PDA

View Full Version : what difference will sandy bridge make to macbook air ?




rav16
Feb 12, 2011, 06:28 AM
hello all ,
iam not a geek or a tech savvy guy just just wanted some questions to be answered here .

if the rumors are true what differnce one can expect if they bring sandy bridge cpus to the macbook air compared to the c2d ?

will there be a huge difference so i can wait and buy later ?



Hellhammer
Feb 12, 2011, 06:32 AM
The difference depends on the task. It won't make Safari or Adium any faster but same CPU intensive tasks will definitely be faster. The most noticeable difference for an average user should be the better battery life

hcho3
Feb 12, 2011, 06:42 AM
They are going to use intel graphics card. It will be worse in games, but u will get better battery life.

rav16
Feb 12, 2011, 06:59 AM
The difference depends on the task. It won't make Safari or Adium any faster but same CPU intensive tasks will definitely be faster. The most noticeable difference for an average user should be the better battery life

like how much more battery life i can get compared to the c2d ?
in a electronic store in india i compared the display of a i3 . 15 windows machine with the air and used the same movie running on all 3 machines and even pics belive me the air just blow all of the hps, acers and sonys. is that because air has the nvidia chip ? and will the sandy bridge ones give the same kind of display like the current models are giving ?

and sorry for a silly question which are CPU based extensive task for example ?

Hellhammer
Feb 12, 2011, 07:12 AM
like how much more battery life i can get compared to the c2d ?

Hard to say as the chips are not available yet. I would expect something like an extra hour or two.

in a electronic store in india i compared the display of a i3 . 15 windows machine with the air and used the same movie running on all 3 machines and even pics belive me the air just blow all of the hps, acers and sonys. is that because air has the nvidia chip ? and will the sandy bridge ones give the same kind of display like the current models are giving ?

Most likely because of the screen. Usually those cheap laptops come with awful displays.

and sorry for a silly question which are CPU based extensive task for example ?

Video encoding and rendering for example. Mainly something to do with creativity

southnc
Feb 12, 2011, 11:48 AM
Sandy Bridge would:
-Improve general processing power substantially - much faster machine.
-New onboard GPU should be about equivalent to current GPU in terms of performance.
-No more separate GPU - more space (or smaller size), less heat, longer battery life, and maybe lower cost.
-Main CPU now current, instead of 2 generations behind.

Definitely worth waiting for, if you can.

63dot
Feb 12, 2011, 12:07 PM
The difference depends on the task. It won't make Safari or Adium any faster but same CPU intensive tasks will definitely be faster. The most noticeable difference for an average user should be the better battery life

I tend to agree with that. But wouldn't it be great if all tasks were noticeably faster?

Anyway, the big one is better battery time.

Funkymonk
Feb 12, 2011, 12:16 PM
Is it physically impossible for apple to put sandy bridge and amd discrete graphics on the mba?

63dot
Feb 12, 2011, 12:57 PM
Is it physically impossible for apple to put sandy bridge and amd discrete graphics on the mba?

Time will tell. Let's first see how SB does on PC laptops with integrated graphics.

It may be suitable for MBA and entry level MBP. While people totally knock current Intel Core "i" series and integrated graphics, it's not that bad on one of my laptops and integrated graphics have come a very long way. Let's see though if the Macintosh community is pleased, which it probably won't be for every member.

Integrated graphics are not trying to pretend to be high end, and for now, it doesn't seem like it's possible or cost-effective. Until then, a dedicated/separate graphics chip is the answer.

acedickson
Feb 12, 2011, 02:49 PM
Time will tell. Let's first see how SB does on PC laptops with integrated graphics.

It may be suitable for MBA and entry level MBP. While people totally knock current Intel Core "i" series and integrated graphics, it's not that bad on one of my laptops and integrated graphics have come a very long way. Let's see though if the Macintosh community is pleased, which it probably won't be for every member.

Integrated graphics are not trying to pretend to be high end, and for now, it doesn't seem like it's possible or cost-effective. Until then, a dedicated/separate graphics chip is the answer.

