Intel unleashes Mac-bound "Woodcrest" server chip - Page 8

You don't have to agree with it, I've never observed my statement to be false. I've only rarely seen a situation where the top of the line unit in electronics components gets 50% better performance than a unit of the same brand that's half the price. Add to that that the prices of graphics cards drop like a rock, next year's $200 card could easily outperform today's $400 card.

These aren't electronics components as you are wording it. Graphics cards are stratified much more so than most other products.

The $500 cards are much better than the $300 ones are. The rare $650 cards are often 15 to 20% faster still.

There is usually a three year cycle. The top card today is the middle card next year, and then the bottom one the year after that.

To get back to the topic of new CPUs...
I checked out what might be a similar Dell computer, at least a Woodcrest quad model. I configured a Dell Precision Workstation 490 MiniTower - 64 bit with 2.66GHz porcessors and it came to $4435 I configured with a cheap ATI FireGL V7200 video card. The other options were nCidia Quadro FX 3450, 3500 or 4500 workstation class cards. 4GB of DDR2 FBD 533MHz ECC RAM and 250 GB SATA II drive and superdrive, keyboard and optical mouse. Should be close to a RAM upgraded Mac. Upgrading to quad 3GHz put it at $5255 these kinds of prices are beyond Apple's historic price points for a Quad G5 so I have to believe Apple would have to settle for something a little more modest for even their top of the line.

Closer would be a XPS 700 with a single dual-core Conroe X6800 for $3779. 3.73GHz, 4GB 667MHz DDR2 RAM, 320GB HD and the ATI Radeon X1900 XTX, keyboard and optical mouse. Of course these won't be shipping until 10/4/2006. I'm thinking we might be disappointed, unless price no object. Still disappointed in having to wait, if Dell is any example.

The Mac Pro will be out by WWDC. To round out the "anniversary" of about one year ago at the previous WWDC where the Intel bombshell was dropped. It would be a rousing finale for Steve J to stand on stage and say, "We did it ALL in one year, We've got this exciting high performance per watt Mac Pro, and We've got (insert number) thousands of Universal apps, all thanks to you developers." Crowd then gives standing ovation for a few minutes, exhibition hall explodes in an epic aura of RDF.

"Oh, and one more thing........"

wireless mighty mouse... bummer

Dell's high-end is the only place they have nice margins. Apple takes decent margins everywhere, thus they need no 40-50% margin on top, and could out-price Dell now if they wanted.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by onlooker
Chances are they can not out price DELL...(where do you dream this shit up)

ROFLMAO

Same thing at Apple. High margins on high end products. Apple could out-price Dell, but Dell probably still sells more XPS700 and Power Edge servers than Apple selling dual and quad G5 replacements. Apple has not tried to price match anybody, ever. Certainly not Dell or low end or midrange models. Yes, if you equip a Dell with similar stuff as Apple throws in, they are close, as opposed to a base model cheapest Dell versus Apple.

I just figured that the "Mac Pro" has a Intel processor and a Intel designed motherboard, let's see what somebody else is doing with that. Should give us an idea what Apple might ship, given their past history and bias towards less cutting edge RAM and video cards.

Dell is pushing SAS or serial attached SCSI hard drives, which are full duplex compared to SATA II and Apple has only done SATA I so far. So since no single hard drive can push 3Gb/s, at least offer double the thoughput by offering SAS drives. Not to mention that there are 10,000 and 15,000 rpm SAS drives, which are faster than the 7200 rpm SATA drives Apple now uses. They are expensive though: a Maxtor 300GB 10K SAS drive is $800 A 300GB SATA 7200 rpm drive from Maxtor is $120 You can do a stripped array of SATA drives and get better speed and capacity for less money. I think Apple's customers for desktop computers are better served with the better value of SATA. Maybe a cost no object server should have SAS.

As for the video card, Apple could offer and should offer for the gamers more choices, now that there are standard PCI Express slots.

