Core i7 (Nehalem) Based MacBook Pros Possible in Q4 2009?

[chrmjenkins]

Just a clarification, if a 45nm core i7 mobile variant skips the MB and MBP pro line, we're talking about Westmere. Westmere, like penryn, is a die shrink of a previous architecture technology.

For example, penryn was largely the same as merom in architecture, but featured a die shrink from 65nm to 45nm (with some improvements, like some SSE4 instructions).

Similarly, westmere will be a 32nm shrink of the 45nm nehalem core, but with some minor enhancements, such as encryption/decryption instructions.

This would also be the first time that a processor with an integrated graphics controller and quickpath technology would show up in any macbook variant.

Be aware that Q4 09 for any macbook update is highly unlikely. Apple doesn't typically update here (october would be too early to get these chips). Also be aware Intel is prepared to push back the release of the Calpella platform in order to ensure montevina inventory is cleared out and the economy will show favor to its new platform.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/10/intel-demos-first-ever-32nm-processors/

http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/10/intel-puts-the-freeze-on-notebook-prices-ponders-calpella-delay/

 

[Tallest Skil]

Am I SERIOUSLY the first one to say this?

It isn't Core i7 if it is laptop Nehalem, it isn't Core i7 if it's Arrandale, it isn't Nehalem if it's Arrandale Westmere, and it isn't Core i7 if it's Westmere!

I don't get it. Core i7 is the desktop enthusiast chip.

Core i5 is the standard desktop chip.

Laptop Nehalem, Clarksfield, would probably be Core i4 or i3, and Arrandale isn't even Nehalem, so it wouldn't necessarily follow this naming convention!

Why create even more confusion?

 

[chrmjenkins]

Am I SERIOUSLY the first one to say this?

It isn't Core i7 if it is laptop Nehalem, it isn't Core i7 if it's Arrandale, it isn't Nehalem if it's Arrandale Westmere, and it isn't Core i7 if it's Westmere!

I don't get it. Core i7 is the desktop enthusiast chip.

Core i5 is the standard desktop chip.

Laptop Nehalem, Clarksfield, would probably be Core i4 or i3, and Arrandale isn't even Nehalem, so it wouldn't necessarily follow this naming convention!

Why create even more confusion?

For now, it's the only point of reference. When you talk about what's out there in terms of nehalem, you're talking about core i7. Not everyone understands that the new architecture is referred to as nehalem, but they can sure see the "core i7" logo slapped on all the chip labels.

There's not really anyway to avoid the confusion with code names and official names for architectures, platforms, and architecture revisions.

 

[Tallest Skil]

For now, it's the only point of reference. When you talk about what's out there in terms of nehalem, you're talking about core i7. Not everyone understands that the new architecture is referred to as nehalem, but they can sure see the "core i7" logo slapped on all the chip labels.

There's not really anyway to avoid the confusion with code names and official names for architectures, platforms, and architecture revisions.

What's so hard about saying, "It'll have Clarksfield," instead of, "It'll have Core i7."?

"Wow, a laptop with a gaming desktop chip?!"

"Well, no, the laptop version..."

"So it's not Core i7?"

"No."

"Lame."

 

[tibi08]

It isn't Core i7 if it is laptop Nehalem, it isn't Core i7 if it's Arrandale, it isn't Nehalem if it's Arrandale Westmere?

Not sure about this bit.... Arrandale, a Westmere variant, is built on the Nehalem microarchitecture.

I think Intel have brought all this confusion upon themselves!

 

[chrmjenkins]

What's so hard about saying, "It'll have Clarksfield," instead of, "It'll have Core i7."?

"Wow, a laptop with a gaming desktop chip?!"

"Well, no, the laptop version..."

"So it's not Core i7?"

"No."

"Lame."

I've been through many a patient discussion with people about merom, penryn, centrino 2, montevina etc. to know the only thing you can hope to do is explain it to them in terms of what they know.

