or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Ripe in Cupertino: an Apple with 8 cores
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ripe in Cupertino: an Apple with 8 cores - Page 3

post #81 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell

Where exactly do we loose out in our practical everyday computing experience?

One way in which Nvidia cards are crippled on the Mac is screen rotation. ATI cards and even the low ass GMA 950 support screen rotation in Mac OS Tiger. For some reason, rotation is not available for Nvidia cards in Mac OS even though the same cards support rotation in Windows.
post #82 of 184
Here's the solution: if AMD can buy ATI, then Apple can buy Nvidia. I'm sure that Intel won't mind.
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
post #83 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by donebylee


Here's the solution: if AMD can buy ATI, then Apple can buy Nvidia. I'm sure that Intel won't mind.

I like it!
post #84 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by donebylee

Here's the solution: if AMD can buy ATI, then Apple can buy Nvidia. I'm sure that Intel won't mind.

Im actually really surprised Intel hasn't bought them already, considering what AMD did...
post #85 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell

Are you saying Apple should have a better selection of lower end cards?

I think Apple's low end graphics cards are too low end. They should raise the bar on the standard cards for their professional desktop machines. An entry level card like the Geforce 7300 should not have been offered at all for the Mac Pro. The Geforce 7600 would make a good standard card for the Mac Pro.
post #86 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by hypoluxa

Im actually really surprised Intel hasn't bought them already, considering what AMD did...

So am I. Like really surprised!! Imagine if Microsoft had of bought YouTube, yuck, that would have been terrible. Intel should snap up Nvidia before it's too late.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #87 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland

So am I. Like really surprised!! Imagine if Microsoft had of bought YouTube, yuck, that would have been terrible. Intel should snap up Nvidia before it's too late.

I agree they should as well, before MS gets any ideas...
post #88 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar

I think Apple's low end graphics cards are too low end. They should raise the bar on the standard cards for their professional desktop machines. An entry level card like the Geforce 7300 should not have been offered at all for the Mac Pro. The Geforce 7600 would make a good standard card for the Mac Pro.

Why? Lots of Mac Pro's are used in areas where a graphics card is totally unnecessary. Say, for Photoshop.
post #89 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell

Perhaps I'm being obtuse but I haven't really seen any one explain in real world terms what they are missing out on with Apple's current system. Well outside of gaming of course.

I gave you some reasons which you seem to not appreciate. Just the choice matters. One doesn't need a specific reason. I suppose all companies should have just a few models of whatever they make.

But, you dismiss gaming, which you shouldn't. Especially now.

If gamers want a Mac, and many do, they can now use BootCamp to run their games at full speed. They would want higher power gaming cards. It's a small market—possibly. But, in looking at some game sites, it certainly seems as though a lot of gamers would want that Mac, if they could get a good card.

Perhaps a small part of the overall market, but if a fair number switch over, possibly a good jump for Mac sales.

Scientific apps often call for a fast card with a lot of RAM, but not a workstation card.

Quote:
I'm sure this can be true under certain circumstances. I'm asking what circumstances are those.

See above. Again, don't dismiss gamers.

Quote:
I have friends who work with Macs configured into quarter million dollar workstations. I have not heard them complain about graphic card limitation.

Good for those two or three people. They represent a very small portion of the community.
post #90 of 184
Quote:
I gave you some reasons which you seem to not appreciate. Just the choice matters. One doesn't need a specific reason.

I can appreciate people wanting choice. So far seems its not a compelling enough reason for Apple nor Nvidia/ATI to do much about it. Hopefully that will change in the future.

Quote:
Good for those two or three people. They represent a very small portion of the community.

I wasn't talking about individuals. Some friends who work at a post production company that edits and finishes national commercial spots and music videos. That actually is a fair sized market with a significantly large buying power.
post #91 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell

I wasn't talking about individuals. Some friends who work at a post production company that edits and finishes national commercial spots and music videos. That actually is a fair sized market with a significantly large buying power.

Unfortunately not so big. Smaller than the gamer market by far.

