It's like waiting for a bus... only this time, four came at once.



 

Apple introduced the long-anticipated update to its ageing Mac Pro range in the form of the "Nehalem"-powered towers. Featuring Intel's latest Quad-Core Xeon which pack all four cores on one die for efficient transfer of data as opposed to splitting them over two, the new Mac Pros show no cosmetic differences. Top-end clock speed on the processors went down in a rare move, from 3.2GHz to 2.93GHz, but performance claims from Apple state they are twice as powerful as the outgoing generation.

It's worth noting that the 20" and 23" cinema displays have quietly disappeared from the range, and the new Mac Pro is now featured alongside the LED Cinema Display in product shots.

 



So it looks like the various images and video posted on various websites were the real deal, as Apple announced the updated Mac Mini sporting no less than five(!) USB ports. To much relief, Apple has replaced the onboard Intel GMA graphics chipset with the much healthier NVIDIA GeForce 9400M with up to 256MB of DDR3 SDRAM, and also upped the max support of RAM to 4GB.

Probably the coolest feature in our opinion is the Mac Mini's ability to now support dual displays in extended desktop mode at 1920x1200 resolution from the Mini-DVI and DisplayPort outputs.

 



Still sticking with the Intel Core 2 Duo processors, the iMac range did receive an update too, albeit a tame one bar (relatively) recession-friendly pricing, with a 24" iMac starting at just $1,499 (£1,199 inc. VAT). Note that the standard issue keyboard is now sans numeric keypad, but the full length version is still available via the Configure-To-Order options on the Apple Store as a no-cost upgrade.

 



On a more subtle note, the MacBook Pro range got a sort-of update in the form of faster CTO options on the processor front. The 17" and backlit 15" MacBook Pro's can now be spec'd up with lap-scorching 2.93GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processors for an additional $300 (£210 inc. VAT).

WOW! Finally, a reasonable computer for a reasonable price! Only $599 for a Mac mini!

Three points worth noting:

(1) The Mac Pro is now actually two distinct models: a regular x58 motherboard with 4 DIMM slots (limited to 8GB RAM or 6GB for triple channel, just like the Intel DX58SO was originally) and a new dual socket motherboard with 8 DIMM slot (expandable to 32GB or 24GB for triple channel). It is possible the x58 version will be fixed so it can take 4GB DIMMs like the Intel DX58SO (which the Apple motherboard is almost certainly based on), but Apple may leave it crippled to encourage people to pay for more (while perhaps lowering the price of x58 version to fill the gaping hole in the Macintosh line up which OSx86 partially occupies).

(2) Apple scored a coup here, it appears to have cut a deal with Intel to be the first to bring the dual socket Nehalem chips (code name "Gainestown" / Xeon 5500 series) to market.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xeon#5500-ser...22Gainestown.22

(3) Firewire apparently is not dead (contrary to what was assumed after the MacBook dropped it), Firewire 400 devices can be used with the Firewire 800 machines by means of a cheap adapter.

or 599€ wich would be 754$

Yawn. I won't be spending any hardware money at the Apple Store this year.

The i7 cpu has the memory controller built in, so chipset shouldn't limit amount of memory.

Great MAC Pro 8-core, and this will lead to real workin bugfree ATI Radeon 48xx Driver for Hackintoshes.
I´ll wat till Quadcore MacBook Pro´s are out.

Does this official support for nVidia cards mean good things for hackintosh drivers down the road? I still can't get dual monitors to work on GeForce 9800's 8600's.

Thank god. The price of the Mini in the UK, with the current rate of exchange, is whopping great $701(£499), so value for money is rarely a term you see when referring to the Mac Mini but... as with most things Apple... and this is something that some people here don't seem to pick up on... with Macs you are paying an apparent premium to get quality engineered aesthetics and software that works. The price might not be recession friendly but the power consumption is at least environmentally responsible, the physical size unobtrusive. How do you measure value for money? Macs are a high productivity tool for high productivity environments that can comfortably run XP or Vista in an open window. I was literally having nightmares that the Mini would be dropped, then an equally bad nightmare that they would drop Firewire and I curse Jobs name, again. My existing Mac Mini has no hard drive in it. I removed it and put it in a Firwire enclosure and have a second Firewire hard drive. Both are silent. I boot between them. One I use for safe surfing, the other is a slave to the whims of Google. Also, I can pocket those Firewire drives and take them anywhere. The Mini is gorgeous, the new one makes me excited about the Apple brand, again.

this is awesome! partially disappointed that the iMacs n Mac Mini's aren't quad core. but still these updates are awesome! time to save up some money!

