Intel's 18-core Xeon CPU might be coming to the iMac Pro

[Spenser1337]

37 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Apple's current options are only slightly behind due to form factor choice. And they're still priced accordingly. When they came out, one could not build, using validated hardware, for less.

Now, it takes finding a good deal on hardware.

See, you say something close to true and then you give an excuse like "form factor choice" 

 

 

i want you to link me an apple product that is not one within their array of mobile devices that you believe is slightly behind the curve due to form factor.

[mynameisjuan]

32 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

The CPU is made for other machines in mind.

Apple is putting it in there for the ECC ram, core count and the Xeon name.

But the argument I was quoting was someone complaining about lanes in an AIO. But part of it still applies to now 99% of people apparently all of a sudden need 10000 lanes when 99% of the time they have 1 GPU, 1NVME and a handful of drive that barely saturated desktops lanes.

[The Benjamins]

3 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

But the argument I was quoting was someone complaining about lanes in an AIO. But part of it still applies to now 99% of people apparently all of a sudden need 10000 lanes when 99% of the time they have 1 GPU, 1NVME and a handful of drive that barely saturated desktops lanes.

Oops on my part.

 

I feel people are more annoyed by Intel cutting things back on the lower end Skus like how the 7800x/7820x have 28 PCIe vs TR4 has 60 on all CPU's even the 1900x.

[Sauron]

10 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

But isn't the 18 core even newer?

The chip itself is, the architecture and ecosystem aren't.

12 hours ago, Drak3 said:

 

Not in the past few years. And even then, only because older hardware has had more bugs ironed out by the time Apple uses it.

Not like Xeon-W or HCC SLX is readily available.

Think about all the Thunderbolt 3!

Well, the mac pro is painfully obsolete, the iMac and the macbook pro are a full generation behind. Whatever the reasons, they still use outdated hardware. And we still don't know for sure if the iMac pro will actually use the xeon W in its first iteration since 18 core xeons have been available for a while.

 

Thunderbolt 3 could make use of the extra lanes, unfortunately the amount of ports they will put on this won't even saturate the lower end pcie lanes.

[Drak3]

49 minutes ago, Spenser1337 said:

want you to link me an apple product that is not one within their array of mobile devices that you believe is slightly behind the curve due to form factor.

https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/

 

One could argue the iMac, but it's still leagues ahead of what joe consumer can buy at Best Buy or Office Depot.

 

The Mac Mini needs an update, but give its size, it is still a good system compared to Alienware Alphas of similar cost. Just a matter of trade offs between the two.

 

The 4th gen MacBook Pro 15" suffers from thinness when it comes to GPU selection, yet it has a quad core CPU, hard find in laptops that size, and it does cool it well enough to render and game on. They still sell the older 3rd gen variant for those that need what 3rd gen offers and 4th gen doesn't.

 

But the MBP and Mac Pro are also far more validated than consumer Windows systems.

[Drak3]

Just now, Sauron said:

Thunderbolt 3 could make use of the extra lanes, unfortunately the amount of ports they will put on this won't even saturate the lower end pcie lanes.

16 lanes to drive 4 ports with 4 controllers. 4 lanes for an NVMe SSD. Assuming one MXM GPU, 8 lanes minimum. 28 lanes if that is base.

 

Add a GPU, 36 lanes.

Add a GPU and extra NVMe SSD, 40.

Add 4 for another NVMe, 44, another, 48.

 

If assumed base uses x16 for GPU, then 36.

Add GPU, 44.

Add GPU and extra NVMe SSD. 48.

 

If this is how it happens, it would make sense to use Xeon W.

4 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Well, the mac pro is painfully obsolete, the iMac and the macbook pro are a full generation behind. Whatever the reasons, they still use outdated hardware. And we still don't know for sure if the iMac pro will actually use the xeon W in its first iteration since 18 core xeons have been available for a while.

The Mac Pro isn't really obsolete. It uses Broadwell based processors, which aren't slouches. Neither are the FirePro graphocs. Sure, there are faster options, but the Mac Pro isn't really obsolete and it isn't any more outdated than my system.

