or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple intros new Mac Pro with "Nehalem" Xeon processors
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple intros new Mac Pro with "Nehalem" Xeon processors - Page 12

post #441 of 505
Lemon... your Sig... "You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs..."

It's weird huh, it applies as you used it in the years before these Mac Pro updates and will continue to apply in the next year (or more)...!
post #442 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Lemon... your Sig... "You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs..."

It's weird huh, it applies as you used it in the years before these Mac Pro updates and will continue to apply in the next year (or more)...!

Yeah. I know it's a broken record. But so are Apple...wit their vram tightness. It's tiresome how a top company can get something like that 'wrong'.

It's disappointing. Even their 24 inch (and overpriced...) LED display has a 1900x1200 display. And that NEEDs the extra vram folks. A week ago I was inconsolable. Now? I'm resigned to it. After 10 years, I can wait no longer. I'm buying. But I'll do so with the 'taste of vommit in my mouth.' It's looking like the 2.66 quad for me...with the tactless 4870 512megger.

On an aside point. Does anyone know if the 30 inch display got updated to LED as well? Or are we STILL waiting for it to be updated? I only see the 24 inch LED. I was going to treat myself to the 30 incher. But I'd like the new styling...

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #443 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

Yeah. I know it's a broken record. But so are Apple...wit their vram tightness. It's tiresome how a top company can get something like that 'wrong'.

It's disappointing. Even their 24 inch (and overpriced...) LED display has a 1900x1200 display. And that NEEDs the extra vram folks. A week ago I was inconsolable. Now? I'm resigned to it. After 10 years, I can wait no longer. I'm buying. But I'll do so with the 'taste of vommit in my mouth.' It's looking like the 2.66 quad for me...with the tactless 4870 512megger.

On an aside point. Does anyone know if the 30 inch display got updated to LED as well? Or are we STILL waiting for it to be updated? I only see the 24 inch LED. I was going to treat myself to the 30 incher. But I'd like the new styling...

Lemon Bon Bon.


Still: Apple Cinema HD Display (30" flat panel)
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 #444 of 505
Thanks. Still the old 30 incher. Hmmm.

Lemon Bon Bon

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #445 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

On an aside point. Does anyone know if the 30 inch display got updated to LED as well? Or are we STILL waiting for it to be updated? I only see the 24 inch LED. I was going to treat myself to the 30 incher. But I'd like the new styling...

Lemon Bon Bon.

I've been watching for over a year for a new 30 inch ACD. I'm finally bitting the bullet and getting the current 30-incher with my new Mac Pro (free 3-year warranty due to Apple Care with the MP). We have some at work and it's just a bitchen good display. For photo work it's pretty accurate out of the box, but calibrating brings out the beauty. The display itself is incredibly great looking--not that there's anything wrong with that!

The new one, whenever it finally gets released, will be LED and most likely glossy. As with the new MPs, it will probably cost a lot more and will include more connections and faster refresh rates. But for photoshop print-makers and midi music makers the current one lacks nothing unless you want to play the wide gamut game. And I can get a new 30-incher for $1,600 with company discount!
post #446 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by NShirkey View Post

I've been watching for over a year for a new 30 inch ACD. I'm finally bitting the bullet and getting the current 30-incher with my new Mac Pro (free 3-year warranty due to Apple Care with the MP). We have some at work and it's just a bitchen good display. For photo work it's pretty accurate out of the box, but calibrating brings out the beauty. The display itself is incredibly great looking--not that there's anything wrong with that!

The new one, whenever it finally gets released, will be LED and most likely glossy. As with the new MPs, it will probably cost a lot more and will include more connections and faster refresh rates. But for photoshop print-makers and midi music makers the current one lacks nothing unless you want to play the wide gamut game. And I can get a new 30-incher for $1,600 with company discount!

