Intel Unveils Update to MacBook Air's Custom Processor

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

ArsTechnica reports (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080822-intel-shares-macbook-air-love-with-new-ulp-mobile-cpus.html) that hidden amongst all the announcements at the Intel Developer Forum was a brief mention that Intel had introduced "the company's second-generation dual-core mobile processors for increasingly popular ultra thin and light notebook PCs."

These new processors represent the Penryn update to the custom processor that is used in the MacBook Air. Both the SL9400 (1.8GHz) and the SL9300 (1.6GHz) use a 1066MHz FSB and carry 6MB of L2 cache. Intel is also introducing a pair of 10W processors: the SU9400 (1.4GHz) and SU9300 (1.2GHz). Both of these chips run on an 800MHz FSB and carry 3MB of L2 cache.These new processors will be available to all manufacturers and not just Apple. Readers may recall that the original MacBook Air processor was a custom configuration (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/06/13/apple-and-intels-collaboration-on-macbook-air-and-beyond/) designed for Apple by Intel.

The new processors are expected to be available in September. Apple has been recently rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/08/14/apple-to-update-macbook-air-to-penryn-soon/) to be prepping a MacBook Air update which could use these new processors.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/08/22/intel-unveils-update-to-macbook-airs-custom-processor/)

[Aznsensation45]

nice!! I hope all the notebooks are going to be refreshed this September, not just the air! I really need a MBP update!

[CWallace]

So the same clock-speeds, but larger cache (by 2MB), a faster FSB and better TDPs (by 3W) so hopefully not as many core shutdowns.

I am hoping the MacBook Air systemboards can handle the 1066MHz FSB or perhaps Intel will "Santa Rosa Special" them, as well.

[group09]

1.2 and 1.4 GHz? Would these be expected to perform as well as the current processors? Or is their main advantage extra battery life?

nice!! I hope all the notebooks are going to be refreshed this September, not just the air! I really need a MBP update!

And I'm looking forward to an MBP update too!

[nick9191]

W00t.

The cache has doubled hasn't it? The FSB is also 1066. So no clock increases but as we know clock != speed.

[Roller]

I think that the Air updates will use the SL9400 and SL9300; the other two processors might be good for an ultra-portable if Apple ever decides to produce one.

[Mackilroy]

I'd imagine they're for UMPCs that require longer battery life and less power consumption, not so much for speed. So no, being around half the speed of current laptop processors, they wouldn't run Leopard comparably.

[Firefly2002]

Wow. Same exact clocks. Zero speed increases, even with faster FSB. Woohoo?

I guess they'll run cooler being Penryn, but still.

[Mykbibby]

So it appears the MacBook and MacBook Pro aren't the only Mac laptops being updated in September...

[bug67]

Good news for ultra portables. I personally would never have a notebook without some kind of media drive but, this is good news for those that like such things.

[CWallace]

Wow. Same exact clocks. Zero speed increases, even with faster FSB. Woohoo?

The SP9400 (2.4GHz) and SP9300 (2.26GHz) have TDPs of 25w - 5w higher then the Memroms. Since the Memrom's are having core shutdown problems, it would likely be even worse with the SP9400 or SP9300.

[swingerofbirch]

Wow, the MBA will have a faster FSB speed than the MP!

[commander.data]

There are medium voltage small-form factor Penryns for Montevina that the article didn't mention. The SP9400 and SP9300 run at 2.4GHz and 2.26GHz respectively, have 1066MHz FSB with 6MB of L2 cache and have a 25W TDP. If the cooling system is tweaked and the battery improved, Apple could also use these for a larger performance boost.

EDIT: I see someone posted while I was typing. :( Oh well.

[SirOmega]

I dunno if I'd call it hidden (it wasn't made a big deal though).

Whats more interesting IMO is the fact that the northbridge G45 is also supposed to be cut down in power consumption too - 8W TDP, and includes capabilities for video decoding (H.264/MPEG2), assuming Intel and Apple can get the drivers working. So the MBAir should see somewhat a significant battery life improvement this generation (15% depending on usage) assuming Apple keeps the same battery.

Also, I wouldn't be surprised if the new MBAirs also start to use Intel's SSD. They announced their X-25 and X-18 SSDs that offer 240MB/s read and 70MB/s write capabilities. Thats a huge leap over the SSD they currently use.

[nick9191]

Wow, the MBA will have a faster FSB speed than the MP!

No it wont. The Mac Pro has a 1600mhz FSB. Your looking at the RAM which is 800mhz in the Mac Pro. The RAM in the Macbook Air is 667mhz.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Apple clocked them up a few mhz. IE. 1.6 to 1.67. 1.8 to 1.87. Just as a marketing tactic.

[pkoury]

Yikes, what are the chances of Apple doing an entire line switch all at one time? Would something like that be unusual? Normally I always see them changing 1 product at a time unless its one of the 2 major events.

Imagining new MB, MBP, and MBA along with an iPod lineup change. Interesting months are coming.

[commander.data]

Whats more interesting IMO is the fact that the northbridge G45 is also supposed to be cut down in power consumption too - 8W TDP, and includes capabilities for video decoding (H.264/MPEG2), assuming Intel and Apple can get the drivers working. So the MBAir should see somewhat a significant battery life improvement this generation (15% depending on usage) assuming Apple keeps the same battery.
The GM45 actually has a TDP of 12W. The chipset that would be coupled with small form factor Penryns is the GS45 which was just launched. The GS45 is also small form factor and can be configured for high performance, whereby it's GMA X4500MHD is clocked at 533MHz, the same as the GM45, and has a 12W TDP. Or in low-power configuration, where the IGP is clocked at 333MHz for a 8W TDP. It'll be interesting to see which mode Apple chooses.

