Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The 2009 (Gainestown) Mac Pro: Everything We Know
- Thread starter Tallest Skil
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Apparently not the current Mac Pro's though. The 2006 model could switch up the lane multiplier, but this model can't.
Does the current model have two PCIe 2.0 slots and two PCIe 1.1 slots, and THAT is why we can't, or is it some other reason?
Oh, you quoted yourself... I didn't even notice.
Yes, I realize that Apple's secrecy doesn't work very well in your market. I'm sure that in December 2007 there were more than a few people who HAD to buy the horribly outdated 2006 Mac Pro simply for tax reasons before the end of the year, and then lo and behold the Penryn (current model) Mac Pro came out just a few days later...
I can't see Apple changing their mindset anytime soon, as they seem to think that a compromise in the area of workstations compromises everything else.
Just keep a close watch on Intel's chip release schedule, and know that anywhere from 6-13 weeks later we will see a new Mac Pro.
And... OH, YES. Waiting WILL be worth it.
Thank you , that was the type of response I was looking for.
-Cheers
Cory, Owner
vogelhaus design
www.vogelha.us
The reason I asked is because I've often seen those lanes referred to as "6 PCI-E x1 slots" rather than "6 PCI-E lanes", however Intels documentation clearly indicates a PCI-E x4 slot can be supported.
So two full x16 2.0 slots for graphics cards and a x4 PCI-E 2.0 and x4 PCI-E 1.1 for additional GPUs or RAID and Fiber Channel cards. I would hope as Apple only support PCI-E they would go with two IOHs and offer as much PCI-E bandwidth as they could.
No, I believe that is the reason.
With that budget? Ten base models or fewer better-speced ones...
Provided they get all Mac Pros, of course.
None at $2300. I'm not wasting money on another iMac either. Where that leaves me is up to cuptertino.
We're buying 2 machines, budget for each machine is around $20,000 because we need it to run to its full potential.
So 2 Machines, Cinema Display ( Array x4 ) 10TB HD, 2 Wacom Cintiq 21" and an external but separate server for our website, mailer, ect..
We're planning on making a large portion of our company interactive design, and we're currently working on 3 Stop Motion movies for 1 client. As well as sound design and architecture.
Best of luck to all of you in 2009 , I think I'll just sit back and read. Try to make an estimated guess as to when this technology can be in my hands.
For now, without a computer, I've converted the website to gallery poster designs, and our 3D stationary.
Cory, Owner
vogelhaus design
www.vogelha.us
I was under the illusion that snow leopard somehow leveraged the power of the graphics card so using the worlds most powerfull graphics card has to add to overall system performance (throwing towel exaggeration) ? regarding the quadro i believe the extra price you pay is for the drivers mainly, plus the extra vram ? I am a little alarmed that 3D apps are moving from the platform and open gl. My current workflow uses open gl in modelling & rendering. Because of the beastly price involved with these cards it is going to be a little difficult to get first hand feedback. I have double checked and confirmed that the 8800 is not suitable mainly because of the drivers even though apple tout it as suitable for 3D apps. I think it will be very interesting watching this develop.
I'm definitely buying one of the new Mac Pros when they're finally released. The main thing I want to be able to do is HD video editing with footage from my HD camcorder. How much of a difference do you guys think it will make having the RAID card and SAS hard drive, compared to the standard 7,200 rpm hard drives?
So SSD should give better performance than SAS drive? (I thought I'd read somewhere that SSD drives had slower write speeds, but I may be wrong). Any idea what capacity SSD drives might be available for the new Mac Pros?
I've had this highlighted on the first post for quite some time. I can't believe that page 10 is the first time we're starting to discuss it...
What are the current capacities of 3.5" SSDs? I can't find any in online stores, so...
You can always use the conversion trey that people are using with the velociraptor with the 2.5" SSD drives (this is my plan to use my intel x25-m with the nehalem mac pro).
http://www.maxupgrades.com/istore/index.cfm?fuseaction=Product.display&product_id=180
You can always use the conversion trey that people are using with the velociraptor with the 2.5" SSD drives (this is my plan to use my intel x25-m with the nehalem mac pro).
Not me, but Apple. I doubt that Apple will us this converter tray, so I'd like to find some 3.5" SSD sizes (because they'll have at least one SSD option for the next Mac Pro).
When researching many SSD drives on the web before plunging for the intel x25-m, I read from many sources that they might keep most SSD drives at 2.5" and future desktops might even shrink as technology gets better and maybe even completely do away with 3.5" into the future.
