PDA

View Full Version : Intel Demos Next Generation Mobile Processor




MacRumors
Oct 15, 2007, 02:26 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Electronista details (http://www.electronista.com/articles/07/10/15/intel.4.core.mobile.demo/) Intel's demo of a mobile quad-core processor at their Developer Forum in Taiwan. The mobile quad-core processor was a version of the upcoming Penryn architecture and is expected to ship in the second half of 2008.
The CPU required larger-than-normal cooling equipment given the rough state of the processor, but was stable despite its 847 million transistors and a typical peak usage of 45 watts versus the 35 of today's Core 2 Duo processors, the Intel executive said.

The processor will also be introduced alongside the new "Motevina" platform which will replace the current Santa Rosa chipset. This new chipset will boost the bus-speed to 1066MHz (up from 800MHz), provide improved integrated graphics, 800MHz DDR2 and DDR3 support. Due to the power requirements, the processor would first see use in desktops and larger laptops, but improved cooling systems will help the transition.

Penryn represents a full class of processors from mobile to server. The first of the Penryn processors (server class) are expected to ship in November (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/05/apple-buying-up-high-end-penryn-processors/), and could be used in future Mac Pros. The first of the Penryn mobile processors are not due until January 2008 (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/09/20/january-2008-macbook-pros-with-penryn-processors/) and are expected to power the next generation MacBook Pros.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/15/intel-demos-next-generation-mobile-processor/)



psychofreak
Oct 15, 2007, 02:28 PM
'Larger laptops'...seems suited to the iMacs...

plumbingandtech
Oct 15, 2007, 02:28 PM
1066MHz (up from 800MHz), provide improved integrated graphics, 800MHz DDR2 and DDR3 support

Does this mean the bus will have to run slower to account for the speed in memory?

:confused:

dizastor
Oct 15, 2007, 02:35 PM
quad core MacBook Pro

mmm.

BTW
Oct 15, 2007, 02:37 PM
'Larger laptops'...seems suited to the iMacs...

That's what I was thinking. This is a good candidate for the 17" MacBook Pro and the iMacs. :)

Data
Oct 15, 2007, 02:41 PM
'Larger laptops'...seems suited to the iMacs...

It sounds crazy but seems actually treu ;-) .

Hudgie
Oct 15, 2007, 02:41 PM
Just let it mean new Macbooks in the next 4 weeks.

Multimedia
Oct 15, 2007, 02:43 PM
quad core MacBook Pro

mmm.Not now. In a year.

plumbingandtech
Oct 15, 2007, 02:51 PM
and it will be another year or two it seems until a quad core mobile chip will achieve the same speed in bus and memory as the mac pro.

:(

lazyrighteye
Oct 15, 2007, 02:52 PM
I just don't see Apple jumping to quad-core MBPs as soon as Jan.
I mean, from where MBPs are today to quads???
Would that not represent the largest leap in Apple's history?
Regardless, that's just not how they roll.
They'll take their sweet time and milk as much out of this tech as possible.
A small bump here, a tweak there - which is both smart business and annoying as all get out, to me.

T'hain Esh Kelch
Oct 15, 2007, 02:54 PM
Im not sure I like a 30% increase in watt usage..

flopticalcube
Oct 15, 2007, 02:55 PM
I just don't see Apple jumping to quad-core MBPs as soon as Jan.
I mean, from where MBPs are today to quads???
Would that not represent the largest leap in Apple's history?
Regardless, that's just not how they roll.
They'll take their sweet time and milk as much out of this tech as possible.
A small bump here, a tweak there - which is both smart business and annoying as all get out, to me.

These quad CPUs won't be around until H2 '08.

flopticalcube
Oct 15, 2007, 02:56 PM
Does this mean the bus will have to run slower to account for the speed in memory?

:confused:

bus speed ≠ memory speed.

Memory and system bus have been decoupled for several years now.

brianus
Oct 15, 2007, 02:59 PM
I just don't see Apple jumping to quad-core MBPs as soon as Jan.

