Xeon E7 v2 series


daveedjackson

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 6, 2009
102
112
London
Probably not the cause of the delays but it would be nice if it could find it's way into the MP
I find it astonishing that Apple could (badly) plan the launch of the MP in December, be working with Intel - and not be aware/or consider putting these in their brand new system. I guess it will allow them to release an updated version in 6 months - which i'm sure will anger some/all of the early purchasers.
 

iBug2

macrumors 601
Jun 12, 2005
4,014
193
I find it astonishing that Apple could (badly) plan the launch of the MP in December, be working with Intel - and not be aware/or consider putting these in their brand new system. I guess it will allow them to release an updated version in 6 months - which i'm sure will anger some/all of the early purchasers.
They are 6500$ per ONE cpu. Yes if you really want 15K costing Mac Pro's.
 

daveedjackson

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 6, 2009
102
112
London
They are 6500$ per ONE cpu. Yes if you really want 15K costing Mac Pro's.
With respect - i've just spent that £7799 on the new MP for old chips - this is a pro system so the option should be there. Also the whole architecture of these chips is different, so even to go for the 12c would be much faster.
 

theSeb

macrumors 604
Aug 10, 2010
6,963
83
Poole, England
With respect - i've just spent that £7799 on the new MP for old chips - this is a pro system so the option should be there. Also the whole architecture of these chips is different, so even to go for the 12c would be much faster.
With respect, the CPUs in the article are E7 chips, which will never be in the Mac Pro. The chips in the new Mac Pro ARE NOT OLD. They are the latest suitable CPUs available from Intel.

They are E5 V2 CPUs.

E5-1620v2 (4) - launch date Q3'13
E5-1650v2 (6) - launch date Q3'13
E5-1680v2 (8) - launchg date Q3'13
E5-2697v2 (12) - Launch Date Q3'13



----------

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/02/18/intel_releases_mission_critical_two_four_and_eight_socket_xeon_e7_v2_line/?page=1

Very interesting read. Do you think it's worth holding out for this new chippery to come to the new mac pro? Could this be the cause of the delays?
No, it's not worth waiting for it, because these CPUs will never be in the Mac Pro, as I have already mentioned.

----------

I find it astonishing that Apple could (badly) plan the launch of the MP in December, be working with Intel - and not be aware/or consider putting these in their brand new system. I guess it will allow them to release an updated version in 6 months - which i'm sure will anger some/all of the early purchasers.
I find it astonishing that people spout angry nonsense without knowing all of the facts. The worst part is that other people will read posts like this, believe it, and then spread this further.
 

daveedjackson

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 6, 2009
102
112
London
With respect, the CPUs in the article are E7 chips, which will never be in the Mac Pro. The chips in the new Mac Pro ARE NOT OLD. They are the latest suitable CPUs available from Intel.

They are E5 V2 CPUs.

E5-1620v2 (4) - launch date Q3'13
E5-1650v2 (6) - launch date Q3'13
E5-1680v2 (8) - launchg date Q3'13
E5-2697v2 (12) - Launch Date Q3'13

Please get your facts right before spouting angry nonsense.
My point is why would they not consider using the newer technology. Also this is not an angry post, i just don't understand, and there is no need to speak to me IN ALL CAPS!
 

MH01

Suspended
Feb 11, 2008
12,118
9,216
With respect, the CPUs in the article are E7 chips, which will never be in the Mac Pro. The chips in the new Mac Pro ARE NOT OLD. They are the latest suitable CPUs available from Intel.

They are E5 V2 CPUs.

E5-1620v2 (4) - launch date Q3'13
E5-1650v2 (6) - launch date Q3'13
E5-1680v2 (8) - launchg date Q3'13
E5-2697v2 (12) - Launch Date Q3'13

Please get your facts right before spouting angry nonsense.
ummmm In all due respect to your post, you have actually added little to the discussion.

If you explained the difference between E5 and E7 than that would go a long way to explain why the E7 are not used in the mac pros. Or why the mac pro does not require a CPU for mission critical applications. This would go a long way in explaining why the E7 will not be used in a "desktop" by Apple.