This is un-friggin believable!!!!

I've had my Ati4870 in a box and been using my crappy Nvidia 8800GT to get me by.

Now we have a chance at using proper ATi 48XX drivers!!!

I can't wait!

Oh yeah Mac mini looks alright.

Wow, the price of upgrading to a 4850 card - which you can only do on the two more expensive iMacs - even though they must be subtracting the cost of the included card that you upgrade from... is way more than the cost of a store bought 4850. The 4850 upgrade costs more than a store bought 4870. I suppose Apple's take would be that they are fitting the card for the customer and that you can't buy Apple firmware flashed 4850 cards (yet?).

What I'm curious about, is what they had to do to drop the price of the 24" iMac the way they did? Is it now a TN panel LCD vs. the high quality IPS of the outgoing one, just like they did when they made the 20" one the entry level? That would be a complete shame, IMO. That screen, alone, is what makes the cost of an iMac actually reasonable.

I almost considered buying a mac mini til i read that the nvidia 9400 in the 599 model is only 128mb's of memory

We will still see how that works out, with the 128mb/256mb thing. Can it be converted, what's the performance comparison etc.

Agreed. Having both a 20" and 24" iMac, the difference is remarkable.

But in this day of $$$ being the absolute most important factor these are the type of short cuts I hope Apple doesn't use to appease the I can make it cheaper crowd.

And still no Bluray! - Yawn

When you upgrade the 599 mac mini to 2 or 4 gigs of ram it gets 256 megs Vram... So its all good.

They're finally using Nehalem for the Mac pro. Good to see actually.



It's not clock speed that will always determine the final performance of the cpu. These Macs pros are based off of a different platform from what it was before.



Please, Bluray hasn't even begin to kick off yet. It's not big enough yet or worth the cost for apple to include support for it.

I bet the new 8 core 2.26 Ghz is slower than the old 8 core 2.8 Ghz, in CPU demanding apps, for example Logic Pro running loads of plugins.
When apple says the new top end MacPro ( 2.93 x 8 ) is twice as fast as the previous (3.2 x8 ghz) modell, it is only in memory demanding test, in CPU related tests it is approx 1.2 times faster but twice as expensive.

Neither was the iPod nor iPhone before Apple introduced it to us, remember?

Ehm......i think they are actually the first one having access to the Core i7 based Xeons as far as i know.

What do y'all computer nerds think about the MCH being integrated with the CPU? Good or Bad?
I wonder what will be used in place of a northbridge, and will the southbridge be normal or weird?
Or will it have a normal northbridge/chipset that just does less work?

It is a huge design improvement that put AMD on top of Intel for a few years.




That's right, Apple staged a major Intel coup.

HP & Dell have to wait, Apple is the first to get the hot Gainestown (dual socket) platform:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xeon#5500-ser...22Gainestown.22

Wikipedia seems to imply that Gainestown support dual channel memory, I wonder if these that the Mac Pro will do so with 32 GB (or RAM in pairs in general).

Wow, does anybody else get the feeling that Apple is getting really lazy in the desktop hardware department? This is really pitiful! The rest of the hardware world is passing them by except for the super high end mac pro. I guess this is good news for the hackintosh community as the incentive for building a hackintosh has not evaporated with the latest Apple hardware upgrade. I am beginning to think that Apple will never get it. They just don't give a damn about the market segment that needs a machine that is affordable and offers upgrade options besides plugging in external boxes.

I think you are missing the major threading efficiency improvement in Nehalem.

Nehalem chips have a "Turbo-burst" mode that will take active cores above rated clock speed unless the chip is too hot:
http://download.intel.com/design/processor...d=tech_tb+paper


I am not sure if SAP benchmarks are particularly memory intensive, but the dual socket Nehalem (Gainestown) results are impressive:
http://it.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=532





Hardware engineers lazy? No...

Marketing executives arrogant, obtuse? Likely...

