It sucks if Apple keeps going with Core 2 Duos. Good thing is that Arrandale contains two dies, the CPU and the GPU so it's easier to manufacture one without the GPU than if they were on the same die.
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 to Skip Intel Arrandale? Demands Alternative Chip?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Things to note as this jives with things I've heard.
By the way Apple has a lot of pull here. The last thing Intel needs is Apple on record as saying that Arrandale can't cut the mustard. Beyond that AMD does have very viable chips to compete with Arrandale especially when GPU quality is factored in.
In the end though it should be easy for Intel to deliver something for the general market here. It doesn't have to even be an Apple specific chip. As the subject indicates the rumor mill has already indicated that such a chip is coming.
Dave
- I've heard in the past that an Arrandale variant without the IGP was coming. For some markets it just makes sense.
- The Arrandale is apparently a multichip module so removal of the GPU should be relatively easy
- The big problem with GPU removal is what do you have left with respect to pin I/O. If the IGP interface is PCI Express like a simple solution might be to add a buffer chip/line driver to take the signals outside the chip module.
- If you have no intention at all for using the IGP then it becomes a power burden. The last thing you would want in a processor for portables is dead power draw. It would be pretty much dead power draw because last I knew Intel GPUs can even handle OpenCL code.
By the way Apple has a lot of pull here. The last thing Intel needs is Apple on record as saying that Arrandale can't cut the mustard. Beyond that AMD does have very viable chips to compete with Arrandale especially when GPU quality is factored in.
In the end though it should be easy for Intel to deliver something for the general market here. It doesn't have to even be an Apple specific chip. As the subject indicates the rumor mill has already indicated that such a chip is coming.
Dave
It depends on what a bios-disable of the IGP actually means - if it completely switches it off and stops it drawing any power at all then that's probably good enough - then the onus is on nVidia to create a GPU suitable for the 13"/mini (the 9400m has the chipset built into it).
The way Apple is going with OS-X needs a decent GPU to carry out OpenCL instructions - thus using an Intel IGP for "simple" tasks may not cut it.
The way Apple is going with OS-X needs a decent GPU to carry out OpenCL instructions - thus using an Intel IGP for "simple" tasks may not cut it.
I think they would. Quad core Clarksfield isn't the most appropriate for most of the MacBook lineup given the 45W TDP and there are only 2 models with that TDP, which isn't enough to fill a whole lineup. And once Arrandale is released, the Nehalem lineup would be complete and fully replaced Core 2 Penryns.
I also don't understand the need to completely rip out the IGP. There are 2 dies, but the memory controller and PCIe controller appear to be integrated in into the IGP die (it's basically a full northbridge), so taking out the IGP die requires a major redesign. Quad core Nehalems have the memory controller integrated into the actual CPU die, but I believe the MC is in the IGP die in Arrandale for more efficient memory bandwidth for the IGP. The IGP could of course be easily disabled and the TDP used elsewhere. What's more, if the point is to use discrete graphics, even low-end ones, that's still possible with the IGP intact, and Intel supports dynamic GPU switching between IGP and nVidia and ATI graphics cards. And it's not like their is a nVidia alternative IGP for Arrandale. It is a very peculiar request.
Lower Power Clarksfield
Intel does have a non-hobbled laptop version of the i7 called Clarksfield... it just gobbles power. I think it would be much more likely that Apple would ask for low power versions of Clarksfield than a redesign of Arrandale.
Clarksfield
The CPU part of Arrandale isn't much faster than the Core2. All Intel would need to make Clarksfield acceptable is clock it lower and certify it at those lower speed. Even at much lower clock speeds it would wipe the floor with Arrandale.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarksfield_(microprocessor)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrandale_(microprocessor)
Intel does have a non-hobbled laptop version of the i7 called Clarksfield... it just gobbles power. I think it would be much more likely that Apple would ask for low power versions of Clarksfield than a redesign of Arrandale.
