That seems odd to me. The iMac and mini have become so fast that in order to differentiate the MP I would presume they make it the fastest beast around. Quad socket, 6-core machine with 16x16GB memory sticks. No HDD, SSD only. Partnership with a company that makes a successor to the Xserve RAID
First 1100 go to project System Y.
SSD only makes little sense in this kind of setup. Have you looked at the price of ssds appropriate for large scale raid use? Typically if you're going to build a 20TB Raid with striped parity (not sure how well Raid 10 would work and a 0 is too volatile with large numbers of disks, especially without some kind of failover setup in place), you'd generally stick to enterprise grade drives. They use different firmware timings. SSDs are made for enterprise use, but they tend to be cost prohibitive, and when you're stacking up a bunch of disks, you can saturate the available bandwidth with HDDs. At that point why would you drop many thousands more on SSDs?
Q… QUAD-socket? As in the… crap, what were they called… I'll find it.
The ones that start at $1,000 per chip. You really want Apple to use those?! The board has to be huge, too…
I agree with everything but drives, UNLESS Apple starts making an XServe RAID equivalent again. I like the Mac Pro because of its ludicrously simple and Apple-approved expansion.
The XServe never went past dual cpu packages any more than any other model. People sometimes confuse the mac pro with what is referred to as "big iron", which wouldn't have anywhere near the level of one man shop ownership that has been seen with prior mac pros. Obviously those make sense in some server types. When I've looked at workloads typical to mac pros where individuals or companies have tried to keep things that drift into server like usage patterns in one box as much as possible, it seems to come down to things like data bandwidth constraints and software licensing costs. Video and rendering come up frequently enough, and I'm partly at fault for that. In that context some software can distribute calculations, but it can mean shifting around GB of data. The other problem is that licensing and interdependencies don't always allow this box to do one set of frames and this box to do another or you run into the issue of shifting a lot of data around.
Yes. I wouldn't mind if the MP became more expensive. I don't think anyone would mind; you buy what you need, the cost is irrelevant. Well, that not something you'd hear in Business School, but you catch my drift. Besides, aren't the current CPU's something like $800 a piece already.
If they keep HDD's in the new MP, they could put them perpendicular, possibly creating room for 12 old school 3.5" ones. However, I don't know what kind of heat that will create, and how they'll deal with that.
It's not a very forward thinking way to deal with the problem, and I don't think many businesses would trust Apple there. When you say $800 a piece, you're thinking of those in the dual package models. The Sandy Bridge equivalent would be E5-26XX variants. The single tops out at $600 cpus. For comparison the 2.3 quad mini uses a cpu that's listed at $378 Obviously that lacks an additional discrete graphics chip to add to the cost. The 2.6 costs the same. The 2.7 offered cto in macbook pros has a recommended customer pricing (the standard I've been using) of $568. I chose specific examples but not so much to be biased. I wanted to show that there is a range to it. The main options used by Apple rarely go far north of the $300 barrier. On the mini this year, while I don't think it's an amazing value, the middle one took on a more seemingly more expensive cpu when it dropped the gpu (unless I just misread launch cpu pricing somewhere).
In terms of buying what you need, the companies (and a few individuals) that need quad socket servers haven't filled these requirements with Macs. Even for them, cost is not entirely elastic. You jump to such a solution if it makes sense in spite of the sharp price increase. Keep in mind many of these are far more than $800. The E5-4650 is listed at $3620. Intel is reasonably consistent in their naming conventions within a given Xeon lineup. Typical XX50 means mid range relative to that specific line. Note the E5-2650. That still allows for 2 cpus and 80 PCI lanes. Here is something similar in pricing to what is used in the current single mac pro at the $3000 price point. The W3680 that is used now started off higher in price, but it came out in 2010.