Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MacRonin

macrumors member
Jun 15, 2002
41
0
in denial…
longofest said:
Because I'd be pissed at having spent over 3 grand for a top-of-the-line machine, only to have him say a year later that I have just been witness to the biggest leap forward in pro-mac desktop performance in this decade.

That, and because he'd be lying while he is at it (so the independent benchmarks say).

Dude, if you are pissed about a machine that comes out a year AFTER you have bought yours, well; my advise to you would be to ****…!!!

And it isn't lying, it's marketing…

That's why they are ALL the biggest leap forw… blah, blah, blah…

Mmm… RDF… Mmm…
 

generik

macrumors 601
Aug 5, 2005
4,116
1
Minitrue
longofest said:
And if steve says that the new Mac Pros are 4x as fast as my Quad, I'm going to go down to Cupertino and punch him in the face.

Lol@longofest

Feeling a bit sore spending so much on an obsolete PC architecture? :rolleyes:
 

kuwan

macrumors member
May 31, 2006
30
0
longofest said:
Every piece of information we have had up until now has pointed to "No" in regards to the question I believe you are really asking, which is can you place two Conroe chips together. Yes, Conroe is SMP capable because it is a dual-core chip, but so far we have not seen evidence that it will support dual-processor configurations, so in that respect, it will be similar to the Pentium 4.

Of course, if anyone has hard evidence to the contrary (or even hard evidence supporting this idea), please let us know.

p.s. I should note that it is most likely the chipset that accompanies Conroe that is most likely the limiting factor in deploying multi-processor Conroe systems.

Intel demonstrated Conroe processors in a Quad configuration at this year's IDF. So yes, Conroe should support Quad configurations, but they aren't expected to ship any chipsets that support this until next year. The only Quad configurations that are expected to be available this year are with Woodcrest CPUs.

Which makes me wonder if Apple will use both Conroe and Woodcrest CPUs. They could use Conroe for Dual configurations and Woodcrest for the high-end Quad configurations.
 

generik

macrumors 601
Aug 5, 2005
4,116
1
Minitrue
kuwan said:
Which makes me wonder if Apple will use both Conroe and Woodcrest CPUs. They could use Conroe for Dual configurations and Woodcrest for the high-end Quad configurations.

I suspect Apple will do this too, take a commodity CPU and try to foist it as a workstation grade component in a "MacPro"
 

danielwsmithee

macrumors 65816
Mar 12, 2005
1,135
410
Decoder

kuwan said:
Intel demonstrated Conroe processors in a Quad configuration at this year's IDF. So yes, Conroe should support Quad configurations, but they aren't expected to ship any chipsets that support this until next year.
That was not Conroe it was Kentsfield, which is two Conroe dies in a single housing. Different then two housings.

If you want the truth read it from the source.

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/events/idfspr_2006/20060313_multicore_fact_sheet_decoder.pdf
 

kuwan

macrumors member
May 31, 2006
30
0
generik said:
I suspect Apple will do this too, take a commodity CPU and try to foist it as a workstation grade component in a "MacPro"

I wouldn't call Conroe a commodity CPU. Conroe isn't meant to perform like the current Core Duo (a mobile CPU), Conroe is meant to be a high-performance desktop CPU. There's nothing commodity about it.

IMHO, the reason why they wouldn't use Woodcrest across the board is because Woodcrest CPUs are very expensive and I doubt there will be a huge performance advantage of Woodcrest over Conroe. The biggest advantage that Woodcrest has is that it can be put into a Quad configuration and Conroe cannot (at least for now).
 

tonyl

macrumors 6502
Jan 18, 2006
284
0
kuwan said:
I wouldn't call Conroe a commodity CPU. Conroe isn't meant to perform like the current Core Duo (a mobile CPU), Conroe is meant to be a high-performance desktop CPU. There's nothing commodity about it.

IMHO, the reason why they wouldn't use Woodcrest across the board is because Woodcrest CPUs are very expensive and I doubt there will be a huge performance advantage of Woodcrest over Conroe. The biggest advantage that Woodcrest has is that it can be put into a Quad configuration and Conroe cannot (at least for now).
Conroe is not SMP enabled. You can't put two conroe in dual socket mb.
 

kuwan

macrumors member
May 31, 2006
30
0
longofest said:
And if steve says that the new Mac Pros are 4x as fast as my Quad, I'm going to go down to Cupertino and punch him in the face.

<sarcasm>
They'll introduce an 8-processor Mac Pro and claim that it's 2-3x faster than the Quad G5. ;) Which is pretty much what they did when they introduced the Intel iMac - claiming the dual-core iMac is 2-3x faster than the single-core iMac G5.
</sarcasm>
 

jiggie2g

macrumors 6502
Apr 12, 2003
491
0
Brooklyn,NY
I swear some of you people in this forum are complete snobs , "oh no not Conroe noooooooooooooo , but it's a "Desktop Class CPU" blah blah blah. We want the more expensive Woodcrest that has no performance advantage what so ever.

