[ezkcdude]

New Mac Pros, iMacs, and Cinema Displays are out!!!

Mac Pro has up to 12 cores!

[psmith2.0]

The store is back up and the home page has changed a bit...the only two things I'm seeing are the updated iMacs and that new magic trackpad. I don't see anything about updated Mac Pros and displays.

[ezkcdude]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 The store is back up and the home page has changed a bit...the only two things I'm seeing are the updated iMacs and that new magic trackpad. I don't see anything about updated Mac Pros and displays.

The article I linked says it will be available in August.

[drewprops]

So now we can speculate on the case design?


...

[psmith2.0]

Speculatificatefy away!

This is the only mention or notice I see of any "upcoming Mac Pro update" at Apple's site:

http://www.apple.com/macpro/

That little orange triangular "coming in August" badge.

Strange.

Did they announce this thing today or not? Because there's no reference on the homepage or store section. Apple frequently - hell, always - releases stuff and it isn't shipping for a few more weeks...but it's available for sale/pre-order, and they'll put a little "NEW" badge above its photo at the store.

This is the most silent of silent updates I've ever seen...

You actually have to go to apple.com/pr to read about the new Mac Pros and displays, because you sure wouldn't know about them otherwise.

The 27" display, BTW, is just $999.

Considering what they've sold other displays in the past for, I think that's quite a move for them!

[Wyatt]

Originally Posted by drewprops So now we can speculate on the case design? ...

Since there's a picture on the site, I don't think so.

http://www.apple.com/macpro/

Displays are online too, but not in the store yet:

http://www.apple.com/displays/specs.html

[psmith2.0]

A 13" MacBook Pro, a Magic Mouse and that 27" Cinema Display would be one nice little setup.

[nikstar101]

I am wondering if the new ATI 5870 can be put into my Mac Pro 2009? I mean you can spec it in the lower 4 core Mac Pro, which is essentially the same as the 2009 model.

But it mentions using Aux power connectors which from my memory (as i am not sat next to my machine at the moment), mine doesnn't have kicking about.....

I am disappointed about teh update in general though and i can see why it is let off the main page. I mean no USB 3 or new firewire connections? It still has only 5 USB ports!!!

I think they could have really pushed some technology into these models which would have looked very nice and then phased that cool stuff down to the iMac models next update... As i am sure by the next time they upadate the iMacs they will have USB 3 etc. So make a big thing about being the first manufacturer to start seeling it mainstream (or something).

[tiddles]

Oooof! Look at the starting price of the 12-core!!!! $4999

[Banana]

Considering that Quad starts at $2499, 12 core is a steal at $4999 - 200% more processor for an 100% price increase.

[Moogs]

I'm not sure why there are no pre-orders yet but my initial take:

• Very nice range of options (Nehalem and Westmere, 4,6,8,12 core)
• Solid standard graphics option that isn't a POS like the Nvidia 120 was
• Good GPU upgrade option that is a clear boost over standard model
• SSD option is great but I'm not holding my breath on pricing
• Looks like support for PC-1333 RAM on fastest single CPU machine

• Little disappointing there's no USB 3 but easy enough to add a card
• Only 4 RAM slots for single CPU makes no sense to me, but 16GB will do, thanks.
• Wish they'd offer an option with a single optical bay and two extra HD bays. I don't know anyone who uses two optical drives regularly.
• We'll see on price. I expect the 12 core machine to be beaucoup dollah, but hopefully the others are more reasonably priced than the current generation.


My plan: Sell the current Mac Pro towards 6 core, 3.33 GHz beast with 1 SSD, Radeon 5780, and the cheapest ram config I can get. I'll then go out and buy additional SSD unless Apple's drive prices are fair, and swap out any OEM modules for 4x4GB from OWC.

Will be a lot of confusing benchmarks coming that's for sure, what with all the configurations and permutations you can set up.

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by Moogs • Looks like support for PC-1333 RAM on fastest single CPU machine • Little disappointing there's no USB 3 but easy enough to add a card • Only 4 RAM slots for single CPU makes no sense to me, but 16GB will do, thanks. • We'll see on price. I expect the 12 core machine to be beaucoup dollah, but hopefully the others are more reasonably priced than the current generation.

