It seams the transfer speeds are very adequate. My only wish is for apple to offer 10k and 15k RPM drives for their flagship. I know they are less reliable but they sure offer some awesome performance. I noticed the XServe has them.
The 10 and 15k drives are not less reliable, they are actually more reliable in general. I think Franksargeant is the one that dug up a paper that explains the differences between the server drives and the desktop drives. Someone mentioned that typical desktop drives are rated assuming 40hr/week operation, the enterprise drives are rated for non-stop operation. The Raptors do work with Mac Pro, but to get anything faster, you need SAS or SCSI. SAS for Mac Pro is a pretty hard sell.
The quads will take over the dual's prices and the duals will drop in price.
I don't think this is possible. The Mac Pro is already pretty much the cheapest Woodcrest system on the market, and I have not read anything about Woodcrest price drops. A slow Clovertown is about the same price as a 3.0 GHz Woodcrest, so those configurations could be the same price; a fast OctoMac seems like it would certainly cost more than the fastest current Mac Pro.
I don't think this is possible. The Mac Pro is already pretty much the cheapest Woodcrest system on the market, and I have not read anything about Woodcrest price drops. A slow Clovertown is about the same price as a 3.0 GHz Woodcrest, so those configurations could be the same price; a fast OctoMac seems like it would certainly cost more than the fastest current Mac Pro.
Intel is being very aggressive with it's pricing. As I recall, the 4-core chips will cost the same as the 2-core chips. If you recall, Intel did the same thing with CD to C2D. They offered the C2D with a .13GHz speed increase over the CD for the same price.
Intel is being very aggressive with it's pricing. As I recall, the 4-core chips will cost the same as the 2-core chips. If you recall, Intel did the same thing with CD to C2D. They offered the C2D with a .13GHz speed increase over the CD for the same price.
Read the thread from the beginning - pricing was announced by the first poster, and the quad core chips are the same price as the dual core at the next higher clock speed. From earlier, my estimates based on new and old chip pricing:
Read the thread from the beginning - pricing was announced by the first poster, and the quad core chips are the same price as the dual core at the next higher clock speed. From earlier, my estimates based on new and old chip pricing:
o Two 2.0 GHz dual core [subtract $299]
o Two 2.66 GHz dual core
o Two 2.0 GHz quad core
o Two 3.0 GHz dual core [add $799]
o Two 2.33 GHz quad core [add $799]
o Two 2.66 GHz quad core [add $1999]
I would expect that there be only three options, at most, maybe four. Apple has only offered three or four speed options for the towers that I remember. That said. I've only been watching Apple from the time of the original G5.
I would expect that there be only three options, at most, maybe four. Apple has only offered three or four speed options for the towers that I remember. That said. I've only been watching Apple from the time of the original G5.
I agree - Apple will only offer about four of the above, but I have no way of guessing which ones. Any removal would be missed by somebody.
I would expect that there be only three options, at most, maybe four. Apple has only offered three or four speed options for the towers that I remember. That said. I've only been watching Apple from the time of the original G5.
This may be true, but they could also list the Mac Pro with multiple base configurations, like with the Mac Mini, White MacBook and 17" iMac.
Apple has some possible options:
1) It could offer 2 base configurations for the Mac Pro. One being a Mac Pro Quad and the other a Mac Pro Octo (as listed below). This only works if Apple foresees consistent increases of multiple cores.
MAC PRO QUAD (Woodcrest):
- Two 2.00GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon ($316x2) [Mac Pro for $2200]
- Two 2.66GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon ($690x2) [Mac Pro for $2499]
- Two 3.0GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon ($851x2) [Mac Pro for $3298]
MAC PRO OCTO (Clovertown):
- Two 1.86GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon ($690x2) [Mac Pro for $2499]
- Two 2.33GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon ($851x2) [Mac Pro for $3298]
- Two 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon ($1172x2) [Mac Pro for $3998]
2) Apple could remove the Dual Core Woodcrests from the lineup. This decision depends mainly on how well the 2.33GHz Mac Pro (Woodcrest) is currently selling. If the low end Mac Pro isn't selling well, compared to the 2.66 and 3.0GHz offerings, then Apple may just pull the Woodcrest altogether in favor of Clovertown. This way, Apple could still advertise 8-cores with a better performance, all while maintaining the same initial, pre-configuration price point for the Mac Pro.
3) If the 2.33GHz Mac Pro (Woodcrest) is a top seller of the three, then Apple may keep it in the lineup at the current price point while replacing the other two Woodcrest offerings with the Clovertown equivalent of the same price (as seen below).
MAC PRO:
- Two 2.00GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon ($316x2) [Mac Pro for $2200]
- Two 1.86GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon ($690x2) [Mac Pro for $2499]
- Two 2.33GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon ($851x2) [Mac Pro for $3298]
- Two 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon ($1172x2) [Mac Pro for $3998]
- Two 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon ($1172x2) [Mac Pro for $3998
I think that your price on the top model is a little light (by $500 or so), because you didn't add in any margin for Apple on the processors - look at the old pricing, each successive model is more costly than the previous (and this price difference is more than the difference between the processor costs).
