Apple said to be preparing 12-core Mac Pros and 27-inch LED Cinema Displays
By Vlad Savov 
posted March 19th 2010 7:32AM
posted March 19th 2010 7:32AM
AppleInsider has rounded up its stable of "people familiar with the matter" and squeezed them for info on Cupertino's plans for the near term. Firstly, they've heard that a 27-inch version of the currently available 24-inch LED Cinema Display is on its way, sporting a 2,560 x 1,440 resolution and targeted for release "by June." The more exciting tip from those in the know, however, relates to the well aged Mac Pro and its future upgrade path. Apple has apparently firmed up plans to offer 6- and 12-core options (to replace the current 4- and 8-core variants), though the star of the show internally is said to be Intel's Xeon 5600, rather than the similarly specced Core i7-980X that had been rumored. This seems to be motivated by the fact the i7 beast can't do dual-CPU configurations, which are necessary to offer a dozen cores. Pricing for the single Xeon CPU model is expected to be close to the current $2,499 starting sticker, but release dates still elude us.
expensive!!!
@gax907 That surprises you?
@gax907
Some of that is to do with the fact it uses workstation-class CPUs rather than consumer CPUs
@gax907
These machines are targeted at professionals and businesses, ie: customers that don't care about the initial price tag of the machine, since they are often planning to make money using the machine, instead of playing Crysis on them.
@drange Exactly. But it should be said that if Apple made a proper consumer tower, people would be less likely to think the Mac Pro just represents an expensive desktop machine.
Not that they will, given the margins they would make on the iMac, but there it is.
@reticulate
I think Apple's view is that towers aren't as consumer friendly as all-in-ones. For most people having everything lumped into one package is the best option, and so Apple's consumer desktop is therefore the iMac. I guess they think that only professionals have real need for a tower.
@martynmcfarquhar I agree, Apple's opinion appears to be that the iMac is all the machine most people will need. And they're mostly right, if you discount gamers and professionals looking for an upgradeable OS X machine on the cheap.
I'm very interested in how Steam is going to change that opinion though. It's not quite the second coming, but it shows that a major developer and owner of a popular distribution channel is serious about gaming on the Mac. Apple can't help but notice that.
Call me one of those hopeless optimists for a proper consumer Mac tower ;)
@reticulate
They'll either offer a cheaper Mac Pro as they did with the 15" MacBook Pro, but maybe only offer it with an i7 and a couple of HDD bays, or they'll be forced to add better cards to the iMac.
I'd probably put money on the second one. As it is now there's about a $300 difference between the top-end iMac and the bottom end Mac Pro, if they offered a more competitive Mac Pro they may well cannibalise sales of the top-end iMac.
@gax907 Its not a consumer machine, just ao you know...those are workstation chips...
@reticulate Nicely said. I would prefer a tower myself as the iMac doesn't fit my style/needs. My MBP is perfect for laptop uses, but I have other needs for desktop.
@martynmcfarquhar
both.
There will possibly by both a single CPU MacPro with an i7, as well as the single and dual slot versions. Plus, the iMac line is overdue for a CPU and GPU change, bringing the i7 down to the 22", and bringing more powerful CPU options (new chips are available in the same thermal envelope that fit in the same internal slot). Prices should remain the same, and core2s should get bumped to i5s across the board, and i3 in the mini if they update it.
@bullshitexpresscom You're in the same boat as me. I don't have a desktop PC anymore and use my MPB exclusively. That works in most situations, but not when I really need extendable horsepower. The Mac Pro is overkill in price and chips for what I want, and the iMac doesn't quite get there, especially given the resolution of the 27".
I'm probably in a minority but if Apple fills that gap, I'm willing to buy.
@gax907
I already smell the burning ash coming from my wallet.
I could use one on my toilet
Wheres my macbook pro updates? please?
Mainly for developers and content designers/creators.
No gamer will need 12 cores....not yet anyway
....but the price is actually alright, just depends on how much they hike it up for that extra 6 cores...it might prove to be cheaper than other high-end PCs.........might, but knowing Apples greediness, it wont.
=[
Thats going to be cheap!
*sarcasm*
Finally, it was time for those display refreshes.
OMFG about time
12 cores, 12gb of ram, and a kitchen sink. All yours for the low low price of 4 equally outfitted PCs and your left leg.
Now limp like a dog for your Starbucks conversation piece.
@Mekkakat
4 consumer towers vs. a professional-class workstation...there is a difference
@martynmcfarquhar Call it whatever you want. You can spec out a more flexible rig yourself and load it with a complete top shelf software suite all for less than the price of one Mac Pro.
I work from home most days and the deal I had to cut was that if I bought (built) the computer they would purchase the software for it. Buying a mac Pro would have provided absolutely no advantage in price or (more importantly) speed.
@Atkins When did I ever mention CHEAP top shelf software?
And on month 6 of my rig... no problems. If you have the need for a Mac Pro then, more likely than not, you have the ability to assemble your own system... properly.
