Penryn Based Mac Pros Soon?

[Mac Kiwi]

Oh ya fingers crossed for Nov release


Heaps faster GI and AO will not go a miss for sure.


To get the best perofrmance out of a dual quad setup {3D} do you really need a minimum of 1G per core or do the new Intel processors mitigate that now?..... the ram is just so damn expensive!

 

[ACW]

if those are the new mac pros, they are still huge, i would of thought will design something smaller, i mean who the f*** needs 3 TB of hardrive?

Loads of people need 3TB in certain industries. The Mac Pro is designed to meet the needs of the Pros.

 

[slackpacker]

either that or the HD 2900 XT, i always felt apple was more ATI that nVidia.

The new ATI cards suck Lemons compared to the NVIDIA ..... Apple Please Please Please do not limit me to some pathetic card selection.... Support the latest stuff Please.

I laughed when the "Mac Pro" was released with the 7300 as the standard option... Its like selling a Ferrari with a 3 hp engine...

 

[slackpacker]

Loads of people need 3TB in certain industries. The Mac Pro is designed to meet the needs of the Pros.

But I think there are many more people who don't want the limited graphics options of current Laptops and iMacs. While the graphics in Macbook Pros/iMacs are awesome for laptops ...they suck when running games in Bootcamp. All I want is a great smaller desktop with a great graphics card so I can run Bootcamp and Vista for gaming. My windows machine is getting old and this would be a great upgrade. But a less expensive model with less slots and a smaller footprint would be awesome.

 

[Rowlander]

Yes, finally some "official rumor"

As soon as this comes out... well let me say it in the words of a great (He-)man:

I HAVE THE POWER!

I´d really like to know what options there will be and what they are going to be prized at. I won´t be able to afford a top-range mac pro but maybe a mid-range with 4 gigs of RAM. My 5-year old PC will have it´s earned retirement at last.

 

[iZaid]

Loads of people need 3TB in certain industries. The Mac Pro is designed to meet the needs of the Pros.

i use alot of pro apps on a mac pro for animation and design at college but the mac pro is huge, there is just no space for it at home.

 

[Macinposh]

i use alot of pro apps on a mac pro for animation and design at college but the mac pro is huge, there is just no space for it at home.

Wow!
You have a very small home then?
Do you live in a cardboardbox?

Next someone is starting to whine how heavy the MP is.
And then why it doesnt have Airport or BT.
And then why it doesnt have Frontrow and remote.
And then.

 

[netdog]

I'd rather see all laptops updated at MacWorld leading it into the years first, most thinest (the Ultra-Thin) laptop.

In my previous experience with numerous Vaios, thin = fragile. I think the MBP is just right in its balance between thickness and ruggedness.

 

[tk421]

Currently any configuration of the Mac Pro via the Apple Store ships in 2 - 4 days at the most. We have not heard of any distributors or retailers receiving notification of supply constraints or the "EOL - End of Life" notifications.

I think that an announcement will be forthcoming next week or on November 13 after the Intel embargo is lifted.

They will not ship immediately, Intel will have to ramp the production and Apple will have to do the assembly of the systems.

With Leopard right around the corner, it is only going to help drive additional sales of the Mac Pro line in it's current configurations, Apple will take advantage of this sales enabler for the balance of the year thereby maximizing sales of Leopard and clearing existing inventory. They will release the updated Mac Pro line in 2008.

I guess I don't see it. Does Leopard (which costs an inexpensive $129) really drive sales of the most expensive, top-of-the-line machine Apple offers? Maybe a tiny bit. But the professionals that buy a Mac Pro generally don't need it for the 300+ Leopard features (which would work fine on an iMac) they need it for it's power to process video, animation, audio, etc.

If these folks want the new OS, most will pay $129 for that, not $2500 (or more) for a new machine.

 

[Multimedia]

How is $48.25/GB For 667MHz And $62.50/GB For 800MHz RAM Expensive?

To get the best perofrmance out of a dual quad setup {3D} do you really need a minimum of 1G per core or do the new Intel processors mitigate that now?..... the ram is just so damn expensive!

I think $48.25/GB for current Mac Pro models and $62.50/GB for the new 800MHz ram is not expensive unless you think they should be selling it for free.

I think the ram is incredibly INexpensive and maxing the new models out to 16GB for only an extra $999 will be well worth it.

