I thought that was the 32 nm shrink of Clarksfield (which is rumored for a similar time frame). Are you saying Arrandale will also have a quad-core variant?
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.
Core i7 in Upcoming MBP's??
- Thread starter Winter Charm
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The next revision will probably be for the back to school season (around July - Sept) and feature some bumps. Nothing spectacular. If Apple plays the predictable hand:
- MacBooks at 2.13 GHz and 2.53 GHz
- MBP at 2.66 GHz (or 2.53 GHz if Apple still wants to be a cheapskate), 2.8 GHz and BTO of 3.06 GHz.
Wouldn't 2.26 and 2.53 be more logical for MacBooks?
Doubt it. The 2.26 GHz model is more expensive than the new 2.13 GHz model. That and giving the low-end model as low a clock speed as possible is good marketing as people tend to jump for the high-end model more easily. If it was 2.26 GHz and 2.53 GHz most people would think it's too close together to justify the extra $300.
Huh, I thought people would have forgotten...
Yes, I did. It's been sitting at home since Thursday. I, however, am not sitting at home, but am on campus. It's annoying. I will be returning home over Easter to be united with my Mac Pro, at which time I will port my files and install my extra GT 120, BD-RE DL/HD DVD-ROM drive, and Windows 7 64-bit.
I'm psyched.
Congrats man, I bet your eager as hell to actually go home. I would be.
Not sure if you can drive down but I would if I were you, just to go pick up the mac pro.
You not holding out for a surprise announcement from Intel Tallest Skil?
I don't think Intel does surprise announcements. AFAIK they publish their roadmaps.
Most speed differentiations are less than 267 MHz. If Apple decides to go closer, then they'll change other specs to give the $300 difference.
Can't really differentiate that much on the MacBook's though. Bumping the high-end to 4 GBs RAM is an option, but would add massively to Apple's cost. I don't think Apple would be too keen on offering different graphics cards and the Hard Drive can only be differentiated so much without going beyond the MBP. With the MBP, they've got the graphics card, RAM and Hard Drive to differentiate as well as the L2 cache in the processor.
The current MacBook has a dual .4 GHz difference and I think they'll roughly maintain that going into the next revision.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-10221737-64.html
The Intel graphic seems to have Arrandale as 2009 release?
The Intel graphic seems to have Arrandale as 2009 release?