I like what you are thinking, but I say they need a version of the nVidia QuadroFX4500 X2, and they need to add in the SDI for viewing Shake comps?
;^p
By then I'm thinking there will be a QuadroFX 5500 X2. But if the rumor melgross posted turns out to be true that may be our best option, but I hope the rumor is false.
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
The only problem is that if you're thinking SLI, it may not happen.
While we don't know what is up Apple's and Intel's sleeves, if the Mac Pro uses an Intel chipset, which it most assuredly will, SLI could be out of the question. If it won't work with Conroe, why should it work with Woodcrest?
Well, it won't be long before we find out.
We'll have to see if this rumor is merely - hopefully just a rumor. I'd think there would be no problem with nvidia licensing the spec to Apple just for Apple's motherboard. Which could actually happen. Wouldn't that be the bomb if nvidia only licensed the SLI spec to intel for Apple's motherboard only. lol. That would be one hell of another feather in Apples cap to sell PC's wouldn't it. I doubt that last part will happen though.
In all honesty though does nvidia actually make a motherboard, or do others license the technology? Because Tyan has been selling 16x dual lane full speed PCI-E SLI board for over a year, and it's not carbon copy of anyone else's Nforce SLI board.
I really don't think Apple is going to have a SLI board.
This is Apple we're talking about. They are about minimalism when it's appropriate. How many people would actually utilize dual cards in a Mac Pro?
Is this number high enough to warrant the extra engineering? They extra power and cooling requirements?
Even poring over Nvidia's site I see that SLI is still aimed at gaming. Personally I'm just not seeing where it's a "must have" feature for a professional.
I really don't think Apple is going to have a SLI board.
This is Apple we're talking about. They are about minimalism when it's appropriate. How many people would actually utilize dual cards in a Mac Pro?
Is this number high enough to warrant the extra engineering? They extra power and cooling requirements?
Even poring over Nvidia's site I see that SLI is still aimed at gaming. Personally I'm just not seeing where it's a "must have" feature for a professional.
Gamers loved the idea of SLI, and attached themselves to it immediately, and like any trend it sold to the masses, but it's still 2D Application compliant, with regular cards, and QuadroFX compliant for rendering every other frame per card in 3D view.
Fact is that many of the people that will use bootcamp will be using it for gaming, so there is definitely interest in it, and for Apple to have dual 16x PCI-E lanes does not mean that you need to use them both for graphics cards. If your going to have the PCI-E lanes there anyway - so why not? It's definitely not going to decrease sales, but it could help them, and there are those that do want to use it.
But if that rumor is true we are out of luck regardless.
Fact is that many of the people that will use bootcamp will be using it for gaming,
Face it: for better or worse, Apple doesn't give a shit for Mac Pro users that want to play games. The Mac Pro is, in Apple's eyes, purely creative high-end workstation.
Face it: for better or worse, Apple doesn't give a shit for Mac Pro users that want to play games. The Mac Pro is, in Apple's eyes, purely creative high-end workstation.
Hogwash.. Apple is in it for sales. Bootcamp gives them many more avenues to pursue, and capitalize on.
Your comment on gamers don't buy Mac Pro's is ridiculous. Nobody has ever bought a Mac Pro there has never been one. But bootcamp ushers in a whole new era of uses for the Mac workstation. Alienware is the perfect example of this. Not only did they make an incredible gaming machine, but they also competed with BOXX with 3D workstations all in one system.
You can hardly compare a old mac without windows, and windows games availability to a new one, and say people don't buy them, because there is no data on that yet, and you don't even have a rounded percentile of Mac users that have installed windows for gaming let alone PC users that bought Mac's so they could. Try your story after next years WWDC. If you can.
I did see in the Inquirer article that the intel chipsets do support ATI's equivalent, so maybe there'll be a dual-ATI option instead. I know that currently NVidia seem to have the edge on top end cards, but is it really so much that a dual-Radeon Xwhatever will be a disappointment?
Also, does the one slot, dual card thing that's just been released by NVidia need SLI on the mobo?
Also, does the one slot, dual card thing that's just been released by NVidia need SLI on the mobo?
Nope it should work in any PCI-Express 16x slot. This is the solution that I believe makes the most sense. If you need SLI then you have the 7950gx2.
Apple will most likely use the Intel 5000x motherboards slightly modified. Intel doesn't have dual 16x slots. It's hard to justify when predominantly your workstations are going to ship with a Quadro FX card.