When the new 24 inch LED replaced the 23 inch ACD, there wasn't a price increase was there? So what makes you think the 30 inch LED will be any more expensive?
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 #447 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royboy View Post

When the new 24 inch LED replaced the 23 inch ACD, there wasn't a price increase was there? So what makes you think the 30 inch LED will be any more expensive?

Just a guess. But it will no doubt be positioned as the perfect display for the new Mac pro, and we know Apple kept the line on costs there.
post #448 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malenfant View Post

Only need for Windows is to play latest FPS like Crysis and Far Cry 2 -like to run 25x16 on 30" Cinema Display with settings as high as possible for visual realism...

Anandtech did a good benchmark on what it *REALLY* takes to run Crysis 2560x1600 at highest settings. Absolutely bloody ridiculous. You need at least 3 GPUs of the top, top-end GPUs before you get anything above 40 frames per second. But hey, that's 2K resolution we're talking about, beyond 1080p.

Maybe instead of getting a Mac Pro get a PC and spend that price differential to a SLI/Crossfire motherboard and a few GPUs thrown in for good measure.

For reference Quad SLI doesn't mean four GPUs, it's 2 dual-GPU cards. Two GTX295's = Quad SLI = Sweeeet.

post #449 of 505
BTW my worst fears were realised.
http://www.dailytech.com/NVIDIAs+GTX...ticle14480.htm

"The problem is that many consumers will pick up a GTX 280M or GTX 260M thinking that it is the same or similar to the GTX 280, when it is actually just a 9800 GTX+."

Like I said, the GTX280 and GTX260 is just too hot and big to be any sort of mobile solution. So what they are calling the GTX280M and GTX260M are actually, <drum roll> G92 ie. Nvidia 9800 55nm's.

Nvidia's flagship great technology, that is, the GTX280 and GTX260, cannot go mobile and are jammed at 55nm... ATI will probably beat them to the punch with 40nm shipping in volume.

So. The 2nd half of 2009, it could be ATI's best ever chance of gaining dominance.

Nvidia2008. ATI2009... I am considering changing my username... \
post #450 of 505
Crysis. It's just ridiculous. Quad sli and the like.

Shrugs. A lack of 280 or x2 radeon is one thing. But to pay through the nose for a sli set up that still struggles. I still think of SLI as Niche tech.

Crysis was too forward thinking in my book. Nvidia were sandbagging with the 8xxx series for what seemed like ages. And then had the audacity to rebadge them as 9xxx just before the release of the 280 etc. Blooming cheeky company.

But not as cheeky as Apple offering crappy 120 Nvidias instead of 4850s as standard when they're dirt cheap. And don't get me started on the Vram thing when PCs for a grand get GPUs with 1 gig of vram on them.

Moan. Moan. Moan.

As for what you said...re
Quote:
Originally Posted by NShirkey
I've been watching for over a year for a new 30 inch ACD. I'm finally bitting the bullet and getting the current 30-incher with my new Mac Pro (free 3-year warranty due to Apple Care with the MP). We have some at work and it's just a bitchen good display. For photo work it's pretty accurate out of the box, but calibrating brings out the beauty. The display itself is incredibly great looking--not that there's anything wrong with that!

The new one, whenever it finally gets released, will be LED and most likely glossy. As with the new MPs, it will probably cost a lot more and will include more connections and faster refresh rates. But for photoshop print-makers and midi music makers the current one lacks nothing unless you want to play the wide gamut game. And I can get a new 30-incher for $1,600 with company discount!

That may be a point. I'm willing to bet if Apple are charging £600 plus for a 24 incher...then the 30 inch LED will be in excess of £1170. The old 30 incher should be selling for less than that.

Still. I think I maybe able to get a discount... Maybe I should go for the old display..? I'm not sure. 24 inch black border? Or the old 30 incher? I've had a dream of getting the 30 incher when I got my rig.

Hmm. About a week to make up my mind. I can bet Apple will launch the new 30 incher the moment I buy the old one.

