-
Ivy Bridge is a go. Officially.
-
[Andrew Richards] “[Chris Harlan] “And, apparently, Ivy Bridge Xeons are supposed to ship in June.”
Those are the E3 series. Sandy Bridge E3 has been out for a year. The E5 series is what would go into a Mac Pro or any other dual CPU box. Those will be a while…
“Fair enough. So E3 would not be used? So we can go back to “Why aren’t they using Sandy Bridge?” The distinction of individual Xeon lines is something the eludes me.
-
[Chris Harlan] “So E3 would not be used?”
The big difference is E3 does not support dual sockets (dual CPUs). The predecessor to the E3, the 3000 series, was never used in a Mac Pro. Apple could use it, but it would mean the Mac Pro (or whatever) would be going down-market from where it has been thus far.
[Chris Harlan] “So we can go back to “Why aren’t they using Sandy Bridge?””
That’s the waiting game. HP will ship theirs next month. Probably other OEMs too. In 2010, it took Apple till July to refresh the Mac Pro, despite suitable 5000 series Xeons hitting the market that March.
Best,
Andy -
[Phil Hoppes] “Sandy Bridge 8 core Xenon CPU’s are already out. I can buy them today”
Yes, but Apple needs more of them than you do; they have to wait for production to ramp further. Major Wintel OEMs aren’t generally shipping Xeon E5 systems yet either. It’s not all that uncommon for new Intel processors to be available to the enthusiast/DIY market a month or two before OEMs ship systems.
This doesn’t necessarily mean there will be a new Mac Pro, of course. Merely that the fact that there isn’t one yet isn’t evidence that there won’t be one.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Andrew Richards] “The big difference is E3 does not support dual sockets (dual CPUs). The predecessor to the E3, the 3000 series, was never used in a Mac Pro. Apple could use it, but it would mean the Mac Pro (or whatever) would be going down-market from where it has been thus far.”
Although it’ll probably happen eventually. If Intel has a 12 core processor available in a couple of years, will Apple really still feel the need to make a dual processor (i.e. 24 core) machine? There’s a big price bump to go dual processor; at some point single CPU performance will be so high it won’t really make sense even for most of the Mac Pro’s demographic.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Chris Kenny] “Although it’ll probably happen eventually. If Intel has a 12 core processor available in a couple of years, will Apple really still feel the need to make a dual processor (i.e. 24 core) machine? There’s a big price bump to go dual processor; at some point single CPU performance will be so high it won’t really make sense even for most of the Mac Pro’s demographic.”
You’ve just made the case to cancel the Mac Pro. If no one needs something more powerful (and necessarily more expensive) than a single processor, then the top end iMac is all anyone needs.
Isn’t the demographic for the Mac Pro the professional Mac user who really needs the most computing power they can reasonably stuff into a mass-market box?
For decades, we’ve been able to do things with lesser boxes that used to take bleeding edge rigs only a few years earlier. What makes 2012 the year that our expectations plateau?
Best,
Andy -
[Andrew Richards] “You’ve just made the case to cancel the Mac Pro. If no one needs something more powerful (and necessarily more expensive) than a single processor, then the top end iMac is all anyone needs. “
I’m not sure we’re quite there yet, and in any event CPU isn’t the only compelling advantage of the Mac Pro — internal expansion (particularly PCIe slots) is also important. (Though that probably won’t be true if Intel’s plans to ramp 100 Gb/s Thunderbolt pan out.)
[Andrew Richards] “Isn’t the demographic for the Mac Pro the professional Mac user who really needs the most computing power they can reasonably stuff into a mass-market box? “
I think the issue is that at some point, as CPU performance keeps increasing, dual socket towers won’t be any more “mass-market” than refrigerator-sized computers are today.
[Andrew Richards] “For decades, we’ve been able to do things with lesser boxes that used to take bleeding edge rigs only a few years earlier. What makes 2012 the year that our expectations plateau?”