The potential negative with Intel's integrated graphics only seems to be gaming, and that drop off shouldn't be too much. If you're buying a MBA to game you're putting your money in the wrong class of notebook but if you happen to game on it the performance wouldn't be horrible unless you expect all settings on high.

63dot
Feb 12, 2011, 06:52 PM
The potential negative with Intel's integrated graphics only seems to be gaming, and that drop off shouldn't be too much. If you're buying a MBA to game you're putting your money in the wrong class of notebook but if you happen to game on it the performance wouldn't be horrible unless you expect all settings on high.

My idea of computer gaming is mahjong, and the only moving game would be a Bugdom type of thing.

If I were online doing first person shooter on a really high level, wouldn't a self built desktop buying the best components one at a time be the best option, especially since it's upgradeable?

2IS
Feb 12, 2011, 07:13 PM
If you're worried about gaming, sign up for On Live

GekkePrutser
Feb 12, 2011, 07:16 PM
Is it physically impossible for apple to put sandy bridge and amd discrete graphics on the mba?

They've held off on putting discrete graphics on all their 13" models ever since the switch to Intel CPU's. Even in the GMA950 time (which was atrocious when compared to even the weakest discrete GPU at the time). Apparently the 13" case was just a bit too tight to fit a GPU.

I could see them adding a discrete GPU to the MBP 13" or maybe even the standard plastic MacBook. But the air is even more limited in terms of space than those, and quite a lot so. Also the focus on features is portability, not performance. So I'd guess the chance of it getting one in the near future is minimal. The MB/MBP 13" will be first with that feature if it appears and even then the air might never get it.

Having said that, it'll be interesting to see what the upcoming MBP refresh will bring. If it does indeed bring discrete graphics (which I doubt, because SB is apparently pretty good), the chances of the Air getting it in the future would be a bit greater. Still wouldn't bet on it though.

sbb155
Feb 12, 2011, 07:18 PM
i dont understand why people arent impressed with SB. It will be better than the historical c2duo, and then something else will come along and make SB obsolete. It is a natural evolution. Generally speaking, people desire newer processors eventually. I am not using my old PB G4 after all, though i loved the form factor.

Yes, if you buy a MBA now, it will become "yesterday's news".

One should buy the computer if you need it, and if you don't need it, then dont. If you have the option, then you have to weigh what you have now to what your needs are.

Certain apple computers stay fast for a while. A 2006 model mac pro can geekbench at over 5000... the top laptops just reached that level last year. The MBA geekbenches at 2000-3000. That mac pro can be bought for ~1100 on auction sites.

The good news is resale value.

I am a corporate user, so for me, the slow processor is not as important as portability for travel. I have a mac pro and other higher power computers for the crunching at work. It seems like a lot of mac users are students or younger people. For a corporate user like myself, it is about productivity. I am less productive if I cannot take the computer with me.

Sandy bridge is probably not important for me - where my needs are on the road, with MS office and internet capability. Powerpoint/keynote use. However, the second the MBA is too slow for my basic needs I will upgrade. Usually that is about 2 years. And the cost of the machine, whether it is 1000 or 3000 is not important for my corporation. I produce 100x-1000x that in payback for the company. So the upgrade process is easy.

When I look at ultraportables, I think of the business user. If I were a home user, the MBP 13" offers so much more for a few pounds. And if I were a home user/student/ entertainment user, I think the new MBP that will come out soon with SB are probably the best bang for the buck.

torbjoern
Feb 12, 2011, 07:28 PM
hello all ,
iam not a geek or a tech savvy guy just just wanted some questions to be answered here .

if the rumors are true what differnce one can expect if they bring sandy bridge cpus to the macbook air compared to the c2d ?

will there be a huge difference so i can wait and buy later ?
As to whether or not there will be a difference to you, depends on what you are going to use it for. If you're planning to do video editing or run VMs on your Air, wait until it comes with quad core and 8 GB of RAM. You might also want to consider a Pro instead.