Does anyone know if the current MacBook's GMA X3100 is faster than the MacBook Air's? I'm not sure whether they already downclock the MBA's GMA X3100.

[Small White Car]

Wow. Same exact clocks. Zero speed increases, even with faster FSB. Woohoo?

I guess they'll run cooler being Penryn, but still.

Good. The MacBook Air is fast enough for what it does. But having a sealed battery, it needs to get as much battery life as it can. I want them to keep pushing battery life higher and higher without adding to the speed.

Fact is, if you need a faster chip than the MBA offers, you probably also need things like a firewire port and a 7200 rpm drive. In other words, making the MBA faster gives almost no one a needed boost since the people who need 'fast' already have other kinds of Macbooks!

[motulist]

Yikes, what are the chances of Apple doing an entire line switch all at one time? Would something like that be unusual? Normally I always see them changing 1 product at a time unless its one of the 2 major events.

I noticed this a couple of weeks ago. I've never seen anything like this before, every single Apple consumer product besides the iMac and iPhone are ALL due for an imminent update. I've never seen anything like this.

http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/

[kjs862]

Sounds good. Extra battery life is a big plus considering it doesn't have a removable battery.

[Silentwave]

Not bad...remember Penryn does have some internal improvements besides just 45nm...especially with media-related applications. Good to know.

[Rocketman]

iPhone NOT Nano, with mobile version of iWork, here we come!

"10W processors: the SU9400 (1.4GHz) and SU9300 (1.2GHz). Both of these chips run on an 800MHz FSB and carry 3MB of L2 cache."

Traditional navigation through integrated trackball/pad and finger button/pad.

Rocketman

[mjteix]

Given the price list of the SL cpus ($284 for 1.60GHz and $316 for 1.86GHz), Apple could simply use just the 1.86GHz cpu (economy of scale) and differentiate the models by storage. For example:
$1799 1.86GHz, 80GB HDD (or whatever capacity is available by then for 5mm high 1.8" HDDs)
$2399 1.86GHz. 64 (samsung) or 80GB (Intel) SSD
$2999 1.86GHz. 128 (samsung) or 160GB (Intel) SSD

FWIW, the 1.86GHz model should be faster and more efficient (battery life) than the current 1.80GHz one (as well as the chipset, igp), not only because of the slightly faster clock and FSB but also because of the RAM supported (at least DDR2-800 or eventually DDR3-1066). In high performance mode/configuration the GS45 chipset has the same specs as the GM45 chipset (same clock for the IGP, for example).

If done right, it should be a nice update for the MB Air.

[rustedshut]

What is the purpose of the MBA? I was excited to see it unveiled but, that excitement soon dissipated. I have yet to see any update that would make it worth purchasing a MBA over another Mac. It still has a slow proc, no GPU power, lack of interfaces, small hard-drive, no ROM drive and high cost. What is the point of this thing? Surfing the web and watching movie trailers is not worth $1800.

[QCassidy352]

sounds minor, but nice. Add the intel SSDs and we're really talking.

[costabunny]

What is the purpose of the MBA? I was excited to see it unveiled but, that excitement soon dissipated. I have yet to see any update that would make it worth purchasing a MBA over another Mac. It still has a slow proc, no GPU power, lack of interfaces, small hard-drive, no ROM drive and high cost. What is the point of this thing? Surfing the web and watching movie trailers is not worth $1800.

Ok ok calm down - this is a thread aboutthe new CPU's offered by intel in the same package as used in the Air - not a 'lets slag off the air because I dont have one, and thus am not qualified to comment' thread. go here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=548038) if you want that.

[SFStateStudent]

What is the point of this thing? Surfing the web and watching movie trailers is not worth $1800.

"Once you got it, you'll FLAUNT it," I always say. Why would I spend $2600+ on an MBA? "Because I Can!" Once you go MBA, there is no other way... Heck, I might buy the new MBA in September. :p

[swingerofbirch]

No it wont. The Mac Pro has a 1600mhz FSB. Your looking at the RAM which is 800mhz in the Mac Pro. The RAM in the Macbook Air is 667mhz.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Apple clocked them up a few mhz. IE. 1.6 to 1.67. 1.8 to 1.87. Just as a marketing tactic.

My bad.

[BlizzardBomb]

Nice stuff. So a 2 MB increase in the L2 cache and 1066 MHz FSB means a slight but definitely noticeable improvement. Add to that the lower TDP (20W vs. 17W) and hopefully Intel's GMA 4500MHD and it sounds like a solid update.

I also wonder if Apple would make a slightly premature leap to DDR3 SDRAM for the notebook line seeing as it offers lower power consumption and runs cooler. Would raise prices though. 800 MHz DDR2 would be second best. 4 GBs of RAM soldered onto the high-end 1.8 GHz would be nice too.

[O. Frabjous-Dey]

I noticed this a couple of weeks ago. I've never seen anything like this before, every single Apple consumer product besides the iMac and iPhone are ALL due for an imminent update. I've never seen anything like this.

http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/

Yeah, it's pretty weird.

Part of this is because the buyer's guides are still factoring in release dates from before the switch to Intel. Apple is now constrained by Intel's releases, which are on a different cycle than the PowerPCs.

But we're overdue for a new generation of changes. I doubt they'll release them all at once; it's better to spread out your PR over time than use it all up at once.

[fixyourthinking]

Wow. Same exact clocks. Zero speed increases, even with faster FSB. Woohoo?

I guess they'll run cooler being Penryn, but still.


