Intel's Six-Core 'Gulftown' processor revealed, possibly headed to Mac Pro

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 90
    WARNING. TPPED ON IPHONE sometime means quite a few spelling and grammar mistakes. Example fit instead of for. The iPhone should allow for certain words never to be typed unless you use a key command. Anyway, You know, 50% increase is great for just two more cores but I though I read somewhere AMD might have an 8? We need that and need it to work to get intel back in line so we can have those price wars again. Before AMD had the 1.9 ghz Athlon, intel would charge $700 for a 50 MHz doped bump.





    Anyway, a few things, why not 8? Is there a dye problem, six is a departure from the 2,4,6, 8,16,32,64,128,1024,2048 as we've cone to know and love, so I wonder why 6 and if it's low watts, then pc users will have a field day as the bios will allow formnucg greater overclocking due to the low heat which begs some questionsANCan they apply thus to laptop for great times in between charging.



    What about faster speeds with more watts?





    As stated earlier, this could be acgood time to come out with the midrange predicted last year as their current models could become the midrange with the 6 and 12, 48, being the top of the line. Just some ideas.





    Peace.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Performance numbers of Intel's new six-core Xeon were prematurely revealed by Polish website PCLab, showing strong increases in performance for the chip rumored to be in the next iteration of the Mac Pro.



    Hardmac reported that test and performance results of Intel's new 6-core Xeon chips code-named "Gulftown" were briefly featured on PCLab before being taken down at the request of Intel. According to the test results, the new chips are nearly 50% faster than the previous quad-core Xenon during parallel tasks, and use up to 50% less power.



    This chip will, according to sources, be featured in future Mac Pro models that could arrive as early as the first quarter of 2010. The "Gulftown" chip will be sold under the Core i9 name and will be Intel's first six-core, dual-socket processor. The 32 nanometer chips feature 12MB of L3 cache. If paired with another chip, as Apple usually does in its high-end workstations, the processors will offer 12 physical and 24 logical cores.



    In a previous story, Hardmac reported that the new Mac Pro will have a modified motherboard with a 10Gbit/second Ethernet port and will support 8GB and 16GB RAM modules, allowing for a maximum of 128GB of RAM. The report also stated that it is likely that Apple would have short-term exclusive use of the i9 processor. Apple has enjoyed short-term exclusivity during the release of the previous two Mac Pro lines.



  • Reply 22 of 90
    Dual 6 core.



    Hmm.



    Married to the quad core on the iMac.



    And you have the 27.5 inch screen.



    You run the Mac Pro through the iMac screen.





    Wow. That's alot of juice.



    16 'hard' cores. 32 virtual.



    That's...alot of render power for 3D.



    Just hope the new Mac Pro gets some sort of makeover. Not that the case looks bad in any way. It's still a timeless work of art to me.



    And a price cut would be nice. £1899 is ridiculous for something that has a weak gpu and no monitor included. It's a joke compared to the Nehalem iMac.



    Should be another round of GPUs from Ati and Nv by then. Hope Apple offers the latest ones.



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 23 of 90
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bitzandbitez View Post


    MAN, i cannot keep up with the Joneses anymore, so why do we need SO MUCH MORE POWER FOR AGAIN??



    I am still saving up for last years or is it this years model?? (damn I lost track already)

    oh, I forgot i'm going to need it for that rocket ship I'm building in the back... yeah right.



    eeesssshh!!!!



    In audio, video, cad, science, there is no such thing as to much power. Fir the consumer yes.