Nehalem cores are faster than previous cores, even tough they're clocked lower.

About the Mac Pro I don't understand why they have a single processore configuration at 2.66GHz and double processor configuration at 2.26GHz ... Boh !

What's not to get? Contrary to popular belief, more cores does not mean more performance. Or better performance. Applications will only take advantage of 1 cpu, not 2 cpus. Now that being said, you have to take into consideration how many cores a single cpu has, and if the application is written to take advantage of multiple cores. The single 2.66ghz cpu, is a quad core cpu. Way more effective then 2 dual cores as it was in the first generation Mac pros. For the double processors, it's 2 quad cores. Not eight cores. And, as for clock for clock comparisons, these new Mac pros are based off the nehalim core(Core i7 if you don't know.), which also means ddr3 memory. It's not the frequency of the cpu that will determine the performance of the chip.

The single socket Mac Pro uses Xeon 3500 series chips (Bloomfield), these are basically the same (perhaps with some tweaks to the circuitry connecting the silicon die to the pins) as regular Core i7 chips. Here, the entry level chip is the "920," it is clocked at 2.66 GHz:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_i7


The dual socket Mac Pro requires Xeon 5500 series chips (Gainestown). Here, Intel decided to clock the entry level chip, the "E5520," at 2.26 GHz:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xeon#5500-ser...22Gainestown.22

Apple is just following Intel's product line from the bottom up.

There is actually 3 models of the Mac Mini. The two 2.0 models that are on their website, and a beefier 2.26GHz Intel Core 2 Duo model which (for some odd reason) won't be available through any Apple stores according to the store manager that I talked to. This model is going to be Apples MID-SIZED performing Mac costing around $1,044.00, and with the following specs:

• * 2.26GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor
• * 4GB (2x2GB) of 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM
• * 320GB 5400-rpm SATA hard drive
• * 8X Slot-loading SuperDrive

I will be ordering two of these new Mac Minis by the end of the week

THANK YOU APPLE!!!!

Not quite right: There are 2 models (actually just one, but 2 displayed on the website) and you can configure each
to your taste (2GHz /2.26GHz, 1/2/4GB Ram, 3 hard drives - makes like 18 models according to your way of counting )

x58 chipset works fine, bad move not instaling it in new macs

Mac Mini's and iMac's use mobile parts , quad-core is not a mobile option from Intel yet.
EDIT: As Vbetts points out below, Intel actually has released a quad-core mobile CPU now, but I think my point still stands.

I would add that two cores is more than enough for the vast majority of people, especially those in the Mac Mini and iMac market.

the 2.26 ghz macmini is rather expensive considering the difference.

about the i7 cpu, and x58 chipset. the one major advantage is the fact that memory latency and speed is catching up with the cpu speed. Memory bandwidth is much larger, so there will be huge improvement for data not cached in the cpu. There is no point to have a 4GHz cpu if it can't get instructions and data quick enough to utilize it.

Yes there is. The Q9000 has been out for probably a month or 2 now.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16834115542

There is something I am curious about. There should be an imac10,1 coming soon. All these imacs now are imac9,1.

No, you can't get the MB464LL/A with 1Gig ram. I tried because it has the better video processor but it's only available in 2 or 4 gigs.

Blu-Ray is big enough to be supported. Especially by high end computers. Blu Ray is much better quality than DVD. DVDs look bad now....

The "Intel® Core™2 Extreme Mobile Processor" would be a great candidate for the imac10,1 :-)

I don't see a difference in on video between MB464LL/A and MB463LL/A please see specs:
http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html

Video ram is used according to the main ram built in it apears.
(Quote "2. Memory available to Mac OS X may vary depending on graphics needs. Minimum graphics memory usage is 128MB for 1GB configuration and 256MB for 2GB configuration.")

So a MB464LL/A is just another name for a MB463LL/A with bigger hard drive and 2GB ram.
Thus 18 variations of one basic machine. But all right, they don't give you a Mac mini with the MB464LL/A label
with only 1GB ram. But that's just a marketing label.

Are you joking? As soon as both the Ipod and Iphone were released, they were both big hits. Bluray isn't an apple product either.



