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

Any ideas about the next wave of Macbook Pros?

F

farkasam

macrumors member
Original poster
Apr 10, 2009
71
2
New York
Hi All,

Has anyone heard about when the next wave of Macbook(Pros) may be released? In the "Buying Guide" here it says that it's been about 177 days since the last update (the big one w/ unibody etc.) and the average product cycle is around 190 days. Any information is appreciated, I'm doing some relatively demanding data analysis and image manipulation and could use the processing power and nicer display.

Thanks,

-2.0-gHz MacBook (Black), 1G RAM, 80G harddrive
 
Penryn speed bumps (133 MHz), other upgrades in the next few months. This update is quite possible.

Then, Arrandale (Nehalem) in H1 2010 with other upgrades.

Clarksfield (quad-core Nehalem) is coming in Q3 2009 however it may be unsuitable for the MacBook Pro for several reasons, so it may not be used.
 
I know this gets asked a lot around here regarding product updates and such, but here goes... :)

I'm looking at buying a new Mac at some point before September, and the MacBook Pro is the one I'm looking at.

What's really different between the current processors and the new Nehalem processors that are going to be coming out soon? Will they really make that much of a difference?

FYI, when I bought my iMac G5, two weeks later Apple came out with the iSight built-in version... :eek:
 
iMacmatician said:
Penryn speed bumps (133 MHz), other upgrades in the next few months. This update is quite possible.

Then, Arrandale (Nehalem) in H1 2010 with other upgrades.

Clarksfield (quad-core Nehalem) is coming in Q3 2009 however it may be unsuitable for the MacBook Pro for several reasons, so it may not be used.
Click to expand...

Agree with all 3 points.
 
monke said:
I'm looking at buying a new Mac at some point before September, and the MacBook Pro is the one I'm looking at.

What's really different between the current processors and the new Nehalem processors that are going to be coming out soon? Will they really make that much of a difference?

FYI, when I bought my iMac G5, two weeks later Apple came out with the iSight built-in version... :eek:
Click to expand...

Haha, I know how you feel about the iMac G5. That update came out of nowhere and caught everyone off guard.

As good old iMacmatician said, there should be a Penryn speed bump fairly soonish for the back-to-school season as Intel drops their prices.

Intel's 2.8 GHz C2D will drop to the same price as the current 2.66 GHz model they use in the MBP. So it's reasonable to expect the 2.8 GHz as the high-end option and the new 3.06 GHz processor as BTO. The low-end MBP will probably get the 2.53 GHz or 2.66 GHz processor (probably retaining the smaller 3 MB L2 cache too).

As for Nehalem, Intel's saying Q4 2009 (for mobile 32nm processors), but I think it's optimistic to expect it in an Apple notebook before the New Year. Intel say they'll hit the Christmas market with enough supply of 32nm processors, but time will tell. Whether it'll provide a big boost, no-one can really say without seeing benchmarks. They are hyper-threaded so a dual-core is quad-thread capable. I'll be buying around September too and if it's urgent it may be best to buy when you need it and then wait for the successor to the Nehalem microarchitecture (e.g. Sandy Bridge). You can take comfort in the fact that Intel themselves said clock speeds on Arrandale will be very similar to what we have on current processors too.
 
Just another point of note to consider is the expected release of Snow Leopard in Q4 2009. With all its optimizations and lower consumption of system resources, should go hand and glove if Calpella (aka Nehalem Mobile) manage to arrive around the same time. Though like others suggest it's looking more like wishful thinking to see Apple use them before the new year since it probably means a case redesign.
 
iMacmatician said:
Penryn speed bumps (133 MHz), other upgrades in the next few months. This update is quite possible.

Then, Arrandale (Nehalem) in H1 2010 with other upgrades.

Clarksfield (quad-core Nehalem) is coming in Q3 2009 however it may be unsuitable for the MacBook Pro for several reasons, so it may not be used.
Click to expand...
Nehalem is a different architecture and requires a different chipset. So a Nehalem Macbook Pro would require a complete (technical) redesign. I don't see them doing that as a minor model update. Expect Apple to stick with Penryn until a real laptop version of the Nehalem architecture (Arrendale) is released by Intel.
 
how long would one expect?
im semi in the market for a new laptop, i can hold out till the yr end and possibly edging to a yr from now max, but im fast running out of room on this lappy and would like a upgrade anyway, if the wait would be worth it, i could hold out

im currently using a macbook air 1.8 64 ssd, ( rev a )
 
wolfie said:
how long would one expect?
im semi in the market for a new laptop, i can hold out till the yr end and possibly edging to a yr from now max, but im fast running out of room on this lappy and would like a upgrade anyway, if the wait would be worth it, i could hold out

im currently using a macbook air 1.8 64 ssd, ( rev a )
Click to expand...
Late 2009 (if it uses Clarksfield) or H1 2010 (if it uses Clarksfield and Auburndale or only Auburndale). Usually Mac updates are released some time after the chips' initial release, although there have been exceptions.
 