Me neither, considering, as the article said, these quad-core processors won't even be available until the second half of 2008. They couldn't do it in Jan even if they wanted to. My fear is that they just don't want to -- Apple doesn't seem interested in the highest-end mobile processors even now because they're more interested in conserving battery life and maintaining a very thin enclosure. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple doesn't go for quad-core laptops until 2009, since this first generation, at least, looks like it's gonna be pretty power-hungry.

Not now. In a year.

I hope! ...but I doubt it.

dizastor
Oct 15, 2007, 03:00 PM
Not now. In a year.

That won't make it less delicious.

Eidorian
Oct 15, 2007, 03:06 PM
Maybe we can merge threads (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=369081).

I wonder what AMD is up to on the mobile front. It looks like K8 has an even longer life there.

psychofreak
Oct 15, 2007, 03:08 PM
Im not sure I like a 30% increase in watt usage..
And neither will Apple...

plumbingandtech
Oct 15, 2007, 03:08 PM
bus speed ? memory speed.

Memory and system bus have been decoupled for several years now.

Excellent. Thank you.

MrCrowbar
Oct 15, 2007, 03:09 PM
Does this mean the bus will have to run slower to account for the speed in memory?

:confused:
Well, assuming you have 2 RAM modules each running at 800 MHz, the bus should actually be 1600 MHz to fully use the speed of the RAM. On RAM module can be read while the other one is written onto (as long as the data belongs to different processes). Either way, a faster bus or RAM is a step up.

MrCrowbar
Oct 15, 2007, 03:14 PM
Im not sure I like a 30% increase in watt usage..

Well, it has the "extreme" label on it which means: "Look at me, I'm sucking up power like crazy for a few more MHz". So the normal quad core versions should be more normal in terms of power usage. I actually love mobile CPUs for home server: can't beat those 15 Watts a Mac Mini is using. I think my internet setup is using more than that. :p I want a Mini with Leopard on it so bad. Think Apple might lower the price for those someday?

KingYaba
Oct 15, 2007, 03:16 PM
Goodbye battery life.

Eidorian
Oct 15, 2007, 03:18 PM
Goodbye battery life.The quad is designed for a desktop replacement.

Dual core processors will see better battery life under Penryn. :p

psychofreak
Oct 15, 2007, 03:19 PM
Goodbye battery life.

Batteries also increase technologically...hopefully at a better rate than the power usage will increase for these CPUs...

masse
Oct 15, 2007, 03:21 PM
Just what I've been waiting for. By back to school season I hope...

I want my $200 to an ipod touch.

twoodcc
Oct 15, 2007, 03:34 PM
'Larger laptops'...seems suited to the iMacs...

yes it does.....and maybe the mac mini.

ph0rk
Oct 15, 2007, 03:46 PM
Batteries also increase technologically...hopefully at a better rate than the power usage will increase for these CPUs...

Not really. Batteries have been pretty stagnant, especially relative to the electronics they power.

Most of the increases in battery life in recent years have been due to power reductions and meaner batteries (not necessarily better batteries).

Wake me when we get laptops with fuel cells.

RedDragon870503
Oct 15, 2007, 03:49 PM
All I read was: quad core iMacs... mmmm...

vendettabass
Oct 15, 2007, 03:49 PM
Will these be able to use any more than 4GB of ram?

andiwm2003
Oct 15, 2007, 03:50 PM
good, just bought myself an emac. with my powerbook and the emac i can do for another 9 month. then i upgrade to a montevina, quadcore 2.6 GHz powerbook/macbook pro with 4 GB Ram and a 160GB solid state HD:D.

that will keep me then happy for another 5 years.

looking back over 15 years it seems i update every 4-5 years and if the above plan works out this will continue:)

Eidorian
Oct 15, 2007, 03:50 PM
Will these be able to use any more than 4GB of ram?The current models technically can.