KPOM
Feb 12, 2011, 08:47 PM
i dont understand why people arent impressed with SB. It will be better than the historical c2duo, and then something else will come along and make SB obsolete. It is a natural evolution. Generally speaking, people desire newer processors eventually. I am not using my old PB G4 after all, though i loved the form factor.


It isn't that we're not impressed. It's that we're telling people to evaluate their needs. The current systems are fast enough for many people's needs, and if people keep waiting for the next big thing to come out, they'll never buy because something better is always on the way.

Remember, too, that a lot of us here are the type who buy new computers after a year or two. The Core 2 Duo is outdated, but not so outdated that it can't keep up with most people's needs for the next two years. Remember, it was Intel's current chip 2 years ago.

2IS
Feb 12, 2011, 09:18 PM
Remember, it was Intel's current chip 2 years ago.

You say that like it's a good thing. When the next best thing is right around the corner, it makes sense to wait for it. The only issue here is that SB equipped MBA has not been confirmed by Apple yet. Given the dwindling supply of Core 2 based CPU's though, it makes sense.

If I didn't already have an MBA, I'd wait for it.

iRun26.2
Feb 12, 2011, 09:41 PM
You say that like it's a good thing. When the next best thing is right around the corner, it makes sense to wait for it. The only issue here is that SB equipped MBA has not been confirmed by Apple yet. Given the dwindling supply of Core 2 based CPU's though, it makes sense.

If I didn't already have an MBA, I'd wait for it.

If you buy your computer to make you 'feel good' that you have the top of the line for a longer period of time then you should wait. If you actually buy your computer because you intend to put it to good use, and take advantage of the combination of speed and portability that the current MBA has, then you should buy it now.

I like using mine. :)

neko girl
Feb 12, 2011, 09:45 PM
I just have limited knowledge here, but..

Does anyone know what the lack of support for OpenCL will do? 320 M supports it (from the few MR threads I've looked at), but Sandy Bridge does not (Anandtech).

axu539
Feb 12, 2011, 09:45 PM
Honestly, I don't think SB would see that much of a benefit on the Air. The graphics will take a small hit, and the performance to power usage ratio would improve. But, given what most people buy the Airs for (ultraportability, not performance), the SB mostly won't be used to its max. I guess I can't speak for all Airs since I guess an SB ultimate 13" would be much better for video encoding, etc, but in the end, anyone who bought the Air as a secondary or travel machine won't really care. That being said, I guess the higher end Airs would become much more viable as primary machines.

To summarize, 13" Air users would be benefited the most, and 11" Air users would see very little improvement to what the 11" Air already does quite well.

If the update really does come in June, I'd say it'll be because Apple is out of C2D chips, and not because of much of a performance boost.

2IS
Feb 12, 2011, 10:13 PM
If you buy your computer to make you 'feel good' that you have the top of the line for a longer period of time then you should wait. If you actually buy your computer because you intend to put it to good use, and take advantage of the combination of speed and portability that the current MBA has, then you should buy it now.

I like using mine. :)

I like using mine too. Id like it that much more if it had SB in there. It'll be put to use and just as portable with SB as it is with C2D. Not sure what you're getting at there. :)

DarwinOSX
Feb 13, 2011, 12:39 AM
You can't say it will be much faster or the GPU will be the same with credibility since the new low power mobile chips that would be used in an Air aren't even out yet. Those aren't due out until later this year.
The C2D in current Airs is not the same as the C2D's from 2 years ago. These have a faster bus and more cache for one thing as well as a different die size making them run cooler with less power.
For the OP if you want an Air just get one instead of worrying about it or listening to people who don't know what they are talking about.
Apple typically only updates specific models once a year anyway even if new chips are out.
If you start playing this guessing game about whats coming next you will always be doomed to frustration.


Sandy Bridge would:
-Improve general processing power substantially - much faster machine.
-New onboard GPU should be about equivalent to current GPU in terms of performance.
-No more separate GPU - more space (or smaller size), less heat, longer battery life, and maybe lower cost.
-Main CPU now current, instead of 2 generations behind.

