The Next Mac Pro

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by millertime021, Jul 13, 2010.

  1. millertime021 macrumors 6502a

    millertime021

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Location:
    AZ
    #1
    Let me start off by saying I don't own a Mac Pro nor am I in the market for a Mac Pro but I do like following rumors for different products.

    The current Mac Pro hasn't been updated it quite some time now and a lot of people are understandably upset and would kill for a refreshed MP.

    However, has there been any "major" upgrade worthy breakthroughs that would warrant a whole new Pro? Wouldn't it make more sense (for Apple) to wait until the end of the year when the new processors come out?

    Just my thoughts. Now lets hear yours. Am I stupid? Are my thoughts logical? Or what? :)
     
  2. TMRaven macrumors 68020

    TMRaven

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    #2
    The only major new cpus worth noting are the server edition sanydbridges, and those come out q4 of 2011. Besides a gpu upgrade, there really isn't much apple can do to the current Mac Pros besides offering 6core nehalems-- which really isn't worth it I feel. The thing apple should do foremost is give a huge price cut to the current mac pros.
     
  3. Cromulent macrumors 603

    Cromulent

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Location:
    The Land of Hope and Glory
    #3
    A whole new processor series has come out. But Apple have not updated the Mac Pro to reflect that.
     
  4. Roman23 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    #4
    Me personally?

    I could care less as I use my mac pro as a home computer/desktop workstation for light video editing and some gaming.. yes, some of it is hard-core but compared to a PC, I'd rather have that but can't afford all the high tech video cards to warrant it.

    The reason why the mac pro hasn't been updated is simply that the pro-market(what apple calls it) simply doesn't need an update every year.. Now, consumer machines like the imac, mac mini, and the laptops - yes, they too don't need updates every single year, but consumers demand more than the professionals as the professionals and the pro-market see that the computers they own will be plenty to get the work they do completed in a very short time.

    While I do welcome the 2010 mac pro, if it ever arrives, I shall stick with my 2009 as I really don't need the power of hexcores as most programs out there - 90 percent of them hardly use 2-4 cores let alone 8 or 16. And for my uses, I will never need to use hard-core video editing software because its not my interest to do so.

    Therefore, for some an update to the mac pro is essential to speed things up more efficiently, but given that the 2009 dual systems can support beyond 32GB of memory and other hard ware, it wouldn't seem feasible for an update at this given moment.. If anything, possibly Sandy Bridge might be a point where the Mac Pro should be updated..

    Steve Jobs replied to someone on here saying: The mac pro really is doing fine the way it is, no update needed - he maybe right, but the consensus on here says otherwise. In my opinion, I agree with Steve Jobs - for now.


     
  5. Roman23 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    #5
    I think

    Sandy Bridge is the next step.. not the 980x series processors if you prefer: the w5600 series or w3600 series.


     
  6. Roman23 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    #6
    Not enough of a difference

    to warrant it to be updated.. however, Sandy Bridge is and this is the target i think, not westmere.


     
  7. millertime021 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    millertime021

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Location:
    AZ
    #7
    I agree. I feel if they don't feel its worth upgrading them, at least a few hundred dollars off.

    Would this be profitable for Apple? Just a processor upgrade? If it would virtually just plug into the existing Mother Board it would make sense, but if a full redesign would be necessary then I don't think it would be worth it ya?
     
  8. UltimaLink macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Location:
    Somewhere in PA.
    #8
    They need to add an option for i5 and i7 intel processors for the quad core and 8 core models. They're used more and seem like they're cheaper, unless I'm looking at prices wrong.

    I think Macintosh should switch over to AMD processors though, they're cheaper and are just as good as intel unless you are gaming, and
    >Mac
    >Games

    Pretty much sums up everything.

    Also Mac pro line should have parts for it be sold online in the apple store, that way PCs can lose the advantage of being upgradable.
     
  9. Cindori macrumors 68040

    Cindori

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Sweden
    #9
    People, how can you even consider sandybridge. The macpro is bad value now, what will it be if the specs are still the same until Q4 2010. /weep

    Seriously, with GTX 480 and ATI 5870 drivers leaked, a GPU upgrade is as close as weeks away. With or without a new Mac Pro? Who knows, have not happened before though.
     