Don't know, nor care about the iMac. The current MBP uses Polaris and Kaby Lake, and have before VEGA launch. Slightly late, a bit, outdated, nope. Especially considering that 7th gen processors are just efficient Sky parts, clocked a tad higher, and a hardware H.265 decoder "glued" on.

[Spenser1337]

24 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/

 

One could argue the iMac, but it's still leagues ahead of what joe consumer can buy at Best Buy or Office Depot.

 

The Mac Mini needs an update, but give its size, it is still a good system compared to Alienware Alphas of similar cost. Just a matter of trade offs between the two.

 

The 4th gen MacBook Pro 15" suffers from thinness when it comes to GPU selection, yet it has a quad core CPU, hard find in laptops that size, and it does cool it well enough to render and game on. They still sell the older 3rd gen variant for those that need what 3rd gen offers and 4th gen doesn't.

 

But the MBP and Mac Pro are also far more validated than consumer Windows systems.

Just with a simple google search, I found systems for 1300$ with identical specs to the 3000$ Mac Pro 

http://www.titancomputers.com/Intel-and-AMD-based-Workstation-Computers-s/72.htm

 

try to have an unbiased look at this, if you are capable of such a feat

 

http://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/xps-15-touch/spd/xps-15-9560-laptop/dncwxb1603v2

 

400$ less than the base model MacBook 

Pro, better specs across the board with a much nicer screen.

 

You clearly need to learn how to separate your feelings from reality, you may believe macs are more "validated" but to most it seems like you're just trying to  validate your favorite companies shit products 

[Drak3]

52 minutes ago, Spenser1337 said:

Just with a simple google search, I found systems for 1300$ with identical specs to the 3000$ Mac Pro 

http://www.titancomputers.com/Intel-and-AMD-based-Workstation-Computers-s/72.htm

 

try to have an unbiased look at this, if you are capable of such a feat

 

http://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/xps-15-touch/spd/xps-15-9560-laptop/dncwxb1603v2

 

400$ less than the base model MacBook 

Pro, better specs across the board with a much nicer screen.

 

You clearly need to learn how to separate your feelings from reality, you may believe macs are more "validated" but to most it seems like you're just trying to  validate your favorite companies shit products 

As close as identical spec, your Titan Systems link has a PC starting at $3,200, but sustitutes the 2 FirePros for a GTX 1080.

 

Dell's laptop is somewhat impressive, but ultimately a product primarily aimed at consumers and not heavily validated. Also, $2000 is the starting price of the MBP. The only key separaters are the 1050 and the 4K screen on the Dell, and 2 thunderbolt controllers, each with a x4 link, on the MBP.

Might as well compare a Titan Xp to a Quadro P6000.

 

And you would know how extremely stupid it would be to call or imply that I'm an Apple fanboy, if this wasn't our first interaction regarding Apple. I've got a bias against Apple, and only regard the 15" MBP, Mac Pro, and Mac mini base models to be worth a damn, and namely for enterprise environments.

 

They actually validate their hardware, and optimize their software. Its why they don't sell OSX by itself, why they procure custom silicon from AMD for their GPUs, why OSX only works on Intel hardware without modding it, and why it takes Apple longer to bring a processor to their lineup.

[Spenser1337]

4 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

As close as identical spec, your Titan Systems link has a PC starting at $3,200, but sustitutes the 2 FirePros for a GTX 1080.

 

Dell's laptop is somewhat impressive, but ultimately a product primarily aimed at consumers and not heavily validated. Also, $2000 is the starting price of the MBP. The only key separaters are the 1050 and the 4K screen on the Dell, and 2 thunderbolt controllers, each with a x4 link, on the MBP.

Might as well compare a Titan Xp to a Quadro P6000.

 

And you would know how extremely stupid it would be to call or imply that I'm an Apple fanboy, if this wasn't our first interaction regarding Apple. I've got a bias against Apple, and only regard the 15" MBP, Mac Pro, and Mac mini base models to be worth a damn, and namely for enterprise environments.

 

They actually validate their hardware, and optimize their software. Its why they don't sell OSX by itself, why they procure custom silicon from AMD for their GPUs, why OSX only works on Intel hardware without modding it, and why it takes Apple longer to bring a processor to their lineup.