Intel has recently adopted one price for all, instead of tiered pricing for the new Core 2 Duo processors, so Dell has lost that one advantage. Also Dell has been courting AMD for their high end stuff, so Apple may be in favor at Intel. That might help with priority shipping to Apple, so we might get a first to market advantage. With Vista slipping, the Mac market has a real opportunity to grow once the new desktops appear. Apple has been growing big time in laptop market share. Probably due to the Intel transition. With a MacBookPro likely to get a 20% speed bump from a Yonah to Merom upgrade soon, it's only going to get better. I just wish Adobe could ship CS3 sooner. Nobody is really complaining about MS Office 2004's performance under Rosetta.

I generally complain about it's performance running native on a PPC so I'd be surprised. Or have they magically found a way of making it skip the 'Optimizing Font Menu' every bloody time it starts?

I use Pages for Word document opening - I can be in and out of the document in the time Word starts. If only there was a cocoa Excel replacement....

Text Edit can open Word files. It's even faster loading than Pages. You can't avoid Word's Optimizing Font menu, but you can lessen it, by managing your fonts and having less available when Word is running. There is the free Linotype Font Explorer, or Suitcase Fusion, or just fiddling around with Font Book.

At 6:51 AM, having gone to bed at 5:30, I was sleep-posting (sort of like sleepwalking but awkwarder).

But if you don't think Apple will beat Dell, you're not expecting a sub-3k Quad, and you're not expecting a 3.0 GHz model for under $4k.

That's what I expect. I'm more than happy to be proved wrong. Apple just announced bluetooth mighty mouse.

Those more expensive drives have their place, though their necessity in workstations is diminishing. For consumer use, it doesn't make sense to run enterprise-type drives. But for server use, it often doesn't make sense to use consumer drives. The 10k+ RPM drives really are generally meant for servers. Some of the 15k drives can handle 2.5x the transactions per second as the faster 7.2k drives. Striping two slower drives doesn't markedly increase the number of transactions per second. The "enterprise" type drives are also designed assuming it is going to handle constant use.

On the happy side, if you take a low-end dual-proc Precision, mentally drop a GB of RAM and remove the monitor, and think of the savings of going from Quadro to 7600GT and losing "memory risers", you could do a $2000 Quad. Granted, that was with Xeon 50xx - I can find workstatioin 51xx's on Dell's site somehow.

The Precision 690 offers both 50xx and 51xx options, you have to pick "choose", then "continue" to configure the system and it will show the processor options. The 51xxs show a shipping delay though. A 1.6GHz 5110 single shows up at the same price as a single 3.0GHz 5050. The cheapest Woodcrest with only one chip is $1730, the cheapest Woodcrest dual-dual is about $2100 US. An otherwise minimal 3.0GHz 5160 quad runs to $3940.

My guess is that Apple will wait for the Xserves till later in the year, somewhere around October to November, and concentrate on getting the Pro and Consumer hardware updated.

Thanks. I get so lost in Dell's site...

Anyhow - 2x 5130, DVD+/-RW, 250 GB HDD, rest basic = $2847

subtract "memory risers", 1 GB of RAM ($150), monitor ($250-300), and you hit low-$2ks for a Quad 2.0 Woodcrest system. Meaning my 2 x 2.0 for $2200 isn't a total crack-pipe dream.

Honestly - drop-in three sentences at WWDC, at best. Followed by a write up in tech magazines about the TCO, and how it's a great bargain, as the current XServe apparently was at one point.

"10.5 Server will drastically reduce the messenging lag in the Darwin kernel, making it even better for servers. Which reminds me... we've got a new Xserve: 2 x 2.33 and 2 x 2.66 Xeon 5100s, room for 4 HDDs <insert 1-2 more features here>, all at the competitive price of <price>. Additionally, 10.5 Server has..."