Most Intel processors are overclocked slightly. I would imagine these will be 1.83 and 2.1 Ghz when they ship inside the Air - IF they do.

[digitalbiker]

Nice stuff. So a 2 MB increase in the L2 cache and 1066 MHz FSB means a slight but definitely noticeable improvement. Add to that the lower TDP (20W vs. 17W) and hopefully Intel's GMA 4500MHD and it sounds like a solid update.

I also wonder if Apple would make a slightly premature leap to DDR3 SDRAM for the notebook line seeing as it offers lower power consumption and runs cooler. Would raise prices though. 800 MHz DDR2 would be second best. 4 GBs of RAM soldered onto the high-end 1.8 GHz would be nice too.

If Apple offered MBA with the 1.8 GHZ penryn, 1066 MHZ FSB, 4GB of ram (optional), the new 4500MHD, and 160 GB SSD, they would have a killer pro light portable.

I might even bite on that one instead of a new MBP. We'll see.

[BornAgainMac]

Not much difference. Time to provide the Air in 5 wonderful colors.

[Lershac]

What is the purpose of the MBA? I was excited to see it unveiled but, that excitement soon dissipated. I have yet to see any update that would make it worth purchasing a MBA over another Mac. It still has a slow proc, no GPU power, lack of interfaces, small hard-drive, no ROM drive and high cost. What is the point of this thing? Surfing the web and watching movie trailers is not worth $1800.

Most of my clients that purchase them are executive types. They just want something for email that they can throw in their briefcase, and edit the occasional word doc, while on the beach looking cool. At the exec level looking cool and shallow stuff like that can be suprisingly important to them. To each his own.

[richard.mac]

Oh man more Penryn news but the chips are the custom for lightweight notebooks. lets hear about Nehalem!

[SirOmega]

We wont hear anything about nehalem in notebooks until this time next year. So sit tight.

[CWallace]

What is the purpose of the MBA?

For people who need a very light platform that runs OS X.

The author Dr. Jerry Pournelle has one and he often comments how nice it is to have such a light machine that allows him to carry a computer with him literally everywhere.

My father is also about ready to move to OS X and he has decided he wants a MacBook Air for the same reason. His needs are absolutely minimal so the MBA will more then adequately meet them, but he wants absolute minimum weight possible.

[Bobjob186]

What is the purpose of the MBA? I was excited to see it unveiled but, that excitement soon dissipated. I have yet to see any update that would make it worth purchasing a MBA over another Mac. It still has a slow proc, no GPU power, lack of interfaces, small hard-drive, no ROM drive and high cost. What is the point of this thing? Surfing the web and watching movie trailers is not worth $1800.

I replaced my 2.0ghz BlackBook with a MBA that I got for $1300. I used my blackbook for DJing, and now my MBA is even better for DJing. Super light, fantastic LCD, and well fast enough for what I do. Sure the blackbook did everything I needed, but the MBA makes it that much easier and that much nicer to lug around. Plus its the best looking laptop i've ever seen in my life...hands down.

[andiwm2003]

What is the purpose of the MBA? I was excited to see it unveiled but, that excitement soon dissipated. I have yet to see any update that would make it worth purchasing a MBA over another Mac. It still has a slow proc, no GPU power, lack of interfaces, small hard-drive, no ROM drive and high cost. What is the point of this thing? Surfing the web and watching movie trailers is not worth $1800.

come on. it's a nice second computer and $1800 is not that much money. given what we spend on drinks at the weekend or for a simple dinner. many people are quite happy with it.

anyway, is there a chance that these cpu's find their way into other macs as well? like a tablet or a 10 inch Asus EEE like machine? leopard would run just fine on a dual 1,4GHz notebook.

[Bobjob186]

If Apple offered MBA with the 1.8 GHZ penryn, 1066 MHZ FSB, 4GB of ram (optional), the new 4500MHD, and 160 GB SSD, they would have a killer pro light portable.

I might even bite on that one instead of a new MBP. We'll see.

$3500+ for that computer

[AppliedMicro]

What is the purpose of the MBA?
What is the point of this thing? Surfing the web and watching movie trailers is not worth $1800.
Of course not.
I'm a bit perplexed about these questions.
I mean... what is the purpose of the white "standard" MacBook?
What's the purpose of the black one?

Everything what you can do on the "standard" black/white MacBook can be also done with the MacBook Air - except a (very) few things which require the FireWire interface: Video and/or audio editing which depend on a FireWire interface. And then, the MBA is thinner, it's of higher quality, it's of aluminum, it's got a backlit keyboard and, probably most important: It's lighter. Considerably lighter.

At the exec level looking cool and shallow stuff like that can be suprisingly important to them. To each his own.
Personally, I really don't care that much about how cool the thing looks.
I do, however, care about weight and battery runtime.

While the MacBook Air is already a considerable improvement over the MacBook in terms of weight (2 pounds = 40%), the new Low Voltage-Processors could also provide some in terms of battery runtime.

Anyhow... if it were just about "cooler" look on the beach, thoses exec guys could have purchased the black- or the Pro-version MacBook since 2006...

[Marx55]

We need something much more important to purchase the MacBook Air:

- Firewire 800 ports. Hint: Target Disk Mode. Repairs. Video.
- Gigabit Ethernet port. Hint: wireless may not work or unavailable.
- Four USB 2 ports. Hint: obvious!

[maccam]

SU9400 (1.4GHz) and SU9300 (1.2GHz)
Those are the processors that are going in the new mac tablet (which is sounding better and better :D).

[digitalbiker]

$3500+ for that computer

I really doubt that.

Sony is offering the Viao Z at competitive pricing, it has all of the above mentioned features + Blu-ray and it only weighs a few ozs. more than the MBA.

