or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › MacPro Upgrade: When and what?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MacPro Upgrade: When and what?

post #1 of 34
Thread Starter 
My PowerMac G5 Dual 2.7GHz is slowly dying. Any idea when we can expect a MacPro upgrade and what it might look like? Thanks
post #2 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gulliver View Post

My PowerMac G5 Dual 2.7GHz is slowly dying. Any idea when we can expect a MacPro upgrade and what it might look like? Thanks

Anything that you get here is going to be conjecture, WAGs. It goes without saying that there will be a speed bump, but beyond that only Apple knows for sure.
post #3 of 34
If you can wait until Q1 next year I would. We don't need Apple anymore to speculate when updates may come. Apple uses Intel processors now and so we can speculate with pretty good accuracy what quarter Apple will release new products.

In Q1 of next year Intel will release a completely new architecture code named Nehalem. It offers dramatic speed improvements and is very well detailed on the web if you care to Google it.

I would wait till then to buy if you can. Plus, around that time we'll have more info on Snow Leopard and a better idea as to when that may be released.
post #4 of 34
When: January
post #5 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gulliver View Post

My PowerMac G5 Dual 2.7GHz is slowly dying. Any idea when we can expect a MacPro upgrade and what it might look like? Thanks

How does a computer "slowly die"?
post #6 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by zinfella View Post

Anything that you get here is going to be conjecture, WAGs. It goes without saying that there will be a speed bump, but beyond that only Apple knows for sure.

Ah, come on now! Say it: "A speed bump to what?" Here's the current lineup below. What do you say the lineup will look like when we get the "speed bump"?


# One 2.8GHZ Quad-Core Intel Xeon
# Two 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon [Add $500.00]
# Two 3.0GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon [Add $1,300.00]
# Two 3.2GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon [Add $2,100.00]
2009 Quad 2.66 Mac Pro, 12 GB OWC RAM, ATI 4870, Wi-Fi Card 802.11n, AppleCare, 4 WD Caviar Black 1TB HD's, 2 SuperDrives, 24" Apple LED Display.
Reply
2009 Quad 2.66 Mac Pro, 12 GB OWC RAM, ATI 4870, Wi-Fi Card 802.11n, AppleCare, 4 WD Caviar Black 1TB HD's, 2 SuperDrives, 24" Apple LED Display.
Reply
post #7 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royboy View Post

Ah, come on now! Say it: "A speed bump to what?" Here's the current lineup below. What do you say the lineup will look like when we get the "speed bump"?


# One 2.8GHZ Quad-Core Intel Xeon
# Two 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon [Add $500.00]
# Two 3.0GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon [Add $1,300.00]
# Two 3.2GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon [Add $2,100.00]

In January, dual Nehalem-microarchitecture Gainestown Xeon processors, which should be 2.66GHz, 2.93GHz, and 3.2GHz. Possibly a 3.33GHz model as well. A total of eight cores able to run 16 threads at once. That doesn't sound much faster, but it will be. It'll be a lot faster, and use cheaper RAM.
post #8 of 34
The only downsize is that either some internal features or RAM slots are going to be lost unless Apple uses a deeper case. Regular DDR3 memory cannot be put on a riser card. The good news is that socket 1366 is replacing both the desktop socket 775 and xeon socket 771.
post #9 of 34
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbwi View Post

If you can wait until Q1 next year I would. We don't need Apple anymore to speculate when updates may come. Apple uses Intel processors now and so we can speculate with pretty good accuracy what quarter Apple will release new products.

In Q1 of next year Intel will release a completely new architecture code named Nehalem. It offers dramatic speed improvements and is very well detailed on the web if you care to Google it.

I would wait till then to buy if you can. Plus, around that time we'll have more info on Snow Leopard and a better idea as to when that may be released.

Thanks bbwi! I also heard rumors about Q4/08, that's why I asked.
post #10 of 34
Current Intel design with the frontside bus runs out of steam with many CPUs
http://it.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3335&p=5
Shared by 16 cores each has 600Mb/s or the same as a 1 GHz Pentium 3 on a 133 MHz bus.


