or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Next-gen Mac Pro processors could arrive March 29
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Next-gen Mac Pro processors could arrive March 29

post #1 of 254
Thread Starter 
New Xeon processors widely believed to be candidates to power a next-generation Apple Mac Pro will go on sale in late March, according to a new report.

Fudzilla.com is reporting a Sunday, March 29th on-sale date, with the chips becoming more widely available the next day. While their report doesn't cite any sources, the news does seem to jive with an earlier story about the new Nehalem-based Xeon chips arriving in "early 2009".

As outlined in the November report, only nine of the new Xeon 5500 series chips (which Intel refers to as the "Gainestown" series) are quad-core, and only five would seem to be legitimate candidates to find their way into the new Mac Pro (Charts). These chips are the 3.2GHz W5580 ($1,600), 2.93GHz X5570 ($1,386), 2.8GHz X5560 ($1,172), 2.66GHz X5550 ($958), and 2.53GHz E5540 ($744).

At first glance, the new chips seem like a confusing choice, since they're more expensive at identical clock speeds than their predecessors. However, Intel claims dramatically improved performance thanks to a new architecture that puts the memory controller on the same die as the processor and introduces a new interconnect called QuickPath, which replaces the legacy standard Front Side Bus (FSB).

This image, taken from Intel's demo of the new technology, represents the complexity of legacy systems with four processors and lots of memory. | Courtesy of Intel

Instead of forcing a server or high-end workstation to use a single shared pool of memory connected to all the processors through FSBs and memory controller hubs, as seen above, most Nehalem processors can take advantage of their own dedicated memory that will be accessible directly through an Integrated Memory Controller on the processor die itself with QuickPath. To see this visually, refer to the below "before" and "after" schematics.

Before | Courtesy of Intel

After | Courtesy of Intel

The Mac Pro line of Apple's flagship desktop workstations was last updated more than a year ago when eight-processor cores and a new architecture combined to deliver up to twice the claimed performance of its predecessor.
post #2 of 254
These look like great chips, but what will the new mac pros cost?
post #3 of 254
Cost will be the same.

Intel is doing what AMD did years ago, integrated memory controller on the cpu's. This boosts performance GREATLY. On the windows server platform AMD will out score Intel Xeon's nearly 2:1 in raw performance and database performance. They also have downsides but this is a huge leap forward for Intel.

When the portable versions show up expect your iMac/Laptop/Mini to LEAP ahead in terms of performance.
post #4 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

These look like great chips, but what will the new mac pros cost?

If I'm Apple I keep the same pricepoint

2.93Ghz Xeon Nehalem for $2799.
The added advantage is that they can now claim 4-8 physical cores and 8-16 logical cores via SMT (simultaneous multi-threading)
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #5 of 254
I think the price points will stay the same.

Common specs:
• Dual socket Core i7 Xeon
• 12 DIMM slots - DDR3, ECC, up to 48GB RAM (96GB with 8GB DIMMS)
• 4 PCIe 2.0 x16 slots
• Apple's first SLI implementation
• SATA II only; no PATA
• 2 Firewire 800; no 400
• Built in hardware in RAID IHC10R

Single 2.66GHz - $2,299

Dual 2.8GHz - $2,799

Dual 2.93GHz - $3,599

Dual 3.2GHz - $4,399

maybe a little less expensive due to the more basic RAM and standard x58 chipset:

Single 2.66GHz - $1,999

Dual 2.8GHz - $2,599

Dual 2.93GHz - $2,999

Dual 3.2GHz - $3,999
post #6 of 254
Yay, just after I get laid off, so just in time to make me feel better.

Can't wait.

...but wait...."Sunday"? Not a Tuesday?
--------------------------
"Why join the navy if you can be a pirate?"
-Steve Jobs
Reply
--------------------------
"Why join the navy if you can be a pirate?"
-Steve Jobs
Reply
post #7 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

While their report doesn't cite any sources, the news does seem to jive with an earlier story...

I think you mean 'jibe.'
post #8 of 254
Hey while were at it can I get SAS/SATA 6Gbps support?

I figure now that SSD are taking off we needn't have the storage bus become the limiting
factor for RAID systems.

I'd love to see FW 3.2Gbps as well. Hell if i'm spending $4 grand for a nicely spec'd system humor me with excess please.

