If the dual-core versions put out similar numbers and run OpenCL code decently, I think we can safely predict that Apple will go back to Intel integrated graphics with no discrete GPU for the 13" MacBook Pro and the MacBook Air line. A significant CPU boost and no appreciable difference to the 320M on graphics performance should lead to a nice upgrade.
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.
Intel Announces 'Sandy Bridge' Core Processors
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If the dual-core versions put out similar numbers and run OpenCL code decently, I think we can safely predict that Apple will go back to Intel integrated graphics with no discrete GPU for the 13" MacBook Pro and the MacBook Air line. A significant CPU boost and no appreciable difference to the 320M on graphics performance should lead to a nice upgrade.
arkmannj
macrumors 68000
Do they really want to be comparing this to the Pentium 4?
I thought part of the marketing for the Core line was that they stepped back to P3 and built off of that. P4 era was a prime time for AMD.
Edit:
P.S. Dear Apple, we love you, please use both the new integrated graphics AND discrete graphics in your portables (at least for all the MBP's) Mac Mini's would be nice too 🙂
Gemütlichkeit
macrumors 65816
gnasher729
Suspended
Splendid observation. If you take a MacBook, add a better CPU and a crappy GPU, you will get better results at low resolution and bad results at high resolution.
Well, the Apple haters will either say "why is Apple using last years CPU", "why does Apple use crappy integrated graphics", or "why is Apple using battery-eating discrete graphics". Or Apple offers three models, in which case they'll say "why is Apple confusing consumers with three different models". 🙁
I suppose you are talking about OpenGL drivers here. Nobody cares whether some slow integrated Intel graphics supports OpenCL or not, unless they don't have a clue what OpenCL is for.
Last edited:
Gemütlichkeit
macrumors 65816
Maybe for the custom build's but the desktop world the Pentium 4 was king. And for a long time too. I guess they're saying this new sandy bridge technology is a big leap that nothing will compete with it for a long time. dunno
Now this sounds pretty much like all these postings, when Motorola dropped the ball on the G4. And when IBM dropped the ball on the PPC970 route.
Who knows...maybe the A4 was Apple's first step in the right direction and hopefully they are using their newly acquired ARM-engineering experience to build a decent processor for use in desktops.
I personally have the feeling that Apple is testing a full blown Mac OS X variant on ARM-procs and not relying on iOS alone. Hopefully we'll see something interesting evolving here.
And I would greatly embrace when Apple would decide to use ARM processors...
Very nice news that it's out, but honestly i think we all saw it coming... however the question you have to ask yourself is What's the point in upgrading when Ivy Bridge will be released end of this year?
Soo I mean i don't know yet if i will buy a new MBP, Im still on a Early 2008 model. 🙂
Soo I mean i don't know yet if i will buy a new MBP, Im still on a Early 2008 model. 🙂
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
And we care what "Apple haters" say why exactly ? They don't buy Apple computers, they don't matter. Us Apple buyers however shouldn't be taking this crap.
emotion
macrumors 68040
I believe he/she meant OpenCL.
The point is that OpenCL is in much wider use in OSX than you think. This is backed by the fact that Apple chose the option for NVIDIA GPUs over faster CPUs. That alone says a lot.
emotion
macrumors 68040
You'd be surprised....and wait until Lion - I expect extensive OpenCL use all over the place in the OS. By that point the software producers will be using it more widely too.
the graphics may not be killer graphics, but according to Anand's battery tests a test laptop with a 17" screen killed a 13" MBP in battery life.
How many people actually play GPU-intensive games on their laptops? Give me low heat, good battery life, and an SSD.
Then again, I think laptops are becoming redundant. Have a desktop to do real work on, and an iPad to do the rest. Sure, there are some traveling warriors who need a laptop, but not the average Joe. I think the iPad / other tablet devices will eventually kill much of the laptop market.
Then again, I think laptops are becoming redundant. Have a desktop to do real work on, and an iPad to do the rest. Sure, there are some traveling warriors who need a laptop, but not the average Joe. I think the iPad / other tablet devices will eventually kill much of the laptop market.
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
And I think having 2 systems is a pain. I have a laptop, it's my desktop and my "iPad" all in one. No need to manage syncing and making sure I have an up-to-date copy of my file to work on since it's always the same machine whether I'm sitting at my desk at home, on the coach in the basement or on the road. Not to mention I can do the same tasks at all times and I'm not being limited by the lack of apps on the iPad or it's cheesy input methods.
And I game on my laptop, occasionnally. Having a good GPU is a godsend even for casual gamers. You're not left wondering if the game will run when you plop down your hard earned cash.
Not to mention GPUs are used for much more than gaming these days.
iPad still needs a computer to function
i'm looking at a sandy bridge laptop this year, probably from dell and an iPad 2. the laptop will sit at home and store my data and the iPad will be mobile
What's the point in upgrading when Ivy Bridge will be released end of this year?
And wait until the "Bridge over troubled water" chip is ready!
