I don't know whether it's more proper to start a new thread to ask this question or if I'm hijacking this thread by asking it here, so please forgive me.
Does Intel's forthcoming Bearlake chipset sound like anything that may appear in the new Mac Pros that will be announced on or before Sunday, April 15?
Sincerely,
Jaddie
Biggest change with bearlake is the 1333 fsb right? Well the apple mac pros already have a 1333 fsb.... unless someone cares to enlighten me further.
Moreover, these (Bearlake) haven't even been released yet, and apple generally lags a 1-2m behind the chip release to ensure system stability etc, etc.... so yea my answer is ... Nope.
Biggest change with bearlake is the 1333 fsb right? Well the apple mac pros already have a 1333 fsb.... unless someone cares to enlighten me further.
Moreover, these (Bearlake) haven't even been released yet, and apple generally lags a 1-2m behind the chip release to ensure system stability etc, etc.... so yea my answer is ... Nope.
cheers.
Yes they have a 1333 MHz FSB already. What they don't have is RAM fast enough to take advantage of it so maybe, underscore maybe, we will see faster RAM on a refresh, but other than that I don't see what they could offer us in basic architecture.
I think you are assuming some things here that may or may not be true: specifically that there is a Mac Pro announcement on or before April 15th.
Unless you have something to share with us?????
I don't think that's much of an assumption, though, yes, it's an assumption nonetheless. I also assume the sun will rise tomorrow.
The Mac Pro is due for an update, both Apple and Adobe have big announcement events that'll take place in the next few weeks (April 15 and March 27, respectively), and Apple has cited pent-up demand for the Mac Pro relative to the impending release of Creative Suite 3. It's not much of a leap to say that new Mac Pros will be announced soon.
I'm hoping we get something that's faster than what the current Mac Pros offer, though anything will be faster than my main Mac, which is a single-processor 733MHz G4 with 1.25GB of memory. The tests I've seen show that the 2.66GHz quad-core processors, when dropped into the current Mac Pros, are actually a little slower at most things than the 3GHz dual-core processors.
I'm hoping we get something that's faster than what the current Mac Pros offer, though anything will be faster than my main Mac, which is a single-processor 733MHz G4 with 1.25GB of memory. The tests I've seen show that the 2.66GHz quad-core processors, when dropped into the current Mac Pros, are actually a little slower at most things than the 3GHz dual-core processors.
[/QUOTE]
What are you looking for? Do you want more cores or more ghz? You need to decide what will give you what you need. You probably wont see more cores and higher clock speeds until next year when Penryns hit the street in numbers. I would probably go for the extra cores. Eventually the software will catch up to take advantage of all the cores.
Photoshop performance, specifically when editing multi-layer, 16-bit files that begin with at least 8.2 megapixels of data. I want excellent Photoshop performance even while iTunes is playing and Safari and Entourage are running in the background.
My typical edited master file (no image resizing) weighs around 125MB. It takes my current six-year-old machine--that was the fastest Mac money could buy back then--takes nearly a full minute to save these files. I like to save often, but my pain/patience threshold just can't take these delays.
(Maybe Photoshop just isn't very well optimized for 16-bit editing. If I convert the image to 8-bit mode prior to saving, the file will save in less than ten seconds.)
(My current machine has only 1.25GB of memory, so that could be part of the problem. Our new Mac Pro will have 5-6GB.)
Photoshop performance, specifically when editing multi-layer, 16-bit files that begin with at least 8.2 megapixels of data. I want excellent Photoshop performance even while iTunes is playing and Safari and Entourage are running in the background.
My typical edited master file (no image resizing) weighs around 125MB. It takes my current six-year-old machine--that was the fastest Mac money could buy back then--takes nearly a full minute to save these files. I like to save often, but my pain/patience threshold just can't take these delays.
(Maybe Photoshop just isn't very well optimized for 16-bit editing. If I convert the image to 8-bit mode prior to saving, the file will save in less than ten seconds.)
(My current machine has only 1.25GB of memory, so that could be part of the problem. Our new Mac Pro will have 5-6GB.)
