What chip will Mac Pro (Power Mac) get?

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
? Should I get the new iMac Duo Core (FAST CHIP) or wait for the next Mac Pro?



? Any idea what chip they will put in it? (according to the Intel roadmap)



? When will it arrive? (I believe BEFORE summer, what do you think?)





Sincerely



Zab the Fab
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 42
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Zab The Fab

    ? Should I get the new iMac Duo Core (FAST CHIP) or wait for the next Mac Pro?



    ? Any idea what chip they will put in it? (according to the Intel roadmap)



    ? When will it arrive? (I believe BEFORE summer, what do you think?)





    Sincerely



    Zab the Fab






    Merom
  • Reply 2 of 42
    Quote:

    Originally posted by TednDi

    Merom



    Merom ? What do you mean? Please explain.





    Sincerely



    Zab the Fab
  • Reply 3 of 42
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    From Tom's hardware approx page 3.





    ...The introduction of the Merom design will be a turning point in Intel's product policy, because it will be the backbone for all processor families that go into the desktop, the mobile or the enterprise space. In contrast, the desktop and enterprise markets are provided with Pentium 4 and Pentium D NetBurst architecture processors while the mobility CPUs are derived from the more efficient Pentium M design. At this point we should also mention that all processors currently shipping out of AMD's Fab 35 facility in Dresden, Germany, are already based on one single processor design. Still AMD has not yet been able to transition to neither a 65 nm production process or 300 mm wafer manufacturing....





    http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/...red/page3.html
  • Reply 4 of 42
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by TednDi

    Merom



    Well, not exactly.

    The new Intel architecture will bring Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest. These chips will share the "same 64-bit core". Merom is dedicated to notebooks and small desktops, Conroe for standard desktops, and Woodcrest for servers and workstations. One of the differences between the chips is power consumption.

    Most believe that the next generation of Power Mac (Mac Pro?) will have Conroe and/or Woodcrest chips. Conroe is a dual-core chip and so is Woodcrest, but Woodcrest can work in a dual processor configuration (like the actual PowerMac Quad that contains 2 dual-core G5 chips).

    Conroe is supposed to be available in quantity in July, Merom in September and Woodcrest sometime in the same quarter...

    Mac Pro's with Conroe chips may be announced in June at Apple's WWDC.

    More MacBook Pro's may be shipping around Apple Expo Paris (late September).

    And a Mac Pro Quad may be available before the end of the year...

    We'll see...
  • Reply 5 of 42
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,145member
    No it won't be Merom although that's a half truth. Merom is a laptop chip and also a core.



    The desktop parts that come from the Merom core will be the Conroe and Woodcrest.



    It's basically Merom with breathing room (65 watts TDP vs Meroms 35watts or so)
  • Reply 6 of 42
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    yes.



    Then the powermac will get an update.



    imho
  • Reply 7 of 42
    anandanand Posts: 285member
    Why not Sossaman? It is to be released in early 2006 and is just a SMP version of the Yonah. Right?
  • Reply 8 of 42
    Here's my view of the Intel roadmap and how it fits Mac models by the end of the year.





    Core Duo (Yonah) replaces Celeron and Celeron M and will be in the MacMini and iBook replacement.



    Merom (64 bit) replaces Pentium M and will be in the MacBook Pro and iMac.



    Conroe (64 bit) replaces Pentium IV and will be in the Power Mac G5 replacement.



    Woodcrest (64 bit) replaces Pentium IV Xeon and will be in the quad core G5 and Xserve replacements.
  • Reply 9 of 42
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Maddan

    Here's my view of the Intel roadmap and how it fits Mac models by the end of the year.





    Core Duo (Yonah) replaces Celeron and Celeron M and will be in the MacMini and iBook replacement.



    Merom (64 bit) replaces Pentium M and will be in the MacBook Pro and iMac.



    Conroe (64 bit) replaces Pentium IV and will be in the Power Mac G5 replacement.