With your pricing, Apple would make more money on the low end models than the high end (the dollar value margin would be the same, percentage margin would be lower, but Apple would be carrying more inventory value so the total profit would be less).
I think that your price on the top model is a little light (by $500 or so), because you didn't add in any margin for Apple on the processors - look at the old pricing, each successive model is more costly than the previous (and this price difference is more than the difference between the processor costs).
With your pricing, Apple would make more money on the low end models than the high end (the dollar value margin would be the same, percentage margin would be lower, but Apple would be carrying more inventory value so the total profit would be less).
I thought about that, but decided to keep it low for two reasons:
2) Apple could remove the Dual Core Woodcrests from the lineup. This decision depends mainly on how well the 2.33GHz Mac Pro (Woodcrest) is currently selling. ..snip..]
Don't you mean: 2.0GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon, not 2.33GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon?
Well I've been doing some real space tripping over at Deoxy after googling "eight brains" after starting to look for an image of an octopus for this thread.
I mean if Apple does introduce an 8-core Mac Pro model, will it be branded OctoPro, OctoMac, or just a new Mac Pro model (no unique name)?
I don't know, but Mac Pro Octave has a certain ring to it!
Why is that? Octo sounds pretty natural to me. After all, it does mean 8 and comes in order: quad, penta, hex, sept, oct*.
But what do we call the 16 core chips? Hextane** or Hexten?
*Yes, we root of those month names are Greek, but originally the calendar year started in March. That is why February has the shortest days and get the leap year day. I'm glad I don't have to wait until the 2nd Tuesday in March for MWSF.
** Taken from the word "Octane" which refers to the 18 hydrocarbon isomers.
So I imagine that the new processor lineup will be like this:
o Two 2.0 GHz dual core [subtract $299]
o Two 2.66 GHz dual core
o Two 2.0 GHz quad core
o Two 3.0 GHz dual core [add $799]
o Two 2.33 GHz quad core [add $799]
o Two 2.66 GHz quad core [add $1999] (i.e. just low enough to make it not worth while to buy the 2.0GHz and swap processors)
Apple's prices are significantly less than I expected - they must be getting the processors for much less than the originally quoted Appleinsider price of $1172 for the 2.66GHz variant.
We've been waiting since november and all that showed up was a new super high end option with two 3ghz quad core chips. No 2.0, 2.33, or 2.66ghz quad core options. Nothing else updated.
We've been waiting since november and all that showed up was a new super high end option with two 3ghz quad core chips. No 2.0, 2.33, or 2.66ghz quad core options. Nothing else updated.
Yeah, why aren't there more price cuts? No octo option on the UK site either and I don't think the Cinema display price drop is there yet either.
Comments
http://news.softpedia.com/news/INTEL...ts-42683.shtml
http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/itnews.php?...me=0&endtime=0
The quads will take over the dual's prices and the duals will drop in price.
It seams the transfer speeds are very adequate. My only wish is for apple to offer 10k and 15k RPM drives for their flagship. I know they are less reliable but they sure offer some awesome performance. I noticed the XServe has them.
The 10 and 15k drives are not less reliable, they are actually more reliable in general. I think Franksargeant is the one that dug up a paper that explains the differences between the server drives and the desktop drives. Someone mentioned that typical desktop drives are rated assuming 40hr/week operation, the enterprise drives are rated for non-stop operation. The Raptors do work with Mac Pro, but to get anything faster, you need SAS or SCSI. SAS for Mac Pro is a pretty hard sell.
The quads will take over the dual's prices and the duals will drop in price.
I don't think this is possible. The Mac Pro is already pretty much the cheapest Woodcrest system on the market, and I have not read anything about Woodcrest price drops. A slow Clovertown is about the same price as a 3.0 GHz Woodcrest, so those configurations could be the same price; a fast OctoMac seems like it would certainly cost more than the fastest current Mac Pro.
I don't think this is possible. The Mac Pro is already pretty much the cheapest Woodcrest system on the market, and I have not read anything about Woodcrest price drops. A slow Clovertown is about the same price as a 3.0 GHz Woodcrest, so those configurations could be the same price; a fast OctoMac seems like it would certainly cost more than the fastest current Mac Pro.
Intel is being very aggressive with it's pricing. As I recall, the 4-core chips will cost the same as the 2-core chips. If you recall, Intel did the same thing with CD to C2D. They offered the C2D with a .13GHz speed increase over the CD for the same price.
Intel is being very aggressive with it's pricing. As I recall, the 4-core chips will cost the same as the 2-core chips. If you recall, Intel did the same thing with CD to C2D. They offered the C2D with a .13GHz speed increase over the CD for the same price.
