Intel launching Ivy Bridge Xeons in Q2 2012?

[peabo]

Not sure how much stock to place in this rumor but:
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20120102PD217.html

Surely this is going to make the new Mac Pros either even later or far less desirable. Either way, in the short term it's not a particularly good thing for people looking to buy right now.

 

[Umbongo]

The E3 Ivy Bridge processors are not suitable for Mac Pros.

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2012/2012010301_Details_of_Xeon_E3-1200_v2_CPUs.html

We know how much better Ivy Bridge is likely to be and can guess the price of those being the same or more than the ones they will replace. So the only issue really is that the E5-1620 won't be as great as some E3s that will cost more.

 

[xgman]

The Xeons suitable for the MP are always on the last platform of the series and seem to be later and later every year at least as compared to the imac/laptop platforms, or so it would seem. In my opinion, it should work from the top down, but that isn't going to happen. The sales numbers are on portables and PC's.

 

[Umbongo]

The Xeons suitable for the MP are always on the last platform of the series and seem to be later and later every year at least as compared to the imac/laptop platforms, or so it would seem. In my opinion, it should work from the top down, but that isn't going to happen.

You're wrong here. DP Xeons and high-end UP Xeons have historically come at the start of ticks and tocks. Only since Sandy Bridge have Intel moved them to coming later. This move certainly hasn't negativly impacted their business because they have continued to see growth in the Data Centre Group (Xeons) in 2011. Mac Pros had the last 4 generations of architecture before any other Macs.

Intel, OEMs and board makers didn't want LGA 1366 to be phased out quickly as they had a lot of product left. There was also talk of them pushing it to come later - even before the LGA 1155 SATA bug - to make sure they had a more solid platform for critical usage as the product gets more complex to produce. No competition in the market probably helps, and as they expect record sales on LGA 2011 products they aren't hurting.

The sales numbers are on portables and PC's.

This is correct, but Xeons make up more than 20% of their business and it is a growing market and will continue to be as things move to the cloud.

 

[wallysb01]

This is correct, but Xeons make up more than 20% of their business and it is a growing market and will continue to be as things move to the cloud.

I agree with most of your post, but I think the cloud growth will likely mean more sales of E3 data movers. Certainly the E5s and E7s have their place, but if we're mostly talking about serving a lot of data and not doing a lot of processing of that data, I don't know why we'd be using E5s.

 

[Umbongo]

I agree with most of your post, but I think the cloud growth will likely mean more sales of E3 data movers. Certainly the E5s and E7s have their place, but if we're mostly talking about serving a lot of data and not doing a lot of processing of that data, I don't know why we'd be using E5s.

The cloud isn't just about pushing data and the more processor intensive tasks that can be offloaded to the cloud mean more battery time on mobile devices.

Also physical space within data centers is limited, which is why multi-processor systems are more efficient as you can get many more virtual servers in to the same space. Also why they can charge such huge premiums for them over the single socket systems and processors. There are also a lot more features on such systems that support data center usage.

 

[xgman]

I recall waiting impatiently for the 2010 MP where the mainstream chipset for desktops was already in imacs for many months, no? In any case, I wish we just knew what Apple was going to do with the MP sooner than later. I feel like we are all just waiting for the other shoe to drop.

 

[Umbongo]

I recall waiting impatiently for the 2010 MP where the mainstream chipset for desktops was already in imacs for many months, no?

Yeah but that was due to Apple not Intel. The Xeons were updated in March and Apple waited 6 months for some reason (low sales, prolonging the life so it wasn't 2 years for the 2010? *shrugs*). The processors found in the 2010 iMacs came later in July, but shipped in iMacs right away - so before Mac Pros.

In any case, I wish we just knew what Apple was going to do with the MP sooner than later. I feel like we are all just waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Yep, very frustrating. Don't envy anyone who is heavily invested in Apple's ecosystem and needs horsepower and to be efficient.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Yep, very frustrating. Don't envy anyone who is heavily invested in Apple's ecosystem and needs horsepower and to be efficient.

Except only rarely (like the original MP) have MPs ever been the speed leader. Apple pro users are sophisticated enough to recognize horse power is just one factor of an efficient computer and work flow. It's maybe an over used analogy but a Mustang GT has raw horsepower and will clobber a BMW M3 on a straight path, but a BMW M3 is a total package, and the Mustang better watch those sharp curves and tight passing situations.

Point is, Mac users and PC users alike buy what they buy because it fits there needs. Don't feel sorry for either group.

 

[xgman]

Sometimes it's simply a case of "want what you want" and not necessarily "need what you need". Then again, more like "want what you can't have".