[citi]

We need something much more important to purchase the MacBook Air:

- Firewire 800 ports. Hint: Target Disk Mode. Repairs. Video.
- Gigabit Ethernet port. Hint: wireless may not work or unavailable.
- Four USB 2 ports. Hint: obvious!

firewire: agreed
gigabit: they offer usb ethernet
four usb: Not gonna happen. They may squeeze out one more but, you are not going to get four.

[ryanwarsaw]

The title of this thread seems misleading, did Intel specifically say it is a processor designed for the MBA?

[citi]

I replaced my 2.0ghz BlackBook with a MBA that I got for $1300. I used my blackbook for DJing, and now my MBA is even better for DJing. Super light, fantastic LCD, and well fast enough for what I do. Sure the blackbook did everything I needed, but the MBA makes it that much easier and that much nicer to lug around. Plus its the best looking laptop i've ever seen in my life...hands down.

Bobjob: How do you use it for DJing? The single reason I don't get it is because you only have the one USB and a very small hard drive. Where do you store your music? So then you use a USB hub for you audio card and storage drive? You've had good performance? Have you used it at all for video mixing?

That is the one reason I am hoping for a firewire port on the next go around - then I will buy it an a heartbeat.

[AppliedMicro]

- Firewire 800 ports. Hint: Target Disk Mode. Repairs. Video.
FireWire is not necessary.
USB could do it.
Apple could probably even deliver the USB Target Disk Mode via firmware update.
- Gigabit Ethernet port. Hint: wireless may not work or unavailable.
That's why Apple offers an USB Ethernet adapter.
There are also some Gigabit adapters available which might be considerable faster (maybe not as fast as integrated of course, due to USB limit)

- Four USB 2 ports. Hint: obvious!
That's why you can buy USB hubs almost everywhere.
Just for curiousity:
Why would you get a MacBookAir, if you plan to connect 4 (!) USB devices regularly?

I do not see all this coming anyway. I mean... why would Apple call it the "Air" MacBook, if they're adding ports and more ports in the next revision. The future is pretty much wireless*, and Apple has promoted wireless connectivity for years... often being among the first or earlier vendors to adapt it throughout their entire product line (as with 802.11b, 802.11g, 802.11n and Bluetooth).

I think (and I'm pretty sure, Apple is with me on this one), with prices for Bluetooth and 802.11 wireless products having come down, future use of wired external connectivity (USB, FireWire, Gigabit Ethernet, eSATA) will be more and more confined to

a) "cheap" products (that is not what Apple is about)
b) professional / high-performance applications (that's not what the MacBook Air is about)

The title of this thread seems misleading, did Intel specifically say it is a processor designed for the MBA?
No, they didn't.
On the contrary, this isn't "custom" at all, as it's listed in Intel's official price list.
a very small hard drive. Where do you store your music?
Without the full array of printer drivers and languages, you should have at least 30-40 GB of free space on your hard drive.
This should equal a lot (!) of music ;)

[Bobjob186]

Bobjob: How do you use it for DJing? The single reason I don't get it is because you only have the one USB and a very small hard drive. Where do you store your music? So then you use a USB hub for you audio card and storage drive? You've had good performance? Have you used it at all for video mixing?

That is the one reason I am hoping for a firewire port on the next go around - then I will buy it an a heartbeat.

I have like 15gigs of music, probably 8 gigs that I actually DJ with. I use Traktor 3 with a behringer BCD3000 that plugs into the air through usb and has it's own outpus. from there it's off to the mixer and then the JBL EON's. It works just as good as it did with my macbook, maybe a little more fan action but nothing too major. I've never mixed video at a show, and I don't use Serato. I have plugged in my CDJs into my macbook and used it with Traktor but I have yet to try with the Air, I don't see why it wouldn't work though. I'm sure the air could handle it. I went to this trendy retail store that features DJ's every week and this guy was using Traktor Scratch on a MacBook Air connected to two turntables and he was jamming and it looked super clean. I wish it had a firewire port and to be fair I wouldn't have bought it for 1799 + tax, but cause I got it for 1300 I couldn't resist. I'd definitely look into it though, it's a bomb machine.

what's your setup right now?

[citi]

what's your setup right now?

I'm on a macbook pro 2.0 + two technics 1200 going in to The Rane/Serato TTM57sl mixer. I use a 250gb firewire drive for all my audio/video files (even with video - the 250 is overkill) I use about 30gb of it for audio and 10-15gb for video.

My audio setup:

TTM57sl - DBX Driverack - 2 QSC 2450/4050 amps - Cerwin Vega Earthquakes/JBL MRX 15s.

I do a lot of large events



a very small hard drive. Where do you store your music?
Without the full array of printer drivers and languages, you should have at least 30-40 GB of free space on your hard drive.
This should equal a lot (!) of music

Problem is you really shouldn't max out a hard drive like that - you're going to run into performance issues and I'm talking about audio and video files.

[reallynotnick]

I really want one of these for college next year, I think it would be SOOO much easier to carry around then a MB. I really don't care about having an optical drive on me at all times, hell I hardly use it besides to burn an occasional back up, rip a CD or install one of those old school programs that come discs :p

Of course like others I want a few additions, though this GPU update helps a lot. 2 USB ports, ideally USB 3.0 by next year, I would love a FW port right now but if USB 3.0 can get massively supported then that should be good. Also bigger storage, that's my biggest peeve about the computer is I love to have large amounts of data, yeah yeah get a MBP.

Can't wait to see the future of this bad boy!

[mac jones]

hmm, this actually presents a problem.