Read the thread from the beginning - pricing was announced by the first poster, and the quad core chips are the same price as the dual core at the next higher clock speed. From earlier, my estimates based on new and old chip pricing:
o Two 2.0 GHz dual core [subtract $299]
o Two 2.66 GHz dual core
o Two 2.0 GHz quad core
o Two 3.0 GHz dual core [add $799]
o Two 2.33 GHz quad core [add $799]
o Two 2.66 GHz quad core [add $1999]
Read the thread from the beginning - pricing was announced by the first poster, and the quad core chips are the same price as the dual core at the next higher clock speed. From earlier, my estimates based on new and old chip pricing:
o Two 2.0 GHz dual core [subtract $299]
o Two 2.66 GHz dual core
o Two 2.0 GHz quad core
o Two 3.0 GHz dual core [add $799]
o Two 2.33 GHz quad core [add $799]
o Two 2.66 GHz quad core [add $1999]
I would expect that there be only three options, at most, maybe four. Apple has only offered three or four speed options for the towers that I remember. That said. I've only been watching Apple from the time of the original G5.
I would expect that there be only three options, at most, maybe four. Apple has only offered three or four speed options for the towers that I remember. That said. I've only been watching Apple from the time of the original G5.
I agree - Apple will only offer about four of the above, but I have no way of guessing which ones. Any removal would be missed by somebody.
I would expect that there be only three options, at most, maybe four. Apple has only offered three or four speed options for the towers that I remember. That said. I've only been watching Apple from the time of the original G5.
This may be true, but they could also list the Mac Pro with multiple base configurations, like with the Mac Mini, White MacBook and 17" iMac.
Apple has some possible options: PS: Pricing from Anandtech.
- Two 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon ($1172x2) [Mac Pro for $3998
I think that your price on the top model is a little light (by $500 or so), because you didn't add in any margin for Apple on the processors - look at the old pricing, each successive model is more costly than the previous (and this price difference is more than the difference between the processor costs).
With your pricing, Apple would make more money on the low end models than the high end (the dollar value margin would be the same, percentage margin would be lower, but Apple would be carrying more inventory value so the total profit would be less).
I think that your price on the top model is a little light (by $500 or so), because you didn't add in any margin for Apple on the processors - look at the old pricing, each successive model is more costly than the previous (and this price difference is more than the difference between the processor costs).
With your pricing, Apple would make more money on the low end models than the high end (the dollar value margin would be the same, percentage margin would be lower, but Apple would be carrying more inventory value so the total profit would be less).
I thought about that, but decided to keep it low for two reasons:
1) Wishful thinking
2) Would anyone even notice?
...snip.....
2) Apple could remove the Dual Core Woodcrests from the lineup. This decision depends mainly on how well the 2.33GHz Mac Pro (Woodcrest) is currently selling. ..snip..]
Don't you mean: 2.0GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon, not 2.33GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon?
Don't you mean: 2.0GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon, not 2.33GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon?
Yes I do. Thanks.
note: Original post edited to reflect corrections.
Well I've been doing some real space tripping over at Deoxy after googling "eight brains" after starting to look for an image of an octopus for this thread.
I mean if Apple does introduce an 8-core Mac Pro model, will it be branded OctoPro, OctoMac, or just a new Mac Pro model (no unique name)?
I don't know, but Mac Pro Octave has a certain ring to it!
I mean if Apple does introduce an 8-core Mac Pro model, will it be branded OctoPro, OctoMac, or just a new Mac Pro model (no unique name)?
It will probably be referred to as a Mac Pro Octo--as opposed to a Mac Pro Quad--but the machine name will certainly remain Mac Pro.
Octo sounds kinda lame.
Mac Pro Octane
Mac Pro Octüber
Mac Pro 8
Octo sounds kinda lame.
Why is that? Octo sounds pretty natural to me. After all, it does mean 8 and comes in order: quad, penta, hex, sept, oct*.
But what do we call the 16 core chips? Hextane** or Hexten?
*Yes, we root of those month names are Greek, but originally the calendar year started in March. That is why February has the shortest days and get the leap year day. I'm glad I don't have to wait until the 2nd Tuesday in March for MWSF.
** Taken from the word "Octane" which refers to the 18 hydrocarbon isomers.
At launch, the prices were:
3GHz $850, 2.66 GHz $700, 2.33GHz $470, 2.0GHz $330, 1.83GHz $270 and 1.6GHz $230.
http://www.theinquirer.org/default.aspx?article=29510
So I imagine that the new processor lineup will be like this:
o Two 2.0 GHz dual core [subtract $299]
o Two 2.66 GHz dual core
o Two 2.0 GHz quad core
o Two 3.0 GHz dual core [add $799]
o Two 2.33 GHz quad core [add $799]
o Two 2.66 GHz quad core [add $1999] (i.e. just low enough to make it not worth while to buy the 2.0GHz and swap processors)
Apple's prices are significantly less than I expected - they must be getting the processors for much less than the originally quoted Appleinsider price of $1172 for the 2.66GHz variant.
We've been waiting since november and all that showed up was a new super high end option with two 3ghz quad core chips. No 2.0, 2.33, or 2.66ghz quad core options. Nothing else updated.
Yeah, why aren't there more price cuts? No octo option on the UK site either and I don't think the Cinema display price drop is there yet either.
The waiting continues...