Sincerely,
Jaddie
OK, as I understand the PhotoShop specs, it will not address anything above the 3 GB RAM level, but any additional RAM can be used for other apps, such as iTunes, etc...
So you are good to go with the 5-6 GB RAM, but as far as I know PhotoShop will not take advantage of 8-cores at this time, and that includes CS3.
I'm in much the same situation as you are with an older computer and needing to upgrade. I'm waiting for CS3 and I would like it if there was a refresh on the Mac Pro, but I'm looking for faster RAM not more cores.
Without an update to the Mac Pro, CS3 sales out of the gate will be good, but a bit tempered.
Apple can't afford to have the Mac-based Graphics Pros move to CS3 at a lower rate than those who are Windows based.
There's also a general consensus building that Final Cut 6 is coming on April 15th at NAB.
I think this is true, given that Apple seems to be doing nothing to squelch the rumors, and it serves no purpose to have Video Pros feel let down at an event as big and important as NAB.
Given that the Mac Pro is overdue for an update, and is the (very high margin) machine on which both CS3 and FCP users dominate, I think this Tuesday, March 20th will be very interesting.
I'm in much the same situation as you are with an older computer and needing to upgrade. I'm waiting for CS3 and I would like it if there was a refresh on the Mac Pro, but I'm looking for faster RAM not more cores.
I hate to disappoint you donebylee, but Intel's Bensley platform requires FB-DIMMs and those are not (yet) available at any speed faster than 667 MHz. A minor increase in speed (to 800 MHz) might even result in slower performance because the FSB and memory would have to run asynchronously. Lower latencies might improve performance though, but only marginally. Intel makes up for the lack of an IMC by using gobs of cache to buffer against the slower DRAM. With AMD, faster memory will result in faster performance; with Intel, not so much.
I hate to disappoint you donebylee, but Intel's Bensley platform requires FB-DIMMs and those are not (yet) available at any speed faster than 667 MHz. A minor increase in speed (to 800 MHz) might even result in slower performance because the FSB and memory would have to run asynchronously. Lower latencies might improve performance though, but only marginally. Intel makes up for the lack of an IMC by using gobs of cache to buffer against the slower DRAM. With AMD, faster memory will result in faster performance; with Intel, not so much.
I had been wondering about the speed difference between the FSB and RAM.
What if anything then are we looking at in a refresh of the Mac Pro? 8-cores? Updated graphics cards?
Not to minimize those changes, but they would seem to be very limited in their appeal.
What if anything then are we looking at in a refresh of the Mac Pro? 8-cores? Updated graphics cards?
Not to minimize those changes, but they would seem to be very limited in their appeal.
All I'm hoping for is lower prices on the current dual-dual core lineup... say 2299 for the base 2.66Ghz model instead of 2499. Either way, I'm purchasing the machine either when/if the price drop happens or after NAB which ever occurs first.
Looking at the previous performance numbers for the octa-core setups, I've been disappointingly underwhelmed. I'm hoping that Apple has been delaying the release of the octa-core beast for so long because they know the octa-core performance was off, and they've been tweaking stuff in leopard to make it run faster (again just hoping) If there are good performance numbers to justify the undoubtedly high price for the octa-core beast, then I'll jump for it... otherwise I'm just waiting for lower priced dual-dual cores which have been pegged at the same prices since August 2006.
What would be quite nice would be the option for a single-quad core machine which could be upgraded at a later date to the octa-core beast when software catches up? I'd go for that even if it was at a higher price point than the current dual-dual cores.
But I really can't speak for others, some people seem to really want the 8-cores, though I've not seen any compelling performance numbers to support such a purchase for myself, yet.
Without an update to the Mac Pro, CS3 sales out of the gate will be good, but a bit tempered.
Apple can't afford to have the Mac-based Graphics Pros move to CS3 at a lower rate than those who are Windows based.
There's also a general consensus building that Final Cut 6 is coming on April 15th at NAB.
I think this is true, given that Apple seems to be doing nothing to squelch the rumors, and it serves no purpose to have Video Pros feel let down at an event as big and important as NAB.
Given that the Mac Pro is overdue for an update, and is the (very high margin) machine on which both CS3 and FCP users dominate, I think this Tuesday, March 20th will be very interesting.
