Mac Pro...

[cowasaki]

then surely there interchangable. atleast they are with PCs?

Xeons are just the workstation version of core 2 with a different name.

Only in the same way that Celerons are the same as Pentium 4!

Also Core2 and their quad core counter parts are not normally designed to work in PAIRS so they are not interchangable. Even if you put one of them into a Mac pro the EFI would probably fail to recognise it (as it is designed for Xeons) unless you were lucky. I do know of one modder that has done it but more for amusement than anything else because the Xeons will always out perform their desktop equivalents. I doubt that Intel will release any EIGHT core processors until after NEHALEM is out but the six core is already mapped.

 

[cowasaki]

but by the time you need 16 cores the rest of the machine will be obsolete because you won't be able to fit any more dimms in it and it'll probably have a totally outdated graphics card and by then we'll have PCI-E 3 etc.

It is getting clear that your knowledge of Apple machines and workstation class machines is rather limited. The next version of MacOS "snow leopard" is being changed to make it work in multiple threads as much as possible and to make use of as many cores as possible so what you are saying might be right for Windows but not MacOS. Also Macpros have 8 DIMM slots and it will be a while before having 32Gb of RAM will be a limiting factor!

In fact 8Gb FB-Dimms are due so a Mac pro will be able to handle 64Gb

 

[cowasaki]

Besides either way, I don't relaly see the point in going for 8 core atm. Future proofing is stupid, because by the time you nned to make the upgrades either the rest of your hardware is out of date, you don't really NEED an upgrade or it'd be more viable to just replace the whole system.

I refer to my last answer we are using MacOS not windows and MacOS handles multi cores far better now and even better next year with the new version Snow-Leopard. So buying a computer now that will benefit next year is sensible not stupid !!

 

[Yantorsen]

I disagree. Xeons are exactly the same as core 2s just tested to higher degree.

And just becuase the OS can handle more cores does not mean that you need it, certainly not worth the extra.

 

[cowasaki]

I disagree. Xeons are exactly the same as core 2s just tested to higher degree.

I refer to my previous post about your lack of knowledge of the subject.

 

[Yantorsen]

I refer to my previous post about your lack of knowledge of the subject.

the only reason why the xeon would be better with duel socket is because it has a higher thermal rating so could thus withstand the heat in the case better.

 

[cowasaki]

the only reason why the xeon would be better with duel socket is because it has a higher thermal rating so could thus withstand the heat in the case better.

I think you should quit whilst you are behind... before you get further behind.

 

[Yantorsen]

I think you should quit whilst you are behind... before you get further behind.

there is no difference between the chips.

providing we are both talking about 775s not 771s, they are made on the same line, in the same factory, to the same spec.

they are then tested to see how well they perform testing different thermal conditions etc.

the ones that do the best are named up as xeons. thats all there is too it. because of this xeons are usually more efficent. so unless powermacs are fitted with wimpy PSUs (which i doubt), then there would be no problem.

 

[Yantorsen]

the comment about celerons and pentium 4s is rubbish aswell.

theres clear differences between pentium 4s and celorons, different, buses, different mltiplyers, l2 cache, etc...

 

[cowasaki]

there is no difference between the chips.

providing we are both talking about 775s not 771s, they are made on the same line, in the same factory, to the same spec.

they are then tested to see how well they perform testing different thermal conditions etc.

the ones that do the best are named up as xeons. thats all there is too it. because of this xeons are usually more efficent.

We are talking about s771 Workstation class chips that have the ability to run in dual and above chip setups. Remember the Mac pro is a dual chip setup and uses s771 - Thats what we have been talking about all along.

so unless powermacs are fitted with wimpy PSUs (which i doubt), then there would be no problem.

PowerMacs are an obsolete Mac from several years ago using motorola power processors. The Macpro is a different computer (and it has a 1000w PSU just for info)

 

[Yantorsen]

We are talking about s771 Workstation class chips that have the ability to run in dual and above chip setups. Remember the Mac pro is a dual chip setup and uses s771 - Thats what we have been talking about all along.

but you said earlier that core 2 and xeons use the same socket? when i said they don't?

you cannot to my knowledge get s771 core 2s.