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #451 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

...Hmm. About a week to make up my mind. I can bet Apple will launch the new 30 incher the moment I buy the old one.

Lemon Bon Bon.

Don't worry. The moment the new 30-inch comes out there will be endless bitching on the forums about how "the old 30-inch was better", "Apple is raping us", "Apple abandoned the Pro market for good", that guy (username hiimamac will come on with his posts all in CAPS), etc. etc. etc. ...So even if you buy the "old" 30-inch right now, There will be continuing claims it is still "the best" and so on...

I don't know if that makes your decision any easier though. Maybe.
post #452 of 505
I am also a little bit disapointed by the price of the new powermac. They are more expansive than the previous generation.
At one point I considered buying a new mac pro.
Now I am not sure anymore. I will wait a litte bit more to replace my quad G5.
post #453 of 505
Just to cheer things up!

I ordered a MP octo 2.26 w/12GB RAM and the upgraded graphics board (and the wireless, and iWorks for work stuff, and Apple Care--Jeese) But I'm a happy camper!

I gave Steve a few extra bucks for the RAM, but couldn't go there for additional HD storage. I want to buy 2 1TB drives.

Any recommendations for which drives I should buy? Anyone know what Apple puts in?

Thanks!

Good news for others--I also ordered a 30" ACD, so new ones are on the way!!
post #454 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by NShirkey View Post

Just to cheer things up!

I ordered a MP octo 2.26 w/12GB RAM and the upgraded graphics board (and the wireless, and iWorks for work stuff, and Apple Care--Jeese) But I'm a happy camper!

I gave Steve a few extra bucks for the RAM, but couldn't go there for additional HD storage. I want to buy 2 1TB drives.

Any recommendations for which drives I should buy? Anyone know what Apple puts in?

Thanks!

Good news for others--I also ordered a 30" ACD, so new ones are on the way!!

Congratulations!

My dual 2.66 came with a WD Caviar 640 drive. I happen to like WD.

I have two 1 TB Black Caviar drives. They cost $140 at OWC, and just about everywhere else that sells that model. The regular Caviar drives are cheaper, but not as fast.

I also have a Seagate 1TB drive that I've not used as yet because of the firmware problem, and I'm waiting for a firmware update installable from the Intel Macs to appear. Several are working on it.

Until this firmware problem is gone from the drives being sold—for sure, I won't buy another Seagate.

The Samsung F1's are very fast, but seem to be having reliability problems.

I have a bunch of older, and smaller, drives that I'm phasing out.

There are a lot of drive manufacturers out there. If you want to know about the others, ask me about any particular one, and that line. It's too much to put into one post.

New ACD's on the way? More info please!
post #455 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Congratulations!

My dual 2.66 came with a WD Caviar 640 drive. I happen to like WD.

That WD Caviar Blue 640 drive is great. A nearly perfect blend of speed, capacity, and price. Quiet, too.
post #456 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post

That WD Caviar Blue 640 drive is great. A nearly perfect blend of speed, capacity, and price. Quiet, too.

Yes.

But you know what? The DVD drive seems noisier than it should be. Maybe the new inside design doesn't give as much damping. My dual 2 GHz G5's drive is quieter, of course, it's not the original drive.
post #457 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Congratulations!

My dual 2.66 came with a WD Caviar 640 drive. I happen to like WD.

I have two 1 TB Black Caviar drives. They cost $140 at OWC, and just about everywhere else that sells that model. The regular Caviar drives are cheaper, but not as fast.

I also have a Seagate 1TB drive that I've not used as yet because of the firmware problem, and I'm waiting for a firmware update installable from the Intel Macs to appear. Several are working on it.

Until this firmware problem is gone from the drives being soldfor sure, I won't buy another Seagate.

The Samsung F1's are very fast, but seem to be having reliability problems.

I have a bunch of older, and smaller, drives that I'm phasing out.

