New Mac Pros are here

[goMac]

Preparing for nerd rage...

The graphics cards at the very least should have been updated. That's just all sorts of unhappy.

At least the new Macbook Pro still has slower graphics.

 

[derbothaus]

They gave us what we should have got 2 years ago (133MHz). Maybe 1.5 with same architecture speed bump. Tragic. No X79? WTF? At least the base model now can compete with a 13" MBP now.

 

[ludeboy12]

Weak....

 

[Astroboy907]

They gave us what we should have got 2 years ago. Maybe 1.5 with same architecture speed bump. Tragic. No X79? WTF?

Its up!

 

[gusmahler]

Absurd. All we get is a small speed bump? Still stuck with the ancient graphics card? WTF? Windows 8, here I come.

 

[derbothaus]

Its up!

Yup. Comment stands.

 

[KintoVW]

Just looks like a good ol' spec bump.....Even kept the 5770 like we heard it would...

At least the prices for RAM and SSDs has come down.

 

[goodcow]

So ... no Thunderbolt?

 

[diane143]

Price drop is great news for consumers looking to buy into Mac Pro. Specs are already incredible.

Hell of an upgrade from my 2003 FW800!

 

[theSeb]

This is the update that should have happened last year in June / July when the Sandy Bridge Xeons were delayed. I am completely flabbergasted. They are definitely clearing out the stocks as they prepare to kill it. I can't believe I am typing this.

 

[derbothaus]

At least the new Macbook Pro still has slower graphics.

Barely at this point.

 

[leman]

This is a blatant insult. They 'updated' the Mac Pro with a two years old CPUs? Hell yeah...

 

[derbothaus]

So ... no Thunderbolt?

They couldn't figure it out.

 

[Icaras]

Surely this is an error on Apple's part?

 

[goMac]

Surely this is an error on Apple's part?

Doesn't seem to be.

It's a very odd upgrade. If they're thinking about cutting the Mac Pro, why bother? If they're keeping it, then WTF?

 

[ValSalva]

They are definitely clearing out the stocks as they prepare to kill it. I can't believe I am typing this.

Yup, this looks about the size of it...

 

[Icaras]

Doesn't seem to be.

Just seems pretty insulting to the Mac Pro user base.

 

[BigJohno]

So just processor bump? Nothing else?

 

[Cindori]

So just processor bump? Nothing else?

133MHz!

 

[Topper]

I am so very happy.
Thank you, Apple.

 

[Santabean2000]

2 year wait, and this...?!

They obviously don't give a ******* about the MP anymore. It is an embarrassingly awful update.

Expect a EOL next time. This is Apple's way of letting everyone know.

 

[BigJohno]

Just take down the mac pro page for god sake! What the hell. 133mhz!!! what is this 1999.

 

[gglockner]

This is the update that should have happened last year in June / July when the Sandy Bridge Xeons were delayed. I am completely flabbergasted. They are definitely clearing out the stocks as they prepare to kill it. I can't believe I am typing this.

I don't know about killing it, but I'm definitely disappointed that they used Nehalem and not Sandy Bridge chips. According to http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/mac_pro, they're using the W3565 for the 1-socket Mac Pro and dual E5645 for the 2-socket Mac Pro. Makes me pretty ambivalent about upgrading from my 2009 Mac Pro.

Edit: The W3565 and E5645 processors are over 2-years old:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Xeon_microprocessors

Seriously, Apple?

 

[Derpage]

Here's a little ditty about Dell and Hp
Outperforming Apple Mac Pro's
OooOOooh take my money and run.

 

[goMac]

Yup, this looks about the size of it...

Apple doesn't have that much stock built up though. They only keep a week of stock for their machines.

They could shut down production any time they wanted and not have much to clear out, which is why this makes no sense.

Maybe the Mac Pro engineers are just drunk?