Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Xserve July, Mac Pro (PowerMac) in August?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
THX1139 said:
Traditionally with PPC this is true, but this is not true for x86-64. x86-64 is different from other 64-bit architectures such as PPC-64. Some of the differences:
- x86-64 has twice as many registers than IA-32. This means 64-bit applications can be significantly faster than their 32-bit counterparts.
- You cannot run x86-64 binaries under a 32-bit OS such as Tiger. This means that when the Mac Pros are introduced running Tiger you will not be able to run 64-bit applications on them (you'll have to wait for Leopard for that).
- You must be running a 64-bit OS in order to take advantage of the improvements in x86-64. With PPC-64 you can run a 32-bit OS (Tiger) and still run 64-bit apps and take advantage of the 64-bit improvements of the G5.
Traditionally 64-bit applications are not faster and are sometimes slower than their 32-bit counterparts due to the increased memory bandwidth of 64-bit data types (pointers, long ints, etc.). As described above, this is not true for x86-64 and you can see significant speed improvements (up to 2x) in 64-bit applications over 32-bit apps.
seenew said:!!
So I should stop waiting and go ahead and buy it?
I'd go ahead and get an iMac now..
Later you can take it to an Apple specialist and have them stick in the Merom if you so desire.
THX1139 said:Using Woodcrest over Conroe in a single (dual core) serves little purpose other than to cost more. The only use for Woodcrest besides server, is in dual chip configuration (Quad), but that would cost a lot of money. We "might" see a Woodcrest Quad, but it's gonna cost a hell of a lot more than the current Quad. And it will run Pro apps in rosetta. Doesn't make sense until ALL pro apps go UB or the Woodcrest price drops. I said it in an earlier post, I don't think you will see an "affordable" Intel Quad until Kentsfield. Better embrace Conroe or wait another 6 months.
I'd love to see the maximum possible number of cores available in a mac. If that means the price of a quad goes up, than so be it.
And there are plenty of PRO apps already universal, notably the apple pro apps like FCS and Logic. There are plenty of users running those who would like a blazing fast intel tower as soon as they are possible. Makes no sense to wait until photoshop (or whatever) is UB, not all "pro" users need it.
To put it as simply as possible, when apple releases towers they need a configuration that beats the current G5 quad. If they release towers and they are all slower, they would take a public beating over it, it's not going to happen.
heisetax said:
So far, the new machines have been better than the machines they replace, when running native apps. The lower clock speeds don't really matter when real world performance goes up. The fastest current macs already beat the dual G5's on a number of apps (even the lowly MB beats the dual G5 2.0 tower on many Final Cut Studio benchmarks). Topping the dual towers shouldn't be hard, the real challenge is just the quad, which is about double the speed of any other shipping mac.
I think the way SJ will claim that the new machines are faster is by shipping machines that are faster. Piece of cake with the duals, the big question mark is what will replace the quad?
There was never any possibility of G5 upgrades, once the first intel boxes started shipping.
I'm Probably Gonna Wait For Dual Kentsfield 8 Core Leopards Next Spring
Well then if we get no Intel Quad until next year, you just made the case for the G5 Quad remaining the King of Macs for almost another year. I think Apple must try to sell a Woodcrest Quad if they really expect to keep claiming top speed PC the rest of this year. But if it's also true that Tiger cannot exploit Core 2 Duo 64-bitness, then we have to wait for Leopard anyway. So now I'm thinking along the lines you have posited which means wait for the Dual Kentsfield 8 Core Leopards next Spring '07 after Adobe CS3 UB ships.THX1139 said:Using Woodcrest over Conroe in a single (dual core) serves little purpose other than to cost more. The only use for Woodcrest besides server, is in dual chip configuration (Quad), but that would cost a lot of money. We "might" see a Woodcrest Quad, but it's gonna cost a hell of a lot more than the current Quad. And it will run Pro apps in rosetta. Doesn't make sense until ALL pro apps go UB or the Woodcrest price drops. I said it in an earlier post, I don't think you will see an "affordable" Intel Quad until Kentsfield. Better embrace Conroe or wait another 6 months.
seenew said:!
So I should stop waiting and go ahead and buy it?
