when will Mac Pro get Sandy Bridge processor?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by malch, Apr 21, 2010.

  1. malch macrumors 6502

    Jan 20, 2008
    Hi there,
    I just saw a news item re the new Sandy Bridge processor, and I'm wondering when it might appear in the Mac Pro?
    Any ideas? (by the way, I tried to post this in the Rumours thread, and found out I can't post there).
  2. wally21 macrumors member

    Mar 7, 2009
    When will mac pro get the Westmere processor?
  3. rajbonham macrumors 6502

    Mar 29, 2010
  4. wisty macrumors regular

    Feb 18, 2009
    Maybe they are just holding out for Sandy Bridge?
  5. rajbonham macrumors 6502

    Mar 29, 2010
    No way. Purely my opinion, but I would be completely shocked if they waited that long to update.
  6. Icaras macrumors 603


    Mar 18, 2008
    California, United States
    It may be just be me, but I think I sensed a bit of sarcasm from Wisty :rolleyes:

    Anyway, in another thread, a poster just purchased a new 30" ACD from Apple and his delivery time is showing middle of May, not 5-7 business days, which is what it's currently showing on the store.

    I have believed for a while that the rumored ACDs would be launching alongside the new Mac Pros, so I'm thinking we might see something mid May...
  7. malch thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jan 20, 2008
    Forgive me for asking a simple/naive question, but here goes: since the Mac Pro 'case' doesn't seem to get any smaller (and I don't see people asking for smaller, lighter Mac Pros), is it so important that processors keep getting smaller and smaller? (32mm coming, then we're waiting for 22mm).
    Is it just so they can add more processors, in less space?
    I can see smaller and smaller processors being needed for ever-shrinking laptops/pads/phones, but for a big desktop like the Mac Pro, is it really crucial? Isn't there room in there for even the big, clunky 32mm processors they're about to launch?
    Thanks for the replies... I've now read some of the links, and I see that we're a good ways off from Sandy Bridge. Westmere up next, and it could be within a couple months.
  8. live4ever macrumors 6502a

    Aug 13, 2003
    Not so much the processor size but the manufacturing process.
    smaller process = more transistors = more calculations = faster
  9. alphaod macrumors Core


    Feb 9, 2008
    I'd be fine with that kind of delay. :eek:
  10. nanofrog macrumors G4

    May 6, 2008
    It's the process. The transistors themselves are smaller, which allows them to pack in more transistors in a given CPU, and keep the yields high (processors per wafer that pass the binning process - QC + speed measurements).

    This allows them to pack in more complex controllers (i.e. features such as HT, Turbo Mode, and Power Management), and more cores per die, which is what the enterprise market desires.

    Sort of. It depends on the software, as to whether or not it can utilize the additional cores (parallelism). Frequencies aren't increasing by leaps and bounds any longer.

    But if you run single threaded applications, it won't matter if it has 2/4/8/12... cores, it only uses one, and the frequency will dictate how fast an instruction can be completed (all other aspects the same, such as bus interfaces in both CPU and board).
  11. malch thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jan 20, 2008
    thank you frog, and the rest of you, for all the info.

Share This Page