Next Macbook Pro Update (13 inch pro)

[Groucho Marx]

Any one else think the next MBP will just be the 2.66.


2.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
320GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Backlit Keyboard (English) / User's Guide

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JLjldgjuKI

Check the video and click 6:40. After a while it shows the 13 inch MBP today was $1599 about two years ago. But a little bit different then todays model it had 2GB less. New one has NVIDIA GeForce 320M graphics.

167 (Avg = 208) So that will be november 5th a friday. Other wise it will come earlier or later than this date. As well they have to update the MBA it is way overdue and they cant just hold it off till next year.

I still see the macbook a little bit to close to the pro. Even though it has backlit keyboard and a sd card slot and a firewire. 2GB less.

 

[Hellhammer]

Look at the Intel Macs in Buyer's Guide. Updates have usually taken 7-10 months so I doubt we will see an update before 2011. Mobile Core 2 Duos will be EOLed then so Apple is forced to use iX CPUs.

 

[antster94]

Will the iX models be faster than a C2D? Otherwise surely Apple would have put an i3 in it at the last refresh when iX came to the other models?

 

[Covart]

Will the iX models be faster than a C2D? Otherwise surely Apple would have put an i3 in it at the last refresh when iX came to the other models?

Apple took a look at cost vs benefit of the i3 in the last installment in April. The cost of the i3 over the C2D was more than the benefits that would have been gained. I doubt Apple will go another cycle using C2D though.

 

[Blues003]

The problem is, unless they use Sandy Bridge or find a way to use i3 + 320m, the graphics will actually get worse! The problem with iX is that there is no space for it + a graphics card...

 

[old-wiz]

The problem is, unless they use Sandy Bridge or find a way to use i3 + 320m, the graphics will actually get worse! The problem with iX is that there is no space for it + a graphics card...

And due to bickering between Apple and NVidia, NVIDIA can't make a graphics card that will work with iX processors.

 

[ljonesj]

oh they can its the chipsets they cant make that have a gpu with it all cause intell put there gpu in with the ix die which to me makes it run hotter

 

[Menge]

And due to bickering between Apple and NVidia, NVIDIA can't make a graphics card that will work with iX processors.

Nope. That's due to Intel and a patent fight with Nvidia. Apple has little to do with that.

 

[Reelknead1]

I'm interested to see, even though I just bought a i7 MBP. My parents need a new computer but i told them to hold off on buying the 13, until the new ones come out.

I have a feeling that the new ones will have an i series processor. Even if the speed isn't much different it still should make a bit difference down the road for resale.

 

[old-wiz]

Nope. That's due to Intel and a patent fight with Nvidia. Apple has little to do with that.

Oops..posted before my morning tea. Yes, it's Intel/Nvidia, not Apple. I'm sure that Apple isn't happy about it since it would make it easier to go to iX.

 

[Blues003]

Here are the possible options, and my analysis of each scenario:

1) Core 2 Duo + Dedicated graphics
2) iX + Dedicated graphics
3) iX + Integrated graphics
4) Sandy Bridge
5) Llano



1 - Same situation as the current 13'' MBP. I find it unlikely because the Core 2 Duo chips are getting EOL'd in Q4 2010. It's doubtful that Apple would sustain 8 months of laptop production with chips that don't exist anymore.


2 - I find this hard to accomplish. If it was possible, wouldn't they already have done it? The reason the current MBP 13''s are running Core 2 Duo is because they couldn't find space in the laptop to put both iX AND a Dedicated Graphic card.


3 - I also find this hard to believe. The integrated graphics of Intel typically suck. HARD. This would mean that if Apple took this option, they would improve in processor but downgrade their product when it comes to graphic power. Since they valued graphics more than processor power last time, why would they do it differently?


4 - Unfortunately... this doesn't seem that likely to me either. Not only it's a very new technology (it'll come out in early 2011), but its integrated graphic card isn't apparently that revolutionary. It's said it's as good as a 2-year-old NVIDIA card. So heh...


5 - ATI's version of SandyBridge. I can't see Apple going to an ATI processor.



All-in-all... unless Intel resolves their issues with NVIDIA, the option that seems the least unlikely to me is Apple making a deal with Intel for the production of Core 2 Duos for a few more months...

 

[Reelknead1]

^^^^^


So what do you suggest, every option that you came up with you feel that apple won't go with?

 

[Hellhammer]

All-in-all... unless Intel resolves their issues with NVIDIA, the option that seems the least unlikely to me is Apple making a deal with Intel for the production of Core 2 Duos for a few more months...

What would that help? Apple would face the same issue when they are updating the 13" again. Apple can't use C2Ds forever.

Sandy Bridge's IGP will likely be little worse than 320M is but the CPU will be much better than C2Ds. The IGP will be more than sufficient for an average Joe though and that way Apple can sell the 15" and 17" for gamers etc. I'm sure most people are fine giving up some GPU power and gaining CPU power.

You can have 2 from these: CPU, GPU and battery.