I was shopping the precision 490 instead of the 690 as they started at a cheaper price, more like Apple's. I then customozed mini-Tower with XP Pro x64 edition, to match Apple's 64 bit approach. Cheapest Woodcreast, the 1.6GHz 5110, no 2nd CPU and cheapest video card, and Apple Std. 1GB of RAM and 160GB HD (not cheapest, but lowest end for current G5) and combo drive, 2nd Ethernet to match current G5, keyboard and optical mouse, 1394a card ( a compromise at only FireWire 400), Finally, I save some money on the cheapest support option of 3 years and the price thus was $2250, just a tad more than Apple's $2000 base model pricing. For the same price, I could have done a (dual core) Xeon 5050 at 3GHz but only 667MHz RAM. That probably would sound better for a non-quad machine.

I think you can avoid adding 2nd Ethernet card and FW card - those seem to be Apple-standard: Apple has then whether or not the model you compare it to has them.

You are right, I didn't look that hard at the 490. It's a little closer if you put in the Applecare ($250) to bring the G5's support up to three years to match the Dell's.

Very true. good point to even things up. Of course Apple doesn't market their computers as "Workstations" even if they have nearly the same power. I think Apple might use a Core 2 Extreme in the non-quad desktop. it seems to be a cheaper way to go. Only Woodcrest is needed in a Quad machine.

I hope you guys really enjoy pouring through those pages, and numbers. I'm just not sure that Apple cares much about them. Remember that Apple's pricing is based on different areas than Dell's are. Dells prices are not all that relevant.

Dell has features as standard that Apple doesn't offer, and Apple has much more expensive cases that Dell doesn't offer. The designs are totally different, and sell into different markets, for the most part. Dell also can get better pricing on parts than Apple can, due to much greater volume. Dell also can sell for less because of their direct model, while Apple still sells most of its models through the distribution system.

If Apple's prices are about the same, then they are for very different reasons. I don't think that looking through Dells lists really helps judge what Apple can do. Any similarities are likely coincidental.

They might not say that in their literature and their site, but I would suggest that they both have the same kind of buyers and the same general uses, the same general pricing. If Apple continues their plan of non-upgradable duals, then their one-processor unit certainly won't need to be Woodcrest.

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en...5-3224812.html

HP's got a single 2.33GHz 5140 Woodcrest for $2869

Interesting...that's a pretty fat margin they're taking in._ I hope Apple will be more competitive than that...that's almost a 50% margin if I were to guess...there's not more than 2000 worth of parts in that HP._ If I were to guess, I'd say there is 1600 dollars of parts in there.

I thought someone would find that interesting. But HP is known to have better margins than Dell, but then again Apple is known for fatter margins too. I can't wait to see what's up Apple's sleeve.

I think that a good look at what Hp is offering on this machine is in order first. If Apple offered the same, we would be in ecstasy!

160GB SATA drive

16x/48x DVD

2 - 3.5" internal
2 - 5.25" external
1 - 3.5" external

4 PCIe slots 16, 4, 4
2 PCI slots

Front ports

1 Mic
USB 2
1 Firewire
1 audio out

rear ports

5 USB 2
1 serial
2 PS/2
1 rj-45 (NIC)
1 audio in
1 audio out
1 mic in
1 parallel
1USB 2 (not sure what that means)

Nvidia Quadro NVS 285 128MB PCIe card.

10/100/1000 NIC

Data center grade power supply

3 year warranty including labor, AND onsite service!

When Apple offers us something like that, for a lower price, then we can say that Hp is making a fat margin.

Apple already offers_10/100/1000 NICs.
The Nvidia Quadro NVS 285 128MB PCIe card is a 160 dollar card.
Apple already offers USB 2, Firewire, audio in/out, RJ-45 (obviously)...we don't need serial, parallel or PS/2.
Apple already offers 4 PCIe slots.
Apple already offers 160GB SATAs.

All of this for $1999...and this isn't no ordinary $1999...these 1999 dollars are on a 7 month old product which is probably worth no more than $1499 now. So in a sense, Apple is offering almost all of that *right now* and the PowerMac G5 could be very competitive *right now* if Apple had a "don't-screw-the customer" policy.

