Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

reallynotnick

macrumors 65816
Oct 21, 2005
1,249
1,193
These look perfect for an iMac, don't let them near my xMac though, I want a real desktop chip in it. Even if the iMac is thin is pretty dang huge espcially with them dropping the 17in, it would be super easy to fit one of these in a 24in and even the 20in.
 

!¡ V ¡!

macrumors 6502a
Jun 21, 2007
850
0
What is the point of having all the processing and GPU power in the portable industry if the laptop cannot run longer than 2+ hours of road use.

Gone are the days of the iBook G4 which used to give the user 4-6 hours of portable office time.

If you want CPU/GPU/HDD for mobility purposes you are going to cut out mobility usage. All this is really doing is allowing the desktop industry and the mobile industry reach synergy which losing out on the whole idea of a laptop.
 

CWallace

macrumors G4
Aug 17, 2007
11,961
10,617
Seattle, WA
What's the benefit of these mobile quad cores anyway? There's still some apps that don't even take advantage of the dual cores and only very few that take advantage of the quad cores in the Mac Pros. Why is everyone getting so excited?

Because too much is never enough, I guess. :)
 

danielwsmithee

macrumors 65816
Mar 12, 2005
1,135
410
My fear is that they just don't want to -- Apple doesn't seem interested in the highest-end mobile processors even now because they're more interested in conserving battery life and maintaining a very thin enclosure.
That is not true, they just don't use the highest performing processors in the MacBook and MacBook Pro. They currently use the highest performing mobile processor (extreme) in the 2.8 Ghz iMac. This is going to make killer new iMacs come next year.
 

Pooldraft

macrumors member
Sep 16, 2004
45
0
Hahahaha

Everytime a MacBook Pro gets an update, so should the iMac. In fact, the iMac should get the update first. The power and heat constraints do not effect it as much. The iMac should ALWAYS get the latest, greatest, fastest mobile chip. A quad iMac would be nice. C'mon Apple! There's no reason not to! Keep bumpin' those machines! Letting them languish for a year in unacceptable! This isn't PPC!

Remember this is no longer Apple Computers Inc. it is Apple, Inc. The iPhone is probably getting a lot more of Apple, Inc. resources. Or maybe the Touch.

There was an initial boost in the intel switch but now it seems as if intel is falling into the same problem PPC is having, stagnant mobile processors. Good Luck. I hope a PPC computer comes out and kicks intel's ass.
 

SiliconAddict

macrumors 603
Jun 19, 2003
5,889
0
Chicago, IL
Yah 2009 sounds like a good time to upgrade. I'm still not set on going with another Mac though. The problems I've had.....
icon_confused.gif
 

Analog Kid

macrumors G3
Mar 4, 2003
8,810
11,260
Im not sure I like a 30% increase in watt usage..
Yup. I could rant about how Intel has never cared about heat or power supply concerns, but they do have 100% more logic on this thing, so I guess 30% more power is acceptable. Combine that with the added power drawn by the chipsets and memory though and this will be one hot beast.

I reserve the right to launch into my "Intel doesn't care about power" rant at a later time, however.
Batteries also increase technologically...hopefully at a better rate than the power usage will increase for these CPUs...
Yeah, they improve, but they improve at a snails pace. Now we've gotten to the point that we've pushed the margins on them so far they're regularly bursting into flames. I just hope that if Apple does begin using these things they keep lower performance options available too. I'd bet a quad 1GHz laptop would be amazingly responsive and probably run quite a bit longer than current MBPs.
Well, this is an engineering sample, so we can expect a refined, less powerhungry model by the time they ship. I would also expect that we would see powersaving features such as turning off a few of the cores under battery power, etc.
If Intel was as confident as you are, they wouldn't also be bragging about their miniaturized refrigerator. That refrigerator is running from the same battery, mind you.
 

heisetax

macrumors 6502a
Jun 12, 2004
944
0
Omaha, NE
Lower Price?

Well, it has the "extreme" label on it which means: "Look at me, I'm sucking up power like crazy for a few more MHz". So the normal quad core versions should be more normal in terms of power usage. I actually love mobile CPUs for home server: can't beat those 15 Watts a Mac Mini is using. I think my internet setup is using more than that. :p I want a Mini with Leopard on it so bad. Think Apple might lower the price for those someday?



NO!
 

