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

Xeon E7 v2 series

hpe said:
Probably not the cause of the delays but it would be nice if it could find it's way into the MP
Click to expand...

I find it astonishing that Apple could (badly) plan the launch of the MP in December, be working with Intel - and not be aware/or consider putting these in their brand new system. I guess it will allow them to release an updated version in 6 months - which i'm sure will anger some/all of the early purchasers.
 
daveedjackson said:
I find it astonishing that Apple could (badly) plan the launch of the MP in December, be working with Intel - and not be aware/or consider putting these in their brand new system. I guess it will allow them to release an updated version in 6 months - which i'm sure will anger some/all of the early purchasers.
Click to expand...

They are 6500$ per ONE cpu. Yes if you really want 15K costing Mac Pro's.
 
iBug2 said:
They are 6500$ per ONE cpu. Yes if you really want 15K costing Mac Pro's.
Click to expand...

With respect - i've just spent that £7799 on the new MP for old chips - this is a pro system so the option should be there. Also the whole architecture of these chips is different, so even to go for the 12c would be much faster.
 
daveedjackson said:
With respect - i've just spent that £7799 on the new MP for old chips - this is a pro system so the option should be there. Also the whole architecture of these chips is different, so even to go for the 12c would be much faster.
Click to expand...

With respect, the CPUs in the article are E7 chips, which will never be in the Mac Pro. The chips in the new Mac Pro ARE NOT OLD. They are the latest suitable CPUs available from Intel.

They are E5 V2 CPUs.

E5-1620v2 (4) - launch date Q3'13
E5-1650v2 (6) - launch date Q3'13
E5-1680v2 (8) - launchg date Q3'13
E5-2697v2 (12) - Launch Date Q3'13



----------
daveedjackson said:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/0...four_and_eight_socket_xeon_e7_v2_line/?page=1

Very interesting read. Do you think it's worth holding out for this new chippery to come to the new mac pro? Could this be the cause of the delays?
Click to expand...

No, it's not worth waiting for it, because these CPUs will never be in the Mac Pro, as I have already mentioned.

----------
daveedjackson said:
I find it astonishing that Apple could (badly) plan the launch of the MP in December, be working with Intel - and not be aware/or consider putting these in their brand new system. I guess it will allow them to release an updated version in 6 months - which i'm sure will anger some/all of the early purchasers.
Click to expand...

I find it astonishing that people spout angry nonsense without knowing all of the facts. The worst part is that other people will read posts like this, believe it, and then spread this further.
 
theSeb said:
With respect, the CPUs in the article are E7 chips, which will never be in the Mac Pro. The chips in the new Mac Pro ARE NOT OLD. They are the latest suitable CPUs available from Intel.

They are E5 V2 CPUs.

E5-1620v2 (4) - launch date Q3'13
E5-1650v2 (6) - launch date Q3'13
E5-1680v2 (8) - launchg date Q3'13
E5-2697v2 (12) - Launch Date Q3'13

Please get your facts right before spouting angry nonsense.
Click to expand...

My point is why would they not consider using the newer technology. Also this is not an angry post, i just don't understand, and there is no need to speak to me IN ALL CAPS!
 
theSeb said:
With respect, the CPUs in the article are E7 chips, which will never be in the Mac Pro. The chips in the new Mac Pro ARE NOT OLD. They are the latest suitable CPUs available from Intel.

They are E5 V2 CPUs.

E5-1620v2 (4) - launch date Q3'13
E5-1650v2 (6) - launch date Q3'13
E5-1680v2 (8) - launchg date Q3'13
E5-2697v2 (12) - Launch Date Q3'13

Please get your facts right before spouting angry nonsense.
Click to expand...

ummmm In all due respect to your post, you have actually added little to the discussion.

If you explained the difference between E5 and E7 than that would go a long way to explain why the E7 are not used in the mac pros. Or why the mac pro does not require a CPU for mission critical applications. This would go a long way in explaining why the E7 will not be used in a "desktop" by Apple.

