1. Welcome to the new MacRumors forums. See our announcement and read our FAQ

Chinese Article mentions new MBA will have i3 Processor?

Discussion in 'MacBook Air' started by roxygal9, Apr 5, 2010.

  1. macrumors regular

    Not sure if anyone saw the chinese article it was linked to under the Unofficial Waiting for Arrandale thread in the Macboo Pro Section, and now is on 9 to 5 rumor site.

    Anyways, wouldnt this be a disappointment if this is true? From what I have read, this processor isnt much faster than the Core duos out now, and it eats a lot of power.

    I thought for sure they would put an i7 in it, I hope this is wrong!
  2. macrumors regular

  3. macrumors regular

    I really hope that i3 info is wrong or I wont be getting the MBA
  4. macrumors 68000


    If it's true the report that the new MBA will use only an i3 processor is disappointing. Nevertheless, I will probably buy an MBA anyway if the RAM is increased.
  5. macrumors 601


    It's not even possible. It just proves that this article has no merit and the authors no credibility. Drop this idea, and just hope that they GUESSED right. With all the iPads sold, and Apple and buyers waiting for more iPads, why not sell some Mac notebooks... the update has to happen sometime, I think.
  6. Moderator


    Well, there is NO way it will use Core i3 as they are 35W while the current ones are 17W....

    Core i7 620UM (1.06GHz) and 640UM (1.2GHz) are 18W so I'm pretty sure we will see them instead of i3.

    There are also i7 620LM (2GHz) and 640LM (2.13GHz) which are 25W so because there is no need for North or Southbridge anymore because they are integrated into the CPU, they are also possible, especially if Apple can figure out a new cooling method
  7. macrumors 601


    I read the article. It didn't say anything about the MBA getting a Core i3 CPU. What it did state was that the MBA was getting a revision to the Ultra Low Voltage CPUs. Core i5 is doubtful, but it was mentioned in the article. Unless Intel made a chip specific for the MBA, the MBA will not get the one ultra low voltage CPU in a Core i5... unless low-end with an upgrade to the Core i7 or the high-end MBA getting a Core i7. That I could see happening. I think it would be much more likely that there's a choice between Core i7-6x0UM and Core i7-6x0LM. The ultra low voltage CPU will frustrate a lot of people including ME. I don't want it, but it could be necessary to get a dedicated graphics card in the MBA. The TDP seems too high with a 25W low voltage CPU, unless Apple can turn off the IGP and save TDP or get a CPU without the GMA IGP die on chip.

    I still say we will get at least the option for a Core i7-6x0LM CPU which is Intel's stated replacement for the SL9x00 CPUs already used in the MBA. I just don't understand the theory of going Core i5 to save money and price the MBA even lower than $1499 and $1799. I really see the iPad allowing Apple to reposition the MBA in the $2000 price range for high-end MBA, and allowing BTO options from there. Before, Apple was allowing the MBA to cater to the person who needed an iPad but it wasn't available yet. The MBA should go back to a primary Mac like computer for the business type user.

    I guess we will see sometime in the next six months... but even that's no guarantee. I certainly didn't think the article was credible enough to include on the first page of MR. I would have put it on page two. Either way, we're not getting a Core i3 in the MBA unless Apple is changing its purpose from ultraportable to frying plate.
  8. macrumors regular


    And its something that has been clarified and made clear in many other threads here. Especially very very well founded by you.
    Anybody else who starts about the i3 would probably be a troll, or someone who doesn't read.
    An i3 would be a downgrade. Period.
  9. macrumors 601

    The Google translation says:

    So I'm assuming the reference to the UM is for the MacBook Air.

    The LM versions are also the direct replacements to the LV Penryns.

    The LM and UM, especially the UM, have quite impressive Turbo modes.
  10. Moderator


    You don't know what you are talking about... Core i3 would be hell of an update but it's too hot! Core i3s are 2.13GHz and 2.26GHz while the CPUs we are talking about are either 1-1.2GHz or 2-2.1GHz (suitable for MBA)...

    Yeah, could be because no need for Southbridge anymore and it was at least few watts so LM sounds possible and hopefully is true. All are quad threaded so HT should speed things up as well.

    Just looked at LMs' Turbo speeds, 2.93GHz in i7-640LM! That sounds FAST!
  11. gri
    macrumors 6502a


    Hi Scottsdale, can you expand on why it is not possible please...? Oh well, never mind, I just got the answer from the few posts below...
  12. macrumors 6502a

    I would guess that they will be using the same CPU used in the Thinkpads X201s models. The X201s models were recently removed the Lenovo site due to a shortage of CPU's. I assume this shortage was because Intel was trying to make sure Apple had enough for their Macbook Air:confused:
  13. macrumors newbie

    I dont think it will be an i3 for the reasons already mentioned. The i7-6xxLM or UM will replace the current processors most likely. Anyway I dont get why you would be disappointed by an i3? It outperforms even the fastest current cpu available in the 13" MPB, thats really a disappointing result isnt it?:rolleyes: http://cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
  14. macrumors 601


    I completely disagree. It's not all about clock speed. If your theory is correct, its just about as likely the MBA would get a Xeon Server CPU as a Core i3 35W TDP CPU. You're completely talking clock speed when you say Core i3 is better, and it's not better than the current SL9600 Penryn w/6 MB cache anyways.