Hogwash.. Apple is in it for sales. Bootcamp gives them many more avenues to pursue, and capitalize on.
Nobody would disagree with that.
Quote:
Your comment on gamers don't buy Mac Pro's is ridiculous.
Is it?
Quote:
But bootcamp ushers in a whole new era of uses for the Mac workstation. Alienware is the perfect example of this. Not only did they make an incredible gaming machine, but they also competed with BOXX with 3D workstations all in one system.
You don't really want to compare Alienware with Apple? You don't really want Apple to inherit any of Alienware's reputation?
Onlooker wins, Chucker. The Mac Pro is a high-end boutique PC like any other now, albeit with the ability to run Mac OS X. Other than that, it is just like a boutique PC like Alienware, or Falcon Northwest, or Boxx: it's higher-than-sum-of-parts priced, has a pretty polished appearance, and maybe has some out-of-the-box overclocking.
But let's admit it: Macs are PCs now, hardware-wise. Workstations play games extremely well, one could even say that gaming systems are simply overhyped workstations hardware-wise.
Basically, there's absolutely no reason to believe that it won't be an excellent gaming PC. Why? Because it's a PC. And as we all know, PCs play games pretty damned well.
End of story.
A lot of people think that "gaming machines" are something special. All they are, are computers with performance components and an above-average graphics card. This is what the Mac Pro is set to be, and as we've seen with the iMac G5 and Macbook Pro, Apple is using standard PC graphics cards, and standard Windows drivers for Bootcamp. So 1) there's no excuse for Apple to play the insanity-pricing game on graphics cards again 2) if they don't play stupid tricks, graphics cards from the off-the-shelf PC world should be usable and 3) there should be great Windows performance.
Onlooker wins, Chucker. The Mac Pro is a high-end boutique PC like any other now, albeit with the ability to run Mac OS X. Other than that, it is just like a boutique PC like Alienware, or Falcon Northwest, or Boxx: it's higher-than-sum-of-parts priced, has a pretty polished appearance, and maybe has some out-of-the-box overclocking.
I don't disagree with any of that.
Quote:
But let's admit it: Macs are PCs now, hardware-wise. Workstations play games extremely well, one could even say that gaming systems are simply overhyped workstations hardware-wise.
But nobody buys a workstation for the main (let alone sole!) purpose of gaming. Secondary purpose? Sure, why not. I do gaming on my MacBook Pro. I have Boot Camp set up mainly for that; most other Windows stuff can be done more comfortably in Parallels (aside from somewhat lacking RAM).
My point is not that Apple doesn't want people buying Mac Pros for this. Obviously they know very well that many are going to (ab)use Mac Pros (or any other Intel mac, for that matter) to play games on. Or that people are going to put random graphics cards rigs in. Or waste their money on overclocking or other such nonsense.
My point is that they probably won't advertise that. Not because they don't want to piss of Aspyr (they probably couldn't care less), but because they would represent a cliché that they don't want themselves in.
Quote:
Basically, there's absolutely no reason to believe that it won't be an excellent gaming PC. Why? Because it's a PC. And as we all know, PCs play games pretty damned well.
End of story.
I don't disagree with any of that either.
For reference, here's what onlooker quoted from my original post:
Quote:
Gamers don't buy Mac Pros.
Face it: for better or worse, Apple doesn't give a shit for Mac Pro users that want to play games. The Mac Pro is, in Apple's eyes, purely creative high-end workstation.
Nowhere am I implying that Apple has anything against people playing games on Mac Pros. Or anything against people buying Mac Pros mainly to play games on. But the latter idea seems asinine to me, as Apple's hardware simply isn't suited for that*, and the former idea, while probably quite common realistically, isn't one that Apple cares for either way. They won't do anything against it, but they (probably) won't encourage it or advertise it either.
Simply put, there's not gonna be a "Mac Pro Quake 5 LOLWTFBBQ 3D Live! BETTER GRAPHICS SLI CROSSFIRE PLUS EXTREME Edition". Ever.
*) Because its components are comparably expensive for typical gamer's gear (which is usually more optimized towards raw performance, not detailed quality), and because a lot of expandability won't be there.
Nope it should work in any PCI-Express 16x slot. This is the solution that I believe makes the most sense. If you need SLI then you have the 7950gx2.
Apple will most likely use the Intel 5000x motherboards slightly modified. Intel doesn't have dual 16x slots. It's hard to justify when predominantly your workstations are going to ship with a Quadro FX card.