About 6 months away we have a solution:
Nehalem 30-50% faster (at least!)
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...oc.aspx?i=3326

As they have to change the MB totaly they may even change the case

So if you do not have to have one new now hold on tight until the next generation arrives, I am....
post #11 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gulliver View Post

My PowerMac G5 Dual 2.7GHz is slowly dying. Any idea when we can expect a MacPro upgrade and what it might look like? Thanks

I just replaced my G5 Dual 2.5GHz (6GB RAM) last week for the same reason. It hasn't been able to handle Leopard terribly well at all - spinning beachball, constant whirring fans, big slowdowns etc. I did a number of full re-installs as well, thinking that something had got fouled up, but it never improved. Tiger ran just fine on it though.

I replaced it with a Dual 2.8 Quad Core MacPro. I also added 8GB RAM. This thing absolutely flies - I am extremely glad that I made this decision. Things have been far more productive ever since.
post #12 of 34
An enclosure change? Interesting! I hope you're right!

While Apple's at it, how about allowing the loyal Apple customer to outfit a Mac Pro with the lower-priced desktop processors for those that don't want to start off at $2,299 for a tower? I mean Xeon is great and powerful but... a desktop quad core Core 2 Processor might do the trick too for a lot of folks. And it would stop all of the bitching for people who want a tower and don't want a mini or iMac! Maybe we could actually get a Mac tower back in $1,599 range again.
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
post #13 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by auslander View Post

I just replaced my G5 Dual 2.5GHz (6GB RAM) last week for the same reason. It hasn't been able to handle Leopard terribly well at all - spinning beachball, constant whirring fans, big slowdowns etc. I did a number of full re-installs as well, thinking that something had got fouled up, but it never improved. Tiger ran just fine on it though.

I replaced it with a Dual 2.8 Quad Core MacPro. I also added 8GB RAM. This thing absolutely flies - I am extremely glad that I made this decision. Things have been far more productive ever since.

Thats odd.I am running a last gen G5 dual 2.3 with 10gb of ram and 10.5.4 runs fine on it. Tiger of course runs fine as well.
"An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest."
"Those who would give up essential liberties to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither." -Ben Franklin
Reply
"An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest."
"Those who would give up essential liberties to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither." -Ben Franklin
Reply
post #14 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHagan4755 View Post

An enclosure change? Interesting! I hope you're right!

While Apple's at it, how about allowing the loyal Apple customer to outfit a Mac Pro with the lower-priced desktop processors for those that don't want to start off at $2,299 for a tower? I mean Xeon is great and powerful but... a desktop quad core Core 2 Processor might do the trick too for a lot of folks. And it would stop all of the bitching for people who want a tower and don't want a mini or iMac! Maybe we could actually get a Mac tower back in $1,599 range again.

It's not the processor that makes a difference in that case, it's the motherboard. Apple would have to design a second board for the Mac Pro's enclosure to offer a single-socket model that used cheaper processors.
post #15 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by hypoluxa View Post

Thats odd.I am running a last gen G5 dual 2.3 with 10gb of ram and 10.5.4 runs fine on it. Tiger of course runs fine as well.

Well, I'm glad it's working for you. I was literally sitting watching the beachball for minutes at a time, on two different drives/installs. It just wasn't liking Leopard one bit.
post #16 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by auslander View Post

Well, I'm glad it's working for you. I was literally sitting watching the beachball for minutes at a time, on two different drives/installs. It just wasn't liking Leopard one bit.

Hmmm, on two different drives? Weird. Im not sure what to recommend trying, maybe boot up in safe mode and see if it is a app issue. The only thing I have a possible issue with in Leopard is a weird sleep issue where it doesn't stay asleep when I set it to, it wakes right back up again in a matter of seconds. Its sporadic though so its not too much of an issue.
"An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest."
"Those who would give up essential liberties to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither." -Ben Franklin
Reply
"An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest."
"Those who would give up essential liberties to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither." -Ben Franklin
Reply
post #17 of 34
No worries, Hypo - I've transferred everything onto my Mac Pro and everything is proceeding at light speed by comparison. I'm going to be putting the G5 up for sale, with Tiger installed on it.

post #18 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by auslander View Post

Well, I'm glad it's working for you. I was literally sitting watching the beachball for minutes at a time, on two different drives/installs. It just wasn't liking Leopard one bit.