Okay, so that was wrong. Is Apple really going to debut new Mac Pro towers alongside the new Final Cut suite?
It seems unlike Jobs to have two such huge announcements at the same venue.
Usually, it's a big hardware announcement and a One More Thing. Not Two Big Things.
Okay, so that was wrong. Is Apple really going to debut new Mac Pro towers alongside the new Final Cut suite?
It seems unlike Jobs to have two such huge announcements at the same venue.
Usually, it's a big hardware announcement and a One More Thing. Not Two Big Things.
Quite often the 'one more thing' is quite significant. I could very well imagine the new Mac Pro being just that. After the new Pro apps have been announced, Steve could whip out the infamous phrase and debut the new hardware to run them on.
If so, will those new displays be available any larger than 30"?
I'm very, very interested!
If I seem ungrateful and spoiled for asking about a Cinema Display larger than 30", it's only because I don't upgrade often. I bought my 1GHz PowerBook G4 in December of 2001. It was introduced in November. Then, in January, out comes the 17". I do photography and work with a handful of applications at the same time, so for me there's never enough screen space. My soon-to-be-replaced workstation includes 22" and 19" CRTs.
(Completely off topic I know, but did y'all know that you could use fn+Delete on a notebook Mac as a forward-delete key? I've been a daily Mac user since 1989--and have been working with Macs for my full-time job since 1996--and just learned this fundamental thing last week!)
If so, will those new displays be available any larger than 30"?
We probably all hope so, but it's hard to tell. Heck, we can't even nail down when Apple is going to update the Mac Pro (and didn't someone say we'd have a better idea when updates would happen when Apple went Intel?!? yeah, right, we're still left guessing)! If new displays aren't announced, hopefully Apple will at least reduce the price of the existing displays. But you would hope they would update their displays at the same time as the Mac Pro as some Mac Pro customers buy displays at the same time as a Mac Pro.
Adobe is previewing their Intel based Creative Suite on the 27th, with Apple also being represented. If we see a preview of a new
mac Pro before NAB, this may be the occasion.
At yesterday's conference call, Adobe said they have not added any special functionality that would require Leopard. So we may not see any preview of the new OSX next week.
All I'm hoping for is lower prices on the current dual-dual core lineup... say 2299 for the base 2.66Ghz model instead of 2499. Either way, I'm purchasing the machine either when/if the price drop happens or after NAB which ever occurs first.
Lower prices would be great, but doesn't Apple usually do that in conjunction with a new addition to the product line? Maybe we get a an Octo Pro and lower prices???
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaddie
Will new displays accompany new Mac Pros?
Apple needs to do something here.
I put more stock in Apple announcing HD monitors with advanced connectivity at NAB along with updated Final Cut Pro software. Maybe an Octo Pro gets announced at NAB, but only if Final Cut Pro has the hooks for utilizing all those cores.
Quote:
Originally Posted by willrob
At yesterday's conference call, Adobe said they have not added any special functionality that would require Leopard. So we may not see any preview of the new OSX next week.
Hmmm, I wonder if there's some semantics going on here.
CS3 doesn't require Leopard.
I had heard rumors that there were aspects of CS3 that would work better/faster under Leopard. So maybe there's no requirement, only better performance with Leopard?
Without an update to the Mac Pro, CS3 sales out of the gate will be good, but a bit tempered.
Apple can't afford to have the Mac-based Graphics Pros move to CS3 at a lower rate than those who are Windows based.
There's also a general consensus building that Final Cut 6 is coming on April 15th at NAB.
I think this is true, given that Apple seems to be doing nothing to squelch the rumors, and it serves no purpose to have Video Pros feel let down at an event as big and important as NAB.
Given that the Mac Pro is overdue for an update, and is the (very high margin) machine on which both CS3 and FCP users dominate, I think this Tuesday, March 20th will be very interesting.
Other than the March 20th thing I have to agree with Frank777 here. Adobe, FCP, and most, if not all, the other Apple pro apps should be updated at NAB on April 15th. I see no reason that Apple wont use this date for a Mac Pro announcment.