There are a lot of drive manufacturers out there. If you want to know about the others, ask me about any particular one, and that line. It's too much to put into one post.

New ACD's on the way? More info please!

Thanks for the info. What's the difference between the Black Caviar and Blue Caviar drives? I will use the drive mostly for huge sample libraries, and I've read that it's better to have a large drive that no more than 65% full so maximum speed is maintained. So 1TB seems about right. The other 1TB drive I'll buy will be for back-up.

I don't know when a new 30" ACD will be announced, I was only guessing it would be soon because I finally bought the old one.
post #458 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by NShirkey View Post

Thanks for the info. What's the difference between the Black Caviar and Blue Caviar drives? I will use the drive mostly for huge sample libraries, and I've read that it's better to have a large drive that no more than 65% full so maximum speed is maintained. So 1TB seems about right. The other 1TB drive I'll buy will be for back-up.

I don't know when a new 30" ACD will be announced, I was only guessing it would be soon because I finally bought the old one.

Usually the WD "Blue" series drives have 16MB of cache, and the "Black" drives have 32MB. It makes very little difference, but some people want that difference.
post #459 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by NShirkey View Post

Thanks for the info. What's the difference between the Black Caviar and Blue Caviar drives? I will use the drive mostly for huge sample libraries, and I've read that it's better to have a large drive that no more than 65% full so maximum speed is maintained. So 1TB seems about right. The other 1TB drive I'll buy will be for back-up.

I don't know when a new 30" ACD will be announced, I was only guessing it would be soon because I finally bought the old one.

The cache difference that FuturePastNow said is correct. But the Black versions have better throughput.

The cache matters on some things. There are predictive algorithms that look ahead to see what you would be wanting next, based on what you have just done. Often they are correct. The same basic idea that cpu makers use in their caching schemes.

Depending on file size, the cache can be very helpful, or a hinderance. If the files are small enough to fit within the cache, and its "guesses" are mostly right, it can speed up the performance by a considerable bit. If they are wrong, or the file is a cache "buster" (too big to fit), then it will slow things down.


When drives were considerably smaller, the 65%, or so, rule was pretty good. Two reasons. One was to use the outside of the drive where throughput is greatest (normally, the outside is used first, for this reason, automatically), and two, because as the drive gets filled up too far, files get fragmented, which means the drive heads have to bounce around getting all of the pieces.

Today, drives are much bigger, and faster. If ypu have a big library, but the individual files are relatively small, drive speed isn't too much of an issue. A fast drive today can deliver 50 to 100 MB/s. Your milage will vary, but even half of that is pretty fast for files that aren't that size.

Fragmentation isn't nearly as much as an issue either, as the drives are so large. I keep 20% free on all drives that aren't being used for large video files in editing. Photoshop scratch disks are kept open after the work is done.
post #460 of 505
Thanks for the information!

BTW, Bare Feats has updated their pro app benchmarks for new Mac Pros (Photshop, After Effects, and Compressor)...

"In the three tests above, the slowest 8-core 2009 Mac Pro (2.26GHz) is faster than the fastest 8-core Mac Pro (3.2GHz). On the other hand, the 2008 is a solid machine and selling at big discounts."

http://www.barefeats.com/nehal04.html
post #461 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by NShirkey View Post

Thanks for the information!

BTW, Bare Feats has updated their pro app benchmarks for new Mac Pros (Photshop, After Effects, and Compressor)...

"In the three tests above, the slowest 8-core 2009 Mac Pro (2.26GHz) is faster than the fastest 8-core Mac Pro (3.2GHz). On the other hand, the 2008 is a solid machine and selling at big discounts."

http://www.barefeats.com/nehal04.html

And what we have to remember is that Adobe is working very hard on getting CS5 not only 64 bits (though that isn't as important as some think), as well as better at using more cores and threads.