I suspect you had a deeper problem then. My G5 took to Leopard just fine, and I'm quite sure that most of them did because that's the experience that Apple wants its professional users to have.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #19 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Programmer View Post

I suspect you had a deeper problem then. My G5 took to Leopard just fine, and I'm quite sure that most of them did because that's the experience that Apple wants its professional users to have.

Well, sadly that wasn't the case for me. This is my 16th Mac.

I'm a longtime professional user myself - I'm a record producer/recording engineer - and this issue made it impossible for me to do any composition work in Logic Studio, due to the aforementioned spinning beachball/howling fans etc.

I also have a Quad G5 which I run Tiger on for my Pro Tools HD rig, and that's been great. Even my now-replaced Dual G5 was fine with three PCI cards installed under Tiger, apart from the loud fans of course, which is a pain in an environment where noise needs to be kept down.

Still, as I said, I'm thrilled with the MacPro - it's handled everything perfectly, and on top of that it's really incredibly quiet - even with 4 HDs in it - so I really couldn't be happier at this point.
post #20 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by hypoluxa View Post

Thats odd.I am running a last gen G5 dual 2.3 with 10gb of ram and 10.5.4 runs fine on it. Tiger of course runs fine as well.

The G5's can only use 8GB of ram (8 x 1GB). How are you getting 10GB?
post #21 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlashmanBurgess View Post

The G5's can only use 8GB of ram (8 x 1GB). How are you getting 10GB?

Quite simply. The Powermac G5's can have upto 16GB of ram. Look it up, it' true! Or at least the last gen can.
"An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest."
"Those who would give up essential liberties to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither." -Ben Franklin
Reply
"An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest."
"Those who would give up essential liberties to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither." -Ben Franklin
Reply
post #22 of 34
Actually, there might be some misunderstanding. I have 6GB RAM in my G5 Dual 2.5, but I have 10 GB in my new Mac Pro.
post #23 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlashmanBurgess View Post

The G5's can only use 8GB of ram (8 x 1GB). How are you getting 10GB?

The first G5 models only took 8GB RAM, but the rest could handle 16GB RAM.
post #24 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHagan4755 View Post

An enclosure change? Interesting! I hope you're right!

While Apple's at it, how about allowing the loyal Apple customer to outfit a Mac Pro with the lower-priced desktop processors for those that don't want to start off at $2,299 for a tower? I mean Xeon is great and powerful but... a desktop quad core Core 2 Processor might do the trick too for a lot of folks. And it would stop all of the bitching for people who want a tower and don't want a mini or iMac! Maybe we could actually get a Mac tower back in $1,599 range again.

The Mac Pro is a workstation, not a desktop, which is what people are "bitching" for Apple to offer. I find nothing wrong with the models that Apple is offering, but that doesn't mean there isn't a gap in the lineup. I will freely admit that if Apple offers a desktop model then sales of the iMac, Mac mini, and Mac Pro will be "lost" to the sales of the desktop, but they would still be sales for Apple. As with the Mac Pro, Apple would offer a base model that customers could configure.

With Apple making a stab at the corporate market (theory based on touting out-of-the-box support for Exchange server) we just might get our desktop because I do not see corporations getting either the Mac mini or iMac for their offices.
post #25 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by troberts View Post

I will freely admit that if Apple offers a desktop model then sales of the iMac, Mac mini, and Mac Pro will be "lost" to the sales of the desktop, but they would still be sales for Apple.

If anything, an "XMac"-type machine would be a higher margin product than any of Apple's other desktops, just because of the much lower component cost.