Probably 95% of users can do all of what they want to do with their current Macs right now.
So why do the other 5% get excited or upset about something that isn't even decided yet.
You can count on Apple to keep going with the complete mac user experience route, regardless of what is inside or what the latest technology is or what chips are available.
Doesn't look like they have lost by using that concept.
And wait until the "Bridge over troubled water" chip is ready!
Probably 95% of users can do all of what they want to do with their current Macs right now.
So why do the other 5% get excited or upset about something that isn't even decided yet.
You can count on Apple to keep going with the complete mac user experience route, regardless of what is inside or what the latest technology is or what chips are available.
Doesn't look like they have lost by using that concept.
emotion
macrumors 68040
I love the iPad but it's not there yet in terms of replacing a laptop.
However, I think that we might see the rise of the desktop again in the form of the home server. The driver for this will be the immanent charging hike for broadband.
Gemütlichkeit
macrumors 65816
head to any coffee shop and you'll see it a different way. Everyone has a laptop in there and I've only ever seen someone with an iPad out in public, once.
Really? May have had a higher clock but the P3 Tualatin was faster clock for clock IIRC??? I could be wrong I've not really followed the x86 world with much interest back in those days, RISC and MIPS fancied my interest back then.
Hellhammer
Moderator emeritus
People said the same with Snow Leopard, yet OpenCL is poorly supported by 3rd party apps. IMO OpenCL is just bunch of marketing BS from Apple. It might be useful for Mac Pro owners with real GPUs and who actually do more than browse the net with Safari but it's useless with IGPs. More raw CPU power will deliver better performance in intensive tasks than some low-end GPU with OpenCL, and that's what SB would bring.
I don't get it why small decrease in GPU power is so huge deal when you gain enormous amount of CPU power. With C2D the CPU bump would be 5% and GPU would stay the same. Does that sound better? People will whine no matter what Apple does, that's a fact.
Last edited:
Sweet intel integrated cards can play 4+ year old games on LOW! Lets all cheer for their amazing progress!
How come no one has mentioned that Intel has put DRM on the chip to satisfy Hollywood? I bet you all aren't too excited about that.
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1934536/intels-sandy-bridge-sucks-hollywood-drm
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1934536/intels-sandy-bridge-sucks-hollywood-drm
I have now read through the entire thread, and I must say that to my dissapointment not one of the posts mention the impact that this can be for the iMac.
With both new processors out on the market and the new gfx cards from both nVidia and ATI out I think we will see a new iMac in the next 2 months. What is really enticing me is that we might actually get desktop graphics into the iMac. The new ATI cards use way less power than previous generation and these new cpus looks nice. With a nice handeling of switching between the inegrated and the discreet gfx card this would also limit the total poweroutput and fan noise after what you are doing.
I think this is more exciting than the update for the laptops, as the laptops are under the shadow of only getting intel integrated graphics again. except 15 and 17 will still continue to get discreet.
I really hope apple will start using low midend discreet in the 13" mbp line and finally get som highend gfx in the 15 and especially the 17" model. I am tired of apple making the laptops thinner and thinner. I want power now, it is almost to thin as it is. And after all when it comes to portability it wont make a huge impact with 1" more in thickness after all the width and depth will be the same limiting factor. The only thing that might matter is weight. though I would gladly choose 0.5kg heavier 17" to get proper gfx soloutions.
With both new processors out on the market and the new gfx cards from both nVidia and ATI out I think we will see a new iMac in the next 2 months. What is really enticing me is that we might actually get desktop graphics into the iMac. The new ATI cards use way less power than previous generation and these new cpus looks nice. With a nice handeling of switching between the inegrated and the discreet gfx card this would also limit the total poweroutput and fan noise after what you are doing.
I think this is more exciting than the update for the laptops, as the laptops are under the shadow of only getting intel integrated graphics again. except 15 and 17 will still continue to get discreet.
I really hope apple will start using low midend discreet in the 13" mbp line and finally get som highend gfx in the 15 and especially the 17" model. I am tired of apple making the laptops thinner and thinner. I want power now, it is almost to thin as it is. And after all when it comes to portability it wont make a huge impact with 1" more in thickness after all the width and depth will be the same limiting factor. The only thing that might matter is weight. though I would gladly choose 0.5kg heavier 17" to get proper gfx soloutions.
Wow this has just fueled my ongaing hatred towards intel and their business practices. Apple should just go AMD.
Hellhammer
Moderator emeritus
Not exactly. AMD 6870 has TDP of 151W which is exactly the same what 5850 has. The performance difference between those two is relatively small as well, 6870 is a bit faster. With desktop GPUs, Apple would have to use something like 5570 which is much worse than the current 5850M is.
emotion
macrumors 68040
Raw CPU power will not save you now. Moore's Law just delivers more cores now not more GHz. We're in that many-core future many people predicted. Software will have to conform. As will the OSs.
It is in no way marketing BS. AMD have thrown their weight behind it wholesale, and increasingly so are Intel. Even NVIDIA are supportive despite CUDA.