I own the Air and it overheats as the fan constantly jacks up to 6K rpm over nothing (mine is average)

Apple will want to have some kind of speed bump and not just a lateral upgrade to tweak the thermal characteristics.

So unless they can jack up the speed AND lower the TDP, a speed increase will not give joy to the present Air crowd who may want to watch Youtube reliably.

[Firefly2002]

No it wont. The Mac Pro has a 1600mhz FSB. Your looking at the RAM which is 800mhz in the Mac Pro. The RAM in the Macbook Air is 667mhz.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Apple clocked them up a few mhz. IE. 1.6 to 1.67. 1.8 to 1.87. Just as a marketing tactic.

Nah, they can't do that, they'd have to change the FSB frequency to hit increments like that.

[iMacmatician]

Wow. Same exact clocks. Zero speed increases, even with faster FSB. Woohoo?

I guess they'll run cooler being Penryn, but still.The "1.8" GHz should be 1.87 GHz. And it's 3 W cooler, which is good for the MacBook Air.

Apple could have a special 2/2.13 GHz 20 W version for the MacBook Air.

anyway, is there a chance that these cpu's find their way into other macs as well? like a tablet or a 10 inch Asus EEE like machine? leopard would run just fine on a dual 1,4GHz notebook.Likely, although they're probably too expensive for an Eee.

[thecartoonguy]

What is the purpose of the MBA? I was excited to see it unveiled but, that excitement soon dissipated. I have yet to see any update that would make it worth purchasing a MBA over another Mac. It still has a slow proc, no GPU power, lack of interfaces, small hard-drive, no ROM drive and high cost. What is the point of this thing? Surfing the web and watching movie trailers is not worth $1800.

I may be able to shed some light on this topic. As a software training, who is on the road four days a week, this computer is perfect to travel with. Sure there could be a few more ports, but for me it's a great choice.

[iMacmatician]

Not much difference. Time to provide the Air in 5 wonderful colors.How about a raiiinnnbowww! :D

[digitalbiker]

hmm, this actually presents a problem.

I own the Air and it overheats as the fan constantly jacks up to 6K rpm over nothing (mine is average)

Apple will want to have some kind of speed bump and not just a lateral upgrade to tweak the thermal characteristics.

So unless they can jack up the speed AND lower the TDP, a speed increase will not give joy to the present Air crowd who may want to watch Youtube reliably.

I would expect Apple to fix this issue with gen. 2 MBA. Hopefully they'll improve cooing somehow when they add these new chipsets.

[mac jones]

I would expect Apple to fix this issue with gen. 2 MBA. Hopefully they'll improve cooing somehow when they add these new chipsets.


Yes, I imagine they will. I guess it's not just a matter of clocks and nm.

For example, they might decide to use a REAL heat sink instead of tinfoil. :D

[andreab35]

Wow... I'm very excited!

I wish there was a little more umph in speed... but that's ok.
The 4GB memory (optional) would be fantastic for me.

Can't wait to purchase mine. ;)

I hope it runs Snow Leopard well when it comes out in the future. :D

[macwall]

i really want one to travel with

[alphaod]

I'd prefer the ULVs.

[chadder007]

I noticed this a couple of weeks ago. I've never seen anything like this before, every single Apple consumer product besides the iMac and iPhone are ALL due for an imminent update. I've never seen anything like this.

http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/

Yeah, this is unusual....the lag time for the Mini is insane.

[chadder007]

Also how about better access to the existing USB port on the AIR?? Some USB flash drives don't fit too well.....

[griz]

Those are the processors that are going in the new mac tablet (which is sounding better and better :D).

I thought exactly the same thing. Picture a macbook air, sans keyboard with a 32 or 64GB SSD and 2GB of RAM. 13" touch screen.
Would that be more or less valuable than the MBA?
I want that configuration for under $1000. $899 for a 32GB/1.2Ghz version would be nice.

[Apple Ink]

How about a raiiinnnbowww! :D

iMacmatician.... I've always ever liked your ideas and opinions but this one is well..... not so good! Reminds me of 'Metal Poisoning Minimata' disease!

[AppliedMicro]

Problem is you really shouldn't max out a hard drive like that - you're going to run into performance issues and I'm talking about audio and video files.
I haven't noticed any "serious" performance issues by "maxing out" hard drives. Sure, startup times might be prolonged and it might get sluggish when the system would (but obviously cannot) do a lot of memory paging. And of course you notice slow data saving/copying. But really, even with only 2 or 3 GB availabe it never was got as bad as to render the computer unusable or prevent reliable audio/video playback. My experience is based on 2.5" HD however...
Apple will want to have some kind of speed bump and not just a lateral upgrade to tweak the thermal characteristics.
Maybe... but they also ("should", at least,) want to make this baby run longer on batteries and not exhibit core shutdowns.
So unless they can jack up the speed AND lower the TDP, a speed increase will not give joy to the present Air crowd who may want to watch Youtube reliably.
Therefore, they'd better be advised to go with the lower voltage processors up to 1.87 GHz. The present performance issues aren't a problem in terms of low clock speed - they are a thermal one. 1.87 GHz Dual-core ought to be good enough for watching Youtube quite comfortably - as long as the system reliably provides those 1.87 GHz, that is.
Picture a macbook air, sans keyboard with a 32 or 64GB SSD and 2GB of RAM. 13" touch screen.
Would that be more or less valuable than the MBA?
I want that configuration for under $1000. $899 for a 32GB/1.2Ghz version would be nice.$500 or $300 dollars would be even nicer - and just as probable to happen ;)

(For two reasons, mainly:
1. Virtual keyboards don't provide the same hassle-free speedy typing as "real" ones.
2. Apple doesn't exactly churn out new product lines every few months. This would rather cannibalize some MacBook Air and/or MacBook sales, without being a broadly appealing product in its own right
3. The price point seems a bit low)

[kntgsp]

Jumping from 65nm Meroms to Penryn based Meroms adds SSE4 set instructions, lower heat output clock for clock, more L2 cache and the result is better performance at the same clocks. And they have the same 17W TDP.

