Single Core Towers

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Do you think we will see any single core tower systems? Or is the Mini going to be the only single core machine?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 20
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    We shouldn't see the Core Solos or Core Duos in the Power Mac line. They will use an entirely different processor (or so we hope).
  • Reply 2 of 20
    noah93noah93 Posts: 168member
    I doubt there will be any other towers/desktops using the Solo. The Mini is a 'switcher' computer, and therefor has to be cheaper, hence the Solo. The rest of Apple's desktop lineup is/will use Yonah's [iMac] and Merom/Kentsfield [PM] (I hope). I just do not see room for another Solo. But anyway, that is good news for us.





    - Noah
  • Reply 3 of 20
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,341member
    A single core tower in 2006 is computing suicide.



    Vista's recommended computer specs call for a dual core or dual processor computer. We should expect no less than the same for Leopard.



    The entry mini and macbook will likely be the only single core models and by the end of 2007 you likely won't even have a single core option at all.
  • Reply 4 of 20
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Vista's recommended computer specs call for a dual core or dual processor computer. We should expect no less than the same for Leopard.



    Not really. Leopard's still going to run on a single G3...



    I agree that there will be no PowerMac with single core processor though.
  • Reply 5 of 20
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,341member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by danielctull

    Not really. Leopard's still going to run on a single G3...



    I agree that there will be no PowerMac with single core processor though.






    Yes and Vista will run on a single core processor. However both Apple and Microsoft bump the specs up for their recommended computers. I know the min requirement for XP is 256MB of RAM but God help you if you try that



    Another reason for the lack of single core towers is the assumption that a single core processor is by default cheaper than a dual core. I'm sure it is but probably not as much as people think. Conroe as 65nm occupies roughly the same physical area as a single core P4. Thus, providing Intel doesn't have yield issues I'd expect the actual cost of making Conroes to be fairly close to the P4.
  • Reply 6 of 20
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    The single core tower will never be. I just can't imagine it. With intel releasing Quad core processors in the beginning, or middle of next year I'd bet apple is looking to up the specs of their entire platform. Everything should be dual, and I wouldn't doubt having the equivalent of a CoreOcto in a Mac book Pro in about a year and a half. (all speculative, but possible)



    We should see Merom in the iMac, and MBP soonish, and Woodcrests in the powerMac's.
  • Reply 7 of 20
    macroninmacronin Posts: 1,174member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Another reason for the lack of single core towers is the assumption that a single core processor is by default cheaper than a dual core. I'm sure it is but probably not as much as people think.



    I would think that the single core units are nothing more than dual core units with a faulty core?



    Which might then include an extra process to disable the faulty core?



    So, single core units could actually (from a production POV) "cost more" than a dual core unit?



    I don't think Intel is actually producing single core units, as in units with ONLY a single core from the beginning of production?
  • Reply 8 of 20
    THe powermacs will use Conroe, that is definite. They are all dual core processors. THere maybe a workstation class Mac using the Woodcrest Xeon CPU (or 2 of them more likely) as a direct replacement for the Quad G5
  • Reply 9 of 20
    macroninmacronin Posts: 1,174member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Thereubster

    THe powermacs will use Conroe, that is definite. They are all dual core processors. THere maybe a workstation class Mac using the Woodcrest Xeon CPU (or 2 of them more likely) as a direct replacement for the Quad G5



    Intel classifies the Conroe units as a desktop item? The chipset associated with the Conroe units does not support SMP at all? It also has a slower FSB & max memory speed specs?



    The Woodcrest units are classified as workstation/server items?



    Yohan = Mac mini, MacBook, MacPad mini & MacPad



    Merom = MacBook Pro & MacPad Pro



    Conroe = iMac



    Woodcrest = workstations & servers (what the hell are they gonna call these things??!?)
  • Reply 10 of 20
    Quote:

    Originally posted by MacRonin

    Woodcrest = workstations & servers (what the hell are they gonna call these things??!?)



    Power Mac Pro?
  • Reply 11 of 20
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Thereubster

    THe powermacs will use Conroe, that is definite. They are all dual core processors. THere maybe a workstation class Mac using the Woodcrest Xeon CPU (or 2 of them more likely) as a direct replacement for the Quad G5



    I'm sorry Thereubster, but the PowerMac is not Apples desktop the iMac is. PowerMac according to Apple is a Pro Workstation. It'll be using Woodcrests. Which BTW is the next Processor coming from intel. It's release also coincides with the updated WWDC timeframe. You can expect an announcement, and in all probability a demo of it at WWDC with a version of Leopard running on it.
  • Reply 12 of 20
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ThinkingDifferent

    Power Mac Pro?



    No it wont probably wont say Power. Power = PPC.



    I'm thinking ProMac, ProMacintosh.
  • Reply 13 of 20
    macroninmacronin Posts: 1,174member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by onlooker

    No it wont probably wont say Power. Power = PPC.



    I'm thinking ProMac, ProMacintosh.