    Fir the prosumer, never. Especially if the machine has no TDM ( pro tools) avid (www.avid.com) cards, or with prosumers UAD AND cards like this fir the laptop.

    http://www.uaudio.com/products/uad/uad2solo/index.html and of corse the make it for pci cards too. Thus is one of dozens if companies. One virtual composer may have a live orchesta to score their one hour (43:29) show, but 5-10 machines running sample libraires from EWQLSO, VSL, Symphobia with as much ram as possible, fir their mock up. For laptop users, there chives become limited, thus the out cry when some wants a faster mac 15" and they suddenly see thier esata or sound device slot gone. And this isvnit just for prosumers. Pros with $50,000-$100k studios were just as livid as you can't put you mac pros in your carry on your mac pros. Let's blhope this is it and they finally "Get It" thus time.
  • Reply 24 of 90
    geekdadgeekdad Posts: 1,131member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post


    I've said it before and will say it again. Only adding a few different elements to the mix.

    With Apples pricing, they sort of painted themseleves into a corner. Example mac air thus no netbook due to high price.



    Now Avid makes about 98% off all tv/ feature films we see as they make editing equipment. Their sister company, Digidesign, makes high end audio systems.

    Avid can run around $100,000k, pro tools anywhere from $5000 to $50k depending in your needs. A few years ago though, they saw the trend that computers were getting faster and people were not buying pro tools tdm which are basically cards that take the load off the CPU as even high end top 10 artists wrrevrecording at home and mixing only in the studio, so Avid BOUGHT OUT M-AUDIO as this is a pro-Sumer company. All the software runs native unless you have say a fx pci card or express slot card with FX (same for video and people were livid apple took it off the 15", in fact most were hoping to see a 13 MacBook pro with express so that could slide in gig back, record shows, ideas.



    Now. With this new chip. This is apples chance to raise the prive a little and realease the 4/8 cores as headlesss mid range. Not only will they get millions of prosumer audio users that make up a bulk of the market. They would get gamers that make more sales than video and music combined.



    If you have a good, great gaming machine by Apple, you also have a device that will run their Pro Apps and oddly, Apple assumes they will lose money as the Pros, 2~3%, would buy the cheaper alternative, and their right, we would but so woudnt the gamers (who make up more sales then video sales and music sales combined), as well as the millions of ProSumers who don't really have the cash for a server made desktop but do have the talent, not to mention all the studios that had mac pros would also buy these non existent devices for their smaller rooms. In a nutshell, Apple would MAKE money not lose money due to lack of sales but they can't seem to figure that out yet.*



    Avid/Digidesing did!!!! They saw people were no longer buying their $$10,000 TDM (processing chips in a card, thus reducing CPU latency which you cannot have in music), and saw computers were getting faster and faster and more core on a single dye were happening, so they purchased M-Audio which relies on the cpu only. In music it's caled native recording vs TDM. In fact, for the mac pro, for those left with the express slot, now only the 17" has it forces yet higher prices on the pro, with an express card, you can purchase something similar that puts all the processing on the card that goes into the express slot. Google. "UAD laptop express" card and you'll see what I mean. Apple could make more money simply by adding an express slot on the iMac. Add in esata and the sales go even higher. *



    Anyway, Apple can do it but won't as I said earlier great grahics normally mean it can run pro apps and they don't really want that and rather have you buy the mac pro when in fact they would make so much more anyway.*



    Check it out. Let's pretend apple released a $1000 i7 core with a great graphics card, 1000 FSB, normal memory, headless and in the future you could swap the CPU out. *

    You would have thousands of gamers buy them.*

    You would have millions of musicians buy them and buy their own ram after market, similar to gamers.*

    You would have everyone that is tired of windows but has nice HDMI DVI diplays buy them.*

    You would have the more semi pro photographer buy them. *

    You would have most all semi pro video users buy these.*

    And ironically, all the pros apple were afraid they would lose sale to, would buy these instead of the pc rendering farms as well as place them in their smaller studios, so it not a matter of how come, it more like their are misguided somehow. I mean they really only care about the iPhone now, example, One to One and Pro C are used to be one program. Now it's seperated and most of the training used to be pro apps, and is now iLife and $99 each. So why not go ahead and build them. *There is a huge market out there. The only problem I would see is people would want their own video card at new egg or Frys pricing and apple would have to start supporting numerous cards but all the companies are gone and there's only nvidia and ati, so that wouldn't be that big of a deal and it would for sure, put a dent in the hacntosh.