The iMac, MacBook and MacBook Pro RAM is all the way down to $37.50/GB with two 2GB sticks now at $149 sales. RAM has never been cheaper. I can't understand where you get off calling it expensive unless this is simply a case of you wanting to pay nothing for it.

 

[netdog]

I guess I don't see it. Does Leopard (which costs an inexpensive $129) really drive sales of the most expensive, top-of-the-line machine Apple offers? Maybe a tiny bit. But the professionals that buy a Mac Pro generally don't need it for the 300+ Leopard features (which would work fine on an iMac) they need it for it's power to process video, animation, audio, etc.

If these folks want the new OS, most will pay $129 for that, not $2500 (or more) for a new machine.

Leopard + FCS2 should use the 8-Cores much more efficiently, I would expect, than Tiger + 8-cores, never mind the fact that the new chipset and mobo are supposed to be MUCH faster precisely for things like rendering video, and you can bet that Leopard, FCS2, Aperture and eventually CS3 will be optimized for the S/S and Penryn.

Leopard, the apps and new Mac Pros are all going to work together to give Pros enormous advantages in performing exactly the tasks that you are addressing.

 

[diamond.g]

I think $48.25/GB for current Mac Pro models and $62.50/GB for the new 800MHz ram is not expensive unless you think they should be selling it for free.

I think the ram is incredibly INexpensive and maxing them out to 16GB for only an extra $999 will be well worth it.

The iMac, MacBook and MacBook Pro RAM is all the way down to $37.50/GB with two 2GB sticks now at $149 sales. RAM has never been cheaper. I can't understand where you get off calling it expensive unless this is simply a case of you wanting to pay nothing for it.

Is there any limitation on how you get to 16GB of Ram in the Mac Pro? It seems like it would be cheaper to just get 4 4GB sticks.

EDIT: Nevermind. FBDIMM really is more expensive than I remembered it being. You would also think the system would support more than 16GB of RAM. Is that an Intel limitation or an Apple one?

EDIT 2: after reading the Xserver page it may be an Apple one...

 

[Multimedia]

4GB Sticks Are Not Readily For Sale As They Cost Dearly

Is there any limitation on how you get to 16GB of Ram in the Mac Pro? It seems like it would be cheaper to just get 4 4GB sticks.

4GB sticks cost a fortune. Resellers don't even offer them yet.

 

[diamond.g]

4GB sticks cost a fortune. Resellers don't even offer them yet.

Yeah, that was my bad. I was reading the pages wrong. Is Crucial a reseller? They offer 4GB sticks, but they aren't cheap, and it looks like they have to be installed in pairs.

I am also noting that Crucial seems to believe that the Mac Pro can take 32GB of RAM.

 

[AidenShaw]

You would also think the system would support more than 16GB of RAM. Is that an Intel limitation or an Apple one?

Apple.

Seaburg supports up to 128 GiB of RAM. (http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/13224)

Apple made a reasonable design decision to keep prices lower by only supporting 8 DIMM slots, so with 2 GiB FB-DIMMs that gives a current limitation of 16 GiB.

When 4 GiB FB-DIMMs are available, it is possible that Apple will up the supported limit to 32 GiB.

 

[iMartini]

I guess I don't see it. Does Leopard (which costs an inexpensive $129) really drive sales of the most expensive, top-of-the-line machine Apple offers? Maybe a tiny bit. But the professionals that buy a Mac Pro generally don't need it for the 300+ Leopard features (which would work fine on an iMac) they need it for it's power to process video, animation, audio, etc.

If these folks want the new OS, most will pay $129 for that, not $2500 (or more) for a new machine.

I suspect many people who were already planning to upgrade their computers (myself included) are waiting for Leopard to come out before they make a purchase. True, it's only $129, and from what I understand Mac OS upgrades are relatively painless in terms of installation (at least compared to Windows), but I think a lot of people would rather just wait a few weeks and avoid the hassle altogether... Especially if it's a professional environment where companies may be purchasing/upgrading multiple machines at a time. It won't be surprising to see a big spike in Mac sales once Leopard is available pre-installed and people seem happy with it.

 

[Kwill]

My Guesses: In a couple of weeks

Prices?
These are my GUESSES - so relax

Octo 2.33 = $1899
Octo 2.66 = $2399
Octo 3.00 = $2999

What do you think?

