Haswell arrives June 4th.

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by jafingi, Apr 27, 2013.

  1. jafingi macrumors 65816

    jafingi

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Location:
    Denmark
    #1
    http://us.hardware.info/news/34689/its-official-intels-4th-generation-core-qhaswellq-processors-arrive-june-4

    Yay! Looks like we're soon gonna see a Haswell rMBP :D

    I guess Apple will already have the fixed C2 stepping on their motherboards (remember, it's just an updated chip on the MB). They are lucky that they use their own boards :)

    Guess there is a chance for us to see them at WWDC on June 10th. At least we will see them before September!
     
  2. justperry macrumors 604

    justperry

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    Location:
    In the core of a black hole.
    #2
    All recipients must accept both C1 and C2 packages so if Apple decides to release early they might end up with the USB bug inside the CPU!

    http://qdms.intel.com/dm/d.aspx/C79FC2E6-6B75-4063-8687-660F4668FFC8/PCN112101-00.pdf

     
  3. bbishop93 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    #3
    Is this legit? Is it worth it then waiting to WWDC or should I just buy a rMBP now?
     
  4. swerve147 macrumors 6502a

    swerve147

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    #4
    The June 3rd/4th Computex date is legit. Is it worth waiting? Yeah, it is at this point, if only to see real benchmarks and performance numbers come out a few days afterward. It's only a little over a month away, that is not a long period at all to wait and see if the gains are worth it.
     
  5. jbruce2112, Apr 27, 2013
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2013

    jbruce2112 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    #5
    I find that wording quite strange. This is a legitimate bug in the Haswell PCH, so OEMs must have some sort of say in whether or not they purchase and integrate this components into their machines, shouldn't they? At the very least, they should have some sort of plan to support the C1 steppings.


    OP:
    As far as this not being an issue for Apple because they make their own motherboards - I'm not sure that's the case. Like you said, this is an issue in the PCH, which is tightly integrated with the CPU itself. It combines most of the north and south bridge components of the chipset (e.g. the clock, I/O controllers, talking to integrated graphics), so this is pretty much part of the Haswell package. According to the Haswell wikipedia, this is expected to see a reduction from 65 nm to 32 nm. I couldn't quickly find anything about Apple making these parts themselves in their computers.
     
  6. tmagman macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2010
    Location:
    Calgary AB
    #6
    Haswell is the 'tock' in the intel tick-tock cycle so the performance gains should be quite significant on this new architecture.
     
  7. e²Studios macrumors 68020

    e²Studios

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    #7
    Keep telling yourself that buddy.. lol Then wait for broadwell and so on.. It's a incremental update, nothing as world peace solving and epic as most your type want to make yourself believe it is.

    I'll just be happy when they land so people can shut up about this and stop crowding the forum with useless blabber. Until the next update.. Or until all the new bugs come up.. lol you kids are funny.
     
  8. Weaselboy Moderator

    Weaselboy

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #8
    It is not like the title was misleading and you got tricked into the thread. If this annoys you so much, just skip the thread.
     
  9. MoreAwesomeDanU macrumors regular

    MoreAwesomeDanU

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2010
    #9
    Well at this point there's really gonna be no more "significant" update to CPU chips. I mean how much more speed can you possibly want? A dual core i5 is already MORE than enough to handle all the daily tasks you can possibly throw at it. At this point, its only gonna be a matter of less power consumption and better integrated graphics to drive that retina display
     
  10. xVeinx macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Location:
    California
    #10
    Um, we already know the performance.... link.

    It isn't going to be a huge update, though graphics will improve. Also, Intel required OEMs to accept the C1 variants since there are ways to work around the problem (external USB chip) so they wouldn't have to take a loss like with Sandy Bridge chipsets. OEMs don't have much choice at the moment. Apple actually used some of the broken chipsets last time around since they didn't' need the sata III ports. Who knows what they will do this time around, since adding another chip on a motherboard is a bit more problematic in their case...
     
  11. jbruce2112 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    #11
    Ah, good information. This makes a little more sense now.

    I'm guessing Apple will have a little more room on the rMBPs this year due to the integration of thunderbolt in the chipset, along with the PCH shrink. This makes me think that addition of their own USB chip might not be an issue of space, provided they don't add anything else to the motherboard.

    It still strikes me as strange that Intel would ship chips to them that they had to provide a workaround themselves to ensure that something basic like USB worked in every case. Oh well. This does give me more hope in the June/July rMBP refresh date.
     
  12. Pentad macrumors 6502a

    Pentad

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    Location:
    Indiana
    #12

    I'm not sure I would speak for everyone. Your daily tasks and my daily tasks probably vary greatly.

    Personally, I would never buy an i5 for the work I'm doing.