CWallace
Oct 15, 2007, 03:51 PM
I wonder what AMD is up to on the mobile front. It looks like K8 has an even longer life there.

Not much, it appears. The 90nm X2's remain their fastest chip and reports imply this will be the case deep into 2008 as Phenom X4's are having problems getting past 2.5GHz at this time.

vendettabass
Oct 15, 2007, 03:52 PM
The current models technically can.

will quad core, with the montevina chipset accept 8GB's? Can't find details on wikipedia :(

8GB's would be cool, and would probably sell me a top end iMac over a Mac Pro when the time comes to upgrade

Eidorian
Oct 15, 2007, 03:53 PM
will quad core, with the montevina chipset accept 8GB's? Can't find details on wikipedia :(

8GB's would be cool, and would probably sell me a top end iMac over a Mac Pro when the time comes to upgradeSanta Rosa can already accept up to 8 GB of RAM.

lazyrighteye
Oct 15, 2007, 03:54 PM
These quad CPUs won't be around until H2 '08.

Hehe. Duh. Right. Reading... :p

Digital Skunk
Oct 15, 2007, 04:04 PM
quad core MacBook Pro

mmm.

Quad Core Mac Book Pro, that's the real update I have been looking for. Santa Rosa wasn't enough for me to get a new machine, too small of a boost. If we get a quad core MBP I am all over it, if not, then can the update be more than just a paltry .04 GHz and brighter displays? I am looking for some real updates Apple, in graphics, processor, and overall hardware. Leave the cute stuff for the high school students.

skellener
Oct 15, 2007, 04:20 PM
The first of the Penryn mobile processors are not due until January 2008 and are expected to power the next generation MacBook Pros.
Everytime a MacBook Pro gets an update, so should the iMac. In fact, the iMac should get the update first. The power and heat constraints do not effect it as much. The iMac should ALWAYS get the latest, greatest, fastest mobile chip. A quad iMac would be nice. C'mon Apple! There's no reason not to! Keep bumpin' those machines! Letting them languish for a year in unacceptable! This isn't PPC!

minik
Oct 15, 2007, 04:23 PM
MacBook Pro with a quad-core processor?! I'll order one ASAP.

Call me weird, the dual-core processor thing just doesn't give me enough incentive to upgrade. I'm still on a PPC Mac.

theheyes
Oct 15, 2007, 04:30 PM
Quad core is gonna be old news by the time these make it into a Mac I would buy.

mkrishnan
Oct 15, 2007, 04:33 PM
MacBook Pro with a quad-core processor?! I'll order one ASAP.

Yeah... I don't think the MBP is getting a 45W processor. The only fit for this in Apple's current lineup is the top-end iMac.

psychofreak
Oct 15, 2007, 04:34 PM
Yeah... I don't think the MBP is getting a 45W processor. The only fit for this in Apple's current lineup is the top-end iMac.

Unless the long-rumoured Mid-end tower comes...

Eidorian
Oct 15, 2007, 04:35 PM
The current X7900 is at a 44 W TDP.

RichP
Oct 15, 2007, 04:38 PM
Yeah... I don't think the MBP is getting a 45W processor. The only fit for this in Apple's current lineup is the top-end iMac.

The current X7900 is at a 44 W TDP.

Well, this is an engineering sample, so we can expect a refined, less powerhungry model by the time they ship. I would also expect that we would see powersaving features such as turning off a few of the cores under battery power, etc.

darwiners
Oct 15, 2007, 04:40 PM
ill be the first to buy a quad mbp!!! Im waitin apple!

ChrisA
Oct 15, 2007, 04:43 PM
...assuming you have 2 RAM modules each running at 800 MHz, the bus should actually be 1600 MHz to fully use the speed of the RAM...

It doesn't work that way. The bus is twice as wide as one memory module. So if you have two you can access them in parallel. It does not matter at all about which process accesses which memory. All the RAM does is back the cache

mkrishnan
Oct 15, 2007, 04:43 PM
Unless the long-rumoured Mid-end tower comes...