    There are millions of users waiting. Just take a page from what digidesign did.*

    They would have 20% of the marketshare within a year and to top it off, it would increase the sales of iMacs as business and enterprise started off with these mid range machines. 30% in less than 5 years. Is it really so hard to understand Apple?





    Peace all.*



    I would buy this machine in s heartbeat! Great post!
  • Reply 25 of 90
    I live and work in hollywood now. Spent 8 years at Capitol records. FinalCutvare in the room ms that make the bumpers avid are used mainly fir feature film.



    My idea I'd was from apple was to put back the express slots in most of the machines as the low end ones need them the most.



    Then by moving 12/24 machines to the top, they can fill in the prosumer markets with the midrange machines. It's not that difficult to understand. plus you get the gamers who's same= more then music/video combined, plus of corse enthusiasts. Their are a lot of pro sumers that apple doesn't target and just by removing the expresscslot was a huge blow to audio users.



    I'm glad we agree in DSP, as it is dead but you overlooked Avid swooping up MAudio as they saw the writing on the wall and one simply has to go to the logic forums at apple to see the complaints of CPU overload and ironically, iMovie will render anything in real time wheras FCP won't due to compressor and various codecs. Apple puts more time into consumer software then they do pro apps which is seen at any one to one session. Five years ago, people were learning fcp or logic now it's older people trying ti set up email.



    All I was saying is this would be a great time ti really sock it to the competing vendors but so far, anything that has good graphic is normally crippled as good gpu means they can run pro apps thus the deletion if FireWire for a time then the non matte option in iMacs. They want prosumers to buy pro machines. It doesn't work like that. Trust me. I've been in a room with two top guys from steinberg who said it was the cracks that give them free promotions.





    Again, just add the express port in most if the machines, matte as an option and build a mid range machine. Let the vendors take care of the rest instead of worrying about tge 3-4% of Pro users and what machine they night buy or not. The prosumer sales similar to avid owning maudio will tKe care of the rest.





    Peace. And I don't take your comments as insulting. This is a good time fir Apple. They are

    doing well. Nowadays let's focus on the user base that kept apple afloat all pre iPod and iPhone days. It's a plan easy to execute and would target some of the holes apple has in their computer line.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by csimmons View Post


    Not to be too insulting, but I must say that I'm really glad Apple doesn't have you on their marketing team.



    Avid's video business has been pretty much decimated by Apple since FinalCut Pro has been on the market. More and more TV and film houses are using FCP on their productions, due to the cost efficiency / performance ratio of the Apple ecosystem (it's been that way for a number of years now!), thus Avid does NOT control 98% of the video editing market as you state. More like 50 - 60%.



    As far as the pro audio market is concerned, the market is trending away from external DSP solutions, precisely because computers are becoming more and more powerful. Every Mac comes shipped with Logic Light, a.k.a. Garage Band, and Logic is - despite the competition from apps such as Cubase, Digital Performer, Live and ProTools - still the best complete digital audio workstation out now, and is selling very well WITHOUT having to rely on external DSP products. An Apple-branded external DSP solution will not increase sales of Logic Studio, as you suggest.



  • Reply 26 of 90
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    Sure you would, but it would be at the expense of a iMac or Mac Mini, which is why Apple isn't going to release it. Not to mention it wouldn't be making it's typical twenty to thirty percent profit.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by geekdad View Post


    I would buy this machine in s heartbeat! Great post!



  • Reply 27 of 90
    Wow, this is proof to me that machines are taking over the world.



    This computer would be even more board than my current machine, waiting on me to press a key.



    "Please, press a key!!!!!"
  • Reply 28 of 90
    gcsgcs Posts: 29member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post


    ...The only problem I would see is people would want their own video card at new egg or Frys pricing and apple would have to start supporting numerous cards but all the companies are gone and there's only nvidia and ati, so that wouldn't be that big of a deal and it would for sure, put a dent in the hacntosh...



