Current MacBook Pro Models Deleted From Best Buy's Inventory System? Updates Imminent?

[sth]

Thats the thing about optimus, how efficient would it actually be? With PowerXpress it isnt broken because AMD update a chipset. Each time Intel update their chipset nVidia would have to play catch up.

Eeeer... the only ways Intel could "break" Optimus would be either by encrypting the Framebuffer or by giving their graphics chips dedicated video memory. But besides that: What benefit would Intel have from doing that (breaking Optimus)?

Anyway: No matter if PowerXpress works or not: It requires an ATI chipset, which requires an AMD CPU. And if Apple wanted to switch to AMD, they could just as well stay with C2D.

 

[MorphingDragon]

Eeeer... the only ways Intel could "break" Optimus would be either by encrypting the Framebuffer or by giving their graphics chips dedicated video memory. But besides that: What benefit would Intel have from doing that (breaking Optimus)?

Anyway: No matter if PowerXpress works or not: It requires an ATI chipset, which requires an AMD CPU. And if Apple wanted to switch to AMD, they could just as well stay with C2D.

Im not meaning Intentionally. Depending how robust optimus is, a small change could effect everything.

Why stay with C2D? The Turion II series outperforms C2D and provides a better overall solution.

 

[AidenShaw]

Eeeer... the only ways Intel could "break" Optimus would be either by encrypting the Framebuffer or by giving their graphics chips dedicated video memory. But besides that: What benefit would Intel have from doing that (breaking Optimus)?

Another important part of this is that Intel quite rarely changes
their chipsets. Literally, about as often as they make major
changes to CPU architecture.

 

[sth]

Why stay with C2D? The Turion II series outperforms C2D and provides a better overall solution.

I can't find any benchmarks that back up that claim. But that said, I can hardly find any benchmarks/comparisons at all of that CPU.

The only site I can find that lists at least some performance numbers for the lastest (2009) Turions is http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html
They only have CineBench there but in that benchmark, the highest-end Turion (M660, 35W TDP) can't keep up with the C2Ds at all, neither single- nor multi-threaded. Even the mid-range, lower power (25W TDP), 2.53ghz C2D currently used in the base 15" MBP, beats AMDs range-topper.

If you can find better benchmarks, please post them here. I'd love to be proven wrong since I'd love to see some real competition again between AMD and Intel.

 

[DesmoPilot]

Why stay with C2D? The Turion II series outperforms C2D and provides a better overall solution.

Better question; why stay with C2D? Why not play catchup and get some i3/5/7s in already. It's laughable that Apple expects people to pay $2k+ for C2D based notebooks.

 

[MorphingDragon]

I can't find any benchmarks that back up that claim. But that said, I can hardly find any benchmarks/comparisons at all of that CPU.

The only site I can find that lists at least some performance numbers for the lastest (2009) Turions is http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html
They only have CineBench there but in that benchmark, the highest-end Turion (M660, 35W TDP) can't keep up with the C2Ds at all, neither single- nor multi-threaded. Even the mid-range, lower power (25W TDP), 2.53ghz C2D currently used in the base 15" MBP, beats AMDs range-topper.

If you can find better benchmarks, please post them here. I'd love to be proven wrong since I'd love to see some real competition again between AMD and Intel.

Unfortunately its scientifically wrong to rely on one benchmark source. The other problem is that no one else sems to benchmark laptop CPUs. A more curious thing to consider is that in most reviews, AMD always performs rather badly in CineBench.

We have an Asus M660 laptop at work and a Asus T9900 (Not sure about the Model #). The M660 is snappier but the T9900 has about 1/2hr more battery life. Both run Fedora 12. Both have Compiz enabled.

 

[kobewankenobi]

Better question; why stay with C2D? Why not play catchup and get some i3/5/7s in already. It's laughable that Apple expects people to pay $2k+ for C2D based notebooks.

i guess you dont understand mac market
it is laughable for geeks like us that check this website and so on
90% of mac buyers probably dont even know the difference between c2d and arrandale
and they do not even care
just give a big hd sleek design problem free os, the trick is done

 

[NMBPPLS]

Store is DOWN...

Store is DOWN... Please Apple, give us not only the iPad!!!

 

[20LEGEND]

*Down on knees, praying for new MBPs*

 

[cwlaw84]

I really don't expect it today... I think they'll want to give full media attention and buyer attention to the pre-order for at least a few days.

Hopefully Tuesday if/when the Mac Pros are announced...

Wouldn't mind being wrong and seeing them today though

 

[sth]

Unfortunately its scientifically wrong to rely on one benchmark source.

I know, that's why I wrote my last sentence.
It is, however, still better than relying on no benchmarks at all.

We have an Asus M660 laptop at work and a Asus T9900 (Not sure about the Model #). The M660 is snappier but the T9900 has about 1/2hr more battery life. Both run Fedora 12. Both have Compiz enabled.