    The SL9x00 Penryn CPUs Apple uses in the MBA use low voltage TDP and still provide 2.13 GHz of clock speed. At the same time, they have 6 MB L2 cache. When saying a Core i3 is better than the SL9x00, "you don't know what you're talking about"... via your own quote!

    Any chip's overall value or advantage is its power consumption for clock speed performance, plus other tech like boost, hyperthreading, and most especially cache are the total value of the chip
  15. macrumors 601


    The LM is essentially DOUBLE the normal clock speed of the UM. The UM isn't the stated "Low Voltage" CPU like the MBA currently uses, it's ultra low voltage. The thing is the current SL9x00 uses 17w, then the chipset uses 12w - totaling 29w. The Intel Core i7-6x0LM is a 25W CPU and includes the GMA IGP, Northbridge and Southbridge. So Intel alone would use less power from just the upgraded Core i7 replacements for the SL9x00 CPUs.

    I would much prefer the Core i7-640LM over the Core i7-640UM. We're talking 2.13 vs. 1.2 GHz normal clock speed. As I have mentioned elsewhere, the Core i7-640UM is actually closer to the way the current CPU is utilized in the MBA because Apple throttles the SL9x00 CPUs. However, the SL9x00 is throttled on average to 1.6 GHz and is marketed as 2.13 GHz even though it rarely operates there.

    It's hard to say what Apple will ultimately use, but I find it hard to think Apple would be happy saying MBA a 1.2 GHz CPU... that's a marketing problem. Therefore, the stated Core i7-6x0LM makes far more sense from a marketing perspective. However, if we think about the TDP of a dedicated graphics card, 25W TDP for a Core i7 + another 12W to 16W for a dedicated graphics card is too hot.

    What I hope is that Apple can figure out how to turn off the IGP when utilizing the dedicated graphics. Right now, we know Optimus just turns on the dedicated graphics when needed, but the Intel GMA IGP stays on at the same time. That may not work with the MBA, unless Apple can set the dedicated graphics to only turn on when a certain threshold is met and needed. Therefore, the vast majority of the time, let's say unless the MBA is also plugged in, the dedicated graphics stays off. That way when connected to an LED ACD it can drive the display and graphics performance needed. It's difficult to envision just using Intel's GMA IGP again... but it's difficult for Apple to give us dedicated graphics in a confined space with limited cooling.

    I think we're going to have to make some compromises to get both a Core i7-640LM in the high-end MBA and dedicated graphics. We certainly don't want the same problems as the original MBA. I feel like Apple is going to have a problem sticking with only Intel's GMA IGP since Apple bashed it and we all experienced it with the original MBA. So we have a dilemma, and I don't know how it's going to play out... but I have speculated about this for ten months.

    I still am not even positive that this update will not have the same SL9x00 CPUs, Nvidia upgraded GPU, plus RAM and drive space upgrades. I also wonder if Apple needs even more time to determine this whole Arrandale switch and could even stick with C2D in the low-end MBPs, MBAs, MBs, Mm, and even iMac until Apple can find a solution that could work across its entire Mac platform. We all want to believe this update will have Arrandale, dedicated graphics and more but we might be one update off yet. Or, we might have a lot longer wait than the MBP has...
  16. macrumors newbie

    Now I completly disagree. True, usualy its wrong just to see the clockspeed, but in this case its suitable. The i cpu's are much more efficient than the c2d penryns, just like the penryns are much more efficient than the c2d meroms. They pare fater even if they have the same clockspeed. simple example: A 2,0Ghz i cpu provides the same performance as a 2,5Ghz penryn and the same performance as 3,0Ghz merom.

    The cache really plays a minor role. So in what way is the SL9600 better as an i3? At least in performance issues it isnt in any way. Saw the chart i posted before?(link) Of course it has a lower tdp, so in this paet its better. but never never never in terms of performance. Anyway cause of the tdp the i3 isnt a suitable competitor, a i7-LM would rather be, but its again more performant.
  17. Moderator


    Well, can you say that 1.06GHz CPU is faster than 2.26GHz? Neither is the SL9600! If we forget the power consumption, Core i3 in MBA would be sooo awesome as it is faster than CPUs suitable for it. Core i3 is faster than the current chips in MBAs, you can't beat that. I was talking about RAW SPEED, rather than the possibility and power consumption. I know i3 would make MBA a piece of melt aluminum but it doesn't beat the fact that it would be faster.

    Sure the power consumption mustn't be forgotten when thinking about overall value and pros as SL9600 and i5/i7 suitable for MBA would overall be better than i3 because of power consumption.
  18. macrumors newbie

    The i7 LM versions have 2,0 and 2,13GHz clockspeed
  19. macrumors 6502a


    As far as marketing goes they could just use the UM and advertise the Turbo-Boost speed, its not really all that different than what they are doing now and I wouldn't put it past apple.

Share This Page