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 iBook Processor Speculation
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
progect said:
Celeron M != Celeron.
Celeron M is Core Solo, with 1 MB L2 Cache instead of 2 MB, some minor optimisations in the core missing, and faster L2 cache. It will run at almost the same speed, at major savings in cost.
Core Solo is so expensive because it is a Core Duo gone wrong; a chip where one of the two cores doesn't work properly and had to be turned off. These chips are then recycled as Core Solo. That is also the reason why the L2 cache on Core Solo is slower than on Celeron M: Its cache is designed to be shared between two cores, which makes it slower. Unfortunately, the second core isn't there so the ability to share the cache is wasted.
This whole thing is beginning to remind me of the middle of 2005. I can just about hear the cries now...
"New ibooks next Tuesday..."
"New ibooks next Tuesday..."
mrgreen4242 said:
Dell Inspiron 1705 with 1.66GHz Core Duo; it is $1199 in their price list; which goes up by $149 for Windows XP (Dell recommended), $49 for Bluetooth (included in the iBooks), and they make you fight for $250 (mail-in rebate, hoping you are one of the suckers who give up the fight), which makes it $1649. I could have added the cost that you need to get the software up to MacBook Pro standards (starting with $79 for anti-virus software), but I didn't want to hurt their feelings too much...
I bet "ibooks" come in as single core (bread and butter... and price difference sounds small relative to price of book, but is big relative to the margin on the things). Cheap, profitable.
Then, here's the great part. New line, low or ultra-low chips, of something like macbook slim's. Sexier, longer life, plenty of performance, nice middle ground in price.
These days, it doesn't make sense to have three lines of desktops and two of notebooks, should be the other way around.
this scheme would be great products, solid product differintation, and profits all around. dual cores would cut into PB sales. Single cores keep profits up by encouraging PB sales (two cores sounds like twice as fast, plus extra hz), while simultaneously increasing margins on the ibooks.
can't lose.
Then, here's the great part. New line, low or ultra-low chips, of something like macbook slim's. Sexier, longer life, plenty of performance, nice middle ground in price.
These days, it doesn't make sense to have three lines of desktops and two of notebooks, should be the other way around.
this scheme would be great products, solid product differintation, and profits all around. dual cores would cut into PB sales. Single cores keep profits up by encouraging PB sales (two cores sounds like twice as fast, plus extra hz), while simultaneously increasing margins on the ibooks.
can't lose.
Don't knock Celeron Ms. They are fine CPUs, as good performance-wise as similarly clocked Pentium Ms. They just don't have as good a battery life.progect said:
The Celeron Ms are being replaced by the Core Solos. So there won't be any Macs with Celeron Ms anyway, but just remember that the Core Solos are the current version of Celeron Ms.
However, Celerons without the M are totally different story. There's nothing good to say about them (a few years ago they were good for overclocking though) - they were Intel's way of soaking up cash from noobs who didn't know the difference.
If iBook comes with Core Duo, then Mac Mini must come with Core Duo as well (Don't think Appl will buy Core Solo JUST for Mac Mini)
I think, we really have to think about iBook as a portable Mac Mini on spec...
So... from intel price list, I saw T2300 w/ Intel 945 PM Chipset and Intel PRO/Wireless 3945ABG cost $306 (even though iMac Core Duo use GM which is $4 extra) add bluetooth, change wireless, add HD/RAM... It's hard to control the price under $500. based on the price differet between a set and just a CPU is about $60, I'll also believe the Celeron M will be put into Mac Mini and iBook. 1.6Ghz Celeron M should be just suitable for Mac Mini/iBook...
I think, we really have to think about iBook as a portable Mac Mini on spec...
So... from intel price list, I saw T2300 w/ Intel 945 PM Chipset and Intel PRO/Wireless 3945ABG cost $306 (even though iMac Core Duo use GM which is $4 extra) add bluetooth, change wireless, add HD/RAM... It's hard to control the price under $500. based on the price differet between a set and just a CPU is about $60, I'll also believe the Celeron M will be put into Mac Mini and iBook. 1.6Ghz Celeron M should be just suitable for Mac Mini/iBook...
Aqua Structure said:
Yeah Mac OSX and iLife is a big distinction but most end users who haven't had much Apple exposure will still just look at the overall hardware, processor specs and ticket price and make a judgement based upon that.
Like it or not Apple will still have to make the distinction for the user on an inital "so what's in a Mac?" from a hardware POV to boost sales.
Otherwise there are plenty users out there who will definantly buy a Dell, HP or Compaq just on the basis of hardware specs and ticket price rather than which product has the best mix of value for money, components, software and other various features (which is Apple
).If Apple doesn't put 1.5GHz Duos in the iBook I'd be suprised.
I think Apple should stay as far away from Celeron as possible.
I think Apple should stay as far away from Celeron as possible.
w_parietti22 said:Ultra-Low Voltage in iTab???
Oh, COME ON!!!!
It would surely be called a "MacPad".
It would definately have a LV or possibly a ULV processor as well.