He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #9 of 254
ugh. I just bought an 8 core 2.8 system a few months ago. I know I'm dreaming, however I was hoping any new chipsets might "fit" the socket of the current system. It seems based on these specs the new Mac Pro's will have completely new logic boards corresponding with new processors. Oh well, you can't stifle technology just to keep yourself up-to-date. If the specs live up to their hype, I may have to bite the bullet and buy one (anyone interested in an 8 core Mac Pro with 8 GB's of RAM?).

Side note, a couple of questions:

1. What is SATA II compared to SATA (assuming their is a difference)?

2. What RAM will this new system accept? DDR3?

3. With the new integrated system, what is the defining difference between the proposed new Mac Pro versus the current system?
Psst, there's a war in Darfur...
Reply
Psst, there's a war in Darfur...
Reply
post #10 of 254
The current graphics options are out of date. How about SLI support and new graphics cards such as the NVidia GTX 2xx series. Built in support for individual SAS drives without having to buy the $800 RAID card would also be nice.
post #11 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Hey while were at it can I get SAS/SATA 6Gbps support?

I figure now that SSD are taking off we needn't have the storage bus become the limiting
factor for RAID systems.

I'd love to see FW 3.2Gbps as well. Hell if i'm spending $4 grand for a nicely spec'd system humor me with excess please.


Yup, it seems like buses (storage buses as you point out) might become limiting factors this year. But other than that, I see unprecedented speed gains this year with Nehalem, super fast SSDs (which will only become cheaper by the end of the year), and Snow Leopard right around the corner.
post #12 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Hey while were at it can I get SAS/SATA 6Gbps support?

I figure now that SSD are taking off we needn't have the storage bus become the limiting
factor for RAID systems.

I'd love to see FW 3.2Gbps as well. Hell if i'm spending $4 grand for a nicely spec'd system humor me with excess please.


Don't we already have SAS for the Mac Pro?

Is SATA 6 out yet?
post #13 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJD2112 View Post

ugh. I just bought an 8 core 2.8 system a few months ago. I know I'm dreaming, however I was hoping any new chipsets might "fit" the socket of the current system. It seems based on these specs the new Mac Pro's will have completely new logic boards corresponding with new processors. Oh well, you can't stifle technology just to keep yourself up-to-date. If the specs live up to their hype, I may have to bite the bullet and buy one (anyone interested in an 8 core Mac Pro with 8 GB's of RAM?).

Side note, a couple of questions:

1. What is SATA II compared to SATA (assuming their is a difference)?

2. What RAM will this new system accept? DDR3?

3. With the new integrated system, what is the defining difference between the proposed new Mac Pro versus the current system?

1. SATA II has 3.0Gb/sec of bandwidth while SATA I has 1.5Gb/sec. SATA III will double it to 6.0Gb/sec.

2. The Nehalem Xeon processors have triple channel DDR3 memory buses. ECC or non-ECC but the Mac Pro will likely demand ECC memory.

3. Well the Nehalem Xeon will have 4 dual threaded cores so it can process 8 simultaneous threads per processor, or 16 in a dual system. Also, there is much less latency from memory to processor since the memory controller is on the processor die.
post #14 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Don't we already have SAS for the Mac Pro?

Is SATA 6 out yet?


Looks like Mid Year

SAS 6Gbps is early with Atto Technology offering int and ext 8-port
608 and 680 cards

http://www.attotech.com/sashostadaptertechnology.html
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #15 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJD2112 View Post

ugh. I just bought an 8 core 2.8 system a few months ago. I know I'm dreaming, however I was hoping any new chipsets might "fit" the socket of the current system. It seems based on these specs the new Mac Pro's will have completely new logic boards corresponding with new processors. Oh well, you can't stifle technology just to keep yourself up-to-date. If the specs live up to their hype, I may have to bite the bullet and buy one (anyone interested in an 8 core Mac Pro with 8 GB's of RAM?).

Side note, a couple of questions:

1. What is SATA II compared to SATA (assuming their is a difference)?

2. What RAM will this new system accept? DDR3?

3. With the new integrated system, what is the defining difference between the proposed new Mac Pro versus the current system?

Sorry, this is an entirely new mobo.

SATA I vs II is not what people think it is. It has nothing to do with the speeds per se, though it works out that way. It's other specs. But it just happens that SATA II is normally spec'ed at 3 Gbs rather than the older 1.5 Gbs. SATA 6Gb/s, which is what they want the latest to be called as a product name., is twice again as fast.

Actually SATA I and SATA II are incorrect. It's really SATA Revision I.x, SATA Revision 2.x, SATA Revision 3.x, etc.