Yeah, sure, there are a nearly unlimited number of products that are *not* in the current lineup that could use the processor... ;)

The current X7900 is at a 44 W TDP.

But the current X7900 is also not in the MBP....

HLdan
Oct 15, 2007, 04:51 PM
What's the benefit of these mobile quad cores anyway? There's still some apps that don't even take advantage of the dual cores and only very few that take advantage of the quad cores in the Mac Pros. Why is everyone getting so excited? The current processors in the iMacs and the MBP's are quite powerful and should last anyone with high demands for 3-4 years in the computing world easily.

flopticalcube
Oct 15, 2007, 04:54 PM
What's the benefit of these mobile quad cores anyway? There's still some apps that don't even take advantage of the dual cores and only very few that take advantage of the quad cores in the Mac Pros. Why is everyone getting so excited? The current processors in the iMacs and the MBP's are quite powerful and should last anyone with high demands for 3-4 years in the computing world easily.

Its a long way away for sure. Encoding and (some) video games take advantage of multiple cores. Of course, its nice to have two or three apps running and still have CPU headroom to spare.

aliquis-
Oct 15, 2007, 05:03 PM
quad core MacBook Pro

mmm.Not with 45 watt cpu, but yes, some day, 8 core aswell, probably 16 to, and so on.. ;D

aliquis-
Oct 15, 2007, 05:05 PM
I just don't see Apple jumping to quad-core MBPs as soon as Jan.
I mean, from where MBPs are today to quads???
Would that not represent the largest leap in Apple's history?
Regardless, that's just not how they roll.
They'll take their sweet time and milk as much out of this tech as possible.
A small bump here, a tweak there - which is both smart business and annoying as all get out, to me.It is for second HALF OF 2008, not january... And it's not a chip which works good in laptops anyway, so more like quad MBPs in 2-3 upgrades depending on the rate we see them at.

But who cares, just give me higher res and stop ****ing up my GPU and vram.

offwidafairies
Oct 15, 2007, 05:30 PM
Batteries also increase technologically...hopefully at a better rate than the power usage will increase for these CPUs...

Id like to see solar powered laptops in the future

reallynotnick
Oct 15, 2007, 05:35 PM
These look perfect for an iMac, don't let them near my xMac though, I want a real desktop chip in it. Even if the iMac is thin is pretty dang huge espcially with them dropping the 17in, it would be super easy to fit one of these in a 24in and even the 20in.

!¡ V ¡!
Oct 15, 2007, 05:40 PM
What is the point of having all the processing and GPU power in the portable industry if the laptop cannot run longer than 2+ hours of road use.

Gone are the days of the iBook G4 which used to give the user 4-6 hours of portable office time.

If you want CPU/GPU/HDD for mobility purposes you are going to cut out mobility usage. All this is really doing is allowing the desktop industry and the mobile industry reach synergy which losing out on the whole idea of a laptop.

CWallace
Oct 15, 2007, 05:42 PM
What's the benefit of these mobile quad cores anyway? There's still some apps that don't even take advantage of the dual cores and only very few that take advantage of the quad cores in the Mac Pros. Why is everyone getting so excited?

Because too much is never enough, I guess. :)

danielwsmithee
Oct 15, 2007, 07:01 PM
My fear is that they just don't want to -- Apple doesn't seem interested in the highest-end mobile processors even now because they're more interested in conserving battery life and maintaining a very thin enclosure. That is not true, they just don't use the highest performing processors in the MacBook and MacBook Pro. They currently use the highest performing mobile processor (extreme) in the 2.8 Ghz iMac. This is going to make killer new iMacs come next year.

Pooldraft
Oct 15, 2007, 07:12 PM
Everytime a MacBook Pro gets an update, so should the iMac. In fact, the iMac should get the update first. The power and heat constraints do not effect it as much. The iMac should ALWAYS get the latest, greatest, fastest mobile chip. A quad iMac would be nice. C'mon Apple! There's no reason not to! Keep bumpin' those machines! Letting them languish for a year in unacceptable! This isn't PPC!