MacBook Mini...........low voltage dual
MacBook.................dual
MacbookPro.............dual+specs
MacBook.................dual
MacbookPro.............dual+specs
Just say no to Solo
Now, for a budget choice to keep the price below $1000, can any of you who are bemoaning the possible choice of Celeron M as opposed to the Core Solo tell me what the difference is between these processors, aside from the 2 MB cache the Core Solo has, compared to 1 MB for the new Celeron Ms? I had read that the architecture of the each core of the Core chips was almost the same as the architecture of a Celeron M.
As far as the LV Core Duo chips go, I would love to see them in the iBooks, but I'm worried about the price difference.
I'm still hoping for Core Duo in all of Apple's consumer Macs, including the iBook and Mac Mini at 1.66 GHz, as I have suggested since the beginning of these debates. It sends a strong message to developers that no matter what apps they are developing, consumer or pro, they had better make sure that they are multi-threaded, since all new Macs will have multiple processing units.
IMO, compared to either the Core Duo or the Celeron M, the Core Solo just doesn't have enough bang for the buck. Either go for performance, and use the Duo, or go for the entry-level price, and use the Celeron M. The Core Solo is the best of neither world.
So, the difference between Core Solo and Core Duo at 1.66 Ghz is $32, and you don't think the extra core is worth that amount?Mitthrawnuruodo said:I don't know, according to the list above, the T2400 (2M L2 cache 1.83 GHz 667 MHz FSB 65nm) is $294 and the T2300 (2M L2 cache 1.66 GHz 667 MHz FSB 65nm) is $241 and the low voltage version, the L2400 (2M L2 cache 1.66 GHz 667 MHz FSB 65nm) is $316 (and the 1.5 GHz version, even cheaper at $284). Not that big price difference...
Can't beat the price of the Core Solo T1300 (2M L2 cache 1.66 GHz 667 MHz FSB 65nm) at $209, though, so I suspect that is what's going into the base MacBook and Mac mini...
I know this isn't the prices Apple pay, but the relative price difference shouldn't vary too much...
Now, for a budget choice to keep the price below $1000, can any of you who are bemoaning the possible choice of Celeron M as opposed to the Core Solo tell me what the difference is between these processors, aside from the 2 MB cache the Core Solo has, compared to 1 MB for the new Celeron Ms? I had read that the architecture of the each core of the Core chips was almost the same as the architecture of a Celeron M.
As far as the LV Core Duo chips go, I would love to see them in the iBooks, but I'm worried about the price difference.
I'm still hoping for Core Duo in all of Apple's consumer Macs, including the iBook and Mac Mini at 1.66 GHz, as I have suggested since the beginning of these debates. It sends a strong message to developers that no matter what apps they are developing, consumer or pro, they had better make sure that they are multi-threaded, since all new Macs will have multiple processing units.
IMO, compared to either the Core Duo or the Celeron M, the Core Solo just doesn't have enough bang for the buck. Either go for performance, and use the Duo, or go for the entry-level price, and use the Celeron M. The Core Solo is the best of neither world.
As far as features, the Celeron M simply doesn't support the SpeedStep technology, which lowers the CPU speed when it isn't under load. This makes battery life a little lower compared to a Pentium M or Core Duo/Solo. As mentioned, Celeron M has less L2 cache, and a slower bus speed, but otherwise, a Celeron M is exactly IDENTICAL to a Pentium M or Core Solo based on the same micro-architecture.
So, in a nutshell, Celeron M + SpeedStep + more L2 cache + faster bus = Pentium M/Core Solo. Faster bus may not even apply sometimes since there are some Pentium M's with the same bus speed. I mention Pentium M/Core Solo because the Pentium M is what the current Celeron M is based on (Dothan architecture), and the Core Duo/Solo is of course based on the Yonah architecture.
Now, as Intel introduces more features, like Virtualization Technology (running multiple OS's at the same time), these may or may not find their way into the Celeron M, but will most likely be included in the Core CPU's.
So, in a nutshell, Celeron M + SpeedStep + more L2 cache + faster bus = Pentium M/Core Solo. Faster bus may not even apply sometimes since there are some Pentium M's with the same bus speed. I mention Pentium M/Core Solo because the Pentium M is what the current Celeron M is based on (Dothan architecture), and the Core Duo/Solo is of course based on the Yonah architecture.
Now, as Intel introduces more features, like Virtualization Technology (running multiple OS's at the same time), these may or may not find their way into the Celeron M, but will most likely be included in the Core CPU's.
I thought I had read that the new Celeron M does support SpeedStep - I will look for a quote. Edit: it appears that it supports power-optimized system bus, core stepping and mobile voltage positioning, but not SpeedStep, which apparently allows for one slightly deeper level of sleep.t^3 said:
And yes, I will concede that the bus speed is faster on the Core chips, but how much that difference will mean in the real world is debatable.
As far as Virtualization Technology is concerned, I don't think that will be an issue for iBooks - they won't have the processing power for it anyway, as entry-level consumer laptops.