    Woodcrest (64 bit) replaces Pentium IV Xeon and will be in the quad core G5 and Xserve replacements.




    Yep seems a pretty safe bet that this is exactly how it will go, esp. since Conroe will NOT support 2 CPU sockets so Apple will have to use Woodcrest to replace the G5 in the Quad.
  • Reply 10 of 42
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,145member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by anand

    Why not Sossaman? It is to be released in early 2006 and is just a SMP version of the Yonah. Right?



    Because it's aimed at low power Server configs. Since it's based off the Yonah core the performance won't match that of a Merom core. Might as well just go to Merom although Sossaman will make a nice Blade Server CPU.
  • Reply 11 of 42
    thttht Posts: 3,062member
    My prediction is 2.5 and 2.8 GHz Conroe on the lower 2 configs and a 2.8-3 GHz Woodcrest quad on the high end, late Q3 06.



    Zab, there is really no choice between an iMac and a "Mac Pro". You either spend <$2000 on an iMac system or >$2500 (assuming you have to buy a monitor). If you can afford a prosumer system in the $2500+ range, and have need, then get the existing Quad. If you can't, the iMac (or mini or iBook) is your only choice.



    An iMac 2 GHz Core Duo, a 20" ACD as second monitor (or cheaper version), and 1+ GB ram is a very nice setup for about $2500. This would have cost $6000+ 2 years ago.



    If you are a gamer, get a PC.
  • Reply 12 of 42
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Zab The Fab

    ?

    ? Any idea what chip they will put in it? (according to the Intel roadmap)







    Confirmed: the G5 at 3 MHz.
  • Reply 13 of 42
    macroninmacronin Posts: 1,136member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Because it's aimed at low power Server configs. Since it's based off the Yonah core the performance won't match that of a Merom core. Might as well just go to Merom although Sossaman will make a nice Blade Server CPU.



    Mmm...



    Blade Server...



    Would LOVE to see Apple put out a nice blade server...



    But then, of course, they would need to come out with some sweet thin clients...



    Mmm... NetBoot...



    ;^p
  • Reply 14 of 42
    Quote:

    Originally posted by THT

    My prediction is 2.5 and 2.8 GHz Conroe on the lower 2 configs and a 2.8-3 GHz Woodcrest quad on the high end, late Q3 06.



    Zab, there is really no choice between an iMac and a "Mac Pro". You either spend <$2000 on an iMac system or >$2500 (assuming you have to buy a monitor). If you can afford a prosumer system in the $2500+ range, and have need, then get the existing Quad. If you can't, the iMac (or mini or iBook) is your only choice.



    An iMac 2 GHz Core Duo, a 20" ACD as second monitor (or cheaper version), and 1+ GB ram is a very nice setup for about $2500. This would have cost $6000+ 2 years ago.



    If you are a gamer, get a PC.




    Hi THT



    It's my impression that right now the Quad G5 is not worth the extra $ compared to the speed tests of the iMac Core Duo. The Quad G5 is certainly faster, but not as much as it is more expensive. What do you think?



    My choice revolves around choosing between the iMac Core Duo now, or waiting for a Mac Pro speed monster (which I feel will be introduced around summer, but time will tell). I need power for music production and a lot of it.



    Obviously the comming intel Mac Pro will have to be faster than their iMac, but the question is if we can tell from Intel's roadmap WHAT the processor will be and there through WHEN it will be introduced.



    There were some VERY interesting speculation that Apples engineers were working in secret (obviously) with Intel to develop a special product that would include some of the cool G6 technologies and be introduced to the Mac (and only to the Mac) at first and only later on be available for other PC vendors.



    Man, we live in exciting times







    Sincerely



    Zab the Fab
  • Reply 15 of 42
    pbpb Posts: 4,231member
    Are there any preliminary performance/power consumption estimation for the forthcoming Intel chips (Merom, Conroe, Woodcrest)? Just to get an idea of what we should expect in the second half of the year.
  • Reply 16 of 42
    telomartelomar Posts: 1,804member
    Listed TDP for merom is 35W. Conroe is 65W and Woodcrest is 85W.