The entire production industry buys computers numbering in the thousands per year, running to at most a very few tens of thousands. It really isn't a big market.
post #92 of 184
Quote:
But, you dismiss gaming, which you shouldn't. Especially now.

No it wasn't my intention to be dismissive of gamers.
I was being proactive in preparation for an onslaught of them explaining why they want a wide card selection.

When Dell bought Alienware I saw their sales were around $170 million for the quarter. Even though its not much its good money Apple should not turn away.
post #93 of 184
Quote:
Unfortunately not so big. Smaller than the gamer market by far.

The entire production industry buys computers numbering in the thousands per year, running to at most a very few tens of thousands. It really isn't a big market.

I don't believe this to be true.

There are numerous types of productions facilities in every city. From large national broadcast facilities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Atlanta) local affiliates in every major market, government television, college television, film schools, in house cable production, in house business production, public access television, professional production companies, independent editors. To people like me who have Final Cut Studio to edit my reel and burn it to DVD. To every wanna' be filmmaker everywhere who has some type of computer post production set up.

I don't see that as a small market at all.
post #94 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell

I don't believe this to be true.

There are numerous types of productions facilities in every city. From large national broadcast facilities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Atlanta) local affiliates in every major market, government television, college television, film schools, in house cable production, in house business production, public access television, professional production companies, independent editors. To people like me who have Final Cut Studio to edit my reel and burn it to DVD. To every wanna' be filmmaker everywhere who has some type of computer post production set up.

I don't see that as a small market at all.

And I can attest, after having been in that industry for quite a while, that most of those set-ups consist of 10 or less machines, with several dozen having between 10 and 100, and very few having substantially more than that.

For rendering, which is what large set-ups are for, Dell or Sun is mostly used. Even Pixar uses Dell, though hopefully, that will now change.

Just how many independent editors do you think are out there? The number is in the thousands, for professional users (Semi-pro and amateurs don't count).They don't buy machines more than every two, three, or even four years, so their impact is less. Even the bigger houses don't buy all new machines every year.

So, at the most a low few 10's of thousand sales a year. Even Apple acknowledges this.
post #95 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat

Why? Lots of Mac Pro's are used in areas where a graphics card is totally unnecessary. Say, for Photoshop.

While it is true that my Illustrator and Photoshop work do not tax my video card substantially, when I hit the lottery and buy that second second 30" display, I have to move up to the higher end card.
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
post #96 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

So, at the most a low few 10's of thousand sales a year. Even Apple acknowledges this.

I'm not doubting you, it's pretty expensive stuff. How did Apple count their announced 500,000 Final Cut user base? Were they counting every sale since they bought the programs, were they counting eacy upgrade as a user too?
post #97 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by donebylee

While it is true that my Illustrator and Photoshop work do not tax my video card substantially, when I hit the lottery and buy that second second 30" display, I have to move up to the higher end card.

At least you can probably upgrade by spending $400 on the ATI and not another grand for the Quadro. There might be the option to get another 7300 if you have a Mac Pro.
post #98 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM

At least you can probably upgrade by spending $400 on the ATI and not another grand for the Quadro. There might be the option to get another 7300 if you have a Mac Pro.

I am waiting for Leopard (please let it be January), and then it is a Mac Pro for me. No need for an Octo-Pro...just some Quad-Pro [quo] goodness...that will do nicely thank you.

"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
post #99 of 184
BTW, just read that MS Vista is going require 1 GB RAM and recommends 2 GB.

Either RAM is about to get very cheap, Vista is about to fail big time, or Apple is about to become very popular
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
post #100 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by donebylee

BTW, just read that MS Vista is going require 1 GB RAM and recommends 2 GB.

Either RAM is about to get very cheap, Vista is about to fail big time, or Apple is about to become very popular

well...in all honesty, I don't think OS X performs all that well without at least a gig in my opinion. I was running up until this Jan, a B&W G3 300mhz w/ 1gig of ram, and it ran ok with 10.3.9 on it. Anything less would take things like just opening the sys prefs a number of seconds to open.
post #101 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by donebylee

BTW, just read that MS Vista is going require 1 GB RAM and recommends 2 GB.