If you go for CPU (iX) and GPU (dedicated), the battery life will suffer.
If you go for CPU (iX) and battery, the GPU (Intel IGP) won't be that good.
If you go for GPU (non-Intel) and battery, the CPU (C2D) will be the bottleneck.

Apple has never cared about graphics that much so IMO Sandy Bridge with IGP is what we will see

 

[Blues003]

What would that help? Apple would face the same issue when they are updating the 13" again. Apple can't use C2Ds forever.

Sandy Bridge's IGP will likely be little worse than 320M is but the CPU will be much better than C2Ds. The IGP will be more than sufficient for an average Joe though and that way Apple can sell the 15" and 17" for gamers etc. I'm sure most people are fine giving up some GPU power and gaining CPU power.

You can have 2 from these: CPU, GPU and battery.

If you go for CPU (iX) and GPU (dedicated), the battery life will suffer.
If you go for CPU (iX) and battery, the GPU (Intel IGP) won't be that good.
If you go for GPU (non-Intel) and battery, the CPU (C2D) will be the bottleneck.

Apple has never cared about graphics that much so IMO Sandy Bridge with IGP is what we will see

I can't see them using the Sandy Bridge. Not only its IGP isn't that good (and they chose graphics over processor last time), but it'll also be a very new technology. Apple typically doesn't use techonology the minute it comes out. In fact, it has a fame of being sort of a late adopter.

Out of curiosity, do you know how Sony Vaio Zs manage to have iX + Dedicated graphics on a 13''? Do they sacrifice battery power?

^^^^^


So what do you suggest, every option that you came up with you feel that apple won't go with?

Unfortunately. Notice my last phrase. I said "the least unlikely". Not "the more likely". I do hope it's my pessimism talking louder than my realism, though.

 

[Hellhammer]

I can't see them using the Sandy Bridge. Not only its IGP isn't that good (and they chose graphics over processor last time), but it'll also be a very new technology. Apple typically doesn't use techonology the minute it comes out. In fact, it has a fame of being sort of a late adopter.

Apple got Nehalem Xeons almost month before they were released in March 2009. I don't think Apple is a late adopter but they seem to do updates when they want to and don't care so much about when Intel and others update their products. Feb-March update in 2011 with Sandy Bridge is plausible IMO.

Out of curiosity, do you know how Sony Vaio Zs manage to have iX + Dedicated graphics on a 13''? Do they sacrifice battery power?

The size isn't really an issue as 9400M and 330M are about the same size. Sony states that Vaio Z gets up to 7 hours battery life but I think that's with IGP (it supports GPU switching).

Dedicated GPU + iX isn't impossible but then the GPU should be fairly fast so it would be worth it over the SB's IGP and that would mean that 15" should get even better GPU. There are several options but I'm staying with Sandy Bridge + Intel IGP

 

[Blues003]

Dedicated GPU + iX isn't impossible but then the GPU should be fairly fast so it would be worth it over the SB's IGP and that would mean that 15" should get even better GPU. There are several options but I'm staying with Sandy Bridge + Intel IGP

If that is possible, why didn't Apple go with iX + 320m then for the MBP 13'' last update?

Not that I'm questioning it being possible or not. I know it's possible in other 13'' computers (Sony Vaio Z). But wasn't Apple's excuse related to size?

And as I've said, it appears Sandy Bridge's IGP is as good as a year and a half-old NVIDIA card...

 

[Hellhammer]

If that is possible, why didn't Apple go with iX + 320m then for the MBP 13'' last update?

Not that I'm questioning it being possible or not. I know it's possible in other 13'' computers (Sony Vaio Z). But wasn't Apple's excuse related to size?

Maybe it would have been too close the the 15". Apple said they chose "killer" graphics and battery life. Possible doesn't mean that it's the best solution. Looks like Apple just don't like the idea of discrete GPU in 13"

And as I've said, it appears Sandy Bridge's IGP is as good as a year and a half-old NVIDIA card...

And what card to be exact? It's better than 9400M. Hell, even current IGP is as fast 9400M is in benchmarks. It may not be the gamer's choice but the second option is to use over two years old CPUs and 320M or something similar. C2D is starting to be moot because Intel is EOLing them.

Apple must move on and live with the Intel IGP. So many GPUs that Apple has used could be improved with better drivers so Apple must look at the mirror too. If they want to deliver good graphics performance, the drivers must be improved, a lot.

 

[Blues003]

Maybe it would have been too close the the 15". Apple said they chose "killer" graphics and battery life. Possible doesn't mean that it's the best solution. Looks like Apple just don't like the idea of discrete GPU in 13"

And what card to be exact? It's better than 9400M. Hell, even current IGP is as fast 9400M is in benchmarks. It may not be the gamer's choice but the second option is to use over two years old CPUs and 320M or something similar. C2D is starting to be moot because Intel is EOLing them.

Apple must move on and live with the Intel IGP. So many GPUs that Apple has used could be improved with better drivers so Apple must look at the mirror too. If they want to deliver good graphics performance, the drivers must be improved, a lot.