Yeah, the only thing I can see going into th eiMacs is teh Merom, but that's pure speculation, obviously.
Silentwave said:
and that woodcrest must be used in dual configs. w/ecc-ram + a dual socket mainboard which cost around $500-600 itself so u do the math.
jiggie2g said:
Are you sure about that MUST?
If so, then we may still see the 2.93 conroe Extreme ed. in the low end, but the middle range may have 2x Woodcrest 2.6ghz
Or it may go 2.6conroe 2.93extreme conroe 3ghz woodcrest x2
iGary said:
Hate to break it to you iGary, but Merom IS Core 2 Duo!
Merom and Conroe are under the same umbrella of Core 2 Duo, with the highest Conroe alone being a Core 2 Extreme.
OK here's the pricing for Intel's chips:
Conroe:
Core 2 Duo E6600: 2.4ghz $316 (I doubt this will be in our Mac Pros)
Core 2 Duo E6700: 2.67ghz $530 (this could be our mac pro low end)
Core 2 EXTREME X6800: 2.93ghz $999 (This may be in our Mac Pros, but its expensive!)
Woodcrest:
Xeon 5140: 2.33ghz $455 (I doubt this will be in the mac pros either, may be too slow. But it is relatively inexpensive, and two of them means a quad at $900 processor cost. Ignore the Xeon 5148 which is 'low voltage' at a premium price.
Xeon 5150: 2.66ghz $690 (this may make it in, not as inexpensive as the 5140, but faster still.)
Xeon 5160: 3.0ghz $851 at release. (I think this will be in the top top end quad.
We also have to remember that Woodcrest comes out before Conroe by a full month...and then we still have a bit before WWDC, so for all I know prices could drop. I don't know how quickly they move, personally.
Conroe:
Core 2 Duo E6600: 2.4ghz $316 (I doubt this will be in our Mac Pros)
Core 2 Duo E6700: 2.67ghz $530 (this could be our mac pro low end)
Core 2 EXTREME X6800: 2.93ghz $999 (This may be in our Mac Pros, but its expensive!)
Woodcrest:
Xeon 5140: 2.33ghz $455 (I doubt this will be in the mac pros either, may be too slow. But it is relatively inexpensive, and two of them means a quad at $900 processor cost. Ignore the Xeon 5148 which is 'low voltage' at a premium price.
Xeon 5150: 2.66ghz $690 (this may make it in, not as inexpensive as the 5140, but faster still.)
Xeon 5160: 3.0ghz $851 at release. (I think this will be in the top top end quad.
We also have to remember that Woodcrest comes out before Conroe by a full month...and then we still have a bit before WWDC, so for all I know prices could drop. I don't know how quickly they move, personally.
Apple Pays Less Than Retail
So here's how I see them released at the August 7 SteveNote:
Conroe Core 2 Duo E6600: 2.4ghz $316 Bottom End.
Conroe Core 2 Duo E6700: 2.67ghz $530 Mid level.
NO Conroe Core 2 Duo EXTREME X6800: 2.93ghz $999 is too expensive. Not worth the extra cost to Apple.
Woodcrest Core 2 Duo x 2 Quad (formerly Xeon 5160): 3.0ghz $851 at release. (I think this will be in the top top end quad). Me too. Guessing Apple pays about $1200 per pair.
Can anyone explain if Tiger is useless on an Intel Quad or not? Are there no 32-bit to 64-bit Intel Quad multitasking-multithreading parts in the Intel version of Tiger? I mean what's the point of offering an Intel Quad if it can't run like a PPC Quad can only FASTER? Aiden Please?
Good find Silentwave. Also remember Apple does not pay these prices. They pay less according to the deal they make with Intel.Silentwave said:
So here's how I see them released at the August 7 SteveNote:
Conroe Core 2 Duo E6600: 2.4ghz $316 Bottom End.
Conroe Core 2 Duo E6700: 2.67ghz $530 Mid level.
NO Conroe Core 2 Duo EXTREME X6800: 2.93ghz $999 is too expensive. Not worth the extra cost to Apple.
Woodcrest Core 2 Duo x 2 Quad (formerly Xeon 5160): 3.0ghz $851 at release. (I think this will be in the top top end quad). Me too. Guessing Apple pays about $1200 per pair.
