The point is, new MPs ARE coming this summer.
Based on a couple of speculative tweets that offer absolutely no evidential support whatsoever?
The rest of use that have used the Q4 2011 date are getting that from a verifiable source (Intel's Roadmap).
So why do you insist on believing unsupported speculation vs. any real facts that currently exist?
Refresh is still a NEW MP = one not available now. No one will say that the 2011 MP IS the same as a 2010 MP.
It all depends on what CPU's you're talking about. Historically speaking, the MP's have usually gotten different CPU's (different family from previous models, and that includes both the 2007 and 2010's, where the socket remained the same).
Tossing in a faster clock from the existing family won't qualify (no change in core counts or any other aspect of the architecture). The GPU and Thunderbolt can be changed and added respectively via PCIe cards, which was clearly stated before. Something like this isn't really worthy of a new model (wouldn't increase the overall system performance but by a couple of percent due to faster clocks - new CPU's lines tend to change this by 10% or so with most usage patterns).
It's all incremental upgrades in terms of speed gains when measuring clocks, but different architectures push this. For example, benchmarks (and some rare application suites) can demonstrate/truly utilize the performance differences between current and previous architectures.
So just tossing in a faster clock and couple of PCIe cards in the existing system would be a mistake IMO (reasons stated in previous posts in multiple threads you keep spreading this around). Others have even picked up on this, and tried to explain it to you (hint: based on monetary impact for Apple).
It will be updated this summer, you are probably wrong, and so are the naysayers.
Based on what
actual facts?
Tweets and any articles using Tong's Tweets as a source do not qualify as there's no substantiation (i.e. name of the source it actually came from, pics/screen shots, internal documents, ...). Mr. Tong didn't do any of this - it's completely unsubstantiated in any shape, form or fashion.
I like how the naysayers are already revising the history - they said before that NO new MPs until 2012. Well, thanks to apple to stop their discourse. woo-hoo new MP are coming SOON! a few weeks! AWESOME!
They're not out yet, so how can anyone remotely revise history that hasn't even been made?
And as per dates, show us some real proof, which Tong's tweets don't provide (opinion claimed as "inside information" is not fact).
There are processors, the idea that there aren;t is just wrong. what about the 3.2 hex? the 3.46 hex?
We've covered this.
Please go back and read (and not just what was aimed directly at you - but it's certainly there, and even repeated again this time around).
NEW MPs are COMING - and the source is one WHO IS USING THE SAME SOURCE AS IMAC REFRESH
Maybe. It could easily be stated as "coming from an inside source", when in fact it's his own opinion.
Supply data could be easily used (I actually did in terms of what was likely well before he ever did <even back when Intel still called it by it's codename - LightPeak>, and it was accurate <SB processor + Thunderbolt>). I didn't go for dates, as it was in a MP thread (had more to do with the direction workstations are going).
So why is your source more trustworthy than the *Intel* roadmap?
Exactly.
As you mention, we'll know in July/August (remember, some were adamant about one at WWDC this month, and that never happened either).
The real issue for me, is that August to March is only 6 months. So the financial impact releasing MP's that rapidly would have on Apple (MP sales are small) is what I'm focusing on.
The only way this would make any sense to me (particularly meeting a summer release date), is if they've decided to dump the DP systems all together (skip LGA2011 entirely) and go for a less powerful CPU series (i.e. LGA1155 based, which are already in production; adding ECC to the memory controller isn't that difficult as the real work has already been done for other parts). But it would mean the MP would be slower than currently available machines (particularly in I/O throughput to the CPU, which is the LGA1155's weakness, and thusly the iMac's), and solely rely on PCIe slots to generate it's sales volume.
I could see a significant uproar over something like this. Even to the extent the MP would be declared EOL entirely (too many sales lost, so they determine that it's no longer a viable profit generator).
What if they just use the latest sandy bridge (socket 1155) chips?
Intel is going to release a Xeon based LGA1155 part. But as to it's viability, see the portion of this post directly above...
Now I'm not saying it's impossible, but there's going to be some fall-out if they do (i.e. loose animators and other power workstation users as the machine won't be sufficient for their needs).
The LGA1155 Xeons are the bottom end (aka entry level) workstation parts. But the MP has been using high range parts (suitable to 1 or 2 sockets only), which is why they've never used Multiprocessor sockets (previously known as the 7xxx series Xeons, which are super expensive).
The logical transition is to LGA 2011 parts.
If they remotely plan to have a faster machine and keep their current MP market base, definitely.
There are other possibilities (LGA1155 or even LGA1355 <when they show up in Q4 2011>), but it will change their market base, considerably so if they go with an LGA1155 based model (reduced I/O throughput to the CPU, and more akin to the iMac - just has slots and no built-in monitor, which isn't really much of a product distinguishment IMO).
I realize that's a system some would want (many have bemoaned the lack of a headless mac), but the pricing would also be used to set it apart I suspect (not the reasonable X-Mac they've been dreaming about - just as is currently the case with the base SP Quad core MP's since 2009).
As much as I want to be able to access my drives, change video cards, add a Thunderbolt board, it just isn't in the cards right now. Consider though how much money Apple could make with a ~$1,000-1700 mini Mac Pro with consumer chips. It would still be premium over a Dell or HP. All that isn't thinking like Apple.
The pricing would, as Apple wants high margins (last report I saw, the Gross Margin was hovering at ~41%).
I would also like to point out that you are now doing what you have been complaining about others doing: stating things that are speculation as fact.
Exactly, and I'd add ignoring actual facts that others have provided (more than blind speculation, as its been based on an assemblage of publicly available facts).
