Do you think they will do anything with the Core 2 Extreme?
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2625
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2625
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).
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.
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.
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.
That was not Conroe it was Kentsfield, which is two Conroe dies in a single housing. Different then two housings.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.
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"
Conroe is not SMP enabled. You can't put two conroe in dual socket mb.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).
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.
tonyl said:Conroe is not SMP enabled. You can't put two conroe in dual socket mb.
kuwan said:The biggest advantage that Woodcrest has is that it can be put into a Quad configuration and Conroe cannot.
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.
adamfilip said:cry me a river
geeze.
having newer faster machines doesnt make your machine any slower to you.
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.
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
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.
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.
generik said:Lol@longofest
Feeling a bit sore spending so much on an obsolete PC architecture?