Do you think there will be a 2014 nMP with Haswell XEONs and upgraded GPU's? Or do you think Apple will push out updates until 2015?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Do you think there will be a 2014 nMP?
- Thread starter scottrichardson
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Don't know how DDR4 and Haswell-EPs release will go down so too hard to say. Intel saying its on course doesn't mean that it ends up in good supply to Apple this year.
That's even assuming Apple would want to push something quickly, I'd be surprised if the current model has less than a year life span.
2015 for me.
That's even assuming Apple would want to push something quickly, I'd be surprised if the current model has less than a year life span.
2015 for me.
Not sure about any possible graphics updates in the pipeline, that would warrant such a speedy update cycle, but as for new Intel Xeon processors, according to these roadmaps, we are talking 2015 for the 14nm Broadwell-EP series processors to make an appearance, but Apple could possibly do an intermediate update to replace the current gen of Ivy Bridge Xeon-EP processors with the 22nm Haswell-EP line sometime later this year.
Although I'm hazarding, if recent history is any indication with the MacPro line not getting the same frequency of spec bumps as MBAs, MBPs and iMacs, my guess is they'll wait for the 14nm Broadwell-EP chips.
They would be nuts to wait for Broadwell-EP. They can't proclaim commitment to Pros and then skip a generation. We're then talking another 2 year gap before an update and all the same nonsense as before. They only skipped one CPU update in 6 years, and this appears to have been due to a lack of sales and not knowing what to do with the line.
http://vr-zone.com/articles/computex-will-show-desktop-alive-well/77282.html
Can see apple doing an 18 core version if the new mac pros now make any money for apple.
Can see apple doing an 18 core version if the new mac pros now make any money for apple.
I'm guessing that the reason they skipped Sandy Bridge was because if they were to put those CPUs in the old design, they would have had a top-end model with 16-cores, but if they were to have put it in the redesigned Mac Pro, it would have had a top-end model with only 8 cores.
I'm sure they already had the tube redesign in mind, so if they had released the Sandy-Bridge oMP 16-core update first, the following Ivy-Bridge nMP would have been less powerful. If they were to have released the Sandy-Bridge nMP version first, it would have been less powerful than the Westmere version that preceded it as it would have had a maximum of 8 cores.
Waiting until Ivy bridge with its 12-core variant seems like the most sensible business decision if they were definitely going for a new design.
I'm sure they already had the tube redesign in mind, so if they had released the Sandy-Bridge oMP 16-core update first, the following Ivy-Bridge nMP would have been less powerful. If they were to have released the Sandy-Bridge nMP version first, it would have been less powerful than the Westmere version that preceded it as it would have had a maximum of 8 cores.
Waiting until Ivy bridge with its 12-core variant seems like the most sensible business decision if they were definitely going for a new design.
Apple should have built a dual processor option that some folks need. The trash can would have been a bit bigger but worth it for folks wanting/needing the power. Maybe they will if enough folks scream for it. Could you imagine a dual 18 core/36 threaded monster? One can dream of such power.
I can not only imagine it, but also have a little taste of it and I'm fully awake.
Why only a dual 18 cores?
...................
Why just build a dual 18 cores?
Why not a QUADRO 64 cores? It would be even MORE POWERFUL!
Or a OCTO 128 cores, that would be EVEN MORE POWERFUL!
Just change the brand from "Apple" to "Godzilla" and find enough monster loving freaks with the necessary wealth and power supply (who cares about the environment!) to feed those WONDERFUL computers.
A dream?... Rather a nightmare...
...................
Why just build a dual 18 cores?
Why not a QUADRO 64 cores? It would be even MORE POWERFUL!
Or a OCTO 128 cores, that would be EVEN MORE POWERFUL!
Just change the brand from "Apple" to "Godzilla" and find enough monster loving freaks with the necessary wealth and power supply (who cares about the environment!) to feed those WONDERFUL computers.
A dream?... Rather a nightmare...
Rub it in Tutor. We know you have some serious power over there.
----------
...................
A dream?... Rather a nightmare...
I think tutor would disagree with you as well as I do. If this power can get the work done faster and more efficient, why not. These processors are more energy efficient than previous models. But you feel computers are so evil, by all means, unplug your computer.