    Performance is meant to be around 20 - 30% better than yonah at the same clock speed, which in turn isn't too far off the current Athlons. That gives you some idea.



    It should be way ahead on laptop performance and pretty similar on desktop and server performance/watt. AMD will be better in some places, Intel in others. I expect Intel will dominate integer and AMD FP although it won't be quite that clear cut.
  • Reply 17 of 42
    pbpb Posts: 4,231member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Telomar

    Listed TDP for merom is 35W. Conroe is 65W and Woodcrest is 85W.



    Performance is meant to be around 20 - 30% better than yonah at the same clock speed...




    I suppose you compare yonah to merom. I wonder however if the following excerpt from Wikipedia makes sense:





    According to Intel, Merom's design places emphasis on both high performance and low power consumption. On a performance per watt basis, Intel claims Merom will outperform Yonah by a 2-1 margin. Ultra low voltage Merom chips will consume as little as 0.5 W of power, enabling ultra portable laptops to have battery lives in the tens of hours.





    Or it is just misinformation?
  • Reply 18 of 42
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,145member
    PB



    Sounds like misinformation. The Netburst P4 and Yonah are 3 issue cores. Merom will be Intel's first 4 issue core and thus the IPC (instruction per cycle) should improve but I think it's a little bit of a stretch to say Merom will offer a 2:1 advantage. I'm thinking more along the lines of what Telomar has stated. Up to %30 avg for most functions.



    I bet you will see some interesting cache features in Merom. Yonah's shared cache actually has more latency than Dothan/Bania and that can be somewhat ameliorated by more efficient caching and branch prediction.



    I'd love to see a Merom iMac. I guess we'll need to see where Intel prices them to see if they'll work in an iMac.
  • Reply 19 of 42
    Woodcrest can indeed be coupled, i.e. two SMP dualcores = quadcore in the high-end Mac Pro, whereas Conroe cannot (in fact it seems this feature is much more about the Woodcrest chipset rather than the processor itself, so perhaps a Woodcrest chipset could drive two Conroes?)



    But we forget another thing about Conroe vs Woodcrest inside lower-end Mac Pro (one dualcore) : the Front Side Bus.

    - Merom will have a 667 MHz FSB at launch (800 later)

    - Conroe will have a 1067 MHz FSB (1333 later)

    - Woodcrest will have a 1333 FSB (1600 later). And dual FSB with dual Woodcrest.



    But Intel FSBs are quad-pumped, and their real frequency is four times less. This real frequency is the same as the memory controller frequency. So for a 800 MHz FSB, the memory controller is running at 200 MHz, and for a 1067 MHz FSB, the controller is running at 267 MHz. Current Core Duo has only a 167 MHz memory controller. That's not very high for DDR and DDR2 memory (think Intel plans to use DDR3 memory by H2'2007!). That's even a bottleneck.



    Considering current Power Mac G5 have buses half the processor's frequency (a 2.5 GHz G5 has a 1.25 GHz bus) with a high speed interconnect (AMD HyperTransport), and considering integrated memory controller and/or high speed interconnect from Intel (CSI) will not come to market before 2008 or 2009, I bet all Mac Pro models will have Woodcrest (either 1 or 2 dualcores) and no Conroe, because of the memory controller bottleneck, a step backwards from G5. I think Conroe is for iMac.

    Another thing to consider: Woodcrest is a Xeon, and IMHO Power Mac (Mac Pro) are workstations, not common desktop PCs.
  • Reply 20 of 42
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Cosmos 1999

    But Intel FSBs are quad-pumped, and their real frequency is four times less.



    sure the g5 got a good amount of memory bandwidth compared to intels FSBes, but do you really think it's important what frequency the fsb is really running at?





    and i dont really see the point in running the memory controller faster than the memory itself...?
Sign In or Register to comment.