Primate benchmarks Apple's new 8-core Mac Pro

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 51
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Does any one else think these new G5s may be blow out models clearing the cases and motherboards in advance of something totally new at WWDC? Or am I too cynical ...?



    No. That would be insanely stupid.



    (BTW, Apple hasn't sold G5s for quite a while. I'm assuming you meant Intel chips.)
  • Reply 22 of 51
    ronboronbo Posts: 669member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by suhail View Post


    Hopefully we won't be disappointed on Tuesday and we'd see an xMac with at-least one PCI slot.



    Man, you're just all set up for being disappointed until the end up time, aren't you?







    (Seriously, though I'm sure there's a market for what you're pining for, if Apple wanted to pursue that niche, they'd have surely done it long ago, right?)
  • Reply 23 of 51
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,426member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    I believe Melgross has made mention that next Intel chip will warrant a new exterior case design, but I don't think so. The new one still looks great and I find it hard to conceive of how they could improve on this timeless design. Now, if the heat and innards and reduced then perhaps it would warrant more some changes to fully optimize the space, but I don't think it will. Just my opinion.



    PS: These aren't G5.





    I guess we could have it both ways. One to see a straight comparison of clockspeed and GB of RAM and another test to see how the new base model "Harpertown" 8-core compares to the previous "Clovertown" 8-core.



    I did find that the machine tested would have cost $3,997 and not include Bluetooth, a 320GB HDD and an extra 1GB RAM. Anyone who bought a Mac Pro before Tuesday and within the last two weeks should return it.



    right they are not G5s, it's that I have a G5 and it looks the same so my brain screwed up.
  • Reply 24 of 51
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,426member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    No. That would be insanely stupid.



    (BTW, Apple hasn't sold G5s for quite a while. I'm assuming you meant Intel chips.)



    Yep Intel ... My bad



    But I am the one who bought a Lisa, an Apple ///, a Mac IIFX, and a Quadra 840 av, so just as I reached for the phone to order the 8 core I hesitated ...
  • Reply 25 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    This makes this new machine a future-proof investment.



    No such thing.



    But I have ordered one because it should offer a good platform to carry me at least 3-5 years into the future.



    I expect that at this time next year we will be looking at new Mac Pros with Nehalem, and they will look awfully good. But again the change will be evolutionary not revolutionary. Just like this one.
  • Reply 26 of 51
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,426member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by donebylee View Post


    No such thing.



    But I have ordered one because it should offer a good platform to carry me at least 3-5 years into the future.



    I expect that at this time next year we will be looking at new Mac Pros with Nehalem, and they will look awfully good. But again the change will be evolutionary not revolutionary. Just like this one.



    Stop tempting me ....
  • Reply 27 of 51
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,117member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by donebylee View Post


    No such thing.



    But I have ordered one because it should offer a good platform to carry me at least 3-5 years into the future.



    I expect that at this time next year we will be looking at new Mac Pros with Nehalem, and they will look awfully good. But again the change will be evolutionary not revolutionary. Just like this one.



    More so than this one.



    This will be a serious architectural change. Moving to Penyrn is a noticeable, but fairly minor improvement.
  • Reply 28 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Stop tempting me ....



    LOL, the worst part of it is I wanted the 8800 so I have to wait until February for the system I ordered to ship. Now that is the definition of hell in my book.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    More so than this one.



    This will be a serious architectural change. Moving to Penyrn is a noticeable, but fairly minor improvement.



    From an architecture point of view you are right. Whether or not it will be a performance revolution is yet to be seen, and I am more affected by performance than architecture.
  • Reply 29 of 51
    netdognetdog Posts: 244member
    Not only did they test without SSE4 (as OS X is waiting for 10.5.2 for that), but they don't plan on implementing SSE4 into their benchmarking even though Intel claims that the gains are quite dramatic. Think that we will have to look elsewhere for our MP2 benchmarks perhaps.
  • Reply 30 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    The new one still looks great and I find it hard to conceive of how they could improve on this timeless design. Now, if the heat and innards are reduced then perhaps it would warrant some changes to fully optimize the space, but I don't think it will. Just my opinion.



    Before the iPhone came out, I thought my RAZR was cool looking. Before the 'where's the computer' iMacs came out, I thought the flat-panel iMac was the coolest ever. The current 'G5' towers are simply TOO big. Working Mac IT, delivering, and setting up these machines, I am honestly stressed that I am one day either going to break one when I fail to lift it, or break myself when I go down instead of the machine going up.



    Quite simply, there is no reason for the case to be quite so big now that they are more efficiently cooled Intels. And, Apple could really stun us with a sleek, small tower and make the current suddenly look oh so old.
  • Reply 31 of 51
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,117member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by donebylee View Post


    From an architecture point of view you are right. Whether or not it will be a performance revolution is yet to be seen, and I am more affected by performance than architecture.



    Performancewise, it will be a much bigger step than this one.



    I also expect Apple do do more with the mobo and the rest of the case.
  • Reply 32 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    Performancewise, it will be a much bigger step than this one.