I swear seeing people talk about Conroe being desktop class cpu is like Bush making more PR Spin about Moral Values in America:p . You people are decieving youselves and your fellow mac users with this nonsense.

There are 2 differences between a Conroe and a Woodcrest.

1 . what makes 1 cpu a conore and 1 a woodcrest is testing those CPU's that pass the extremely rigorous test for Server Certification. Those that pass become Woodcrest those that don't are Conroe. this is not a bad thing as I suspect most people here will just do Folding , Photoshop , Video , Audio.

2. Woodcrest uses socket 771 which is for Mulit-socket setups as apposed to socket 775 for Conore , Woodcrest uses the 1333mhz FSB becuse it needs the extra bandwidth to accomodate another cpu.

Conroe is expected to make the jump to 1333mhz FSB when the Core 2 XE X8000(3.3ghz)is released in QT1 '07 , Intel has Confirmed a X6900(3.2ghz) 1066FSB in QT4 06

Dual Core Woodcrest vs Conroe at same clock and same cpu count will be exactly the same ...nothing to see here folks ..move on.


If you're calling the Core 2 a Desktop class CPU then I will call th G5 a cheap Power 4 spin off that kept getting it's ass handed to it AMD 64.

Conroe is to WoodCrest what Athlon 64 is to Opteron ..same CPU Core.

Last time I checked I can't recall an Athlon FX or even a 4800+ being in Mainstrean PC or any for under $2000

Intel has 5 Core 2 CPU's coming out next month for 5 different segments of the market. I doubt you will see a E6700 or X6800 in anything less then Dell's XPS series.

You People are too Stuck in the G5 days when Stevo' spoon fed you all BullSh*t about how the G5 was a workstation killer.

The engineering samples are 1st spin tape outs and are already hitting 5ghz on exotic cooling and 3.6-3.9ghz on air, imagin when Intel has had time to rev. this baby 3-4 times. this
is probabally the best cpu architecture of the last 10yrs and you people have the nerve act like it's a bargin bin celeron.


I swear you people deserve to be stuck with IBM.
 

aztiml

macrumors newbie
Jul 21, 2004
5
0
Adobe / Macromedia Apps?

Is it a good idea to ship pro machines before the pro apps from Adobe/Macromedia even go universal? Or will the latest and greatest chips from Intel overcome the slowness of Rosetta?

Seems like many of us are stuck with PowerPC until Adobe releases their new stuff.
 

kuwan

macrumors member
May 31, 2006
30
0
tonyl said:
Conroe is not SMP enabled. You can't put two conroe in dual socket mb.

Isn't that what I said? ...

kuwan said:
The biggest advantage that Woodcrest has is that it can be put into a Quad configuration and Conroe cannot.
 

MacMan93

macrumors member
May 10, 2006
58
0
May be apple will introduce the PowerMac (grrr Mac Pro) with two different proccesors. Like a $1499 Conroe and $1999 and up models with a woodcrest.
 

macenforcer

macrumors 65816
Jun 9, 2004
1,248
0
Colorado
adamfilip said:
cry me a river

geeze.

having newer faster machines doesnt make your machine any slower to you.

Yes it does.

remember how fast the G3 was over the 604e? New machines made that processor a turtle and so will the new intels. Especially when that horse can be rendered in 2 seconds flat. :eek:
 

jrhone

macrumors member
Jul 22, 2002
69
0
aztiml said:
Is it a good idea to ship pro machines before the pro apps from Adobe/Macromedia even go universal? Or will the latest and greatest chips from Intel overcome the slowness of Rosetta?

Seems like many of us are stuck with PowerPC until Adobe releases their new stuff.

sure it is....especially when there are MANY MANY of us in Audio and Video with Pro apps available now....but no pro machine.....Why make us wait when Adobe/Macromedia has nothing to do with our workflow?
 

Peace

Cancelled
Apr 1, 2005
19,546
4,556
Space The Only Frontier
Keep in mind Intel and Apple have been playing in the think tank on the new MacPro..Completely new design inside and out.And it's the top of the line Mac.There won't be anything but the best in it.For a price ;)
 

macenforcer

macrumors 65816
Jun 9, 2004
1,248
0
Colorado
Peace said:
Keep in mind Intel and Apple have been playing in the think tank on the new MacPro..Completely new design inside and out.And it's the top of the line Mac.There won't be anything but the best in it.For a price ;)


Yeah, and for that price they had better come stock with at least 400gb HD and 1gb ram, airport and bluetooth included.
 

darrens

macrumors member
MacMan93 said:
May be apple will introduce the PowerMac (grrr Mac Pro) with two different proccesors. Like a $1499 Conroe and $1999 and up models with a woodcrest.

