Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Penryn Based Mac Pros Soon?

Umbongo said:
I don't want to speak for Aiden, but when people say the MP is expensive they don't tend to be saying it's an expensive dual socket workstation, they are saying it's alot to pay to have a desktop mac that isn't the mini or iMac. Also as it's older technology a quad core system (single socket) can now be had alot cheaper than $2,500+.
Click to expand...

Thank you - that's exactly what I would have said :)
 
Pressure said:
It applies to memory intensive applications.

Applications written specifically to take advantage of the SSE4 code could see a 100% speed improvement.
Click to expand...

I think you're right about the memory-intensive part, though the benchmarks I have been reading show much less of an increase (around 10-15%) in real-world tests. It is definitely an improvement (more speed is always better), but not much of one.

Where do you get the 100% figure from?
 
Eidorian said:
Keep sliding...

attachment.php
Click to expand...

This is a single Quad core... so comparing it to the Mac Pro which has a 2 processor motherboard is not fair. Also what store is this? Is it one of those stores where you have to purchase something else o even get that price.

Saying it again sorry...

My only issue with Apple is that we have very powerful CPU's in our machines... But on the GPU front Apple gives us junk.
 
Jdot said:
You know it just kills me every time someone says "MAC PRO = EXPENSIVE" I would like someone to find me a manufacture who makes a quad core xeon workstation that is less expensive than the mac pro because I can't even build one for cheaper then Apple sells them.
Click to expand...

I can get a slightly better video card in an HP xw8400 (nVidia FX4600 768MB) for $4479 vs. the $4797 for the Mac Pro with the 512MB FX4500. Both have dual 5130 CPUs, 4 x 1GB RAM, a 250GB HDD, Operating System, keyboard, mouse, FireWire800 and a SuperDrive. The HP can also take one extra HDD, so I can have a single boot drive and either 2xRAID 1 or 4xRAID 0.

All that being said, my beef is not that the Mac Pro is "overly expensive", because as you note, it really is not compared to systems with similar specifications.

No, my beef is that there is no "middle choice" between the iMac and the Mac Pro, which also has to have the price of a 20" or 23"/24" display added.
 
Jdot said:
You know it just kills me every time someone says "MAC PRO = EXPENSIVE" I would like someone to find me a manufacture who makes a quad core xeon workstation that is less expensive than the mac pro because I can't even build one for cheaper then Apple sells them.

BTW already checked dell the cheapest they offer the dual xeon 2.66 machine with same specs as mac pro is over $2,800
Click to expand...

The ones that say that aren't looking for a quad xeon workstation, they're looking for a desktop. Unfortunately, Apple does make one anymore.
 
slackpacker said:
This is a single Quad core... so comparing it to the Mac Pro which has a 2 processor motherboard is not fair.
Click to expand...

But, as we've been trying to get people to understand, if you only need 4 cores the HP is *much* more computer for the dollar.

If you're looking for a mid-range system (it seems so silly to call a quad core system with 3 GiB of RAM a "mid-range" system ;) ), the Mac Pro is very expensive in comparision to other available systems. (Not to mention that it's also Hummer-sized compared to a quad-core mini-tower.)

This is especially obvious when you look at lesser systems - this $1100 system is a full Vista media centre system with TV tuner, FM radio tuner, PVR software, ... Similar HP systems without the radios are priced every day for about $850 (yes, that's quad core 2.4 GHz, 3 GiB RAM).


slackpacker said:
Also what store is this? Is it one of those stores where you have to purchase something else o even get that price.
Click to expand...

It's this weekend's Fry's Electronics ad for the Bay Area. http://newspaperads.mercurynews.com/ROP/ads.aspx?adid=5202697&advid=32664&type=
 
Multimedia said:
Doubtful. I paid $2700 for a 2.66 with a 150GB 10K Raptor, two 500s, the 250 it came with, 5GB of ram and bluetooth + a 23" ACD HD both only 2 months old in August.
Click to expand...

