Intel's Upcoming Penryn Core 2 Duo Processors

[Mac.Jnr]

Probably not but you do get a 1,07 GHz FSB (1067 Mhz?), 800 MHz DDR3 support as well as WiMax/3G (HSDPA) amongst others

Isn't it 800mhz FSB for mobile processors and 1333 FSB for desktop processors? DDR3 is way over 800mhz more like 1333+fsb.

 

[daneoni]

Isn't it 800mhz FSB for mobile processors and 1333 FSB for desktop processors? DDR3 is way over 800mhz more like 1333+fsb.

Technically yes but i get the feeling what you're talking about is already happening now. If i can assume you're mixing up things up. We have 1333MHz FSB in Desktops (Mac Pro?) an 800MHz FSB in Notebooks (SR MBP).

DDR3 clockrates will range from 800-1600MHz compared to the 400-1066MHz of DDR2. Montevina supports the 800 clock and will increase the centrino "notebook" FSB to 1067MHz. Hoever there are no chips on the horizon to support anything above 800MHz for now.

Look here, here and here for more info

 

[AidenShaw]

That almost sounds like an endorsement of the all-in-one form factor - you're slipping, Aiden! So, if the new iMac had 4 RAM slots and a user-serviceable HD bay, would you recommend it (as a form factor)?

Well, if...

Keep the notebook chips in the iMac (for heat reasons), and put quads and some modest expandability (2 or 3 hard drives, 2nd optical, standard x16 PCIe graphics slot and additional x4 (in x8) PCIe slot) in a minitower.

...the iMac has 3 hard drive slots (2 for 2.5" drives, one for a either a 2.5" or 5.25" drive), a user replaceable x16 PCIe full height graphics card, a quad Kentsfield, and a spare PCIe slot for an ATSC video tuner and they get rid of the chin -- then I'd definitely soften my tone on all-in-ones.

Actually, what I was trying to say is that buying "expandability" to future-proof yourself for 3 years down the road isn't such a wise investment most of the time. Three years from now, the available systems will have features that you can't imagine now - and it may be better (or at least more fun) to replace rather than add stuff to the old one.

On the other hand, getting expandability so that the initial purchase meets all your needs is good - most "expansion" is done at the BTO time, not down the road. If people do upgrade, most of the time it's adding a hard drive or more memory.

Some issues that I have with the iMac/all-in-one are:

1. the idea that you may have to throw away a good computer because the screen died, or a good screen because the computer died or you want something faster
2. the inherent bundling - if you want a larger monitor, you have to buy a faster CPU and a larger disk - whether you want them or not
3. the "elegant mess" - people say that the iMac is elegant, but most of the time in real life an iMac is surrounded by a rat's nest of 1394 and USB cables leading to all those things that should have fit inside the box
4. I prefer to have a mini-tower or micro-tower on the floor, and a more trim LCD on the desk (a quiet fan under the desk is quieter than a quiet fan up by your ears)
5. did I mention the chin?

So yes, an iMac would be great if it were expandable (including having a real choice of monitor).

 

[nja247]

I'm still hoping for a rushed release. Intel has had samples for months as it is.

Unfortunately there's no need as Intel is currently on top of the game with AMD barely able to offer chips with similar performance.

 

[Thomas2006]

More importantly, what will the Montevina revision bring me that is better than Santa Rosa ? Will I finally be able to expand my RAM to 16GB in my MBP ?

I do not know about the MBP but the MB will get much better graphics. Yes, dedicated video is better, but that is not going to happen anytime soon so we will just have to not go there.

 

[nja247]

Intel said today that the sold a larger number of chips at a lower margin. I wish Apple would pass along some of of those savings along to us, their customers! I can remember when the last price cut was on a Mac. Sure they are improving speed little by little, but it doesn't seem as though the prices are ever going to come down.

I guess that's the "price" we have to pay given the Mac new found popularity. My buddy had to wait 2 weeks for his new MacBook Pro to come back into stock.

Hey Apple, if Intel says that they are selling chips at a lower rate to compete with AMD, how about passing the savings on to us in the form of lower prices?

I recently priced out 13.3" Dell's and Sony's and found Apple's MacBook to be the best priced machine of the lot (though Sony and Dell did offer a dedicated video option). However comparing the MacBook Pro was a different story; it could definitely use a price drop.

 

[jeremyrader]

Santa Rosa is a chipset now?

Just to clarify the original post:

- Santa Rosa is not a chipset, it is a platform - specifically an Intel Centrino Duo processor technology (mobile) platform.

- Santa Rosa uses a Core 2 Duo processor (Merom) running 1.3-2.4 GHz with 2-4 MB L2 cache, and the 965 Express GM or PM chipset (Crestline).