    -P
     
  13. Mr. Retrofire, Apr 27, 2013
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2013

    Mr. Retrofire macrumors 601

    Mr. Retrofire

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Location:
    www.emiliana.cl/en
    #13
    No. The Haswell-optimized software does not exist. Only preliminary optimizations exist:
    http://de.scribd.com/doc/137419114/Introduction-to-AVX2-optimizations-in-x264

    ----------

    Motherboard manufacturers use C1 in prototypes. C2 is the version for the public.

    ----------

    AFAIK, Haswell-based devices exist already in the secret Apple laboratories. And they contain, yes C1, not C2.
     
  14. Freyqq macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2004
    #14
    however, intel is focusing that improvement this cycle into their integrated gpu
     
  15. adjeff8 macrumors 6502

    adjeff8

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2012
    #15
    Weaselboy is soooooooo right. People, even the layman...ESPECIALLY the layman, want to discuss these kinds if subjects, and this is the place to do it. I encourage EVERYBODY to feel free to make the threads to discuss whatever you want to know about, as long as it pertains to the forums subject. In this case the MacBook Pro

    ----------

    I want my pages to open in -10 seconds. I want my work to be done before I boot my computer up
     
  16. thundersteele macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2011
    Location:
    Switzerland
    #16
    I thought it was june 3...

    that one day will make a big difference for me... hmm, what to do?




    /sarcasm
     
  17. UBS28 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2012
    #17
    With a test platform that was running with 17 percent less memory bandwidth, it was still 13% faster than a similar clocked Ivy Bridge CPU. So it looks promising.

    http://www.techspot.com/news/51986-intels-core-i7-4770k-haswell-cpu-gets-benchmarked.html
     
  18. akdj, Apr 27, 2013
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2013

    akdj macrumors 65816

    akdj

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2008
    Location:
    Alaska
    #18
    Exactly. Each of these updates are evolutionary, not a massive performance slam ala core 2 duo--->core 'I' series...which the Haswell chipset will be the fourth generation of. It's going to be 'better' but in a 10-15% 'sorta way' if you get where I'm going. Intel's hands are being forced to improve in two key areas. And neither has to do with CPU 'grunt' or horsepower. They're integrated graphics and power consumption. Those are the two areas of biggest concern and where they're placing their focus. No doubt, horsepower will increase as the tri gate transistor process improves and wafers become thinner. However, a massive performance increase or a 'tock' expectation isn't realistic.


    You're right if all you're using is yesterday's software. If your gig entails CPU and GPU power and efficiency, updated chips can mean time saved...which in many occupations directly equals dollars saved. Even those of us running our own businesses can vouch for and appreciate differences in updated performance. However...there is still the law of diminishing returns. Upgrading to a fancy new, fast machine is fun...but if you're using any of the core'i' chips at this time, more often than not one can better their performance in other ways...IE an SSD. More RAM...better display, etc.

    As always, depending what you rely on your computer to do for you, ymmv. In many cases, an iPad is more than enough for those folks checking email, Facebook, capturing and editing pics and video, surfing the net and reading their books....listening to their music or watching their videos. On the flip side, there HAS to be a platform that allows for the development of all that content being consumed by the iPad users. Hence, the development community...and the need for more and more power.

    J
     
  19. splitpea macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Location:
    Among the starlings
    #19
    Yup, and 640k should be enough for anyone.

    This. Apple is trying to make laptops right now for the mass market, but pretty soon there will be no mass market left for laptops, and it'll just be a professional market that *can't* do their work on an iPad.

    Apple seems to forget that they escaped their 90s doldrums by making a platform that was spectacular for professionals -- content and particularly software creators. It was these people, who found that the OS X platform was fun to make software on and for, we're the ones who turned around the perception that you shouldn't buy a Mac because there's no software for it.

    Well, apple seems to be going out of their way now to make things hard on developers -- whether it's creating hardware that doesn't meet the expectations of power users, or dumbing down their OS in ways that interfere with the power user's workflow, or even just the pain the the ass process and obnoxious, limiting rules and hoop-jumping to get an application into the app store (at my place of work, you'll hear someone swear at apple for it daily).

    Down the line (and I mean in the 7-10 year range), as more consumers discover they can get by with less-expensive tablets instead of laptops, apple is going to have a choice on its hands. It can drop laptops to mass market prices (something that doesn't seem very apple-like). It can tailor them and the OS to the needs of the professionals who still need them. Or it can drop them altogether, and run the risk of its becoming very difficult or even less attractive to develop applications for iOS, causing what will then be their flagship platform to start to fall behind. Personally, I think the second option would be the best... But if not, well, apple will probably lose a consumer for their devices too.
     
  20. xVeinx macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Location:
    California
    #20
    It will be faster, but the degree to which it will be faster will vary, averaging about 5% on most things. As someone else pointed out, there are new instructions, such as AVX2 that will help boost some software after a recompile. Newer instructions are going to be the predominant speed boost going forward it would seem to me. Unfortunately, it takes a good 6 months to a year to see any amount of software get optimized for newer processor instructions.
     

Share This Page