There is no point having a Mac Pro with a single Woodcrest. The only logical move for this would be:

Single Dual Core (Conroe) MacPro (low end)
Dual Dual Core (Woodcrest) Mac Pro (high end)

But given the past pricing of Xeons, I doubt a Dual Dual Core Woodcrest Mac Pro would be $1999

I'd like to see a mid-range Mac desktop - the Mac Mini and iMac are not really expandable (can't add a TV tuner card which is a common consumer use), and the Mac Pros won't be consumer/prosumer grade machines - they will be workstations.
 

seenew

macrumors 68000
Dec 1, 2005
1,569
1
Brooklyn
So, Conroe in July... Will they be putting Core2's in the iMacs anytime soon? That's what I'm looking into getting for school, but I'm holding out because I'm scared of an immediate update..
 

mozmac

macrumors 6502
Apr 28, 2005
332
15
Austin, TX
They gotta put something higher than the "Core" chips. This is Apple's top of the line Mac. Even though it's gonna have a stupid name like Mac Pro, it's gotta have some balls. Give us something worthy of gloating over.
 

darrens

macrumors member
mozmac said:
They gotta put something higher than the "Core" chips. This is Apple's top of the line Mac. Even though it's gonna have a stupid name like Mac Pro, it's gotta have some balls. Give us something worthy of gloating over.

I may be wrong, but I think Intel only really has x86 chip "families" now:

Celeron (el-cheapo, not used by Apple to date, probably because there is no Yonah based celeron yet)
Core (replacing Pentium IV and Pentium M)
Xeon (for workstations and servers)

Most high-end PCs will soon be using Core chips.

Edit: And there's no way Apple would put an end-of-the-line Pentium IV in a Mac Pro!
 

THX1139

macrumors 68000
Mar 4, 2006
1,928
0
I'm thinking, don't be surprised if Apple only updates the dual processor PowerMacs and leaves the Quad in the lineup until 1st quarter '07. For what purpose you ask? Well, the Quad PPC is still a great machine and we are still a long way to Photoshop/Illustrator/Maya 3D/Lightwave/etc. binaries. What might happen is, Conroe in low-end and mid-range MacPro's. Then, after the first of the year (MacworldSF?), the new Intel Quad will be announced. Maybe in a new design! I agree with some of the OP's on this thread, Woodcrest is too expensive. I almost hope they DON'T use Woodcrest because I probably won't be able to afford it! ;)

I doubt Apple will use Conroe in anything other than dual core pro desktop machines. Woodcrest will go into Xserve and when the next generation Conroe (Kentsfield) ships, the next generation Quad will come out with (2x DualCore Conroe). Don't flame me, but I also don't think iMac or Mini's are not getting anything other than Core Duo 2. Same as the Laptops. And I think they might even continue Yonah in the lower-end products to save money, like the Macbooks on down. MBP will get CoreDuo 2. That's a given.

Finally, the reason it would be better to wait for a new Intel Quad is because Kentsfield will really be the way to go cost wise. Releasing a Quad in August using Woodcrest would be a bad idea, especially with a more cost effective solution coming first quarter of the year. If Apple sticks with the Woodcrest line for anything other than a super-highend system or Xserve, they will price themselves out of the desktop market. Who here really thinks Apple can release a Quad Woodcrest for less than 5K? I don't...least not until the price comes down.
 

javierbds

macrumors regular
Sep 12, 2005
158
0
Madrid, Spain
generik said:
Lol@longofest

Feeling a bit sore spending so much on an obsolete PC architecture? :rolleyes:

Mmmm ...
<BigSentenceMode>
The only thing that makes a hw architecture obsolete is sw or its absence (that ... and corporate stupidity, cough alpha ...).
The only thing that makes sw obsolete is bloatware or sw non extensibility (that ... and releasing betas).
</BigSentenceMode>
The market has its ways ... There are gotchas:
My k7 system is noticeable faster on real tasks than a P4 more than twice its MHz count (and about 2 years younger) ... It is telling that Intel's median MHz count has gone down recently (while improving hw arch) ... AMD's speed count was TOTALLY justified as Intel was selling highly oscillating crapware ...
It seems, at last, this year Intel may have something with a capability similar to G4's Altivec ... :rolleyes:
I always hated the guts (literally, from a programmable POV) of x86 arch ... Intel's hw optimization of sw gave us the P4 (shudders ...)
OTOH, multicore is sexy, low power too ... Intel is making a comeback and Apple saw it and decided to change horses (Apple's horse was dying anyway, I'm sure we will see nice PPCs next year, but it was too late ...).
My last Intel was a 486 (RIP, sniff ) ... My next Intel will be a Merom or better :cool:
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.