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.
Mac Pro is obsolete
- Thread starter cube
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This website just gets better and better, do they not like Apple?
I very much doubt that Apple would put soo much effort into the Mac Pro, to know tht it'll be completly obsolete in just over a year...
BS from this website strikes again!
Cheers
I very much doubt that Apple would put soo much effort into the Mac Pro, to know tht it'll be completly obsolete in just over a year...
BS from this website strikes again!
Cheers
Um, that's not good....
On the other hand, if Intel is expecting this, why would they have helped Apple design the Mac Pro to use RAM which they antipate will become obsolete?
On the other hand, if Intel is expecting this, why would they have helped Apple design the Mac Pro to use RAM which they antipate will become obsolete?
Mac Rules said:
I'm guessing you didn't read the article, because the article didn't even mention Apple.
NATO said:
Who really cares what RAM is being used in 2008? FB DIMMS are the best RAM on the market today, regardless of what sort of RAM computers in the future will use.
Apple used the RAM that works with the chipset they are using right now, that's fine. Next year's Mac Pro will use whatever RAM works with next year's chipset.NATO said:
This is no big deal, RAM sockets and technologies are constantly changing.
The story is about Intel. Apple aren't even mentioned. You do know that most systems using this stuff won't come from Apple, right?Mac Rules said:
expensive does not mean obsolete.
also i think the MacPros are running fine, hardley obsolete.
i also think they will continue to run OS X and such for quite a while.
now if you were trying to say that the G3 proccessor family is now obsolete i could agree with that. (obviously not having anything to do with this story directly though)
also i think the MacPros are running fine, hardley obsolete.
i also think they will continue to run OS X and such for quite a while.
now if you were trying to say that the G3 proccessor family is now obsolete i could agree with that. (obviously not having anything to do with this story directly though)
cube said:
RAM designed for this kind of workstation will never be cheap.
Even our 3-year+ old Dell PowerEdge servers at work still need relatively expensive RAM. For all intents and purposes, the Mac Pro's architecture has more in common with that of a mid-range server than a home PC, and the cost of components is going to reflect that fact.
The article states Intel are looking to return to using RDRAM. RDRAM has never been cheap either. At least RAM isn't a consumable. Buy wisely (i.e. don't fill your slots with low-capacity modules), buy what you need, and It'll be a one-off expense.
I must say, the thread title is bizarre. Probably the funniest reasons I've heard for a machine to be branded "OBSOLETE!!oneone1!!"... "Its RAM won't be cutting edge in 18-24 months! RAM won't be cheap!"
Ease up on the hyperbole! (man, I say that a lot these days, I think I should make it my sig)
TBi said:
Good point! A quick google shows others have been similarly confused. However, you're correct - I now take R-DIMM to mean Registered-DIMM. This is still a server-grade technology, and will attract higher prices (although not as much as with RIMMs, because of Rambus' lovely licensing costs)
Actually, what I read was that the FB-DIMMs are going to be used on high end servers, because you can run much more Memory through fewer slots on the Logic Board. This basically tells me that maybe we won't have FB-DIMMs, but it is more likely that this means that there will be an in between model between iMac and MacPro.
TEG
TEG
stephenmckeague said:
... then don't wait for it to become obsolete before buying it
It is not obsolete now. Intel's current workstation-class boards (as used in Dell servers, HP servers, IBM servers, etc.) require FB-DIMMs, so there's a need that is being filled by manufacturers.
You might as well say the Dell PowerEdge 2950 is obsolete, or the IBM SystemX 3550 is obsolete too
cube said:
Ah, well that's a different story
It's more like:"RAM For Machines Using Intel's 'Blackford' Chipset Likely to Not Drop In Price. Future Chipsets to Use Different RAM Technology."
Which isn't really an exciting headline, but at least it's accurate...
FB-DIMM's have their advantages, but Intel seems to think that it's not worth the heat, the high cost, and the longer latency.
FB-DIMM's, however, are stable (which likely translates to applications) and have really high-bandwidth.
When I sell my Mac Pro, the only way this article is going to affect anything is that I'll sell the RAM with it (as my new machine likely wont have it).
This doesn't make the Mac Pro "obsolete", it just means that Intel's newer models will be better in some ways, due to them switching to a new memory type. Wow, new things are better, that doesn't make the old things obsolete.
Look, this mac pro I have in front of me has FOUR GOD DAMNED PROCESSORS IN IT.. it's not going to be "obsolete" for a LONG TIME.
FB-DIMM's, however, are stable (which likely translates to applications) and have really high-bandwidth.
When I sell my Mac Pro, the only way this article is going to affect anything is that I'll sell the RAM with it (as my new machine likely wont have it).
This doesn't make the Mac Pro "obsolete", it just means that Intel's newer models will be better in some ways, due to them switching to a new memory type. Wow, new things are better, that doesn't make the old things obsolete.
Look, this mac pro I have in front of me has FOUR GOD DAMNED PROCESSORS IN IT.. it's not going to be "obsolete" for a LONG TIME.