The "Waiting for Nehalem Mac Pros" thread

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by m1stake, Aug 11, 2008.

  1. m1stake macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Philly
    #1
    It's that time again. Intel has just "named" their new line, called Core i7. Will you be waiting to pick one up or can you just not wait anymore? Why? What do you hope comes with it? Graphics cards? Card readers, BluRay? Does a new ACD sound good to you? If this thread actually goes anywhere I'll try to maintain a running list of people who are waiting for it.

    Like everyone else, my fingers are crossed for January.
     
  2. Rendition macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    #2
    Does anyone have any facts on what the performance difference will be from Nehalem vs. the current Mac Pros?
     
  3. UltraNEO* macrumors 601

    UltraNEO*

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Location:
    近畿日本
    #3
    Too late, too late!!!

    If i wait till the new year for a faster desktop machine, i think i'll be queuing up for unemployment! Spending each cent and counting the costs of milk and bread, like the millions out there!! - Poor ba*stards! :D

    I've already brought the a new MacPro, a couple of days ago. So far we're still in the caughting period, the relationship is going well, though I do wish i opted for the 3.2 instead!! Oh well, I think when the times comes... I'll just swap out the slugish CPU's for something with a little more kick!

    As far as the new ones well.. Let hope they'll add a BD drive, even for the few that do use it and the thousands that don't, I think it'll be useful eventually if not for movies then backup!

    Though I think some of you folks will be waiting for the the next release, then when that's out! Others will be waiting for the newer release. Before long some of you will get old, suffer from arthritis, poor eye sight and back pains etc... If the stress of waiting hasn't killed you yet! Personally, I think life's too short!! It's better to go with the flow and have fun with what's available now!
     
  4. Rendition macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    #4
    If someone has any real data, I'd still like to know. :)
     
  5. Animalk macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 27, 2007
    Location:
    Montreal Canada
    #5
    This is my plan. I have no idea how I am going to be able to stick to it. Good luck to all following the Nehalem diet.
     
  6. Mangaroo macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    London
    #6
    1. New 30" ACD with isight, scaler and faster response time would be the perfect monitor for me (ok, maybe height adjustment ^_^)
    2. Ati 4870x2 or better (mac edition) :D
    3. Bluray option would seal the aura of perfectness

    That would be my ideal purchase around january. (NB Tallestskill --->hope, please don't bite :( )

    I will be most likely getting 4 cores, unless information about Photoshop CS4/CS5 and Snow Leopard greatly benefiting from more than 4 cores
     
  7. m1stake thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Philly
    #7
    Coming up.

    http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3326&p=9

    http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-nehalem-core,5854.html

    NehalemNews.com is another site I'm aware of.

    Edit: Pay attention to cards released during the Christmas season (Which starts in Sept, kind of), as Apple will no doubt use cards that are new (!) at the time of the upgrade, like the did with the 8800GT. With any luck ATI will jump on board for this release so buyers can choose from an Nvidia or an ATI card at the high end. I wouldn't count on it though.
     
  8. Rendition macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    #8
    Good god, 20-50% is definitely worth waiting another 6 months for, even if my current notebook implodes due to Nvidia graphics defect. *cough*
     
  9. skyline r34 macrumors 6502

    skyline r34

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Location:
    San Diego
    #9

    My feeling exactly about this time next year Buyers will be talking about the next Mac Pro it will never end the Mac Pro will just get faster and better, how much faster do you really need to run your apps really but if people want to wait there going to wait but one thing folks Nehalem Mac Pro's will be old news about this time next year then what are you going to do then? if you need a computer then get one now but if you don't need one now and willing to wait by all means wait it out it will be worth it for the time being, but good luck to all who's waiting.
     
  10. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #10
    I'm waiting. :)
    I'll upgrade whatever I need to, especially since it tends to be less expensive than buying through Apple. ;)
     
  11. CharlieKirk macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2008
    #11
    I on the other hand, bought mine a month ago, and in 5-6 months, it'll be off to craigslist, I'll bite the difference, and have the best of both! I suggest you follow in my footsteps...

    I love how Tallest Skil's signature changes every now and again. ;)

    He'll be on his Apple I for a while.
     
  12. m1stake thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Philly
    #12
    Of course something faster will be out at Christmas 2009. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out :p But I don't see why you would buy now if you don't need it. If you need it you need it. I'm not posting this thread for people who need to wake up and make money with it tomorrow.

    Personally, I'm riding out my PowerMac G4 until February or so. If there are any really bad problems reported, I'll hold off a little bit. I can do that because the G4 still works, but doesn't work well. YouTube videos are choppy, FF, iTunes, AIM, TextEdit, Preview, Word 2004, and Word Perfect in Classic Mode are, um, slow. Very slow. And lets not talk about websites that are 100% Flash. Not going to happen. But it works, and until it stops working, I don't absolutely 100% HAVE TO HAVE A NEW COMPUTER RIGHT AWAY STAT FAST QUICK.