Once again you're just spouting ignorance 

 

for 2000$ you can get a 22c 44t pc on titan systems

 

 

for 3000$ you can get a 6c12t mac pro

 

Your entire "validated hardware" concept is complete BS. 

[Drak3]

3 minutes ago, Spenser1337 said:

for 2000$ you can get a 22c 44t pc on titan systems

That is the base price of an 8c/16t model that goes UPTO  22c, 44t.

 

4 minutes ago, Spenser1337 said:

Your entire "validated hardware" concept is complete BS. 

High end, server grade hardware, in their only traditionalish desktop, chosen only for its validation, is BS then?

 

7 minutes ago, Spenser1337 said:

Once again you're just spouting ignorance

I'm not the one claiming you can get 22c systems for $2,000, without checking whether you can with the provided source.

[DildorTheDecent]

When someone says an 18 core All In One is going to be expensive

[flibberdipper]

17 hours ago, TheCherryKing said:

It's odd how Apple is not going to use the 28-Core Xeon Platinum for their top of the line iMac Pro. In related news, some rumors suggest that a new Mac Pro tower will be coming next year and will features two CPU's.

To be fair if it's for FCPX, an 18 core chip would probably be fine for all but the most extreme projects since FCPX renders things out so incredibly well. Think it was Hardware Canucks that did a video comparing the MBP with FCPX to a 7700K with Premiere and the MBP walked it as I remember.

[Dylanc1500]

26 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

That is the base price of an 8c/16t model that goes UPTO  22c, 44t.

 

High end, server grade hardware, in their only traditionalish desktop, chosen only for its validation, is BS then?

 

I'm not the one claiming you can get 22c systems for $2,000, without checking whether you can with the provided source.

Just to add to what you are saying , the cheapest I can get a 22 core chip is the broadwell e5-2699v4 for about roughly $1600.

[Drak3]

3 minutes ago, Dylanc1500 said:

Just to add to what you are saying , the cheapest I can get a 22 core chip is the broadwell e5-2699v4 for about roughly $1600.

I imagine that you're talking about just the CPU. It's a pretty penny. Still, cheaper than the 6950X at launch.

[Dylanc1500]

4 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

I imagine that you're talking about just the CPU. It's a pretty penny. Still, cheaper than the 6950X at launch.

Sorry should have clarified that, you are correct, I was referring to the CPU alone, also it was $4115 at launch. Hey you can get the 6950x for about $1300 now! (Don't)

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, Dylanc1500 said:

Hey you can get the 6950x for about $1300 now! (Don't)

Pfft, the 7900X is whatn like $1100 or so?

 

3 minutes ago, Dylanc1500 said:

Sorry should have clarified that, you are correct, I was referring to the CPU alone, also it was $4115 at launch.

They say you should spend 2 months salary of a wedding ring. Well, the gemstone I'd chose is that 22c Broadwell Xeon.

[Dylanc1500]

3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Pfft, the 7900X is whatn like $1100 or so?

 

They say you should spend 2 months salary of a wedding ring. Well, the gemstone I'd chose is that 22c Broadwell Xeon.

You can get the 7900x for around $950 at some retailers. Intel's MSRP is $989- $999.

 

Dang people where I'm from always told me three months salary. That's 33% off!! Oh as a comparison note the cheapest 22 core Skylake part Gold 6152 you can get for about $3600.

[Dabombinable]

8 hours ago, mynameisjuan said:

Whats with everyone now and needing so many lanes? Since Ryzen and TR apparently everyone needs 16 cores and enough lanes to saturate 4 GPUs, 4 NVME drives and a 20TB external TB raid. 

 

Its an AIO....its not like you will be able to have enough hardware to even get close to using all the lanes anyway, even when using TB.

PCIe SSD, 10Gb NIC, graphics/compute cards etc....

[Drak3]

1 hour ago, Dabombinable said:

PCIe SSD, 10Gb NIC, graphics/compute cards etc....

Or, shit ton of Thunderbolt 3, and you can buy adapters for everything else.

[Dabombinable]

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

Or, shit ton of Thunderbolt 3, and you can buy adapters for everything else.

That too. And its much better having as much as possible running from the CPU's lanes instead of the PCH.