More specifically, Adobe points out that previously every Mac OS X upgrade has increased performance, which MAY improve Photoshop CS's performance. Nothing "significant" or even remotely definite.
Comments
Dear Friends
I don't know whether it's more proper to start a new thread to ask this question or if I'm hijacking this thread by asking it here, so please forgive me.
Does Intel's forthcoming Bearlake chipset sound like anything that may appear in the new Mac Pros that will be announced on or before Sunday, April 15?
Sincerely,
Jaddie
Biggest change with bearlake is the 1333 fsb right? Well the apple mac pros already have a 1333 fsb.... unless someone cares to enlighten me further.
Moreover, these (Bearlake) haven't even been released yet, and apple generally lags a 1-2m behind the chip release to ensure system stability etc, etc.... so yea my answer is ... Nope.
cheers.
Biggest change with bearlake is the 1333 fsb right? Well the apple mac pros already have a 1333 fsb.... unless someone cares to enlighten me further.
Moreover, these (Bearlake) haven't even been released yet, and apple generally lags a 1-2m behind the chip release to ensure system stability etc, etc.... so yea my answer is ... Nope.
cheers.
Yes they have a 1333 MHz FSB already. What they don't have is RAM fast enough to take advantage of it so maybe, underscore maybe, we will see faster RAM on a refresh, but other than that I don't see what they could offer us in basic architecture.
Now peripherals are another matter entirely....
I think you are assuming some things here that may or may not be true: specifically that there is a Mac Pro announcement on or before April 15th.
Unless you have something to share with us?????
I don't think that's much of an assumption, though, yes, it's an assumption nonetheless. I also assume the sun will rise tomorrow.
The Mac Pro is due for an update, both Apple and Adobe have big announcement events that'll take place in the next few weeks (April 15 and March 27, respectively), and Apple has cited pent-up demand for the Mac Pro relative to the impending release of Creative Suite 3. It's not much of a leap to say that new Mac Pros will be announced soon.
I'm hoping we get something that's faster than what the current Mac Pros offer, though anything will be faster than my main Mac, which is a single-processor 733MHz G4 with 1.25GB of memory. The tests I've seen show that the 2.66GHz quad-core processors, when dropped into the current Mac Pros, are actually a little slower at most things than the 3GHz dual-core processors.
Sincerely,
Jaddie
I'm hoping we get something that's faster than what the current Mac Pros offer, though anything will be faster than my main Mac, which is a single-processor 733MHz G4 with 1.25GB of memory. The tests I've seen show that the 2.66GHz quad-core processors, when dropped into the current Mac Pros, are actually a little slower at most things than the 3GHz dual-core processors.
[/QUOTE]
What are you looking for? Do you want more cores or more ghz? You need to decide what will give you what you need. You probably wont see more cores and higher clock speeds until next year when Penryns hit the street in numbers. I would probably go for the extra cores. Eventually the software will catch up to take advantage of all the cores.
What are you looking for?
Photoshop performance, specifically when editing multi-layer, 16-bit files that begin with at least 8.2 megapixels of data. I want excellent Photoshop performance even while iTunes is playing and Safari and Entourage are running in the background.
My typical edited master file (no image resizing) weighs around 125MB. It takes my current six-year-old machine--that was the fastest Mac money could buy back then--takes nearly a full minute to save these files. I like to save often, but my pain/patience threshold just can't take these delays.
(Maybe Photoshop just isn't very well optimized for 16-bit editing. If I convert the image to 8-bit mode prior to saving, the file will save in less than ten seconds.)
(My current machine has only 1.25GB of memory, so that could be part of the problem. Our new Mac Pro will have 5-6GB.)
Sincerely,
Jaddie
Photoshop performance, specifically when editing multi-layer, 16-bit files that begin with at least 8.2 megapixels of data. I want excellent Photoshop performance even while iTunes is playing and Safari and Entourage are running in the background.
My typical edited master file (no image resizing) weighs around 125MB. It takes my current six-year-old machine--that was the fastest Mac money could buy back then--takes nearly a full minute to save these files. I like to save often, but my pain/patience threshold just can't take these delays.