Nothing wrong with the OP wanting the best possible CPU if he can afford it.
The way the OP would see it the new E7 15core is better than his "old" E5 12 core.


http://www.intel.co.uk/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/guides/xeon-intel-server-processor-comparison-guide.pdf

----------

My point is why would they not consider using the newer technology. Also this is not an angry post, i just don't understand, and there is no need to speak to me IN ALL CAPS!
The E7 and E5 are aimed for different purposes.

Don't worry, you have the best tech in your Mac Pro, as the E5 is the correct CPU for its purpose.

E7 are for enterprise grade infrastructure and mission critical applications. A huge overkill for the Mac pro, which is in effect an awesome desktop.
 

daveedjackson

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 6, 2009
102
112
London
ummmm In all due respect to your post, you have actually added little to the discussion.

If you explained the difference between E5 and E7 than that would go a long way to explain why the E7 are not used in the mac pros. Or why the mac pro does not require a CPU for mission critical applications. This would go a long way in explaining why the E7 will not be used in a "desktop" by Apple.

Nothing wrong with the OP wanting the best possible CPU if he can afford it.
The way the OP would see it the new E7 15core is better than his "old" E5 12 core.


http://www.intel.co.uk/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/guides/xeon-intel-server-processor-comparison-guide.pdf

----------



The E7 and E5 are aimed for different purposes.

Don't worry, you have the best tech in your Mac Pro, as the E5 is the correct CPU for its purpose.

E7 are for enterprise grade infrastructure and mission critical applications. A huge overkill for the Mac pro, which is in effect an awesome desktop.
Thanks for clearing this up. I'm sure i won't be the only one to read the announcement and think the same thing.
 

theSeb

macrumors 604
Aug 10, 2010
6,963
83
Poole, England
ummmm In all due respect to your post, you have actually added little to the discussion.

If you explained the difference between E5 and E7 than that would go a long way to explain why the E7 are not used in the mac pros. Or why the mac pro does not require a CPU for mission critical applications. This would go a long way in explaining why the E7 will not be used in a "desktop" by Apple.

Nothing wrong with the OP wanting the best possible CPU if he can afford it.
The way the OP would see it the new E7 15core is better than his "old" E5 12 core.


http://www.intel.co.uk/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/guides/xeon-intel-server-processor-comparison-guide.pdf

----------



The E7 and E5 are aimed for different purposes.

Don't worry, you have the best tech in your Mac Pro, as the E5 is the correct CPU for its purpose.

E7 are for enterprise grade infrastructure and mission critical applications. A huge overkill for the Mac pro, which is in effect an awesome desktop.
I do not believe in forcing people to drink, after I have showed them where the water is. If the OP still wants to know what the difference is between E7 and E5, then surely he should use his curiosity and invoke the power of the internet?

If you teach a man to fish, then he can feed himself for a lifetime. In all due respect, you're just throwing fish at him.
 

daveedjackson

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 6, 2009
102
112
London
I do not believe in forcing people to drink, after I have showed them where the water is. If the OP still wants to know what the difference is between E7 and E5, then surely he should use his curiosity and invoke the power of the internet?

If you teach a man to fish, then he can feed himself for a lifetime. In all due respect, you're just throwing fish at him.
Surely a post like this, in the MACRUMORS Forum, is exactly the right place to for the discussion to happen. No one forced to you read my post nor did they force you to send a reply.
 

theSeb

macrumors 604
Aug 10, 2010
6,963
83
Poole, England
Surely a post like this, in the MACRUMORS Forum, is exactly the right place to for the discussion to happen. No one forced to you read my post nor did they force you to send a reply.
Relax. I am joking.

ETA: I am sorry for my curt initial post. It's difficult to not be jaded with the barrage of whinge threads and I classified yours as part of that basket initially.
 
Last edited:

daveedjackson

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 6, 2009
102
112
London
Relax. I am joking.

ETA: I am sorry for my curt initial post. It's difficult to not be jaded with the barrage of whinge threads and I classified yours as part of that basket initially.
No worries. Things easily get lost in translation in forums. I meant no disrespect at all - it was a legitimate question.

