New Mac Products 7th August

[Energize]

You really think Core 2s and Xeons perform the same? Quick, tell the world, this secret has been kept by Intel for far too long.

To buy 2x of the 2.66GHz Xeons that are in the Mac Pro would cost you nearly £800.

Pricing doesn't mean squat for performance, notice how the core 2 extreme cpus cost double the price for a 270mhz speed boost, or how the mac pro costs way more than a more powerful pc?

Core 2 Quad 6700,

Clock: 2.67Ghz
Architecture: Core
Cache: 8MiB
Core: Kentsfield
FSB: 1066MHz

Intel Xeon 5150,

Clock: 2.66Ghz
Architecture: Core
Cache: 4MiB
Core: Woodcrest
FSB: 1,333Mhz

Both use the same architecture and clock speed. And the cache balances out with 2 xeons, though if the 8MiB of cache is shared on the C2Q then that will benefit it in some cases. And of course the Xeon uses registered memory which is a minor hinderence to performance. As you can imagine, the 267Mhz fsb improvement is hardly groundbreaking. Just take a look at some benchmarks.

Just because say opterons cost more doesn't mean they perform better than athlons. They are simply named differently because they are designed for a server environment where reliability is critical and that is why they charge more, not for performance, otherwise servers would be using £50 e2140s cranked upto 3.5Ghz which would own that Xeon.

 

[FreeStream]

You really think Core 2s and Xeons perform the same? Quick, tell the world, this secret has been kept by Intel for far too long.

To buy 2x of the 2.66GHz Xeons that are in the Mac Pro would cost you nearly £800.

So what?

I could build a new PC, overclock it with water cooling for £1000 and it kick the Mac Pros backside, (esp with the new G0 chips).

And they do perform the same, within about 5% IIRC, they are all based on the C2 design.

But I want OS X and the design on the hardware. So therefore I want to buy a Mac Pro, but to buy a Mac Pro I need a DX10 high end graphics card and more memory.

 

[Will_3rd]

might get the new wired Apple keyboard and Leopard in October

 

[NickK]

Ha ha. Hideous to you? Even more hideous if you buy Dell.

This stupidity was put to bed last year.

http://www.macworld.com/2006/08/features/macproprice/index.php

{tl:dr Mac Pro $1000 cheaper than similarly configured Dell.}

More here

http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33576

The prices this year are left as an exercise for the reader.

Being impartial - the Dell does come with a monitor.. the Mac Pro does not. That factor is not discussed.

 

[NickK]

Or just use a quad core for the same performance. *snip*

A bit apples and pears - a two CPU workstation vs a home PC.

As the Mac Pro is targeted at business it's not a surprise that it's more expensive.

Lastly a Mac Pro purchase is an all in one package out of the box. Anyone can buy it and then immediately get a return on the power. No building, no overclocking, no watercooling cleaning cycle.. There's no need to understand the technical gubbins - just plug in and go.

 

[mattyrigby00]

Or just use a quad core for the same performance.

Western Digital Caviar Special Edition 250GB 2500JB ATA-100 8MB Cache
£31.99
Antec NSK4400
£39.99
HP DVD 1035i 20x DVD±RW x12 Ram Dual Layer DVD-Writer (Black)
£13.99
Asus GeForce EN7300GT-HTD Silent 256MB DDR2 TV-Out/DVI (PCI-Express)

£34.99
OcUK 1GB (2x512MB) PC2-6400C5 800MHz DDR2 Dual Channel Kit
£19.99

Intel Core 2 Quad Pro Q6700 "LGA775 Kentsfield" 2.66GHz (1066FSB)
£299.99
EVGA nForce 650i Ultra (Socket 775) PCI-Express
£54.99


Total = £595.58

1/3 of the price of a mac pro and ocuk isn't exactly the cheapest supplier either.

lga771 processors are extremely expensive compared to lga775 ones... and lga771 dual processor boards are too... and registered memory...

xeon 5150 (dual core)'s are about 400 quid each, xeon 5355's about 500 quid each, and a dual processor lga771 motherboard is about 300 quid so even without the expensive memory the price of a mac pro is almost already covered by just the processors and memory.

buying a mac pro for home use is overkill and pointless, they are for buisnesses and stuff (professional use). a q6600 system will actually beat a dual xeon 5150 because of the fact the xeon needs slower fbdimms, but that means nothing simply because the mac pro is not a home machine. a logical explanation to why they have a rubbish graphics card as default: for if buisnesses buy it for server use or other things which dont need a good graphics card but need a lot of processing power, also its not a gaming machine so why would they supply an 8800gtx or other gaming cards with it? the people who buy it can choose the quadro (workstation version of geforce cards) if they need a good graphics card for what they do.

the problem is the imac hasnt got a good graphics card as an option for people who want to use it for games, and theres nothing between the imac and the mac pro so macs offer nothing to gamers.

 

[lay-z-boy]

lga771 processors are extremely expensive compared to lga775 ones... and lga771 dual processor boards are too... and registered memory...

xeon 5150 (dual core)'s are about 400 quid each, xeon 5355's about 500 quid each, and a dual processor lga771 motherboard is about 300 quid so even without the expensive memory the price of a mac pro is almost already covered by just the processors and memory.

buying a mac pro for home use is overkill and pointless, they are for buisnesses and stuff (professional use). a q6600 system will actually beat a dual xeon 5150 because of the fact the xeon needs slower fbdimms, but that means nothing simply because the mac pro is not a home machine. a logical explanation to why they have a rubbish graphics card as default: for if buisnesses buy it for server use or other things which dont need a good graphics card but need a lot of processing power, also its not a gaming machine so why would they supply an 8800gtx or other gaming cards with it? the people who buy it can choose the quadro (workstation version of geforce cards) if they need a good graphics card for what they do.

the problem is the imac hasnt got a good graphics card as an option for people who want to use it for games, and theres nothing between the imac and the mac pro so macs offer nothing to gamers.