Either RAM is about to get very cheap, Vista is about to fail big time, or Apple is about to become very popular

Unless you are using a RAMBUS-based system (like me, I own 3x 4-5yr old workstations), I really don't see that as a problem. I don't plan to get Vista anyway.
post #102 of 184
I think Apple buying Nvidia would only further the Mac VS PC war. I'm tired of all the BS of hearing on both sides which is better and which sucks for whatever reason. I use macs. i like macs. If I wanted to use a PC i would
post #103 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by hypoluxa

well...in all honesty, I don't think OS X performs all that well without at least a gig in my opinion. I was running up until this Jan, a B&W G3 300mhz w/ 1gig of ram, and it ran ok with 10.3.9 on it. Anything less would take things like just opening the sys prefs a number of seconds to open.

I run Tiger with 512 and I dont have any large problems. The only thing that ever annoys me is that occasionally the sound icon in the menubar takes a few seconds to open.
post #104 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat

Why? Lots of Mac Pro's are used in areas where a graphics card is totally unnecessary. Say, for Photoshop.

Since Apple keeps leveraging the graphics card more and more in their OS and applications, they should also be including better stock cards in their systems.
post #105 of 184
Quote:
And I can attest, after having been in that industry for quite a while, that most of those set-ups consist of 10 or less machines, with several dozen having between 10 and 100, and very few having substantially more than that.

Ok I'll frame it from a different perspective. Computer video post production is a fairly new market and has seen exponential growth in the last ten years. Whatever Apple's sales are today it started from zero five years ago. Filmed entertainment and broadcasting over all is an ever growing business.

When I was in film school seven years ago we had expensive Avid Xpress systems. With a few Adobe Premiere systems. Because of its limitations Premiere was primarily used for in-class assignments and editing practice. The Avid's were used for actually editing our important class projects. At that point everyone was editing on expensive Avid systems and there was little alternative option.

Since the introduction of FCP there has been a paradigm shift and its common today for film students to have laptops running FCP and Avid software. When no one had that when I was in film school a few years ago.

In the 1970's broadcast television used to consist of about 5 channels that broadcast content until about 12:00 AM. Today broadcast television has grown to around 500 channels on our cable box. Most of those channels show content 24 hours a day. It takes hundreds of post production facilities and hundreds of thousands of people to produce content for 500 channels that show content every day. Those numbers are increasing.

411 a film and television resource guide lists between LA and NY there are 692 individual post production facilities. This number does not include college television, government television, corporate in-house production, public access, and so on.

In a sense you can say this is a small number. But these facilities buy multiple expensive systems that add significant revenue. The number is much larger than it was 10 years ago and is only increasing.

Quote:
So, at the most a low few 10's of thousand sales a year. Even Apple acknowledges this.

Apple has successfully targeted media far more aggressively than it has target its gaming market. The reason for this is that media is a growing and lucrative market. I'm sure in raw numbers there are more PC gamers. But PC gaming has been on a slow decline since the late 90's. I do not believe PC gamers spend as much money or have the same future growth as video post production.

Quote:
How did Apple count their announced 500,000 Final Cut user base?

That's interesting where did you see that number?
post #106 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM

I'm not doubting you, it's pretty expensive stuff. How did Apple count their announced 500,000 Final Cut user base? Were they counting every sale since they bought the programs, were they counting eacy upgrade as a user too?

Everyone who buys the program is counted. Just how they figure out the number is speculation, but, I think that if they do what Adobe does, they only count new sales. Upgrades show which users are "live". So that a purchase of a ver. 2.5, for example, won't be counted as a "live" user.

But I can't be sure.

But, just like PS, not everyone who buys the program is a pro.

And many people don't use either program on a professional desktop. Many users have iMacs, or Powerbooks, and now Macbooks and MBP's.

Despite what we have been reading, PS, for example, works well under Rossetta, particularly under 10.4.8 which has speeded it up substantially. Just don't use 50Mb, or larger, files.

