Intel puts freeze on notebook (CPU) Prices, and considers delay of new hardware

[Abstract]

http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/10/intel-puts-the-freeze-on-notebook-prices-ponders-calpella-delay/


Hmmm.....not good. They won't lower prices any more, but will freeze prices until May and may delay the release of a new platform until old inventory is cleared. I guess it makes sense, but for all those waiting for new hardware, "BOOOOO!!!".

[Drumjim85]

so would this possibly delay new mac models to come out?

[Amdahl]

When AMD is weak, Intel gets lazy.

[Peace]

Some of Intel's "old cpu's" aren't even in the iMac yet.

Furthermore Intel announced a 7 billion makeover to it's U.S. plants.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10160368-38.html

[gkarris]

So, no new Minis for a long while... :eek:

LOL....

:D

[Abstract]

I don't think this is Intel getting lazy. I think they're not selling enough of their current technology to make their money back. Perhaps they just want to sell a few more computers with today's technology to recoup their R&D costs.

I really don't know, but that's what I'm going to make up. :p

[iMacmatician]

Hmmm. I haven't seen any price drops or speed bumps in the non-high-end mobile CPUs even for the April/May Montevina speed bump.

I didn't expect updated MacBooks until late spring anyway.

The upcoming iMac update, as long as it uses those 65 W quad-cores, won't be affected. The low-end iMacs (if they retain dual-core) and the Mac minis could be affected, but probably not since I didn't think the low-end CPUs would have an update or price drop soon anyway.

As for Nehalem, Apple is likely to use Arandale (Q1 2010) in all the notebook lines (maybe Clarksfield in the high-end MacBook Pro). And I would say the iMac update after the upcoming one will likely use the same "line" of CPU (65 W desktop to 65 W desktop, 45/55 W mobile to 45/55 W mobile).

[Amdahl]

I don't think this is Intel getting lazy. I think they're not selling enough of their current technology to make their money back. Perhaps they just want to sell a few more computers with today's technology to recoup their R&D costs.

I really don't know, but that's what I'm going to make up. :p

Only a monopolist can respond to low sales by letting product get stale and holding prices high. Intel == Lazy.

[Abstract]

As for Nehalem, Apple is likely to use Arandale (Q1 2010) in all the notebook lines (maybe Clarksfield in the high-end MacBook Pro). And I would say the iMac update after the upcoming one will likely use the same "line" of CPU (65 W desktop to 65 W desktop, 45/55 W mobile to 45/55 W mobile).

You obviously know a bit more about this than I do, so I'll ask you.

Apple go with Nvidia's platform for their MB and MBPs, no? There's an onboard 9400M integrated graphics chip on the logic board, so that every logic board used in the MBP has both integrated graphics, and dedicated graphics processing. That's a selling point. However, Intel's Clarkesfield isn't supposed to have any integrated graphics chip, right? Would Apple suddenly tell customers, "Forget dual graphics processors. You don't need them"?

[iMacmatician]

You obviously know a bit more about this than I do, so I'll ask you.

Apple go with Nvidia's platform for their MB and MBPs, no? There's an onboard 9400M integrated graphics chip on the logic board, so that every logic board used in the MBP has both integrated graphics, and dedicated graphics processing. That's a selling point. However, Intel's Clarkesfield isn't supposed to have any integrated graphics chip, right? Clarksfield doesn't have an integrated GPU on the actual chip package (unlike Arrandale). I don't think that means the logic board it's on can't have an integrated GPU.

Would Apple suddenly tell customers, "Forget dual graphics processors. You don't need them"?Even if Apple ended up with just one GPU, they'd just hype up something else.

[FrenchKheldar]

Apple go with Nvidia's platform for their MB and MBPs, no?

That's interesting cause remember when Apple was rumored to introduce the nVidia platform in their laptops, many people thought it didn't make sense with Nehalem mobile CPUs coming up not so long after (for which nVidia at least doesn't have the license, but there might even be hardware compatibility issue)... Probably Apple already knew about Intel possible change of plans and decided to go along with nVidia in the end (I'm sure they had several boards and designs in line)... So it gives them a full year of nVidia's platform which is arguably a better offering than the pure Intel solution... Very interesting. Now we just need to see the damn desktops upgraded, but these delays on Intel side means no huge leap (at least for the iMac) in the near-future...

[iMacmatician]

Now we just need to see the damn desktops upgraded, but these delays on Intel side means no huge leap (at least for the iMac) in the near-future...Unless the iMac goes quad-core. Which is one of many reasons why many are wishing for quad-core in the iMacs.

If the iMac stays mobile dual-core…then brace yourselves for 3.2 (maybe 3.33) GHz in the high-end… :(