The only enticing features on the HP is the expansion. If I had to choose between a 2900 dollar 2.33GHz Xeon and a 1499 dollar 2.00GHz G5, I'd pick the G5 (probably also because I don't need the expandability though...but whatever).

The next round of pro towers from Apple will certainly have 1GB of RAM min and will retain the same price as a worst case scenario...so I'm fairly certain we'll see the 2.33GHz Xeon and everything we see on the current G5s (and, therefore, the HP) with the exception of 1GB less RAM for $1999.

The only things that are expensive in that HP is the processor and the mobo which probably doesn't add up to more than $1000 if we pretend the mobo is $500 and that HP doesn't get any deal from Intel.

What you're showing is still only a subset of what Hp is offering. It's convenient to ignore that fact.

And you do need serial and parallel. I have equipment that I can't use on a Mac because it needs either.

Test equipment, for example. That's why Apple can't compete in some markets. And the makers of those ports for the Mac left when the Mac's marketshare went south a few years ago.

Apple doesn't offer that board at all, and the ones that come with the machine are cheaper game boards. I bet you can get ANY board for the Hp.

I would pick the 2.33 Xeon. The G5 is a dead issue. Who cares?

Never state what Apple will do, and never put a price on it. The best you can do is to say that you think it would be a good idea for it.

If you happen to be about right, it's just luck. everyone comes out with a prediction of what Apple will do. someone has to be lucky. But it means nothing.

Apple simply has nothing to compete, despite what you say. That 3 year onsite warranty is worth $300 by itself. When you add Apple's extended one to the price it still isn't quite as good.

I have made some serial port equipment so I would be interested in that port. I can hack a serial port device in less than a day, and the software, at least for Windows/Linux is easy too. There aren't any PCIe boards or USB->serial converters that work? I would like to know, I've never tried.

Ok but Apple has never ever offered serial or parallel ports in their computers, ever...so they're not going to start now...it's not like these things are jacking up the price anyway...these ports cost what? 10 dollars at most for Intel to slap onto the board? There aren't very many serial and parallel devices anymore...it'd be unjustifiable to add these legacy ports on a 2006 niche computer that would hardly make use of them.


It means common sense and a bit of logic.


True...I'll give you that. I don't understand why AppleCare is seperate...smells like a QuickTime-Pro-type of way to nickel and dime customers to me.

Apple has AFAIK never offered RS232 or Parallel ports on their Macs so I can't imagine that market is large. I'm surprised to see them on PCs even these days.

How old is your equipment ?

I've got old SCSI scanners and ZIP drives from 6-7 years ago but I've not bought a printer or scanner since then that wasn't USB or ethernet. Similarly, apart from some old Palm serial port based docks from 1999, I don't think anything like that hasn't come with USB since about then too.

I really think Apple has to try and hit the same price points as it's old G5 desktops otherwise the Intel switch will just be seen as being more expensive than PowerPC. Machines that come in just a bit quicker than what we had 3 years ago but more expensive just will not do.

USB to serial or parallel converters rarely work with test equipment, because there are timing issues with USB. Equipment must be designed to use it. Much equipment requires serial control. Pro audio recorders use serial, as does other audio equipment.There are boards for the PC, but none for the PCIE Mac. Hopefully there will be. But, that uses a slot, and here we go again about that.

Apple has always offered serial ports. Until they went to USB.



I wish that were true.



No, it's just a professional level of service.

Apple has always offered serial. It would work, with an adapter, with most serial controlled equipment.

http://francis.courtois.free.fr/jc1/...IN8toDB25.html

Other manufacturers offeres RS 232 and higher, serial cards with as many as 8 ports.

New equipment still uses this, and will for many years. Serial control is standard in many industries. From audio recorders to genome sequencers.

There's quite a bit of equipment out there.

http://www.mks.zp.ua/serial-port-monitor.php

http://www.yamaha.co.uk/xg/html/software/s_serial.htm

http://www.quatech.com/catalog/rs232_pcmcia.php

http://www.quatech.com/applications/applications.php

This is just a very small number of links from Google. There are a vast number of devices out there. It's by no means a dead technology.