- Santa Rosa Professional is technically an Intel Centrino Pro processor technology platform. It only uses the T7700 2.4 GHz 4MB processor (Merom), same one you can get with the regular Santa Rosa platform, and the same Crestline chipset.

- the Santa Rosa refresh is considered an Intel Centrino Pro platform and will use the Penryn processor and Crestline chipset.

- the Montevina platform (also Pro) will use the Penryn processor (updated with a 6 MB cache) and the Cantiga chipset. Currently slated for 2nd half 2008.

- no quad core mobile processor have been announced.

And that's just the mobile stuff, not including the ultramobile PC stuff from Intel...

Regarding caches - caches have been doing their jobs effectively for three decades (IBM 360/85). A cache’s mission is to bridge the gap between the fast CPU and the slow main memory. Cache is small but fast and can feed a data-hungry CPU at its demanded speed.

 

[failsafe1]

Honestly, all this stuff is giving me a big headache. The more you try to keep up with this chip news the less you want to purchase anything. I'm going to now ignore it all & unless its about a major redesign in a product (like the talk about the new aluminum iMacs) I'm just gonna buy what I need when I need it and move on with life.

"posted via iPhone"

Man ain't it the truth. But the idea about buy when you need it is still the only way to go. I could see holding out for a major change like blu-ray or something really new but chip sets? Holding out for the next big chip only leads to headaches.

 

[ajhill]

MacBook Pros as popular as ever.

I was at my local Apple Store yesterday. Packed was the word that came to mind. The MacBook Pros were definitely the hot product. Just a quick look around saw three people walking out with them. Just then a cart came out of the back room with four more (corporate purchase?). Notebooks are definitely selling well.

The newer (smaller) chips should be a welcome advantage. With cooler temperatures and better battery life.

If would prefer to see prices come down a bit on the Macbooks. With Intel locked into a price war with AMD shouldn't we see lower prices on Macbook Pros?

 

[fsckus]

I think it's far more likely apple will speed bump macbookpros slightly, but stay away from any major revision until montevina

 

[guzhogi]

which are due in Q1'08. After this release, Intel plans on overhauling their mobile platform in Q2'2008 with the "Montevina" revision.

Releasing an update in Q1 and then doing another ~3 months later? Can they wait a while and let us catch our breath first? I'm sure most people belong in 1 of 2 groups: (1) those people who say procs should be updated very often (every week or something) or (2) those who think procs should be updated less frequently. I personally lean towards the latter. Let us enjoy the top of the line for a few months and when you do update, it's a big one. Remember the last MacBook update and how boring it was?

 

[cliffjumper68]

Nice to have regular speed updates now with Intel driving chip technology.

 

[skellener]

All the chip updates in the world won't matter until Apple puts them inside our Macs. Let's hopefully see them soon!

 

[SuperCompu2]

please help me understand.

Why do faster processors matter when more demanding applications distribute work between many computers?

I don't think he meant spread between cores, but rather 'nodes' for the more intense graphical and scientific programs. I know a friend of mine did some video game design, and he had a non-networked workstation and a node-linked workstation: the node-networked computer rendered about 25x faster than the single workstation (that's amazing in terms of 3D render for Video Games)

 

[ClimbingTheLog]

I belong in that club. I'm still waiting for the best MBP ever... I've been waiting since Dec 2006 and still can't decide whether to wait for the NEXT BIG THING...

The next big thing is Montevina-based laptops. The current generation runs from October 2006 to March 2008 (Santa Rosa turned out to be nothing big - they didn't really use Robson). The LED-based model is probably the best you're going to see for the next 9 months.

But if you're equivocal on the issue that probably means you don't really need a new machine (or you're just a masochist and love your Powerbook 5300). If you get a current MBP I guarantee you'll love it! (and eBay is for upgrades)

 

[spawn135]

Oh wait. After Penryn, there is Nehalem:

Penryn will be the last Intel processor based on the Core Microarchitecture. The successor to the Core Microarchitecture will be the Nehalem core.(1)

Nehalem is a codename for both, a processor microarchitecture and a processor. The microarchitecture is being developed by Intel and is the planned successor to the Core microarchitecture. The processor is expected to debut the microarchitecture. (2)


So what does that mean? Intel is going to abandon Core and use a new microarchitecture?

(1) http://guides.macrumors.com/Penryn
(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_(CPU_architecture)

 

[Eidorian]

So what does that mean? Intel is going to abandon Core and use a new microarchitecture?

Yes it does mean that.