 

[cowasaki]

the comment about celerons and pentium 4s is rubbish aswell.

theres clear differences between pentium 4s and celorons, different, buses, different mltiplyers, l2 cache, etc...

The Celeron and P4 are the same chip other than multiplier and cache size. That is the point I was making. We are talking about s771 Xeons which are as different to Core2Duos as Celerons are to P4s.

You are getting confused with desktop class processors. This entire thread is discussing MAC PROs and THEIR processors

 

[Yantorsen]

The Celeron and P4 are the same chip other than multiplier and cache size. That is the point I was making. We are talking about s771 Xeons which are as different to Core2Duos as Celerons are to P4s.

You are getting confused with desktop class processors. This entire thread is discussing MAC PROs and THEIR processors

I'm not getting confused at all. you made the desktop cpu comparison not me.

celerons also have a less strict binning process, hence why they don't overclock too well usually.

 

[cowasaki]

but you said earlier that core 2 and xeons use the same socket? when i said they don't?

you cannot to my knowledge get s771 core 2s.

You can get s775 Xeons which ARE basically the same as Core2duos/Quad cores but these are not the same as the Xeons in a Macpro and I think this is what is confusing you because your knowledge seems to be along that line rather than the server/workstation class.

 

[Yantorsen]

You can get s775 Xeons which ARE basically the same as Core2duos/Quad cores but these are not the same as the Xeons in a Macpro and I think this is what is confusing you because your knowledge seems to be along that line rather than the server/workstation class.

you would be correct in saying my knowledge is more expansive in the desktp field. But the basic principals are universal. I see no good reason why you cannot slot the latest chip fitting whatever socket you have into the socket you have if you take out the existing chip.

 

[cowasaki]

I'm not getting confused at all. you made the desktop cpu comparison not me.

celerons also have a less strict binning process, hence why they don't overclock too well usually.

I was comparing them in order to use something you were more clear with. Forget testing processes I am talking about physical differences and the internal architecture.

 

[Yantorsen]

I was comparing them in order to use something you were more clear with. Forget testing processes I am talking about physical differences and the internal architecture.

ok then, we were talking at crossed purposes.

I knew that the dual socket macpros would have to use s771 boards, but i wasn't aware that the single socket one would also have to be s771, although thinking about it as they use ecc dimms if i'd thought about it it probably makes more sense.


besides you had given me the impression we were talking about s775 boards.

 

[cowasaki]

you would be correct in saying my knowledge is more expansive in the desktp field. But the basic principals are universal. I see no good reason why you cannot slot the latest chip fitting whatever socket you have into the socket you have if you take out the existing chip.

Yes I was saying you know more about the desktop field the you do about the workstation field. We are getting back to the original conversation. The only chip beyond the current chip that Intel will release is a 6 core version. The 8 core version may physically fit into the socket but it will be a nahelem chip and will NOT work AT ALL and will most likely damage both parts.

 

[Chappers]

OK here's a simple question.

As far as I know, programs such as Photoshop and Lightroom are not coded to work with 8 core machines. ( Please correct me if I am wrong). So is there any point in going for an 8 core Mac Pro, as the programs I will be using won't make use of them.

In 3-4 years time when programs are written for 8 core ( or 12 or 16) then it'll be time to upgrade. Rather than spend the money on cores I won't use it would be better to spend the money on extra memory, which should make things faster, and extra storage, which I defiantly will need

 

[Yantorsen]

Yes I was saying you know more about the desktop field the you do about the workstation field. We are getting back to the original conversation. The only chip beyond the current chip that Intel will release is a 6 core version. The 8 core version may physically fit into the socket but it will be a nahelem chip and will NOT work AT ALL and will most likely damage both parts.

well i'm not familiar with what architecture the chip sets on apple mobos are. I assume there an intel one?

i know that the octo core nahelem will work in p45 s775 boards with a bios update.

but knowing what apple are like i don't suppose its so easy to just do a bios update.