Remember this is no longer Apple Computers Inc. it is Apple, Inc. The iPhone is probably getting a lot more of Apple, Inc. resources. Or maybe the Touch.

There was an initial boost in the intel switch but now it seems as if intel is falling into the same problem PPC is having, stagnant mobile processors. Good Luck. I hope a PPC computer comes out and kicks intel's ass.

SiliconAddict
Oct 15, 2007, 07:47 PM
Yah 2009 sounds like a good time to upgrade. I'm still not set on going with another Mac though. The problems I've had.....
http://home.comcast.net/~jonnormand/icons/posting.php_files/icon_confused.gif

Analog Kid
Oct 15, 2007, 08:50 PM
Im not sure I like a 30% increase in watt usage..
Yup. I could rant about how Intel has never cared about heat or power supply concerns, but they do have 100% more logic on this thing, so I guess 30% more power is acceptable. Combine that with the added power drawn by the chipsets and memory though and this will be one hot beast.

I reserve the right to launch into my "Intel doesn't care about power" rant at a later time, however.
Batteries also increase technologically...hopefully at a better rate than the power usage will increase for these CPUs...
Yeah, they improve, but they improve at a snails pace. Now we've gotten to the point that we've pushed the margins on them so far they're regularly bursting into flames. I just hope that if Apple does begin using these things they keep lower performance options available too. I'd bet a quad 1GHz laptop would be amazingly responsive and probably run quite a bit longer than current MBPs.
Well, this is an engineering sample, so we can expect a refined, less powerhungry model by the time they ship. I would also expect that we would see powersaving features such as turning off a few of the cores under battery power, etc.
If Intel was as confident as you are, they wouldn't also be bragging about their miniaturized refrigerator. That refrigerator is running from the same battery, mind you.

liberty4all
Oct 15, 2007, 09:51 PM
Here is the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850, with some news about the Penryn:

http://reviews.cnet.com/processors/intel-core-2-extreme/4505-3086_7-32516726.html

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/sc/32516726-2-300-overview-1.gif

heisetax
Oct 15, 2007, 11:18 PM
Well, it has the "extreme" label on it which means: "Look at me, I'm sucking up power like crazy for a few more MHz". So the normal quad core versions should be more normal in terms of power usage. I actually love mobile CPUs for home server: can't beat those 15 Watts a Mac Mini is using. I think my internet setup is using more than that. :p I want a Mini with Leopard on it so bad. Think Apple might lower the price for those someday?



NO!

TurboSC
Oct 15, 2007, 11:27 PM
yea it'll be a while before they make quad-core efficient enough for a macbookpro...

I just want a slimmer not burn your hand macbookpro that's fast and powerful.

Bye Bye Baby
Oct 16, 2007, 03:30 AM
Im not sure I like a 30% increase in watt usage..


This is just brand new technology, to be able to get quad-core on a mobile platform is pretty amazing technology. Reduction in power consumption comes with time- first get it to work, then see about optimising it!

YOU CAN'T EVERYTHING ON THE FIRST DAY! ;)

lasuther
Oct 16, 2007, 07:56 AM
No way quad cores end up in MacBooks any time soon.

30" Quad Core iMac with BlueRay superdrive, $2799 by Christmas 2008.

ImAlwaysRight
Oct 16, 2007, 10:43 AM
Great! Now I know when my next iMac upgrade will come along ... when these babies start shipping in the iMac!

WildPalms
Oct 16, 2007, 10:45 AM
No way quad cores end up in MacBooks any time soon.

30" Quad Core iMac with BlueRay superdrive, $2799 by Christmas 2008.

Agreed. Apple doesnt have to use every brand new chip that Intel designs just because its available, no matter how much some posters here wish for it. ;)

Crike .40
Oct 16, 2007, 12:22 PM
yay for new macpros - i need one to continue bumping my computers down the line through my family.