My thinking is that I don't think Apples motherboard is going to be identically spec'd with the intel motherboard because that would essentially give all PC's the ability to install OS X on a moderately hacked version of one #1, and #2 There is just a fat chance, actually slim chance that Apple will be using the standard intel board. The Chipset will be the same, or similar, but there will differences, and probably some mechanism that will keep OS X on Macs, and Macs alone. Apple also has always had a great relationship with Nvidia, and just to emphasize how great Apple feels about them they did build The Quadro FX (Finally) for the Mac platform. #3 Apple always goes with the current leader for the workstations (Nvidia) and uses who ever is trailing (ATI) in their laptops. It keeps the relationship with both parties current, open, and in good standing. #4 I expect options on the cards like last time. Apple wont just use the QuaroFX. THere will most assuredly be options for other less expensive cards.
Apple always goes with the current leader for the workstations (Nvidia) and uses who ever is trailing (ATI) in their laptops.
I think that's mostly coincidence. Mobility Radeons right now are simply more fit for Apple's laptops; that is, they may not be high-performance, but low-power/low-heat output. nVidia GeForce Gos hardly ever fit that bill.
*) Because its components are comparably expensive for typical gamer's gear (which is usually more optimized towards raw performance, not detailed quality)
I was going to make a real reply to your post, but then I saw that, and thought, man, this guy really has no clue what he's talking about.
Some of us older folks have followed Apple before the Macintosh even existed.
At times Apple would offer cursory support for gaming but it always felt like a "back burner" thing. We remember the game sprockets that eventually got old and decrepit. Thus when Chucker says the Mac Pro isn't made for gamers he's right. Apple isn't going to prevent gaming but they don't exactly encourage it either.
Bootcamp is going to be our only salvation here for the time being. With that in mind I find that two slot SLI in a Mac Pro has about a %25 chance of being in the computer. But even without that we'll still be able to game. I just don't expect Quad SLI Mac systems to be blasting through games. Reality bites sometimes.
Oh wait, you mean to encourage gaming in Mac OS X? I meant in Windows. Few people are going to game in OS X ever again with a nicely specced Mac Pro. Mac OS X isn't really made for gaming; Windows is. The Mac Pro is set to be a boutique PC that runs Windows and its games, no doubt just as quickly as a PC with the same motherboard. This is not Apple handing out money begging developers to make games for OS X; it's Apple saying "you can install Windows on a Mac, and it will run your games incredibly well because the Mac Pro is a high-end PC".
Comments
Originally posted by MacRonin
I like what you are thinking, but I say they need a version of the nVidia QuadroFX4500 X2, and they need to add in the SDI for viewing Shake comps?
;^p
By then I'm thinking there will be a QuadroFX 5500 X2.
Originally posted by melgross
The only problem is that if you're thinking SLI, it may not happen.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=32523
While we don't know what is up Apple's and Intel's sleeves, if the Mac Pro uses an Intel chipset, which it most assuredly will, SLI could be out of the question. If it won't work with Conroe, why should it work with Woodcrest?
Well, it won't be long before we find out.
We'll have to see if this rumor is merely - hopefully just a rumor. I'd think there would be no problem with nvidia licensing the spec to Apple just for Apple's motherboard. Which could actually happen. Wouldn't that be the bomb if nvidia only licensed the SLI spec to intel for Apple's motherboard only. lol. That would be one hell of another feather in Apples cap to sell PC's wouldn't it.
In all honesty though does nvidia actually make a motherboard, or do others license the technology? Because Tyan has been selling 16x dual lane full speed PCI-E SLI board for over a year, and it's not carbon copy of anyone else's Nforce SLI board.
This is Apple we're talking about. They are about minimalism when it's appropriate. How many people would actually utilize dual cards in a Mac Pro?
Is this number high enough to warrant the extra engineering? They extra power and cooling requirements?
Even poring over Nvidia's site I see that SLI is still aimed at gaming. Personally I'm just not seeing where it's a "must have" feature for a professional.
Originally posted by hmurchison
I really don't think Apple is going to have a SLI board.
This is Apple we're talking about. They are about minimalism when it's appropriate. How many people would actually utilize dual cards in a Mac Pro?
Is this number high enough to warrant the extra engineering? They extra power and cooling requirements?
Even poring over Nvidia's site I see that SLI is still aimed at gaming. Personally I'm just not seeing where it's a "must have" feature for a professional.
