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

Intel Demos Next Generation Mobile Processor

psychofreak said:
Batteries also increase technologically...hopefully at a better rate than the power usage will increase for these CPUs...
Click to expand...

Not really. Batteries have been pretty stagnant, especially relative to the electronics they power.

Most of the increases in battery life in recent years have been due to power reductions and meaner batteries (not necessarily better batteries).

Wake me when we get laptops with fuel cells.
 
good, just bought myself an emac. with my powerbook and the emac i can do for another 9 month. then i upgrade to a montevina, quadcore 2.6 GHz powerbook/macbook pro with 4 GB Ram and a 160GB solid state HD:D.

that will keep me then happy for another 5 years.

looking back over 15 years it seems i update every 4-5 years and if the above plan works out this will continue:)
 
Eidorian said:
I wonder what AMD is up to on the mobile front. It looks like K8 has an even longer life there.
Click to expand...

Not much, it appears. The 90nm X2's remain their fastest chip and reports imply this will be the case deep into 2008 as Phenom X4's are having problems getting past 2.5GHz at this time.
 
dizastor said:
quad core MacBook Pro

mmm.
Click to expand...

Quad Core Mac Book Pro, that's the real update I have been looking for. Santa Rosa wasn't enough for me to get a new machine, too small of a boost. If we get a quad core MBP I am all over it, if not, then can the update be more than just a paltry .04 GHz and brighter displays? I am looking for some real updates Apple, in graphics, processor, and overall hardware. Leave the cute stuff for the high school students.
 
The first of the Penryn mobile processors are not due until January 2008 and are expected to power the next generation MacBook Pros.
Click to expand...
Everytime a MacBook Pro gets an update, so should the iMac. In fact, the iMac should get the update first. The power and heat constraints do not effect it as much. The iMac should ALWAYS get the latest, greatest, fastest mobile chip. A quad iMac would be nice. C'mon Apple! There's no reason not to! Keep bumpin' those machines! Letting them languish for a year in unacceptable! This isn't PPC!
 
MacBook Pro with a quad-core processor?! I'll order one ASAP.

Call me weird, the dual-core processor thing just doesn't give me enough incentive to upgrade. I'm still on a PPC Mac.
 
mkrishnan said:
Yeah... I don't think the MBP is getting a 45W processor. The only fit for this in Apple's current lineup is the top-end iMac.
Click to expand...

Eidorian said:
The current X7900 is at a 44 W TDP.
Click to expand...

Well, this is an engineering sample, so we can expect a refined, less powerhungry model by the time they ship. I would also expect that we would see powersaving features such as turning off a few of the cores under battery power, etc.
 
MrCrowbar said:
...assuming you have 2 RAM modules each running at 800 MHz, the bus should actually be 1600 MHz to fully use the speed of the RAM...
Click to expand...

It doesn't work that way. The bus is twice as wide as one memory module. So if you have two you can access them in parallel. It does not matter at all about which process accesses which memory. All the RAM does is back the cache
 
What's the benefit of these mobile quad cores anyway? There's still some apps that don't even take advantage of the dual cores and only very few that take advantage of the quad cores in the Mac Pros. Why is everyone getting so excited? The current processors in the iMacs and the MBP's are quite powerful and should last anyone with high demands for 3-4 years in the computing world easily.
 
HLdan said:
What's the benefit of these mobile quad cores anyway? There's still some apps that don't even take advantage of the dual cores and only very few that take advantage of the quad cores in the Mac Pros. Why is everyone getting so excited? The current processors in the iMacs and the MBP's are quite powerful and should last anyone with high demands for 3-4 years in the computing world easily.
Click to expand...

Its a long way away for sure. Encoding and (some) video games take advantage of multiple cores. Of course, its nice to have two or three apps running and still have CPU headroom to spare.
 
lazyrighteye said:
I just don't see Apple jumping to quad-core MBPs as soon as Jan.
I mean, from where MBPs are today to quads???
Would that not represent the largest leap in Apple's history?
Regardless, that's just not how they roll.
They'll take their sweet time and milk as much out of this tech as possible.
A small bump here, a tweak there - which is both smart business and annoying as all get out, to me.
Click to expand...
It is for second HALF OF 2008, not january... And it's not a chip which works good in laptops anyway, so more like quad MBPs in 2-3 upgrades depending on the rate we see them at.

But who cares, just give me higher res and stop ****ing up my GPU and vram.
 
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