The major advantages here for the new machines, which isn't as apparent now for programs like PS which aren't efficiently multithreaded, is that as they become so, the difference in speed between the Nehalem machines and the older models will spread by a remarkable amount. The new cpus scale up much better to multiple cpu's and cores than do the older machines, due to the new memory model. Also, the Hyperthreading can add up to 30% more speed.

I think that a gap of 10% that we see now will grow to 50% or more in the next two years. The old machines really are NOT a good buy unless you're only thinking about the next 6 to 12 months. And even then, it's really questionable.
post #462 of 505
I agree with melgross. This is very important to realize that these machines haven't reached their full potential yet. When other apps are optimized, cs5 and snow leopard come out, then we'll truly know what these machines are capable of. These machines are receiving a lot of flack for not performing greatly in things like games (see engadget). This is the case where the software simply isn't there yet to take advantage of these powerful machines. It's a chicken / egg thing kind of. But the hardware has to be there before you can start doing real optimizations for it. I'm all about these machines. Mel did you get yours yet?

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #463 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647 View Post

I agree with melgross. This is very important to realize that these machines haven't reached their full potential yet. When other apps are optimized, cs5 and snow leopard come out, then we'll truly know what these machines are capable of. These machines are receiving a lot of flack for not performing greatly in things like games (see engadget). This is the case where the software simply isn't there yet to take advantage of these powerful machines. It's a chicken / egg thing kind of. But the hardware has to be there before you can start doing real optimizations for it. I'm all about these machines. Mel did you get yours yet?

Yeah, mine came a while ago. For the first time in many years I ordered a new machine the second day after it was announced.
post #464 of 505
Wow, no comments about your new machine? What's up with that.

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #465 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647 View Post

Wow, no comments about your new machine? What's up with that.

I have, much earlier in the thread.

It's the dual 2.66 with the 4870 and WiFi card. I haven't upgraded the RAM as yet, because I still have some questions about that aspect that I'm trying to get answered.

It's very fast, both from testing, and real work. I have no complaints about speed. Geekbench at 64 bits gave a number of 16,652. That's not with all apps off as is recommended.

Safari 3.2.1, which comes with the machine, gave a rating of a bit over 1100. I don't have the number. But the 4 beta #5528.16 gave a number of 1851. A big jump, and very good number. I haven't tested Firefox. I'm waiting for the newest to get stable enough.

FCS is much faster than my old dual 2 GHz G5 machine, even though that has 16 GB RAM, and this only has the standard 6 GB right now. Like several times faster.

It's also quieter than the old G5. When when pushing it with FCS it remains quiet.

The interior design is much superior to before, and is obviously more expensive to manufacture. When people look inside the old vs the new, and they know anything about design and manufacture, they will understand. Apple is moving up in class here, to an industrial design that ups what they did before.

But the interesting thing about this design is that it opens up possibilities that we haven't had in years, before the G5 came out.

It's far easier to replace the cpu's in this machine. I know that a couple of people here have expressed amazement that I would want to do that, given the cost. But they seem to have forgotten, or simply aren't aware of, the flourishing cpu replacement industry that existed before the G5's ended it. It's just a shadow of itself, offering replacements for old machines from the G4 and backwards. But the fact that they can sell processors for up to $500 for machines that are selling on eBay for under $100 is itself amazing!

I've replaced the cpus on the older Mac Pros, and doing so is a doozy! But it works!

It's even possible, though I don't know how likely it will be, to replace the entire cpu/memory board for a new one!

If the cost could be restrained to about half the cost of a new machine, this could be a viable upgrade route to cpus that require a new socket, such as we will see later in 2010 and beyond

I'm very optimistic here.
post #466 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

It's even possible, though I don't know how likely it will be, to replace the entire cpu/memory board for a new one!

If the cost could be restrained to about half the cost of a new machine, this could be a viable upgrade route to cpus that require a new socket, such as we will see later in 2010 and beyond

I'm very optimistic here.

