Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

First Intel Arrandale (MacBook Pro) Processors Due January 3rd?

Stavros.P said:
what is the difference of 4 threads on a 2 core processor?
Click to expand...

The short answer is that each core has two execution threads, which helps maximize the use of execution resources. Each thread is a virtual cpu (looks like an actual cpu to the OS), but since the two threads on each core share cpu resources, performance will still fall short of what it would be with separate cores. In other words, the performance of 2 cores/4 threads will be greater than 2 cores/2 threads but less than that of 4 cores/4 threads (all other things being equal). That's for pure cpu performance, but overall system performance will depend on how efficient the system is at scheduling operations on the various threads.

For an in-depth look, read the info on hyperthreading in this article:
http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2002/10/hyperthreading.ars
 
PeterQVenkman said:
Anyone have leaked benchmarks of prototype chips? At what point does a much slower clocked quad core compete with the higher clocked core 2 duos?
Click to expand...
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3648&p=7

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3634&p=13

http://www.techpowerup.com/index.php?100424

Cinebench is what I'd look at right now. I believe the 3DMark benchmarks were done on very optimized drivers which were brought under great scrutiny.
 
January 3rd seems a bit early in the new year for any new product. But the MacBook Pro will get the Arrandale and the Mac Pro will get the 6-core Gulftown sometime in the first couple of months of 2010.

Intel is definitely moving forward nicely. Did anyone hear about the 48-core processor that they announced yesterday? Its obviously a few years away, but Intel was even crazy enough to mention the possibility of it being able to read your mind. And it uses as little as 25 watts with a maximum of 125w (less than many of Intel's 4-core processors) built on a 45nm process.
See:
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20091202comp_sm.htm
 
nek said:
January 3rd seems a bit early in the new year for any new product. But the MacBook Pro will get the Arrandale and the Mac Pro will get the 6-core Gulftown sometime in the first couple of months of 2010.

Intel is definitely moving forward nicely. Did anyone hear about the 48-core processor that they announced yesterday? Its obviously a few years away, but Intel was even crazy enough to mention the possibility of it being able to read your mind. And it uses as little as 25 watts with a maximum of 125w (less than many of Intel's 4-core processors) built on a 45nm process.
See:
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20091202comp_sm.htm
Click to expand...

Yeah, but those are some weak cores. At AMD we did a calculation that we could put something like 512 K6-like cores on a die using Opteron's process technology. But no one would want such a thing because it would be so slow.
 
cmaier said:
Yeah, but those are some weak cores. At AMD we did a calculation that we could put something like 512 K6-like cores on a die using Opteron's process technology. But no one would want such a thing because it would be so slow.
Click to expand...

So much for bragging rights.
 
puffnstuff said:
Hardware update is great but I want to find out how light can they make the 13"
Click to expand...

Are you serious???

I think it's light enough. It's only 2.13 kg!!! Seriously, if you can't carry that, you need to be in bed for the rest of your life. You certainly won't be able to drag yourself to the gym.

The 13" MBP is even lighter, 2.04 kg, so just get that. Even the 17" is a perfectly manageable 3 kg.

I seriously hope you're being sarcastic.

P.S. I hate the Air, and want it to die.
 
Erasmus said:
Are you serious???

I think it's light enough. It's only 2.13 kg!!! Seriously, if you can't carry that, you need to be in bed for the rest of your life. You certainly won't be able to drag yourself to the gym.

The 13" MBP is even lighter, 2.04 kg, so just get that. Even the 17" is a perfectly manageable 3 kg.

I seriously hope you're being sarcastic.

P.S. I hate the Air, and want it to die.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

What's wrong with them being lighter? I never said I can't carry it but if they can make them lighter then I don't see why one would argue. People have fallen into this thinness gimmick. I don't want to see how thin they can get but how light.

I carry my notebook with other things too like books. So it adds up.

The so called macbook pro clone, hp envy, 13" is 3.68 LB. That is almost a pound lighter then the mbp.
 
AidenShaw said:
No, they're dual-core.

Don't expect quad-core and great battery life (especially if you're actually putting a CPU load on the laptop).

Dual core will be the better choice for most laptop users - the power users who are usually near a power outlet are the quad-core audience.
Click to expand...


why can't we have both? With flexible power options to shut down cores when on battery or to extend life, and then use them when you're on a power outlet

The point of a laptop is flexibility. They aren't all used away from power. Especially if you're doing encoding or other 'heavy lifting' you may well be plugged in, maybe attached to an external monitor. Then I'd like my four cores please.
 
mrklaw said:
why can't we have both? With flexible power options to shut down cores when on battery or to extend life, and then use them when you're on a power outlet

The point of a laptop is flexibility. They aren't all used away from power. Especially if you're doing encoding or other 'heavy lifting' you may well be plugged in, maybe attached to an external monitor. Then I'd like my four cores please.
Click to expand...

four cores is double the heat. Unless you halve the clock frequency.
 
cmaier said:
four cores is double the heat. Unless you halve the clock frequency.
Click to expand...
The base clocks on Clarksfield are under 2.0 GHz unless you get the i7-920XM. That's before you even take into account idle states.