- That's DDR3-1333 or PC3-10666...
- It's not surprising at all that USB 3.0 didn't make it. Not a single chipset from Intel (or AMD) offer USB 3.0. Every retail motherboard with USB 3.0 uses an NEC controller running off the PCIe bus.
- It makes perfect sense. The single CPU model supports triple channel memory only while the dual CPU socket model has six. Apple's offering just enough DIMM slots to fully support the capabilities of the IMC plus one extra because it's a nice option.
- The current top of the line 6-core "Gulftown" Xeon is about $250/unit more than the 2.93GHz quad-core "Gainestown" Xeon when it was announced. I don't think that necessarily means Apple will charge $600+ more for it.

[Xaqtly]

Well so much for new models being cheaper or even keeping the price the same; The 8 core Westmere is more expensive than the 8 core Nehalem.

For my studio I think we're going to order the 6 core Westmeres. Unfortunately we have to guess at the price since I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere yet. I'm telling my boss to assume it'll be $3k, putting it right in between the quad core Nehalem and the 8 core Westmere.

That's still stupidly expensive for a single processor Mac Pro. I'm going to try to get to the Apple store today to talk to them about returning my Mac Pro for a new one, but since these aren't even available to buy yet I'm not sure what kind of luck I'm going to have with that.

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by Eugene - That's DDR3-1333 or PC3-10666... - It's not surprising at all that USB 3.0 didn't make it. Not a single chipset from Intel (or AMD) offer USB 3.0 - It makes perfect sense. The single CPU model supports triple channel memory only while the dual CPU socket model has six.

Thanks for clearing up my RAM naming goof and explaining the ram channel thing. Not sure how I missed that after all the prior discussions. Re: USB 3 I don't think it's that big a deal either but was hoping they'd lead the pack on this one.

Originally Posted by Xaqtly Well so much for new models being cheaper or even keeping the price the same; The 8 core Westmere is more expensive than the 8 core Nehalem. For my studio I think we're going to order the 6 core Westmeres. Unfortunately we have to guess at the price since I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere yet. I'm telling my boss to assume it'll be $3k, putting it right in between the quad core Nehalem and the 8 core Westmere. That's still stupidly expensive for a single processor Mac Pro. I'm going to try to get to the Apple store today to talk to them about returning my Mac Pro for a new one, but since these aren't even available to buy yet I'm not sure what kind of luck I'm going to have with that.

I think you're going to be hosed on the return because of this oddball delay they've got going here. My guess is, they were anticipating a fair number of returns and want to avoid it so they're not even allowing pre-orders (which is really rare for them). As for the costs, I think it's fair to say you're getting more computer for the same cost as before but it is still overpriced. I guess we shouldn't expect anything different. Apple is clearly not worried about pricing in this niche market.

[rollercoaster375]

Originally Posted by Moogs Thanks for clearing up my RAM naming goof and explaining the ram channel thing. Not sure how I missed that after all the prior discussions. Re: USB 3 I don't think it's that big a deal either but was hoping they'd lead the pack on this one.

I don't think either Apple or Intel is too keen on USB 3. Honestly, I'd be rather surprised if it ever ends up in a Mac.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by rollercoaster375 I don't think either Apple or Intel is too keen on USB 3.

Care to elaborate on what you believe to be Intel's position on USB 3?

[zippy]

Originally Posted by chucker Care to elaborate on what you believe to be Intel's position on USB 3?

I thought Intel had indicated they had put USB 3 on the back burner in favor of Light Peak - which is due later this year if I recall. That might have been more 'outside speculation' than actually coming from Intel though.

[rollercoaster375]

Originally Posted by zippy I thought Intel had indicated they had put USB 3 on the back burner in favor of Light Peak - which is due later this year if I recall. That might have been more 'outside speculation' than actually coming from Intel though.

Yeah, that was my impression as well.

Though, some googling uncovered this, which doesn't bode well for my aforementioned theory.

[zippy]

Interesting. I'm all for it, but the timing is kind of unfortunate. I think it will take 3-5 years before we see computers having only Light Peak connectors (no USB, HDMI, etc.) - if even then. And that's the timeframe they are giving for this newer product to be available. So just when we are getting to one standardized plug /wishful/ we'll be moving to a new one.

It makes me wonder if it wouldn't be better if they just shelved Light Peak and went full speed ahead with this new design.

[Moogs]

Intel is definitely behind LightPeak but I didn't think it would necessarily end USB 3. Seems like something that would be a higher-end protocol / for higher end peripherals than USB 3, which would have the #1 benefit of being backward compatible with all the old USB devices. Not sure who all the players are that might be behind USB3 but then it might not matter either since everyone is going to go along with what Intel does on their chipsets for the most part.

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by zippy I thought Intel had indicated they had put USB 3 on the back burner in favor of Light Peak - which is due later this year if I recall. That might have been more 'outside speculation' than actually coming from Intel though.