A 1.8Ghz Penryn is faster than a 1.8Ghz Conroe.

I don't see how this is so difficult to understand.

[Chundles]

Jumping from 65nm Meroms to Penryn based Meroms adds SSE4 set instructions, lower heat output clock for clock, more L2 cache and the result is better performance at the same clocks. And they have the same 17W TDP.

A 1.8Ghz Penryn is faster than a 1.8Ghz Conroe.

I don't see how this is so difficult to understand.

There's no such thing as a Penryn-based Merom. The Penryn processor replaced the Merom processor.

Merom was the first Core 2 Duo, Penryn is the die-shrink of the Core 2 Duo.

[AidenShaw]

Penryn is the die-shrink of the Core 2 Duo.

Penryn contains a number of performance enhancements to the Merom, so it's more than a simple shrink.

The basic architecture is the same, but cache is larger, power management has more options, SSE4 instructions, etc.

Penryn is a die-shrinked refinement of Merom.

[jackfrost123]

I am very, very unimpressed with intel's penryn. Let's face it the tdps are still sh it. Even so when apple's own p.a. semi has released products with vastly better tdp and raw processing specs (and of course certain things which are worse speced that intel) a year and a half or so ago. It's rather embarassing to present the mobile penryns as anything to write home about but it seems intel has invested so much money in marketing and buzz that even sh it products of theirs are portrayed under a positive light. When you get a new processor that has to be tweaked to the SAME ghz as the previous one just to get to a better tdp which should have been the aim of the update to begin with (what's the use of the die shrink anyway...), i.e. better tdp and better clock speed, we are really talking abou the bottom of the barrel staff here...so faster fsb and dd3 (potentialy) so what? As if nobody has seen this coming. With amd trambled so badly due to their own errors but first and foremost due to the media and bullish intel m$ tactics intel is back to their sh it product updates...huraaahhh!!!

[AidenShaw]

I am very, very unimpressed with intel's penryn. Let's face it the tdps are still <deleted>

D'oh - it's mainly a shrink.

Also, the TDP does not determine the battery life - it's just a worse case consumption that the thermal management of the system should handle. (And the stories of "core shutdowns" on the MBA show that Apple didn't do a good job there.)

The average power under typical usage is what determines the battery life. Penryn has a number of changes to reduce wasted power during idle and light load.

The news today is Nehalem. A new core design, a pretty good jump forward.

[jackfrost123]

D'oh - it's mainly a shrink.
The news today is Nehalem. A new core design, a pretty good jump forward.

So what if it's mainly a shrink, it's not me who's hyping it up as something special, they are...As for nehalem, it's not actually the news today, not in terms of mobile computing, not until next year at about this time, so forgive me if I can't get all warm inside about it. Actually the news TODAY in terms of desktop cpus are the phenoms that at the price they are going for, and I stress this, AT THE PRICE THEY ARE GOING FOR, they are much better than anything intel has right now.:apple:

[iMacmatician]

iMacmatician.... I've always ever liked your ideas and opinions but this one is well..... not so good! Reminds me of 'Metal Poisoning Minimata' disease!Did you really think I was being serious? (Notice the :D at the end.)

As if nobody has seen this coming. With amd trambled so badly due to their own errors but first and foremost due to the media and bullish intel m$ tactics intel is back to their sh it product updates...huraaahhh!!!Then why is Intel releasing Nehalem later this year?

I am very, very unimpressed with intel's penryn. Let's face it the tdps are still sh it.I don't think Intel can hit very high clocks easily on 45 nm, and the initial Yorkfield / 35 W Penryn / 17 W Penryn shows that. As Dothan » Yonah shows, die shrinks can help with more cores. As for now, Intel is trying to raise clocks on their processors with minor core count increases.

Actually the news TODAY in terms of desktop cpus are the phenoms that at the price they are going for, and I stress this, AT THE PRICE THEY ARE GOING FOR, they are much better than anything intel has right now.:apple:This is how AMD can win in performance. They already have the price advantage for those who don't need very powerful CPUs. They have a microarchitecture (K10) that is as scalable as Nehalem. 45 nm K10 cores are smaller than Nehalem cores. And there's also supposedly a version of Deneb (45 nm Phenom) coming with no L3 cache. This doesn't impact performance much but reduces die size considerably. The loss of a L3 cache is a bigger hit with Intel since their L1 and L2 caches are much smaller than AMD's.

All AMD has to do to counter Intel's Nehalem that cost millions of dollars (or so) is to add two more cores to Deneb to make Istanbul* (H2 2009). In fact, I'd be surprised if AMD doesn't decide to stick 2 Deneb CPUs together to make an 8-core chip in H1 2009. They could clock it at ≈2.5 GHz (low TDPs per quad-core) and release it as an FX part to beat Nehalem. Yields wouldn't be any worse than 1 Deneb (unlike Beckton, which prevents it from reaching the desktop space). So while Intel is apparently caught up in yield and TDP problems at >3 GHz, AMD can stay at low GHz ranges with many more cores. And then in H1 2010, 2 Istanbuls are stuck together to make 12-core Magny-Cours*, which will go up against 6-core Westmere.

Looks like GT200 vs. (2x) RV770, doesn't it?

* These are server chips, but I can't see why there can't be desktop versions of them.