Turbo Boost plays an even greater roll on the Ultra Low Voltage Arrandale components.
 
Eidorian said:
The base clocks on Clarksfield are under 2.0 GHz unless you get the i7-920XM. That's before you even take into account idle states.

Turbo Boost plays an even greater roll on the Ultra Low Voltage Arrandale components.
Click to expand...

That changes nothing. Physics says you get to choose: at a given level of heat/power, you can have four clocks running at (average) frequency "f," or two clocks running at frequency "2f." These are average frequencies, taking into account "turbo," clock throttling, etc.

So if you have a particular thermal solution for a laptop that is designed to handle 2 cores, if you double the number of cores (assuming the same core design, same process technology, etc.) you have to run the four cores at an average speed half that of what you could run the 2 cores at.
 
cmaier said:
That changes nothing. Physics says you get to choose: at a given level of heat/power, you can have four clocks running at (average) frequency "f," or two clocks running at frequency "2f." These are average frequencies, taking into account "turbo," clock throttling, etc.

So if you have a particular thermal solution for a laptop that is designed to handle 2 cores, if you double the number of cores (assuming the same core design, same process technology, etc.) you have to run the four cores at an average speed half that of what you could run the 2 cores at.
Click to expand...
We're talking about battery life though. :p
 
I agree with the comments about the express slot; especially since it looks like we won't get lightpeak for at least a year and USB 3.0 may take even longer. I wonder if the iPod will even support the USB 3.0 spec. Anyway, adding the express card slot would really help sell me on buying a new MBP.

Putting an HDD in the cd slot is really cool and something I'd definitely consider on my next laptop, but I'd rather there just be no cd drive at all and it have a thinner, lighter design. This isn't likely, so I guess that's a good way to make use of the space. Hate to be a debbie downer but I seriously doubt the redesign will come standard with either two HDD bays or four slots for RAM.
 
cmaier said:
Same physics. If the battery is designed to handle 2 cores, then to handle 4 cores you either need to halve the average frequency or halve the battery life.
Click to expand...
Did my points about lower base clocks and idle states come across? :confused:

1.6 GHz isn't as low as it goes for the i7-720QM. I agree with everything you've said otherwise.
 
Eidorian said:
Did my points about lower base clocks and idle states come across? :confused:

1.6 GHz isn't as low as it goes for the i7-720QM. I agree with everything you've said otherwise.
Click to expand...

Yes, the points come across. But they're moot. Note I said "average frequency" and "same process technology."
 
If the removal of the cd drive allowed to use a second battery, would that mean 13+hrs of autonomy?
 
MrNeo said:
If the removal of the cd drive allowed to use a second battery, would that mean 13+hrs of autonomy?
Click to expand...

They should remove the cd drive or at least make it optional so one can put in an extra battery or hard drive

I can't recall the last time I used the cd drive
 
lPHONE said:
Are you kidding? We're like the red-headed step child of computing. We're the laughing stock of all technology forums. Everyday, thousands of people on other sites post things like this.
Owning a Mac got so embarrassing, that I bought a cheap pc and left my mac at home when I went to cafes. :(

I ended up buying a red hard case on eBay that makes it look like a new DELL and since then nobody calls me gay or beats me up anymore. :eek:
Click to expand...

i've been reading gamer forums since the 1990's. most of the people on there are idiots who think they need to buy the newest thing out there just to surf the internet or play a game.

doesn't matter since PC gaming is dying and everything is going to consoles except for strategy games. most people don't want to spend $500 on a graphics card and most think you are insane buying 2 of the same cards just to play a game. Means most PC games will be designed for the lower end hardware just as they have been since the 1990's. the last time i bought a new graphics card the day it came out was the nvidia Ti4600. didn't see games that used any of it's features for 18 months and the idiots on anandtech were saying how you had to buy it to get decent framerates. same thing when i bought a Vodoo2 the day it launched. nothing used a fraction of it's power for 12-18 months
 
puffnstuff said:
They should remove the cd drive or at least make it optional so one can put in an extra battery or hard drive

I can't recall the last time I used the cd drive
Click to expand...

If they made it optional, that's fine, but take it away completely would be too soon. There are still a lot of people (including me) that use & like physical media. I still buy CDs the majority of the time and use them as well as DVDs I rent from Netflix in my Powerbook G4.

I really don't need 2 hdd or an extra battery. If I want an extra battery, I'll buy a spare to carry.

I really don't see Apple making that move yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back