    But waiting 4 months isn't really a big deal when such an upgrade is considered. When it comes down to it, a Core Duo MacBook will destroy the G4 in benchmarks and general usage. The whole point of the high end, for me, is for two reasons: Heavy lifting and longevity. It can crunch numbers fast, and will be useful for a longer time than any other Apple computer. The G4 lasted a long time.
     
  13. iMacmatician macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    #13
    Possible realistic specs?

    It looks like the Mac Pro will have CPU, RAM, and GPU benefits. The ACDs look like LED will be the primary improvement.

    Mac Pro:
    • 2x 2.93 GHz Gainestown - 1x 2.67 GHz / 2x 2.67/2.93/3.2 GHz BTO
    • 4.8 GT/s QuickPath - 4.8/4.8/6.4 GT/s QuickPath BTO (tied with CPU)
    • 3 GB DDR3 1333 MHz RAM - 3/6/12/24/48 GB BTO
    • 320 GB 7200 RPM HDD - 320/500/750/1000/1500 GB BTO (1~4)
    • 512 MB ATI Radeon HD 4670 - 1~4 512 MB HD 4670 / 1 GB HD 4870 / Quadro FX BTO
    • 16x DVD+R DL - DVD+R DL (1~2) (I just don't see Blu-ray coming :()
    • $2799
    Cinema Displays:
    • New design, like the iPod, iMac, MacBooks…
    • 20" 1680·1050 LED
    • 24" 1920·1200 LED
    • 30" 2560·1600 LED

    Unfortunately I think my high-res 20" 1920·1200 / 26.7" 2560·1600 / 40" 3840·2400 is but a wishlist for now. :(

    Just for another point of view...

    Microarchitecture changes aren't necessarily the biggest performance increases in CPUs. Core count is an important aspect in performance, at least for multithreaded tasks.

    It's true that Nehalem gives 20%~30% increase over Penryn. But, the core count stays the same (4). Westmere in H1 2010 is rumored to deliver 6 cores (other sources say 4), 50% more than Nehalem and therefore 50% higher theoretical performance given the same clock speed. Now, it's more than likely that the first 6-core Westmeres have a lower clock speed than the 3.33 GHz or so that Nehalem's supposed to reach by late 2009. But even 6 cores at 2.8 GHz is still theoretically 26% faster than 4 cores at 3.33 GHz.
     
  14. m1stake thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Philly
    #14
    I don't think they'll offer a 2.67Ghz part on the MP. The number is lower even if the performance is not (Compared to the 2.8Ghz now). At the same time, if you want to offer 3 tiers of speed, 2.93, and 3.0 are too close together. So in that light the 2.67Ghz looks more likely.

    3GB minimum? Don't think so. Odd numbers of RAM of ram make you waste sticks if you want to upgrade later. I think they'll stick with 2GB.

    320? Seems like a reasonable guess. Who cares, it's a hard drive :p I agree.

    Does the 4670 exist? I'd bet on the 4600 if anything in the 4 series. As far as the high end goes, I'm not familiar with whats coming up for Christmas, but rest assured something WILL be out, like the 200 series equivalent of the 8800GT. The GT 250? The 4870 would be great. Obviously one of the two, or something close.

    I'll definitely pick up a 1920x1200 ACD with LED! :D
     
  15. skyline r34 macrumors 6502

    skyline r34

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Location:
    San Diego
    #15
    I'll definitely pick up a 1920x1200 ACD with LED! :D[/QUOTE]

    That what i'm waiting for but it will be a 30-inch ACD HD Backlit-LED
     
  16. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #16
    Hmm... Greedy, are we? ;) :p
     
  17. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #17
    2.8GHz, 3.06GHz (or 3.07GHz) and 3.2GHz parts will apparently be available and seem the most ideal. They aren't going to offer slower speeds than they do now as m1stake said.

    Apple, like all the major Workstation vendors have always offered the minimum of memory needed to use the system. 512mb on the G5s, 1GB (2x512MB) on the first Mac Pros and 2GB (2x1GB) on the current. If tri-channel is required / reccomended then yes 3GB, but if it will run in single channel then expect a single 2GB stick and if it's dual channel then 2x1GB.

    Seems likely, can't see them going up to 500GB yet as the base drive.

    If 2.8GHz Gainstown processors cost $800 each then I see this price sticking, if they cost more I'd expect Apple to up the price, but $3000 might be a push too far.
     
  18. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #18
    This is what I've been wondering as well. Apple, or any other vendor, is at the mercy of intel's CPU and chipset (X58/Tylersburg) pricing. As of yet, I haven't come across any official price list for the Gainestown. Only Bloomfield.

    Hopefully, Apple will offer similar pricing to current models. :)

    Bloomfield speeds are listed at 2.67. 2.93, 3.2 GHz, based on a 133MHz clock multiplier. This will apply to the Gainestown as well. Don't be fooled by lower frequency specs. The architectural changes will make up for this. This article may help.
     
