Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

jleffell

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 8, 2009
56
0
I am about to purchase a new Mac Pro but would wait a few months if Apple were to release the 3.2Ghz Nehalem CPU.

What is the likelihood of this happening?

I would hate to invest in this machine and then have the faster CPU show up a few weeks/months later.

Thanks
 

CaptainChunk

macrumors 68020
Apr 16, 2008
2,142
6
Phoenix, AZ
Doubtful, at least this year. Past trends in Apple hardware releases have shown that they refresh their desktop machines about once per year. Sometimes, it takes longer than that. The Early 2008 Mac Pro had a January 2008 release; the Early 2009 model got released in March of this year. So, I don't see a replacement coming for at least 7-8 months.

If you need a Mac Pro and have the money, buy now. Waiting for the next big thing in computing is like waiting for the next model year car just because it's rumored to have a slight increase in HP output. Technology inevitably improves and there's no controlling that.
 

ekwipt

macrumors 6502a
Jan 14, 2008
931
312
They should, they could, but most likely won't. I'm guessing thay have design specs/principles and the 3.2 will most likely run too hot for their liking.
 

nanofrog

macrumors G4
May 6, 2008
11,719
2
It would likely be a better idea to upgrade other areas of the system for an overall system boost than swap out the originals for 3.2GHz parts.

HDD throughput can be significantly improved, and would give a better performance IMO. Especially if a RAID is used. Data is fed to the processor(s) faster, so there's less time spent waiting, resulting in faster executions. :D
 

Cynicalone

macrumors 68040
Jul 9, 2008
3,212
0
Okie land
I doubt they will upgrade. Even if they do 2.93GHZ Quad or Octo should be plenty fast enough for a few good years.
 

DeepCobalt

macrumors regular
Sep 6, 2007
188
0
Over and around
A simple search will produce that this topic has been beaten to death thoroughly on this forum. To recap:

No 3.2 Ghz Mac Pros because, (1) the 2.26 is 80W, the 2.66 + 2.93 are both 95W and the 3.2 is 130W. Hence, the 3.2 doesn't fit Apple's "green" kick. (2) the 3.4 Harpertown was never offered--Apple topped off with the 3.2. (3) If they were going to use the 3.2, they would have done so already--they were the first to get the Nehalem chips and could pick which ones they wanted. (4) if you think the 8 x 2.93 is expensive, forget the 3.2.
 

Genghis Khan

macrumors 65816
Jun 3, 2007
1,202
0
Melbourne, Australia
Cynicalone said:
I doubt they will upgrade. Even if they do 2.93GHZ Quad or Octo should be plenty fast enough for a few good years.

You should be banned from the Mac Pro forum for that comment.

People with the 2.93GHz Mac Pro's (or non-base) want/need as fast as is possible. e.g. in my case, if I had a 3.2GHz Pro, i would be able to get renders done at 14% higher resolution in the same time...and that's just better...or i could get them done in 12.5% shorter time...and that's also just better...why not have better?

/rant



@Tutor

may i ask what you do with that beast?:apple:
 

Tesselator

macrumors 601
Jan 9, 2008
4,601
4
Japan
If you believe http://browse.geekbench.ca/ highest scores, there is one faster Linux with Intel Xeon X7460's @ 2.66 GHz (24 cores) and an IBM with Intel Xeon X7460's @ 2.67 GHz (32 cores); but its the fastest Mac listed.

Of course I don't believe GeekBench scores. My own machine varies over twelve hundred points just depending on the phase of the moon. :) So if you want the highest GeekBench scores just run it at various with the fans on max. ;) You'll get it eventually. :)
 

snouter

macrumors 6502a
May 26, 2009
767
0
There is an upcoming article at AnandTech in their review of the MacPro that will cover CPU upgrades.

anandtech said:
It's a Mac Sort of Week

I'm out of the office for the rest of this week but I'm working on wrapping up two major projects: the 3GS review and my Nehalem Mac Pro article. The latter is pretty unique since we managed to upgrade the CPUs in the Mac Pro, which proved to be much more complicated than you'd think at first.

What I am hoping for is this:

Hot on the heels of the radical reorg and price shift of the laptop lineup, I'm hoping that that Mac Pro lineup gets a reorg featuring spec bumps and price drops. I can't spend $3300 on a 2.26 machine that needs expensive video card upgrades out of the box.

I'm hoping to see the 2.66 at the $3300 price point or something like that and they could use Snow Leopard as the reason.

New OS and a refreshed lineup. Do it!~
 

snouter

macrumors 6502a
May 26, 2009
767
0
No 3.2 Ghz Mac Pros because, (1) the 2.26 is 80W, the 2.66 + 2.93 are both 95W and the 3.2 is 130W. Hence, the 3.2 doesn't fit Apple's "green" kick.

Any issues with taking a 2.26 machine and stuffing 90W or 130W processors in there?
 

VirtualRain

macrumors 603
Aug 1, 2008
6,304
116
Vancouver, BC
Any issues with taking a 2.26 machine and stuffing 90W or 130W processors in there?

Someone here ripped the heat sinks off an Octo core machine and it revealed that the octo processors (unlike the quads) run naked without IHS (integrated heat spreaders). Since all retail processors are sold with IHS, and they are soldered on, it's impractical to upgrade the processors on an Octo.
 

VirtualRain

macrumors 603
Aug 1, 2008
6,304
116
Vancouver, BC
Any issues with taking a 2.26 machine and stuffing 90W or 130W processors in there?

Someone here ripped the heat sinks off a dual processor machine and it revealed that the CPU's in the Octo's (unlike the quads) run naked without IHS (integrated heat spreaders). Since all retail processors are sold with IHS, and they are soldered on, it's impractical to upgrade the processors on an Octo.
 

Genghis Khan

macrumors 65816
Jun 3, 2007
1,202
0
Melbourne, Australia
snouter said:
Any issues with taking a 2.26 machine and stuffing 90W or 130W processors in there?

read the thread again (with particular reference to Tutor's posts)


Tutor said:
To Mr. Khan,

The beast is used to help me create management training videos and other training media.

so F.C.P. and stuff? you must be doing pretty well :D

congrats on having (quite possibly) the fastest Mac Pro in the world
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.