Definitely worth waiting for, if you can.

Intel is saying they will support Open CL via the cpu instead of the gpu to get around this issue and make Apple happy but I haven't seen any firm evidence they have actually done so yet.

I just have limited knowledge here, but..

Does anyone know what the lack of support for OpenCL will do? 320 M supports it (from the few MR threads I've looked at), but Sandy Bridge does not (Anandtech).

Oh boy....Dwindling supply of C2D's? That would be news to Intel since they are still in production and will be for a long time to come.
http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?familyId=26548
OP, this is a good example of why you should not listen to people on an errornet forum.

You say that like it's a good thing. When the next best thing is right around the corner, it makes sense to wait for it. The only issue here is that SB equipped MBA has not been confirmed by Apple yet. Given the dwindling supply of Core 2 based CPU's though, it makes sense.

If I didn't already have an MBA, I'd wait for it.

It will get marginally better battery life. Not anything amazingly better.

The difference depends on the task. It won't make Safari or Adium any faster but same CPU intensive tasks will definitely be faster. The most noticeable difference for an average user should be the better battery life

2IS
Feb 13, 2011, 01:06 AM
Oh boy....Dwindling supply of C2D's? That would be news to Intel since they are still in production and will be for a long time to come.
http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?familyId=26548
OP, this is a good example of why you should not listen to people on an errornet forum.

Dwindling supplies does not equal no longer in production smart guy, or do you really think Intel is producing them in the same quantities as they were prior to i3/i5/i7 CPU's? Ironically, I do agree with your last sentence, just not for the same reasons.

Hellhammer
Feb 13, 2011, 01:36 AM
Oh boy....Dwindling supply of C2D's? That would be news to Intel since they are still in production and will be for a long time to come.
http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?familyId=26548
OP, this is a good example of why you should not listen to people on an errornet forum.

Production was stopped in early December 2010 but Intel will be shipping them until October 14th.

It will get marginally better battery life. Not anything amazingly better.

In AT's (http://www.anandtech.com/show/4084/intels-sandy-bridge-upheaval-in-the-mobile-landscape/9) tests, it provided a significant bump in battery life. I wouldn't be surprised to see an extra hour or two of battery life with SB

ArmCortexA8
Feb 13, 2011, 01:52 AM
Personally, I agree Apple make the best hardware / casings / presentation in the laptops, but the real killer of these is they use outdate / old CPU's, which are then overpriced in the shops, yes they've been updated of course. The current MBA should be using the "i" series CPU's which were release 2010, even if the MBA has to be slightly larger. Now SB might be the new standard when the next MBA is due for a refresh.

As for graphics, I have always been a fan of discrete (separate) graphics GPU with its own RAM, this way if some major hardware fault occurs your not killing the CPU/GPU in one hit. The problem with shared graphics is the video ram is taken from your system ram. Maybe apple should make macs with the option to switch from onboard to discrete???? As for Apple I believe they use two extremes high powered lots of features of portable with limited features. I think they need some more features in their MacBook Air's - backlit keyboard for a start, and an ethernet port.

axu539
Feb 13, 2011, 01:56 AM
Personally, I agree Apple make the best hardware / casings / presentation in the laptops, but the real killer of these is they use outdate / old CPU's, which are then overpriced in the shops, yes they've been updated of course. The current MBA should be using the "i" series CPU's which were release 2010, even if the MBA has to be slightly larger. Now SB might be the new standard when the next MBA is due for a refresh.

As for graphics, I have always been a fan of discrete (separate) graphics GPU with its own RAM, this way if some major hardware fault occurs your not killing the CPU/GPU in one hit. The problem with shared graphics is the video ram is taken from your system ram. Maybe apple should make macs with the option to switch from onboard to discrete???? As for Apple I believe they use two extremes high powered lots of features of portable with limited features. I think they need some more features in their MacBook Air's - backlit keyboard for a start, and an ethernet port.

