58) that is made with 2 sockets and pop in two whatever Intel decides to call Gainstowns. Intel pr department is simply telling you what to think and believe by its branding process. This time around, a Mac Pro is a Mac Pro using Intel chips, it doesnt matter what the box or sticker says on the chip because literally they are the same chip. I cant say that enough.

On another note, skulltraill 2 wont be as much as an extreme/one off as it was the first time around. Unless Intel makes it that way. It will still use the standard "desktop" x58 and it wont have a different socket either, its just if Intel decides to price gainestown as an overexpensive Xeon or similar to the IDENTICAL TWIN BROTHER desktop bloomie...

Nehalem Skulltrail is a mess right now since it is using the X58 for dual processors. That means two QPI of course.

Take a look here as well.

 

[AidenShaw]

It's a good thing that Intel call sell the quality of Xeon processors over Core 2.

I think that we're simply used to hardware and software cost structures that add a big "tax" on server/professional tools, even though there often isn't much difference between the two.

Server operating systems (Windows/OSX/Linux...) are mostly identical to the client versions, but cost far more.

Workstation/Server CPUs are virtually the same, yet you pay a big tax to have the option of a dual-socket system.

A gigabit NIC for a desktop is $24 (Intel Pro/1000 GT), for a server it's $87.

The onboard NIC on my ProLiant G5's have an iSCSI offload engine - but it's disabled. It costs about $100 per port to enable it. (The hardware is in the system, the license to turn it on is $100.)

 

[tenks]

Nehalem Skulltrail is a mess right now since it is using the X58 for dual processors. That means two QPI of course.

Take a look here as well.

Yea..That info in that thread kinda negates most of what I said bout the question of gainestown branding. It looks as if its a Xeon for sure? But still, If Intel is marketing skulltrail as the ultimate desktop platform, I can easily see them rebranding a gainestown die as i7 EE or something similiar. Just like they did with Gallatin Xeon core for the original P4EE.

Why is it a mess? Just because of the x58 for all situation?

 

[zoran]

Ridiculously fast the Nehalem MacPro line?

so TechRadar.com found that the new Nehalem Xeons at 2.8GHz scored favorably in SPECfp benchmark with a score of 160 as compared to a score of 90 for Intel's current Penryn-based Xeons running at 3.4GHz.
Ridiculously fast they say, but what exactly are those SPECfp benchmarks and do they have anything to do with a Graphic Designers or a VJ work?

 

[tivoli2]

That's why Apple needs to *ADD* a mini-tower that uses desktop parts to the product line.

The Mac Pro is humonguous, and expensive.

The Mac Mini isn't much more than a toy.

The Imac's an all-in-one - 'nuff said.

Time to *ADD* a mini-tower to the lineup....

Has Apple ever had anything that fit the mini-tower description, or have their towers always been workstations? (If so, what was the last one?)

On the new processors; isn't software still lagging behind the potential of the current Pros? I mean, After Effects is still 32 bit and it only utilizes a small part of the available RAM (although between the processing horsepower and RAM I'm able to continue working on other things while AE churns away - couldn't do that with my old G4 Quicksilver...) so I don't see any reason to be hurrying up to ditch my Early '08 anytime soon, unless I'm missing something?

 

[Eidorian]

Yea..That info in that thread kinda negates most of what I said bout the question of gainestown branding. It looks as if its a Xeon for sure? But still, If Intel is marketing skulltrail as the ultimate desktop platform, I can easily see them rebranding a gainestown die as i7 EE or something similiar. Just like they did with Gallatin Xeon core for the original P4EE.

Why is it a mess? Just because of the x58 for all situation?

Well the Core 2 Extreme QX9775 processors for the Skulltrail platform were actually Xeons all along. I'm still a little surprised that the X58 will be along for the ride. I suspect rebranded Xeons to show up on a Nehalem Skulltrail only basis again.

Has Apple ever had anything that fit the mini-tower description, or have their towers always been workstations? (If so, what was the last one?)

Single/dual processor Power Mac G4 and G5 for about $1,299 - 1,999 fit the bill.

 

[niklot]

as far as i know it would maybe be 'rediculously fast' if the software was optimized 4 it... especially 4 games it wont make a big difference if at all... so there will pass some time, lets say at least 1.5 year, till the core i7 really can show his potential...

 

[Eidorian]

as far as i know it would maybe be 'rediculously fast' if the software was optimized 4 it... especially 4 games it wont make a big difference if at all... so there will pass some time, lets say at least 1.5 year, till the core i7 really can show his potential...

Run multiple instances of the same software.

I know that Multimedia has done dual Handbrake instances on his octo.

 

[tivoli2]

Single/dual processor Power Mac G4 and G5 for about $1,299 - 1,999 fit the bill.

OK - I did a little quick searching as well and I think I see the big differences now. Many thanks.