Gamers loved the idea of SLI, and attached themselves to it immediately, and like any trend it sold to the masses, but it's still 2D Application compliant, with regular cards, and QuadroFX compliant for rendering every other frame per card in 3D view.
Fact is that many of the people that will use bootcamp will be using it for gaming, so there is definitely interest in it, and for Apple to have dual 16x PCI-E lanes does not mean that you need to use them both for graphics cards. If your going to have the PCI-E lanes there anyway - so why not? It's definitely not going to decrease sales, but it could help them, and there are those that do want to use it.
But if that rumor is true we are out of luck regardless.
Originally posted by onlooker
Gamers loved the idea of SLI,
Gamers don't buy Mac Pros.
Fact is that many of the people that will use bootcamp will be using it for gaming,
Face it: for better or worse, Apple doesn't give a shit for Mac Pro users that want to play games. The Mac Pro is, in Apple's eyes, purely creative high-end workstation.
Originally posted by Chucker
Gamers don't buy Mac Pros.
Face it: for better or worse, Apple doesn't give a shit for Mac Pro users that want to play games. The Mac Pro is, in Apple's eyes, purely creative high-end workstation.
Hogwash.. Apple is in it for sales. Bootcamp gives them many more avenues to pursue, and capitalize on.
Your comment on gamers don't buy Mac Pro's is ridiculous. Nobody has ever bought a Mac Pro there has never been one. But bootcamp ushers in a whole new era of uses for the Mac workstation. Alienware is the perfect example of this. Not only did they make an incredible gaming machine, but they also competed with BOXX with 3D workstations all in one system.
You can hardly compare a old mac without windows, and windows games availability to a new one, and say people don't buy them, because there is no data on that yet, and you don't even have a rounded percentile of Mac users that have installed windows for gaming let alone PC users that bought Mac's so they could. Try your story after next years WWDC. If you can.
Also, does the one slot, dual card thing that's just been released by NVidia need SLI on the mobo?
David
Also, does the one slot, dual card thing that's just been released by NVidia need SLI on the mobo?
Nope it should work in any PCI-Express 16x slot. This is the solution that I believe makes the most sense. If you need SLI then you have the 7950gx2.
Apple will most likely use the Intel 5000x motherboards slightly modified. Intel doesn't have dual 16x slots. It's hard to justify when predominantly your workstations are going to ship with a Quadro FX card.
Originally posted by onlooker
Hogwash.. Apple is in it for sales. Bootcamp gives them many more avenues to pursue, and capitalize on.
Nobody would disagree with that.
Your comment on gamers don't buy Mac Pro's is ridiculous.
Is it?
But bootcamp ushers in a whole new era of uses for the Mac workstation. Alienware is the perfect example of this. Not only did they make an incredible gaming machine, but they also competed with BOXX with 3D workstations all in one system.
You don't really want to compare Alienware with Apple? You don't really want Apple to inherit any of Alienware's reputation?
Try your story after next years WWDC. If you can.
I'll call your cell.
But let's admit it: Macs are PCs now, hardware-wise. Workstations play games extremely well, one could even say that gaming systems are simply overhyped workstations hardware-wise.
Basically, there's absolutely no reason to believe that it won't be an excellent gaming PC. Why? Because it's a PC. And as we all know, PCs play games pretty damned well.
End of story.
A lot of people think that "gaming machines" are something special. All they are, are computers with performance components and an above-average graphics card. This is what the Mac Pro is set to be, and as we've seen with the iMac G5 and Macbook Pro, Apple is using standard PC graphics cards, and standard Windows drivers for Bootcamp. So 1) there's no excuse for Apple to play the insanity-pricing game on graphics cards again 2) if they don't play stupid tricks, graphics cards from the off-the-shelf PC world should be usable and 3) there should be great Windows performance.
Originally posted by Placebo
Onlooker wins, Chucker. The Mac Pro is a high-end boutique PC like any other now, albeit with the ability to run Mac OS X. Other than that, it is just like a boutique PC like Alienware, or Falcon Northwest, or Boxx: it's higher-than-sum-of-parts priced, has a pretty polished appearance, and maybe has some out-of-the-box overclocking.
I don't disagree with any of that.
But let's admit it: Macs are PCs now, hardware-wise. Workstations play games extremely well, one could even say that gaming systems are simply overhyped workstations hardware-wise.
But nobody buys a workstation for the main (let alone sole!) purpose of gaming. Secondary purpose? Sure, why not. I do gaming on my MacBook Pro. I have Boot Camp set up mainly for that; most other Windows stuff can be done more comfortably in Parallels (aside from somewhat lacking RAM).
