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

Intel Introduces Core i7 Quad-Core Mobile Processors

Eidorian said:
I don't see a reason to disable it to be honest. It gives me an additional multiplier when overclocking too.

Apple should have had quad cores in the iMac and MacBook Pro since since 2008.
Click to expand...

Me either, but I have seen stuff like that on my servers disabled out of the box (not exactly the same, but you get my point).

I could see Apple using these chips in their iMacs and waiting till Arrendale for the mobile systems. I could also see Apple waiting till Arrendale then upgrading their entire consumer lineup with nehalem all at once.
Eidorian said:
MCP99 anyone?
Click to expand...

Good call. It will be interesting to see how that all pans out.
 
diamond.g said:
Me either, but I have seen stuff like that on my servers disabled out of the box (not exactly the same, but you get my point).
Click to expand...
True, Sony has disabled Intel VT on their computers for no apparent reason.

diamond.g said:
I could see Apple using these chips in their iMacs and waiting till Arrendale for the mobile systems. I could also see Apple waiting till Arrendale then upgrading their entire consumer lineup with nehalem all at once.
Click to expand...
There are only a handful of Arrandale chips. There's going to be even less differentiation right now. Apple NEEDS to put Clarksfield in the iMac or it's going to be even more crippled compared to other desktops.
 
kingtj said:
I just read the reviews of new laptops using these Core i7 chips (on Gizmodo) and the battery life they get is AWFUL. Apple would be wise to wait for a better CPU to come along, rather than rush to engineer something with this one in it.... (None of the tested systems even reached 2 hours of run-time on battery.)

It *could* go in an iMac ... but Apple would probably rather save the engineering/R&D money putting one together with it, and just use the next chip instead. iMac users aren't really THAT performance-minded that they'd buy up the new model in huge numbers.
Click to expand...

those are brand X laptops they used for testing. i have a 2 year old HP laptop that still gets 2 hours on battery. down from 3 hours when it was new.

my 5 year old dell inspiron that i bought with an upgraded battery would push 4 hours battery life when it was new.

unlike Apple, with PC's you get a nice variety of options including battery choices. since most new laptops these days leave the home about as much as SUV's drive offroad most people don't care to buy the better batteries
 
danielwsmithee said:
There is a massive lawsuit going on right now between intel and nVidia about that. You can bet it won't be resolved for at least a year...
Click to expand...

Intel put a PCI-e port on the processors however.

To which NVIDIA will connect their chipset, even though it was "intended" to be for a GPU only.

As a PCI-e compliant device, there is nothing Intel will be able to do.

However maybe the CPU won't work without a DMI device also attached to the CPU, which could be a problem, as NVIDIA don't have a DMI license, despite the fact that DMI is PCI-e with a couple of Intel proprietary features.
 
Im not going to update my computer till i get one of these new processors in it. I love OS X since i switched in Jan 08 but now that i have seen the info on these new chips i want one :D Windows 7 coming out soon and it looks like it going to be a big success for Microsoft so Apple would be wise to include them sooner rather than later.
 
HP already announced they are putting Clarksfield in their MacBook Pro Clone (Envy 15). I really hope Apple finds a way to not be left dual core age.

HPEnvy2_prev.jpg
 
I'm suspicious of Apple moving any quad-core processor into the iMac lineup in the next year. Something tells me they'll opt for the "extreme" dual-core versions at the very most. It just seems too expensive for Apple's taste, even if the iMac is rightly a desktop machine.

We were all having this same conversation back in 2005 about the dual-core G5 processors making their way into the iMacs, which of course never happened (although this may have been more because of the timing of dual-core PPC chips and the Intel switch).
 