  19. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #19
    The Xeon range is likely to be larger. The current 1333MHz FSB range has 2.0GHz, 2.33GHz, 2.5GHz, 2.66GHz, 2.83GHz, 3.0GHz and 3.16GHz processors. Add in the 1600MHz FSB and low power chips and there are 12 SKUs for Harpertown. I would think Nehalem will be similar.

    We can have 2, 2.13, 2.26, 2.4, 2.53, 2.66, 2.8, 2.93, 3.066, 3.2 and 3.33 (in the near future) with Nehalem and regardless of performance I can't see Apple offering lower numbers than those currently available. It's just not how their product image mentality works. In the end though it will come down to pricing.

    Pricing for Nehalem that I have seen ($284 for 2.66GHz, $562 for 2.93GHz) suggest that prices will remain similar for Nehalem on the Xeon side. We may actually see the Mac Pro drop back down to $2499 as Intel will only have one FSB range and the 2.83GHz Harpertown goes for the same $690 as the 2.66GHz Woodcrest did. Hopefully the numbers will come out soon.
     
  20. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #20
    Gainestown doesn't use FSB. They are architecturally different. Intel changed to the QPI (Quick Path Interconnect) and an integrated memory controller. (Nehalem architecture is used in Gainestown and Bloomfield).
    Apple is at the mercy of the technology. Intel sets this. The Nehalem chips are designed around a 133MHz clock multiplier, and that dictates clock speed. The base (lowest speed) that will be released will be 2.66GHz. (133MHz*20), and go up. Not down. If they did reduce the clock from this rate, the current Mac Pro could actually outperform the newer technology. Intel won't do this, and I doubt Apple would want them to. It could translate to lost sales.

    Due to production limits, only one 45nm fabrication plant, initial parts would consist of 2.66, 2.93, and 3.2GHz clock speeds. This plant has to produce all Nehalem parts, which is the reason I keep looking for the Gainestown price list from Intel. Good old supply and demand. ;)

    Future clock speeds could see 3.46, 3.7, and 3.99GHz (133MHz*30). Possible based on 133Mhz clock multiplication, but no official info either way.

    Those prices are for the Bloomfields. Hopefully, Gainestown won't be bad. Keep in mind it will be paired with a different chipset, and tripple channel DDR3 ECC (3 sticks required), I seriously doubt we'll see a reduction in MSRP. :(
     
  21. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #21
    I am well aware of Nehalem technology.

    I am not saying that Apple will use slower speeds, infact I'm saying the opposite. I am saying Intel will release a whole range of speeds as they did for all Core 2 based Xeons.

    The intial clock speeds cited are all in reference to Bloomfield. The binning process Intel use produces parts that can be used with many multipliers as far as I am aware. The speeds I listed are all 133.3 x multipler from 15 to 24. There is nothing that indicates the lowest multipler will be 20, why would it? What would Intel do for the cheaper Xeon speeds?

    The Xeon and Desktop markets are different. The desktop market is better suited to handling a small number of SKUs which has been Intel's strategy. Server use (which really dictates workstation use) is different and requires a different approach, despite utilizing the same technology.

    My point was the bloomfield prices indicate more clock speed on better architecture for a very minor price increase. The Mac Pro price went up $300 when the processors they used cost $107 more, nothing else really changed. If Intel do keep Xeon pricing structure very similar to how it is and inline with Yorkfield to Bloomfield then it is possible a 2.8GHz Gainstown processor could be back in the $700 range making it reasonable for Apple to reduce the cost back to $2500. I'm not expecting it, but it may be possible.
     
  22. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #22
    :cool:
    From what I've managed to stumble upon, it will start lower (2.4GHz). Link. I noticed that the two Gainestown's tested are 2.4 & 3.06GHz listed in graphs. Anything lower, I've not seen. 3.06 (133*23) is a bit unexpected. :eek:
    I was under the impression that they wouldn't release quite as many SKU's for the workstation level this time around. Unless you add Beckton SKU's + Gainestown SKU's (server+workstation). (~6 for Gainestown max, based on n+2 for the multiplier). Particularly since at this time only one 45nm facility is in operation. Two more to begin next year, IIRC. :confused:
    If you can clarify here, it would be useful. :)
    Now I understand the point you were trying to make. (Cost/Performance). Yes, we are benefiting here. :) Yes a decrease in price is possible, and would be dearly loved, but I don't expect to see one either. I can't help but think about the associated memory cost alone. ;) :p
     
  23. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #23
    http://xtreview.com/images/nehalem cpu z 02.jpg

    Found this 2.133 (x16 multiplier) searching for "nehalem multipler" on google image search. Might be user modified though (the multiplier not the image).

    Servers can certainly make use of the 16 threads at lower speeds and a larger range of SKUs can only benefit Intel on the server side.
     
  24. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #24
    Interesting image. Hadn't seen anything that low. Do you trust the image, or not sure?
    I keep hoping Intel will release something definite though.

    As far as the server SKU's, do you separate or combine the Gainestown/Beckton parts?
     
  25. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #25
    I trust it, but it's just that it isn't clear if it is a faster part that was underclocked by the person who took.

    Seperate.
     

Share This Page