Can anyone explain if Tiger is useless on an Intel Quad or not? Are there no 32-bit to 64-bit Intel Quad multitasking-multithreading parts in the Intel version of Tiger? I mean what's the point of offering an Intel Quad if it can't run like a PPC Quad can only FASTER?
Aiden Please?
Multimedia said:
Yep, unless Apple decides to raise the price for the Intel Quad, I think they will keep the G5 Quad in the line-up until Kentsfield. I think anyone who purchased a Quad within the past 6 months may find they have a good investment until Spring '07. I might be wrong... Apple may decide to shake things up by releasing the 3ghz Intel Quad (Woodcrest) at WWDC. But what would they have to charge for that beast!? 6-7K?? If they do release a Woodcrest Quad, then what happens when Kentsfield comes out less than 6 months later? Do a redesigned Quad with Kentsfield and drop the price? I think that's a bad idea. Once commited to Woodcrest, I think it's hard to go to Conroe (Kentsfield) next year. Least from a marketing standpoint.
I'm thinking that Apple is going to release Macpro's at WWDC using Conroe. That will be a pacifier for most professionals who don't need the extreme power of a Quad (like me). They will promote Final Cut on the Conroe desktop...and it should be really fast for general video production. Waaay faster than the current G5 dual 2.3. Then when Adobe ships the new version of CS, After Effects and Indesign next year, (and maybe Maya 3d will come out too?) they will announce the new Quad along with revison B of the shipping Macpros (bumping the GHZ along with new motherboards with faster bus) I know, it sounds strange to have one hold-over G5 in the lineup, but they need to continue offering one fast G5 machine until all the rest of the major Pro apps are shipping. It would be cool if they dropped the price of the Quad too!
Once the consumer/prosumer line gets settled by end of year, Apple can go after the high-end pro market. Don't be surprised if they create a marketing campaign around the '07 Intel Quad and the film-fx/3d industry. I know that Steve would love to move Pixar to Mac. I know they could use X-serve, but the 3d software isn't ready. Anyhow, soon as the chips and software are ready, I'll bet he does it.
What about coprocessing?
So, in the old days, we had the "math coprocessor." Now, we use the graphics card's GPU to speed up various things. I have a new idea.
Apple should release 2 tower lines. Mac Tower and Mac Tower Pro (or whatever).
The Mac Tower would compete with low-end towers: It'd be barebones (with integrated graphics, et cetera), but expandable.
The Mac Tower Pro would be a real workstation-class machine, with multiple processors, lots of open bays and expandability, and -- the important part -- a PPC "Cell" chip like used in the XBox 360.
The OS could shunt off PPC/Altivec instructions there for processing. The Cell's lack of int proc power would be more than compensated for by the Intel chips in the box, which will do most of the work.
The Cell processor could be also be used to do things like:
- Run a virtual-machine XBox 360 environment
- Supercharge 3D rendering and video compression
- Run a virtual-machine "classic" mode
The great part about this is that eventually, XCode could allow Universal software to delegate sections of processing to the Cell, but the benefits would be immediate, as there is plenty of PPC code out there that could take advantage of it.
These machines would basically make the upgrade to a new Pro machine a no-brainer, even for people relying on software that isn't Universal yet. Apple could charge a huge premium for them, too, as long as they were covered on the low end with a cheap tower.
So, in the old days, we had the "math coprocessor." Now, we use the graphics card's GPU to speed up various things. I have a new idea.
Apple should release 2 tower lines. Mac Tower and Mac Tower Pro (or whatever).
The Mac Tower would compete with low-end towers: It'd be barebones (with integrated graphics, et cetera), but expandable.
The Mac Tower Pro would be a real workstation-class machine, with multiple processors, lots of open bays and expandability, and -- the important part -- a PPC "Cell" chip like used in the XBox 360.
The OS could shunt off PPC/Altivec instructions there for processing. The Cell's lack of int proc power would be more than compensated for by the Intel chips in the box, which will do most of the work.
