I really doubt there going to be USB 3.0 or more USB ports, Apple as well as Intel are switching to Thunderbolt ports and developing next generation of it.
so you better start forgetting USB ports
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.
iMac 2012 update thoughts on release?
- Thread starter mayhone1
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I really doubt there going to be USB 3.0 or more USB ports, Apple as well as Intel are switching to Thunderbolt ports and developing next generation of it.
so you better start forgetting USB ports
What I would like to see...
I would like apple to ditch the optical drive and 3.5" hard drive and go to all flash storage like the MacBook Air. I, for one, have not used my optical drive in months and would not miss it. As for larger storage needs, I'm fine with using an external drive. This would most likely save enough space for Apple to get rid of "the chin" and make the new iMac pretty much identical to the thunderbolt display.
That being said, I would be surprised to see Apple apply these changes in the 2012 refresh. But I do think they will eventually go in that direction.
I would like apple to ditch the optical drive and 3.5" hard drive and go to all flash storage like the MacBook Air. I, for one, have not used my optical drive in months and would not miss it. As for larger storage needs, I'm fine with using an external drive. This would most likely save enough space for Apple to get rid of "the chin" and make the new iMac pretty much identical to the thunderbolt display.
That being said, I would be surprised to see Apple apply these changes in the 2012 refresh. But I do think they will eventually go in that direction.
there is about one billion people that think thunderbolt and usb compete each other? why is that so?
thunderbolt and usb DONT compete each other, they supplement each other, at least according to intel, who btw invented thunderbolt technology.
native usb 3 support in ivy bridge? that doesnt say anything?
all of the 2012 mac line WILL have usb 3, probably on all ports.
SectionSearchAA
Lack of competition is changing Intel's priorities
22nd Mar 2012 | 12:48
Upcoming Ivy Bridge processors mark the end of an era
With the launch of Intel's Ivy bridge processors just weeks away, I'm expecting to fall under the deafening silence of Intel's NDA hammer any day now.
So, it's time to sum up what you can expect from Intel's latest PC processors before my hands are tied, lips sealed and the lawyers set to DEFCON 1.
Drawing together various leaks and official expositions form Intel, there are a few things that seem absolutely certain about the new Intel Ivy Bridge processors.
Firstly, they're a product of Intel's shiny new 22nm process. And that means radical new 3-D tri-gate transistors live therein.
The technicalities are pretty complex. But the overall upshot is said to be a major reduction in current leakage. In turn, that supposedly means the 22nm shrink is almost like a double-node step in terms of performance-per-watt.
No cranking of the clocks
However, we also know that Intel isn't using this technological advance to provide higher clockspeeds. Intel is widely reported to be pegging the fastest Ivy Bridge launch chip, the Core i7 3770K, at the same 3.5GHz seen with the existing Core i7 3700K.
OK, you might argue, Intel is keeping the clocks static. But if it adds more cores, we're still winning. And you'd be right, if Intel was adding any cores. But it isn't. The 3770K is still quad-core, just like the 2700K.
What's more, since Ivy Bridge is a Tick rather than a Tock in Intel's Tick-Tock cadence thingy, those cores are largely an architectural carry over. Intel has said that some changes have been made to improve per-core performance. But the general consensus is that the improvement is not dramatic.
All of which means the processor part of the Ivy Bridge equation almost definitely won't deliver the kind of performance improvement that you can actually feel. Making matters worse, it's not looking like it will be any cheaper than existing and equivalent chips from the outgoing generation.
Profits, not performance
What, then, is the point of Ivy Bridge and does it have anything to offer? For Intel, it looks like a winner. Those smaller 22nm transistors are much smaller than the current 32nm sort, so Ivy Bridge chips will be cheaper to make. With prices staying the same, say hello to fatter margins and bigger profits.
To be fair, you can also expect a big uptick in the performance of the integrated Intel HD Graphics and associated QuickSync video transcode processing - perhaps as much as a doubling of performance. It's still unlikely to deliver the sort of 3D performance that any self-respecting gamer would tolerate, however.
I'm also hoping for a decent extra slug of overclocking headroom. I'd have thought 5GHz on air for the unlocked K Seires Ivy Bridgers ought to be easily achievable. Some 32nm Sandy Bridge chips can manage that already.
Over and out for AMD
But overall, it very much looks like Ivy Bridge adds to an increasingly convincing case against Intel for foot dragging and sand bagging. Firstly, I'm convinced Intel could easily be flogging 4.5GHz versions of Ivy Bridge. I also think it could maintain existing margins and profitability with a six-core version.
The reason it isn't doing either of those things is that it is now operating without any competition nor any future prospect of competition. AMD's new FX processors are no threat and AMD itself has publicly indicated that it no longer sees competing with Intel as a priority.
The game is up and with it the prospect of rapid increases in PC processor performance. Oh well. It was fun while it lasted.