Sorry you asked, right?

DDR3

The memory controller is in the cpu package, and on the die for much better performance, and lower total power draw, and heat. This results in much faster memory access, giving better performance for most all apps, some more than others.

These new chips also go back to hyperthreading, which gives two threads per core, which can give up to another 30% performance increase for those programs that can use it, and very little penalty for those that can't.

Also the memory controller uses a point to point wiring scheme instead of the frontside buss called "Quickpath".

We can expect between 20% to 50% better performance on a GHz to GHz comparison.

A simpler mobo results, though much better on board power supply control is needed.
post #16 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Looks like Mid Year

SAS 6Gbps is early with Atto Technology offering int and ext 8-port
608 and 680 cards

http://www.attotech.com/sashostadaptertechnology.html

Oooh! Second quarter. It could just squeak in.

I'm waiting for my new one too.
post #17 of 254
Just FYI, the new architecture of the Intel's Nehalem platform aka Quickpath, Integrated memory controller/NUMA, Level 3 cache, revised TLB, SMT, etc improves performance relatively proportionally to the number of CPUs.

What I mean is that single-CPU systems see the least amount of advantage from this new architecture, although they still can be 10-40% faster than equivalent Core 2 chips, particularly on highly-threaded apps that take advantage of the Hyperthreading (SMT). Dual-CPU (MP) systems like the Mac Pro and DP servers will see a much greater advantage, as has been shown by the mind-blowing SAP/VMware/etc benchmarks run on early versions of the quad-core "Gainestown" Xeon. I don't remember the details, but I believe some of the benchmarks had a dual-Xeon system besting quad-socket systems based on AMDs fastest Shanghai chip. Whether that type of performance is seen when they come out is not yet known, but suffice to say they will no doubt be screamers.

Although Apple doesn't have 4+ socket servers (and they are only used in very expensive mostly-enterprise servers), It will be insane to see how they perform when the 8-core "Beckton" Xeon is ready. a 4P server will have 32 cores and 64 threads, with four independent pools of memory and absolutely enormous total memory and interprocessor bandwidth through the Quickpath interface. They should absolutely blow away anything from AMD.
post #18 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

1. SATA II has 3.0Gb/sec of bandwidth while SATA I has 1.5Gb/sec. SATA III will double it to 6.0Gb/sec.

2. The Nehalem Xeon processors have triple channel DDR3 memory buses. ECC or non-ECC but the Mac Pro will likely demand ECC memory.

3. Well the Nehalem Xeon will have 4 dual threaded cores so it can process 8 simultaneous threads per processor, or 16 in a dual system. Also, there is much less latency from memory to processor since the memory controller is on the processor die.

Thanks for the replies guys, it definitely cleared a lot.

So I assume the current Mac Pro's have SATA Revision 1.x, when is the speculative date for SATA 3.x?

Four dual threaded cores processing eight threads? That's quite a boost from the current Xeon server grade chipsets. Hyper-threading, DDR3, Intel's memory controller utilizing point to point wiring, and obtaining these improved speeds while lowering overall power consumption is impressive. Unfortunately this means I will be drooling longingly at my local Apple store, while my mind quickly calculates the price difference between my current system and a new 8 core unit *sigh*. \
Psst, there's a war in Darfur...
Reply
Psst, there's a war in Darfur...
Reply
post #19 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJD2112 View Post

Thanks for the replies guys, it definitely cleared a lot.

So I assume the current Mac Pro's have SATA Revision 1.x, when is the speculative date for SATA 3.x?

Four dual threaded cores processing eight threads? That's quite a boost from the current Xeon server grade chipsets. Hyper-threading, DDR3, Intel's memory controller utilizing point to point wiring, and obtaining these improved speeds while lowering overall power consumption is impressive. Unfortunately this means I will be drooling longingly at my local Apple store, while my mind quickly calculates the price difference between my current system and a new 8 core unit *sigh*. \

No, the Mac Pro out now do have SATA II.
post #20 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJD2112 View Post

ugh. I just bought an 8 core 2.8 system a few months ago. I know I'm dreaming, however I was hoping any new chipsets might "fit" the socket of the current system. It seems based on these specs the new Mac Pro's will have completely new logic boards corresponding with new processors. Oh well, you can't stifle technology just to keep yourself up-to-date. If the specs live up to their hype, I may have to bite the bullet and buy one (anyone interested in an 8 core Mac Pro with 8 GB's of RAM?).