The Cell processor could be also be used to do things like:
- Run a virtual-machine XBox 360 environment
- Supercharge 3D rendering and video compression
- Run a virtual-machine "classic" mode
The great part about this is that eventually, XCode could allow Universal software to delegate sections of processing to the Cell, but the benefits would be immediate, as there is plenty of PPC code out there that could take advantage of it.
These machines would basically make the upgrade to a new Pro machine a no-brainer, even for people relying on software that isn't Universal yet. Apple could charge a huge premium for them, too, as long as they were covered on the low end with a cheap tower.
Multimedia said:Can anyone explain if Tiger is useless on an Intel Quad or not? Are there no 32-bit to 64-bit Intel Quad multitasking-multithreading parts in the Intel version of Tiger? I mean what's the point of offering an Intel Quad if it can't run like a PPC Quad can only FASTER?
It's not useless under Tiger it just won't be able to run any 64-bit applications until Leopard is released. The number of processors (1, 2, 4) that the OS can use has nothing to do with 64-bit support.
The new Core 2 CPUs (Merom, Conroe & Woodcrest) can run 32-bit code very well, so they should perform well without 64-bit support. But they can run 64-bit code even faster, up to 2x for some applications. As there are very few 64-bit apps for the Mac right now (only Mathmatica comes to mind) then this isn't a huge problem. But if you do happen to need a 64-bit application then you're probably out of luck until Leopard. This is another reason why Apple may keep some PPC towers around - if you need 64-bit support then your only option will be PPC until Leopard.
Keep in mind that if you want one of the Core 2 Mac Pros that you will likely need to go through yet another transition (32-bit Intel to 64-bit Intel). Drivers will need to be updated for 64-bit support so keep that in mind if you depend on any hardware that requires 3rd party drivers. Also, applications that want to take advantage of the speed improvements in 64-bit mode will also need to be updated.
That is a good point about apple getting better prices than just that! I suppose a 3ghz quad may make the same price point as the G5. they'd better start it with 1-2 gigs ram though. 512 is a joke for a quad.
I'm wondering though, since we don't know if they'll be using Conroe for imacs for instance (which I dont think they will as merom, not conroe, is the one that is pin compatible with the current board), maybe it would be more cost effective to go all woodcrest, as they'll probably need them for the xserves in multiple speeds? They could save money: buy a bunch of 2.6 and 3ghz Woodcrests...put them both in xserves, and for the Mac Pros have a cheap 2.6ghz quad and a more pricey 3ghz quad.
I'm holding out until this time next year, with my graduation money I may be able to get a Kentsfield-Octo!
I'm wondering though, since we don't know if they'll be using Conroe for imacs for instance (which I dont think they will as merom, not conroe, is the one that is pin compatible with the current board), maybe it would be more cost effective to go all woodcrest, as they'll probably need them for the xserves in multiple speeds? They could save money: buy a bunch of 2.6 and 3ghz Woodcrests...put them both in xserves, and for the Mac Pros have a cheap 2.6ghz quad and a more pricey 3ghz quad.
I'm holding out until this time next year, with my graduation money I may be able to get a Kentsfield-Octo!
iGary said:So what are you guys gonna run Photoshop on?
Not that adobe has proven their worth to me lately (ACR does not do well for me, and I find lightroom's best feature is "lights out") but by the time I might need to run PS a lot, I expect we'll have CS3 out as an UB program, so I can run it on my Intel quad or by that point a Xeon-Kentsfield Octo!
Silentwave said:
Whatever happend to simple ship marketing?
Am I the only one that thinks this all sound like some alien BS language?
"Core 2 Duo"
Silentwave said:
Guess I dont' see the purpose in dropping 4 G's on a machine and then not being able to use it...
THX1139 said:
I think that would be suicide for apple. How could they possibly put a positive spin on that? Releasing new towers, none of which are faster than the one that's been out for a year? What's the selling point of them if they're not faster than a machine that was released a year before? It would send a message to the world that the G5's were better than intel after all, and makes it look like they made a big mistake.
Seriously, can you imagine the reaction to benchmarks showing a new dual core conroe running FCS SLOWER than the quad which was released a year earlier? I can see them keeping the quad G5 in the lineup for a while until more apps are universal, but they'd have to have an intel machine that beats it on native apps.