 

[Tallest Skil]

Not sure about this bit.... Arrandale, a Westmere variant, is built on the Nehalem microarchitecture.

I think Intel have brought all this confusion upon themselves!

Westmere is the shrink of Nehalem, just as Penryn was the shrink of the first Core 2.

 

[tibi08]

Westmere is the shrink of Nehalem, just as Penryn was the shrink of the first Core 2.

Right... but you said "it isn't Nehalem if it's Arrandale Westmere"

 

[chrmjenkins]

Right... but you said "it isn't Nehalem if it's Arrandale Westmere"

He meant i7 again

 

[Tallest Skil]

Right... but you said "it isn't Nehalem if it's Arrandale Westmere"

It's not Nehalem, though. People don't call Penryn "Core", do they?

I mean, sure, we say "Core 2 Duo", but...

Okay, fine, it's Nehalem. It's not Nehalem Nehalem; it's Westmere Nehalem. Better?

I'll answer that: yes, it is. A lot less confusing.

Intel just needs to call successive releases: One, Two, Three, etc.

"I have a dual-core One processor, which is on par with a single-core Two processor..."

Stuff like that.

Oh, but keep the "-field" names for the Xeons. Those are cool.

 

[tibi08]

He meant i7 again

Shows how confusing it is when Tallest Skil gets it wrong too

 

[chrmjenkins]

It's not Nehalem, though. People don't call Penryn "Core", do they?

I mean, sure, we say "Core 2 Duo", but...

Okay, fine, it's Nehalem. It's not Nehalem Nehalem; it's Westmere Nehalem. Better?

I'll answer that: yes, it is. A lot less confusing.

Intel just needs to call successive releases: One, Two, Three, etc.

"I have a dual-core One processor, which is on par with a single-core Two processor..."

Stuff like that.

Oh, but keep the "-field" names for the Xeons. Those are cool.

We say Core 2 Duo because we know the actual product name. Before that, we only know merom, so there's an inherent difficulty built in when you transition from code name to product name.

If apple keeps nvidia chipsets, at least some of the confusion will be obscured.

 

[Tallest Skil]

We say Core 2 Duo because we know the actual product name. Before that, we only know merom, so there's an inherent difficulty built in when you transition from code name to product name.

If apple keeps nvidia chipsets, at least some of the confusion will be obscured.

The last sentence is truth...

At least we won't have people trying to call chipsets processors. Remember how many people thought that the new (now current) line of MacBooks would have Montevina "processors"?

And, yeah, it's quite confusing. I always just go with codenames until a real one is announced, which tempers the mixups quite a bit.

Unless you don't know the codenames.

 

[tibi08]

The last sentence is truth...

At least we won't have people trying to call chipsets processors. Remember how many people thought that the new (now current) line of MacBooks would have Montevina "processors"?

And, yeah, it's quite confusing. I always just go with codenames until a real one is announced, which tempers the mixups quite a bit.

Unless you don't know the codenames.

Arn did get it wrong tho - the name of this news item suggests that Core i7 is Nehalem... whereas it should be Core ix, or something, I guess...

 

[chrmjenkins]

The last sentence is truth...

At least we won't have people trying to call chipsets processors. Remember how many people thought that the new (now current) line of MacBooks would have Montevina "processors"?

And, yeah, it's quite confusing. I always just go with codenames until a real one is announced, which tempers the mixups quite a bit.

Unless you don't know the codenames.

Well, the problem is, there WAS a new set of processors rolled out when montevina hit. Still penryn and still the same naming convention, but new FSB speeds to match the new platform

Then we start talking about letter pre-fixes to explain TDP. *explode*

 

[Tallest Skil]

Arn did get it wrong tho - the name of this news item suggests that Core i7 is Clarksfield... whereas it should be Core ix, or something, I guess...

Fixed for further clarification.