The problem Apple had with the iBook was that it was too similar to the 12" PowerBook, yet there was a £500 price difference. I suspect the renamed iBook (remember, they want "Mac" in the title of them all) will be smaller versions with longer battery life for the student and general work, whereas the Macbook Pro will be for the high-end user (obviously!) and offer larger screen size, more power and less battery time. I'd be surprised if there is a 12" Macbook Pro - it will just be a variation of an iBook instead.
ezekielrage_99 said:
It also makes it harder to compare relative value of Apple kit with other brands if Apple is using Core Duo and others continue to use Celeron.
mrgreen4242 said:
That's the problem, isn't it? If Apple announce an Intel Mac mini or iBook (MacBook) available only as a Core Solo, there will be a whole bunch of Mac enthusiasts who will simply wait for Apple to bump them to Core Duo. More likely that Apple will announce both low-end Mac minis and iBooks with Core Solo and high-end models with Core Duo.
I see how that could work, and thats what I would have said before this thread. But after reading it I'm expecting three lines of notebooks. One middle line to replace the 12" Powerbook and the 14" iBook. Probably way off mind, I just hope that theres a model I can afford with a duo.MacMyDay said:
t^3 said:
Do you know the battery life that one gets with the Celeron M? They don't have the sidestep technology which is present in the pentium M/Yonahs.. Apple will do anything but limit the battery life of the ibook to 1 hour. Yes, one of my friends has a celeron M laptop and the battery lasts for maximum 2 hours even when he is just writing stuff!
Mitthrawnuruodo said:
Yes you can. The Celeron M 1.6 is $134
Why do they have to use Core in everything?
MacinDoc said:
On the other hand, the L2 cache is faster on the Celeron (10 cycle instead of 14 cycle). Again, hard to say how much difference that makes.
oober_freak said:
Since your friend doesn't have a Macintosh laptop with a Celeron M, this doesn't mean anything at all.
aegisdesign said:
I think that apple will want to put "Core" in everything simply for the marketing. Everyone considers the "Core" chips the next generation of moble CPUs and this is why apple moved to intel in the first place right?
Apple did not get up there and say "What intel has now is better than what we are using" they said "what intel will be making in the future..." so simply from a marketing perspective I think that they will use the "new tech". Also, were we promised more power per watt I doubt that they will be able to go up on stage with a celeron M and show all those pretty graphs (could be wrong). (By the way I am a lab geek that has very little concept of marketing )Well while I am at it I want to throw out what I think the MacBooks specs will be:
Low end:
13" WS (nice and bright, higher pixel density)
Core solo 1.66
512MB RAM
x1400 mobility (64MB)
60 GB SATA HD (5400 RPM)
Combo Drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
Built-in AirPort Extreme
Built-in Bluetooth 2.0+EDR
Scrolling Trackpad
Sudden Motion Sensor
Mini DVI out
No modem (yeah I said it )
Maybe list:
Optical Audio in
iSight
Front Row (ie IR sensor/Remote)...
$1199 USD (would they dare raise the price?)
High End
13" WS (Same as Above)
Core Duo 1.66
512 MB RAM
x1400 mobility (128MB)
80 GB SATA HD (5400 RPM)
SuperDrive (DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Built-in AirPort Extreme
Built-in Bluetooth 2.0+EDR
Scrolling Trackpad
Sudden Motion Sensor
Mini DVI out
No modem
Maybe list:
Optical Audio in
iSight
Front Row (ie IR sensor/Remote)...
$1499 USD
New form factor that lessens the gap between old iBook and PB in thickness etc (1" thick 4ish lbs) and because of this they don't release a MBP 13" the high end statisfies the need of the ultra portable power user. What do you think... am I hopped up on "goof balls"? I guess only time will tell...
Low end:
13" WS (nice and bright, higher pixel density)
Core solo 1.66
512MB RAM
x1400 mobility (64MB)
60 GB SATA HD (5400 RPM)
Combo Drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
Built-in AirPort Extreme
Built-in Bluetooth 2.0+EDR
Scrolling Trackpad
Sudden Motion Sensor
Mini DVI out
No modem (yeah I said it
)Maybe list:
Optical Audio in
iSight
Front Row (ie IR sensor/Remote)...
$1199 USD (would they dare raise the price?)
High End
13" WS (Same as Above)
Core Duo 1.66
512 MB RAM
x1400 mobility (128MB)
80 GB SATA HD (5400 RPM)
SuperDrive (DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Built-in AirPort Extreme
Built-in Bluetooth 2.0+EDR
Scrolling Trackpad
Sudden Motion Sensor
Mini DVI out
No modem
Maybe list:
Optical Audio in
iSight
Front Row (ie IR sensor/Remote)...
$1499 USD
New form factor that lessens the gap between old iBook and PB in thickness etc (1" thick 4ish lbs) and because of this they don't release a MBP 13" the high end statisfies the need of the ultra portable power user. What do you think... am I hopped up on "goof balls"? I guess only time will tell...