Pre-Release PowerMac/XServe Replacement CPU Benchmarks?

[zweigand]

How much of a price difference is there going to be between Merom and Conroe? Would putting a Conroe in the iMac bump up the production costs tremendously? If not, I could still see it ending up in the iMac.

They won't be as hot as the G5s were, will they?

 

[odedia]

I really hope they'll move to NVIDIA's SLI technology with the new Mac Pro design. It's goodbye for the 1 graphics card days. A Mac Pro can now potentially hold FOUR Geforce 7900 Cards, each with 512MB of RAM, making it a 2GB graphics engine beast. Other vendors are offering it (alienware even offers it in a notebook! 2 graphics cards!), so I'm sure Apple can do it too.

 

[macgeek2005]

I really hope they'll move to NVIDIA's SLI technology with the new Mac Pro design. It's goodbye for the 1 graphics card days. A Mac Pro can now potentially hold FOUR Geforce 7900 Cards, each with 512MB of RAM, making it a 2GB graphics engine beast. Other vendors are offering it (alienware even offers it in a notebook! 2 graphics cards!), so I'm sure Apple can do it too.

They better do that... or else.

 

[JasonElise1983]

Woodcrest is not nor will it ever see daylight in a power mac/Mac Pro. Conroe will do just fine and from most benchmarks it out performs the Athlon X2 by atleast 20% clock 4 clock. Hate to break It to you but the dual socket days are over for Desktop macs. You really think apple is gonna put is gonna put 2 $80 cpu's in a prosumer machine....not. maybe in an Xserve but not a mac pro. here's how it will break down. iMac will use Merom as it is already pin compatible with the current Core duo mobile chips. no need to change the motherboard.

Seriously? I'll give you that you know a lot about computers but do you know anything about marketing. People in this world don't give a rats behind about what it technically just as good or faster. People hear "Quad CPUs" and they are sold. If alienware and Falcon Northwest can sell "quad" opteron setups, why wouldn't apple so the same? You really make no sense for someone who knows so much about computers. Like someone else said, It's a step backwards.

My guess will be the same setup they have right now with 2-dual systems and 1-quad system. Noone seems to care tht the Quad costs $3300, people still buy it.

 

[tristan]

Apple has gone to a 4-core system with the Quad. I think they will want to keep at least one system that has a 4-core setup, and Woodcrest is the only chip that is going to be able to be placed in a multi-CPU configuration to my knowledge. I'm still of the opinion that Woodcrest is heading towards a home in the PowerMac. Of course, I could be wrong, as could we all.

You're not wrong at all - as a matter of fact, you're absolutely correct. Also, Woodcrest comes out *first* in the series of new Intel CPUs, and Apple will insist in being first in line with the newest, first, and best CPU.

As soon as is physically possible - which is in late June or so - and then for the forseeable future, you will always see a Mac Pro lineup that includes two of the fastest Intel chips available. Always. Because that's what Steve Jobs wants on his desktop.

 

[milo]

iMac will not use Conroe okay get it now please let it go. Power Mac will not use Woodcrest , maybe Xserve will.

I don't get your reasoning why the towers wouldn't use Woodcrest. I could see if the cheaper towers would have conroe, but why not at least use woodcrest in the high end model?

It's not just a server chip, it's a server/workstation chip (and traditionally, the apple towers have been more powerful than the xserves). And the highest end macs are used as workstations, people are willing to pay top dollar to get top power. Since woodcrest can be used in a 4 core configuration, that will be more powerful than any conroe config, right? I'm skeptical that any dual core intel system will be able to beat the quad G5, apple needs a model that's a significant step up.

 

[macgeek2005]

You're not wrong at all - as a matter of fact, you're absolutely correct. Also, Woodcrest comes out *first* in the series of new Intel CPUs, and Apple will insist in being first in line with the newest, first, and best CPU.

As soon as is physically possible - which is in late June or so - and then for the forseeable future, you will always see a Mac Pro lineup that includes two of the fastest Intel chips available. Always. Because that's what Steve Jobs wants on his desktop.

Yayyy for Mac Pro's at the end of june.

However, I like the name PowerMac better.