Your thoughts about my thoughts are 100% correct.
My guess is that the earliest that the Haswell Xeon unit will be sold is next year - 2015. There's still an advertised two to three week wait for any internal customization. If Apple sold a Haswell XEON update in the same year that they really got their manufacturing of Ivy Bridge Xeon systems cranked up, it'd be a real shocker to me. Although introduced, sold and delivered in small quantity last year, the 2013 is really the 2014 for a lot of folks and/or Apple is reselling nMP refurbs as new and/or Made in America is preventing me from seeing any nMP refurbs. I hope that dual 20 core Haswell Xeon V2 CPUs make their way into a big cylindrical trash can with red as a selectable color.
Last edited:
Haswell should receive another core count bump. I expect the quad toward the bottom of intel's line will be replaced with a hex core cpu. There is no reason to skip it. They change chipsets every other generation. Ivy Bridge was the second. If they move to Haswell, then the logic board can be reused for Broadwell. As long as they are selling these machines in viable quantities, there is no reason to skip that cycle.
Thanks a million for the buzz. Read that article. Here my honey: "Add to this the rumoured confirmation that, unlike their predecessors, Haswell-EP Xeons, including likely the 14-core and 18-core flavours, will have several top bin un-locked and even liquid-cooling optimised variants meant for HPC, workstations and high frequency trading, and you can guess the implications: the Haswell-E and Haswell-EP platforms will again be the overclocker’s heaven." If true, then in heaven's hive I'll be with thirty-six cores/sixty-four threads fully clock tweaked!
I think thats the question: will Intel deliver Haswell-EP and will Apple move to it in 2014. There isn't anything else from Intel coming out before it for this market - no minor updates.
Yeah, I don't think we'll see anything until Haswell-EP, but if Haswell-EP ships this year, it will be in the Mac Pro this year.
It will be interesting to see what Apple does with GPUs. Maxwell looks like a good choice, but AMD doesn't really seem to have anything in the pipe right now, so if Apple stuck with AMD they might have to ship with the GPUs they already have, which would be a shame.
Hmm....
Not that I have better info than anyone else, but I'm thinking what we'd see in 2015 with the Mac Pro is a "spec bump" that uses the same basic shell and logic board inside.
I'm not so sure Apple will go to the lengths it would take to redesign it for dual CPU sockets, at least by next year. My guess is, they had no interest in doing this for the current model because it would push the price point too high, plus would require more wattage, more cooling and more physical size. Keeping all of that to a minimum seemed to be an important goal for the new Mac Pro design.
Most of the popular OS X apps really wouldn't make good use of huge numbers of cores anyway, IMO. Except for edge cases, you typically get diminishing returns when you try to write an app to use too many simultaneous cores. (It's the old axiom about not being able to bake a cake 10 times faster just because you have 10 times as many bakers working on it.)
Bottom line is, there are certainly FAR more powerful workstations one can build than what's in a new Mac Pro. I think Apple is fine with that, because they're shooting for what they view as an optimal compromise of power/performance, style, and low power consumption/quiet operation in a small package.
Not that I have better info than anyone else, but I'm thinking what we'd see in 2015 with the Mac Pro is a "spec bump" that uses the same basic shell and logic board inside.
I'm not so sure Apple will go to the lengths it would take to redesign it for dual CPU sockets, at least by next year. My guess is, they had no interest in doing this for the current model because it would push the price point too high, plus would require more wattage, more cooling and more physical size. Keeping all of that to a minimum seemed to be an important goal for the new Mac Pro design.
Most of the popular OS X apps really wouldn't make good use of huge numbers of cores anyway, IMO. Except for edge cases, you typically get diminishing returns when you try to write an app to use too many simultaneous cores. (It's the old axiom about not being able to bake a cake 10 times faster just because you have 10 times as many bakers working on it.)
Bottom line is, there are certainly FAR more powerful workstations one can build than what's in a new Mac Pro. I think Apple is fine with that, because they're shooting for what they view as an optimal compromise of power/performance, style, and low power consumption/quiet operation in a small package.
Oh! Then I think everything is aligned for a 2014 Mac Pro. Haswell-EP is on schedule, and there is a new FirePro ready.