My point is not that Apple doesn't want people buying Mac Pros for this. Obviously they know very well that many are going to (ab)use Mac Pros (or any other Intel mac, for that matter) to play games on. Or that people are going to put random graphics cards rigs in. Or waste their money on overclocking or other such nonsense.
My point is that they probably won't advertise that. Not because they don't want to piss of Aspyr (they probably couldn't care less), but because they would represent a cliché that they don't want themselves in.
Basically, there's absolutely no reason to believe that it won't be an excellent gaming PC. Why? Because it's a PC. And as we all know, PCs play games pretty damned well.
End of story.
I don't disagree with any of that either.
For reference, here's what onlooker quoted from my original post:
Gamers don't buy Mac Pros.
Face it: for better or worse, Apple doesn't give a shit for Mac Pro users that want to play games. The Mac Pro is, in Apple's eyes, purely creative high-end workstation.
Nowhere am I implying that Apple has anything against people playing games on Mac Pros. Or anything against people buying Mac Pros mainly to play games on. But the latter idea seems asinine to me, as Apple's hardware simply isn't suited for that*, and the former idea, while probably quite common realistically, isn't one that Apple cares for either way. They won't do anything against it, but they (probably) won't encourage it or advertise it either.
Simply put, there's not gonna be a "Mac Pro Quake 5 LOLWTFBBQ 3D Live! BETTER GRAPHICS SLI CROSSFIRE PLUS EXTREME Edition". Ever.
*) Because its components are comparably expensive for typical gamer's gear (which is usually more optimized towards raw performance, not detailed quality), and because a lot of expandability won't be there.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Nope it should work in any PCI-Express 16x slot. This is the solution that I believe makes the most sense. If you need SLI then you have the 7950gx2.
Apple will most likely use the Intel 5000x motherboards slightly modified. Intel doesn't have dual 16x slots. It's hard to justify when predominantly your workstations are going to ship with a Quadro FX card.
My thinking is that I don't think Apples motherboard is going to be identically spec'd with the intel motherboard because that would essentially give all PC's the ability to install OS X on a moderately hacked version of one #1, and #2 There is just a fat chance, actually slim chance that Apple will be using the standard intel board. The Chipset will be the same, or similar, but there will differences, and probably some mechanism that will keep OS X on Macs, and Macs alone. Apple also has always had a great relationship with Nvidia, and just to emphasize how great Apple feels about them they did build The Quadro FX (Finally) for the Mac platform. #3 Apple always goes with the current leader for the workstations (Nvidia) and uses who ever is trailing (ATI) in their laptops. It keeps the relationship with both parties current, open, and in good standing. #4 I expect options on the cards like last time. Apple wont just use the QuaroFX. THere will most assuredly be options for other less expensive cards.
Originally posted by onlooker
Apple always goes with the current leader for the workstations (Nvidia) and uses who ever is trailing (ATI) in their laptops.
I think that's mostly coincidence. Mobility Radeons right now are simply more fit for Apple's laptops; that is, they may not be high-performance, but low-power/low-heat output. nVidia GeForce Gos hardly ever fit that bill.
Originally posted by Chucker
*) Because its components are comparably expensive for typical gamer's gear (which is usually more optimized towards raw performance, not detailed quality)
I was going to make a real reply to your post, but then I saw that, and thought, man, this guy really has no clue what he's talking about.
Originally posted by Placebo
I was going to make a real reply to your post, but then I saw that, and thought, man, this guy really has no clue what he's talking about.
Now you finally know how I feel.
Originally posted by Chucker
Now you finally know how I feel.
No, that would be if I felt unable to think critically and especially prone to generalization.
Originally posted by Placebo
No, that would be if I felt unable to think critically and especialy prone to generalization.
I'm not interested in this petty talk. You're either going to respond to my post, or forget about it.
Some of us older folks have followed Apple before the Macintosh even existed.
At times Apple would offer cursory support for gaming but it always felt like a "back burner" thing. We remember the game sprockets that eventually got old and decrepit. Thus when Chucker says the Mac Pro isn't made for gamers he's right. Apple isn't going to prevent gaming but they don't exactly encourage it either.
Bootcamp is going to be our only salvation here for the time being. With that in mind I find that two slot SLI in a Mac Pro has about a %25 chance of being in the computer. But even without that we'll still be able to game. I just don't expect Quad SLI Mac systems to be blasting through games. Reality bites sometimes.