 

[Shagrat]

Ding Ding Ding we have a winner!
Now I will have to suffer through endless new threads from those who have already been posting away about delaying a purchase 'waiting for Leopard' for the last 6 months start new threads speculating that 'Apple' should have these chips in computers in time for Christmas

Well I am waiting for Penryn based Macs, so I will have to wait 'til then for a new Mac...
er...No, I'll wait for the Nehalem based Macs as I don't want to buy something which will be out of date two weeks after I buy it....er...

It'll be Westmere for me...

er...Sorry, Sandybridge is the one...

Oh, 2010 'til it comes out...

Oh well, got to have the latest processor, me!

 

[heisetax]

Update - How?

That's fine and dandy and all, but I'm still waiting for a Mac Pro revision, and have been all year. I signed up for a student developer package with the intention of getting a decent discount off of a Mac Pro... unfortunately, Apple is taking their sweet time and screwing everybody like me who wants a top-end system but will not stand for a radeon 1900.

PROTIP: Adding an expensive-as-hell option for an 8-core system is not a revision, Apple... update that system now!

/rant

What can they update. The only change in this area has been the Quad Core. There still is no speed increases. The processors have come down in price a couple of times or so. Apple never lowers the price of a current system. I expect no new Intel Mac Pro until the new processors come out. My dual dual 3 GHz is still priced the same. The only difference now is that I can add 32 GB of memory to it rather than the 16 GB wen it was new.

Bill the TaxMan

 

[heisetax]

Gadgettry!

I am more than happy with my SR MBP for the next few years.New processors and advancements are a fact of life, as it stands this may be my last Apple product if their focus is heading further into gadgetry.

You say gadgetry, I say trinkets, but the meaning is the same. The Mac iss almost the forgotten item. Yearly revisions for most items, just like when we had the PPC processors. No price decreases for us, just lower costs for Apple to allow them to develope the next Apple Gadget.

Bill the TaxMan

 

[spawn135]

Yes it does mean that.

That's just crazy. Years ago, it was pentium I, II, III, IV

Now, it's Core, Core 2

And we will be forced to abandon the Core technology after only like 4 years? Software and game developers haven't even started to program their applications to take advantage of these multi-cores, and soon it's gonna be history.

Like i said, that's just crazy.

 

[shawnce]

That's just crazy. Years ago, it was pentium I, II, III, IV

Now, it's Core, Core 2

And we will be forced to abandon the Core technology after only like 4 years? Software and game developers haven't even started to program their applications to take advantage of these multi-cores, and soon it's gonna be history.

Like i said, that's just crazy.

They are using the existing architecture (Core 2) as a starting point an enhancing/reworking it to better leverage the 45nm process, etc. They aren't starting from scratch. They will also be multicore chips like we have with Core 2 today.

Intel talked about a "tick-tock" strategy (only a roughly 2 year cycle)... the "tick" is a change of process node (e.g. 65nm to 45nm) using an existing / established microarchitecture slightly tuned for the new process node and for the new 45nm process node that is Penryn (Conroe / Core 2 based microarchitecture). The "tock" is a "new" microarchitecture designed for the now mainstream process node (e.g. 45nm in 2008) and for the 45nm node that is Nehalem.

Note again that "new" doesn't mean they start from scratch but that they do a revaluation of their existing microarchitecture to see how it can be reworked to better leverage a process node, the current market needs, and the current state of the art.

 

[spawn135]

They are using the existing architecture (Core 2) as a starting point an enhancing/reworking it to better leverage the 45nm process, etc. They aren't starting from scratch. They will also be multicore chips like we have with Core 2 today.

Intel talked about a "tick-tock" strategy (only a roughly 2 year cycle)... the "tick" is a change of process node (e.g. 65nm to 45nm) using an existing / established microarchitecture slightly tuned for the new process node and for the new 45nm process node that is Penryn (Conroe / Core 2 based microarchitecture). The "tock" is a "new" microarchitecture designed for the now mainstream process node (e.g. 45nm in 2008) and for the 45nm node that is Nehalem.

Note again that "new" doesn't mean they start from scratch but that they do a revaluation of their existing microarchitecture to see how it can be reworked to better leverage a process node, the current market needs, and the current state of the art.

I wonder what it's going to be called. Probably not Core 3, or will it be?

 

[iQuit]

Doesn't anyone see where this is going?

Dies are shrinking, and shrinking, and shrinking, until the point to where we will have tiny chips embedded in every human's body.

I will be one of the fortunate ones to make it to heaven.

 

[iQuit]

I am still very happy with my 2.0 CD MBP w/ 2GB. It's very snappy for any task I throw at it.


(P.S. Don't geek rant on how SR and the Octogan can video encode faster blah blah blah)


I'm satisfied, for now.