    Except Nvidia and ATI have closed their driver code, so Apple would have to presuade them to write the drivers for all those cards. Likely not in the cards...
  • Reply 29 of 90
    istudistud Posts: 193member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by joelsalt View Post


    actually, sexicore. Which is even better.



    Hex is Greek though.



    But Quad is Latin, hence the sexicore is better for consistency (and sex-appeal)
  • Reply 30 of 90
    A measly 6 cores?





    I'll wait for the 80 core Intel monster to arrive in 5 to 6 years



    http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/s...leID=196901229







    And if that's not enough there's the 1000 core processor in the works



    http://www.hizook.com/blog/2007/03/1...vision-of-asap





    Too much power, but if you need to get drunk what's better than power?
  • Reply 31 of 90
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    [QUOTE=Macfinger;1527612]If a two-core processor is a 'Dual Core' and a four-core processor a 'Quad Core' is not the proper name for a six-core processor a 'Sex Core' ... ? /QUOTE]



    Never happen - geeks are the ones who come up with the names and geeks don't think that way.



    For example, in the old days, we has SCSI hard disks. If it had bee up to normal people to pronounce that, they would have called it 'sexy'. But, no. The geeks had to call it 'scuzzy'.
  • Reply 32 of 90
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


    A measly 6 cores?





    I'll wait for the 80 core Intel monster to arrive in 5 to 6 years



    http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/s...leID=196901229



    Yes, clearly a tech demo which is not even x86 (the instruction set was similar to Itanium's) will translate to a marketable product.



    The amount of insanity in this thread is mind boggling. Please dial it back, just a bit?
  • Reply 33 of 90
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jeffharris View Post


    I wonder if Apple will refresh the case.



    What's the problem with the current design?
  • Reply 34 of 90
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bitzandbitez View Post


    MAN, i cannot keep up with the Joneses anymore, so why do we need SO MUCH MORE POWER FOR AGAIN??



    Easy... scientific computing. We have an AMD 48-core workstation in the lab that we use all the time (eight 6-core processors). Personally, I think Intel is lagging behind AMD with the multiple-core processors... the Istanbul Opterons ROCK!
  • Reply 35 of 90
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post


    Uhhhhh...any rumors on the MBPs? You know, the machines most Mac users now use?



    Not so much rumours as likelihood. The mobile Core i7s are ramping up production now. Next year?s MBPs and MBA should be using them. Nothing else would make sense.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post


    Anyway, a few things, why not 8? Is there a dye problem, six is a departure from the 2,4,6, 8,16,32,64,128,1024,2048 as we've cone to know and love, so I wonder why 6 and if it's low watts, then pc users will have a field day as the bios will allow formnucg greater overclocking due to the low heat which begs some questionsANCan they apply thus to laptop for great times in between charging.



    We just go to 6 so why do think 8 has been skipped? The 45nm Core i7 Bectons, which I mentioned earlier in this thread, have 8 cores.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by krispie View Post


    What's the problem with the current design?



    Some people like the visual aspects to change to help justify a purchase. I don?t quite understand it. Maybe so it makes it obvious that one isn?t using an on G5 Power Mac from half a decade ago. Seems like a dumb reason to me and I can?t find anything wrong with the current design.



    It?s a essentially a cuboid so much change you can do to it? There is really no need to got to extreme measures to make it lighter and stronger like with unibody milling and the design is still very relevant today. I can?t think of a single way that Apple could make it more appealing? No more brushed aluminum? Use a different shape air vent? change the handle design?
  • Reply 36 of 90
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post


    Anyway, a few things, why not 8? Is there a dye problem, six is a departure from the 2,4,6, 8,16,32,64,128,1024,2048 as we've cone to know and love, so I wonder why 6 and if it's low watts, then pc users will have a field day as the bios will allow formnucg greater overclocking due to the low heat which begs some questionsANCan they apply thus to laptop for great times in between charging.