    Wasn't there a third-party accessories company named ProMac??!?



    EDIT : (My bad, it was ForMac?)



    I would guess MacPro & MacServe (and MacRAID, bleeh?), as bland as those sound?



    But then, so does MacBook Pro?!



    All Mac, all of the time?!
  • Reply 14 of 20
    for the next couple years there will only be 2 machines apple makes that will be single cpu: the bottom end macbook and the bottom end mini. these are strictly budget conscious moves, and unifying moves (since they'll have the same components).



    everything else will be dual or quad cpu or more. single cpu consumer machines died with the new imac, which are now standard dual core. this is the future and apple wont reverse direction here.



    it is also the future of cpu technology. all vendors are moving towards multiple cores as a solution to moore's law. 8-16 cores may be standard in 5 years.



    there will definitely not be a new single cpu tower system from apple now. the minimum is two cpus, 4 is probable, there's an off chance of 8 cpus at the extreme high end, maybe after they introduce 10.5. you will need the OS update to really take advantage of it, and apple will pitch that angle. in this way, apple will be delivering the future now- with an OS that can handle 4 or more cores efficiently. windows cant and wont as quickly as 10.5, apple will probably stress that fact when they demo their first 8 cpu tower.
  • Reply 15 of 20
    Quote:

    Originally posted by onlooker

    I'm sorry Thereubster, but the PowerMac is not Apples desktop the iMac is. PowerMac according to Apple is a Pro Workstation. It'll be using Woodcrests. Which BTW is the next Processor coming from intel. It's release also coincides with the updated WWDC timeframe. You can expect an announcement, and in all probability a demo of it at WWDC with a version of Leopard running on it.



    yeah fair enough, I'm not going to disagree with your assessment esp. if Woodcrest comes first. Why is that BTW? Is it because Intel is taking such a pounding from AMD in the server market?
  • Reply 16 of 20
    macroninmacronin Posts: 1,174member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Thereubster

    yeah fair enough, I'm not going to disagree with your assessment esp. if Woodcrest comes first. Why is that BTW? Is it because Intel is taking such a pounding from AMD in the server market?



    Or maybe because Apple is content using Core Duos in the iMac for now, and really needs to move the PowerMac & Xserve lines over to Intel ASAP??!?



    Wouldn't be the first time Steve Jobs has pressured a vendor to speed up a certain product release?



    Can you say Motorola & the original G4??!?



    Can you say IBM & the original G5??!?



    Hopefully, third time is a charm??!?



    ;^p
  • Reply 17 of 20
    drboardrboar Posts: 477member
    What (sizable) group would be served by a single CPU tower?

    The light user can get a iMac or minimac.

    The macgamer can get a iMac.

    Prior to iMacs with good GPU gamers had to get a tower even if most games only use one CPU. For them a one CPU tower _was_ a good thing.



    With everyone migrating to multicore (and I assume that games will become more SMP in the future) I see no reason to have less than duals in towers.
  • Reply 18 of 20
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Thereubster

    yeah fair enough, I'm not going to disagree with your assessment esp. if Woodcrest comes first. Why is that BTW? Is it because Intel is taking such a pounding from AMD in the server market?



    I think it's because they are getting more requests for it from the companies that buy from them. Everybody in the PC world want's their highend (which is also the gaming machines) intel pro machines updated to the next best thing. Video pro's, 3D pro's, and Gamers can usually live off the same machines on some levels. Not to forget what you mentioned. Intel needs to do a quick re-establishment of itself in the server market as well. They don't have that much of a drop in sales on the consumer side of things so it's hardly a major concern, but the entire highend has been overcome by AMD. Which is why so many Mac users objected to Apple going exclusive with intel. Personally with what intel has provided for specs on what their past 3 years of R&D has achieved I think they will blow right past AMD performance wise in a short while.



    My 2¢
  • Reply 19 of 20
    macroninmacronin Posts: 1,174member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by onlooker

    Personally with what intel has provided for specs on what their past 3 years of R&D has achieved I think they will blow right past AMD performance wise in a short while.



    Hellz yeah!



    ;^p
  • Reply 20 of 20
    smalmsmalm Posts: 667member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by MacRonin

    Wouldn't be the first time Steve Jobs has pressured a vendor to speed up a certain product release?



    You can only pressure a vendor if you're really a big customer. Apple is not (yet 8) ). But Intel will give Apple whatever Jobs wants - as long as it fits in their own plans. SC Yonah was planned for Q2 introduction - Apple got it immediately.

    Quote:

    Originally posted by Thereubster

    if Woodcrest comes first. Why is that BTW?



    Highest demand, smallest market, highest profit.

    Quote:

    Originally posted by ThinkingDifferent

    Do you think we will see any single core tower systems?



    I think we will see single CPU tower systems but no single core!

    I'm shure before the end of 2006 you won't be able to buy a SC machine from Apple anymore.



    And btw Conroe is really fast!

    They also found out you can put a Merom in a Mac mini!
Sign In or Register to comment.