And Eidorian, are you saying I could run two sessions of AE simultaneously? This is the first I've ever heard of such a thing. That's running things in the shell, I'd imagine? (behind the GUI... in the console, is what I'm trying to say...)

 

[Eidorian]

OK - I did a little quick searching as well and I think I see the big differences now. Many thanks.

And Eidorian, are you saying I could run two sessions of AE simultaneously? This is the first I've ever heard of such a thing. That's running things in the shell, I'd imagine? (behind the GUI... in the console, is what I'm trying to say...)

The easiest way is just to make a copy of an application. In most cases it won't complain about multiple instances.

What's "AE"?

 

[tivoli2]

The easiest way is just to make a copy of an application. In most cases it won't complain about multiple instances.

What's "AE"?

Sorry... After Effects.

I may have to give this a whirl. I guess I don't mess around with my computers like I used to.

 

[Evangelion]

what is the difference between workstation and other.. cpu!?

Among other things, Xeons support multi-CPU cofigurations, wheread desktop-like (ajka i7) only supports one CPU.

If Mac Pro moved to i7, it would mean that it could only have one CPU, as opposed to having two CPU's like it does today.

 

[Evangelion]

I think that we're simply used to hardware and software cost structures that add a big "tax" on server/professional tools, even though there often isn't much difference between the two.

Server operating systems (Windows/OSX/Linux...) are mostly identical to the client versions, but cost far more.

Server-Linux and desktop-Linux cost the same .

 

[Digital Skunk]

Then they need to make the iMac cheaper and discontinue the Mac Mini.
Who knows what will Apple do? Maybe at MacWorld 2009 we will see our dream "Mac Pro".

Maybe they will. But I wasn't talking directly to you Kabunaru, you've been around long enough to understand the issue.

As most have said, there's no difference in performance, only price. My current G5 tower cost me 1700 bucks and the G4s before it started out at 1400 bucks for a single chip, fully upgradeable machine.

The iMac could be priced the same thing it is now, and Apple could introduce a new model desktop with the case of a Mac Pro but the insides of an average desktop and motherboard of a desktop and start it at $1499 and wouldn't loose any sales from the iMac.

It is a bit of a shame that you have to throw down $2200 for a tower configuration for the Mac which will last you a good 5 or more years if you aren't just a gear head, but could have cost you less if they used different chips.

p.s. You won't be able to run two instances of certain software without doing some OS trickery. AE is one app that I know won't be able to run twice on the same machine. The network detection that it has, as well as the applications use of the GPU may hinder anything from fully launching.

Handbrake is a different story. Depending on how the app was coded it may not recognize older versions of itself as being the same app. Epson software is notorious for doing this... I had three copies of Epson Printer Utility on my Mac for the R200, R800 and R1900 until I passed my printers on to others and settled on one. They were all the same app, just version 3.4.1, 3.4.8 , etc. you get the idea, that would run at the same time when launched.

 

[tenks]

Well the Core 2 Extreme QX9775 processors for the Skulltrail platform were actually Xeons all along. I'm still a little surprised that the X58 will be along for the ride. I suspect rebranded Xeons to show up on a Nehalem Skulltrail only basis again.

Yea but unfortunately for us, the rebranded Xeons meant a different socket with no upgrade path for the future (then). This time, thankfully, its just that, a rebranded cpu, same socket. Potentially easiar and cheaper to implement. Why are you surprised? this is one of the advantages of having QPI. One chipset, for the most part..this is a good thing!

 

[AidenShaw]

Server-Linux and desktop-Linux cost the same .

Oh really?

Fedora Core (desktop): Free
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (server): ~$1000 for dual socket, ~$1800 for multi-socket

Originally Posted by tivoli2
Has Apple ever had anything that fit the mini-tower description, or have their towers always been workstations? (If so, what was the last one?)

Single/dual processor Power Mac G4 and G5 for about $1,299 - 1,999 fit the bill.

No system using the humonguous aluminum case could be called a "mini-tower". The Yosemite plastic cases (the "Smurf Hotel" PowerMac G3 (B&W) and PowerMac G4) were mid-towers - better, but still large systems.

Apple used to have small pizza box systems like the PowerMac 6300

Look at what Dell has in the OptiPlex line of desktops. Why can't Apple do something similar, instead of the horrible gap between a toy mini and a huge tower? (Not suggesting that either the Mini or the Mac Pro be eliminated, just fill the gap.)

There are three systems shown here - a mini-tower, a small desktop, and an SFF. Specs in the thumbnail. Note that all support quad-core, upto 8 GiB RAM, and have both X4500 integrated graphics *and* an x16 PCIe slot.

I also added a comparison of the size of the SFF to the Mac Pro.

I guess I'll just wait now for the "But they're fugly" tangential replies to start.