    Probably because 4 was too few and 8 was too many. The die size is ≈240 mm^2 which is a bit smaller than Gainestown's.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by axc51 View Post


    Easy... scientific computing. We have an AMD 48-core workstation in the lab that we use all the time (eight 6-core processors). Personally, I think Intel is lagging behind AMD with the multiple-core processors... the Istanbul Opterons ROCK!



    AMD will also have 12 cores at around the same time as Intel will have 8. Possibly same thing with 16 and 12.
  • Reply 37 of 90
    kibitzerkibitzer Posts: 1,113member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    For some reason I love when tech sites write Xenon instead of Xeon.



    I installed some neat xenon under-cabinet lighting in my kitchen a couple years ago. The line-voltage bulbs put out a lot less heat than halogen, last several times longer and work with a wall-mounted dimmer switch. The fixture design provides for very quick and simple lamp changing. How's that for straying off-topic?
  • Reply 38 of 90
    For those seeing this machine as an opportunity for Apple to bring out a mid-range tower slotted between the Mini and the Pro, I don't think the Mini is far removed from being enough computer for a lot of folks. I have a new 2.53 Mini combined with an external 7200 RPM 1 terabyte hard drive hooked up via Firewire 800 and it's quite a decent combo. Bring this forward maybe two years and the Mini by then will have even better specs. I would expect a quad-core chip, an updated GPU, more hard drive capacity, more internal memory than the 4 gigs it already comes with, etc. If such a Mini is in the pipeline for early 2012, or somewhere thereabouts, the mid-range tower really has no place in a market in which desktops are falling out of favour.



    I don't agree that Apple is wrong to not offer a mid-range tower. Raising the bar on the Mini – even now a rather capable machine – is making it progressively less critical that the mid-range market be served by a separate product. The consumer-oriented Mini will just keep on getting more powerful and the Pro will likewise be even more useful for pros as the specs keep moving forward. Both segments get what they want and/or need. Those kind of in the middle will have less to complain about going forward, probably having their needs met by a future iteration of the Mini or, if they're into overkill, a high-powered Pro. Having paid around $7,000 a few years back (including an upgrade of the GPU and bringing the RAM up to a gig) for a dual-core G4 500 tower, I'm liking the state of Apple's desktop offerings a whole lot more now. For me the current Mini is enough and by 2012, few of us, I suspect, will have a legitimate need for more horsepower than it will come with at that time. What would be the point of the mid-range tower in that scenario and if such a unit would be rendered pointless so soon, why bother engineering the thing now?
  • Reply 39 of 90
    Now with all these cores, we need more software written that can utilize parallel processing. Even more so, can we make it so we can utilize other processors on a network (like, if you wanted to use the 27in iMac with a Mac Pro) as easily as multiple cores? (Only specific apps can use Qmaster at the moment) Was that written into Grand Central? I'm telling you, making multi-cores and multi-machines on a network all talk and act happy together would be amazing! (Heck, what about writing a tiny OS that runs on ALL 586 procs and PPC (G3) and better that allows processing to be done on over the network to bring out some of the older machines... but I'm sure that's not efficient enough. And of course, make it really easy to control and setup and available on the standard version of OS X.



    I understand there would be network bottlenecks. Algorithms could be found to figure out the bandwidth of the network, and how to efficiently use that bottleneck.
  • Reply 40 of 90
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,259member
    A midrange tower is not coming folks.



    The only reason for a tower is expandability and with video professionals moving to tapeless storage and with the necessity of external storage the need for a big box that holds a lot of "stuff" is waning.



    The i7 is the first iMac that is somewhat suitable for Prosumer work regarding speed. I think that if Light Peak takes off it'll allow for very fast exernal storage and other peripherals. Basically all the content creator needs in front on him/her is a good display setup and the grunt power.
Sign In or Register to comment.