(Maybe Photoshop just isn't very well optimized for 16-bit editing. If I convert the image to 8-bit mode prior to saving, the file will save in less than ten seconds.)
(My current machine has only 1.25GB of memory, so that could be part of the problem. Our new Mac Pro will have 5-6GB.)
Sincerely,
Jaddie
OK, as I understand the PhotoShop specs, it will not address anything above the 3 GB RAM level, but any additional RAM can be used for other apps, such as iTunes, etc...
So you are good to go with the 5-6 GB RAM, but as far as I know PhotoShop will not take advantage of 8-cores at this time, and that includes CS3.
I'm in much the same situation as you are with an older computer and needing to upgrade. I'm waiting for CS3 and I would like it if there was a refresh on the Mac Pro, but I'm looking for faster RAM not more cores.
Apple can't afford to have the Mac-based Graphics Pros move to CS3 at a lower rate than those who are Windows based.
There's also a general consensus building that Final Cut 6 is coming on April 15th at NAB.
I think this is true, given that Apple seems to be doing nothing to squelch the rumors, and it serves no purpose to have Video Pros feel let down at an event as big and important as NAB.
Given that the Mac Pro is overdue for an update, and is the (very high margin) machine on which both CS3 and FCP users dominate, I think this Tuesday, March 20th will be very interesting.
I'm in much the same situation as you are with an older computer and needing to upgrade. I'm waiting for CS3 and I would like it if there was a refresh on the Mac Pro, but I'm looking for faster RAM not more cores.
I hate to disappoint you donebylee, but Intel's Bensley platform requires FB-DIMMs and those are not (yet) available at any speed faster than 667 MHz. A minor increase in speed (to 800 MHz) might even result in slower performance because the FSB and memory would have to run asynchronously. Lower latencies might improve performance though, but only marginally. Intel makes up for the lack of an IMC by using gobs of cache to buffer against the slower DRAM. With AMD, faster memory will result in faster performance; with Intel, not so much.
I hate to disappoint you donebylee, but Intel's Bensley platform requires FB-DIMMs and those are not (yet) available at any speed faster than 667 MHz. A minor increase in speed (to 800 MHz) might even result in slower performance because the FSB and memory would have to run asynchronously. Lower latencies might improve performance though, but only marginally. Intel makes up for the lack of an IMC by using gobs of cache to buffer against the slower DRAM. With AMD, faster memory will result in faster performance; with Intel, not so much.
I had been wondering about the speed difference between the FSB and RAM.
What if anything then are we looking at in a refresh of the Mac Pro? 8-cores? Updated graphics cards?
Not to minimize those changes, but they would seem to be very limited in their appeal.
What if anything then are we looking at in a refresh of the Mac Pro? 8-cores? Updated graphics cards?
Not to minimize those changes, but they would seem to be very limited in their appeal.
All I'm hoping for is lower prices on the current dual-dual core lineup... say 2299 for the base 2.66Ghz model instead of 2499. Either way, I'm purchasing the machine either when/if the price drop happens or after NAB which ever occurs first.
Looking at the previous performance numbers for the octa-core setups, I've been disappointingly underwhelmed. I'm hoping that Apple has been delaying the release of the octa-core beast for so long because they know the octa-core performance was off, and they've been tweaking stuff in leopard to make it run faster
What would be quite nice would be the option for a single-quad core machine which could be upgraded at a later date to the octa-core beast when software catches up? I'd go for that even if it was at a higher price point than the current dual-dual cores.
But I really can't speak for others, some people seem to really want the 8-cores, though I've not seen any compelling performance numbers to support such a purchase for myself, yet.
Cheers,
Chris
Without an update to the Mac Pro, CS3 sales out of the gate will be good, but a bit tempered.
Apple can't afford to have the Mac-based Graphics Pros move to CS3 at a lower rate than those who are Windows based.
There's also a general consensus building that Final Cut 6 is coming on April 15th at NAB.
I think this is true, given that Apple seems to be doing nothing to squelch the rumors, and it serves no purpose to have Video Pros feel let down at an event as big and important as NAB.
Given that the Mac Pro is overdue for an update, and is the (very high margin) machine on which both CS3 and FCP users dominate, I think this Tuesday, March 20th will be very interesting.