How many Blu-rays do you see in an average home? How many do you see in high end computers now? Blu ray is going to be difficult to grow, because it's not cost effective right now. Yes, Blu-ray does have much higher quality then DVD, and also a hell of a lot more storage space. But, with the way Bluray is now, it's not cost effective. It needs more support. It's not like DVD, where dvd had time to progress from just movie formats to games, to data, basically to computers. That's it's problem right now with hitting off. As well as we're no where near dependant on bluray as we are DVD.

Perhaps the imac10,1 will be based on Core i5 (Lynnfield) which is due in about 6 months:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_i5


I am sure Psystar won't be complaining (or will they?).



I have not really seen any kind of a general memory bandwidth bottleneck like this since the PPC G4, which was stuck with a 133 MHz front side bus for years and then was raised to mere 167 MHz. Meanwhile, the CPU clock was raised from about 400 MHz to about 1.5 GHz. Even then, Altivec streaming/pre-fetch data instructions largely mitigated the problem, G4 Macintoshes were not totally blown out by Pentium 4 machines on Photoshop tests.



I agree. Comparing Blu-ray with iPhone or iPod is not useful here.



On the other hand, apparently 21.3 million PlayStation 3's have been sold (all have Blu-ray players built-in):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3

I see that Sony offers a DVD-burner/Blu-ray-player for about $100 retail:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16827118020

I am sure that Apple could get these at a substantial discount, let's say $50, not only after bulk wholesale negations but also because Sony must be pushing Apple to take the lead in adopting Blu-ray. Apple easily has enough margin in the Mac Pro line to include these Blu-ray drives, the DVD-burners they already use are not free either. I think Apple originally adopted DVD-burners at a much higher price point too.

The timing and economics may not be right yet, but Blu-ray is not going to take off until companies like Apple start adopting it either. I think Apple fanboys expect it to lead on adopting new technology, like Blu-ray, that is guaranteed to go mainstream too. Sony already offers Blu-ray in their PCs, certainly Apple should not wait for Dell & HP to do the same.

Blu-ray should at least be some kind of a Mac Pro option at this point, I am guessing that Apple is still in the process of negotiating a deal with Sony.

Just because though that the playstation features Blu-ray, doesn't mean that's what all 21.3 million of those people bought it for. As well as you know as much as I do, that probably just under half of those people, if not more do not have an HD tv on for their playstation. Which, Blu-ray without an HD tv is completely useless.

Exactly as everythimg without its engineering is not a mac pro

the new kexts for 4870, will probably bring compatibility for 4850, right? what about 46xx and 43xx series?
also, will the gt 120 kexts bring compatibility to gtx 2xx series from nvidea?

greets
osx maniac

Please re-read what I wrote; as in the iPod wasn't the first music player, and the iPhone wasn't the first smart phone, but Apple stepped in this market and their hardware (iPod/iPhone) became 'hits' as you say, and thus what I was saying is that Apple can do magic here, since you basically need Blu-ray for your HD content so it is just a matter of time IMHO.

Microsoft researched this, in Europe, and almost everyone with an XBox 360 had at least a HD-Ready LCD TV so why would PS3 owners be any different?

Remember that PS3 owners already bought the more expensive game console, so money was obviously not a problem, and now people here think that they can't effort a HD(-ready) TV? We're not talking about expensive HDMI 1080p projectors here, which are far more expensive, but plain ordinairy LCD TV's which are quite affordable these days.

Who wants Blue Ray anyway? I want HVD!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile_Disc

Guys cool it, your "arguments" won't hinder nor speed up Blue ray.

Like allways people will buy when the price is right and they think they need it, for some reason.

This means the media has to be cheap, burners cost less then 150US$, readers less then 60US$ and
for the main part the entertainment corporations are through with selling us their DVDs.

Sorry, but this will take a year at least, but it will become common at the end.

It seems to me that Apple has driven the high end even higher. The old 8 core was 2800 US bucks, new one is 3300. Yikes. iMac is yawn but recession friendly. Mini looks fine except who ever thot those mini DVI and mini display ports were a good idea should be naturally selected.

For the hackintosh community it means, vanilla kernel for i7/x58 (we had them beat by a few months...), ATI 4870, 4850 and a few other video cards (still no nvidia 2x0!). A good time to be hackintoshing.

Khan