Well, the problem is, there WAS a new set of processors rolled out when montevina hit. Still penryn and still the same naming convention, but new FSB speeds to match the new platform

Yep, just the lack of naming them Montevina led to confusion.

To that guy below me: Buy now. We won't see Nehalem MacBooks until October at the EARLIEST and Westmere MacBooks until Spring 2010 at the EARLIEST.

 

[rrijkers]

So do I buy now or do I wait?

 

[PygmySurfer]

How could Intel releasing processors in Q4 2009 indicate that these processors will make it into Apple products in 2009? I simply do not see the connection. If anything, the Q4 2009 release of these processors points to a possible 2010 Apple product launch. Why pervert the post with such an baseless headline?

Core Duo was launched in January '06, Apple started shipping the MacBook and MacBook Pro in February. Apple has a very close relationship with Intel, you can be sure they're already working together to get these products out ASAP.

 

[RebootD]

We say Core 2 Duo because we know the actual product name. Before that, we only know merom, so there's an inherent difficulty built in when you transition from code name to product name.

If apple keeps nvidia chipsets, at least some of the confusion will be obscured.

I can't believe we just had 2/3 of a page of responses about what to call a processor. Their naming schemes are overly confusing and I never understood why you can't have one name for desktop, one for mobile and one for server. That way we can just say 'the upcoming "insert name here" line." Core i7(mainstream desktop) Core i7-crippled-but-cheaper, Core i7-Xeon, and Core i7-mobile.

If 99% of the users want to call it Core i7, Nehalem or Bob does it really matter? It seems everyone just refers to the 'new chip line' from intel as core i7 or nehalem. I'm sticking with Bob.

 

[chrmjenkins]

Core Duo was launched in January '06, Apple started shipping the MacBook and MacBook Pro in February. Apple has a very close relationship with Intel, you can be sure they're already working together to get these products out ASAP.

This article is specifically referring to westmere stuff, and we have to have 45nm mobile nehalem variants before we can start talking about westmere. We won't see westmere until 2010 in an apple product.

edit: More information on here:
http://www.dailytech.com/Intel+Repl...rndale+With+32nm+Die+Shrinks/article14225.htm

 

[tibi08]

If 99% of the users want to call it Core i7, Nehalem or Bob does it really matter?

Yes.... it gives me something to talk about while I sit around for the next 12 months waiting for a NOT Core i7 Macbook to come out!

 

[jackfrost123]

They probably have the ceo's nephew or something at the naming and marketing dept. at intel and he made a right mess of them.

You change to a new architecture, you give it ONE name and use an adjunct moniker for enthusiast,mobile,desktop chips etc....that' ll confuse the heck out of a lot of people just because some marketing morons messed it up.

Btw, to clarify the confusion we had a nice discussion at the mba forum a few days ago search for mab roadmap intel there.

 

[NYCMacFan]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

I hope this pans out. I would also like to see a desktop processor in the iMac line as well.

Yeah. What happened to the reports that they were running out of imacs and an refresh was "imminent".

 

[AidenShaw]

Not sure about this bit.... Arrandale, a Westmere variant, is built on the Nehalem microarchitecture.

I think Intel have brought all this confusion upon themselves!

Intel's not confused, all the Apple fans are because of people making word salads of various codenames for future minor (and not so minor) CPUs.

"Core i7" is the only Nehalem chip for sale, so saying "Core i7 mobile", while not quite correct - is clearly understandable.

Once the chips are available for sale, and have clear marketing names, it won't be so confusing - you'll know what i3/i5/i7 mean.

 

[rasmasyean]

32-nanometer chips on the horizon! Woohoo!

Intel to Launch 32-Nanometer CPUs by September 2009
http://www.pcworld.com/article/159294/article.html?tk=nl_dnxnws

Obama Lauds Intel Plan to Invest $7B in Chip Plants
http://www.pcworld.com/article/159291/article.html?tk=nl_dnxnws

Are you ready for the Oct Core Macbook Nano?