I work at a large all-Mac creative company. Our Mac tech/IT guys were talking about this before the new Mac Pros were announced. They had no inside information, but they, along with other IT guys have been giving Apple that feedback for the past couple of years--give us a very sturdy industrial strength box, and offer us the option of replacing a plug-in cpu/memory board for half the cost, and we will upgrade the plug-in board much more frequently than we replace entire computers. They were thrilled to see what could be the start of such an upgrade philosophy from Apple. All the pieces are now in place.

Apple could offer more discounts with the exchange of the old CPU board and kick up a flourishing refurb business.
post #467 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by NShirkey View Post

I work at a large all-Mac creative company. Our Mac tech/IT guys were talking about this before the new Mac Pros were announced. They had no inside information, but they, along with other IT guys have been giving Apple that feedback for the past couple of years--give us a very sturdy industrial strength box, and offer us the option of replacing a plug-in cpu/memory board for half the cost, and we will upgrade the plug-in board much more frequently than we replace entire computers. They were thrilled to see what could be the start of such an upgrade philosophy from Apple. All the pieces are now in place.

Apple could offer more discounts with the exchange of the old CPU board and kick up a flourishing refurb business.

I don't see Apple doing it, unless they have changed their philosophy.

I could see Newer, or OWC through their PowerLogix brand, or Sonnet, etc., doing this..
post #468 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647 View Post

I agree with melgross. This is very important to realize that these machines haven't reached their full potential yet. When other apps are optimized, cs5 and snow leopard come out, then we'll truly know what these machines are capable of. These machines are receiving a lot of flack for not performing greatly in things like games (see engadget). This is the case where the software simply isn't there yet to take advantage of these powerful machines. It's a chicken / egg thing kind of. But the hardware has to be there before you can start doing real optimizations for it. I'm all about these machines. Mel did you get yours yet?

Yeah as for gaming the Core i7 benchmarks are absolutely shocking. But it's got to do with game makers starting to come round to understanding and optimising for the architecture.
post #469 of 505
That would be totally cool if the aftermarket CPU industry like for the G4 had a renaissance with the Nehalem Mac Pros and further on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I have, much earlier in the thread.

It's the dual 2.66 with the 4870 and WiFi card. I haven't upgraded the RAM as yet, because I still have some questions about that aspect that I'm trying to get answered.

It's very fast, both from testing, and real work. I have no complaints about speed. Geekbench at 64 bits gave a number of 16,652. That's not with all apps off as is recommended.

Safari 3.2.1, which comes with the machine, gave a rating of a bit over 1100. I don't have the number. But the 4 beta #5528.16 gave a number of 1851. A big jump, and very good number. I haven't tested Firefox. I'm waiting for the newest to get stable enough.

FCS is much faster than my old dual 2 GHz G5 machine, even though that has 16 GB RAM, and this only has the standard 6 GB right now. Like several times faster.

It's also quieter than the old G5. When when pushing it with FCS it remains quiet.

The interior design is much superior to before, and is obviously more expensive to manufacture. When people look inside the old vs the new, and they know anything about design and manufacture, they will understand. Apple is moving up in class here, to an industrial design that ups what they did before.

But the interesting thing about this design is that it opens up possibilities that we haven't had in years, before the G5 came out.

It's far easier to replace the cpu's in this machine. I know that a couple of people here have expressed amazement that I would want to do that, given the cost. But they seem to have forgotten, or simply aren't aware of, the flourishing cpu replacement industry that existed before the G5's ended it. It's just a shadow of itself, offering replacements for old machines from the G4 and backwards. But the fact that they can sell processors for up to $500 for machines that are selling on eBay for under $100 is itself amazing!

I've replaced the cpus on the older Mac Pros, and doing so is a doozy! But it works!

It's even possible, though I don't know how likely it will be, to replace the entire cpu/memory board for a new one!