 

[cowasaki]

ok then, we were talking at crossed purposes.

I knew that the dual socket macpros would have to use s771 boards, but i wasn't aware that the single socket one would also have to be s771, although thinking about it as they use ecc dimms if i'd thought about it it probably makes more sense.


besides you had given me the impression we were talking about s775 boards.

If you are interested I will give you some links to go and have a read. The Mac pro is basically a PC albeit a workstation one. The only real difference between a Mac and a PC now is that the PC is open and uses a BIOS whereas the Mac is more limited in what it will allow (which is actually an advantage in a lot of ways because it fixes one of the big problems ie compatibility) and the Mac uses EFI instead of a BIOS.

EFI is basically the next thing after BIOS and I think that PCs will go that way too within the next 5 years!

The Mac pro makes a superb Windows PC and in fact when the revision 1 Mac pro was launched it was the fastest Windows workstation you could buy under £5K

 

[whiteflyer]

Besides either way, I don't relaly see the point in going for 8 core atm. Future proofing is stupid, because by the time you nned to make the upgrades either the rest of your hardware is out of date, you don't really NEED an upgrade or it'd be more viable to just replace the whole system.

I think software is nearly always written to make the most out of the latest hardware. I can remember having a good word processor on my BBC Model B that was on an 16K eeprom. As ram came cheap and more widely available the size of programs got large.

As nearly all computers sold now are multi core be it PC or Mac, I'm sure the new software will take account of that. I would expect to see the first game to demand multi core to be launched very soon.

 

[Yantorsen]

OK here's a simple question.

As far as I know, programs such as Photoshop and Lightroom are not coded to work with 8 core machines. ( Please correct me if I am wrong). So is there any point in going for an 8 core Mac Pro, as the programs I will be using won't make use of them.

In 3-4 years time when programs are written for 8 core ( or 12 or 16) then it'll be time to upgrade. Rather than spend the money on cores I won't use it would be better to spend the money on extra memory, which should make things faster, and extra storage, which I defiantly will need

this is what I was trying to say. I agree with you and your logic here.

it has been correctly pointed out that snow leopard will make use of 8 cores, but still doubt if ps or lr will.

even if they do, photoshop runs perfectly well on a quad, well atleast it does with quad on my pc.

 

[Yantorsen]

If you are interested I will give you some links to go and have a read. The Mac pro is basically a PC albeit a workstation one. The only real difference between a Mac and a PC now is that the PC is open and uses a BIOS whereas the Mac is more limited in what it will allow (which is actually an advantage in a lot of ways because it fixes one of the big problems ie compatibility) and the Mac uses EFI instead of a BIOS.

EFI is basically the next thing after BIOS and I think that PCs will go that way too within the next 5 years!

The Mac pro makes a superb Windows PC and in fact when the revision 1 Mac pro was launched it was the fastest Windows workstation you could buy under £5K

well I'm sure you could make something better under 5k.

but besides the point, i've had read a bit about EFI, doesn't seem to have anything over the bios, if its not broke dont fix it imo.

 

[Yantorsen]

I think software is nearly always written to make the most out of the latest hardware. I can remember having a good word processor on my BBC Model B that was on an 16K eeprom. As ram came cheap and more widely available the size of programs got large.

As nearly all computers sold now are multi core be it PC or Mac, I'm sure the new software will take account of that. I would expect to see the first game to demand multi core to be launched very soon.

you say that. but we've had quad core for a few years now, and there only 2 maybe 3 games that even make use of it (such as supcom). not even crysis does.

so i wouldnt be so quick to say that ps and lr are going to be using 8 cores in a hurry.

 

[cowasaki]

well i'm not familiar with what architecture the chip sets on apple mobos are. I assume there an intel one?

i know that the octo core nahelem will work in p45 s775 boards with a bios update.

but knowing what apple are like i don't suppose its so easy to just do a bios update.