@DC MIKE
The fact it's a workstation isn't just advertising spiel, it related to the fact that the machine is built with server-grade hardware. The whole ethos is reliability, a workstation is designed to be left on 24/7 being pushed very hard. That is why server-grade hardware exists and why you pay a premium for it. Not to mention the additional abilities provided by a workstation based CPU.
You can built a tower yourself, but using sever grade parts would get the price up pretty high. That's why these machines exist. Piece of mind that the hardware is as bullet-proof as it gets and will last a long time.
@Atkins Hate to break it to you, but the current dual 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon Mac Pro setup kicks off at almost $6K. that's with only 6GB of memory and one harddrive. Add a single display, more HDD storage, an additional video card (necessary for dual screens), and 2 more GBs of memory and you've added another $2K-$3K. That additional display for a dual display (which you have to buy an additional video card for) will add another $1000.
You can EASILY put together a more than comparable system for less than a third of the price. So actually you have $5k-$6k to spend on software alone.
@DC MIKE
Huh? I checked newegg and a Intel Xeon X5570 Nehalem 2.93GHz 4 x 256KB L2 Cache 8MB L3 Cache LGA 1366 95W Quad-Core Server Processor is $1439.99
Two of those alone would be almost 1/3rd of your $10k cost so how are you going to build a whole comparable system (including $2000 for monitors) for 1/3 of the cost?
@bbltubbl You can build a comparable setup (the processors can be had for $1300 each) for about $5000 which will only leave $5000 or so for software. I ran from memory and didn't do the straight math. My apologies on my improper fraction.
@DC MIKE
Current MacPro parts list: (going from cheapest available parts on NewEgg)
Xeon 5550 2.66GHz: $999 (Fan $30 more).
Dual LGA1366 mainbord w/ at least 8 DDR3 ECC slots and 3 full length PCIs: $449.
Triple Channel 3GB RAM kit ECC at or above 1066: $110
640GB SATA Drive, same specs or better: $70.
Case that can support board and 4+ internal 3.5s, plus 2+ 5.25: $60
Power supply supporting up to 2 Xeon CPUs and up to 4 GPUs: $289.
Comparable basic DVD RW DL: $40
Additional Fans: $60
GPU: $40
Firewire adapter: $30
MIMO Wifi N adapter: $80
You're already over $2250. You have no OS, no kbd/mouse, no bluetooth, (on OS alone you're over Apple's price). You have no warranty or support (other than OEM warranties on individual parts). And you;re using the cheapest components available for each task, none of which are tested and optimized to be together, so odds are it won't perform as fast as the MacPro.
You can not BUILD a MacPro cheaper. Bump to the 8 core and the MacPro parts list is cheaper EXCLUDING the OS by $200.
@DC MIKE
1: no one buys RAM and HDD upgrades from the Apple store... The MacPro Apple Care Plan covers after market components too.
2: the 2.93 nahalems are $1439 each in retail box, not including the fan which is separate. That's $3K right there, not including the $290 PS to run them, and the cheapest available main board of $449. Also, few pop the extra $2600 for the 2.93 vs the 2.26 unless they REALLY have to have it. The 2.26 x 8 cores is a MASSIVE powerhouse. $1400 more might make sense to jump to 2.66, but very few people justify the upgrade to 2.93. Still, even at retail, Apple is only charging about a $400 premium for those chips to be pre-installed vs the price difference of the base 2.26 chip of $400 each (plus fans)
3: the additional display is only $1000 if you want/need IPS or ridiculous resolutions like 2560x1440. If you need that, you're paying for it on ANY machine you buy, so that cost does not count in your equations.
You're at $3500-3700 for an 8 core base Xeon, 5K for the mid-range. YOU CAN NOT BUY THESE PARTS CHEAPER SEPARATELY.
@DC MIKE
Do you do CAD? Exteme detail and resolution Photoshop editing? 1080P + Video editing with layering and special effects? If no, you don't need a MacPro, you need a 4core i7 and maybe a bunch of RAM. Yes, you can build a system for a lot less than a Mac Pro. You can NOT however, buy or even build a system of comparable performance and unreadability, on workstation class components for less, period. If you job requirement includes Xeon class workloads, then your job should pay for for that equipment (or you write it off as uncompensated work related expenses).
@zelannii
Your argument sounds convincing but why would you wanna back it up using the words "YOU CAN NOT, IMPOSSIBLE etc...". If you look into human history. There has been a lot of impossible feats (man on the moon, polio vaccine, just to name a few) but yet people (you) still use those words.
You really think a desktop cannot be built cheaper/maintained at a cheaper price than a MacPro (outlined in your above argument)? I mean really? Deals around the holidays are the best time to purchase those items you specified and you can get them at rock bottom prices. Yes you can build MacPros/PC using those specs at a cheaper price. You have to know when to acquire those items.
FYI: I daytrade for a living. All we have sitting around us are PCs that'll run laps around MacPros. Core i7s 975 overclocked liquid cooled and maintained very well by our on site engineers. They last for 9-12 months before replace them. Macpros don't cut it in our industry cause theyre to slow. Im sorry but its the honest truth.