I think you need a MacBook Pro. Apple can't possibly fit a discrete GPU into the Airs without either completely killing battery life or turning the machine into a personal heater.

ArmCortexA8
Feb 13, 2011, 02:00 AM
I think you need a MacBook Pro. Apple can't possibly fit a discrete GPU into the Airs without either completely killing battery life or turning the machine into a personal heater.

I had a MacBook Pro 13" and it still had shared graphics, no different. As for the MacBook Air, simply remove the C2D and Nvidia and put in an i3 for example, and if need be alter the casing so its flat and retains the largest rear height through the whole laptop (no tapering from rear to front - large to thin) - this would allow larger batteries in the existing space.

2IS
Feb 13, 2011, 02:41 AM
I had a MacBook Pro 13" and it still had shared graphics, no different. As for the MacBook Air, simply remove the C2D and Nvidia and put in an i3 for example, and if need be alter the casing so its flat and retains the largest rear height through the whole laptop (no tapering from rear to front - large to thin) - this would allow larger batteries in the existing space.

For a computer like the Air, if they flattened it out, I'd like it to be for larger batteries for 10+ hour run times. For most ultra-portable consumers, that would be more important that a discrete graphics chipset.

colourfastt
Feb 13, 2011, 12:57 PM
I had a MacBook Pro 13" and it still had shared graphics, no different. As for the MacBook Air, simply remove the C2D and Nvidia and put in an i3 for example, and if need be alter the casing so its flat and retains the largest rear height through the whole laptop (no tapering from rear to front - large to thin) - this would allow larger batteries in the existing space.

The Air is the ultraportable and the Pro is the 'workhorse'; the user needs to decide before purchase which is needed, but Apple certainly shouldn't modify the Air for those who want a 'super-powerful, latest-and-greatest' Air.

MacRumorUser
Feb 13, 2011, 01:42 PM
The Air is the ultraportable and the Pro is the 'workhorse'; the user needs to decide before purchase which is needed, but Apple certainly shouldn't modify the Air for those who want a 'super-powerful, latest-and-greatest' Air.

These statements are entirely dependent on the work you do.

If your using office, or filemaker pro 90% of the time for 'work' then a MBA could almost certainly be labeled a work horse. ;)


alter the casing so its flat and retains the largest rear height through the whole laptop (no tapering from rear to front - large to thin) - this would allow larger batteries in the existing space.

Your solution would undoubtably add weight. When your battling competition in this niche field, weight is as much as a 'spec' as processor. They wont be adding weight.

2IS
Feb 13, 2011, 01:56 PM
These statements are entirely dependent on the work you do.

If your using office, or filemaker pro 90% of the time for 'work' then a MBA could almost certainly be labeled a work horse. ;)



And if that's what you do, then you wouldn't need all the stuff crotex was suggesting which is what that post was responding to.

ceiph
Feb 13, 2011, 02:10 PM
Personally, I agree Apple make the best hardware / casings / presentation in the laptops, but the real killer of these is they use outdate / old CPU's, which are then overpriced in the shops, yes they've been updated of course. The current MBA should be using the "i" series CPU's which were release 2010, even if the MBA has to be slightly larger. Now SB might be the new standard when the next MBA is due for a refresh.

As for graphics, I have always been a fan of discrete (separate) graphics GPU with its own RAM, this way if some major hardware fault occurs your not killing the CPU/GPU in one hit. The problem with shared graphics is the video ram is taken from your system ram. Maybe apple should make macs with the option to switch from onboard to discrete???? As for Apple I believe they use two extremes high powered lots of features of portable with limited features. I think they need some more features in their MacBook Air's - backlit keyboard for a start, and an ethernet port.

slightly larger? onboard and discrete gpu, ethernet. oh wait YOUR TALKING ABOUT A MACBOOK PRO..... :)

MacRumorUser
Feb 13, 2011, 02:37 PM
And if that's what you do, then you wouldn't need all the stuff crotex was suggesting which is what that post was responding to.