I think its reasonable because there is no need to make SSD drives any bigger than 2.5" and you can always buy conversions for older desktops that still do use 3.5" and the standard might switch completely to 2.5" in the near future.
But you can argue the fact that there are so many people using the standard desktop 3.5" HDD that it wouldnt happen any time soon but I'm sure in the next 5 years or so when SSD drives gets beyond 1TB that could be a reality. Especially when SSD drives become much cheaper and its technology is much solid for storing data years beyond the reliability of 3.5" mechanical HDDs.
Two great things about SSD drives is that, 1) Only its ability to rewrite is lost when an SSD drive wears out. 2) Even though the SSD drive crashes or unable to rewrite any new data its ability to read whats already stored on the drive is no problem.
Well yes Apple's implementation could be more beneficial, but someone could also find their windows apps utilizing it too in the near future.
Yeah the price is for certification, optimized drivers and real support. I don't know what the support is like if you buy a Mac card, I assume you get non-OS X support from Nvidia and OS X support from Apple. Certification under OSX doesn't mean much as all Mac cards are effectively certified anyway and the driver situation isn't a simple issue.
Hardware wise (excluding VRAM) the 8800GT and FX 5600, which is based on the older but slightly faster 8800 Ultra, are pretty similar. As Apple are writing the drivers there seems to be no reason why the drivers for GeForce cards can't be as good as those for Quados.
I mean Apple could optimize the 8800GT drivers to perfection if they saw fit making it as good as a Quadro 3700 (based on the 8800GT) would be under windows. However what appears to have happened is that they went the other way and the Quadro FX 5600 has drivers as good as GeForce drivers would be under windows. Hopefully I'm making sense there. All the OS X benchmarks and ancedotes I've seen and the fact that the Quadro is basically marketed by Apple purely as having more memory would seem to confirm this.
One thing you can do is softmod a GeForce card in to a Quadro. While it isn't going to turn an 8800GT in to an FX 3700 it allows you to install the quadro drivers on your system and in a number of Apps, some being OpenGL if I remember right you get improved performance. Searching for softmod Quadro should give some insight. This is a good link too: http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=539
Another option would be to get one of the midrange Quadros or FireGLs and have it for windows use only, but that isn't ideal obviously.
I'm curious, then, what Apple intends to do with the Mac Pro, as they will be offering an SSD with it.
Maybe they'll switch ALL the drives to 2.5" bays... We'll max out at 500GB per drive, but we'll be able to fit eight of them in there...
I'm curious, then, what Apple intends to do with the Mac Pro, as they will be offering an SSD with it.
Maybe they'll switch ALL the drives to 2.5" bays... We'll max out at 500GB per drive, but we'll be able to fit eight of them in there...
That would be suicide. Adapter most likely.
I'm curious, then, what Apple intends to do with the Mac Pro, as they will be offering an SSD with it.
Maybe they'll switch ALL the drives to 2.5" bays... We'll max out at 500GB per drive, but we'll be able to fit eight of them in there...
Or offer a simple 2.5" to 3.5" mounting bracket as every Solid State Drive manufacturer seems to provide.
Mechanical drives are not going away any time soon.
As you use the MacPros for work, you might want to keep in mind that it could take some time till the programs you are using have caught up with both the new architecture and Snow Leopard.
Other posters, who are more knowledgable re. computers, might disagree, but I assume the upcoming MacPro and Snow Leopard will be bug-free and fully compatible with professional software and hardware about 6-12 months after their initial release.
I'm curious, then, what Apple intends to do with the Mac Pro, as they will be offering an SSD with it.
Maybe they'll switch ALL the drives to 2.5" bays... We'll max out at 500GB per drive, but we'll be able to fit eight of them in there...
Hmm an earlier post you said that it might have enough room for 8 drive bays right? Makes me wonder...
Man but after using my intel x25-m, its quiet as hell and virtually no sound and the heat is barely there on the palm rest..
I cant wait to get a nehalem mac pro load up the intel x25-m ssd with it virtually silent or multiple SSD drives instead of the mechanical noisey and hot ones, lol.
Well... 8 2.5" bays with the current size and six 3.5" bays if it is made longer.
A few days ago, I saw a Mac Pro in real life for the first time in a long time...
THE THING IS A FREAKING SQUARE. It's taller than it is deep, for crying out loud! Apple could EASILY do with extending it and going with something like my design from post #305...
I mean, come on. It's TINY!
- Status