Woodcrest Processor in the PowerMac?

[MacRumors]

Several sites have pointed to a Computerworld article which reports on Intel's upcoming low-power processors Merom (mobile), Woodcrest (server) and Conroe (desktop).

The article references comments by Intel's Asia Pacific sales and marketing group general manager, however, it also provides this (uncredited) tidbit:

Apple customers may be the first to enjoy Intel’s new CPU goodies, with the Woodcrest family of processors making it into Macintosh workstations as early as the third quarter. Woodcrest systems will be symmetric multi processing (SMP), with dual processors with up to four cores each. One such machine was demonstrated at IDF, running benchmarks under Windows XP 64-bit edition, showing eight active cores.

There have been no previous rumors about the use of Woodcrest in any Macs. Conroe has been speculated to be the processor used in the upcoming PowerMac, but at this time it all remains speculative.

 

[Peyton]

Eight cores?!? I kind of saw this coming but seriously, I don't know what I would need all that for! I'm sure I could make something up...

 

[zap2]

snap that would ROCK because the iMac would likly use Cornoe, which would rock

 

[DMann]

Woodcrest

snap that would ROCK because the iMac would likly use Cornoe, which would rock

Woodcrest would put Apple way ahead of the competition.......
Since Leopard will be optimized to take full advantage of
multiple core chips, eight cores will fly sky high....

 

[carlos700]

A Power Mac with two dual-core woodcrest processors would be awesome!

 

[miloblithe]

Woodcrest would pull Apple way ahead of the competition.......

Wouldn't the competition use the same thing?

 

[maximumbarkly]

Wouldn't the competition use the same thing?

moot point. It just means that the Powermac will remain the high end machine it always was.

Also keep in mind that OS X could probably take advantage of this better than XP or Vista.

 

[Mord]

anyone who seriously thought apple would use conroe in the powermac is retarded, seriously why would apple go from a quad G5 to a single dual core intel core, it would just look lame.

sseriously who said that conroe was the powermac cpu replacement, whoever did should be added to my retard hall of fame.

woodcrest -> powermac, xserve

conroe -> imac

yonah, merom -> macbook/macbook pro/mac mini

no the imac will not overheat with conroe not too long ago the imac had a 2.1GHz G5 in it the core duo is used at the moment as it's the only decent intel cpu.

 

[KindredMAC]

...And what is the real attraction for anyone to buy a PowerMac/Pro Mac if it comes out this September? Other than Audio/Video Apple Apps, Adobe has stated that CS3 won't be out until FIRST HALF next year.

Unless 4 cores can make a difference in Rosetta I just don't see any pluses until Adobe is Universal.... but that's me being a Mac Graphic Artist.

 

[ChoMomma]

Here's some screenshots of benchmarks done on early versions of the woodcrest cpu.



Enjoy

 

[Spanky Deluxe]

Eight cores?? How expensive is that going to be?!! :-O

The Quad G5 costs enough as it is but an eight core machine, Intel or not will probably clock in at 1-2k extra on the quad's price. That's just getting ridiculous!!

 

[j_maddison]

anyone who seriously thought apple would use conroe in the powermac is retarded, seriously why would apple go from a quad G5 to a single dual core intel core, it would just look lame.

sseriously who said that conroe was the powermac cpu replacement, whoever did should be added to my retard hall of fame.

woodcrest -> powermac, xserve

conroe -> imac

yonah, merom -> macbook/macbook pro/mac mini

no the imac will not overheat with conroe not too long ago the imac had a 2.1GHz G5 in it the core duo is used at the moment as it's the only decent intel cpu.

I totally agree. i think the only people who speculated that conroe would go into the Powermac were people on this forum, but at the same time there has always been others on here who've said all along that the Powermac would use the Woodcrest chip.

Powermacs have usually been compared to dual Xeons in benchmark tests, so it makes sense that the Powermac would get the Woodcrest chip and not Conroe.

I just hope Apple don't balls it up and go all cheapscate on us like they might be doing with the integrated graphics chipsets rumoured for the ibooks

Jay

 

[runninmac]

...And what is the real attraction for anyone to buy a PowerMac/Pro Mac if it comes out this September? Other than Audio/Video Apple Apps, Adobe has stated that CS3 won't be out until FIRST HALF next year.

Unless 4 cores can make a difference in Rosetta I just don't see any pluses until Adobe is Universal.... but that's me being a Mac Graphic Artist.

Someone always has to put a negative spin on things. Just because one (major at that) app isnt out doesn't mean there arn't people out their that aren't going to buy it. If worse comes to worse people will just boot into windows if they can't stand rosetta's performance.

 

[j_maddison]

Eight cores?? How expensive is that going to be?!! :-O

The Quad G5 costs enough as it is but an eight core machine, Intel or not will probably clock in at 1-2k extra on the quad's price. That's just getting ridiculous!!

Why would it cost 1-2k extra? I don't understand your logic. Their not priced per core, their priced per cpu, and the powermac would have 2 cpu's to give it eight cores. Mind you I, like you, have no idea what the price of a Woodcrest chip will be, but I doubt it will mean a machine thats 1 to 2K more.

Jay

 

[plinkoman]

makes sense, after all, the G5 is based off a server processor.

besides, thats about what it will take to beat the quad G5 now.

and i'm definitely thinking conroe for the iMac, after all, isn't it going to be cheaper and more powerful then merom?

 

[081440]

Why Not!?

...And what is the real attraction for anyone to buy a PowerMac/Pro Mac if it comes out this September? Other than Audio/Video Apple Apps, Adobe has stated that CS3 won't be out until FIRST HALF next year.