Wow, you got a very good deal. I was able to sell my MP 2.66 w/stock 250GB HD and 1GB of RAM (and an AppleCare plan) for $2300. I think that was a very good sale, for me. Especially considering these new machines that may/may not be coming.
 
Multimedia said:
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.
Click to expand...

And wow has it gone down in price! $230 for 4GB of Mac Pro heat-sinked RAM these days at OWC, still goes lower every week, and I paid $350 (or so) for ONE GB of Crucial Mac Pro RAM last September.

The RAM prices have dropped 400% in a year! I took the opportunity recently to upgrade from my old 4GB config to 10GB by removing and selling 4 of those 512MB modules and replacing them with 4 2GB modules.
 
AidenShaw said:
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.
Click to expand...


Damn. They are giving these things away.

That said, if you want 3.0GHz or even 2.66GHz, the prices go significantly higher. But yes, Apple can be more competitive as they were when the Mac Pro was originally released. I think the next round will go all 8-core (with perhaps a low end 4 core one processor variant) as a result with at least 2GB of RAM standard. I don't see the high end 3/3.2GHz 8-core machine being any cheaper than today's 3.0 8-core model, however. The chip prices are the same.

RAM and HD are cheaper these days, of course, but Apple loves increased margins!
 
AidenShaw said:
I'm not certain what's going to happen in the next few weeks, but I've been pointing out that historically Intel hasn't allowed open retail sales before the official announcement date.

I wouldn't be really surprised if Apple announces a Penryn-based Mac Pro before too long, shipping on the 12th of November. I would be surprised if it ships earlier.
Click to expand...

It is extremely rare for Apple to announce a new machine just when Intel has the latest chip (the MacBook Pro notwithstanding). The 8-core 3.0 Ghz model was an unusual case where it came out months before any other manufacturer had access to it, but the quad core chips themselves were out for a long while before that. (Apple could have, for example, released an 8-core 2.66 model way back last fall and didn't.)

I highly doubt Apple will rush out and release Penryn models as soon as the chips are released. But then again, this is Apple, and they are never that predictable....
 
Go Core 2 (Conroe/Kentsfield), not single socket Xeon

Ctrl2k said:
I think the next round will go all 8-core (with perhaps a low end 4 core one processor variant)...
Click to expand...

Everything about a Xeon is more expensive (memory, chipset, CPU, ...) - so a Xeon system with a single socket populated doesn't make as much sense as a Conroe/Kentsfield system.

In addition, a single socket in that Hummer-sized PowerMac G5 case is a waste of desk or floor space.

Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... Mini-tower... ;)
 
slackpacker said:
This is a single Quad core... so comparing it to the Mac Pro which has a 2 processor motherboard is not fair. Also what store is this? Is it one of those stores where you have to purchase something else o even get that price.

Saying it again sorry...

My only issue with Apple is that we have very powerful CPU's in our machines... But on the GPU front Apple gives us junk.
Click to expand...
Intel is more then happy to sell a single socket quad core alongside a dual socket dual core. :rolleyes:

It's called Fry's Electronics. I'm sure it's a very questionable place. :p

For around $1,000 you can get a mini-tower that can hold its own against a Mac Pro.
 
Link To Mac Pro Ram At OWC Where No 4GB Sticks Are For Sale

Ctrl2k said:
It is, you just have to look on the Mac Pro Page.
Click to expand...
I did. The maximum they offer is 16GB 8x2GB Kits.

What the F***? The are hidden on a completely different and impossible to find page.

Talk about a confusing setup. They are really hurting themselves by not listing those on the regular pages. I don't even understand how you found that page?

OK So that is $149.96 per GB OWC 32GB Kit @ $4,799 instead of $43.75 per GB from Omni's 16GB kit @ $700. So a 3x+ premium.