 

[jrhone]

Not all of the creative world runs on Apple's software solutions.

But for the ones that do...liek Audio and Video people....this machine is LONG overdue....Why hold a machine back JUST for Adobe and Quark....what happens if they keep pushing the release back...keep the machine from being released? It didnt stop them from releasing the Macbook Pro....Plus its an even BETTER reason to buy a new MacPro and APERTURE....(I know its not really a Photoshop replacement, but...) I am a professional music person, and I would LOVE to replace my Dual 2 Ghz G5....that would then be my home machine and my main studio machine would be a new fully expanded Mac Pro....This will probably run my CS2 FASTER under Rosetta...but my audio stuff will SCREAM.....192Khz full surround sound mixes.....hmmmm.....

 

[ModestPenguin]

I severely doubt that they will cahnge the name, don't fret. PowerMac is much better than Mac Pro. Ugh. No. Please keep the name as it is.

 

[alexeismertin]

its Mac Pro

AI reports :

Offering yet another hint that it's done using the "Power" moniker in the names of its professional computer offerings, Apple Computer this week made a second trademark filing on the phrase "Mac Pro," this time in the United States.

 

[081440]

First off Apple's going to have toput more standard RAM in for users! No more of this 512 stuff if you have these kind of prosssecors.

Seconcd of all - this concern about wether CS3 will be released before Apple releases the Intel PowerMacs is nonsence. If Apple has a chance to get really fast processors in the PowerMacs sooner rather than later they'll do it. Plus just to satisfy all the Adobe users they'll probably keep the G5's available until CS3 is out. (They kept the G5 iMac available after the Intel version was out)

Believe me video editors will snap up the Intel Power Macs, I know I will get one as soon as possible. (It'll pay for it's self in saved time, heat, and electricity during rendering) 😀

 

[boncellis]

...My point. Apple is not compromising anymore. They are going to put Woodcrest in the Mac Pro.

They need this to blow every PC system out of the water, and they need it to be "The worlds fastest personal computer".

They can't afford to put Conroe in it.

I recall getting into this argument with Hector a while back (where are you Hector baby?) and my feelng was that there's no need to look at Conroe and Woodcrest as mutually exclusive within the same line. You (macgeek2005) might be right about the first point--Apple putting Woodcrest in the PowerMac replacement--but that doesn't necessarily lead to your next point--that Apple "can't afford to put Conroe in it."

Maybe some users are still stuck thinking of the distinction between G4/G5. The Conroe PowerMac replacements could ostensibly be sold alongside the Woodcrest systems (at 70% of the price, most likely).

Think Different 😉

 

[gnasher729]

But where are you finding this information that Woodcrest requires a dual-socket motherboard and ECC-RAM? Woodcrest is a dual-core CPU, and although ECC-ram would be good if you have mission-critical stuff, all indications is that Apple will build their next-gen PowerMac similar to today's version with it being able to accept either ECC or non-ECC.

The main difference between Conroe and Woodcrest is that you can have more than one Woodcrest chip on the same motherboard, but only one Conroe chip. So if you use Woodcrest, then you should have two of them (or at least space to add a second one), otherwise you might as well stay with Conroe.

That said, I am really curious what Apple will do with the Powermacs. All the models that got Intel CPUs got at least twice the speed they had before (iMac single G5 -> dual core Yonah = twice the speed, Mac Mini -> Core Solo = twice the speed, everything else = four times the speed). A single Conroe chip at high clockspeed is faster than a single dual core G5, but not twice as fast; that needs two Woodcrests. And two Woodcrests (four cores) are faster than a dual chip = quad core G5, but not twice as fast.

But then Apple had single G5 towers for a while, so I could imagine three models with medium to high speed Conroe, two slowish Woodcrests, and two fast Woodcrests. (Note that in Intel's price lists, price grows extremely fast with speed, so two slow Woodcrests are likely to be faster and cheaper than the fastest Conroe chip available).

 

[aswitcher]

So what do people expect to happen to PM prices?

I was hoping Apple would bring out a revamped intel version at about the same price as a 17" iMac for their low end machine for those who want a bit more grunt and to sue their own screen...