Nail + Head + Hammer.

dual cpu systems are not cheap, plus the overhead you have to pay for it being a mac = huge amount of money.

You are better of buying a WS board and all the other stuff yourself, then you can pick and choose exactly what specs you want.
I would only advise dual cpu if you know you are going to use 100% of its power. MSN, internet, the odd game, some encoding and what have you here and there just isn't good enough.
Just get a single cpu quad core if you do that sort of stuff.

 

[Caged]

So what?

I could build a new PC, overclock it with water cooling for £1000 and it kick the Mac Pros backside, (esp with the new G0 chips).

And they do perform the same, within about 5% IIRC, they are all based on the C2 design.

But I want OS X and the design on the hardware. So therefore I want to buy a Mac Pro, but to buy a Mac Pro I need a DX10 high end graphics card and more memory.

So basically we've gone from "damn I wish those Mac Pros were cheaper" to "I want Apple to build me a system to this spec and I want it to be priced competitively with something I could build and overclock myself". I don't think Steve Jobs is losing any sleep over missing out on your custom.

 

[Deleted member 651465]

Seems like people expect Apple to turn their Mac Pro range in to a gamer-friendly powerhouse.

To be honest it would be amazing if they put in a 8800GTX, but as it stands the majority of MPro customers aren't going to be playing games.

I think people who are buying a Mac just for the OS really shouldn't bother with a Mac Pro as it's one hefty payout, when you could just as easily enjoy OS X on a 600£ MacBook, albeit no gaming options..

 

[daven1986]

the point isnt that we want the mac to turn it into a gaming power house. but they must realise that they are missing out on a HUGE market purely because they do not provide the OPTION to upgrade the graphics to a reasonable level.

 

[lay-z-boy]

Buy a pc if you want to game, customise it to make it a power house. There is no point in demanding high end graphics card in the mac pro if the option isn't there as the closest thing to an 8800gtx perhaps in the future is an fx 5600 which costs a ****ing fortune.

Get a fast pc and get a base spec macbook/mac mini, best of both worlds.

 

[daven1986]

yeah but what i am saying is that apple will then only get £300 - 500 instead of a possible £700+ so they are losing out.

 

[chex]

edit: nvm

 

[FreeStream]

So basically we've gone from "damn I wish those Mac Pros were cheaper" to "I want Apple to build me a system to this spec and I want it to be priced competitively with something I could build and overclock myself". I don't think Steve Jobs is losing any sleep over missing out on your custom.

So you think im the only one!?

I bought a PowerMac G4 for home use, I know about 30 people with G4s/G5s at home.

So its not just for Pro use.

You can't argue that having a top end processors and hardware with a 2 year old design graphics card and overpriced memory isn't exactly brilliant? Also pretty much everyone who wants to by a MacPro knows that a hardware update is on the way (October so they say) so they aint gonna be buying many anyway...

Edit:

Buy a pc if you want to game, customise it to make it a power house. There is no point in demanding high end graphics card in the mac pro if the option isn't there as the closest thing to an 8800gtx perhaps in the future is an fx 5600 which costs a ****ing fortune.

Get a fast pc and get a base spec macbook/mac mini, best of both worlds.

Then whats the point of pushing this dual boot thing? Games is the only thing I can think of really, as "Pros" will use OS X based software.


They have to update the graphics in it, they HAVE to, there is no two ways about it PLUS there is a 2 month wait on the X1900 as it is

 

[Slogan]

Why have people in this thread been comparing the price of components to that of retail prices?

 

[lemonkettaz]

People in the know, know that apple can do a lot better... HARDWARE wise, aesthetic wise.. yes, lovely id bot apple myself...

but hardware wise it isnt happening, for the prices im expected to pay.

we in the know, know we can get more power for the same price or less.

 

[SilverPenguin]

EDIT: and it's not a forest, it's a river...

Actually...

 

[DVD Cinema]

I think people who are buying a Mac just for the OS really shouldn't bother with a Mac Pro as it's one hefty payout, when you could just as easily enjoy OS X on a 600£ MacBook, albeit no gaming options..

Or a mac Mini @ £399.

 

[TheVoice]

the closest thing to an 8800gtx perhaps in the future is an fx 5600 which costs a ****ing fortune.

Just had to be a bit pedantic here - it's the FX4500. The 5600 is a horribly bad GeForce card from 2003.

 

[mattyrigby00]

Just had to be a bit pedantic here - it's the FX4500. The 5600 is a horribly bad GeForce card from 2003.

the quadro fx5600 is the workstation 8800gtx, the quadro fx4500 is the equivalent to 1 of the 7 series, the geforcefx5600 is the horribly bad geforce card from 2003.

Then whats the point of pushing this dual boot thing? Games is the only thing I can think of really, as "Pros" will use OS X based software.

apple made the bootcamp thing for sales, its so people buy a mac to "try out os x but use windows", if they like os x their next machine is a mac too, if they dont like it they sold 1 mac more.