News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Mac Pro by mbell on Monday June 10, 2013 @06:08PM (#5857681)
Personally I couldn't care less about the design, it would be sitting behind several large screens anyway and the thermal ideas sound interesting....

That said....

4 ram slots???? Really? 12 cores, 2 GPUs and I get 32GB of ram? Maybe 64GB if 16GB dimms in standard sizes become a thing? That kills it completely in my book.

Re:Mac Pro by bilbo0s on Monday June 10, 2013 @06:27PM (#5857886)
That paucity of slots is what got me to thinking...

I was wondering if the idea would be to daisy chain these together via TB 2 and see one workstation with... say ...36 cores or whatever.

I'm trying to determine if that would be a possibility. In essence, is the Mac Pro a Thunderbolt 2 "processing" device? Or could it be made to be one?

If it were...

Man...

put me down for a couple of them. I mean you could potentially get a 48 core "workstation" in 1/2 the volume of the current Mac Pro.

Re:Mac Pro by kunai on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:41PM (#5858981)
Since they run on different boards, technically you'd set up two or three nodes and run them in a parallel supercomputing setup.

Would be expensive as hell, I'd reckon.

Re:Mac Pro by reeses on Tuesday June 11, 2013 @02:57AM (#5860200)
I was thinking about this as well. It would make sense to cluster these with a front-end node. The improvements to the scheduler, among other things over the past few years, would indicate a simpler way to build the equivalent of a VAXCluster.
Re:Mac Pro by bingaling on Monday June 10, 2013 @06:15PM (#5857773)
Re:Mac Pro by mbell on Monday June 10, 2013 @08:55PM (#5858793)
The linked dimms have 43% lower bandwidth than what Apple has specced (PC1866 vs PC1066) and are over twice the $ per GB.
Re:Mac Pro by beachstartup on Monday June 10, 2013 @10:30PM (#5859223)
wait a few months.
Re:Mac Pro by rorrr2 on Monday June 10, 2013 @10:56PM (#5859351)
I can't think of a single app that's RAM-speed-bound.

Pretty much everything is CPU- or GPU- or disk-bound.

Re:Mac Pro by alayne on Tuesday June 11, 2013 @12:35AM (#5859759)
Re:Mac Pro by seanp2k2 on Tuesday June 11, 2013 @03:06AM (#5860227)
(this is possibly why they opted to go for a chipset that supports 4 channels and only include 4 slots; 1 slot per channel)
Re:Mac Pro by reeses on Tuesday June 11, 2013 @03:01AM (#5860214)
If that were the case, we wouldn't have multi-level CPU caches and we really wouldn't care about misses stalling the processor.

Everything is RAM speed bound when it comes to CPU and GPU.

Re:Mac Pro by seanp2k2 on Tuesday June 11, 2013 @03:05AM (#5860222)
The 12 cores are going to be in 1 CPU BTW. It's a limitation of the chipset and probably thermal capacity as well (check out http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/... ).

As far as 16GB dimms in standard sizes; that's already a thing: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=...

There are also a handful of 32GB DIMMs out already. Example: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820326...

I would expect that you'll be able to run 64 or 128GB of RAM max.

Re:Mac Pro by sil3ntmac on Monday June 10, 2013 @06:16PM (#5857792)
Unless you're actively thrashing through all 32GB (maybe you are), wouldn't installing a large SSD for swap space will help you out just as much?
Re:Mac Pro by seanp2k2 on Tuesday June 11, 2013 @03:06AM (#5860225)
Not really; bandwidth, latency, etc.
Re:Mac Pro by marknutter on Monday June 10, 2013 @06:12PM (#5857739)
That does kill it.. for everyone who requires more than 64GB of RAM..
Re:Mac Pro by grecy on Monday June 10, 2013 @06:35PM (#5857957)
128GB with 32GB DIMMS. Also, it's possible there is some amount soldered on the board.