One model: Octo 2.66 = $2499

Everything else BTO.

 

[AidenShaw]

I'd like to see them do better than that. If Dell can sell a machine with a base Dual Core Xeon for $1,400, Apple should at least be able to hit $1,750.

Forget the Xeon for the low end - go for Conroe/Kentsfield and the Penryn followons.

E.g. an HP9040N with quad core, 3 GiB RAM, 640 GB disk, 16X DL Super-multi-drive, TV tuner, FM tuner, PVR, ... for $1150.

And it's 60% of the size of the Mac Pro Maxi-tower.

 

[Eidorian]

Forget the Xeon for the low end - go for Conroe/Kentsfield and the Penryn followons.

E.g. an HP9040N with quad core, 3 GiB RAM, 640 GB disk, 16X DL Super-multi-drive, TV tuner, FM tuner, PVR, ... for $1150.

And it's 60% of the size of the Mac Pro Maxi-tower.

RAID 0? Yikes...

I'm still looking at building my own tower if it comes to it.

 

[diamond.g]

RAID 0? Yikes...

I'm still looking at building my own tower if it comes to it.

I wish hardware RAID 5 support was more common. Don't get me wrong RAID 0 and 1 are alright. But nothing beats a hardware based RAID (5+1) + (5+1). Boy EMC's SAN sure have spoiled me...

 

[CWallace]

Can I safely assume that Boot Camp will work on the new Mac Pro's?

Yes, but Boot Camp's "installation license" expires at like the end of the year, so if you chose to stick with Tiger, you'll need to buy your new MacPro before then.

No worries if you chose Leopard, of course, since BootCamp functionality is built-in.

 

[kirkbross]

Didn't the quad core Clovertown appear in the Mac Pro a month before Intel "Released" the chip wide... and... if Intel is going to "release" Penryn mid November, might Apple already have enough to ship the new Mac Pros, say, next Tuesday?

 

[Multimedia]

New Mac Pros Won't Run Tiger. Only Incompatibility Forces Leopard Delay In MP Base

Yes, but Boot Camp's "installation license" expires at like the end of the year, so if you chose to stick with Tiger, you'll need to buy your new MacPro before then.

The installation license expires next Friday. I don't see anyone in their right mind staying with Tiger since Leopard will be much more multi-core friendly in all ways. Only an incompatibility with a needed software package(s) could keep anyone back with Tiger in the installed base. Note too that the new models will not be able to run Tiger.

No worries if you chose Leopard, of course, since BootCamp functionality is built-in.

My point is that the choice to stick with Tiger will only rest with the current model owners. New model owners can forget Tiger ever existed 'cause it will not run on what they buy.

If you have any reservations due to specific software requirements, call the publisher and discuss Leopard compatibility now and next week to see what's really going on with what you have in Leopard vs. what they are preparing for you soon or not so soon. We always have this incongruity during system transition time. Most developers are ready. But a few choose to wait for the release before they get serious about making their software work right with it.

Trouble is when we get compelling new hardware at the same time as a system change it makes for some rocky times if what you need to make a living won't work with the new system right away. It's a lot of pressure because so many of us have waited for the new hardware. Then there's guys like me who went ahead and found an exceptional deal on a previously owned unit and bought it as insurance against exactly this scenario.

Alternatively the refurbished 2.66GHz Quad Mac Pros will still be available with Tiger installed & Leopard dropped in for only $2,199 for some time to come I'm sure.

 

[Multimedia]

Penryn Is A New Model Family Intel Rules Dictate Can't Be Sold Until November 12

Didn't the quad core Clovertown appear in the Mac Pro a month before Intel "Released" the chip wide... and... if Intel is going to "release" Penryn mid November, might Apple already have enough to ship the new Mac Pros, say, next Tuesday?

That was a speed exclusive not a model exclusive. Aiden points out the whole Penryn model family is not allowed to be offered for sale until November 12 according to Intel rules.

 

[tivoli2]

Didn't the quad core Clovertown appear in the Mac Pro a month before Intel "Released" the chip wide... and... if Intel is going to "release" Penryn mid November, might Apple already have enough to ship the new Mac Pros, say, next Tuesday?

Although I don't believe it, the thought gives me a bit of a thrill... but... what are the chances? (read: wishful thinking)

oop - Multimedia beat me to it. Guess that answers that!