I searched a bit, but didn't find the source where I saw that. I remember it being on AppleInsider.com's forums. It didn't specify the card, though.

I also remember seeing there that there were some issues with OpenCL. Not that I know what that means though :\ xD

Finally, I saw this: http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row/7

This blew my mind. Do you have any idea if there are newer tests and/or views regarding Sandy Bridge's IGP? Because this article sure looked promising...

 

[Hellhammer]

I also remember seeing there that there were some issues with OpenCL. Not that I know what that means though :\ xD

Yeah, Intel IGP does not support OpenCL. It transfers load from CPU to GPU i.e. makes it possible for GPU to process CPU tasks. Not really useful for such low power GPUs as they aren't fast enough to speed things up and OpenCL is quite poorly supported.

Finally, I saw this: http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row/7

This blew my mind. Do you have any idea if there are newer tests and/or views regarding Sandy Bridge's IGP? Because this article sure looked promising...

Those are the best tests we've seen. Keep in mind that those tests were performed with desktop CPU with 6 EUs @850MHz, Turbo disabled and with beta drivers. Mobile parts are reported to have 12 EUs @650MHz and up to 1300MHz Turbo and of course better drivers. That means mobile CPUs should have greater graphics performance than what the CPU which was used in those tests have.

Time will show us

 

[wordoflife]

Who knows?

Maybe they'll leave the 2.66Ghz Core 2 Duo in the lower end Macbook Pro and use the i3 in the higher end Macbook Pro 13"

Or maybe the Macbooks will use the 2.66ghz core 2 duo and the Macbook Pros will run the ix line?

if they do that though, they will probably cannibalize the Macbook sales unless they drop the price.

 

[agfrg]

If that is possible, why didn't Apple go with iX + 320m then for the MBP 13'' last update?

Not that I'm questioning it being possible or not. I know it's possible in other 13'' computers (Sony Vaio Z). But wasn't Apple's excuse related to size?

Using an iX and a 320M in the same computer is as possible as using an Intel chipset with a PowerPC CPU.

The 320M is a Nvidia chipset, not a graphics card, that has an IGP. And Nvidia needs a license to produce chipsets for Intel processors and Intel says that the terms of that license don't allow Nvidia to produce chipsets for iX because those CPUs have integrated memory controllers instead of having them on the chipset. Because of this, the 320M chipset is not compatible with any of the Core iX CPUs.

It's not Apple's nor Nvidia's fault, it's Intel's fault and it should be considered as an anti-competitive move by Intel.

Apple said they kept the C2D in 13" MBP because there wasn't enough space on the motherboard to place a discrete GPU, just like in the 15" and 17" MBP, and they opted for the better graphics of the 320M instead of the better processor power offered by the Core i5/7.

 

[NintendoFan]

Yeah, Intel IGP does not support OpenCL. It transfers load from CPU to GPU i.e. makes it possible for GPU to process CPU tasks. Not really useful for such low power GPUs as they aren't fast enough to speed things up and OpenCL is quite poorly supported.



Those are the best tests we've seen. Keep in mind that those tests were performed with desktop CPU with 6 EUs @850MHz, Turbo disabled and with beta drivers. Mobile parts are reported to have 12 EUs @650MHz and up to 1300MHz Turbo and of course better drivers. That means mobile CPUs should have greater graphics performance than what the CPU which was used in those tests have.

Time will show us

It actually looks like it may have been a 12 EU, Anand has still yet to confirm.

 

[Blues003]

Yeah, Intel IGP does not support OpenCL. It transfers load from CPU to GPU i.e. makes it possible for GPU to process CPU tasks. Not really useful for such low power GPUs as they aren't fast enough to speed things up and OpenCL is quite poorly supported.

Those are the best tests we've seen. Keep in mind that those tests were performed with desktop CPU with 6 EUs @850MHz, Turbo disabled and with beta drivers. Mobile parts are reported to have 12 EUs @650MHz and up to 1300MHz Turbo and of course better drivers. That means mobile CPUs should have greater graphics performance than what the CPU which was used in those tests have.

Time will show us

That is awesome! So it does seem the Sandy Bridge set has some nice graphic powers. Any idea when new info will come out?

Also, I agree with you regarding the release date. The average of the last 4 or 5 MBP releases point to a January/February release, not a late-2010 one.

 

[Hellhammer]

It actually looks like it may have been a 12 EU, Anand has still yet to confirm.

Yeah, it has not been confirmed. We of course hope it's 6 EU part

That is awesome! So it does seem the Sandy Bridge set has some nice graphic powers. Any idea when new info will come out?

Haven't heard anything more about it. IDF was held two weeks ago but IIRC there was nothing interesting about the graphics. Hopefully soon.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

It's not Apple's nor Nvidia's fault, it's Intel's fault and it should be considered as an anti-competitive move by Intel.

This would be the perfect opportunity for AMD to step in and provide Apple with a quality power-efficient mobile CPU, giving Apple (and others) a choice of AMD or Nvidia graphics.