Apple released the Quad-core MacPros

[TheThirdMan]

I dont think this is the big upgrade. remember when they upgraded the powerbooks a month before the macbook pros? They havent upgraded anything else.

Ill think theyll bring out another one soon, with a redesigned case and higher spec.

 

[DrQuincy]

Is this US only - I tried speccing one up in the UK store and there was no 8-core option.

Also, even once Leopard is out will you need specific applications to make use of 8 cores or will everything use it?

 

[cjay]

How portable is this thing?

 

[Nagger Pumper]

ezactly how fast is a 3.0 GHz Quad core ?

 

[lionel]

ezactly how fast is a 3.0 GHz Quad core ?

Faster then a fast thing on speed.

 

[ToddG]

Originally Posted by ToddG
And in other news today, Microsoft announced that it will partner with an as-yet unnamed PC builder to create the world's first quad-core processor computer sometime in 2012. :ninja:

You must be one of those techno-illiterate users. The Microsoft world has had quad core processors for months now, just as we are not limited to the outdated Radeon X1900 series of graphics cards. Unbias opinions are appreciated. Thanks.

Uhhhhhhhh ....

 

[Odin_aa]

When I was about 12-14 a friend had a Apple 128 or Commador 64 something like that...which at the time was "Top of the line" in home computing. We were still working with a TI-99 or other such computer my dad had purchased and upgraded several times. That was in the early 80's.

Today I have an 11 year old, using a G5 PowerMac and/or P4 PC system and this monster is released. Imagine if you will what will be available when he is 39. Will we continue to make such huge advances in technology?

 

[kaidomac]

When I was about 12-14 a friend had a Apple 128 or Commador 64 something like that...which at the time was "Top of the line" in home computing. We were still working with a TI-99 or other such computer my dad had purchased and upgraded several times. That was in the early 80's.

Today I have an 11 year old, using a G5 PowerMac and/or P4 PC system and this monster is released. Imagine if you will what will be available when he is 39. Will we continue to make such huge advances in technology?

I kind of wonder if we will hit a performance ceiling to the point where it doesn't really matter anymore. There will always be certain applications that will be power-hungry, but imagine computers that can edit any video in 100% realtime, that can render 3D scenes instantaneously (ALL frames at once!), and so on.

I think for the majority of users, that has already happened. The basics - Internet, Email, Office - already work lighting-fast on brand-new machines. I have a Core 2 Duo Windows laptop and all of my common applications open in the blink of an eye. I think that it will come down to applications (use of computers) and training. As far as training goes, no system can overcome a user who doesn't know how to organize their files, keep backups, etc. However, with proper design you can really make things easier on the user. Time Machine is looking good for most people and Spotlight really helps with file searching, for example. I mean, just take a look at Windows vs. Mac - the usability on a Mac is far superior to a stock Windows machine. Spotlight will find you anything you want. The Dock provides instant access to all of your commonly used programs. Ask a Mac user to tweak some settings and there is a SINGLE PLACE to go - the System Preferences window! No searching around in the Control Panel, in System Properties, in the Start Menu, or in some hidden menu somewhere else.

As far as applications go...I occasionally read an interesting Tom Clancy series called Net Force, wherein the computers can plug directly into your brain and they basically have unlimited computing power. The neural interface is present in holodeck-quality 3D and you can meet people virtually, do all kinds of research, and so on. Clancy has some really novel ideas as far as applications within the system, like mail (read and see!). I almost wonder if we will have a Star Trek-style future, where information and tools are readily available to anyone who wants them. Right now, Macs are just plain awesome for consumer computing. Add in Google, Wikipedia, and all of the other great sites out there and you have tremendous resources available at your disposal.

Yay for being a geek!

 

[deus_ex_machina]

I kind of wonder if we will hit a performance ceiling to the point where it doesn't really matter anymore.

The Singularity

 

[ToddG]

There are a variety of technological hurdles that need to be overcome in the processor and memory speed arenas. Right now, RAM is so much slower than your processor that it is already a bottleneck in many cases.

The rate at which processor speeds are increasing has slowed significantly. Other methods (multiple cores, larger caches, etc) are being used to keep performance increases going. But having tons of memory and a super-fast processor only helps you with certain applications ... slow data access (whether HDD or RAM) is going to keep things limited.

