Intel iBook Processor Speculation

[yankeefan24]

Well people were surprised when the MacBook Pro was released with an Intel Core Duo not the Pentium M that most people were expecting.

Also we are getting speed bumps with the current line of Macbook Pros, I'm surprised we can't get a BTO 20" Intel iMac with a 2.16Ghz option.

I think for the sake of $30 Apple would be stupid not to put in a Duo Processor in the Intel iBooks (or MacBook).

Apple can still save by not putting faster graphics cards, etc in the Intel iBook because after all it's a consumer product not a pro line product, it doesn't need a few of the features the MacBook Pro has.

the only reason why they would even think about putting solos in there would be to not hurt sales of the MBP. now that they have upgraded the MBPs, i can see them having the MB at 1.67 GHz solo and another version 1.67 GHz duo. they had to do something with all those 1.67 duos .

 

[Josh396]

Well I don't really need a laptop but there is no way I can resist a 1.5 Ghz Duo iBook. I wouldn't need speed but I would love the dual core just for Rosetta and a little more future proofing. If those numbers are right that Arn found (he's never wrong, right? ) then it should get great battery life. Add a 64 MB (please 128 MB Apple) X1300 and a baseline 60 GB HD and I'll be in heaven. Oh yeah, price it around $1,000 too.

 

[ezekielrage_99]

Does this also mean that we just might be seeing an Intel Core Duo pop up in an Intel Mac Mini?

 

[~Shard~]

Does this also mean that we just might be seeing an Intel Core Duo pop up in an Intel Mac Mini?

Personally, I think that is less likely, but I of course wouldn't rule it out. My feeling though is that Apple is going to use the Core Solo for something, and the Mac mini is the most logical choice. We'll find out in a month or 2 regardless....

 

[Stella]

A dual core iBook would just be absolutely excellent. Apple should take a slight hit on profits... it would be a killer machine.

 

[muffinman]

cool. i wonder if they will be thinner...

 

[macEfan]

cool. i wonder if they will be thinner...

I doubt it, if it was much thinner, you could snap it in half
I mean, 1" seems like just about the perfect thicknes for a consumer notebook.

 

[w_parietti22]

Ultra-Low Voltage in iTab???

 

[splintah]

didn't steve say something about a very sexy, very portable women thing kind of ibook ?

that sounds a lot like ulv

 

[ezekielrage_99]

the only reason why they would even think about putting solos in there would be to not hurt sales of the MBP. now that they have upgraded the MBPs, i can see them having the MB at 1.67 GHz solo and another version 1.67 GHz duo. they had to do something with all those 1.67 duos .

Yeah I totally agree with you with the point that it could hurt MacBook Pro sales with another line with Duos in it, however look at the current PowerBooks and iBooks.

12" iBook - G4 1.33GHz
14" iBook - G4 1.42GHz
12" PowerBook - G4 1.5Ghz
15" PowerBook - G4 1.5/1.67GHz
17" PowerBook - G4 1.67Ghz

There's very little in the Processor speed difference (300Mhz between the top and bottom G4s), but they distinguish the Pro and Consumer line with features (backlight keyboard), graphic, Hard Disk (Speed/Size), inputs/outputs, and so on.

But then again it could be Apple buying up a whole heap of 1.67GHz Duo and then getting a better deal on the faster processors, then leaving the 1.67Ghz processors for another unreleased future Intel Line of Apple products.

 

[yankeefan24]

I doubt it, if it was much thinner, you could snap it in half
I mean, 1" seems like just about the perfect thicknes for a consumer notebook.

you could probably snap a nano, but that didn't stop them. We will see a pencil thin iBook April 1.

 

[progect]

online store

hello everybody, newbie to the forums but been a Macrumors regular for years now.

anybody else having difficulty actually selecting a mac book pro in the online store?

I'm on campus and I've tried it on a mac and pc...it's a no go. Anyway, I just purchased a macbook pro last week! crossing my fingers on the rev. a!

 

[t^3]

I think you guys have forgotten about the Celeron line. Take a look at their prices ($86-134), much more reasonable for value-minded machines like the iBook and Mac mini. The low-voltage CPU's cost MORE than the regular voltage CPU's, so why in the world would Apple put them in a less expensive Mac?

From http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/16/intel_mobile_roadmap_q1_06/

"The Core Solo will form the basis for the next generation of Celeron M chips, which are expected to retain the old-style branding. The Celeron M 410, 420 and 430 are all 65nm parts and clocked to 1.46GHz, 1.60GHz and 1.73GHz, respectively. There's also a Low-Voltage 65nm Celeron M, the 423, in the works. It's clocked at 1.06GHz. All four chips use a 533MHz FSB."

 

[MacQuest]

...I think if they put duals in there entire lineup that would [give them] bragging rights (as mentioned above), but apple gets less of their huge markup (sob).

Apple will still make huge profit from their entire MacBook Pro line, iPod's, and other products and services.

Hopefully they'll decide to "take a hit" on the consumer MacBooks' initial profit margin and offer the low end 1.66Ghz Core Duo, then make up their "lost" front end profits in the back end through large volume sales increasing their visibility, marketshare, and of course giving them those "bragging" rights.

 

[progect]

I think you guys have forgotten about the Celeron line. Take a look at their prices ($86-134), much more reasonable for value-minded machines like the iBook and Mac mini. The low-voltage CPU's cost MORE than the regular voltage CPU's, so why in the world would Apple put them in a less expensive Mac?

From http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/16/intel_mobile_roadmap_q1_06/

"The Core Solo will form the basis for the next generation of Celeron M chips, which are expected to retain the old-style branding. The Celeron M 410, 420 and 430 are all 65nm parts and clocked to 1.46GHz, 1.60GHz and 1.73GHz, respectively. There's also a Low-Voltage 65nm Celeron M, the 423, in the works. It's clocked at 1.06GHz. All four chips use a 533MHz FSB."

Oh my god. Apple using Celeron? I never thought of that and I feel a great emptiness now.

 

[ezekielrage_99]

Personally, I think that is less likely, but I of course wouldn't rule it out. My feeling though is that Apple is going to use the Core Solo for something, and the Mac mini is the most logical choice. We'll find out in a month or 2 regardless....

Still Apple are the masters of deception when it comes to release cool new stuff (speed bumps already on the MacBook Pro), I wont really be surprised if they put Intel Duos in all there Mac Mini, iBook, MacBook Pro and iMac lines.

Apple are using the same processors as other computer companies like Dell, HP, Compaq, etc, and they still need a way to distinguish themselves apart from the competition in reguards to power/performance/value/features to entise new people to buy Apple products along with the exsisting Apple mob to upgrade to Intel. They can do it with putting a faster Intel processor in the computers for better performance/value, anyway April we will find out.

 

[lordmac]

Price difference between 1.66GHz Core Solo and 1.66GHz Core Duo is about $30.

Those Low Voltage Core Duos cost an arm and a leg though, much more expensive than the regular ones.

I'd love to see 1.66GHz Core Duos in the iBook and Mac mini. Every computer in the line-up would have dual processors - them's some serious bragging rights and if they could keep the iBook price down it would thump anything the PPC manufacturers could come out with at the same price. They're all probably sticking Core Solos in their budget laptops.

Its not just bragging right but also would heavily encourage software makers to code all the there stuff multithreaded. Which would then make the mac side of things feel insanely faster then the pc side of things as most pc based stuff is still single threaded. Apple already has a huge lead when i comes to how much of their software already takes advantage of multi processors/cores, over the windows world so why no go one step further and get an even bigger lead.

 

[Object-X]

Dualing Minis

So, a dual core iBook would mean a dual core Mini! Bring it!

 

[trans3062]

I wonder how current iBooks sales are going now that Intel chips are in use?

Before Apple would make a change and unless you were a die-hard, you might have missed it. Now I see the "Image the Possibilities" ad all the time on TV. I can see holding off on updating the PowerMac until the pro apps are available but anything that housed a G4 should be updated as soon as possible.

I know that I would not recommend the Mini, iBooks, or PowerBooks (G4) to anyone at this time.