(parents g4 mac mini to ebay, g5 imac to parents, c2d imac to fiance, macpro to me)

I'm fairly excited about this and hope they upgrade video cards to match.

Butthead
Oct 16, 2007, 04:23 PM
Wow, this rumor is so laughable, it's not even funny.

I posted the Digitimes rumor on the hardware forums a long, long time ago...no one picked up on the Q core mobile, now all of assuden, a electronista rumor is posted, lol. Electronista the paragon of accurate rumor reporting? For shame for shame MR!

Here take a look at digitimes coverage, much better, and then take alook at what they reported a month ago on the same subject...this is old news, wake up.
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20071015VL200.html


http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/09/19/idf_quad-core_mobiles/
Intel's first four-core processors for notebooks will debut in Q3 2008, it has been claimed. That narrows the release window down from the previous forecast: sometime in the second half of the year.
Related stories

* Intel to up 45nm Core 2 Extreme prices by 50% next year
* Intel shows off working quad-core mobile CPU
* Next-gen Centrino to ship 'May 2008'
* Intel schedules quad-core mobile CPUs for H2 '08
* Intel said to have roadmapped 11 mobile Penryn processors
* Quad-core won't make it big until 2009 - reseacher

Motherboard-maker moles spilled the beans to DigiTimes, confirming what we've heard before: the 45nm chips will contain 12MB of L2 with each core pair sharing 6MB, they'll run on a 1066MHz frontside bus and consume up to 45W of power.

That's the main reason why they won't feature in 'Montevina', the next generation of Intel's Centrino platform and yesterday revealed to be shipping out of the chip maker's warehouses in May 2008. The quad-cores will require different notebook thermal designs than those laid down for the dual-core 45nm chips that will be part of Montevina.

Now compare silly vague rumors of electronista (where do they get these from, they don't actually say Mooly Eden said this via quotes?)...
http://www.electronista.com/articles/07/10/15/intel.4.core.mobile.demo/

[qoute]An official clock speed for the processor is unknown, though its use of the Montevina platform will supply a faster 1,066MHz bus (versus 800MHz) in addition to improved integrated graphics, 800MHz DDR2 and DDR3 support, and the option of WiMAX for wide-area broadband Internet access. Launch details are unknown beyond an early-to-mid 2008 release window, though the initial quad-core notebook chip is said to be considered a Core 2 Extreme and would be intended primarily for desktop replacements and other large notebooks.[/quote]

so what electronista is implying, is that the mobile Quad Core Extreme will be on the market before the Monteviña platform that supports is has been released, lol in early to mid '08, rather than previous optimistic reports of Intel saying off the record that they are on track to deliver H2008, specifically Q308.

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/10/15/intel_demos_mobile_quad-core/

Without specialized cooling tech, it would appear Apple will not be able to have a quad-core, even in a 17in MBP, until next year at the earliest, probably late '08/early '09 when Intel migrates to 32nm process. :(

winterspan
Oct 16, 2007, 09:12 PM
Everytime a MacBook Pro gets an update, so should the iMac. In fact, the iMac should get the update first. The power and heat constraints do not effect it as much. The iMac should ALWAYS get the latest, greatest, fastest mobile chip. A quad iMac would be nice. C'mon Apple! There's no reason not to! Keep bumpin' those machines! Letting them languish for a year in unacceptable! This isn't PPC!

Obviously letting them languish is acceptable if people keep buying them.
I never understood why people, especially "enthusiasts" would let Apple walk over them like that. It's like buying a Mac Pro right now! Who would do that? Maybe it's not a big deal to old mac fans because they are used to it... But from a 'switcher' perspective, It drives me CRAZY that apple jerks around for 12 or even 18 MONTHS before they upgrade!!! People used to the PC industry want the latest and greatest IMMEDIATELY when it comes out. I remember when the first Core Duo chips came out and Dell took about 6 weeks to start shipping products.. people were going nuts! lol.

