Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Shifting to Intel Graphics for Future MacBooks and 13-Inch MacBook Pros?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't know about everyone else but I have been assuming this for months. I have been putting off a new laptop purchase in order to wait for Sandy Bridge 13" MBPs. I wasn't going to accept buying a 5 year old Core 2 processor.
Sandy Bridge will bring along huge overall performance gains and a good improvement in power efficiency / battery life.
I hope the new 13" MBPs have the 1440x900 resolution screen from the new 13" MBA standard with an option for 1680x1050. Or just give me 1680x1050 standard its what I want anyway. I'll take more screen resolution any day of the week and the 1280x800 screens on the current models are outdated.
Sandy Bridge will bring along huge overall performance gains and a good improvement in power efficiency / battery life.
I hope the new 13" MBPs have the 1440x900 resolution screen from the new 13" MBA standard with an option for 1680x1050. Or just give me 1680x1050 standard its what I want anyway. I'll take more screen resolution any day of the week and the 1280x800 screens on the current models are outdated.
Troll
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row/7
Anandtech published this info on 27. Aug. 2010. Enough time for you to read it.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row/7
Anandtech published this info on 27. Aug. 2010. Enough time for you to read it.
That should be with only 6 execution units as well on the IGP. All mobile processors have 12.
This is all about the $'s , crappy intel integrated = big savings (wonder if this will be passed over to the buyer 
)
)
I thinketh you expecteth too much, both from SandyBridge and 1680x1050 (more chance of biting your own arse then Apple putting that res in 13")
Are you kidding me? If the MBP13 '11 comes with a IGP from Intel, I will definitely stay far away.
First of all, the resolution is going up. That right there is already going to effect the performance of the machine. Now you want me to take a 15% hit on the GPU side? Screw you. The 320M is barely acceptable, anything less is a big mistake.
First of all, the resolution is going up. That right there is already going to effect the performance of the machine. Now you want me to take a 15% hit on the GPU side? Screw you. The 320M is barely acceptable, anything less is a big mistake.
Intel's OpenCL status is dead last
AMD and Apple have CPU/GPGPU 1.1 support for OpenCL.
Intel is just now releasing an sdk for a first beta for their CPUs.
AMD and Apple have CPU/GPGPU 1.1 support for OpenCL.
Intel is just now releasing an sdk for a first beta for their CPUs.
It's going to be real nice paying top dollar for a graphics downgrade. Good move Intel, blocking out nVidia from the market was sure sweet for the consumer.
*hugs his nVidia equipped Air*
However...
Graphics processors haven't had any problems running high resolutions for quite some time already. Let's face it, double-buffered, 32 bit RGBA 1440x900 requires about 10 MB of RAM, there's nothing spectular about the processing capabilities required to drive and process that small of a dataset.
*hugs his nVidia equipped Air*
However...
Graphics processors haven't had any problems running high resolutions for quite some time already. Let's face it, double-buffered, 32 bit RGBA 1440x900 requires about 10 MB of RAM, there's nothing spectular about the processing capabilities required to drive and process that small of a dataset.
I don't give a crap as long as video playback is smooth. I'd rather have a processor boost than a rockin' graphics card.
IF VIDEO PLAYBACK IS NICE, then who gives a crap about gaming etc. If you need huge video capabilities for work, get a Mac Pro (you gotta be willing to pay HUGE for that). Otherwise, give me the better processor.
Flame away.
IF VIDEO PLAYBACK IS NICE, then who gives a crap about gaming etc. If you need huge video capabilities for work, get a Mac Pro (you gotta be willing to pay HUGE for that). Otherwise, give me the better processor.
Flame away.
Without an nVidia GPU, Apple will be removing the "Pro" from the 13" MacBook Pro.
I have never heard good things from Intel GPUs. A lot of games will not work on them.
This is all about the $'s , crappy intel integrated = big savings (wonder if this will be passed over to the buyer
Apple never has in the past taken shortcuts just to reduce the price, and i doubt they'll start now. The sandybridge processor + a competitive integrated graphics solution from intel, is most likely going to perform better overall than the core2 duo plus nvidia graphics, so i imagine this will be a step up in performance. Remember, the GPU isn't all that matters, and the Core2 Duo is a rather old chip at this point.
Believe it or not, Intel knows this too, and has improved their offering substantially.
I think your missing Apples quiet move to a more mass market audience. The iOS revolution is bringing more and more switchers. Look at the price drops with the new Air for example. I think this is all about getting cheaper entry level notebooks into the line up.
I was wondering: It´s been a while since OpenCL has been introduced as one killer feature. Is there any app out there making use of it? If so what are the performance benefits (if quantifiable)
cxc
This stupid push to make all these products thinner is the source of this problem. Not some intel / nvidia licensing dispute.
Make the MBA thin. That's what it's supposed to be. But the regular Macbook and the MBP would be much better machines if they were just a few mm thicker. They'd be able to support all the current chips, just like the peecee laptops do. The MBP, if just a hair thicker, would be able to use a nice fast GPU, instead of the watered-down midrange GPU's that the past few MBP's have been equipped with.
Enough with this pointless "thin" crap! Function dictates form, not the other way around!
Make the MBA thin. That's what it's supposed to be. But the regular Macbook and the MBP would be much better machines if they were just a few mm thicker. They'd be able to support all the current chips, just like the peecee laptops do. The MBP, if just a hair thicker, would be able to use a nice fast GPU, instead of the watered-down midrange GPU's that the past few MBP's have been equipped with.
Enough with this pointless "thin" crap! Function dictates form, not the other way around!
Execpt for the fact that, like I said, there should be a real noticeable speed increase too? If Intel's solution is about on par with the 320m, that can only mean the future for intel graphics is much brighter than its past is.
Everytime intel release an attempt at a GPU they always spout all these great bench scores, but the reality is always the same. CPU performance will be increased but the int GPU will be the same used on £300 notebooks so don't expect miracles.
I'm sorry, but i can't stand people who use the past to prove what will happen in the future. It just doesn't work that way. I'm sure intel knows as well as anyone how terrible their GPUs are, and apple refusing to use them probably helped a lot. Please post a link of these rumored "benchmarks" too, assuming they're from a reliable source. All the reliable benchmarks I've seen have proven how terrible intel graphics are. But like i said, this new GPU should be competitive with at least the 9400m, and maybe the 320m.
You can't stand me? You don't know me, to generate these feelings from a few posts on an internet forum is more than a little odd
Time will tell I guess, but I'm not confident.