If the cost could be restrained to about half the cost of a new machine, this could be a viable upgrade route to cpus that require a new socket, such as we will see later in 2010 and beyond

I'm very optimistic here.
post #470 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

That would be totally cool if the aftermarket CPU industry like for the G4 had a renaissance with the Nehalem Mac Pros and further on.

There doesn't need to be an aftermarket CPU industry like there was for the G4. Intel will sell you a pair of processors. They'll be making CPUs for this particular socket for several years at least, so in two or three years you'll be able to buy a pair of eight-core processors and swap them in in an hour yourself.
post #471 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post

There doesn't need to be an aftermarket CPU industry like there was for the G4. Intel will sell you a pair of processors. They'll be making CPUs for this particular socket for several years at least, so in two or three years you'll be able to buy a pair of eight-core processors and swap them in in an hour yourself.

There will only be one iteration of the 1366 socket after this new crop of processors. After that it's a new socket. and new processors. We wont be able to use them without new sockets, and architectural changes in the memory and such. All this is on the slide out board. A new board, and you have, essentially, a new machine. You would still be stuck with SATA 3, but that's not such a big problem.
post #472 of 505
For everyone concerned about the 4 memory socket limitation of the single cpu Mac Pro, as far as OWC is concerned, their testing has shown 16 GB of RAM using 4 Gb modules works fine.

They are selling a 4 x 4 kit for $979.99

See, I said to wait and not get upset.
post #473 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

For everyone concerned about the 4 memory socket limitation of the single cpu Mac Pro, as far as OWC is concerned, their testing has shown 16 GB of RAM using 4 Gb modules works fine.

They are selling a 4 x 4 kit for $979.99

See, I said to wait and not get upset.

Well that is awesome.. except if you get 4x4 with the quad it costs as much as the Octo with 12GB.
You win, I've switched sides.
Reply
You win, I've switched sides.
Reply
post #474 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by DdubRes79 View Post

Well that is awesome.. except if you get 4x4 with the quad it costs as much as the Octo with 12GB.

It's not a big deal. Memory is sometimes more important than cores.

I'll make a bet that the price will drop more. When they first put up the 16 GB with 8 2 GB chips for the dual core, it was $489.99. Now it's dropped to $289.99.

The first 16 GB x 4 GB RAM they have listed cost $2,500. Now it's $1,949, and this new memory is just $979.99.

This is all within 3 weeks.
post #475 of 505
Finally I bought the single CPU quad core nehalem 2,66 ghz. I also take the 4870 card, and 3 *2 GB or Ram.

I only use my Mac for Aperture, DxO and CS2. I truly expect a nice speedbump over my quad G5, and I especially expect, something less noisy than my quad (it's so loud, that my wife refuse it in our bedroom : I can understand that)

For people interested between difference in term of performance between a 4 and 8 cores, you should see this review.
Remember, that very few software are really taking advantage of more than 4 cores, and that Nehalem architecture support HT.

http://www.macworld.com/article/1395...acpro2009.html
post #476 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powerdoc View Post

Finally I bought the single CPU quad core nehalem 2,66 ghz. I also take the 4870 card, and 3 *2 GB or Ram.

I only use my Mac for Aperture, DxO and CS2. I truly expect a nice speedbump over my quad G5, and I especially expect, something less noisy than my quad (it's so loud, that my wife refuse it in our bedroom : I can understand that)

For people interested between difference in term of performance between a 4 and 8 cores, you should see this review.
Remember, that very few software are really taking advantage of more than 4 cores, and that Nehalem architecture support HT.

http://www.macworld.com/article/1395...acpro2009.html

Congrats!

My dual 2.66 is surely quiet! When the machine first comes on, for a few seconds, the fans swoosh up to full speed in a system check, but then quiet down remarkably. Mine is under my desk just to the left of me. I can hear nothing.

The only noisy thing is the DVD unit. for some reason, that's noisy.