  10. Roman23 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    #10
    wonder ideas!!

    But so long as Jobs is in control, its not going to happen.. as for AMD, AMD has always attracted the gaming and hard-core gamers out there compared to Intel.. I don't know, but I remember back in the days of the AMD K6-2 I was told for gaming its best to get AMD as they are the gaming processors of the future..

    Sadly, I think AMD has fallen by the waist size also though this might be just hype to get amd owners to go intel.. Intel is a very old company and the way I see it I am sure Apple would like to design their own processors - potential Power 7 possible home brew PowerPC return? Who knows, and we may never know as these are deep down secrets inside the walls of Apple.

    I would like to see an open mac pro in the future... where one can go on line and customize or buy a logic board and parts at reasonable prices which would give the pc market a good competitve advantage.



     
  11. Roman23 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    #11
    i5

    Isn't the i5 less superior to the i7?

    Why would a mac pro have an i5?


     
  12. TMRaven macrumors 68020

    TMRaven

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    #12
    The cpus the current mac pro uses are i7s. They are xeon versions of intel's bloomfield nehalem processors. The major differences with the server edition xeons is the ability to be paired with other cpus, and use ecc memory.

    Yeah the current mac pros are not very price competitive-- apple should see to it to cut their price and upgrade the gpu.


    No, there hasn't been a COMPLETE new lineup of cpus from intel-- they're still on the nehalem architecture. 6 core westmere or gulftown is too expensive for what they're worth I feel.
     
  13. UltimaLink macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Location:
    Somewhere in PA.
    #13
    Yes it is, but it would allow you to have a cheaper machine, if they do this plus the idea I put about selling separate parts, you could put an i7/Xeon in there later if you wanted more POWER
     
  14. Roman23 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    #14
    Just did this with my mac pro

    Please note: this upgrade I did is only intended for single-quad core 2009 mac pros only as the processors Apple chose are standard OEM Intel xeons with integrated heat spreaders.. The good news is we aren't bound to stay with xeon.. we can use desktop processors, and I have done just that.. Behold, here are my specs for my mac pro using no xeon..


    Model Name: Mac Pro
    Model Identifier: MacPro4,1
    Processor Name: Quad-Core Intel Core i7
    Processor Speed: 3,33 GHz
    Number Of Processors: 1
    Total Number Of Cores: 4
    L2 Cache (per core): 256 KB
    L3 Cache: 8 MB
    Memory: 6 GB
    Processor Interconnect Speed: 6.4 GT/s



     
  15. UltimaLink macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Location:
    Somewhere in PA.
    #15
    Hm...

    I'll have to look into that, I had no idea you could replace the processors with an i7 in Mac Pros. I thought you had to buy a special made Xeon if you wanted to upgrade.
     
  16. snberk103 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Location:
    An Island in the Salish Sea
    #16
    I think the big "Mac Pro" announcement is actually going to be software related. Too much software today does not take advantage of the multiple cores. So the application maxes out one, two, or three cores - and the user thinks the machine has bogged down. Snow Leopard was supposed to make it easier for developers to spread the load over multiple cores, but I don't see that happening very quickly, so....

    I think Apple will announce that several applications, their own and 3rd party, have been optimized to take advantage of 4 or 8 cores. Perhaps in conjunction with a small hardware bump.

    The result will be legions of really happy existing Mac Pro users who will essentially see their machines upgraded (if they use those particular software titles). And, a bunch of pros and semi-pros who have been waffling between a Mac Pro and top end iMac will end up buying an 8 core Mac Pro because it will be truly much faster than the iMac. I don't think Apple actually intends to sell many 4 core Mac Pros... they are more of a sales lever. Once you convince to think about the 4 core Mac Pro instead of the 4 core all-in-one, then you can up-sell them to the 8 core Mac Pro.

    This is all pie-in-my-eye thinking, of course....
     
