this is wrong. there is no core i5 cpu with 4 cores. but you heave hyperthreading, so 2 cores, 4 threads.
and also only 50% of the core i7 have 4 cores.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MacBook Pro Specs, LightPeak Known As ThunderBolt?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
this is wrong. there is no core i5 cpu with 4 cores. but you heave hyperthreading, so 2 cores, 4 threads.
and also only 50% of the core i7 have 4 cores.
I'm no cpu expert... that's just what I read here:
http://www.brighthub.com/computing/hardware/articles/61150.aspx
"There are several major differences when comparing Core i3 vs Core i5 Sandy Bridge processors, and they're more defined than they were before. The first is the number of cores. The new Core i3 processors are dual-core only, while the new Core i5 processors are quad-core only."
I am referring to the veracity of the 'FRENCH' rumor of specs not this one
https://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/22/macbook-pro-specs-leaked-ssd-better-battery-new-technology/
These ones have been dispelled by the 'legitimate' sourced photos posted in this thread
My bad, I apologise.
I've seen it every single time the day before a spec bump when we finally get credible rumors of the upcoming update. People always expect Apple to provide tech that is two years away. At this point it always looks like 99% of macbook pro users are hardcore gamers and the entire computer is just an extension of the GP.
I'm actually surprised about LP (or that James Bond movie franchise cable) making it into this year's macbooks. Of course, there's not much you can do with it but it's a conversation piece. In three years when I'll update again we'll either have a small niche for TB devices or it will have gone the way of Apple's display connectors.
Core i5 is more than I hoped for the 13", but otherwise this is in line with moderate expectations.
Even if it did do bi directional, the displayport technology can already handle 17 Gbps, so cut it to 8.5Gbps two way. That's a ridiculous amount of data. And all
would need to do is upgrade a little firmware to handle 2way communication. Bam, bi-directional GB transfer, already included in many apple products.
Yes, it's only the one 13" model shown in these pictures that has been confirmed so far...
Last edited by a moderator:
Apple has two options to deliver the drug i need:
option 1:
like they already do. distinguish pro and non pro macbooks both ways by inner AND outer characteristics (Hello liquid metal ) otherwise i would pay the pro while getting the non pro lifestyle... doesnt work in my eyes.
option 2:
apple shall burn in hell for making me addicted to their aaaaawesome products and not delivering the right drug i neeeeed.
option 1:
like they already do. distinguish pro and non pro macbooks both ways by inner AND outer characteristics (Hello liquid metal
) otherwise i would pay the pro while getting the non pro lifestyle... doesnt work in my eyes.option 2:
apple shall burn in hell for making me addicted to their aaaaawesome products and not delivering the right drug i neeeeed
.
It seems very odd that there are photo's of ports, boxes, packaging etc from 3 seperate countries in the wild, yet they are all of the same bottom end 13 MBP.
If someone had the inclination to open up some stock from their stockroom to leak photos surely they would have done some of the other models?
If someone had the inclination to open up some stock from their stockroom to leak photos surely they would have done some of the other models?
Not true, bencmark show a significant increase in fps jumping from last gen intel cpus to current gen, in game bencmarks.
WHat do you think then the difference between two generations? Also the intel gpu scales very bad compared to a 320m. Turn the details to medium, and the 320m leaps ahead.
I dont understand why you talk about things you dont know anything about.
here are som real benchmarks http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-3000.37948.0.html
Go down the list and press on compare, intel hd 3000, 50% worse peformance then a 320m
the demanding Anno, the Intel Graphics 3000 achieves 8.8 fps and surrenders at high presets (1280x1024, very high). Although you cannot play Anno at these settings, the integrated graphics chip from Intel indeed reaches the level of entry-level GPUs, which are at 9 fps (Geforce G210M) or at 10 fps (ATI HD 5470) not really faster
If you want more
Just ask
The intel 3000hd is being compared to the 210m. So yes, the intel hd 3000, if you just talk about gpus is a step back, a huge one aswel in many games. If people only had a clue what they talk about
Last edited:
It could be the only model that has arrived in stock so far, the others could still be in transit?
maybe this will help clarify things:
http://www.9to5mac.com/53346/low-end-macbook-pros-intel-core-i5-2410m-processor
It's concerning if 13" really gets 1280x800. That could mean that the 15" version is still stuck on 1440x900. :/
It'll be interesting to see which GPU those ones get. I'm hoping for a Geforce 540, but I think NVIDIA 425 is closer to the truth.
It'll be interesting to see which GPU those ones get. I'm hoping for a Geforce 540, but I think NVIDIA 425 is closer to the truth.
Going on the box (once) and putting stickers all over the machine are two different things.
Came here to post this:
DEAR EUROPEAN DUDE OPENING THE PALLETS,
You've gone this far. Open up the damn 15s and 17s! Thank you and Gracias.
DEAR EUROPEAN DUDE OPENING THE PALLETS,
You've gone this far. Open up the damn 15s and 17s! Thank you and Gracias.
It seems a shame that Sony's mid-range 13.3 SB Series manages to get real graphics (Radeon HD 6470M) along with the same CPU i5-2410M.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/22/sony-vaio-s-series-get-an-updated-design-core-i5-2410m-cpu-and/
http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/22/sony-vaio-s-series-get-an-updated-design-core-i5-2410m-cpu-and/
Hope Apple itself spread those rumors and hope that they are wrong.
If the basic 13'' is 1099$, it is just too much money. I like Apple, I like their products and quality and I like to pay more for it.
But why should I spend my money for so far useless "Tunderbolt", some HD webcam I (and most of the people) can't use due to limited internet access and a graphic chip, which even slightly developed?
The new processor is nice, but upgrading to SSD would give 95% of the MBP users (including me) a better performane boost.
800 for this spec would be fine.
Now I hope at least for a powerful 2nd 13" spec, since I need the mobility.
If the basic 13'' is 1099$, it is just too much money. I like Apple, I like their products and quality and I like to pay more for it.
But why should I spend my money for so far useless "Tunderbolt", some HD webcam I (and most of the people) can't use due to limited internet access and a graphic chip, which even slightly developed?
The new processor is nice, but upgrading to SSD would give 95% of the MBP users (including me) a better performane boost.
800 for this spec would be fine.
Now I hope at least for a powerful 2nd 13" spec, since I need the mobility.
the difference is the price. dedicated gpus are since a longe time possible in smaler notebooks. but this cost money.
I think it may be, or $899. Then what? Will you people be satisfied if this was a "mainstream priced" entry level MacBook?
There will be bigger, better faster models. This is the base 13".