I unfortunately cannot unread this drivel.
If you mean graphics performance, why aren't you looking at a desktop, or at the very least, a PC gaming laptop.
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.
Apple to Update MacBook Pro and MacBook Air in June 2013 with New Processors, All Retina?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I unfortunately cannot unread this drivel.
If you mean graphics performance, why aren't you looking at a desktop, or at the very least, a PC gaming laptop.
Just a correction, the Intel HD 4600 is x3 faster than the current GT1 Intel HD 2500. I know the comparison should be GT2 vs. GT2 but I guess they liked that x3 more for marketing.
The retina display doesn't use GPU performance that badly. I can run a game just fine on my external 2048x1156 while having iTunes up on the 2880x1800 retina display and the FPS in the game doesn't even vary from when I shut off the Retina display and just use the external.
Really folks, try owning a retina MacBook before commenting on the performance of them.
----------
Yeah, an Intel GPU being faster than current generation graphics from ATI and nVidia is a laughable proposition to anyone who's been around 3D accelerators since the early 3Dfx days. Intel has always over-promised and delivered pure bullcrap.
Not to mention AMD's next generation APU, Richland, is set to launch before 1H 2013 is over. HD 8000 Series fGPU in that thing.
damn you 
..... why you dont ship laptops with floppy drives anymore !!!!! I still use them ! specially the 5.25" ones, i got a very nice collection of games, how would i use them now ! 
..... why you dont ship laptops with floppy drives anymore !!!!! I still use them ! specially the 5.25" ones, i got a very nice collection of games, how would i use them now ! Personally, I would find a Macbook Air with IGZO Retina screen and ARM processor intriguing. Especially if it had a battery life of 10+ hours. The extra cost of the Retina screen might be offset by the lower cost of an ARM processor. And who doesn't want extra battery life?
What makes you say it would be 1/5 performance? I'm pretty sure Apple wouldn't be so stupid as to come out with such a product without making sure it performed adequately. ARM performance is scaling pretty damn quickly in case you haven't noticed. Regardless, I'll reserve judgement until they come out with a product. The proof is in the pudding.
Atom and ARM face off very closely now in terms of battery life. The Intel Y Series is only going to make matters worse but that gives you a full Ivy Bridge core instead.
What makes you think that ARM has a secret developed CPU that matches Haswell performance at a fraction of the power consumption?
Have you seen how ARM compares to x86?
Why should Apple always seek to rationalise their laptop range?
Threads like this always seem to throw up a diversity of opinion and requirement which contradicts this strategic direction.
Apple is one of the largest hardware manufacturers in the world - surely limited diversification would be feasible as they would continue to sell massive volumes of all variants.
We don't all necessarily need or want anorexic laptops with Haswell / retina / SSD. Why not retain and update, at little / no expense, the current MBA / MBP lines, adding the higher performance 'Pro' machines at the top end, and perhaps a cheap ARM powered lightweight at the bottom end?
Threads like this always seem to throw up a diversity of opinion and requirement which contradicts this strategic direction.
Apple is one of the largest hardware manufacturers in the world - surely limited diversification would be feasible as they would continue to sell massive volumes of all variants.
We don't all necessarily need or want anorexic laptops with Haswell / retina / SSD. Why not retain and update, at little / no expense, the current MBA / MBP lines, adding the higher performance 'Pro' machines at the top end, and perhaps a cheap ARM powered lightweight at the bottom end?
Why does it have to match Intel's top of the line? The Macbook Air is their consumer oriented line of notebooks. It only needs to perform adequately. They still have the Macbook Pro line for consumers who need cutting edge performance and professional tools
Will there be a performance tradeoff compared to Intel's Haswell chip? Probably. But if comes with a massive boost in battery life, lower cost, and the performance tradeoff is not readily apparent in mass consumer level usage (web browsing, e-mail, movies, music, games), then it might be a good move. With lower power and cooling requirements, it might even allow for a smaller form factor. In addition, the ARM architecture is much better for scaling performance (see big.LITTLE) AND Apple can implement its own designs.