Cheers
 

ABCDEF-Hex

macrumors 6502
Feb 15, 2013
369
76
NC
Try Google

Surely a post like this, in the MACRUMORS Forum, is exactly the right place to for the discussion to happen. No one forced to you read my post nor did they force you to send a reply.
or search the forums - you were complaining,
There will always be new hardware released after you purchase the current model.
Even if they could use those CPU's - they would not sell very many at that price.
 

deconstruct60

macrumors G3
Mar 10, 2009
8,086
1,249
Thanks for clearing this up. I'm sure i won't be the only one to read the announcement and think the same thing.
Which is exactly why searching the threads here in the Mac Pro section would very quickly lead you to someone who is onto the same deeply misguided thought as you were on.

A quick search on 'E7' just in this forum would have yielded a thread posted a couple days ago.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1707751&highlight=e7

as well as several others which outline both that E7 differences and why they are extremely unlikely to ever show up in a Mac product.

If it was a novel question then fine. But it is an 'old as dirt' question that was covered yet again a day or two before you asked. Redundant posts about the same topic in a short amount of time is not useful or courteous.
 
Last edited:

MH01

Suspended
Feb 11, 2008
12,118
9,216
I do not believe in forcing people to drink, after I have showed them where the water is. If the OP still wants to know what the difference is between E7 and E5, then surely he should use his curiosity and invoke the power of the internet?

If you teach a man to fish, then he can feed himself for a lifetime. In all due respect, you're just throwing fish at him.
On MR.... at times its like... teaching to fish, is giving them a grenade... ;)

Though I know where you are coming from.

----------

Thanks for clearing this up. I'm sure i won't be the only one to read the announcement and think the same thing.
Np problem mate. Enjoy your machine! it's a total beast!
 

deconstruct60

macrumors G3
Mar 10, 2009
8,086
1,249
I find it astonishing that Apple could (badly) plan the launch of the MP in December, be working with Intel - and not be aware/or consider putting these in their brand new system.
It is mildly astonishing that you didn't even read (or perhaps not understand) the article.

"... Those 32 PCIe lanes are a step down from the 40 lanes in Intel's E5 v2 line, ..."

The Mac Pro 2013 with an E5 v2's 40 lanes is already oversubscribed on PCIe lanes. Dropping another 8 would not be in the same league in terms of I/O performance.

Dropping to 32 lanes isn't a big deal for 2, 4 , 8 CPU package systems. It leaves you with 64 , 128 , 256 lanes. All of those are more than enough for ultra extremely vast majority of personal workstations and for most servers.

E7 cranks up the QPI links and drops the PCIe lanes. It is a very simple design tradeoff that makes alot of sense. There are no E7 18xx products.
 

SesameWasher

macrumors regular
Nov 22, 2015
244
48
ummmm In all due respect to your post, you have actually added little to the discussion.

If you explained the difference between E5 and E7 than that would go a long way to explain why the E7 are not used in the mac pros. Or why the mac pro does not require a CPU for mission critical applications. This would go a long way in explaining why the E7 will not be used in a "desktop" by Apple.

Nothing wrong with the OP wanting the best possible CPU if he can afford it.
The way the OP would see it the new E7 15core is better than his "old" E5 12 core.


http://www.intel.co.uk/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/guides/xeon-intel-server-processor-comparison-guide.pdf

----------




The E7 and E5 are aimed for different purposes.

Don't worry, you have the best tech in your Mac Pro, as the E5 is the correct CPU for its purpose.

E7 are for enterprise grade infrastructure and mission critical applications. A huge overkill for the Mac pro, which is in effect an awesome desktop.
But I need E7 for calculating when the next asteroid come and hit the Earth, it's critical for humanity!
Well I can always upgrade the chip myself...
Just kidding.
 

MH01

Suspended
Feb 11, 2008
12,118
9,216
But I need E7 for calculating when the next asteroid come and hit the Earth, it's critical for humanity!
Well I can always upgrade the chip myself...
Just kidding.
It's to get the most of iTunes ! I've heard the old , I need a E7 to save humanity chestnut!!