I’m not sure it is 2012, but I don’t think it’s that far off. The market keeps shrinking. It used to be that practically every profssional Photoshop user had a compelling need to buy a high-end tower; now 2D bitmap editing just isn’t demanding enough for most of them to bother. Offline video editing has also basically followed this path, and online editing/color grading are going to follow shortly. When you can grade 4K in real-time on a laptop (probably within five years), how many people in our market will still care about owning a dual socket tower?
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Thomas J. Watson]“I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.”
[Ken Olsen]“There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home.”
[Bill Gates] “640K ought to be enough for anybody.”
[Chris Kenny] “If Intel has a 12 core processor available in a couple of years, will Apple really still feel the need to make a dual processor (i.e. 24 core) machine?”
Apologies to Messrs. Watson, Olsen, and Gates, who were either misquoted or had their quotes taken out of context.
[Chris Kenny] “at some point single CPU performance will be so high it won’t really make sense even for most of the Mac Pro’s demographic.”
It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. Sizzle core beast folks like me are now using PCs for desktop-based performance computing. The workstation market is actually growing in absolute numbers (see just about any Jon Peddie Research article from the last 3 years), but Apple is only doing the bare minimum necessary to stay in it.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] “[Thomas J. Watson]”I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.”
[Ken Olsen]”There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home.”
[Bill Gates] “640K ought to be enough for anybody.”
[Chris Kenny] “If Intel has a 12 core processor available in a couple of years, will Apple really still feel the need to make a dual processor (i.e. 24 core) machine?”
Apologies to Messrs. Watson, Olsen, and Gates, who were either misquoted or had their quotes taken out of context.”
It’s an invalid analogy. I’m not arguing demand for CPU performance will hit a wall and nobody will ever want any more. I’m arguing that at some point single CPU systems will serve the Mac Pro’s current demographic well enough that for most of us (nearly all of us) dual CPU machines will no longer pass a cost/benefit analysis. (The same way most of us probably wouldn’t buy a quad CPU Mac Pro today if Apple had one available at, say, $15K.)
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Chris Kenny] “I’m not sure we’re quite there yet, and in any event CPU isn’t the only compelling advantage of the Mac Pro — internal expansion (particularly PCIe slots) is also important. (Though that probably won’t be true if Intel’s plans to ramp 100 Gb/s Thunderbolt pan out.)”
That’s true, but I suspect Apple more than anyone has drunk the Thunderbolt Kool-aid and imagines slots are already obsolete today. If we actually get 100Gb Thunderbolt, then maybe for almost all practical purposes they are. But today? Hardly. So if we think about the USP of a Mac Pro, and we drop dual CPUs and slots (assuming an overly-optimistic Thunderbolt bias at Apple), there isn’t much USP left to separate it from an iMac.
[Chris Kenny] “When you can grade 4K in real-time on a laptop (probably within five years), how many people in our market will still care about owning a dual socket tower?”
If we’re talking about a five year timetable, then I’m in full agreement.
Best,
Andy -
[Andrew Richards] “That’s true, but I suspect Apple more than anyone has drunk the Thunderbolt Kool-aid and imagines slots are already obsolete today. If we actually get 100Gb Thunderbolt, then maybe for almost all practical purposes they are. But today? Hardly. So if we think about the USP of a Mac Pro, and we drop dual CPUs and slots (assuming an overly-optimistic Thunderbolt bias at Apple), there isn’t much USP left to separate it from an iMac.”
Sure. It’s a Mac Mini with a more powerful CPU at that point. (And actually, the Mac Mini is starting to be a pretty plausible machine for an edit suite… if this year’s Mini lineup includes a machine with both a quad core CPU and dedicated graphics — unlike the current lineup that makes you choose — we’re probably going to try building a couple of offline suites around them.)
Personally, as I said in the other thread, I’d lay 80% odds on at least one more Mac Pro. After that, who knows?
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up