I doubt that Light Peak will make Intel's previously announced arrival date. It will be initially expensive to implement and slow to proliferate. USB 3.0 is cheap to implement and provides legacy compatibility with pretty much all your old devices.

Intel doesn't offer USB 3.0 and SATA 3.0 because it's already very late in the Nehalem development cycle...You can expect both technologies, along with maybe PCIe 3.0 to appear in the Intel 6-series chipsets half a year from now.

[ShadowOfGed]

All this furor over USB 3, but there's still one question in my mind: what peripherals are really going to use it? And, given the design of USB, are the purported speed benefits really going to pan out in practice? Almost nothing hits the 480Mbps rating of USB 2.0.

I dunno, USB 3 feels kinda like lipstick on a pig to me. If you really want to look forward, I think something akin to LightPeak is closer to the right direction.

[PB PM]

USB2 has a real transfer limit of around 60MB/s, and USB3 is faster than that, maybe 150MB/s? That is a big boost for external hard drives, especially if you have an external SSD for example.

[Brad]

*cough* or just use FireWire or eSATA *cough*

[PB PM]

Sure, if Apple in it's great wisdom would give us eSATA ports. FW800 is nice though.

[rampancy]

Originally Posted by ShadowOfGed All this furor over USB 3, but there's still one question in my mind: what peripherals are really going to use it? And, given the design of USB, are the purported speed benefits really going to pan out in practice?

This is exactly my feeling; I used to feel the same way about Blu-Ray, but with Blu-Ray media and movies starting to come down drastically in price, I'm starting to feel like it's something we should start seriously expecting soon.

Anyway, I haven't seen anything yet in terms of external hard drives or other peripherals that have been shipping in significant quantities. You could argue that this didn't stop Apple from initially adopting USB, but back then they had a clear advantage for jumping from Serial/SCSI/ADB to USB; with USB 2 to USB 3 it's not so clear.

Originally Posted by PB PM Sure, if Apple in it's great wisdom would give us eSATA ports. FW800 is nice though.

It'd be really nice if we could get combo USB 2/eSATA ports, especially on the portables...

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by ShadowOfGed All this furor over USB 3, but there's still one question in my mind: what peripherals are really going to use it? And, given the design of USB, are the purported speed benefits really going to pan out in practice? Almost nothing hits the 480Mbps rating of USB 2.0. I dunno, USB 3 feels kinda like lipstick on a pig to me. If you really want to look forward, I think something akin to LightPeak is closer to the right direction.

My sound card / DAC
My Audio Technica AT2020 mic.
All my peripherals
My digital camera
My iPhone
Most of my external drives
My Spyder3 Pro display calibrator
My AIO printer
etc, etc.

USB is going to be around a while, and if it is I'd rather have USB 3.0 than an even older version. I don't consider this one of those times where we need to go "legacy free" ... Like you said, hardly anything really saturates a USB 2.0 link other than fast HDDs and SSDs.

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by PB PM Sure, if Apple in it's great wisdom would give us eSATA ports. FW800 is nice though.

eSATA sounds great on paper, but it is implemented poorly. Almost every eSATA device I have still comes attached with a separate power cord. The connector design is also way too fragile for external use.

[nikstar101]

Originally Posted by ShadowOfGed All this furor over USB 3, but there's still one question in my mind: what peripherals are really going to use it? And, given the design of USB, are the purported speed benefits really going to pan out in practice? Almost nothing hits the 480Mbps rating of USB 2.0.

The problem is that if your laying down £2000+ for a machine you would expect it to last 3 years (or even longer). By which time USB 3 will be here and pretty much every peripheral will be using it. There is more to USB 3 than just speed, such as power management which is hugely important in terms of laptops etc.

Therefore it is rather shortsighted of Apple not to include it. I mean the whole machine is built to handle today's and tomorrows software and tasks, therefore this seems an odd omission as the hardware is available today and will be used within a year (before the time they update the Mac Pro again).

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by nikstar101 Therefore it is rather shortsighted of Apple not to include it. I mean the whole machine is built to handle today's and tomorrows software and tasks, therefore this seems an odd omission as the hardware is available today and will be used within a year (before the time they update the Mac Pro again).

I don't think it's shortsighted. I suspect Apple elected not to use the NEC USB 3.0 chipset because they really didn't want to have discrete USB 2.0 *and* USB 3.0 ports on the I/O panel. They probably want to update every line to USB 3.0 at the same time too.

If you absolutely need USB 3.0 right now (nobody does), then you can buy a PCIe adapter.