although they are using two GPUs they have cut costs considerably in the production of this new model.
In what way? Although there's no apparent option for a second CPU, which is what makes the current high end models leap up in cost, that doesn't represent a saving for the low end model.
While the case is smaller, strips out most of the fans and has ditched internal HDDs and the superdrive, none of those are
that expensive. The only saving really is on space, and any saving on cost will most likely be balanced by the cost of more compact components such as the power supply, a custom heat-sink, more complex custom single fan etc.
Instead, all models will now have Flash memory for storage, which isn't cheap at all, and it seems likely the entire range will have dual GPUs as standard, which again can't be cheap. It's also possible that all of the GPU options will be for Fire Pros with the only difference being the amount of VRAM. The entire line is also now going to be built in the US, which is an additional cost.
So we're talking about the entry-level Mac Pro potentially having two high-end GPUs and Flash memory which means it's likely to be more expensive.
Personally I'm hoping that one of the reasons Apple revealed the Pro early was so they could get a feel for the response, as it could give them time to setup a single GPU option. Even better would be options for a different model of GPU and a non-Xeon CPU, these kinds of options could allow them to offer a competitive "Mac Mini Pro" without an insane cost, and would suit the needs of less high-end users such as software developers. Give a less shiny Darth Vader case to distinguish it and it could be a great option to the line-up. After all, it's not like the Mac Pro needs many models in the range; you'd have a core i7 quad CPU and a desktop class ATI GPU, maybe with a 1-2gb option. Mid-range would be the 6-core Xeon with one Fire Pro 4gb VRAM (or two with 2gb, though one is probably cheaper). Then the high-end has the twin GPUs with up to the full 6gb VRAM each, and the 12-core Xeon.
Also, for those people who keep telling everyone that an iMac is fine for their needs; please stop. An iMac is a terrible option for someone that already has a screen, as you have to pay a hefty premium for an integrated screen you don't need. All-in-ones are fine for people that don't already have a computer, or for lunatics that are happy to get rid of an existing screen, but if you already have everything you need then an all-in-one is a bad option. This is one of the reasons I actually really like the idea of the new Mac Pro as it's more Mac Mini like in that you could just drop it into an existing setup without too much hassle (unless you have Firewire devices like me, bah!).
Since storage is now forced into enclosures it also introduces the possibility of just using a Mac Mini and swapping for a Mac Pro later on, but only if you can live without a discrete GPU. This is why Apple could really do with a Mac Pro option that uses more typical desktop parts to give solid enough performance. Given how (comparatively) simple the new Mac Pro is, offering such an option could be as simple as swapping some or all of the three boards to give you the correct combination of CPU and GPUs.
