This is all well and good with the new cpus!
...but how do people put up with the hideous intel integrated graphics?
By upgrading from a 2009 Mini with Intel GMA 950 in my case!
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.
Intel's 'Haswell' Desktop Processors Detailed for Spring 2013 Launch
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
By upgrading from a 2009 Mini with Intel GMA 950 in my case!
I'm glad they still keep the i3,i5 and i7 naming system. That won't make my Sandy Bridge i7 processor looks ancient.
What's with the illuminati all-seeing eye watermark in those charts???
Weird!!
Weird!!
Yes. Haswell will likely have fully filtered out to apple products in all variants by end of 2014, not 2015. The chips in the mac pro are over 2 years old now.
Haswell is more interesting as a mobile part. The integrated GPU is reported to have double the performance of the current HD Graphics 4000 GPU.
The HD Graphics 4000 GPU is being used on the MBAir, MBPRo, MBPro with Retina Display and Mac mini.
Haswell would become interesting as a desktop part if Apple started using Haswell-E (enthusiast chip) on the iMac. Unlikely for technical, power, thermal and pricing reasons.
Any news whether Haswell desktop/mobile parts will support more than 32GB of memory?
Ivy Bridge was a more compelling part for USB 3 and 4K resolution.
The HD Graphics 4000 GPU is being used on the MBAir, MBPRo, MBPro with Retina Display and Mac mini.
Haswell would become interesting as a desktop part if Apple started using Haswell-E (enthusiast chip) on the iMac. Unlikely for technical, power, thermal and pricing reasons.
Any news whether Haswell desktop/mobile parts will support more than 32GB of memory?
Ivy Bridge was a more compelling part for USB 3 and 4K resolution.
No need to be reported. When you double your EUs, you double your performance assuming you aren't bandwidth starved.
If these are low power enough to put into tablets, that would be awesome to have a tablet that could push 3GHz at times.
The Intel Y Mobile series is now at 10 W (7W targetable). It's based on Ivy Bridge but you are not going to even hit the 2 GHz territory. Expect it in January 2013.
And GHz is just a number anyway. More GHz means a higher core voltage usually, and power increases with square of V so that's not a good trade at all. Of course, you don't want too much silicon either, so you compromise between frequency and amount of silicon to hit your performance target. Currently that frequency is 1-2 GHz. Of course, the layman can't just look at a number going up to tell that it's a better performer.
I'm more interested in the feature set and cores more than just raw clock speed. I was really happy when Intel move the Celeron and Pentium brands to all dual core from single core. The Pentium Dual Core is just shy of breaking 3.0 GHz now.
http://www.madboxpc.com/intel-lanzara-cpus-intel-core-ivy-bridge-de-13w-y-10w-en-el-2013/
On the mobile front you are seeing entry level ULV dual cores too. I would rather have one of those instead of Atom.
There are only a handful of 6 core i7 models: 970, 980(x), 990x, 3930K, 3960X and 3970X. And half of those are Extreme Edition models.
GT3 is going to be on a special die. I do not believe it will be on any quad core, desktop or mobile, but it will be targeted for a ULV and mobile dual core platforms.
For those interested, here's a good article on what the competing minds think is next for fabs: http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4403320/Fur-flies-over-FinFETs-and-future-in-IEDM-panel?
The interesting part is that most seem to agree the reason Intel's finfets on 22nm are so lackluster is that they were forced to dope the fins, which was suboptimal. This means Haswell would be plagued by the same issues unless Intel completely revamps their 22nm process. It seems more likely that 14nm will give us a mature FinFET process form Intel, which won't happen until Broadwell in 2014-2015.
The interesting part is that most seem to agree the reason Intel's finfets on 22nm are so lackluster is that they were forced to dope the fins, which was suboptimal. This means Haswell would be plagued by the same issues unless Intel completely revamps their 22nm process. It seems more likely that 14nm will give us a mature FinFET process form Intel, which won't happen until Broadwell in 2014-2015.
Now this is why I subscribe to MadBoxPC. (Though I could probably do the same with Chinese VR-Zone.)
http://www.madboxpc.com/se-revelan-...s-intel-core-i7-haswell-de-cuarta-generacion/
http://chinese.vr-zone.com/44251/ha...s-gt3-cpu-and-naming-rules-changing-12142012/
http://www.madboxpc.com/se-revelan-...s-intel-core-i7-haswell-de-cuarta-generacion/
http://chinese.vr-zone.com/44251/ha...s-gt3-cpu-and-naming-rules-changing-12142012/
Nope. They've got 4 and 6, not 8.
----------
It will, yes.
Just kidding
I'm srs
Interesting since I don't want to spend too much anyway so if it is on the base model mini, that will work out just fine.
And now there are leaks of Haswell mobile CPUs:
http://wccftech.com/intel-haswell-mobile-cpu-lineup-leaked-core-i7/
Not great, though. Only the quad-core models were leaked. And there's nothing special about them, as they keep the same clock rate of the current generation.
http://wccftech.com/intel-haswell-mobile-cpu-lineup-leaked-core-i7/
Not great, though. Only the quad-core models were leaked. And there's nothing special about them, as they keep the same clock rate of the current generation.
That will depend more on Apple's decisions. The GT3 mobile processors are going to be specialty dies with 2C/4T and then the massive IGP package. Ultrabooks are more than likely the main target along with meeting the ULV envelope. I doubt their ULV single chip solution is going to be GT3.
Haswell is going to introduce Intel's own ULV SoC solution taking the PCH onto the processors package. So you will have the CPU, IGP, and PCH for thin/light notebooks on a single package instead of two chips like currently.
The Intel HD 4600 is going to be everywhere else as you can see.
You're looking at the wrong i7s. Blame intel for their naming conventions. Some of the 6 core i7s are Sandy Bridge E using an LGA2011 socket. The EP types sometimes make it out as "extreme edition" i7s. There are no 8 core i7s. You can only purchase such a thing in Xeons.
It would then be shared with the imac. They currently use one of the fastest in the imac. It's either the fastest or second fastest in the top model, with little difference either way. They'd kill the mac pro line rather than do that. It would give them a single mac pro model covering a smaller customer base. Typically with products like this, the base models cover the development costs due to volume. The 12 core machines carry high margins and would essentially produce the profit for the line. Your business model makes no sense as it just brings us back to the headless imac. I'm sure a number of people would buy that, but it wouldn't really extend the health of the line.