 

[gnasher729]

How much of a price difference is there going to be between Merom and Conroe? Would putting a Conroe in the iMac bump up the production costs tremendously? If not, I could still see it ending up in the iMac.

A Merom and a Conroe chip at same clockspeed will give you exactly the same performance. At the same clockspeed, Merom is likely to be slightly more expensive than Conroe. On the other hand, it uses much less power, so you wouldn't ever use Conroe in a notebook, or in a MacMini or iMac, where you want to cram the computer in the smallest possible space.

You would use Conroe in a tower, where you have plenty of space for fans and don't care about a bit more heat and noise. And there it has the advantage that you can get Conroe chips running at much higher clockspeeds or at a lower price.

 

[SirOmega]

Re: Sli

It is highly doubtful that Apple will put SLI in their workstation Mac Pro line. Why? Because Nvidia tightly controls what chipsets SLI will run on. And right now its ONLY the Nvidia (nForce 4/5)-based motherboards. Nvidia would have to open their drivers to allow SLI to run on an suitable intel-based board (i975X). Unlikely.

ATi's Crossfire however, will work on any motherboard (supposedly - I've never tested a Crossfire rig).

And regarding the procs...

August (WWDC):
Mac Pro: Conroe XE 3GHz for 1S ($2199), Woodcrest 2S 3GHz ($2799)
(maybe) xMac: Conroe 2.66Ghz ($1599)

October 2006: (consider that these yonah-based motherboards are most likely already compatible with the Merom)
iMac: Merom 2.33Ghz (current prices)
MacBook Pro: Merom 2.33Ghz, 2.16GHz

December/January: (its quite possible we see these at thanksgiving for a Christmas buying rush, or we see them launched on or around 10.5)
MacBook: Merom 2.16/2.0Ghz (current prices) - possibly a 1.83Ghz for $899
Mac Mini: Merom 1.83/2Ghz (current prices)

 

[darrens]

MacBook Pro - Meron
iMac - Conroe
MacPro - Woodcrest

That's how Intel's positioning their chips, and that how it will be. Anyone who says different is smoking my uncle's "oregano". Only open questions are what will be in the Mac Mini and the future Macbooks. (Probably older Core Duos.)

Don't know if anyone's said this yet...

What if Apple decides to be consistent in it's naming for once. How about...

MacBook - Yonah
MacBook Pro - Merom
Mac - Conroe
Mac Pro - Woodcrest

There's a lot of difference between a Prosumer and a Workstation user...

Edit: Perhaps the iMac and Mac names are too similar - but eMac and iMac names were pretty similar too. I'll wait and see.

 

[Catfish_Man]

I think it's likely that the high end Mac Pro will use Woodcrest. A single 3Ghz Woodcrest (dual core of course) would likely be competitive with the quad on most stuff... but competitive is not a compelling upgrade. For it to be faster across the board, it'll need to remain quad.

 

[TangoCharlie]

I aggree - XServes first...

Doubtful. The processors will be available, but with Creative Suite still not native, QuarkXPress 7 not being Dual Binary until later this summer, and other pro apps being in a similar quandry, I think WWDC is still a good bet for replacement Powermacs.

XServe, on the other hand, is a totally different story. Just look at how long it has gone untouched. We very well could see an XServe refresh in the next month or two.

Well, sort-of.... I aggree that the XServes will be next.... and with WoodCrest (Xeon) processor(s) at 1.86 and 2 GHz, but I don't think Apple is waiting for CS3.

I think the MacPro will follow not-too-long after, with WoodCrest (Xeon) as well (3GHz).
Additionally, I think Apple will boost the CPU in the iMac to Conroe (Core 2 Extreme), and the MBP to Merom (Core 2 Duo).

Apple will be one of the first (if not the first) to use the new CPU's.

Well, time will tell.🙂

 

[BenRoethig]

Hmm, what do you reckon?
or even forgo Conroe altogether:
Merom - Mac mini, iMac
Woodcrest - PowerMac, xServe

Ding Ding Ding. Both the iMac and Mini will retain a common chipset with portables. Merom will be fast enough for the Mac users not to complain and save a lot of headaches due to its lower power requirements. The PowerMac is a workstation class machine and will use woodcrest across the line. Apple's way of thinking says a headless Prosumer mac will get in the iMac's way, so I don't see much room for conroe in Apple's lineup. They don't understand the prosumer enough to do so.

