People always want more cores. I don't, but I don't require a workstation-level motherboard for my purposes, either, nor do I pay workstation prices. If I did, perhaps I'd expect dual processor capability. Apple is going to enter the Xeon workstation arena without dual processors at least as an option. Maybe the MP wont be priced as such, but I expect that it will, and it'll be a joke.
Hopefully the new Ivy bridge has a 12 core model and not a 6 actual + 6 virtual. I think most users aren't bothered by this, but it will deter some from purchasing the machine.
I think we can stop even considering the possibility that the new MP will top out at 6 real cores. This would pretty much be MP marketing suicide, as almost everyone would consider Apple stating "up to 12 cores" as an almost complete lie. Furthermore, if Apple were to count virtual cores in their core count, they would be promoting the 13" MBPs as quad core, and the 15" MBPs as 8-core. They don't.
Finally, considering the likely cost of the system is going to start at 2 grand (or even 2.5K), a large portion of the potential MP customer base won't be able to justify spending $2K+ on a system that will still be in the same performance ballpark as a much cheaper iMac; that also comes with a $1000 screen, for free.
Let alone the idea of buying 2-4 quad Minis, and building a micro-cluster...
Some people would prefer to pay the rather small sum to get a gaming GPU and then boot into Windows for games. This as opposed to paying for dual fireGL cards which are ridiculously expensive. The w9000 are $3,300 each and are only as good as a 7970 ($370) for games.
Agreed. Also, there's the high probability that the w9000 won't be all that much faster than a 7970 in ALL pro applications. For example, they both have similar SP/DP FlOp/s, so they should have similar performance in many GPGPU tasks, especially if one is writing their own code. For example, scientific computing, or research-based engineering applications, where the vast scale of a simulation requires a lot of horsepower, but the complexity of the algorithms isn't really all that much more than matrix multiplication. In that case, an extra 5-6 grand for a few extra percent in performance is certainly not justifiable.
If, by some miracle, they manage to price the new MP with dual w9000 for < $4,000, I will be impressed. However, I'm guessing that if they even offer a model like that, it's going to be > $7,000.
Well, I think it's safe to say they WILL offer a model like that, but that the price of such a config could be ANYTHING.
$4K isn't impossible, because as far as I can tell, the 3K premium is because the extra application/driver support required by the workstation GPUs is expensive; but really should be the same for purchasing 1 or 2 cards, and if Apple sells a lot of these, that cost should be able to be driven down to a small fraction.
Then again, I wouldn't be TOO surprised it the cost was more like $7K either, because it IS Apple we're talking about here.
All I can say is from anecdotal evidence, I think Apple would be best trying to price their at least close to top-spec machine at around $4K, because they will sell far more at such a price. I know this because I think if there is one that will burn through any C++/OpenCL code I write for it, AND play any modern game at 1440p @ maximum graphics settings, all for under $5K inc. Apple Display, I will probably buy one.
YES, I know I could just build a gaming PC for a lot less, but I don't want to. After all, if you spend 2K on a nice gaming PC, plus buy a nice MBP to do work on, you might as well have just bought the darn $5K MP to begin with.
Last edited: