Register FAQ/Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Welcome to the Mac Forums forums. Please read the FAQ if you have questions. Register to participate.

 
Go Back   Mac Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors' Page 2 News Discussion
TouchArcade.com - iPhone Game Reviews and News

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread  
Old May 15, 2008, 11:56 AM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Intel's Upcoming Quad-Core "Mobile" Chip Realistic For Laptops?



In March we reported that Intel's upcoming Core 2 Extreme QX9300 was scheduled for quarter 3 of this year. The chip promised to be the first mobile quad-core chip available, however the expected 45W power requirements was going to limit the chip's adoption.

The Inquirer is now reporting that the chip may actually come in at 35W, which would be much more palatable for mobile use.

Apple has habitually offered Intel's top-shelf mobile and workstation processors, often obtaining unannounced products. It remains speculation as to when or if the chip may end up in an Apple computer.

Article Link
MacRumors is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 11:58 AM   #2
Eidorian
macrumors G3
 
Eidorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Indiana
Send a message via AIM to Eidorian
It's good to hear it might be coming in at 35W now. It has been on the roadmap for ages now so a mobile quad core isn't a surprise.
__________________
MRoogle it!
hikari T7500 2.2 GHz / 4 GB / 320 GB / GMA X3100 / 10.5.8
chobimaru Core i5 750 2.66 GHz / 4 GB / 640 GB / 4830 / Windows 7
Eidorian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 12:05 PM   #3
flopticalcube
macrumors 601
 
flopticalcube's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Quad core iMac is now a given. Quad core MBP is a highly probable.
__________________
iThink therefore iAm.
flopticalcube is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 12:07 PM   #4
PlaceofDis
macrumors Demi-God
 
PlaceofDis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago.
Send a message via AIM to PlaceofDis
the lower they can get the power the more likely we'll see it used in the macbooks and macbook pros, but i'm still unsure if they'll work alright in such a thin enclosure.
__________________
dim my eyes on the waves of confessions...
SpringWarmCold
PlaceofDis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 12:10 PM   #5
hvfsl
macrumors 65816
 
hvfsl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: London, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlaceofDis View Post
the lower they can get the power the more likely we'll see it used in the macbooks and macbook pros, but i'm still unsure if they'll work alright in such a thin enclosure.
I can't see them putting it in a MacBook for at least 5 years (considering there is no real need to it for the average MacBook user).
__________________
MacBook Pro 2.4Ghz 500GB (uni) OS X/Windows XP/7/Ubuntu
Hackintosh Pro - 2.4Ghz Quad core XP/OS X
Media Centre - 2Ghz dual core BluRay Windows 7
hvfsl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 12:11 PM   #6
Eidorian
macrumors G3
 
Eidorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Indiana
Send a message via AIM to Eidorian
Quote:
Originally Posted by hvfsl View Post
I can't see them putting it in a MacBook for at least 5 years (considering there is no real need to it for the average MacBook user).
Please don't drag up the "average user" argument. It turns quickly into a pointless hardware specification war.

Apple is very fond of using the fastest processors Intel has to offer while skimping on the remaining hardware.
__________________
MRoogle it!
hikari T7500 2.2 GHz / 4 GB / 320 GB / GMA X3100 / 10.5.8
chobimaru Core i5 750 2.66 GHz / 4 GB / 640 GB / 4830 / Windows 7
Eidorian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 12:12 PM   #7
PlaceofDis
macrumors Demi-God
 
