Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Why so long on the new Xeons?

gglockner said:
Sorry, I wasn't clear - I was referring to sales volume, not volume in terms of chips per wafer. And I think it's pretty clear that Intel sells far more Core-series than Xeon.
Click to expand...

My reference to volume is also to sales. There are two tiers of i7. The higher priced (and larger die) one sells in lower volume than the lower priced (and smaller die) one. There is a coupling between die size and product price. Likewise there is a coupling between price and sales volume.

For instance right now there is the i7 Extreme and desktop i7

http://ark.intel.com/products/family/59135/2nd-Generation-Intel-Core-i7-Extreme-Processor/desktop

http://ark.intel.com/products/family/59136/2nd-Generation-Intel-Core-i7-Processors/desktop

The i7 39xx are based on same die as the upcoming Xeon E5's are and only relatively recently appeared. Similarly, the i7 2xxx there are based on the same die as the currently shipping Xeon E3's are.

As far as just the "Xeon" brand goes there will be Ivy Bridge Xeon's a month or two after the desktop ones. Ivy Bridge E3's will ship in close when the i7 2xxxx do. However, it is a simpler, smaller design.

Sandy Bridge (or "Ivy Bridge") are all just architectures. There are different implementations. For instance the SB Xeon E5's will have PCI-e v3.0 whereas the "desktop" SB i7 do not. The E5's have 40 PCI-e lanes and the "desktop" SB i7 are capped at 20. There is more to "high performance" that just the common core architectural feature set.



I think you just proved my point: the gap between Xeon Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge (desktop/laptop) is going to be about 1 quarter, as opposed to the nearly 1 year wait for Xeon Sandy Bridge.
Click to expand...

No. If just focused strictly on the 'Xeon' label this is incorrect. The E3's launched several months ago.

http://ark.intel.com/products/family/59137/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E3-Family/server

E3 and E7 launched around same time.

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2011/...1200_and_Xeon_E7_CPUs_are_officially_out.html

The E7 (and previous Xeon 6000/7000 series ) have trialed in architecture almost 12 months for the last 2-3 years. The sky hasn't fallen over the last 2-3 years. It is largely a none issue because the "lower affordable price" desktop and "high throughput performance" markets are different.



Nevertheless, it's a bit weird to release the high-end product that is - by some measure - virtually obsolete at its launch.
Click to expand...

First, Xeon isn't necessarily "high end". It runs from about the mid-range to the high end but there is a broad spectrum of performance. Second, a "tick" or "tock" bump typically only tweaks average performance by 10-15%. Either the clock gets bumped a bit (on shrink/tick) or the architecture gets some tweaks ( tock ). Labeling a 10-15% shift as obsolesce is hype. The upper end Xeon products will have 20+% more cores which is enough of a performance gap lead to ride out several month gap to the release of the more complex implementation.
 
gglockner said:
Thanks, I inadvertently switched the terms tick and tock. However, I still stand behind my comment about being 'virtually obsolete' from day 1. If you're buying a high-end system, do you really want yesterday's technology today? I guess it depends on the needs: some users want stability, but others want to be on the leading edge, and these are often customers with deep pockets.
Click to expand...

But that's a pretty unfair thing to say. The SB-E5 chips will be the best chips of their kind in the world once they are released. Sure it will be about 9-12 months over due, but it will be the best your money can buy right now. Your other option is to continue to use Westmeres and wait another 12 months for IB-E, at which point, you'll probably just say the same thing about IB-E since the desktop processors for Haswell will probably be around the corner.

You're just going to have to understand that the workstation class processors are going to be a little slower to market than the consumer/desktop processors. That doesn't make the workstation class processors out of date. They are bigger, faster, and better in all but a very limited number of tasks than even the next generation desktop processors. And if you're one of those people that does those kinds of tasks, well, you don't need Xeons, so you don't have anything to complain about.

Right now, my 8 core 2.4 GHz Mac Pro at work does things no i7 2600(K) could ever do. That relationship between workstation and desktop processor is not going to change for at least the next couple of years. But a pair of SB-E 26xx would certainly make for a nice upgrade over my 8 core. What is probably even more exciting is the extra memory channel, increased memory speed (since a great deal of my work is memory, rather than processor, limited) and SATA III.
 
Last edited:
deconstruct60 said:
Sandy Bridge (or "Ivy Bridge") are all just architectures. There are different implementations. For instance the SB Xeon E5's will have PCI-e v3.0 whereas the "desktop" SB i7 do not. The E5's have 40 PCI-e lanes and the "desktop" SB i7 are capped at 20. There is more to "high performance" that just the common core architectural feature set.
Click to expand...
Perhaps to be clearer, you should differentiate based on sockets rather than Xeon and "desktop" i7. LGA 1155 is capped at 16/20 lanes while LGA 2011 provides you with up to 40 lanes. Both sockets can accommodate "Xeon" style processors.

A Core i7 can give you 40 PCIe lanes. It just has to be on the LGA 2011 platform.