Nehelem chips will need a new motherboard rather than a bios upgrade unless the motherboard uses the new chipset that has just been launched which is compatible with both chips.

Intel launch a chipset every two years and a new line of processors every two years but with both one year out ie chipset this year, processor next year, chipset the year after, then processor. Because of this each chipset works with 2 families of processor and the new chipset that has just been launched will work with nahelem next year (although it does not mean that any motherboard you get now with that chipset will work next year - I fell fowl of this myself when the core2duo came out and my motherboard would not take a core2duo despite being a compatible chipset - because the voltages were wrong).

Anyway the chipset in the Macpro is the 5000 which is a workstation chipset but basically it is the same last generation which means it will not work with the new processors next year. Nehalem-Xeon will require the new chipset.

 

[Yantorsen]

Nehelem chips will need a new motherboard rather than a bios upgrade unless the motherboard uses the new chipset that has just been launched which is compatible with both chips.

Intel launch a chipset every two years and a new line of processors every two years but with both one year out ie chipset this year, processor next year, chipset the year after, then processor. Because of this each chipset works with 2 families of processor and the new chipset that has just been launched will work with nahelem next year (although it does not mean that any motherboard you get now with that chipset will work next year - I fell fowl of this myself when the core2duo came out and my motherboard would not take a core2duo despite being a compatible chipset - because the voltages were wrong).

Anyway the chipset in the Macpro is the 5100 which is a workstation chipset but basically it is the same last generation which means it will not work with the new processors next year. Nehalem-Xeon will require the new chipset.

I think you'll find select p45s will also work.

but everything else there i knew.

apart from the last pragraph. If that is the case then you should still be able to slot in a 6 core cpu, which is more than edequate for the next few years.

 

[cowasaki]

you say that. but we've had quad core for a few years now, and there only 2 maybe 3 games that even make use of it (such as supcom). not even crysis does.

so i wouldnt be so quick to say that ps and lr are going to be using 8 cores in a hurry.

You have hit the nail on the head there - GAMES !

Games will not make use of multicores in the same way that serious software will because they do not lead themselves to being broken up into small pieces like serious software does. I do not play games although my Mac pro would probably play them quite well! I actually have a PS3 with NO GAMES which I use for watching blu-ray films!

Multi-core is only really an advantage when you can split a task up into small sub tasks or when several things are happening at the same time. If you a rendering a complicated picture and can split this into 8 tasks across 8 cores then that should make the computer upto 8 times faster. If you are playing a game then it is unlikely you could split it up into as many parts which is the reason games do not make as good a use of multi cores. they should be able to handle upto four though because then you could have one handling i/o, one handling physics, one handling the baddies and one doing something else or something like that. With games though it is now really all about the graphics processor

 

[Yantorsen]

You have hit the nail on the head there - GAMES !

Games will not make use of multicores in the same way that serious software will because they do not lead themselves to being broken up into small pieces like serious software does. I do not play games although my Mac pro would probably play them quite well! I actually have a PS3 with NO GAMES which I use for watching blu-ray films!

Multi-core is only really an advantage when you can split a task up into small sub tasks or when several things are happening at the same time. If you a rendering a complicated picture and can split this into 8 tasks across 8 cores then that should make the computer upto 8 times faster. If you are playing a game then it is unlikely you could split it up into as many parts which is the reason games do not make as good a use of multi cores. they should be able to handle upto four though because then you could have one handling i/o, one handling physics, one handling the baddies and one doing something else or something like that. With games though it is now really all about the graphics processor

yeah graphics cards are more important for games. having said that CS4 should be able to use GPUs for more power.

though tbh i disagree that games don't lend them selves to multi threading. There are a lot of proccesses going on that could be split up in a game, if it was just coded differently. I'm not saying it'd be easy to do mind.

 

[cowasaki]

I think you'll find select p45s will also work.

We will have to see but the Nahelem now includes a memory controller like AMD so I think we may find that Nahelem is going to be new chipset only and if reports are believed there is also a new socket possibly socket B.