Okay, so that was wrong. Is Apple really going to debut new Mac Pro towers alongside the new Final Cut suite?
It seems unlike Jobs to have two such huge announcements at the same venue.
Usually, it's a big hardware announcement and a One More Thing. Not Two Big Things.
Okay, so that was wrong. Is Apple really going to debut new Mac Pro towers alongside the new Final Cut suite?
It seems unlike Jobs to have two such huge announcements at the same venue.
Usually, it's a big hardware announcement and a One More Thing. Not Two Big Things.
Quite often the 'one more thing' is quite significant. I could very well imagine the new Mac Pro being just that. After the new Pro apps have been announced, Steve could whip out the infamous phrase and debut the new hardware to run them on.
Will new displays accompany new Mac Pros?
If so, will those new displays be available any larger than 30"?
I'm very, very interested!
If I seem ungrateful and spoiled for asking about a Cinema Display larger than 30", it's only because I don't upgrade often. I bought my 1GHz PowerBook G4 in December of 2001. It was introduced in November. Then, in January, out comes the 17". I do photography and work with a handful of applications at the same time, so for me there's never enough screen space. My soon-to-be-replaced workstation includes 22" and 19" CRTs.
(Completely off topic I know, but did y'all know that you could use fn+Delete on a notebook Mac as a forward-delete key? I've been a daily Mac user since 1989--and have been working with Macs for my full-time job since 1996--and just learned this fundamental thing last week!)
Sincerely,
Jaddie
Will new displays accompany new Mac Pros?
If so, will those new displays be available any larger than 30"?
We probably all hope so, but it's hard to tell. Heck, we can't even nail down when Apple is going to update the Mac Pro (and didn't someone say we'd have a better idea when updates would happen when Apple went Intel?!?
mac Pro before NAB, this may be the occasion.
At yesterday's conference call, Adobe said they have not added any special functionality that would require Leopard. So we may not see any preview of the new OSX next week.
All I'm hoping for is lower prices on the current dual-dual core lineup... say 2299 for the base 2.66Ghz model instead of 2499. Either way, I'm purchasing the machine either when/if the price drop happens or after NAB which ever occurs first.
Lower prices would be great, but doesn't Apple usually do that in conjunction with a new addition to the product line? Maybe we get a an Octo Pro and lower prices???
Will new displays accompany new Mac Pros?
Apple needs to do something here.
I put more stock in Apple announcing HD monitors with advanced connectivity at NAB along with updated Final Cut Pro software. Maybe an Octo Pro gets announced at NAB, but only if Final Cut Pro has the hooks for utilizing all those cores.
At yesterday's conference call, Adobe said they have not added any special functionality that would require Leopard. So we may not see any preview of the new OSX next week.
Hmmm, I wonder if there's some semantics going on here. I had heard rumors that there were aspects of CS3 that would work better/faster under Leopard. So maybe there's no requirement, only better performance with Leopard?
Ah...speculation...
Go here to read all about it.
Without an update to the Mac Pro, CS3 sales out of the gate will be good, but a bit tempered.
Apple can't afford to have the Mac-based Graphics Pros move to CS3 at a lower rate than those who are Windows based.
There's also a general consensus building that Final Cut 6 is coming on April 15th at NAB.
I think this is true, given that Apple seems to be doing nothing to squelch the rumors, and it serves no purpose to have Video Pros feel let down at an event as big and important as NAB.
Given that the Mac Pro is overdue for an update, and is the (very high margin) machine on which both CS3 and FCP users dominate, I think this Tuesday, March 20th will be very interesting.
Other than the March 20th thing I have to agree with Frank777 here. Adobe, FCP, and most, if not all, the other Apple pro apps should be updated at NAB on April 15th. I see no reason that Apple wont use this date for a Mac Pro announcment.
Just found this on another rumor site. It says that Adobe claims significant performance increases for CS3 under Leopard.
Go here to read all about it.
More specifically, Adobe points out that previously every Mac OS X upgrade has increased performance, which MAY improve Photoshop CS's performance. Nothing "significant" or even remotely definite.