    I also expect Apple do do more with the mobo and the rest of the case.



    You may well be right. I expect to see new Mac Pros at about the same time next year with the new chips and MBs. We will all know for sure then.



    In the meantime, I am looking forward to my Mac Pro. February can't come fast enough. Of course, I wouldn't mind if Apple shipped it earlier than that. Wouldn't mind a bit.



    BTW, for those that haven't seen it, Bare Feats has a buyer's advice article up over here with their take on the new Mac Pro and which video card you should get.
  • Reply 33 of 51
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,117member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by donebylee View Post


    You may well be right. I expect to see new Mac Pros at about the same time next year with the new chips and MBs. We will all know for sure then.



    In the meantime, I am looking forward to my Mac Pro. February can't come fast enough. Of course, I wouldn't mind if Apple shipped it earlier than that. Wouldn't mind a bit.



    BTW, for those that haven't seen it, Bare Feats has a buyer's advice article up over here with their take on the new Mac Pro and which video card you should get.



    We may see these new machines at, or shortly after, the ADC this year. These chips are scheduled to arrive in the third quarter. That could very easily mean that Apple will have them then.



    If it will be this time next year, that would be different. But, the evidence is that we may see 32nm around then. So the cycle begins again.
  • Reply 34 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    We may see these new machines at, or shortly after, the ADC this year. These chips are scheduled to arrive in the third quarter. That could very easily mean that Apple will have them then.



    If it will be this time next year, that would be different. But, the evidence is that we may see 32nm around then. So the cycle begins again.



    That sounds suspiciously like what we were hearing about Penryn all through 2007.



    Given Apple's recent track record with the Mac Pro, I would be surprised if we see a newer version before the year is out.



    But we will see.
  • Reply 35 of 51
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,117member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by donebylee View Post


    That sounds suspiciously like what we were hearing about Penryn all through 2007.



    Given Apple's recent track record with the Mac Pro, I would be surprised if we see a newer version before the year is out.



    But we will see.



    No, it's not. Penyrn had never been thought of as a major new design. It's an improvement over the 65nm designs because of some modificationss, but nothing truly major.



    It's Intel's now well known "Tick Tock" strategy. The die shrink, with some improvements, is the "Tick". The new architecture is the "Tock".



    Nehalem is different from Penyrn. It's the "Tock".
  • Reply 36 of 51
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    No, it's not. Penyrn had never been thought of as a major new design. It's an improvement over the 65nm designs because of some modificationss, but nothing truly major.



    Nehalem is different.



    Architecturally I agree, but the inclusion of SSE4 makes for a very compelling reason to upgrade an older Mac Pro or PowerMac (assuming that Apple adds Penryn support soon).
  • Reply 37 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    No, it's not. Penyrn had never been thought of as a major new design. It's an improvement over the 65nm designs because of some modificationss, but nothing truly major.



    It's Intel's now well known "Tick Tock" strategy. The die shrink, with some improvements, is the "Tick". The new architecture is the "Tock".



    Nehalem is different from Penyrn. It's the "Tock".



    No you missed my point, which is that I don't think we will see Nehalems in a mac Pro until this time next year. That is what I was commenting on being similar to the Penryn situation. Everyone was expecting them much sooner than they arrived. I think we will see the same thing with Nehalem.
  • Reply 38 of 51
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,117member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Architecturally I agree, but the inclusion of SSE4 makes for a very compelling reason to upgrade an older Mac Pro or PowerMac (assuming that Apple adds Penryn support soon).



    Only for a few programs. It will also take months for most software to be able to use the new instructions.



    If Nehalem machines do appear for the ADC, then that would coincide with their ability to use SSE4 as well. Right now, there is only one or two programs that can use them, and they aren't optimized yet either.



    Otherwise, speed improvements range from a couple percent to 10%. Only a very few areas are better than that. Penyrn's main advantage is with the portable models right now, because of the additional battery life as well as the moderate performance increase.



    I'm not saying its terrible for the Mac Pro, just not close to what it will be with Nehalem, along with the other improvements we'll see..
  • Reply 39 of 51
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,117member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by donebylee View Post


    No you missed my point, which is that I don't think we will see Nehalems in a mac Pro until this time next year. That is what I was commenting on being similar to the Penryn situation. Everyone was expecting them much sooner than they arrived. I think we will see the same thing with Nehalem.



    I didn't miss your point. I addressed it. Nehalem is expected, according to Intel, late this year. It's actually expected in the third quarter.



    Re-read post number 34.



    I see no reason why Apple would hold out until next year.
  • Reply 40 of 51
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    I didn't miss your point. I addressed it. Nehalem is expected, according to Intel, late this year. It's actually expected in the third quarter.



    Out of curiosity, how much time lapsed between Intel selling these Penryn 5400 chips and Apple using them in their Mac Pros?



    With Intel and Apple so tight these days?even offering the "Clovertown" quad-core to Apple's Mac Pro first?I would like to see new machines crop up almost immediately.
Sign In or Register to comment.