[CWallace]

Actually the news TODAY in terms of desktop cpus are the phenoms that at the price they are going for, and I stress this, AT THE PRICE THEY ARE GOING FOR, they are much better than anything intel has right now.:apple:

Well the simple reason for that is the Phenom can't cut the mustard with the Core 2 at the top-end, so Intel is able to reduce the price on the Core 2's that the Phenom can match, hurting AMD's ASPs. And where AMD can't touch Intel - the upper end - Intel is free to charge up to $1000 and rake in the cash and more then making up the difference they are losing in the areas where they are busy bleeding AMD.

[Sanchez27]

Omg Omg !!! Check Out The Apple Uk Store. All Macbooks Are Saying 2 Business Days To Ship. Yesterday It Was 24 Hours - Release Due Now!!!

[Tman1523]

nice!! I hope all the notebooks are going to be refreshed this September, not just the air! I really need a MBP update!

I agree with you BROTHER, BROTHER SON; the force be with you

When will the MBP conventions be prepping for refresh releases.:P

[Apple Ink]

Did you really think I was being serious? (Notice the :D at the end.)

Haahhh..... You scared the hell out of me!:D:p

[retroneo]

I would hope Apple chooses the 10W processors (1.4GHz). Apple even might be able to get their hands on a 1.6GHz 10W part. That would be awesome!

The new X4500 integrated graphics, DDR3 memory and cheap SSD drives will easily offset the slightly slower clock speed.

Together these improvements could push the battery life to 6-7 hours.

[jackfrost123]

Well the simple reason for that is the Phenom can't cut the mustard with the Core 2 at the top-end, so Intel is able to reduce the price on the Core 2's that the Phenom can match, hurting AMD's ASPs. And where AMD can't touch Intel - the upper end - Intel is free to charge up to $1000 and rake in the cash and more then making up the difference they are losing in the areas where they are busy bleeding AMD.

Yeah well, that's just your opinion. I and a lot of others are not of the opinion that intel owns the high end.

[CWallace]

Yeah well, that's just your opinion. I and a lot of others are not of the opinion that intel owns the high end.

It is indeed opinion, but it's backed up by plain facts. AMD's fastest Phenom X4 is 2.6GHz, which they sell for $235. Intel is at 3.2GHz, wich goes for $1499, as well as 3.0GHz ($999), 2.83GHz ($530) and 2.66GHz ($316).

[iMacmatician]

Since when did "opinion" become a substitute for "facts"?

Either Intel owns the high end or it doesn't.

It is indeed opinion, but it's backed up by plain facts. AMD's fastest Phenom X4 is 2.6GHz, which they sell for $235. Intel is at 3.2GHz, wich goes for $1499, as well as 3.0GHz ($999), 2.83GHz ($530) and 2.66GHz ($316).And the Intel chips are faster.

[jackfrost123]

Yeah the intel cheaps are faster but how faster are they? Is the 3.2 faster enought than amd's 2.6 ghz to warrant a 700% price increase? Of course not. They are just MARGINALLY BETTER because the bottleneck is not the ghz but the ram speeds and the hd speeds. And of course the shared caches for intel where currently and until nehalem's "groundbreaking" design amd is BY DESIGN better. And let's not venture into tdps...So it might be a fact that in some respect intel's cheaps are faster but they nowhere near own amd, it's just hype. Hype, hype, hype. It's like saying a lamborgini owns a ferrari just cause on3 outputs 300 hp and the other say 280 hp, that's the differences, and they are of course negligeable. Only an idiot would pay up to 700% difference for a perforance gain of no more than 2% (I would wager).

And those are the plain facts of the matters. The rest are for the gullible and those fortunately or not are many. :apple:

INTEL IS MARGINALLY BETTER IN THE HIGH END, THAT'S THE FACT, BUT IT'S WHY BETTER IN MONOPOLY TACTICS AND HAVING ALL THE INTERNET GURU BOZOS POCKETED.

[CWallace]

AMD certainly does not lack for talent, but talent alone isn't enough to stay relevant these days. And even if an Intel CPU is not 700% better, if they can get people to not only think it's 700% better, but consider it worth paying 700% more for...

AMD designs are good, but their initial execution has been usually flawed and it has taken a few revisions before they're "up to snuff", refusing to acknowledge any issues in the interim. That does not exactly inspire confidence in the marketplace and helps create the notion, false or not, that "Intel executes better" and therefore Intel can get the market to pay more for their product.

And even if you have the best product in the world, if you can't make it, then what's the point? Even when AMD was the undisputed leader in chip design, they could barely meet the demand of some third-tier OEMs, to say nothing of folks like HP and Dell. It does HP and Dell no good to offer AMD products across the line when AMD can't get them CPUs due to lack of production space. And instead of spending billions on new fabs, they spent it on ATI (which quickly lost half the value they paid for it).

Intel, on the other hand, has plenty of fabrication space (in general - they're hurting on the 45nm side right now, but within six months will have four facilities) and can meet any demand thrown at them. When an OEM says "we need more chips next quarter", Intel just says "how many" and then delivers. Intel built a "monopoly" by building plants to deliver product to customers who wanted it. And that's not illegal.

Now that AMD has shed some of their clowns in the head office (Ruiz, for example), the new executive team seems to have a clue on both how to run a CPU foundry and how to communicate with the press and their customers. They're desperately short on cash and still seem to be pinning their hopes on a sugar daddy (Dubai) or winning the lottery (the lawsuit against Intel), but they might yet survive.