Lack of competition is changing Intel's priorities
22nd Mar 2012 | 12:48
Upcoming Ivy Bridge processors mark the end of an era
With the launch of Intel's Ivy bridge processors just weeks away, I'm expecting to fall under the deafening silence of Intel's NDA hammer any day now.
So, it's time to sum up what you can expect from Intel's latest PC processors before my hands are tied, lips sealed and the lawyers set to DEFCON 1.
Drawing together various leaks and official expositions form Intel, there are a few things that seem absolutely certain about the new Intel Ivy Bridge processors.
Firstly, they're a product of Intel's shiny new 22nm process. And that means radical new 3-D tri-gate transistors live therein.
The technicalities are pretty complex. But the overall upshot is said to be a major reduction in current leakage. In turn, that supposedly means the 22nm shrink is almost like a double-node step in terms of performance-per-watt.
No cranking of the clocks
However, we also know that Intel isn't using this technological advance to provide higher clockspeeds. Intel is widely reported to be pegging the fastest Ivy Bridge launch chip, the Core i7 3770K, at the same 3.5GHz seen with the existing Core i7 3700K.
OK, you might argue, Intel is keeping the clocks static. But if it adds more cores, we're still winning. And you'd be right, if Intel was adding any cores. But it isn't. The 3770K is still quad-core, just like the 2700K.
What's more, since Ivy Bridge is a Tick rather than a Tock in Intel's Tick-Tock cadence thingy, those cores are largely an architectural carry over. Intel has said that some changes have been made to improve per-core performance. But the general consensus is that the improvement is not dramatic.
All of which means the processor part of the Ivy Bridge equation almost definitely won't deliver the kind of performance improvement that you can actually feel. Making matters worse, it's not looking like it will be any cheaper than existing and equivalent chips from the outgoing generation.
Profits, not performance
What, then, is the point of Ivy Bridge and does it have anything to offer? For Intel, it looks like a winner. Those smaller 22nm transistors are much smaller than the current 32nm sort, so Ivy Bridge chips will be cheaper to make. With prices staying the same, say hello to fatter margins and bigger profits.
To be fair, you can also expect a big uptick in the performance of the integrated Intel HD Graphics and associated QuickSync video transcode processing - perhaps as much as a doubling of performance. It's still unlikely to deliver the sort of 3D performance that any self-respecting gamer would tolerate, however.
I'm also hoping for a decent extra slug of overclocking headroom. I'd have thought 5GHz on air for the unlocked K Seires Ivy Bridgers ought to be easily achievable. Some 32nm Sandy Bridge chips can manage that already.
Over and out for AMD
But overall, it very much looks like Ivy Bridge adds to an increasingly convincing case against Intel for foot dragging and sand bagging. Firstly, I'm convinced Intel could easily be flogging 4.5GHz versions of Ivy Bridge. I also think it could maintain existing margins and profitability with a six-core version.
The reason it isn't doing either of those things is that it is now operating without any competition nor any future prospect of competition. AMD's new FX processors are no threat and AMD itself has publicly indicated that it no longer sees competing with Intel as a priority.
The game is up and with it the prospect of rapid increases in PC processor performance. Oh well. It was fun while it lasted.
While this changes nothing for a number of years, anyone think Apple could be capable of surpassing Intel in terms of processor performance for it's own computer line?
While I do not know how Apple's mobile processor stacks up in terms of performance against the competition, it seems to be comparable. And in terms of market share, "Apple is on pace to surge past Intel this year as the top seller of mobile processors... according to new research from NPD In-Stat." This might give Apple the confidence build computer processors for it's Mac line that give users and it's OS better performance.
If the new Ivy Bridge is incremental and doesn't wow, and even though Intel may have the ability to offer more... I think it does not make sense from a business stand point to take it slow. Apple has shown the ability to make an 8 mega-pixel camera work in their small devices, but chose a 5 mp camera for it's NEW iPad. Heck, they probably have the ability to do 12 mp or more. As long as they are number 1... and baby steps work fine for sales. And doesn't this also apply to Apple's choice to use a beefed up dual core processor in the iPad as apposed to their quad-core processor that has shown up in iOS 5.1? Why leap? Especially if you aren't sure what you can add next.
Is this just a random date or do you have legitimate reasons for giving this date? Thanks.
I'm putting a guess at late-April.
It could easily be anytime in May, though.
I doubt it will be June and onward because there will be minis and Pros somewhere in the mix of Spring/Summer '12 to even out the revenue and release cycle; they have notebooks, iMacs, Pros (we hope) and Minis all to be released between April and August. Then the iPhones and iPods in Sept/Oct with a possible iPad (longshot rumor) alongside those iOS devices.
It could easily be anytime in May, though.
I doubt it will be June and onward because there will be minis and Pros somewhere in the mix of Spring/Summer '12 to even out the revenue and release cycle; they have notebooks, iMacs, Pros (we hope) and Minis all to be released between April and August. Then the iPhones and iPods in Sept/Oct with a possible iPad (longshot rumor) alongside those iOS devices.