Nothing wrong with the OP wanting the best possible CPU if he can afford it.
The way the OP would see it the new E7 15core is better than his "old" E5 12 core.


http://www.intel.co.uk/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/guides/xeon-intel-server-processor-comparison-guide.pdf

----------
daveedjackson said:
My point is why would they not consider using the newer technology. Also this is not an angry post, i just don't understand, and there is no need to speak to me IN ALL CAPS!
Click to expand...

The E7 and E5 are aimed for different purposes.

Don't worry, you have the best tech in your Mac Pro, as the E5 is the correct CPU for its purpose.

E7 are for enterprise grade infrastructure and mission critical applications. A huge overkill for the Mac pro, which is in effect an awesome desktop.
 
MH01 said:
ummmm In all due respect to your post, you have actually added little to the discussion.

If you explained the difference between E5 and E7 than that would go a long way to explain why the E7 are not used in the mac pros. Or why the mac pro does not require a CPU for mission critical applications. This would go a long way in explaining why the E7 will not be used in a "desktop" by Apple.

Nothing wrong with the OP wanting the best possible CPU if he can afford it.
The way the OP would see it the new E7 15core is better than his "old" E5 12 core.


http://www.intel.co.uk/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/guides/xeon-intel-server-processor-comparison-guide.pdf

----------



The E7 and E5 are aimed for different purposes.

Don't worry, you have the best tech in your Mac Pro, as the E5 is the correct CPU for its purpose.

E7 are for enterprise grade infrastructure and mission critical applications. A huge overkill for the Mac pro, which is in effect an awesome desktop.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing this up. I'm sure i won't be the only one to read the announcement and think the same thing.
 
MH01 said:
ummmm In all due respect to your post, you have actually added little to the discussion.

If you explained the difference between E5 and E7 than that would go a long way to explain why the E7 are not used in the mac pros. Or why the mac pro does not require a CPU for mission critical applications. This would go a long way in explaining why the E7 will not be used in a "desktop" by Apple.

Nothing wrong with the OP wanting the best possible CPU if he can afford it.
The way the OP would see it the new E7 15core is better than his "old" E5 12 core.


http://www.intel.co.uk/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/guides/xeon-intel-server-processor-comparison-guide.pdf

----------



The E7 and E5 are aimed for different purposes.

Don't worry, you have the best tech in your Mac Pro, as the E5 is the correct CPU for its purpose.

E7 are for enterprise grade infrastructure and mission critical applications. A huge overkill for the Mac pro, which is in effect an awesome desktop.
Click to expand...

I do not believe in forcing people to drink, after I have showed them where the water is. If the OP still wants to know what the difference is between E7 and E5, then surely he should use his curiosity and invoke the power of the internet?

If you teach a man to fish, then he can feed himself for a lifetime. In all due respect, you're just throwing fish at him.
 
theSeb said:
I do not believe in forcing people to drink, after I have showed them where the water is. If the OP still wants to know what the difference is between E7 and E5, then surely he should use his curiosity and invoke the power of the internet?

If you teach a man to fish, then he can feed himself for a lifetime. In all due respect, you're just throwing fish at him.
Click to expand...

Surely a post like this, in the MACRUMORS Forum, is exactly the right place to for the discussion to happen. No one forced to you read my post nor did they force you to send a reply.
 
daveedjackson said:
Surely a post like this, in the MACRUMORS Forum, is exactly the right place to for the discussion to happen. No one forced to you read my post nor did they force you to send a reply.
Click to expand...

Relax. I am joking.

ETA: I am sorry for my curt initial post. It's difficult to not be jaded with the barrage of whinge threads and I classified yours as part of that basket initially.
 
Last edited:
theSeb said:
Relax. I am joking.

ETA: I am sorry for my curt initial post. It's difficult to not be jaded with the barrage of whinge threads and I classified yours as part of that basket initially.
Click to expand...

No worries. Things easily get lost in translation in forums. I meant no disrespect at all - it was a legitimate question.