Clarksfield
- 4 core
- no IGP
- 45W to 55W <- PROBLEM
- 2 core <- PROBLEM
- crappy IGP <- PROBLEM
- 18W to 35W
The CPU part of Arrandale isn't much faster than the Core2. All Intel would need to make Clarksfield acceptable is clock it lower and certify it at those lower speed. Even at much lower clock speeds it would wipe the floor with Arrandale.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarksfield_(microprocessor)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrandale_(microprocessor)
A lower clock speed Clarksfield would likely be a performance decrease from current dual core Core 2 Duos when running dual threaded applications which is the most common operating scenario. The current slowest Clarksfield already runs at a slow 1.6GHz and can only Turbo up to 2.67GHz when running dual cores which would be slower than current 2.8GHz and 3.06GHz high-end dual cores. Needing even lower clock speeds to fit the 35W TDP, will be even worse.
Personally, I think this fuss about Intel IGPs is a good way for Apple to get Intel to write OpenCL drivers for their Arrandale IGPs. I doubt Apple is too concerned about raw IGP performance, but Apple would certainly be concerned about selling a new Mac without OpenCL support. A reasonable compromise, instead of ripping out the IGP would be for Intel to write OpenCL drivers not only for their GPU but also for the CPU. Currently, AMD includes both CPU and GPU OpenCL drivers with their graphics cards, while nVidia only includes GPU OpenCL drivers since they don't make CPUs. If Intel were to provide both CPU and IGP drivers for OpenCL, the installed OpenCL compatible base would suddenly increase several fold. Moreover, if Apple can convince Intel to release OpenCL drivers as a priority over DirectCompute drivers, that'll also give OpenCL a decisive early advantage.
This is likely a good thing, but I'm bummed because I was hoping for the new MBPs in January.
I don't see how anyone can see this as a good thing. If true, you can forget a new laptop refresh of any significance for at least 9 more months. You just don't spin a new chipset out of thin air. These things take a lot of time to design, simulate, fix the bugs in the simulation, loop till it all looks good. Spin the ASICs, motherboard, test it in the lap, respin that ASIC that had bugs, test in lap ----> build in manufacturing, send to Apple, Apple repackages and sends to their manufacturing partners in China.
Is there such a thing as too much technology?
Jeeze, what a tangled web we weave.......
Motorola would have consulted Apple first and nothing would have been created without Apple's input.
Intel will come to regret Apple's patronage. But, who can blame Apple I guess?
Rich
Jeeze, what a tangled web we weave.......
Motorola would have consulted Apple first and nothing would have been created without Apple's input.
Intel will come to regret Apple's patronage. But, who can blame Apple I guess?
Rich
Steve: Take off the GPU.
Intel: No.
Steve: Take off the GPU and I wont kneecap you.
Intel: Yes sir.
Gimme HD 5xxx MacBook Pros!Best case scenario
Worst case scenario
But they need to update the GPUs on the iMac too.
You won't... and if anything this would make it more plausible without a worthless integrated graphics chip adding heat/wattage.
Good move on Apple's part for once, I was really hoping this would happen.
Intel GPU sucks!
Why
don't want to have this crappy GPU inside the Arrandale?
Because it will reduce the prices!!! And we don't need it. Just NVidia.
R e m e m b e r . . .
A T I & A M D & I n t e l G P U & W i n d o w s s u c k s !
I n t e l C P U & N V i d i a & M a c & r u l e s !
Why
don't want to have this crappy GPU inside the Arrandale?Because it will reduce the prices!!!
And we don't need it. Just NVidia. R e m e m b e r . . .
A T I & A M D & I n t e l G P U & W i n d o w s s u c k s !
I n t e l C P U & N V i d i a & M a c &
r u l e s !
I don't have much faith in BrightSideofNews but it will be interesting to see what Apple does since we've been discussing it for ages.
Why
Because it will reduce the prices!!!
Apple could claim disability benefits
Intel would be wise to conform to Apple's request. The MBPs sell like hotcakes. I can definitely see a future 13" MBP having two options (much like the 15") with an integrated and one with a discrete graphics card.
2 cores is plenty for 90% of users. 95%. 4-core performance isn't even taken advantage of in most apps.