 

[aswitcher]

SNIP Apple's way of thinking says a headless Prosumer mac will get in the iMac's way, so I don't see much room for conroe in Apple's lineup.

But a Powermac that could happily lie on its side would allow them to increase powermac sales and thus reduce costs through economies of scale. Look at the success if the Mac Mini and in many cases its due to the form factor not just the price. Sure some iMac sales would be canablised but all up I think Apple would sell more Macs with a powermac that could go under your monitor or big screen TV because it has extra expandability for TV tuners and additional HDDs.

 

[BWhaler]

Sure, I am happy that we now have true speed.

But let's get back to quality. Basically ever Intel Mac that has been released this year--except for the 17" MBP--has had some form of design or manufacturing problem.

(I am not saying EVERY Mac has problems, but the lines are less than optimal.)

Apple needs to remember they are not Dell. We pay more. We expect quality. (Not heat and noise and crappy backlighting on our screens.)

 

[BenRoethig]

But a Powermac that could happily lie on its side would allow them to increase powermac sales and thus reduce costs through economies of scale. Look at the success if the Mac Mini and in many cases its due to the form factor not just the price. Sure some iMac sales would be canablised but all up I think Apple would sell more Macs with a powermac that could go under your monitor or big screen TV because it has extra expandability for TV tuners and additional HDDs.

I know, they would sell a bunch. But remember, Apple designs and sells machines according to how Steve Jobs believes the PC market should be, not how it is. In their mind, the iMac fufills the needs of all mid-range customers and anyone else is a pro who can drop down two grand minimum on a PowerMac. If Apple were to bring their sense of style to the Micro and full ATX tower market, I'd buy one in a second. Add in a free standing 17" display with a built in isight and hub, I'd pick on of those up too. Especially, if the dislay prices got closer to reality.

 

[combatcolin]

Seriously? I'll give you that you know a lot about computers but do you know anything about marketing. People in this world don't give a rats behind about what it technically just as good or faster. People hear "Quad CPUs" and they are sold. If alienware and Falcon Northwest can sell "quad" opteron setups, why wouldn't apple so the same? You really make no sense for someone who knows so much about computers. Like someone else said, It's a step backwards.

My guess will be the same setup they have right now with 2-dual systems and 1-quad system. Noone seems to care tht the Quad costs $3300, people still buy it.

Wasn't it Gil Amino who once said that Apple is a marketing company?

 

[jiggie2g]

I've been waiting for a few months for the MacBook to be released, and amongst all this anticipation I now find that there is a potential for the Merom processor to replace the current dual-core chip. Just curious, but could someone please explain the major advantages of Merom? I mean, I'm an engineer and I'm going to use Windows on the Mac 1/4 time for specific apps, but...will Merom really be worth the wait?

Yes it will be worth the wait, just take a look at at it's potential

Super Pi, All sandra tests, Cinebench, TMPG encoding, 3dmark06
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=99466

Super Pi, 3dmark01, 3dmark03, Sandra, Cinebench, 3dmark06, 3dmark05, Aquamark3, Mandelbrot benchmark
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=99342

Super Pi, Sandra, PassMark, TMPG encoding, 3dmark01, 3dmark03, 3dmark05, 3dmark06, and everything repeated at different speeds
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=98919

As for Conroe ...lookie here
Conroe Destroys Athlon FX-62 socket AM2
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=5692&page=1

Conroe at 4.2ghz
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=100628&conroe

Conroe at 4.6ghz
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=100739&conroe

Benchmarks Galore
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=99892&conroe

and that's not even counting the Conroe XE(Extreme Edition). now i know these are overclocked benchmarks , but just shows the potential of these CPU's and this will silence you mac monkeys for downplaying Conroe's significance.

I can possible see Woodcrest at the very top end model but for single socket dual core CPU's woodcrest is a waste and is just more expensive with no performance gains in that configuration. Conroe will due just fine.