Unless 4 cores can make a difference in Rosetta I just don't see any pluses until Adobe is Universal.... but that's me being a Mac Graphic Artist.

People like me will buy, as I use the PowerMac for FCP and DVD studio Pro, and I use Photoshop so rarely that rosetta will make no difference to me, when compared to the speed gained in rendering and encoding.

 

[Analog Kid]

I'd be surprised if the PowerMac was all Woodcrest. It would be prohibitively expensive... Intel charges quite a premium for their server class chips-- a premium that is not linearly related to performance. Apple would price themselves out of sales.

I'd expect Conroe. Maybe they'll throw together a high-end "workstation" that's Woodcrest based, but the bulk of the line will be the desktop chips-- just as you see with the Pentium/Xeon mix from most PC makers today.

 

[nagromme]

I thought four-core variants were not expected until 2007. Or is that just for Conroe, and Woodcrest is expected to start off with four?

I personally expect Conroe in PowerMacs (childish name-calling is encouraged), if that's what other desktops will use from other manufacturers.

But if Woodcrest shows up in a top model too, I won't complain!

How much more will a PowerMac cost with Woodcrest vs. Conroe, do you suppose? (Saving up just in case!)

 

[Analog Kid]

Why would it cost 1-2k extra? I don't understand your logic. Their not priced per core, their priced per cpu, and the powermac would have 2 cpu's to give it eight cores. Mind you I, like you, have no idea what the price of a Woodcrest chip will be, but I doubt it will mean a machine thats 1 to 2K more.
Jay

To say it's not priced per core is a little naive... While I would expect 2 four-core devices might be cheaper than 8 single-core devices, a four-core would certainly be more expensive than one single-core.

There's all kinds of factors that will go into the pricing of the device: silicon size and yield (which goes down as Si size goes up) are just two of the obvious technical costs, while marketing considerations and product line placement are non-technical drivers. On top of that you have system costs that are certainly not equal: chipsets, memory, power supply....

Doubling the number of cores could easily add more than $1-2k to the system-- take a look at Intel's price lists:
http://www.intel.com/intel/finance/pricelist/

Add to that the cost of the chipset and memory and everything else and the price goes up pretty quickly.

 

[Danksi]

People like me will buy, as I use the PowerMac for FCP and DVD studio Pro, and I use Photoshop so rarely that rosetta will make no difference to me, when compared to the speed gained in rendering and encoding.

Ditto...

.. and going from an iMac G5 to something like this, I'd have no time to go make the tea!

Just hope the price stays the same..

 

[~Shard~]

Woodcrest PowerMacs would indeed be amazing! And here I thought we wouldn't see anything really cool until Cloverton was released.

 

[MacQuest]

woodcrest -> powermac, xserve

conroe -> imac

yonah, merom -> macbook/macbook pro/mac mini

I'm thinking the less expensive Conroe will also be used in a new, mini-tower form factor, home/small business targeted, fully upgradeable Mac tower, which I call the "Mac Pro mini" with at least one [but hopefully a couple] of model in the $1000 - $1500 price range.

ENOUGH WITH THE "HEADLESS iMAC" REFERENCE, THAT'S JUST LAME AND THEY'RE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PRODUCTS.

There is a HUGE product line and price gap [$1200] in Apple's current non-integrated display Mac line-up with the integrated graphics using, high end Mac mini @ $799 and the lowest end PowerPC based PowerMac @ $1999.

I can just see this being unveiled as the "One more thing" at WWDC '06 in August after SJ introduces the new professional class [price & form factor] "Mac Pro" workstation. The Mac Pro will be re-designed, and the Mac Pro mini will be a consumer [price & form factor] version of it.

So:

Woodcrest -> PowerMac [Mac Pro], Xserve

Conroe -> iMac, Mac Pro mini

Merom -> MacBook/MacBook Pro/Mac Mini

 

[Photorun]

...And what is the real attraction for anyone to buy a PowerMac/Pro Mac if it comes out this September? Other than Audio/Video Apple Apps, Adobe has stated that CS3 won't be out until FIRST HALF next year.

Actually Adobe is currently on schedule to hit February 07 or earlier. I've used Adobe apps under Rosetta, the only one that takes a performance hit that's substantial is Photoshop. Illustrator, because the way it handles vector data (simply moving X/Y points), though it takes longer to launch, once you're in Illustrator you can't really tell the difference much. As I do more vector based art than raster based I've been fine under Rosetta. And for everyone out there who's doing more vector art or using InDesign or Illustrator mostly Rosetta works just fine. Photoshop people can use it fine just have a little patience... pretend you're working on an old G4, which wasn't that long ago.

 

[nagromme]

There is a HUGE product line and price gap in Apple's current non-integrated display Mac line-up with the integrated graphics using, high end Mac mini @ $799 and the lowest end PowerPC based PowerMac @ $1999.

Agreed. There seems to be a lot of demand for something in the middle (preferably with upgradable GPU).

I expect Apple will release a midrange headless. Maybe a mini-tower, or maybe a maxi-mini (is that a word?), or maybe just a lower-spec'd full tower (cheaper for them than designing/manufacturing a whole separate form factor).

 

[Danksi]

Agreed. There seems to be a lot of demand for something in the middle (preferably with upgradable GPU).

I expect Apple will release a midrange headless. Maybe a mini-tower, or maybe a maxi-mini (is that a word?), or maybe just a lower-spec'd full tower (cheaper for them than designing/manufacturing a whole separate form factor).

Lower spec'd full tower, that's fully upgradable, would be nice.