I think you're making a lot of assumptions about what *needs* to be in a MBA.
Last edited:
Top of the line? ARM CPU's match the slower Atom processors so I don't know why we would want to go from an Ivy Bridge performance to an Atom performance and gain only sone battery life
Gosh, I just bought my rMBP 15" and the rumors of new products started!! I know it's part of life, but I hate when this happens.
Have you seen it you?
Do you really know anything about ARM or x86 architectures or do you only wish that Apple can make miracles?
----------
Now it is very clear that you don't know much about computers and what taxes more the battery.
You're the one bringing up Haswell. With ARM CPU's, you only look at the current ones, but you compare it with an Intel chip that hasn't come out yet?
Try comparing the A15 performance to Atom. I'm not saying an ARM CPU will be more powerful than an Intel processor. I'm saying it doesn't need to be.
----------
How many tablets or phones run on x86 architecture?
You're the one bringing up Haswell. With ARM CPU's, you only look at the current ones, but you compare it with an Intel chip that hasn't come out yet?
My god, I compare then with the current x86 processors.
If you know any secret arm CPU's, tell us. Until then, they can't even much the current weaker x86 CPU's
Nope, but I'm saying if you haven't seen it, why do you assume that it can't be done?
Why do people alway have to get so immature and nasty on here? You realize it's already been done, right?Samsung Chromebook
----------
Who says it has to?
Look, why are you getting so upset? And what is your point? That Apple can't produce a MBA with ARM, that they won't produce one, or that you don't want one?
All I said was that I would be intrigued. All I do on my MBA is watch movies, listen to music, browse the Internet, and occasionally use Lightroom 4 (yes, it performs acceptably). If Apple comes out with a MBA that has ARM, and allows me to do everything I currently do, but also gives me a Retina screen and over 8 hours battery life (my 2010 MBA only gives me about 2 hours now if I'm lucky), then I'd be pretty ecstatic.
This apparently pisses you off.
Last edited:
Because I know only a little about computers and I know about the current ARM and x86 developments
Thanks for proving my point, the ARM chromebook is more less on par with the Atom 2011 chromebook and has less battery life
And what it is inmature is being clearly not versed in a theme and argue about it trying to have the truth
The ****ing point was that an ARM Air would be like a 2.007 computer an it won't run any ****ing x86 program.
Do you understand now?
So Apple and ARM are incapable of improving the performance/battery life? OS X can't be re-optimized for ARM?
Again, OS X and its applications can't be re-compiled and optimized for ARM?
Do you understand that a lot of people made similar arguments when Apple switched to x86 from PowerPC? Are you so unimaginative that you can't conceive that it's even possible that Apple could introduce a new architecture into ONE of their notebook lines? Are you so narrow-minded that you can't even allow that there might be *some* benefits in doing so?
If you need to resort to cursing to make your point, you haven't made it very well.
----------
If it makes you feel any better, I'll be jealous of you until the next one comes out.
If you're comparing the change from PowerPC to x86 it is clear that you know less that you were showing in your previous posts
Have a nice day, I give up.
A hint, PowerPC CPU's and x86 CPU's had similar performance
Please note that I didn't disagree with any of your points about performance. You just seem to think that's the only factor (or the only important one). If it's not faster, then it can't or shouldn't be done? I merely disagree and think it could be an interesting choice if Apple is able to make some future version of OS X perform acceptably on some future version of an ARM chip with the benefits of battery life and perhaps lighter thinner form factor. Note that no one (except tech geeks) knows or cares what the processor is inside their iPhone or iPad. This has always been the fundamental disconnect between tech geeks and the average consumer. Tech geeks assume that everyone else would care about something just because they do.
I'm not saying this is the same thing as PowerPC-->x86 in terms of performance. I'm comparing the reaction you're displaying. A LOT of people were really pissed at Steve Jobs for moving architectures for whatever reason they deemed most important.
Have a nice day yourself. Please relax. It's okay to speculate and let others speculate. It can even be fun if you let it be.
Last edited: