The jokes is sure on us and Apple is seriously laughing their tails off. They know we only have two choices, pay them whatever fee they command or leave for windows.
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
The jokes is sure on us and Apple is seriously laughing their tails off. They know we only have two choices, pay them whatever fee they command or leave for windows.
The architecture is definitely different, and can't be considered on a 1:1 clock scale any longer.
It would assume at this point, Apple is using a different board in the Quad core versions, and it would only have a single socket. The DP boards would allow a single processor to operate, even the W35xx parts.
(Intel did nicely with QPI). It would be possible, but not cost effective. Assuming you mean to upgrade later down the road, I doubt the prices will drop much below what we'd se in around Sept., provided it follows the same pattern as the Harpertowns did. The current economy may change this however. Not really sure at this point.
If you are serious about getting the new model, and can swing it, I'd go for the 2.66 at purchase, as it would be cheaper in the long run. (Or 2.93 if your needs warrant it).
Justinm59 & Fomaphone: Wait for benchmarks on the new base model first before making a quick decision. I don't think we'll have to wait too long for Rob at barefeats to post.
Hey, why does barefeats.com not exist anymore? I want benchmarks!
I think Apple bankrupted them this time around.
The architecture is definitely different, and can't be considered on a 1:1 clock scale any longer.
It would assume at this point, Apple is using a different board in the Quad core versions, and it would only have a single socket. The DP boards would allow a single processor to operate, even the W35xx parts.
ehurtley said they wouldn't, so I took his word for it. Close to as official as we have right?
I would presume about a 20% increase in performance between a 3.2 octo and a new 2.66 octo. I would wait for real performance test when folks get them and see if the apps you use will see much boost. I'm glad I snagged a refurb 2.8 last month.
Does it? I didn't think so...
How can you tell? The BTO page on the store remains at 1066MHz when you choose the 2.93 option...
To which part do you refer?
He said something like Xeons 5500s will work in single socket boards, but 3500s and i7s wont work in dual socket boards.
Check wikipedia and a few other sites.
They point that the 2.66GHz+ Nehalems use 1333MHz ram. I think Apple made a mistake on their site.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_(CPU_architecture)
Who should we believe?
From what's currently available information wise, this seems quite realistic. Benchmarks would be much better though.
Well the 2.66GHz and 2.93GHz "octo" systems should be able to use 1333Mhz memory. The others can't. I wouldn't worry about it. Are you really going to need 32GB/s over 25.6GB/s memory bandwidth. And only to the processor the memory is attached to anyway as QPI is only 25.6GB/s.
I'd believe Apple. Apple has the hardware in hand, Wikipedia doesn't have much.
I'm a FCP editor and the what I do often requires Motion/After Effects/Photoshop use while FCP is open. As soon as I'm out of school I'll be diving into Cinema 4D, Shake, and whatever else seems lucrative.
For the first few months that I have this machine, I'll be doing reel-building exclusively... mostly motion graphics work in After Effects. My only real deadlines are opportunities to get hired... nobody's paying me directly to use my machine.
They can use it, they don't need to.
Xeon X5570 2.93GHz and X5550 2.66GHz have 1333MHz memory controllers which provide 32GB/s from a tri-channel configuration.
Xeon E5520, 3540 and 3520 (the others being used) have 1066MHz memory controllers which provide 25.6GB/s to each processor when using tri-channel.
QPI @ 6.4GT/s is 32GB/s when using 20 bit wide links, but I don't know if the Mac Pro i using that or the 16 bit (25.6GB/s) that has been used on the i7s.
Huh, that's the first I've heard of that, what a cheap ass way to sell Xeon's. Reading the specs on the single core, it does state 3 DDR slots also. You ALWAYS used to be able to run with one CPU. Can't believe they've changed it. Don't understand why even bar cost cutting.
I understand even less the fact they don't have the Quadro card option? It's not like your gonna worry about it's cost when spending $10,000 is it?
There isn't much information on the 3500 on Intels site.
Ummm, knowing Apple it IS the same mother board. But it's missing one of the daughter boards. It looks like the new systems have 4 slots of memory and one CPU on each (of two possible) daughter boards. Or it's two different daughter boards (?) one type haveing the one CPU and 4 ram slots while the other type has two procs and 8 slots. I wonder too if the chipset in on the daughterboard??? This is a faster design to be certain but it means that there is a custom part which Apple WILL refuse to sell separately thus making it impossible to upgrade on your own.
They changed it as the 3500s offer the same performance as the 5500s but at a much lower price.
The 3500s aren't out until the end of the month so won't be on Intel's site, but they are EXACTLY the same as the Core i7s but with ECC memory support.
The X5550 supports 1333MHz memory.
Check out this (Tom's Hardware). Their info came from Intel. Scroll down a bit.
It will work with 1066 however. Going by Apple's BUY page, the memory does not offer 1333MHz memory with either the 2.66 or 2.93GHz model. Perhaps Apple doesn't want to spend the extra $$$ for it, and hamstringing the performance somewhat as a result.
It could still be swapped though.
It has.
Updates have been quick too. 
Which brings me back to me earlier questions:
I'm confused about the memory speeds on the new Mac Pro. Hopefully someone can help me...
1) The speed that is currently offered is 1066. Why did Apple not choose the faster 1333 memory speeds?
2) Also, I was under the impression that each new CPU could access up to 3 channels (DIMM slots), and if 3 slots are populated, this would give the best performance. Is this correct? Why is Apple offering 8 memory slots, and will performance be affected by the amount of memory modules used?
3) How are Apple/Intel getting 4 channels from a 3 channel memory controller? Something seems strange about this configuration.
Thanks!
I have a feeling a price drop + modified versions of the mac pros are coming sometime this summer.
Ahh..
They may have had to limit the QPI management to one way only. DP parts can switch off the unused channel, but in the case of Tylersburg 36D, it can't switch it off itself when using the W35xx.
I would certainly like to find out for certain.
I just checked Intel's site an hour or so ago, and none of the 5500 or 3500 series parts are listed yet. I presume they're waiting to update the site when they officially release.
Oh right, thanks matey. Must admit when you make your own Hardware can make the interior use trays etc with bespoke parts, I agree with the daughter board theory. But why worry if that is the case, you'll be able to buy it as a part through online suppliers. Will be interesting to see what Apple have done here.
- Status