FCP, of course, now works VERY well in a MacBook, or iMac.
post #107 of 184
[QUOTE=donebylee (please let it be January)[/QUOTE]

Nope! Highly unlikely. Not enough time for developers, and Apple hasn't presented a version to them that is even close to being ready.

Wait, and be happy they took their time.

Here is a quote from Apple's Developer Connection's "Leopard Technology Series for Developers"

"Leopard is scheduled to ship in the spring of 2007, so there is time for you to start working with Leopard technologies well before your customers get Leopard in their hands. When you do so, you will be more able to provide your users with the latest and greatest features of Mac OS X sooner."

http://developer.apple.com/leopard/overview/index.html
post #108 of 184
WHOOHOO!!!

BLAZING FAST MAC PROS + CS3 UB AND I'M ALL SET!!!

Thats what I'm talking about right there!


Been waiting for this for awhile now. FINALLY time for the payoff!
post #109 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell

Ok I'll frame it from a different perspective. Computer video post production is a fairly new market and has seen exponential growth in the last ten years. Whatever Apple's sales are today it started from zero five years ago. Filmed entertainment and broadcasting over all is an ever growing business.

When I was in film school seven years ago we had expensive Avid Xpress systems. With a few Adobe Premiere systems. Because of its limitations Premiere was primarily used for in-class assignments and editing practice. The Avid's were used for actually editing our important class projects. At that point everyone was editing on expensive Avid systems and there was little alternative option.

Since the introduction of FCP there has been a paradigm shift and its common today for film students to have laptops running FCP and Avid software. When no one had that when I was in film school a few years ago.

In the 1970's broadcast television used to consist of about 5 channels that broadcast content until about 12:00 AM. Today broadcast television has grown to around 500 channels on our cable box. Most of those channels show content 24 hours a day. It takes hundreds of post production facilities and hundreds of thousands of people to produce content for 500 channels that show content every day. Those numbers are increasing.

411 a film and television resource guide lists between LA and NY there are 692 individual post production facilities. This number does not include college television, government television, corporate in-house production, public access, and so on.

In a sense you can say this is a small number. But these facilities buy multiple expensive systems that add significant revenue. The number is much larger than it was 10 years ago and is only increasing.



Apple has successfully targeted media far more aggressively than it has target its gaming market. The reason for this is that media is a growing and lucrative market. I'm sure in raw numbers there are more PC gamers. But PC gaming has been on a slow decline since the late 90's. I do not believe PC gamers spend as much money or have the same future growth as video post production.

I won't agrue those numbers. But they add up to the numbers I'm estimating, and that Apple has hinted to in the recent past. It's also been a number that's been bandied about in the industry.

If each of those pro houses has an average of say (on the rather generous side) 30 machines, that would come out to about 20.76 thousand machines.

Most of the pro houses are on the coasts, though some are in the hinterlands. If we want to double that number, again being generous, it comes out to 42 thousand.

I would say that is a lot. More than reality would dictate. Add some more for independents, and it might jump to 50 thousand. But lots of companies who use FCP are wedding companies, schools, etc. And they mostly use iMacs, or portables. In the field, pros use portables.

A much bigger use for Apple's workstations are for publishing, photography, and pro music applications.
post #110 of 184
Hmmm, I sell Macs to the gfx, print, photographic, and post industries for a living, and I am pretty sure more than a few thousand to a few tens of thousand production rigs are sold every year. There are a good number of organizations with dozens of Mac towers, and there are definitely thosuands of pro, Mac-based companies/organizations just in the Baltimore/DC/Northern VA areas my company caters to. If you add in Xserves and Xserve RAIDs, Apple is definitely selling a healthy number of high-margin units every year, quite a few more than I think you realize. The vast majority of systems sold in this category, I am guessing, are to Mom-and-Pop outfits that own 1 to 5 pro Mac towers that are used for some kind of production work. There are many thousands of these kind of people on the island of Manhattan at any given moment, much less the USA at large, much less the world at large.
post #111 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicky g