TurboSC

macrumors 65816
Aug 4, 2007
1,361
0
California
yea it'll be a while before they make quad-core efficient enough for a macbookpro...

I just want a slimmer not burn your hand macbookpro that's fast and powerful.
 

WildPalms

macrumors 6502a
Jan 4, 2006
995
2
Honolulu, HI
No way quad cores end up in MacBooks any time soon.

30" Quad Core iMac with BlueRay superdrive, $2799 by Christmas 2008.

Agreed. Apple doesnt have to use every brand new chip that Intel designs just because its available, no matter how much some posters here wish for it. ;)
 

Crike .40

macrumors member
Aug 9, 2006
46
0
Oxnard Shores (Ventura), CA
yay for new macpros - i need one to continue bumping my computers down the line through my family.

(parents g4 mac mini to ebay, g5 imac to parents, c2d imac to fiance, macpro to me)

I'm fairly excited about this and hope they upgrade video cards to match.
 

Butthead

macrumors 6502
Jan 10, 2006
440
19
Wow, this rumor is so laughable, it's not even funny.

I posted the Digitimes rumor on the hardware forums a long, long time ago...no one picked up on the Q core mobile, now all of assuden, a electronista rumor is posted, lol. Electronista the paragon of accurate rumor reporting? For shame for shame MR!

Here take a look at digitimes coverage, much better, and then take alook at what they reported a month ago on the same subject...this is old news, wake up.
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20071015VL200.html


http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/09/19/idf_quad-core_mobiles/
Intel's first four-core processors for notebooks will debut in Q3 2008, it has been claimed. That narrows the release window down from the previous forecast: sometime in the second half of the year.
Related stories

* Intel to up 45nm Core 2 Extreme prices by 50% next year
* Intel shows off working quad-core mobile CPU
* Next-gen Centrino to ship 'May 2008'
* Intel schedules quad-core mobile CPUs for H2 '08
* Intel said to have roadmapped 11 mobile Penryn processors
* Quad-core won't make it big until 2009 - reseacher

Motherboard-maker moles spilled the beans to DigiTimes, confirming what we've heard before: the 45nm chips will contain 12MB of L2 with each core pair sharing 6MB, they'll run on a 1066MHz frontside bus and consume up to 45W of power.

That's the main reason why they won't feature in 'Montevina', the next generation of Intel's Centrino platform and yesterday revealed to be shipping out of the chip maker's warehouses in May 2008. The quad-cores will require different notebook thermal designs than those laid down for the dual-core 45nm chips that will be part of Montevina.

Now compare silly vague rumors of electronista (where do they get these from, they don't actually say Mooly Eden said this via quotes?)...
http://www.electronista.com/articles/07/10/15/intel.4.core.mobile.demo/

[qoute]An official clock speed for the processor is unknown, though its use of the Montevina platform will supply a faster 1,066MHz bus (versus 800MHz) in addition to improved integrated graphics, 800MHz DDR2 and DDR3 support, and the option of WiMAX for wide-area broadband Internet access. Launch details are unknown beyond an early-to-mid 2008 release window, though the initial quad-core notebook chip is said to be considered a Core 2 Extreme and would be intended primarily for desktop replacements and other large notebooks.[/quote]

so what electronista is implying, is that the mobile Quad Core Extreme will be on the market before the Monteviña platform that supports is has been released, lol in early to mid '08, rather than previous optimistic reports of Intel saying off the record that they are on track to deliver H2008, specifically Q308.

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/10/15/intel_demos_mobile_quad-core/

Without specialized cooling tech, it would appear Apple will not be able to have a quad-core, even in a 17in MBP, until next year at the earliest, probably late '08/early '09 when Intel migrates to 32nm process. :(
 

winterspan

macrumors 65816
Jun 12, 2007
1,008
0
Apple drives me CRAZY with their sluggish upgrade cycle

Everytime a MacBook Pro gets an update, so should the iMac. In fact, the iMac should get the update first. The power and heat constraints do not effect it as much. The iMac should ALWAYS get the latest, greatest, fastest mobile chip. A quad iMac would be nice. C'mon Apple! There's no reason not to! Keep bumpin' those machines! Letting them languish for a year in unacceptable! This isn't PPC!

