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

Quad core anybody?

Wow the FX-62 is really slow... it got last in nearly all the tests! I never liked AMD, and probably wont unless they release something that can close at all to Intels new chips.
 
Yeah but this means that intel will likely make a quad core xeon processor then we will have the octo-core Mac Pro
 
Carguy172 said:
Yeah but this means that intel will likely make a quad core xeon processor then we will have the octo-core Mac Pro
Click to expand...

Clovertown IS Quad Core.
Which suggests there will be an eight core Mac Pro soonish (MWSF2007 is my bet, but earlier would be nice) but we already knew that.

Still hanging out for thin chance Apple releases something with a Kentsfield in it. Conversely, I would guess there is a very slim chance Apple WON'T put Clovertown in new revisions of Mac Pro.
 
So what would be more future proof and upgradable ideal? That Apple put these new quadcore C2D in the mac pro (thus revising it's hardware I guess) or just sticks with going down the same hardware road and putting Cloverton in the mac pro later?
 
Jiddick ExRex said:
So what would be more future proof and upgradable ideal? That Apple put these new quadcore C2D in the mac pro (thus revising it's hardware I guess) or just sticks with going down the same hardware road and putting Cloverton in the mac pro later?
Click to expand...

If this is a sarcastic question, which it certainly sounds like, I don't understand your logic. Clovertown is to Kentsfield how Woodcrest is to Conroe. You can't do 8-core with Kentsfield.

If it's a serious question, then Clovertown is the better option, as firstly it will have two CPU sockets, versus one for Kentsfield, and will have twice the cores. It also seems silly for Apple to "de-rate" the Mac Pro to one CPU socket, when it will inevitably be increased to 4 sockets in a year or two for 16-core quad Tigertons.
 
suneohair said:
This would be a perfect candidate for the headless Mac on the way... ;)
Click to expand...

Don't make me cry...
Quad 2.66Ghz Kentsfield and a Geforce 8800GTS would be very nice...
...But no doubt never going to happen. :(

(PS I've lost hope completely that Apple will ever use such a high performance GPU as the 8800GTX, considering their present and past use of GPUs over their entire line. Note lack of Geforce 7950 GX2 from Mac Pro BTO page)
 
Erasmus said:
If this is a sarcastic question, which it certainly sounds like, I don't understand your logic. Clovertown is to Kentsfield how Woodcrest is to Conroe. You can't do 8-core with Kentsfield.

If it's a serious question, then Clovertown is the better option, as firstly it will have two CPU sockets, versus one for Kentsfield, and will have twice the cores. It also seems silly for Apple to "de-rate" the Mac Pro to one CPU socket, when it will inevitably be increased to 4 sockets in a year or two for 16-core quad Tigertons.
Click to expand...

It was the ladder. I was somewhat confused about what technically is defined as core 2 duo (merom, conroe, woodcrest) and what is not (Xeon, although still uses the microarchitecture.) After reading up a bit on it on wiki and with your input, I think it answered my question :)
 
Jiddick ExRex said:
It was the ladder. I was somewhat confused about what technically is defined as core 2 duo (merom, conroe, woodcrest) and what is not (Xeon, although still uses the microarchitecture.) After reading up a bit on it on wiki and with your input, I think it answered my question :)
Click to expand...

Glad to help. Can anybody either tell me the socket compatibility of future Intel updates or point me in the direction of a good website? If Apple do release a Conroe box, will it be CPU upgradeable in the future, and for how long if it's known at this stage? I think we determined that Conroe could be replaced with Kentsfield?
 
wallock said:
Yea, their market share is tanking - the only they have going for them is ATI, but they'll probably wreck that too
Click to expand...

ATM, I don't really care about ATI. Yes, their R600 GPU will probably blow G80 completely out of the water, but just look at their TDPs!

I'm pretty sure Geforce 8800 has a TDP of about 140, which seems pretty normal. What's R600 looking to be? Like 250W!!! It seems unbelievable to me, especially with their new partenership with AMD, who try and make energy efficient chips like Intel, that they would go and make a single GPU that would blow off more heat than a pair of Clovertowns (Guessing that Clovertown and Kentsfield will have similar TDPs). This is the single reason why at the moment I like NVIDIA more than ATI.

Here's to high performance GPUs with TDPs under 100W in the near future!
 
Mac'Mo said:
Let the "Waiting for Quad Core MB/MBPs" Threads begin!
Click to expand...

They might be waiting for a very long time. One thing I do remember from Intel's planned future releases of chips is a lack of quad core mobile CPUs.

So unless we get a "Macyclopedia Pro" that is 3 inches thick, and contains a Kentsfield, no Quad Core MBP's for, well, years. This could cause these threads to become a tad tiresome.

Now Quad Core Cubes on the other hand... :cool:
Can you say...
..."Waiting for Cube II"? :D :p
 
Erasmus said:
Glad to help. Can anybody either tell me the socket compatibility of future Intel updates or point me in the direction of a good website? If Apple do release a Conroe box, will it be CPU upgradeable in the future, and for how long if it's known at this stage? I think we determined that Conroe could be replaced with Kentsfield?
Click to expand...
It'll only be replaceable with Kentsfield (as far as I know), after that any better desktop chips will not be compatible as they will be on a 45nm process as opposed to the 64nm of the current core 2 duo.
 
dmw007 said:
A Cube II..... ***drool*** :D :cool:
Click to expand...

Hmmm... I wonder how immensely painful it would be to take my cube, rip everything out of it, and...

...Replace it with the innards of a Mac Mini? (With the CPU replaced with a 2.33 Merom, and a decent GPU (somehow) shoved in)

That would be cool. However I think It would be easier to just detonate a stick of dynamite under my cube. No doubt the end result would be the same.

It's kind of amazing how many people here seem to want a new Cube...

Yep, Kentsfield plus Geforce 8800. And a full size freezer unit. Sounds like fun! : )

Umbongo said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_C...roarchitecture covers most of it, assuming it is all correct as sources are often confused about Intel's plans.
Click to expand...

I have read this. I was hoping for what sockets (and possible clock speeds) these processors are likely to be. On second thoughts this info probably isn't available.
 
Erasmus said:
Hmmm... I wonder how immensely painful it would be to take my cube, rip everything out of it, and...

...Replace it with the innards of a Mac Mini? (With the CPU replaced with a 2.33 Merom, and a decent GPU (somehow) shoved in)

That would be cool. However I think It would be easier to just detonate a stick of dynamite under my cube. No doubt the end result would be the same.
Click to expand...

That would be next to impossible the graphics chip is soldered on to the logic board and there are not expansion ports to add a video card. :eek:



Give the dynamite a try, you might have better luck. :p ;) :D :)
 
Zwhaler said:
The Mac Pro did a lot better than the Quad Core C2D in many of the tests. If anything it will get Clovertown...
Click to expand...
No way. Where are you getting that from? Mac Pro has the slow FB DDR2. No way it's going to be faster than a quad core Kentsfield with plain DDR2.
 
dusanv said:
No way. Where are you getting that from? Mac Pro has the slow FB DDR2. No way it's going to be faster than a quad core Kentsfield with plain DDR2.
Click to expand...

Sorry about that, when I said clovertown I pictured kentsfield in my head, I just got the names mixed up.
 
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