Hmmm, I sell Macs to the gfx, print, photographic, and post industries for a living, and I am pretty sure more than a few thousand to a few tens of thousand production rigs are sold every year. There are a good number of organizations with dozens of Mac towers, and there are definitely thosuands of pro, Mac-based companies/organizations just in the Baltimore/DC/Northern VA areas my company caters to. If you add in Xserves and Xserve RAIDs, Apple is definitely selling a healthy number of high-margin units every year, quite a few more than I think you realize. The vast majority of systems sold in this category, I am guessing, are to Mom-and-Pop outfits that own 1 to 5 pro Mac towers that are used for some kind of production work. There are many thousands of these kind of people on the island of Manhattan at any given moment, much less the USA at large, much less the world at large.

I didn't say 10 thousand. I said in the low twn thousands, perhaps 50 thousand.

But so that we can end this earlier, I will grant even 75 thousand.

The point is that even if it were a absurd number such as 100 thousand, it is still a small number. Mac Pro, and Powermac sales this year together now ending Sept were about 500 thousand units. So, at most, by the most favorable numbers you can imagine, that would be no more than 20% of those sales. Likely much less.

I'm not talking about XServes. But Apple doesn't sell very many of those either, perhaps 50 thousand this year.

And we are talking about Video here. That's all. There are most definately not thousands of video production studios around the entire US, much less your area.

What you've done is to expand the discussion way beyond the one we were having. We do know, as we have already mentioned, that professional Macs are used for many things. That wasn't the discussion.
post #112 of 184
Forget eight cores.

I'm looking forward to a Mac version of this.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35383
post #113 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

Forget eight cores.

I'm looking forward to a Mac version of this.

heh... 16 processors in one board, nice!
post #114 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skwidspawn

heh... 16 processors in on board, nice!

how many pci-e lanes?
how many full x16 slots?
post #115 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_the_dragon

how many pci-e lanes?
how many full x16 slots?

Probably doesn't matter for the intended application(s).
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #116 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_the_dragon

how many pci-e lanes?
how many full x16 slots?

For that type of machine, as Programmer has said, it shouldn't matter.

It's for a server. Likely a lot of transactional calculation going on. The more cores the better for that. Lanes aren't as important.
post #117 of 184
Geez...is it hard to believe that most Workstation purchasers are not playing Doom 3 on their boxes...at least not officially?

I have a Pro on my desk and I couldn't care less what card it has as long as its fully supports DX9in hardware and support the 30" monitor. The 7300 is just fine.

Gamers are important but how many are buying expensive rigs?

Vinea
post #118 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjteix

Mac Pro Dual (Xeon 5100/5300)
base model dual-dual 2.66 $2499
better model dual-quad 2.33 $2999
best model dual-quad 2.66 $3499
2GB FB-DIMM RAM standard, ATI X1900XT (or newer) standard

Mac Pro Single (Conroe/Kentsfield)
base model dual 2.66 $1499
better model quad 2.40 $1699
best model quad 2.66 $1999
1GB DDR2-800 RAM standard, nVidia 7300GT (or newer) standard

@ MacWorld SF January 2007

You forgot quad-quad.
post #119 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea

Geez...is it hard to believe that most Workstation purchasers are not playing Doom 3 on their boxes...at least not officially?

I have a Pro on my desk and I couldn't care less what card it has as long as its fully supports DX9in hardware and support the 30" monitor. The 7300 is just fine.

Gamers are important but how many are buying expensive rigs?

Vinea

Workstation users, sure. Not generally server users though.

Going by the sales of Alien, VooDoo, and other small makers, then tripling that number as a guess. I'd say possibly about 400 to 600 thousand a year. That's worldwide. It's just a guess.
post #120 of 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

For that type of machine, as Programmer has said, it shouldn't matter.

It's for a server. Likely a lot of transactional calculation going on. The more cores the better for that. Lanes aren't as important.

Severs have hardware raid cards in them.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Ripe in Cupertino: an Apple with 8 cores