I think the single core model is a good buy for now. But when Photoshop CS5 comes out, and it can access all cores and threads, just a bit of that can be done now, the situation will change.

With FCS, I often find all 16 threads active. Multitasking also seems to use more cores and threads. So it does depend on what you will need a year or two down the road.
post #477 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Congrats!

My dual 2.66 is surely quiet! When the machine first comes on, for a few seconds, the fans swoosh up to full speed in a system check, but then quiet down remarkably. Mine is under my desk just to the left of me. I can hear nothing.

The only noisy thing is the DVD unit. for some reason, that's noisy.

I think the single core model is a good buy for now. But when Photoshop CS5 comes out, and it can access all cores and threads, just a bit of that can be done now, the situation will change.

With FCS, I often find all 16 threads active. Multitasking also seems to use more cores and threads. So it does depend on what you will need a year or two down the road.

Thanks for your input Melgross
I am very happy to hear that it's quiet even with the radeon ( I was efraid of that, because it's a big card).

You are right, in the future, software will take advantage of more cores.
That's not really a big deal for me. My plan is to change one Mac in my office every year. I always kept my best mac for home, and I replace the slowest mac at my office with my previous home mac.
I do not really need raw power at my office, and even my PW G5 1,6 ghz, is still doing a great job
post #478 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powerdoc View Post

Thanks for your input Melgross
I am very happy to hear that it's quiet even with the radeon ( I was efraid of that, because it's a big card).

You really have to have a silent room before you can hear it. Otherwise, you have to bend down to the machine. Even when all 16 threads are rendering, it's quieter than any other machine i've used. Still don't get why the DVD is noisy. hopefully, it's just that model they use now. I might replace it anyway.

Quote:
You are right, in the future, software will take advantage of more cores.
That's not really a big deal for me. My plan is to change one Mac in my office every year. I always kept my best mac for home, and I replace the slowest mac at my office with my previous home mac.
I do not really need raw power at my office, and even my PW G5 1,6 ghz, is still doing a great job

I used to replace a third of my machines every year when I had my lab. Now that I'm retired, I wanted to buy a machine that would last longer. I do intend to replace the chips late next year with dual 6 core versions running at a higher speed just before they obsolete the current 1366 B socket.
post #479 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

Those are the 5000-series dual socket machines, the same class as the 8-core. Price the Precision T3400.

Dell is "ripping you off" also - the T3500 is $1800 when you spec it like the Mac Pro. Looks like you and Lemon Bon Bon were WAY wrong.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #480 of 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

Dell is "ripping you off" also - the T3500 is $1800 when you spec it like the Mac Pro. Looks like you and Lemon Bon Bon were WAY wrong.

There are workstations, and there are workstations. It depends.

The cheap models aren't really workstations. They have some workstationny plastic exterior over the cheap metal case to make them look serious, but they are really just home computers.

And then there are the REAL workstations, which are built to a higher standard, and are modular. That's what the Mac Pro is, and where it's competing. Conveniently, those who assail this machine forget about those machines.

The problem is that many people here who complain about the price look at such machines from the bottom up, and find the prices too high, whereas those who buy real workstations look at it from the top down, and find it to be cheap for what it offers.

http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterpri...m_mac_pro.html

http://www.boxxtech.com/

Some also complain about memory pricing, without understanding what memory for these machines really costs. It's very expensive.

http://www.memory4less.com/m4l_itemd...temid=27116493

http://www.memory4less.com/m4l_itemd...temid=27069934

http://www.memory4less.com/m4l_itemd...temid=27216300

For those who poo poo Kingston memory, I'll say what I said about it in another post, if you go to an industrial installation, you will likely find this memory in the machines. Memory4less is also a low price vendor.

Those memory kits, for those who didn't follow the links yet, are for 8 GB RAM in two 4 GB packages. Check out the pricing, and then compare it to Apple's.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple intros new Mac Pro with "Nehalem" Xeon processors