The problem is that Intel doesn't stick to a socket for very long, when they up the process technology, they often change the socket & bus along with it, this is especially so with Xeon processors. They'll offer the older chips for a while, but they don't often offer faster ones later.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

2. The Nehalem Xeon processors have triple channel DDR3 memory buses. ECC or non-ECC but the Mac Pro will likely demand ECC memory.

Right, I don't remember any Xeon system using non-ECC memory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Hey while were at it can I get SAS/SATA 6Gbps support?

I figure now that SSD are taking off we needn't have the storage bus become the limiting
factor for RAID systems.

So far that I've heard about, SSDs aren't choked by the bus yet.
post #21 of 254
SSD drives connected directly to the PCIe bus are delivering excellent performance (700MB/sec reads and ~550MB/sec writes).

Check out FusionIO. (PDF)
post #22 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

No, the Mac Pro out now do have SATA II.

I don't know about SATA I / II, I'll leave that for other people to bicker about, but the SATA ports on my original Mac Pro can operate at 3Gbps rates, or at least that's what the System Profiler app says.
post #23 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I don't know about SATA I / II, I'll leave that for other people to bicker about, but the SATA ports on my original Mac Pro can operate at 3Gbps rates, or at least that's what the System Profiler app says.

My iMac says the same thing. Operation speed=3 Gigabit

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #24 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I don't know about SATA I / II, I'll leave that for other people to bicker about, but the SATA ports on my original Mac Pro can operate at 3Gbps rates, or at least that's what the System Profiler app says.

Yeah, I was just saying that the current Mac Pros do have SATA II (3.0) and that you don't have to wait for the next Mac Pro to get that feature. In fact I think every Mac Pro had SATA II. All G5s had SATA I.
post #25 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

If I'm Apple I keep the same pricepoint

2.93Ghz Xeon Nehalem for $2799.
The added advantage is that they can now claim 4-8 physical cores and 8-16 logical cores via SMT (simultaneous multi-threading)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

I think the price points will stay the same.

Common specs:
Dual socket Core i7 Xeon
12 DIMM slots - DDR3, ECC, up to 48GB RAM (96GB with 8GB DIMMS)
4 PCIe 2.0 x16 slots
Apple's first SLI implementation
SATA II only; no PATA
2 Firewire 800; no 400
Built in hardware in RAID IHC10R

Single 2.66GHz - $2,299
Dual 2.8GHz - $2,799
Dual 2.93GHz - $3,599
Dual 3.2GHz - $4,399

maybe a little less expensive due to the more basic RAM and standard x58 chipset:
Single 2.66GHz - $1,999
Dual 2.8GHz - $2,599
Dual 2.93GHz - $2,999
Dual 3.2GHz - $3,999

The X58 chipset doesn't support dual-processors. There will be no such thing as a Core i7 Xeon, it will be the 5500 series Xeon, with a particular chipset (dual QPI) that will probably get a 5500 name.

At the same (or so) clock, the gainestown cpus are more expensive than the current harpertown cpus so I expect a price increase no matter what. While the RAM will probably be a little less expensive per GB, it will be better to offer multiple of 3 capacities in two seperate banks (one per cpu) or at least 2 sticks per bank (dual-channel mode), the mobo actually costs more to manufacture, too.

current harpertown 2.66GHz $455, future gainestown 2.53GHz $747 DDR3-1066
current harpertown 2.80GHz $797, future gainestown 2.66GHz $958 DDR3-1333
current harpertown 3.00GHz $958, future gainestown 2.80GHz $1172 DDR3-1333
current harpertown 3.20GHz $1279, future gainestown 2.93GHz $1386 DDR3-1333
current harpertown 3.40GHz $1493, future gainestown 3.20GHz $1600 DDR3-1333

While the gainestown cpus will be more powerful than similarly priced harpertown cpus, I think that Apple would have to go down to 2.53GHz to be able to offer a Mac Pro at the same price as the current ones.

$2799 for the 2.53GHz model
$3999 for the 2.80GHz model
$4999+ for the 3.20GHz model

If Apple choose to have things simple, they would only use 2.66 cpus and up (same DDR3-1333 RAM). Those cpu cost the same as the 3.0GHz harpertown, so imagine the base price: no less than $2999 for a Mac Pro with dual 2.66GHz gainestown cpus and probably "just" 4GB RAM.
post #26 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I don't know about SATA I / II, I'll leave that for other people to bicker about, but the SATA ports on my original Mac Pro can operate at 3Gbps rates, or at least that's what the System Profiler app says.

Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post

My iMac says the same thing. Operation speed=3 Gigabit

It actually is called SATA/1.5 or SATA/3.0, there is no such thing as "SATA II" but unfortunately it entered the lexicon and will not go away. The vast majority of people are talking about SATA/3.0 Gps when they say "SATA II".

The Next standard is SATA/6.0 and no doubt many will call it SATA III.



Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

So far that I've heard about, SSDs aren't choked by the bus yet.

Well, most singular SSDs aren't, but Intel's MLC-based X25s will do over 200MB/sec in sequential reads. So if you were to use two of these (or a 4+ disk RAID setup) on the same SATA link through a port multiplier or external eSATA setup you could easily saturate the link. I think for the next few years, SATA/6.0 will be of more use with eSATA in external raid setups..



Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

SSD drives connected directly to the PCIe bus are delivering excellent performance (700MB/sec reads and ~550MB/sec writes).
Check out FusionIO. (PDF)

Well obviously the FusioIO isn't a widely used product, and there are many advantages lost when you stop using SATA/SAS and hook up drives to the PCIe bus.
post #27 of 254
I hope the New Mac Pro's use a smaller chasis design. The current generation, although stunning, is remarkably imposing and very heavy. Anyone know what the TDP is for the prospective CPU's?
post #28 of 254
Looks like DIMMs are to be added in multiples of three now.....
Regards
Reply
Regards
Reply
post #29 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

Yeah, I was just saying that the current Mac Pros do have SATA II (3.0) and that you don't have to wait for the next Mac Pro to get that feature. In fact I think every Mac Pro had SATA II. All G5s had SATA I.

Ok. I wasn't sure if you were also considering the first Mac Pros in that or not, there are more differences than just the clock speeds and number of cores, but they're not that apparent at a glance.
post #30 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjteix View Post

T
While the gainestown cpus will be more powerful than similarly priced harpertown cpus, I think that Apple would have to go down to 2.53GHz to be able to offer a Mac Pro at the same price as the current ones.

I don't think they'll raise prices... No doubt the current CPUs were more expensive when the current Mac Pro was brand new. That seems to be how Apple always does it - they keep the prices the same throughout the lifetime of the product even though the components become cheaper and cheaper until the next update.
post #31 of 254
I doubt they'll raise prices either. I think Apple is fully aware that when large companies do their budgets at the end of the year to submit to their finance departments, they make basic assumptions with regards to how much a workstation will cost and how many they will need. It helps when you know you'll need to replace 8 computers that are coming off Applecare and need to be replaced, and you know how much to put aside for them.

The 4 Tylersburg chipsets will come in 4 variations, the 24D, 24S, 36D, 36S. S = single QPI bus and D = dual. The number refers to the PCIe lanes. A lot of the websites there refer to Tylersburg as X58 in general even when talking about the dual processor capable ones. I suspect that the D variations will adopt Intel's typical server/enterprise nomenclature; 5500X, 5500, etc.
post #32 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

I think you mean 'jibe.'

"Excuse me, stewardess. I speak jibe..."
post #33 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by winterspan View Post

I don't think they'll raise prices... No doubt the current CPUs were more expensive when the current Mac Pro was brand new. That seems to be how Apple always does it - they keep the prices the same throughout the lifetime of the product even though the components become cheaper and cheaper until the next update.

The Xeons used in the Mac Pro have never seen a price cut, meaning the prices I mentionned are not just current prices but also the price when the harpertowns were released. You can hope all you want of lower prices Mac Pro, but if Apple uses the nehalem DP architecture, either the clock will decrease or the prices will increase.

Ever since the PowerMac G5, the base price for Apple workstations has increase, if I remember well: $1499 (late 2004), $1999 for the last generation G5, $2199/2499 for the 1st gen Intel MP, $2299/2799 for the current harpertown generation. It wouldn't surprise me if it was $2499/2999 for nehalem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider

I doubt they'll raise prices either. I think Apple is fully aware that when large companies do their budgets at the end of the year to submit to their finance departments, they make basic assumptions with regards to how much a workstation will cost and how many they will need. It helps when you know you'll need to replace 8 computers that are coming off Applecare and need to be replaced, and you know how much to put aside for them.

The 4 Tylersburg chipsets will come in 4 variations, the 24D, 24S, 36D, 36S. S = single QPI bus and D = dual. The number refers to the PCIe lanes. A lot of the websites there refer to Tylersburg as X58 in general even when talking about the dual processor capable ones. I suspect that the D variations will adopt Intel's typical server/enterprise nomenclature; 5500X, 5500, etc.