Great. That proves? Absolutely nothing. UI snappiness has almost nothing to do with CPU speeds these days (it's simply not a task that requires loads of CPU power), and especially not for hardware-accelerated UIs like with Compiz.

If you want to do some real tests, how about converting some RAW images or encoding some audio/video?

 

[20LEGEND]

...and the wait continues.

 

[alent1234]

store is back up, the new MBP's are here

Finally .......

 

[20LEGEND]

^Douche.

 

[alent1234]

the site did say The New MacBook Pro Family is here

 

[jahman]

Bummer. No joy.

What are you playing at Apple?

Cheers,

jahman

 

[karmachrome]

Newegg selling Macs again?

Available on Tuesday.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834100054

Interesting...

 

[AidenShaw]

At Fry's this week....

For comparison, Fry's has the following in this week's specials - i3, i5, i7. All with 4 GiB, 500 GB, Nvidia discrete graphics and HDMI...:

 

[karmachrome]

None of those machines have the support Apple (or Asus for that matter) has. It is true, though, that by the time MBPs are released, i3,5 & 7s will be old hat.

March 22nd seems to be a recurring date - that's my pick.

 

[AidenShaw]

None of those machines have the support Apple (or Asus for that matter) has. It is true, though, that by the time MBPs are released, i3,5 & 7s will be old hat.

Yes, "old hat" is my point - not that any one of these systems
is overall better than any MacBook beyond the spec/price sheet.

When Fry's is running an ad with Core i3/Core i5/Core i7
side-by-side, with 4 GiB dual cores under $800 and a quad core
under $1000 - the Core i* CPUs have reached the mainstream.

Core 2 is now in the bargain basement at Fry's.

 

[Eidorian]

Core 2 is now in the bargain basement at Fry's.

The lack of lower voltage parts only compounds Apple's lack of interest in moving beyond Core 2.

I have been saying Core 2 Duo is bargain basement for ages now. At least since February 2008. Though this leans more toward the desktop side.

 

[karmachrome]

Amd?

My PCs have always run AMD mostly because when I started building rigs, they were cheap and more energy efficient. That may not be the case anymore IDK. Any reason why Apple has never entertained the notion of switching?

 

[MorphingDragon]

I know, that's why I wrote my last sentence.
It is, however, still better than relying on no benchmarks at all.

Its actually better to make no inference at all.

Great. That proves? Absolutely nothing. UI snappiness has almost nothing to do with CPU speeds these days (it's simply not a task that requires loads of CPU power), and especially not for hardware-accelerated UIs like with Compiz.

Actually it proves a point I said awhile ago that an AMD package is better overall. Especially on the low end and for an OS like Mac OSX where all 2D is hardware accelerated. One of the guys is a commercial lawyer and does a small amount of CAD work. He has the M660, with no complaints but I think his home computer is a G5 iMac or something.

If you want to do some real tests, how about converting some RAW images or encoding some audio/video?

I will next time I can get a hold of both Laptops. But being Linux it aint gonna break anytime soon.

 

[kobewankenobi]

For comparison, Fry's has the following in this week's specials - i3, i5, i7. All with 4 GiB, 500 GB, Nvidia discrete graphics and HDMI...:

so what?
just get it if u want to
why do u have to post it in a mac forum?
those are not macs, do not run as good as a mbp the mac osX, so they are totally useless for me, and for most of people that use macs...
good luck on having a long lasting battery or working with it on your laps for more than 30 min

 

[cwlaw84]

so what?
just get it if u want to
why do u have to post it in a mac forum?
those are not macs, do not run as good as a mbp the mac osX, so they are totally useless for me, and for most of people that use macs...
good luck on having a long lasting battery or working with it on your laps for more than 30 min

I don't mean to speak for the author, but I was under the impression that the post was simply meant to show the presence of intel iSeries chips available on the market below the $1000 price point. This would suggest that the market is already saturated by the new chips and that systems with similar hardware specs (not talking OS here) are out there. This supports the idea that any new Macbook Pro will have the Intel iSeries chips inside, which is completely relevant to any discussion of a forth coming release as we have all been speculating what would be including in the refreshed MBP. Further, given the price points of even the i7 windows machines out there, it would make sense for the low end MBP to sport the i5 as opposed to the i3 as has been speculated. The price difference between a similarly spec'd i3 PC and an i3 MBP is likely to be substantial to the point of making the MBP less marketable than if it held an i5.

Regardless, I don't think the post was advocating you go out and buy one of these computers instead of a mac, but even if it was, many people over the course of the past 1800 or so messages have contemplated buying the current edition MBP or waiting, and within that decision it is only reasonable to consider alternative systems entirely. Why pay $1500 for an MBP with a C2D chip when you could get newer technology for substantially less. Yes there are cosmetic reasons, yes there are reliability factors, but in the end the decisions are personal and should be made with consideration of all available options.

Someone should start a pool as to the release date, let people bet on it in the hopes of winning enough to buy that new MBP as it is, here's hoping for the 16th!