I KNOW Apple isn't dell and they (usually) have higher quality system integration and maybe home consumers don't care as much, but it's INSULTING to professionals to try to get away with charging so much for their Mac Pro and THEN NOT UPDATING THEM IN OVER A YEAR!! WTF?

I don't understand why people don't just boycott their products when they don't update them in a decent time frame! Force them to upgrade and stop selling old hardware! or at slash the prices!

winterspan
Oct 16, 2007, 09:30 PM
What's the benefit of these mobile quad cores anyway? There's still some apps that don't even take advantage of the dual cores and only very few that take advantage of the quad cores in the Mac Pros. Why is everyone getting so excited? The current processors in the iMacs and the MBP's are quite powerful and should last anyone with high demands for 3-4 years in the computing world easily.

Every time there is an article on a processor, someone just *HAS* to write a comment like this. I don't mean to be rude, but I feel it's really an ignorant statement on your behalf. There are many Apple fans that use their systems to do much more hardware intensive tasks than word processing, internet browsing, email and Itunes.

As these would probably be in the Macbook PRO, keyword being "PRO", it would make sense as many of the applications that professionals/high-end amateurs/hobbyists/etc use will definitely benefit from all the processing you can throw at them.

Just between Apple itself and Adobe There are MANY applications that are quite capable of taking advantage of many-core multithreading. Leopard will even be much more suited to large numbers of cores than Tiger is.

A quad-core "desktop replacement" laptop or a mobile in-the-field workstation will be a great boon to professionals and consumers alike that work in creative media production, 3D graphics, scientific and engineering fields, etc.

Even a media enthusiast re-encoding video from VCR tapes/DVDs/etc for the Apple TV / iPod could take advantage of one.

I can't WAIT to get my hands on one of these...

winterspan
Oct 16, 2007, 09:40 PM
What is the point of having all the processing and GPU power in the portable industry if the laptop cannot run longer than 2+ hours of road use.

Gone are the days of the iBook G4 which used to give the user 4-6 hours of portable office time.

If you want CPU/GPU/HDD for mobility purposes you are going to cut out mobility usage. All this is really doing is allowing the desktop industry and the mobile industry reach synergy which losing out on the whole idea of a laptop.

You are assuming everyone person with a laptop needs to use battery power on the road. If you are buying a 17" quad-core laptop with a good GPU, it's usually assumed you are using it as a desktop replacement. I have one of these myself right now. I hardly ever use it on battery power, But it makes sense for me to have a laptop because I travel frequently between two locations. I also have a small office so I don't need/want a big desktop computer/monitor/accessories taking up my whole desk, but I still need a high-end system with decent performance.

A quad-core penryn laptop CPU will make the most sense when used in these type of desktop replacement applications.

georgi0
Oct 17, 2007, 05:11 PM
so what should i do now?? get a new MBP by the end of october (leopard) or wait till January??

Dontdothat317
Oct 20, 2007, 01:44 PM
a Quad-core MBP would be awsome, although I think a successful upgrade from penryn dual cores would entail advanced power saving capabilities as well, like being able to shut off several cores and fans when running in power-saving work mode.

The Macbook Pro is defined as Apple's PROFESSIONAL Laptop, geared largely towards multimedia work. I know a number of professionals (artists, photographers, musicians, and engineers..some of them being the same people) who use the MBP for highly intensive, multi-threaded applications on a regular basis, so people who wonder "who needs a quad?" get their answers. But on the other hand these people also need to be able to use the MBP for simple things like word processing for hours at a time without the dependence of an outlet.

Long story Short. The winning strategy is to make the laptop as fast as possible and as expandable as possible while simultaneously allowing it to disable many of its features (at the discretion of the user) to preserve battery life of 4+ hours.

If they can bring the wattage down on the quad cores (which will happen eventually), I'll be all over it. Apple, take the money you got from my Ipod and Iphone and make this happen!