 

[fleurya]

Originally Posted by kaidomac
I kind of wonder if we will hit a performance ceiling to the point where it doesn't really matter anymore.

You mean, that there will be no practical application for the advances? I don't think that could ever happen. As long as we have the ability to do more, we'll find more to do with it. Look at the earliest spreadsheet programs. It was predicted that these programs along would cut the workload of accountants down so much that they would only have to work 2 or 3 days a week, 4 hours a day.. Check with those accountants are tax time these days and see how many hours a day they work!

 

[ronokenneally]

sorry probably a stupid question to ye but what is a core is it a process or or the slot which a hard drive can be put into and what is the quad part for

 

[PowerBookG4]

a "core" is a processor on a single chip. So a dual core processor is 2 processors on 1 chip, where as a quad core processor is 4 processors on a single chip. The 8 core mac pro, is 2 quad core processors on 1 mother board, giving the user access to a total of 8 cores... which is .. really... really.. really ..(one more really?) really.. FAST!!

 

[ronokenneally]

they wouldn't be usable in macbook pro's would they by any chance and is it possable to put in lets say 2 x 2gb processors into one or is there a limit i'm not going to do it (too expensive) but i'm just wondering

 

[mac57]

OK, here goes. My dream machine would be:

2 x 3.0 GHz Core 2 Quad
2 GB RAM
750 GB 7200 RPM hard drive
nVidia GForce 7300, 256 MB Video RAM (not a gamer, don't really care here)
Airport Extreme card
Apple Wireless keyboard and mouse

Total (from Apple site): $4703.00. Add 8% sales tax here in Texas and you get $5079.24

Zowie! That machine would be a real "barn burner" but I think the tag is a bit high! I may have to wait a bit! :dive:

 

[mac57]

Predictions for the iMac Line

Some of you may have seen my oft repeated (wishful thinking?) projection that Apple would, in 2007, differentiate their line up per:

Mac Pro line: 8 cores
iMac line: 4 cores
Mini line: 2 cores

I am pleased to see that the first part of this has come true, although I had expected the whole Mac Pro line to go quad core.

Now the prediction: watch for the 24" iMac to go Core 2 Quad in the next few months. You heard it here first folks! :dive:

 

[fleurya]

Don't iMacs and MAc Mini's use basically the same components as the laptops? So getting quad core in them would make it possible to do so in the MBPs, space and power usage notwithstanding.

 

[johnnyluu]

anyone have any idea when the 24-core will be released?

24-core, pah! I'm waiting for the mac pro I can plug directly into my brain via my left nostril!

 

[knightlie]

Don't iMacs and MAc Mini's use basically the same components as the laptops? So getting quad core in them would make it possible to do so in the MBPs, space and power usage notwithstanding.

They would probably melt their way to the Earth's core. I don't think quad-cores are laptop-capable yet.

 

[lonerider]

You mean, that there will be no practical application for the advances? I don't think that could ever happen. As long as we have the ability to do more, we'll find more to do with it. Look at the earliest spreadsheet programs. It was predicted that these programs along would cut the workload of accountants down so much that they would only have to work 2 or 3 days a week, 4 hours a day.. Check with those accountants are tax time these days and see how many hours a day they work!

Actually I think that poster has a good point. It hasn't quite infected the Mac world yet, but I think for the typical user (95% of them) the point where 'it doesn't matter anymore' was passed about 4 or 5 years ago in the PC world.

Think back to then - the 3.06Ghz HT P4 was released (2002).

That is still a fine processor for most anything you want to do. Teamed up with state hardware for the time, the only thing you wouldn't be able to do today with it is play new video games. Of course, all you'd have to change from that rig 5 years ago is a video card - and you'd be able to play the vast majority of todays new releases just fine.

Now veryone is going to throw in encoding and rendering as examples where speed is needed - but that's in the other 5% category. Even for light duty encoding and ripping - that old rig would server quite well.

I've thought for quite some time that the computer 'revolution' is nearing its final stage, where computers are like cars. They get more bells and whistles and advance some over time, but the advancements arent really detectible except over a long time - say a decade or so. We're pretty darn close to that now in the computer industry.