But on the subject of the Mac Pro, the model using Nehalem processors should be one hell of a computer. Eight cores, 16 threads, and with OpenCL the graphics card will throw its number-crunching power in, too.
post #26 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post

But on the subject of the Mac Pro, the model using Nehalem processors should be one hell of a computer. Eight cores, 16 threads, and with OpenCL the graphics card will throw its number-crunching power in, too.

Speaking of OpenCL, what is going to happen when the GPU starts to get used to its full potential? Will OpenCL cause the GPU to produce more heat when it is used to processes whatever is processes in addition to graphics? If so, will Apple have to scale back the GPU even more than it does now to reduce the amount of heat generated?
post #27 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by troberts View Post

Speaking of OpenCL, what is going to happen when the GPU starts to get used to its full potential? Will OpenCL cause the GPU to produce more heat when it is used to processes whatever is processes in addition to graphics? If so, will Apple have to scale back the GPU even more than it does now to reduce the amount of heat generated?

It will create more heat when run at load, the same as if you were playing a game. This means its fan will spin up to a higher speed, making more noise. It will use more power. But GPUs are designed to be stressed, it won't hurt it, if that's what you're asking.
post #28 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post

...But GPUs are designed to be stressed, it won't hurt it, if that's what you're asking.

I am not worried about the GPU being stressed out, but the heat produced by the GPU when it is stressed out. With a tower model, be it a Dell, Compaq, Mac Pro, etc., you can use the full potential of the GPU; however, Apple is hell-bent on being thin and that affects the ability to dissipate heat properly. This in turn, affects which GPU can be used and even how much of its potential can be made available.
post #29 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by troberts View Post

I am not worried about the GPU being stressed out, but the heat produced by the GPU when it is stressed out. With a tower model, be it a Dell, Compaq, Mac Pro, etc., you can use the full potential of the GPU; however, Apple is hell-bent on being thin and that affects the ability to dissipate heat properly. This in turn, affects which GPU can be used and even how much of its potential can be made available.

You know you'll be eventually countered with "well that's good enough me so it should be good enough for everyone" and/or "Apple knows best".
post #30 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

You know you'll be eventually countered with "well that's good enough me so it should be good enough for everyone" and/or "Apple knows best".

Presumably Apple knows what the limits of the cooling systems are, and the GPUs in the iMac and Macbook Pro are underclocked. But no, it's not something you'll want to use in a laptop.
post #31 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post

Presumably Apple knows what the limits of the cooling systems are, and the GPUs in the iMac and Macbook Pro are underclocked. But no, it's not something you'll want to use in a laptop.

Actually they're not under clocked in the iMac. Apple uses the notebook parts but gives them the desktop names. The Radeon 2600Pro is actually a Radeon Mobility 2600XT and the Geforce 8800 is an 8800M GTS.
post #32 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

Actually they're not under clocked in the iMac. Apple uses the notebook parts but gives them the notebook names. The Radeon 2600Pro is actually a Radeon Mobility 2600XT and the Geforce 8800 is an 8800M GTS.

Do you mean "and gives them the notebook names"?

Or

"uses the notebook parts but gives them the desktop names"?
2009 Quad 2.66 Mac Pro, 12 GB OWC RAM, ATI 4870, Wi-Fi Card 802.11n, AppleCare, 4 WD Caviar Black 1TB HD's, 2 SuperDrives, 24" Apple LED Display.
Reply
2009 Quad 2.66 Mac Pro, 12 GB OWC RAM, ATI 4870, Wi-Fi Card 802.11n, AppleCare, 4 WD Caviar Black 1TB HD's, 2 SuperDrives, 24" Apple LED Display.
Reply
post #33 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royboy View Post

Do you mean "and gives them the notebook names"?

Or

"uses the notebook parts but gives them the desktop names"?

The later.
post #34 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

Actually they're not under clocked in the iMac. Apple uses the notebook parts but gives them the desktop names. The Radeon 2600Pro is actually a Radeon Mobility 2600XT and the Geforce 8800 is an 8800M GTS.

You're right, although that accomplishes the same thing- less heat. Some people might consider it false advertising, too.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › MacPro Upgrade: When and what?