Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Desktops > New pro machines all quad? or more?

New pro machines all quad? or more?
Thread Tools
sodamnregistered2
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 18, 2006, 04:25 PM
 
With the duo MacBooks, it would seem like the towers would almost have to be all quads?

I always wondered why Apple took so long to both, release quads and decent video cards and make the Mac what SGI was around the turn of the millenium.

How are they going to differentiate the towers?
MacBook Pro C2D 2.16GHz 2GB 120GB OSX 10.4.9, Boot Camp 1.2, Vista Home Premium
mac mini 1.42, 60GB 7200rpm, 1GB (sold), dual 2GHz/G5 (sold), Powerbook 15" 1GHz (sold)
dual G4 800MHz (sold), dual G4 450MHz (sold), G4 450MHz (sold), Powerbook Pismo G3 500MHz (sold)
PowerMac 9500 132MHz 601, dual 180MHz 604e, Newer G3 400MHz (in closet)
Powermac 7100 80MHz (sold), Powermac 7100 66MHz (sold)
     
Zubir
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 18, 2006, 04:32 PM
 
I wouldn't count on it. There will definitely be a Intel quad, but the lower end PowerMacs will probably be duals.
     
sodamnregistered2  (op)
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 18, 2006, 04:48 PM
 
Why though? Seems like people would just get the MacBook.

Man, I really do hate the MacBook name... just realized that... haha
MacBook Pro C2D 2.16GHz 2GB 120GB OSX 10.4.9, Boot Camp 1.2, Vista Home Premium
mac mini 1.42, 60GB 7200rpm, 1GB (sold), dual 2GHz/G5 (sold), Powerbook 15" 1GHz (sold)
dual G4 800MHz (sold), dual G4 450MHz (sold), G4 450MHz (sold), Powerbook Pismo G3 500MHz (sold)
PowerMac 9500 132MHz 601, dual 180MHz 604e, Newer G3 400MHz (in closet)
Powermac 7100 80MHz (sold), Powermac 7100 66MHz (sold)
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 18, 2006, 05:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by sodamnregistered2
Why though? Seems like people would just get the MacBook.
It looks like it will take a long time for Intel to get a dual dual core package out, and it's going to be expensive. It definitely won't be standard across the Mactel tower line. But the towers will get faster desktop variant Intel chips.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
sodamnregistered2  (op)
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 18, 2006, 05:09 PM
 
ah, so Intel is making the mobo chipsets I guess?

If it's a 2GHz Macbook vs. a 2.13 Tower... the only truly compelling feature will be video/card PCI slots...

The iMac looks better and better... I wish they'd make a headless one... the mini will almost have to be single core for price reasons... although a duo would be really sweet...

I'm just trying to get a grip on their lineup... I'm down to a Mac Mini waiting for the dust to settle. I'm doing all my pro work on Windows now...

I just built a dualcore Athlon64 for like $1200... Apple is going to be under some new pricing pressures... I prefer OS X to Windows, but...
MacBook Pro C2D 2.16GHz 2GB 120GB OSX 10.4.9, Boot Camp 1.2, Vista Home Premium
mac mini 1.42, 60GB 7200rpm, 1GB (sold), dual 2GHz/G5 (sold), Powerbook 15" 1GHz (sold)
dual G4 800MHz (sold), dual G4 450MHz (sold), G4 450MHz (sold), Powerbook Pismo G3 500MHz (sold)
PowerMac 9500 132MHz 601, dual 180MHz 604e, Newer G3 400MHz (in closet)
Powermac 7100 80MHz (sold), Powermac 7100 66MHz (sold)
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 18, 2006, 06:23 PM
 
Intel has SMP capable dual core chips (Woodcrest), quad core chips (Kentsfield), SMP capable quad core chips (Clovertown), octo (octal?) core chips (Yorkfield), and 32 (I'm not even going to bother trying to spell it out) core chips (Dunnington) planned for their Next Generation Microarchitecture (INGM, also known as P8).
     
Westfoto
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: New Orleans, La. USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 18, 2006, 09:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by sodamnregistered2

I just built a dualcore Athlon64 for like $1200... Apple is going to be under some new pricing pressures... I prefer OS X to Windows, but...

Not everyone is willing or able to build there own computer, so there is more to a computer than price. Why do you think that dell does so well that there is even an Apple computer Co. ??

Some people just want the thing to do want it is suppose to do and do well ...
Mac Pro - 12 GB RAM - 30" & 23" Displays - 10.7.1
MacBook Pro - 2 GB RAM - 10.6.8
Airport Extreme • Canon iPF5000 • PIXMA Pro9000 • Xerox N2125
     
rhashem
Forum Regular
Join Date: Nov 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 18, 2006, 09:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by sodamnregistered2
ah, so Intel is making the mobo chipsets I guess?
Not just that. In order to put in Quads, Apple has to use the more expensive Xeon equivalents of the desktop processors, since the consumer models won't support SMP.

If it's a 2GHz Macbook vs. a 2.13 Tower... the only truly compelling feature will be video/card PCI slots...
Conroe will have a thermal design power of about 60W, or double that of Merom. That means it'll be 2.33 GHz Macbook versus 3.33 GHz Conroe, or something along those lines.
     
   
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:27 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,