8-Core Mac is now set as default configuration for Apple
Newsmeldung von slashCAM: Januar 2008
8-Core Mac now a standard configurationofApplerob - 8 Jan 2008 15:12:00 Apple has just bekannnt indicated that the 8-core Mac, which currently only available as an option was now to the standard configurations of the Mac Pro Calculator counts. Also updated was Apple's Xserve.
Here are the specifications and Prices:
Mac Pro:
The standard 8-core Mac Pro for 2499 euros including VAT has:
- Two 2.8 GHz quad-core Intel Xeon processors with two independent 1600 MHz front side buses; - 2 GB 800 MHz DDR2 ECC DIMM memory, up to 32 GB extensible; - ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT with 256 MB GDDR3 memory; - 320 GB Serial ATA 3GB / s hard drive with 7200 rpm; - 16x SuperDrive DL with support (DVD ± R DL / DVD ± RW / CD-RW); - Two PCI Express 2.0 and two PCI Express Connections; - Bluetooth 2.0 + EDR; and - Apple Keyboard and Mighty Mouse.
Xserve:
In the basic configuration for 2899 euros including VAT, the server on:
- A 64-bit 2.8 GHz Quad-Core Xeon processor with 12 MB of L2 cache and a 1600 MHz frontside bus; - 2 GB 800 MHz DDR2 ECC FB-DIMM RAM, expandable to up to 32 GB; - A single 80GB SATA Apple Drive Module; - Integrated dual-Gigabit Ethernet; - Internal graphics; - Two FireWire 800 and three USB 2.0 ports, and - A Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard Server license for an unlimited number of clients.
Nettes device so that Pac Man will now run properly redundant :-)
Krass particular are "up to 32 GB extensible 's memory!
Now, Grandma certainly more socks Strike.
Rob thanks for the thread that now runs the only legally slobber from the mouth angles !!!!-)))
Antwort von felix75:
simply rude these 32 GB of RAM ... and the price demanded for the Apple, which is $ 9100. Well, who has it has it. I'm happy about my "lame" iMac 2,4 Ghz and 24 inch. Yeah ....
Antwort von necroPHIL:
Who buys RAM from Apple is your own fault .....
Antwort von B.DeKid:
"necroPHIL" wrote:
Who buys RAM from Apple is your own fault .....
:-) Well rather not, because anyone who buys such a calculator, which is no preference what what is the cost (-:
You should probably be aware that this is not a "Home PC" Although I have a G3 at times ... the comb was in MM with Pappi bought because it was so beautiful bunt, and Pappi said "Yes so apple logos have our things to the working synonymous " Only it was a student only wanted to tap and is still synonymous same PC software bought in MM but strangely not on the thing ran fine. :-) I found cool and the girl built a PC in transparents housing and then swapped with you :-)))
Antwort von PowerMac:
Let's see if the budget is there ...
Antwort von B.DeKid:
"PowerMac" wrote:
Let's see if the budget is there ...
... hopefully this had not let down the pants ;-)
Antwort von felix75:
"B. DeKid" wrote:
:-) Well rather not, because anyone who buys such a calculator, which is no preference what what is the cost (-:
Huh? What's that for a thesis - I have the predecessor to stand here and there before me was 1.5 years and did not quite no preference, the store where I buy (guaranteed not from Apple). Initially, 1 GB tired cost 150 euros (not from Apple!) And only now is the halfway affordable memory (ECC memory in comparison to normal DDR is still quite expensive - 160 euros for 4 GB löhnt because it currently).
What we have seen in the new models are certainly not synonymous should ignore: there is 800'er DDR memory in it - who has already seen somewhere? DSP Memory is not yet in range and even likely that memory so rare and expensive again. When the miser is available anywhere and for a 4 GB kit to the partial 277 euros. Then have fun upgrading :-)
Anyway, the new devices are a nice update, if it is synonymous to me nothing would bring (when rendering video bored the 4 cores of the predecessor already - what should I bring da 8 cores? If one with Maya or other similar programs is underway, which certainly looks different (the super-scaled so synonymous to the many nuclei), but the normal video applications because probably less likely to get performance boost (at least in the Avid, I remember little of great scale -- there would be enough air).
Perhaps yes Slashcam times bring a performance comparison - I would be really interesting times if the 8 cores what will (likely because of motion improved Grakas much more interesting - the there's synonymous for the older Mac Pros as an upgrade option. A beautiful train of Apple, although 300 euros for the 8800 GT a little fierce, in comparison to the PC cards).
Besides
Antwort von PowerMac:
So the benchmarks of the Apple Final Cut Pro rendering are already enormous. 10.5 Leopard, Final Cut Pro 6.0.2 and the 8-cores Mac have been given another 60% draufgelegt.
Antwort von felix75:
60%? I always wonder what is actually measured. If this renders the Avid (as are synonymous, things like the Sapphire Plugs involved, the rather computationally intensive), the processor load at just 19% - the rest dümpelt way down.
Why should an 8-core Mac because faster? Maybe Final Cut Pro better on Apple's best machines, but since Avid is already on a multi-processor workstations and should actually genaus can (in practice, I notice, however, little of it).
Antwort von PowerMac:
Well, Final Cut Pro is stuff of Apple and the Mac Pro synonymous. I do not know how to cheat. The basket just clips with color correction and any filters in the Timeline and measure the time. Final Cut Pro with 10.5 is much faster.
http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html
Antwort von MacPro:
Wow: 211% nominal power, 40% speed increase (HDV rendering) The scaled so incredibly great ;-)
(Comparison: 4-core 2.66 against 8-core 2.8)
Antwort von nomulus:
"PowerMac" wrote:
Well, Final Cut Pro is stuff of Apple and the Mac Pro synonymous. I do not know how to cheat. The basket just clips with color correction and any filters in the Timeline and measure the time. Final Cut Pro with 10.5 is much faster.
http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html
Well, Apple and benchmarks are a matter :-). When I look at the graphic, for example, in FC Pro Res rendering, then the odds are a little graphic with the caption: the G5 would be the graphic to go much faster (at Apple seems more bars = yes to be faster), but anything is 1.8 faster than G5.
For me the question is synonymous simple: I notice something like this in practice? Benchmarks are always very theoretical and synonymous if the new equipment to the paper 1.4 times faster rendering - remembers the man synonymous with the daily work?
Well, now wait for official tests :-).
But a 8800GT, I will probably for the Mac Pro indulge (the 7300 GT is quite schwachbrüstig).
