More efficient quad-core Xeons coming Monday
#4
Posted 12 March 2007 - 07:49 AM
There is no chance, zilch, nada of these lower-power varients being used in the Mac Pro. Can you really realistically see the Mac Pro's cores, if even it has 8 of them, being clocked at 1.86GHz? I mean, which would you rather have, four 3GHz cores or eight 1.86GHz cores, bearing in mind the current software usage models? You'd have to a very specific usage pattern to gain extra performance from the eight core model at that clock speed. There's also the marketing aspect, although we should have left GHz behind us, sub-2GHz doesn't sound good for a 'pro' machine.
#6
Posted 12 March 2007 - 09:13 AM
Quote:
There is no chance, zilch, nada of these lower-power varients being used in the Mac Pro. Can you really realistically see the Mac Pro's cores, if even it has 8 of them, being clocked at 1.86GHz? I mean, which would you rather have, four 3GHz cores or eight 1.86GHz cores, bearing in mind the current software usage models? You'd have to a very specific usage pattern to gain extra performance from the eight core model at that clock speed. There's also the marketing aspect, although we should have left GHz behind us, sub-2GHz doesn't sound good for a 'pro' machine.
There is no chance, zilch, nada of these lower-power varients being used in the Mac Pro. Can you really realistically see the Mac Pro's cores, if even it has 8 of them, being clocked at 1.86GHz? I mean, which would you rather have, four 3GHz cores or eight 1.86GHz cores, bearing in mind the current software usage models? You'd have to a very specific usage pattern to gain extra performance from the eight core model at that clock speed. There's also the marketing aspect, although we should have left GHz behind us, sub-2GHz doesn't sound good for a 'pro' machine.
The 5300 Cloverton Xeon is at 2.66 Ghz. An 8-core PC gets a Cinebench score of around 1,900 whereas the 4-core 3 Ghz Mac Pro gets a score of around 1,500. That's not very good scaling.
I think the number of cores is going to be the new Mhz Myth. People are going to think they are getting twice the speed because they have twice the cores. The 8-core 5300-based PCs are seeing a speedup of just over 4X, not 8X.
Oh yeah, the iMac would get the Core 2 Extreme, which has four cores.
#11 Guest__*
Posted 12 March 2007 - 01:39 PM
Quote:
I think the number of cores is going to be the new Mhz Myth.
I think the number of cores is going to be the new Mhz Myth.
You may well be right, perhaps it can be called the "Core-a-Hertz Myth". As with many things it will probably be part myth, due to scalability problems, and part reality, due to actual performance increases albeit not in exact multiples of the number of cores.
#13
Posted 12 March 2007 - 07:04 PM
Quote:
Apple, could you please make a fanless Mac for the rest of us using all that power saving technology from Intel?
Fanless = ultraquiet. Bedroom quiet.
Thanks.
Apple, could you please make a fanless Mac for the rest of us using all that power saving technology from Intel?
Fanless = ultraquiet. Bedroom quiet.
Thanks.
I have a 3.0GHz Mac Pro IN A BEDROOM, and the thing is whisper quiet. So much so that coming in the door I literally have to look to see if the white dot on the front is there to tell if it is on or not.
Under a desk, using the system is almost inaudible.
The fans are virtually a non issue. The loudest components are now the hard drives. With two Seagate 7200.10 drives (quiet) in a RAID-0 arrangement, plus the standard shipped Western Digital WD2500 (noisiest), the main sound you can hear is their spinning hum, the seek & read/write noise.
By the way, for comparison, I also have a dual G5 2.5GHz in another room, which relative to the Mac Pro is an airforce grade supersonic wind tunnel! It is as loud and obnoxious as the Mac Pro isn't. I also have an old 450MHz Cube, running a photo display, and despite being fanless, its hard drive means it is not totally noiseless.
There's no doubt, Mac Pros are very quiet machines.



Sign In
Register
Help


MultiQuote