  17. SnowLeopard2008 macrumors 604

    SnowLeopard2008

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Location:
    Silicon Valley
    #17
    Mac Pros aren't about power. It's about long-term use. It's a workstation, something that is meant to last longer than a 4-5 years. I still see 8+ year old workstations being used in multiple IC design firms. And they're all Suns but that's another story.
     
  18. Major Reeves macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2009
    Location:
    EUSSR
    #18
    Well I still have my SGI Octane around here, but usually professional grade hardware gets replaced or gets a major update on 3 years basis. I guess that the Sun workstations you're mentioning are sparc based.
     
  19. strausd macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #19
    They won't put i7s in a MP. They do not support dual socket or ECC RAM. As for Sandy Bridge, the xeon parts don't come out til late 2011, as someone has already said. But, it is Apple we are talking about, so a Sandy Bridge MP probably wouldn't be for sale til 2012. Personally, I don't want wait another year and a half.

    As for programs that don't use all cores, your'e right, but as the software progresses, they will be able to. When it comes to 3D rendering, more cores is a definite plus. Rendering a long and complicated animation can take a long time. The more processing power the better, and the quicker.
     
  20. Cromulent macrumors 603

    Cromulent

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Location:
    The Land of Hope and Glory
    #20
    What? Yes, they do. In fact the Pro market needs updates far more often than consumer machines. It is quite common to own a home computer for 2 - 3 years. In some circles a computers life expectancy is 12 months given the need for performance of certain professionals.

    They've done it with every other Xeon processor upgrade. The fact that they haven't updated yet says quite a bit about their current attitude to the Mac Pro and the Xserve.
     
  21. Roman23 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    #21
    I happen to own a 4-core single-quad

    They sell plenty of them.. a month at least on the apple website.. retail stores? The one near me hardly sells a mac pro at all.

    And with my new i7 975 in my mac pro, it is no slouch.



     
  22. Roman23 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    #22
    on the single, no such thing as..

    a special made xeon.. in fact, if you look at the single-quad cores you will see nothing fancy, just an OEM STANDARD retail intel xeon processor with integrated heat spreader.. This means that one can either upgrade the 2.66 or 2.93 to either a xeon w3580 or w3570(3.2) without a hitch.. OR... You can go the desktop route like I did and go with core i7-975 or i7-970 but be sure to get rid of the ecc memory as the desktop processors don't make use of ecc.

    For the dual mac pros, this is another story.. since THOSE are special made processors for Apple by Intel. They are LIDLESS meaning nothing holds them down, not a latch like the single-quad cores.. plus if you read the article on anadtech's website about a poor chap who decided to upgrade those processors, he wound up destroying one and it cost him 2000 to replace everything..

    The single's are easy.. the duals? I wouldn't even bother, as those are not standard intel parts.. in fact, the lidless processors are "lidless" as they don't use integrated heatspreaders and one can't get them through consumer channels.


     
  23. Roman23 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    #23
    They won't. but I did..

    My Mac Pro as we speak is now using the core i7-975 running at 3.33 with non-ecc memory which i got for more than 1/2 of what it would cost for ecc memory.

    Only the single-quad core 2009's can handle i7 and xeons, the duals are another story as they don't use standard intel processors. They use specialy made processors without integrated heatspreaders.. Every intel processor out there uses an integrated heat spreader, at least the xeons do.. but leave it to Apple to thwart trying to upgrade the duals if the 2.26 is too slow for you..

    Amazing Apple used standard intel oem's in the single-quad cores.. hense my 2.66 w3520 is now a core i7-975 and it works great and a little bit faster too.


     
  24. strausd macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #24
    I read that thing on anandtech your'e talking about. It seemed to me like he talked about no lids for better ventilation. You can put one with a lid in, but you may have to worry a little more about temperature.
     
  25. Mikey7c8 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    #25
    I seriously doubt it's enough to be significant unless you're overclocking the processor. It is definitely cool that Intel has done it for apple, though.

    If you wanted to do it, I wouldn't let the IHS stop you. :)
     

Share This Page