I think they need to release a quad along with dual models, if it requires a price increase, then so be it. If people aren't willing to pay the price, the dual machines will be an alternative for much less money. Is there any argument for NOT releasing a quad machine, other than price?
iGary said:
There isn't. Going intel makes sense in two cases. Either the apps you use the most are native, or the apps that aren't native aren't ones that require a ton of speed. Some people will want to wait, but those of us running UB apps want to see towers shipping with the fastest chips available as soon as possible.
Good things will come to those who wait. I'm not 100% sure when TIGERTON will be out... I seem to remember reading Q1 2007 though that may have been Kentsfield. If people wait for Adobe to go universal, they'll be able to pick up Octos! (I knew kentsfield sounded wrong...its the Conroe successor quad, the Woodcrest quad-core successor/MP capable is Tigergton)
Of course those who wait for Dunnington may be even happier.
Of course those who wait for Dunnington may be even happier.
Xbox is not a Cell
Xbox uses a PowerPC chip that is simpler than a PPC970, but has three cores.welborn said:
Tigerton Makes Octopussies Not Kentsfield Pairs?
So you're saying that Kentsfields may not be mounted in pairs while Tigertons may? And what is Dunnington? 8 core processors? And if so may they be mounted in pairs? And when do they ship? Are they Core 2 Octo or Core 3 Octo in 2008?Silentwave said:
Tigerton replaced Whitefield, but I think it is still going to be followed by Dunnington, which will be 45nm process. I don't know if Tigerton's details have been leaked yet, so we don't know if its 65 or 45nm.
Dunnington may have between 4 and 32 cores according to various rumors. I'd be happy with 8
There are also rumors about Harpertown which may be a woodcrest with the 45nm process, or 8 core MCM with 12MiB L2.
We'll know more as time goes by.
Right now the brands are not known...remember just about what, 2 weeks ago, we didn't know that Conroe/Merom would be called Core 2 Duo. Woodcrest is the Xeon dual-core 5100 series if memory serves.
The good news is we're already predicting 2 generations down the line, once the mac pros are announced we'll have a better idea of where Steve Jobs is putting us as far as processors so we'll know where to watch...and with time will also come a progression in the leaks and announcements as to what will be coming up. We may still see many changes...we're possibly <1yr away from tigertons and they recently brought Tigerton out to replace Whitefield.
Even the Conroes have a bright future. As we said earlier, Kentsfield will be a quad core MCM based on two Conroes, with two 4MiB L2s for a total of 8MiB L2. I do not believe it will be capable of MP. After that will come Yorkfield which is an 8-core MCM on the 45nm process with 12MiB L2.
Of course all of this is tentative and may change...but even if Conroe makes it into the Mac Pros permanently on the low end, it successors Kentsfield and Yorkfield will be blazingly fast at what is likely to be an affordable price point, and may make the chips we have today seem like snails.
Whatever the future holds, it'll be bright and FAST!
Dunnington may have between 4 and 32 cores according to various rumors. I'd be happy with 8
There are also rumors about Harpertown which may be a woodcrest with the 45nm process, or 8 core MCM with 12MiB L2.
We'll know more as time goes by.
Right now the brands are not known...remember just about what, 2 weeks ago, we didn't know that Conroe/Merom would be called Core 2 Duo. Woodcrest is the Xeon dual-core 5100 series if memory serves.
The good news is we're already predicting 2 generations down the line, once the mac pros are announced we'll have a better idea of where Steve Jobs is putting us as far as processors so we'll know where to watch...and with time will also come a progression in the leaks and announcements as to what will be coming up. We may still see many changes...we're possibly <1yr away from tigertons and they recently brought Tigerton out to replace Whitefield.
Even the Conroes have a bright future. As we said earlier, Kentsfield will be a quad core MCM based on two Conroes, with two 4MiB L2s for a total of 8MiB L2. I do not believe it will be capable of MP. After that will come Yorkfield which is an 8-core MCM on the 45nm process with 12MiB L2.
Of course all of this is tentative and may change...but even if Conroe makes it into the Mac Pros permanently on the low end, it successors Kentsfield and Yorkfield will be blazingly fast at what is likely to be an affordable price point, and may make the chips we have today seem like snails.
Whatever the future holds, it'll be bright and FAST!