PlaceofDis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago.
Send a message via AIM to PlaceofDis
Quote:
Originally Posted by hvfsl View Post
I can't see them putting it in a MacBook for at least 5 years (considering there is no real need to it for the average MacBook user).
well that all depends on the development process. they won't put it in the macbooks immediately, but it should trickle down in a year or two. five would be much too long imo.
__________________
dim my eyes on the waves of confessions...
SpringWarmCold
PlaceofDis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 12:13 PM   #8
flopticalcube
macrumors 601
 
flopticalcube's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlaceofDis View Post
the lower they can get the power the more likely we'll see it used in the macbooks and macbook pros, but i'm still unsure if they'll work alright in such a thin enclosure.
I guess it would depend on what Apple had in mind for the MBP. If they go the way of the MBA and go even thinner, then heat could be a problem, although they could always underclock it.
__________________
iThink therefore iAm.
flopticalcube is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 12:53 PM   #9
vendettabass
macrumors 6502a
 
vendettabass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Manchester, UK
Send a message via Skype™ to vendettabass
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hvfsl
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlaceofDis View Post
the lower they can get the power the more likely we'll see it used in the macbooks and macbook pros, but i'm still unsure if they'll work alright in such a thin enclosure.
I can't see them putting it in a MacBook for at least 5 years (considering there is no real need to it for the average MacBook user).
octo core MacBooks at least! in 5 years!
__________________
Italic Edge || Twitter || Facebook
vendettabass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 01:11 PM   #10
Yvan256
macrumors 68040
 
Yvan256's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Canada
Would it be possible to see both the iMac and Mac mini with quad core first, before the laptops?
__________________
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 1.83 GHz/2.5 GiB, Mac mini G4 1.42 GHz/1 GiB, 12" PowerBook G4 1.5 GHz/512 MiB, iPod touch 16 GiB, silver iPod shuffle 1 GiB.
Yvan256 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 01:16 PM   #11
PlaceofDis
macrumors Demi-God
 
PlaceofDis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago.
Send a message via AIM to PlaceofDis
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yvan256 View Post
Would it be possible to see both the iMac and Mac mini with quad core first, before the laptops?
imac, of course.
mini? unlikely. hell it would be nice to see the mini with just some faster chips in it at this point. plus that thing just as cramped for space and heat dissipation as the laptops.
__________________
dim my eyes on the waves of confessions...
SpringWarmCold
PlaceofDis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 01:22 PM   #12
SirOmega
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
I'm inclined to think that we'll see the iMac upgrade in late Q3, with MBP add-on in early Q4 (it'll be added to the BTO options for the 17" MBP).
SirOmega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 01:22 PM   #13
vansouza
macrumors Demi-God
 
vansouza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Las Vegas, Earth
quad core iMac please.
__________________
www.usheroes.us
You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body. C. S. Lewis
vansouza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 01:24 PM   #14
KindredMAC
macrumors 6502a
 
KindredMAC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Quad Core is needed in the iMac, since it is becoming more and more a pro designers computer with all that it offers.

A Quad Core in a MacBook Pro would create a nice gap between the Pros and Dual Core MacBooks.

Would still like to see Apple offer a couple more low end Quad Core options for the Mac Pros that would be in line with the high end of the iMac line.
__________________
"We want to let go of this notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose." - Steve Jobs
KindredMAC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 01:28 PM   #15
iBunny
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
This is good news. Hopefully they get announced at WWDC. Even if we dont see them until Q3... I can live with that.
__________________
Sergeant
United States Marine Corps
iBunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 01:32 PM   #16
Eidorian
macrumors G3
 
Eidorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Indiana
Send a message via AIM to Eidorian
Quote:
Originally Posted by KindredMAC View Post
Quad Core is needed in the iMac, since it is becoming more and more a pro designers computer with all that it offers.

A Quad Core in a MacBook Pro would create a nice gap between the Pros and Dual Core MacBooks.

Would still like to see Apple offer a couple more low end Quad Core options for the Mac Pros that would be in line with the high end of the iMac line.
I'm more concerned about the tri and quad core offerings that are found in SFF and minitowers for $500 - 1,000.
__________________
MRoogle it!
hikari T7500 2.2 GHz / 4 GB / 320 GB / GMA X3100 / 10.5.8
chobimaru Core i5 750 2.66 GHz / 4 GB / 640 GB / 4830 / Windows 7
Eidorian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 01:55 PM   #17
mjteix
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Don't believe everything posted by the Inquirer.