 

[t^3]

Oh my god. Apple using Celeron? I never thought of that and I feel a great emptiness now.

I know it sounds bad, but look at the specs for the Celeron - it really isn't that bad. The Celeron is there to make the Pentium/Core line of CPU's look better, and thus, priced higher. The differences aren't that significant. People who want more should just get something more expensive, or it may even be possible to upgrade a Celeron-based Mac with a Core Duo. The current Pentium M and Celeron M are pin-compatible.

 

[mrgreen4242]

I can see them being able to make money on a Core Duo at the $1300 price range (current 14" iBook), with the smaller (13") screen, slower GPU $ less VRAM... they are selling the 1.83ghz Duo w/ 512 RAM, 80gb HDD, and a 128mb VRAM x1300 for $2000.

Put in a 1.63ghz Duo, x700 w/ 64mb RAM and the smaller screen, cheaper casing (plastic vs. aluminum), no expansion slot, etc and they must be able to get it down $700... getting the next $300 without going to a "standard" Pentium M chip will be tough tho.

Still, I'd pay $1300 for a machine like that (13" widescreen, 1.63ghz Duo, 512mb RAM - up to 1.5gb, 60gb HDD - up to 80gb, x700 w/ 64mb VRAM, SD, AE, BT) in a heartbeat... Not sure I'd pay $1000 for a similar system with a Core Solo, though... would be worth waiting for the Duo drop in price.

 

[powerbook911]

If Apple makes a 13-inch widescreen about these specs:

$1300
Core Duo
mini-DVI output supporting up to 23-inch cinema

I will sale my Powerbook and iMac Core Duo. Pocket some cash too. Furthermore, if they offered a $600 Mac Mini, with Core Duo I'd sale the iMac.

My hope would be that they'd offer a 7200 RPM hard drive option.

 

[Aqua Structure]

Apple are using the same processors as other computer companies like Dell, HP, Compaq, etc, and they still need a way to distinguish themselves apart from the competition in reguards to power/performance/value/features to entise new people to buy Apple products along with the exsisting Apple mob to upgrade to Intel. They can do it with putting a faster Intel processor in the computers for better performance/value, anyway April we will find out.

True, although Mac OS is quite a nice distinction already for the new buyers.

 

[QCassidy352]

If Apple makes a 13-inch widescreen about these specs:

$1300
Core Duo
mini-DVI output supporting up to 23-inch cinema

Yeah, that's what I'm waiting on too. They can call it a powerbook, ibook, macbook, macbook pro, or poweri pro for all I care; I just want to see it.

There was a rumor that the 12" PB would not be replaced, and if that's true then the intel ibook really need DVI. Personally, I'm betting on a core duo @ 1.67 in a 12/13" macbook pro and core solo @ 1.67 in the ibook.

 

[gnasher729]

T1300 (Single) - 1.66GHz
T2300 (Dual) - 1.66GHz
T2400 (Dual) - 1.83GHz - MacBook Pro 1.83GHz
T2500 (Dual) - 2.00GHz - MacBook Pro 2.00GHz
T2600 (Dual) - 2.16GHz - MacBook Pro BTO

Low Voltage Versions
L2300 (Dual) - 1.5GHz
L2400 (Dual) - 1.66GHz

T1300 (Single) - 1.66GHz costs $209
T2300 (Dual) - 1.66GHz costs $241
T2400 (Dual) - 1.83GHz - MacBook Pro 1.83GHz costs $294
T2500 (Dual) - 2.00GHz - MacBook Pro 2.00GHz costs $423
T2600 (Dual) - 2.16GHz - MacBook Pro BTO costs $637

Low Voltage Versions
L2300 (Dual) - 1.5GHz costs $284
L2400 (Dual) - 1.66GHz costs $316

Not mentioned in the article:
Celeron M - $86 to $134 for 1.3 to 1.6 GHz, 1MB Cache
ULV Celeron M - $144 to $161 for 1 GHz, 512K-1MB Cache

Add about 40% to these prices; that is what they will cost a customer. Apple is not exactly known to be a charitable organisation, so whatever they will use, we will pay for it. That rules out some of these chips in a $999 iBook.