Sorry I couldn't figure out where you found that page - next time please post a PROMINENT BOLD link to what you reference like that in the original post and not with two little words like "It is". Thanks.
 
Eidorian said:
For around $1,000 you can get a mini-tower that can hold its own against a Mac Pro.
Click to expand...


There you answered why there wont be a MP Light ever..

With the state of the programs,apple would never publish a computer that is on par with their pro systems. Who the hell would buy the macpros when you would get the same performance for half the price?

Let´s see:

Music: You can do practically everything in the music production with a iMac nowadays. Unless you are running 24bit/192hz 5.1 surround stuff with 128 tracks filled with plugins. Wich you could do with your MP Light.
Macpro, no love.

Photo: Poor threadings in CS3 dont even use 4 cores properly. So no need for 8cores +. Macpro or macpro Light? Hmm? They would be on par...
No love for macpro.

DTP : See above. Most art directors/designer were allready using 24" iMacs for their stuff.Now that apple cleverly borked the displays,they are about forced to get macpros. BUT. Now, Macpro or Macpro Light for them?
No love for macpro..

Video: Well,the tough one.Well,not actually. Pro´s would get the Macpros and server nodes. But the home enthusiasts and small production companies doing SD stuff would be tempted to go Macpro Light.
Draw.


All the other stuff: Well, let say 50/50?
No love for macpro.


So,why would apple cut their own market,both on iMac and Macpro lineups to compete in a segment with smaller margins?
They wont.

Thus, Loooove for Macpro.
:apple:
 
slackpacker said:
My only issue with Apple is that we have very powerful CPU's in our machines... But on the GPU front Apple gives us junk.
Click to expand...

The majority of prospective Mac Pro owners have that very same issue. We can only hope that Apple "gets it" this time and offers up some video card options worthy of being housed in that machine.

It will be very interesting to see how Leopard utilizes multi-cores. Will it use all eight cores?? Only four?? Two??? Not multi-core aware??? History has shown that with every new OS release, it is faster than the previous version. Imagine Leopard making full use of eight available cores, on top of the already reported speed increase.

I'm still crossing fingers and toes that we'll see the new Mac Pro announced along with Leopard's released, shipping November 12th. :D
 
Macinposh said:
There you answered why there wont be a MP Light ever..

With the state of the programs,apple would never publish a computer that is on par with their pro systems. Who the hell would buy the macpros when you would get the same performance for half the price?

Let´s see:

(snipped)

So,why would apple cut their own market,both on iMac and Macpro lineups to compete in a segment with smaller margins?
They wont.

Thus, Loooove for Macpro.
:apple:
Click to expand...

Why are you justifying Apple forcing people to pay too much money for too much power because of a big hole in their lineup? It's not like a full product line will hurt sales or profits (see the iPod).

Speaking as a recent switcher, I don't want Apple to compete against Dell, I just want something comparable to my old tower. I ended up having to get a Mac mini instead. Clearly I'm okay with paying a premium to run OS X, but a $1200 premium? I don't think so. And if Apple had something to fill that gap, I'd have bought it instead, and Apple probably would have made more money too.
 
As much as I love the Mac Pro I agree that there is a hole in the Mac lineup. There should be an intermediate system that allows you to pull your own hard drive or add more to utilize the built in software RAID. The ability to change out video cards would be a big step towards making Macs legitimate gaming machines even if only through boot camp. You don't need a Mac Pro level machine for these features.
 
cohibadad said:
The ability to change out video cards would be a big step towards making Macs legitimate gaming machines even if only through boot camp.
Click to expand...

So far, I'd say the promise of an "upgradeable graphics card" is a complete canard. I've been waiting for something other than my ATI X1900 (that, by the way, I'll be working on replacing for the second time soon since it is artifacting again) for quite some time now.

I love my Mac Pro, but Apple could do a heck of a lot more to make it more friendly to those interested in upgrading their graphics capability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back