$1500? Why did they only use the 3GHz chips as options? Quad-core Xeons are available in slower configurations.

The next question - how many apps can take advantage of eight cores...

posted by mitchcohen

Next question, if you have to ask why do you care?

posted by Guest

Whew! I was fearful, with the new chip options, that Apple would be forced to drop their prices on these machines. Luckily for all of us, Apple has managed to keep prices right there at the $2500 mark ($2200 on the 'low' end).

Woohoo! Apple has again saved many a users from purchasing a cheap apple tower and having to deal with all those options that tower owners are stuck with. Way to go apple!

posted by testudo

They could have done this back in December if this is the only update...

posted by Macrat

The question of app support is very important. Many apps and Mac functions only take advantage of one, two, or four cores based on how their threads interact. I'll be very curious to see benchmarks of FCP, Compressor, Quicktime exports, iDVD render... (all Quicktime-based). I don't care about games, but I know others will.

For apps that can't take advantage of eight cores, the "spare" cores will be available for other functions, which for some users will be nice. Personally I'm looking for really, really fast MPEG-2 and H.264 encoding, and secondarily faster FCP renders while editing (better real-time performance etc).

I'll bet we'll hear more about this at NAB with FCP 6.

posted by mitchcohen

Maybe a better video card is a good option next. The nvidia 8800 has been around a couple of month allready now. Put one of those in next please : )

posted by dom2cool

...you don't need, want or have the means to get one. others do. so keep your incoherent and pointless ramblings to yourself.

apple does, however, need to step up with the video card options. in lieu of that, would be nice if drivers came available for 3rd party cards more quickly. guess we'll need to see more volume for that to happen.

posted by rtbarry

...you don't need, want or have the means to get one. others do. so keep your incoherent and pointless ramblings to yourself.

Of course I don't need one. Its hard as a consumer to justify spending $2500 on a computer just so you can have some configurability in the thing (you know, so when some new features come about, or your harddisk space requriements grow, your computer can grow with you). Esp. since my G5 tower is only two years old (after having to deal with a Beige G3).

And I'm sorry my satire was to off-the-wall for you to understand that I was again bemoaning the fact that Apple is unwilling to sell an upgradable computer for less than $2000. I guess you have no problem with that, but a lot of Apple fans (and people who'd like to buy an apple computer if their offerings were more palatable, cost wise) do. (Then again, you also can't get a 15" mac laptop for less than $2000, but, I know, if you need something as large as 15", you should easily be willing to fork over $2000 to get it!).

BTW, while you may not have any apps that can take advantage of all 8 cores, it does give you the ability to really do more than one thing on your computer without slowing down your large tasks.

posted by testudo

I was assuming the next new desktop would be the 8-core, but I hoped it would include OS 10.5 and major updates to the overall system I wonder if Apple will come out with a "real" new desktop system in June? As much as I thought I would buy the 8-core when introduced (along with CS3), I think I will wait because it would suck to sink my money into this computer only to have a much updated system introduced soon after...

posted by misterdna

...wasn't difficult to grasp, just tired.

you like hearing yourself talk, and it gets old for everyone else.

posted by rtbarry