Very True, was just making the point in general that the definition of 'work horse' is indeed transitory and multi faceted :)

But yes if a render station is your definition of work horse then the MBA is not for you (unless you have a lot of time on your hands ;) ) but for others it is a very productive work tool :)

magbarn
Feb 13, 2011, 02:57 PM
It's not going to be a huge upgrade guys. Reason is, we're limited to a 10-17w power envelope. Even with the 32nm process upgrade, Intel's LV/ULV lines have always been a little disappointing in performance. Plus SB graphics are about equal to 9400 graphics from the previous MBA.

Xeperu
Feb 13, 2011, 04:28 PM
Let me be frank, I have tons and tons of experience with all kinds of computomajigs. Certain computers have certain purposes.

In the Mac lineup we get this.

Mac Pro: Professional powerhouse. Most powerful in the line up.
iMac: Consumer, ranging from basic to powerful depending on user needs (and wallet).

MacBook Pro: Professional/Prosumer. Good laptop, power on the road. Bit heavy and clumsey, but the person buying it won't mind.
MacBook: Entry model, for the person who want the Apple experience, at a relatively low cost.

Which brings us to my personal favorite.

MacBook Air. Made for people who take it on the road a lot. People who don't need the power of the MBP and are not satisfied with the clunkyness of the MacBook.

The air is not made for the newest games, nor for heavy video, image and sound processing. It's made to be the friend you take when you need to do on the road computing. Office, Internet, some movies and some tunes. You hook it up at home to a bigger screen if you only want one computer and have no need for something more powerful.

In my opinion the Core I's won't be needed in the MBA now. It's just not the point. Sure I'd welcome more battery life, but I travel business so I get a power outlet anyway.

I won't be upgrading nor would I wait with buying a MBA if I didn't have one yet. The current Air fits my needs perfectly, no upgrade needed for a couple of years!

cfedu
Feb 13, 2011, 05:27 PM
The C2D in current Airs is not the same as the C2D's from 2 years ago. These have a faster bus and more cache for one thing

my core 2 duo MacBook from 2008 has a 1066 Mhz FSB 3 MB cache

my new MacBook air has a 800 MHZ FSB and 3 MB cache

GekkePrutser
Feb 13, 2011, 05:33 PM
MacBook Pro: Professional/Prosumer. Good laptop, power on the road. Bit heavy and clumsey, but the person buying it won't mind.


I think this really shows how good the current Air is, it's making the MBP look bad :). When the first unibody MBP's came out, nobody would have called them 'heavy and clumsy' and their thin & light construction was brilliant compared to comparable laptops on the market. And this was less than 3 years ago.

Of course the original MBA was around even before the unibody MBP's but it wasn't until the current iteration that they can be considered a serious alternative for a MBP, they were just too slow before due to the HDD and the heavy CPU throttling (not to mention the price).

impulse462
Feb 13, 2011, 06:02 PM
my core 2 duo MacBook from 2008 has a 1066 Mhz FSB 3 MB cache

my new MacBook air has a 800 MHZ FSB and 3 MB cache

Good point. The only thing that has changed is the architecture of the SU9400 & 9600.

sebbo90
Feb 15, 2011, 07:10 AM
Just looking at gaming performance here, I think if they use the IGP then there will be a drop.

Looking at Starcarft II in these two reviews

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/the-sandy-bridge-review-intel-core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/11

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3991/apples-2010-macbook-air-11-13inch-reviewed/10

The top one is even using a desktop cpu combined with the HD3000 and it is still achieving less FPS than the 11 inch

BlackMax
Feb 15, 2011, 09:42 AM
Just looking at gaming performance here, I think if they use the IGP then there will be a drop.

Looking at Starcarft II in these two reviews

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/the-sandy-bridge-review-intel-core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/11

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3991/apples-2010-macbook-air-11-13inch-reviewed/10

The top one is even using a desktop cpu combined with the HD3000 and it is still achieving less FPS than the 11 inch


Good comparison... I think at the end of the day folks want to believe that the next generation MBA will be a step forward in all categories (CPU & GPU performance) and not just with the CPU performance.