Ill leave the monitors out of the discussion. There's no arguing that :)
@Mekkakat The "Mac Pro is expensive" argument has been disproven many times over since the switch to Intel. Any comparable Dell or HP workstation will/has cost as much, if not more.
It's not by any stretch a normal consumer machine. Not that you couldn't use at as one, but the vast majority aren't likely to do so.
@Atkins
From my own personal experience. I enjoy 2-3 times maintenance on my desktops. They last me for 2-3 years so im patient enough to wait for the rock bottom deals. To each his own i guess. Maybe the average consumer yes but were here debating on a tech site so i had to throw my 2 cents in.
@zelannii Ok, so I just got out of work, and here's the thing:
1: I own, and have owned many, MANY Apple products. The post was more of a joke than anything, simply exaggerating the typically larger premiums you pay for Apple products, WHICH YOU DO. Anyone denying this fact is simply showing their fanboydom tbh. I can buy a Microsoft slapped product (obviously getting an OS premium bump) that is pre-made and fitted with the SAME parts as my MBP (which I'm currently on) for $200-$400 less, and that's on AVERAGE. I'm a graphic designer, and an old school nerd, and have had at LEAST 10 Apple computers, and countless Windows and Linux machines. I can fit custom computers like the Mac Pro *coughalreadyhave* for HALF as much as what a Pro cost.
2: The human eye isn't strong enough to notice the difference in resolution once you go but so high, EVEN for CAD or PShop, and it's as simple as that. It's like mice with 3000+ DPI for no reason.
I'm a long time Engadget reader, but only recently started commenting, but if the some of you other readers are going to be so aggressive for such a silly comment, maybe I'll go back to avoiding the drama.
Part of me really wants to see another 27" display sitting beside my 27" iMac. The other part of me knows better.
@Atkins
At least the 30" is 16:10, not buying into this 16:9 nonsense they're trying to push.
@Lee A "The other part of me knows better." A 30", right? :)
@DC MIKE And you won't have a warranty for the rig. And I would like also to hear about this cheap top shelf software.
@DC MIKE I was referring to this: "You can spec out a more flexible rig yourself and load it with a complete top shelf software suite"
Most top shelf soft can be quite expensive, so you'll be left with not that much money for your rig.
If we take the 2500$ pricing and you buy a 6core xeon processor, good aluminium box, ram etc it will definitely be cheaper than a Mac Pro, but I doubt you'll save much more than let's say 700 bucks? But I may be wrong :)
@DC MIKE Agreed. But that is only because Apple hasn't updated the processors yet. You know how they work. When they update them (probably very soon) it will suddenly become a different story.
By the way, thats the Mac Pro setup in my office at work. I built my home rig to match it, I run the PC version of all of the software I use at work.
@DC MIKE And let's not forget what @martynmcfarquhar said about the parts quality.
I think this would actually make some sense. Considering they already have the 27" LED panels from the iMacs to use. I wouldn't think it would take to much effort to make them just a display.
I really hope this new display just uses regular displayport, dvi, or hdmi... none of that mini-displayport shit.
I'm thinking the new, if it's new, panel will be one to rival the U2711 from Dell. It would make sense since LG makes the panels for both companies to begin with.
MacPro's have ALWAYS used Xeons, they are supposed to be Workstation PCs...er, macs :P
@DoctarPeppar
Always? They were doing Nehalem more recently.
Of course core i5s, i7s are the 'in' thing right now and for good reason, but I've got a quad xeon model that's done nothing but impress me. At this point they really have to be breathing down major dev's necks to go full 64 bit so pro users will have a reason to buy a monstrosity like a 12 core. Their own Logic application went full 64 somewhat recently and it's still quite buggy.
@soypancho
It can be confusing, I admit, but this is how it is for the current Mac Pro series from what I've gathered:
1CPU: Bloomfield, (i7 920-975 & Xeon 3500), 45 nm Nehalem.
2CPU: Gainestown (Xeon 5500 dual-socket), 45 nm Nehalem.
And the upcoming Mac Pro series being reported on:
1CPU: Gulftown, (i7 980X & Xeon 3600), 32 nm Westmere (Nehalem shrink).
2CPU: Westmere-EP (Xeon 5600 dual-socket), 32 nm Westmere (Nehalem shrink).
Basically, Nehalem (and its 32 nm shrink Westmere) is only the micro architecture Intel is basing their CPUs off of. Their successor will be Sandy Bridge by the end of this year.
@soypancho
Typical ignorant Mac user.
Nehalem is the code-name for the microarchitecture.
Xeon is the "class" name of the chip.
Xeon CPUs are capable of multi-cpus per board.
Every single mac pro model since the FIRST one has used Xeon class CPUs.
I personally don't care what processors they use. The system itself needs an overhaul. What about sata 6gbps? or USB 3.0? esata? More pcie slots? A slot for a 2.5" HD for an ssd boot drive? At this point, processor upgrades aren't going to help because they rest of the system is the bottleneck.