[AppliedMicro]

They are just MARGINALLY BETTER because the bottleneck is not the ghz but the ram speeds and the hd speeds
Not true. You will see performance improvements until 3.2GHz which scale not perfectly, but substantially well with CPU clock in real-world applications.
Only an idiot would pay up to 700% difference for a perforance gain of no more than 2%
Probably - but the difference in performance is nowhere near 2% but in most cases considerably larger. Depending on if and how applications are making use of the cores (AMD has more affordable 3+ core processors). A Core 2 Duo at a given clockspeed will often outperform a triple-core part from AMD at the same clockspeed. And even in multithreaded applications will the Intel CPU mostly be not far behind.
Intel, on the other hand, has plenty of fabrication space (in general - they're hurting on the 45nm side right now, but within six months will have four facilities) and can meet any demand thrown at them.
Well... they can meet "any" demand for their run-of-the-mill processors.
But the story might a whole lot different considering the models at the very high end (3.2 GHz Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad). As far as I know, these things aren' produced on dedicated assembly lines or factories - rather they are the "best" individual samples coming from the same factories. A lot of slightly "defective" parts (and there are many in CPU manufacturing, AFAIK) will have some parts deactivated on the die and be sold at the lower end. Which is why Intel's pricing isn't just based on "hype". And it definitely just isn't only about how much "better" the higher-end, enthusiast parts are. "Real" limits in terms of manufacturing technology are playing a role there.

Plainly put: The difference in clock speed between a 2.4 and a 3.0 GHz part is 25%. If, however, the 3.0 GHz part cost just a mere 25% more, "everybody" would want to buy the faster thing - and then, Intel might very very well have problems meeting the higher demand (without investing and / or spending considerably more on manufacturing, lowering margins)

[diamond.g]

Well... they can meet "any" demand for their run-of-the-mill processors.
But the story might a whole lot different considering the models at the very high end (3.2 GHz Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad). As far as I know, these things aren' produced on dedicated assembly lines or factories - rather they are the "best" individual samples coming from the same factories. A lot of slightly "defective" parts (and there are many in CPU manufacturing, AFAIK) will have some parts deactivated on the die and be sold at the lower end. Which is why Intel's pricing isn't just based on "hype". And it definitely just isn't only about how much "better" the higher-end, enthusiast parts are. "Real" limits in terms of manufacturing technology are playing a role there.

Plainly put: The difference in clock speed between a 2.4 and a 3.0 GHz part is 25%. If, however, the 3.0 GHz part cost just a mere 25% more, "everybody" would want to buy the faster thing - and then, Intel might very very well have problems meeting the higher demand (without investing and / or spending considerably more on manufacturing, lowering margins)

All of the cpus Intel makes are speed binned (manufacturer backed overclocking basically). That 2.4 Ghz chip people buy most likely can run at 3.0 Ghz just fine. The higher clocked chips are stupidly high margin parts. But the demand for those parts is low. Intel actually locks the multiplier of the cpu because people would buy the lower speed unit and run it at higher speeds, if given the chance.


The lower TDP units for the Macbook Air are a welcome change. Maybe then people wont have that core shutdown due to heat issue. I also hope the chipset runs cooler that would help a ton as well.

[CWallace]

Well... they can meet "any" demand for their run-of-the-mill processors. But the story might a whole lot different considering the models at the very high end (3.2 GHz Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad).

Intel's 45nm production yields are much better the AMD's so the majority of their wafers are producing CPUs that can handle any clockspeed. This is why their CPUs have been overclocking so well, lately.

And yes, the Core2 Quads take up more die space then the Core2 Duos, which is why the cheapest quad is almost the same price as the most expensive dualie, but again, Intel can make all the QX9775s the market wants because most of their chips can handle that.

As far as I know, these things aren't produced on dedicated assembly lines or factories - rather they are the "best" individual samples coming from the same factories.

Intel has currently one full-scale 45nm fabrication facility - Fab 32 in Chandler, AZ. A new 45nm fab - 28 - is under construction in Israel. It was supposed to be online by now, but is running late and will not be ready until early next year. Fab 11X in New Mexico is in the process of being converted from 65nm to 45nm and will also be ready in early 2009. They also have a small R&D fab in Hillsboro, OR which can help produce chips and has been doing so to help try and cover the short-falls in production due to the delay in Fab 28 coming on-line.

[jackfrost123]

Ok guys, I will conceide that the difference might be more than 2% but not that much more, and of course not 700% more in terms of price. Plus I dont think anyone in the home user environment would be gagging for a 5% say increase right here right now, while they can have that for nothing in a few months, we are not talking about servers. But of course maniacs to fork out the extra 700% abound. The rest like many friends here said is marketing.

Plus those babies from amd overclock very, very neatly too.

But I stand behind my analogy that a laborgini and a ferrari where one outruns the other by a few secs, which for me is the case with intel and amd at the moment, (as was the reverse a few years ago) isn't exactly owning. Of course in the computer biz and giving the nature of the web we have the tendency to blow everything out of proportion...anyone remeber the iphone aka the jesus phone.

The jesus phone....

Jesus....

hey cwalace and applied micro. Great points! wasnt aware of alot of what you said. Thanks.

[JayMan8081]

It would not surprise me to see Apple do a minor refresh in the MBA and include these new processors as the new defaults and BTOs. The price shouldn't go up too much if at all.

[AppliedMicro]

But I stand behind my analogy that a laborgini and a ferrari where one outruns the other by a few secs, which for me is the case with intel and amd at the moment, (as was the reverse a few years ago) isn't exactly owning.
Sure.

But if this puts you off, may I dare to ask, why you are even here, as a Mac user?
I mean... Apple and teh Steve are masters in blowing little advantages out of proportion as a selling proposition, aren't they? ;)