That a quad-core chip will get into the 24" iMac later this year is almost certain.

I don't believe will see those in the 20" iMac or the MBP this year, Apple doesn't even use the current extreme edition 2.8GHz Penryn in the MBP.

AFAIK, Nehalem (mid-2009) will bring mobile quads in the 35W power envelop for sure, that's when the MBP will get his (and hopefully the 20" iMac too).

@ Eidorian

I agree. Even if the mid-tower segment is not growing as fast as the rest of the industry (laptops and Apple's AIO), it still represent a huge part of the market worldwide. I'd love Apple to release a "regular" desktop with desktop parts all the way at a reasonable price (more in the $999-1999 price range however).
mjteix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 01:59 PM   #18
kjs862
macrumors 6502a
 
kjs862's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Long Island
Send a message via AIM to kjs862
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

Nice get this thing into an iPhone and you got yourself a deal!
__________________
Power Mac G5 Dual 2.0Ghz (1 Gen), 6.5GB Ram, X800XT, Mac OS X (10.5.8)
kjs862 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 02:28 PM   #19
kornyboy
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Knoxville, TN (USA)
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

I would definitely like to see one of these in a laptop soon.
__________________
Stuff
kornyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 02:38 PM   #20
CmdrLaForge
macrumors 68000
 
CmdrLaForge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: around the world
Send a message via AIM to CmdrLaForge Send a message via Skype™ to CmdrLaForge
I will wait for quad core MBP to buy a new one. So I keep my fingers crossed.
__________________

Macbook Pro 17" 2.8 GHz ; Cinema Display 23"; iPhone 3G 16GB; TimeCapsule
Final Cut Pro 2; Aperture 2
CmdrLaForge is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 02:43 PM   #21
RoDe
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
If this is true, this could be good news, for the upcoming MBP's. Apple does seem to get president when it comes to new processors.
RoDe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 02:44 PM   #22
cnote678
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
It would be awesome to get a quad-core into the MBP but yes, it seems unlikely that would happen before 2009. As long as battery life keeps going up, I'm happy.
cnote678 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 03:49 PM   #23
KindredMAC
macrumors 6502a
 
KindredMAC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Apple does NOT need a mini-tower as everyone keeps clamoring for.

All they really need to do is offer a couple Mac Pros with a single Quad Core Xeon chip with a price starting at $1499.

This is how Apple always used to handle the Power Mac G3's, G4's and G5's, why not go back to a system that worked and no one was screaming for a model between the iMac and the PowerMac.

Here is an example of what could make sense with the next Mac Pro revision:
- Single Quad Core 2.8GHz XEON $1499
- Single Quad Core 3.0GHz XEON $1999
- Double Quad Core 2.8GHz XEON $2499
- Double Quad Core 3.0GHz XEON $2799
- Double Quad Core 3.2GHz XEON $3299
- Double Quad Core 3.4GHz XEON $3699

For this to work out, Apple would also have to offer either a $999 or $1099 iMac.

For me personally at home I would pick up the lowest end Quad Core Mac Pro, while at work I would put in for the mid-high range Octo Core Mac Pro.
__________________
"We want to let go of this notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose." - Steve Jobs
KindredMAC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 04:00 PM   #24
twoodcc
macrumors 603
 
twoodcc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Right side of wrong
Send a message via AIM to twoodcc Send a message via MSN to twoodcc
great news! looking forward to 4 cores in a laptop
__________________
tville pump
Smarter than the average bear
twoodcc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2008, 04:05 PM   #25
longofest
Demi-God (Editor)
 
longofest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Falls Church, VA
Send a message via AIM to longofest
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjteix View Post
Don't believe everything posted by the Inquirer.
That is one of the reasons why I posted this on page2. They do have some correct rumors to their credit as well though. Its just weird that they are going against the grain on this. (35W vs. 45W)
longofest is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Mac Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors' Page 2 News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:26 PM.

Mac News | Mac Rumors | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002-2009, MacRumors.com, LLC