Obviously letting them languish is acceptable if people keep buying them.
I never understood why people, especially "enthusiasts" would let Apple walk over them like that. It's like buying a Mac Pro right now! Who would do that? Maybe it's not a big deal to old mac fans because they are used to it... But from a 'switcher' perspective, It drives me CRAZY that apple jerks around for 12 or even 18 MONTHS before they upgrade!!! People used to the PC industry want the latest and greatest IMMEDIATELY when it comes out. I remember when the first Core Duo chips came out and Dell took about 6 weeks to start shipping products.. people were going nuts! lol.

I KNOW Apple isn't dell and they (usually) have higher quality system integration and maybe home consumers don't care as much, but it's INSULTING to professionals to try to get away with charging so much for their Mac Pro and THEN NOT UPDATING THEM IN OVER A YEAR!! WTF?

I don't understand why people don't just boycott their products when they don't update them in a decent time frame! Force them to upgrade and stop selling old hardware! or at slash the prices!
 

winterspan

macrumors 65816
Jun 12, 2007
1,008
0
Professional Apps can easily use a Quad core Macbook Pro!

What's the benefit of these mobile quad cores anyway? There's still some apps that don't even take advantage of the dual cores and only very few that take advantage of the quad cores in the Mac Pros. Why is everyone getting so excited? The current processors in the iMacs and the MBP's are quite powerful and should last anyone with high demands for 3-4 years in the computing world easily.

Every time there is an article on a processor, someone just *HAS* to write a comment like this. I don't mean to be rude, but I feel it's really an ignorant statement on your behalf. There are many Apple fans that use their systems to do much more hardware intensive tasks than word processing, internet browsing, email and Itunes.

As these would probably be in the Macbook PRO, keyword being "PRO", it would make sense as many of the applications that professionals/high-end amateurs/hobbyists/etc use will definitely benefit from all the processing you can throw at them.

Just between Apple itself and Adobe There are MANY applications that are quite capable of taking advantage of many-core multithreading. Leopard will even be much more suited to large numbers of cores than Tiger is.

A quad-core "desktop replacement" laptop or a mobile in-the-field workstation will be a great boon to professionals and consumers alike that work in creative media production, 3D graphics, scientific and engineering fields, etc.

Even a media enthusiast re-encoding video from VCR tapes/DVDs/etc for the Apple TV / iPod could take advantage of one.

I can't WAIT to get my hands on one of these...
 

winterspan

macrumors 65816
Jun 12, 2007
1,008
0
desktop replacement

What is the point of having all the processing and GPU power in the portable industry if the laptop cannot run longer than 2+ hours of road use.

Gone are the days of the iBook G4 which used to give the user 4-6 hours of portable office time.

If you want CPU/GPU/HDD for mobility purposes you are going to cut out mobility usage. All this is really doing is allowing the desktop industry and the mobile industry reach synergy which losing out on the whole idea of a laptop.

You are assuming everyone person with a laptop needs to use battery power on the road. If you are buying a 17" quad-core laptop with a good GPU, it's usually assumed you are using it as a desktop replacement. I have one of these myself right now. I hardly ever use it on battery power, But it makes sense for me to have a laptop because I travel frequently between two locations. I also have a small office so I don't need/want a big desktop computer/monitor/accessories taking up my whole desk, but I still need a high-end system with decent performance.

A quad-core penryn laptop CPU will make the most sense when used in these type of desktop replacement applications.
 

Dontdothat317

macrumors member
Mar 29, 2007
62
12
a Quad-core MBP would be awsome, although I think a successful upgrade from penryn dual cores would entail advanced power saving capabilities as well, like being able to shut off several cores and fans when running in power-saving work mode.

The Macbook Pro is defined as Apple's PROFESSIONAL Laptop, geared largely towards multimedia work. I know a number of professionals (artists, photographers, musicians, and engineers..some of them being the same people) who use the MBP for highly intensive, multi-threaded applications on a regular basis, so people who wonder "who needs a quad?" get their answers. But on the other hand these people also need to be able to use the MBP for simple things like word processing for hours at a time without the dependence of an outlet.

Long story Short. The winning strategy is to make the laptop as fast as possible and as expandable as possible while simultaneously allowing it to disable many of its features (at the discretion of the user) to preserve battery life of 4+ hours.

If they can bring the wattage down on the quad cores (which will happen eventually), I'll be all over it. Apple, take the money you got from my Ipod and Iphone and make this happen!
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.