Intel is now pushing product differentiation based more on the platforms compared to the core architecture. Core i7 3xxx/Xeon offers you more PCIe lanes, quad channel RAM (RAM disks might make a comeback), and +12 SATA ports. Go over to Xeon LGA 2011 and you get fun things like SAS.

Mainstream desktop and mobile platforms are now much more strongly linked. Old rumors went as far as to call Sandy Bridge a mobile platform that was spun off into a desktop one as well. Similar to Penryn that brought 45nm but on the mobile front Medium Voltage processors and even quad cores.

Ivy Bridge is once again reinforcing Intel's mobile front with programmable TDP, 35W quad cores, stronger IGP performance, and more display outputs.

deconstruct60 said:
First, Xeon isn't necessarily "high end". It runs from about the mid-range to the high end but there is a broad spectrum of performance. Second, a "tick" or "tock" bump typically only tweaks average performance by 10-15%. Either the clock gets bumped a bit (on shrink/tick) or the architecture gets some tweaks ( tock ). Labeling a 10-15% shift as obsolesce is hype. The upper end Xeon products will have 20+% more cores which is enough of a performance gap lead to ride out several month gap to the release of the more complex implementation.
Click to expand...
Xeon covers a large range of SKUs from 20W to 130W. As mentioned before, one might be perplexed as to what purpose a 20W dual core Xeon serves but turn around and you get 40 PCIe lanes from that lower power processor. On the other end of the spectrum it is the only platform that offers octo-core processors in dual sockets and on up. Also what is easily overlooked is that your PCIe lanes are now based on how many processor sockets you have. 40 lanes per processor grows very quickly compared to being limited to what the old X58 IOH provided.

LGA 1356 comes in as well to offer 24 PCIe lanes, triple channel RAM, and eight cores but limits you to a single socket. The lower the BOM for the entire system but provides a mid-step between LGA 1155 and LGA 2011 for a single socket workstation that demands 8 cores/16 threads.

Gamers and desktop enthusiasts get LGA 2011 too but like LGA 1366, the benefits of the platform are somewhat wasted on a single socket.
 
Bubba - no hand grenades allowed :)

While another topic, my belief is that the Mac Pro will continue for years to come. An associate of mine has started using an I5 iMac in the phone company to test software. The groups reaction to it is very positive - quite fast - gets very hot at the top when stressed heavily - thinking about introducing Mac Pros into their test environment based on what they have seen so far.

At any rate, we will continue to wait for Intel to release.....
 
Last edited:
Umbongo said:
He's just repeating what has been said on here and it comes from the same anonymous source. None of these journalists or analysts know any more than forum members here. Heck some on here are far more plugged in than many of these professional commentators.
Click to expand...
It is all about the page hits. I wish I could find some way to monetize that for myself.
 
I just wish they would decide win way or the other and get it over with. Need to know!
 
xgman said:
I just wish they would decide win way or the other and get it over with. Need to know!
Click to expand...

You can mark it down. The question right now is only when, not if. 2-3 years from now that might change, but I put about 1% chance we don't see a SB-E Mac Pro in 2012.
 
wallysb01 said:
You can mark it down. The question right now is only when, not if. 2-3 years from now that might change, but I put about 1% chance we don't see a SB-E Mac Pro in 2012.
Click to expand...

You are being quite optimistic with a 2-3 year schedule. I'm guessing 1 at most. Hope I'm wrong, but,
I almost wish they would just start developing the high end alternative (whatever that is) right now and get it over with.
 
xgman said:
I just wish they would decide win way or the other and get it over with. Need to know!
Click to expand...

Long term and in part, it is not Apple's decision to make. If enough people buy Mac Pros they will probably keep selling them. (i.e., the number sold go up year over year at a rate similar to the other desktop Macs). If most previous customers vacate the > $2K workstation space then they probably won't.

If the new Mac Pros have a large uptick in sales traffic that would add on another year or two. If revised and sales volume numbers sink even lower then they will probably stop further R&D. They could squeeze out 2012 and 2013 since the Ivy Bridge processor will likely be pin compatible and just do processor update. However, if the numbers are really off there probably would not be a big motivation to even do that extra year on the cheap.
 
Last edited:
theSeb said:
I am not sure what you're hoping for. No one here can give you a definitive answer and this theorising has already been done to death. My answer is correct, even if you don't like it.
Click to expand...

now now seb, your answer was not an answer, only opinion.
 
Eidorian said:
It is all about the page hits. I wish I could find some way to monetize that for myself.
Click to expand...

Pretty much all sites need more writers so just start shooting them with emails. It's mainly pay per article so it's never a loss for them to have one more. Judging from your posts in here, you would make a good CPU analyst at some site. Anything with Intel or AMD doubles or triples the views in my experience.

derbothaus said:
http://vr-zone.com/articles/cascadi...Men,+Geek,+Nerd,+Overclockers+and+Enthusiast)

Good read.
Click to expand...

Nothing new there, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back