 

[Matt]

ps3 splits games into smaller parts for its CELL processor.

Games on PC will always have to be playable on a lowish spec machine, the lowest common denominator, much like xbox360 games will always have to be playable without a HDD as long as microsoft insist on building them without

 

[Yantorsen]

We will have to see but the Nahelem now includes a memory controller like AMD so I think we may find that Nahelem is going to be new chipset only and if reports are believed there is also a new socket possibly socket B.

possibly. like i said though i havn't looked into the latest hardware news too seriously since i built my last pc.

ps3 splits games into smaller parts for its CELL processor.

Games on PC will always have to be playable on a lowish spec machine, the lowest common denominator, much like xbox360 games will always have to be playable without a HDD as long as microsoft insist on building them without

this is getting a bit off topic now, but yeah thats also true, a game for pc will need to be coded for multicore and single core, which can cause problems and make game files huge.

 

[Marcel]

Applecare !!!

Don't get Applecare from Apple... Buy it from America via Ebay, I paid less than £100 for my Applecare... It is transferable worldwide so you can just get the American one and use that

Has anyone else done this? I was weighing up the pros and cons of Applecare, but think its quite expensive (120 quid or so for my imac).
There's a few on ebay US, or about £65, and they email you the code.

Is doing it this way worth it? Is it risky? The ads say you just go to the apple warranty site and put the code in. Do Apple care that its a US originating code?

 

[cowasaki]

ps3 splits games into smaller parts for its CELL processor.

Games on PC will always have to be playable on a lowish spec machine, the lowest common denominator, much like xbox360 games will always have to be playable without a HDD as long as microsoft insist on building them without

Yes, rendering can be split and my example above split the game into 3/4. But this is the excuse being given by the games developers and has been for a few years now! But as games rely so much on 3D processing it is the graphics card that really makes the big difference especially at any higher resolution.

Games are not really going to benefit till the games companies start pushing their programmers to re-code. It is far more difficult to write decent efficient multi threaded applications than to write them that just rely on shear grunt from the GPU

 

[cowasaki]

Has anyone else done this? I was weighing up the pros and cons of Applecare, but think its quite expensive (120 quid or so for my imac).
There's a few on ebay US, or about £65, and they email you the code.

Is doing it this way worth it? Is it risky? The ads say you just go to the apple warranty site and put the code in. Do Apple care that its a US originating code?

I have done it and it worked perfectly. I bought the applecare and he emailed the code. I then input the code into the UK site and it brought up my Mac pro. I have used it and it works

I also bought a .MAC code from the US which also worked perfectly

 

[Chappers]

I have done it and it worked perfectly. I bought the applecare and he emailed the code. I then input the code into the UK site and it brought up my Mac pro. I have used it and it works

I also bought a .MAC code from the US which also worked perfectly

Suggestions as to which site to use for the Applecare

 

[cowasaki]

Suggestions as to which site to use for the Applecare

I would make sure that you find one with really good feedback...... I will just check if the computer I bought mine from is still on my history......back shortly!

 

[Marcel]

I have done it and it worked perfectly. I bought the applecare and he emailed the code. I then input the code into the UK site and it brought up my Mac pro. I have used it and it works

I also bought a .MAC code from the US which also worked perfectly

Do you have a link to the seller you used? (For both the applecare and the .MAC)

 

[cowasaki]

I have just been through all my feedback to try and find it but ebay only shows you the last few transactions now. You can't view older ones so I cant work out which seller sold me what! Have just checked and I've cleared all my ebay email prior to March too.

I will have a look on ebay usa shortly as I've just put tea on and see if I can find the same one again as I need to sort out one for my macbook pro anyway!

 

[hyakuhei]

Well, this thread has gotten rather technical!

I have an eight core mac pro with 10gig of Ram, I love it. Works very well with the Nvidia 8800GT and is doing a good job of driving my monitors. The easy to configure disk management, software raid and time machine have made my life a lot easier!

-Rob