Time will tell.

TSE
Feb 15, 2011, 10:23 AM
I am going to say one thing:

The Intel GMA HD 3000 (Sandy Bridge graphics) is not, not, NOT "on-par" with the nvidia 320m.

All the tests were up against the ATI Radeon 5450 card, a terrible card to begin with. And even then, the Intel GMA HD 3000 could barely match the 5450, it lost some tests won some others. On top of that, the tests were only done with 640x400 and 800x600 resolutions. Upping the resolution would definitely show the 5450 to beat the GMA HD 3000. Who wants to game with those terrible resolultions? And on top of that, the reviews stated to reach the performance comparable to the 5450, the Intel GMA HD 3000 scaled down the graphics quality on it's own, making the game blurrier.

If Apple decides (or cannot use anything else) other than the GMA HD 3000, we are going to see a significant (significant is relative) graphics performance hit, but a lot longer battery life and better CPU performance. I am going to take an educated guess and say about 20-25% worse graphics performance.

wisty
Feb 15, 2011, 11:42 AM
I am going to say one thing:

The Intel GMA HD 3000 (Sandy Bridge graphics) is not, not, NOT "on-par" with the nvidia 320m.

All the tests were up against the ATI Radeon 5450 card, a terrible card to begin with. And even then, the Intel GMA HD 3000 could barely match the 5450, it lost some tests won some others. On top of that, the tests were only done with 640x400 and 800x600 resolutions. Upping the resolution would definitely show the 5450 to beat the GMA HD 3000. Who wants to game with those terrible resolultions? And on top of that, the reviews stated to reach the performance comparable to the 5450, the Intel GMA HD 3000 scaled down the graphics quality on it's own, making the game blurrier.

If Apple decides (or cannot use anything else) other than the GMA HD 3000, we are going to see a significant (significant is relative) graphics performance hit, but a lot longer battery life and better CPU performance. I am going to take an educated guess and say about 20-25% worse graphics performance.
And then, you lose OpenCL. That really hurts if you were hoping to use something like Photoshop.

AMD's new Atom-killer Zacate can do wonderful graphics, but the chip is only a little better than an Atom. It's cheap and low-power though :s

Llano, coming out in July, would be awesome (if it fits), but it's at least 20W - way too hot.

Hellhammer
Feb 15, 2011, 11:58 AM
Llano, coming out in July, would be awesome (if it fits), but it's at least 20W - way too hot.

20W is not much considering that it's the TDP of the CPU and the GPU. Current 11" MBAs have 10W CPUs but 320M takes 20W according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Nvidia_graphics_processing_units). I don't have a lot faith towards that number as 9400M was 12W but still, the total TDP of 11" is around 20-25W. 20W CPU with IGP + couple of watts for Southbridge should be fine.

TSE
Feb 15, 2011, 06:14 PM
If Llano impresses, perhaps.

We know the graphics capabilities of it built in is going to blow Sandy Bridge and the nvidia 320m out of the water, and I'm guessing the processor performance will be around Core 2 Duo, give or take... the battery capabilities should also be pretty good judging by the other fusion products.

Perhaps... AMD hasn't really competed head to head with Intel in the mainstream laptop processor area in 5.5 years.

wisty
Feb 15, 2011, 07:33 PM
20W is not much considering that it's the TDP of the CPU and the GPU. Current 11" MBAs have 10W CPUs but 320M takes 20W according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Nvidia_graphics_processing_units). I don't have a lot faith towards that number as 9400M was 12W but still, the total TDP of 11" is around 20-25W. 20W CPU with IGP + couple of watts for Southbridge should be fine.

Awesome. But still, 20W is the lowest rating I've heard (the 3.0Ghz Quad will be more like 100W), and Llano has to deliver. Normally, I wouldn't be too hopeful, but it's little brother Zacate is just such a nice chip - lower power and better performance than Atom+Ion. Heck, for 3D it beats an i5.