As far as updates go, why isn't anyone talking about a new battery in the 15" MBP?

Wouldn't it make sense that we see an adapted version of the new longer-life battery that's currently in the 17" released soon? I raise this because I'm also trying to time my upgrade from my current MBP to the new unibody

(I've got some monitor questions too, if anyone cares to weigh in on that).
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/682551/
 
jdebeer said:
As far as updates go, why isn't anyone talking about a new battery in the 15" MBP?

Wouldn't it make sense that we see an adapted version of the new longer-life battery that's currently in the 17" released soon? I raise this because I'm also trying to time my upgrade from my current MBP to the new unibody

(I've got some monitor questions too, if anyone cares to weigh in on that).
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/682551/
Click to expand...
There have been speculation on the new battery in other threads. I agree that the long-life battery will make its way to the whole notebook line in time, just like the multi-touch trackpad. I think the 15" MacBook Pro and MacBook Air will get it their next revisions and the MacBook at its next revision or sometime later.
 
jdebeer said:
As far as updates go, why isn't anyone talking about a new battery in the 15" MBP?

Wouldn't it make sense that we see an adapted version of the new longer-life battery that's currently in the 17" released soon? I raise this because I'm also trying to time my upgrade from my current MBP to the new unibody
Click to expand...

i don't think so, since a 15" laptop is much more likely to be away from a power source for longer periods than a 17"...so people will REALLY complain if they can't swap batteries. i don't think Apple can make a swappable one, because part of making the battery larger was removing the bits and pieces that made it removable.

i figure the matte option will trickle down from the 17".
 
What's it going to mean to most of us? I mean, really...

I'm mildly curious about the new chips, but how much of a difference are they going to make to most of us already using current macs?

And by most of us, I mean mac users who use their computers for every day consumer purposes: browsing, email, iWork, iLife, iWhatever. Those of us who don't make a living squeezing every processor cycle to do FCP, etc. I dare to say most of us only challenge our current systems when we occasionally encode a video every once in a while.

I realize that 10.6 is the great unknown, and promises to harness every nook and cranny of the processors and graphics cards to deliver increased speed and performance to everyday computing tasks. But it's not here yet, and until it is, I regard SL's promises as just promises. That being said, I hope I'll be pleasantly surprised.

One of the things I've liked about macs when I switched in 03, during the swan years of the ppc era, was that they seemed to have escaped the forced upgrade cycle treadmill present in windows machine. "Oh no, they now have the pentium 4!!! I just have to buy a new system now!!!" I knew a couple of longtime mac users who were contently making a living writing articles on their two or three year old machines.

I think the windows upgrade mentality has transplanted itself into a lot of mac users. Witness the constant threads on the boards from people asking if they should sell their 2.33 ghz core2duo macbook pros to buy a 2.66 ghz core 2 duo unibody macbook pro.

These people get it in their heads that their year old machines somehow won't meet their needs and feel compelled to dump them on craigslist for a disc-come to think of it, disregard everything I said. Keep buying new machines every eight to eighteen months and selling your old ones. Just make sure they have Applecare on them, okay? :D
 
dmmcintyre3 said:
1680x1050 screen on 15 inch too.
Click to expand...

I would absolutely go nuts if Apple did a 15" MBP with 1680x1050. That's my biggest request right now as most of my work is very screen real estate intensive and that little bit extra resolution would mean I wouldn't have to pay an extra £600 for the 17" MBP.

toxic said:
i don't think so, since a 15" laptop is much more likely to be away from a power source for longer periods than a 17"...so people will REALLY complain if they can't swap batteries. i don't think Apple can make a swappable one, because part of making the battery larger was removing the bits and pieces that made it removable.
Click to expand...

I think they'll do it anyway. If not, at least add the techniques they use for additional cycles. That and the current 15" MBP lasts for about 4 hours under regular use (5 hours max). If Apple gets it to at least 7 hours I'm sure most people would be happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back