Cheers
 
Try Google

daveedjackson said:
Surely a post like this, in the MACRUMORS Forum, is exactly the right place to for the discussion to happen. No one forced to you read my post nor did they force you to send a reply.
Click to expand...

or search the forums - you were complaining,
There will always be new hardware released after you purchase the current model.
Even if they could use those CPU's - they would not sell very many at that price.
 
daveedjackson said:
Thanks for clearing this up. I'm sure i won't be the only one to read the announcement and think the same thing.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly why searching the threads here in the Mac Pro section would very quickly lead you to someone who is onto the same deeply misguided thought as you were on.

A quick search on 'E7' just in this forum would have yielded a thread posted a couple days ago.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1707751/

as well as several others which outline both that E7 differences and why they are extremely unlikely to ever show up in a Mac product.

If it was a novel question then fine. But it is an 'old as dirt' question that was covered yet again a day or two before you asked. Redundant posts about the same topic in a short amount of time is not useful or courteous.
 
Last edited:
theSeb said:
I do not believe in forcing people to drink, after I have showed them where the water is. If the OP still wants to know what the difference is between E7 and E5, then surely he should use his curiosity and invoke the power of the internet?

If you teach a man to fish, then he can feed himself for a lifetime. In all due respect, you're just throwing fish at him.
Click to expand...

On MR.... at times its like... teaching to fish, is giving them a grenade... ;)

Though I know where you are coming from.

----------
daveedjackson said:
Thanks for clearing this up. I'm sure i won't be the only one to read the announcement and think the same thing.
Click to expand...

Np problem mate. Enjoy your machine! it's a total beast!
 
daveedjackson said:
I find it astonishing that Apple could (badly) plan the launch of the MP in December, be working with Intel - and not be aware/or consider putting these in their brand new system.
Click to expand...

It is mildly astonishing that you didn't even read (or perhaps not understand) the article.

"... Those 32 PCIe lanes are a step down from the 40 lanes in Intel's E5 v2 line, ..."

The Mac Pro 2013 with an E5 v2's 40 lanes is already oversubscribed on PCIe lanes. Dropping another 8 would not be in the same league in terms of I/O performance.

Dropping to 32 lanes isn't a big deal for 2, 4 , 8 CPU package systems. It leaves you with 64 , 128 , 256 lanes. All of those are more than enough for ultra extremely vast majority of personal workstations and for most servers.

E7 cranks up the QPI links and drops the PCIe lanes. It is a very simple design tradeoff that makes alot of sense. There are no E7 18xx products.
 
MH01 said:
Someone spending 6K on a CPU is not going to be skimping on the MB and complaining about compatibility with their old 2011 MB ;)
Click to expand...

I have learnt from these forums that people will always find something to complain about. :D
 
MH01 said:
ummmm In all due respect to your post, you have actually added little to the discussion.

If you explained the difference between E5 and E7 than that would go a long way to explain why the E7 are not used in the mac pros. Or why the mac pro does not require a CPU for mission critical applications. This would go a long way in explaining why the E7 will not be used in a "desktop" by Apple.

Nothing wrong with the OP wanting the best possible CPU if he can afford it.
The way the OP would see it the new E7 15core is better than his "old" E5 12 core.


http://www.intel.co.uk/content/dam/...n-intel-server-processor-comparison-guide.pdf

----------



The E7 and E5 are aimed for different purposes.

Don't worry, you have the best tech in your Mac Pro, as the E5 is the correct CPU for its purpose.

E7 are for enterprise grade infrastructure and mission critical applications. A huge overkill for the Mac pro, which is in effect an awesome desktop.
Click to expand...
But I need E7 for calculating when the next asteroid come and hit the Earth, it's critical for humanity!
Well I can always upgrade the chip myself...
Just kidding.
 
SesameWasher said:
But I need E7 for calculating when the next asteroid come and hit the Earth, it's critical for humanity!
Well I can always upgrade the chip myself...
Just kidding.
Click to expand...

It's to get the most of iTunes ! I've heard the old , I need a E7 to save humanity chestnut!!
 
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