If you want to take full advantage of the architecture, you will use a "D" chipset with two cpus. There have been very few articles about tylersburg and nehalem Xeons, just because not a lot of them are in circulation yet, while the X58 chipset and Core i7 cpus are already available and have been circulating for at least 3 months. Good web sites don't call Tylersburg: X58, as X58 is a product name (Intel® X58 Express Chipset) and Tylersburg is the codename for server/workstation platforms.

24/36S are primarily for Bloomfield cpus (Core i7 or Xeon X3500 series cpus = 1 QPI link), 24/36D are primarily for the Xeon 5500 series cpus with 2 QPI links. But you can use a 24/36D with a single bloomfield cpu if you want to address more PCIe slots (via another 24/36S).

Here are some examples.
post #34 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJD2112 View Post

Thanks for the replies guys, it definitely cleared a lot.

So I assume the current Mac Pro's have SATA Revision 1.x, when is the speculative date for SATA 3.x?

Thanks to murch's link it looks to be the second quarter. Will the new Mac Pro get it? I sure hope so, but who knows? But they currently have Rev 2, not 1.

Quote:
Four dual threaded cores processing eight threads? That's quite a boost from the current Xeon server grade chipsets. Hyper-threading, DDR3, Intel's memory controller utilizing point to point wiring, and obtaining these improved speeds while lowering overall power consumption is impressive. Unfortunately this means I will be drooling longingly at my local Apple store, while my mind quickly calculates the price difference between my current system and a new 8 core unit *sigh*. \

Wait 'till the end of the year, then you can calculate for Intel's new 8 core cpu's.
post #35 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Right, I don't remember any Xeon system using non-ECC memory.

The new chips and chipsets don't require ECC memory. The company can go either way.

Quote:
So far that I've heard about, SSDs aren't choked by the bus yet.

They're like HDD's. One won't do it. Two may not, but surely a four drive RAID will.
post #36 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I don't know about SATA I / II, I'll leave that for other people to bicker about, but the SATA ports on my original Mac Pro can operate at 3Gbps rates, or at least that's what the System Profiler app says.

Apple went from Rev 1 to Rev 2, thats why.
post #37 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

Yeah, I was just saying that the current Mac Pros do have SATA II (3.0) and that you don't have to wait for the next Mac Pro to get that feature. In fact I think every Mac Pro had SATA II. All G5s had SATA I.

You are correct sir!
post #38 of 254
Looks like a common-sense way of designing the memory controller.

Makes you wonder why they didn't design it that way the first time around?
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
post #39 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJD2112 View Post

ugh. I just bought an 8 core 2.8 system a few months ago. I know I'm dreaming, however I was hoping any new chipsets might "fit" the socket of the current system. It seems based on these specs the new Mac Pro's will have completely new logic boards corresponding with new processors. Oh well, you can't stifle technology just to keep yourself up-to-date. If the specs live up to their hype, I may have to bite the bullet and buy one (anyone interested in an 8 core Mac Pro with 8 GB's of RAM?).

Side note, a couple of questions:

1. What is SATA II compared to SATA (assuming their is a difference)?

2. What RAM will this new system accept? DDR3?

3. With the new integrated system, what is the defining difference between the proposed new Mac Pro versus the current system?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SATA_2#SATA_3Gb.2Fs

Theoretical throughput rates of 3Gbps [actual 300MB/s] versus 1.5Gbps [actual 150MB/s].
post #40 of 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony1 View Post

Yay, just after I get laid off, so just in time to make me feel better.

Can't wait.

...but wait...."Sunday"? Not a Tuesday?

Does anyone know of dev teams paring up for iPhone apps, and if so where they are meeting via the internet? Don't know what Tony does but that may help him, in one capacity or another as well as help me. I know I would like to find a group that is tackling iPhone app development as well as a broad spectrum of iPhone games. I have searched via Google, but no luck or maybe I just need to refine my query.

Also I wonder how long it will take for these types of chips, albeit more a mobile verity, to make their way into the iMac line? Are there mobile XEON chips? I thought that the XEONs were all server and higher end where heat is not as much an issue. So it will take some time for chips with some of these technologies to make it into the iMac line, but how long?

Anyone know anything on either of these fronts?
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Next-gen Mac Pro processors could arrive March 29