All of this talk is making me excited for the future. I'm going to upgrade my May 2007 white mac book in the fall of 2011. I'm already satisfied with the performance of my MacBook. Since Mac OSX is getting a smaller footprint, and by the time I get my next MacBook/Pro with these processors and USB 3, it's gonna be mind blowingly fast!
 
now seriously, what kill-joy(s) gave this article a Negative rating? I swear, some people must just get a rise out of being pessimists...

as for the processors, I've been looking forward to these for forever (and from what I've read, they definitely don't disappoint performance-wise), though I have a feeling that that's all I'll be able to do for now considering how long it usually takes Apple to implement the latest processors into their lineup... besides, I won't even considering buying a new notebook until Apple have released a 13/15" version with at least a 2.8GHz i7, relatively affordably-priced 256/512GB SSD (no more than $250-300 to upgrade from a HDD), USB 3, 1600MHz DDR3 RAM (or faster), and 802.11n final. and a higher-resolution/matte screen option would be nice (13"- 1440x900/15"- 1680x1050), though I'm fairly content with the resolution options available at the moment.

so ya, I'll be waiting for awhile... :).
 
FoxyKaye said:
I'm suspicious of Apple moving any quad-core processor into the iMac lineup in the next year. Something tells me they'll opt for the "extreme" dual-core versions at the very most.
Click to expand...
The just doesn't make that much sense. The current extreme dual core version runs at 3.06 GHZ and costs $851. http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=35431

The new clarksfield 1.7 Ghz boosts to 2.8 Ghz in a 2 core situation, costs $350 less, and provides tons better performance.

On and also notice the TDP numbers, the current extreme edition (available already in the iMac) has a TDP of 44W. The new Clarkfield processor has a TDP of 45W. Sounds like pretty solid evidence that the new iMac should have a Core i7.
 
I would expect Clarksfield based iMacs really soon now.

Ambrose Chapel said:
i had been holding out for a Clarksfield-powered iMac to replace my G5, but it died earlier this year and I got the currently shipping model. Think Clarksfield will ever make it to the iMac, or does it run too hot, and the iMac will have to wait for Arrandale like the MacBook Pros?
Click to expand...

Clarksfield is almost the ideal processor for lower end iMacs. I would expect new iMacs with this processor in the next few weeks. I'm actually surprised the article missed this application for the processor.


Dave
 
I think we are jumping guns here,

i take 65W Quad core desktop or lower clocked 55W Quad Core desktop CPUs...

These mobile CPUs are way to expensive to apple's liking, if Core i7 Mobile quad core coming then it will be only in the the top two systems with $1799 and $2199, that would be ironic.

Bring some form of Core i5 under clocked (read 55Watts) desktop quads please apple? 32nm might help this also, but that would mean they will be ready Q12010...

1.6/1.73/2.0 Ghz Mobile Core i7 Priced $364/$546/$1054 bit expensive
 
danielwsmithee said:
HP already announced they are putting Clarksfield in their MacBook Pro Clone (Envy 15). I really hope Apple finds a way to not be left dual core age.

HPEnvy2_prev.jpg
Click to expand...

Wow, how can HP get away with a design like that? Then again, i wish Apple would update the MBP to those specs.

Dell also has a new Alienware M15x using these processors.
See: http://www1.ap.dell.com/content/pro...are-m15x?c=au&l=en&s=dhs&cs=audhs1&ref=homepg

The price jump from the 1.6GHz to 1.73GHz is going on $600 AUD or around $500 USD, and a whopping $1650AUD for the 2.0GHz. Not sure if apple will be able to update imacs and reduce prices just yet.
 
CrackedButter said:
In a word, future- proofing..
Click to expand...

Well, good luck with that. I've given up on the idea. To me, the future is just 1-3 years away. It's become like trading in a car. I use it until I need something else. Then I sell the old one and put that money toward a new version. There's simply no way to keep up. I got a MacPro for my animation and video work, but I'm finding it's overkill for my needs. A quad-core iMac would take up a lot less space and probably get the job done just fine.
 
shanmugam said:
These mobile CPUs are way to expensive to apple's liking, if Core i7 Mobile quad core coming then it will be only in the the top two systems with $1799 and $2199, that would be ironic.
Click to expand...
They current iMac has similar processor price points.

Current Core 2 Duo Mobile prices.
2.8 - $316
2.93 - $530
3.06 - $851

Clarkfield i7 Prices
1.6 - $364
1.73 - $546
2.0 - $1054
 
danielwsmithee said:
They current iMac has similar processor price points.

Current Core 2 Duo Mobile prices.
2.8 - $316
2.93 - $530
3.06 - $851

Clarkfield i7 Prices
1.6 - $364
1.73 - $546
2.0 - $1054
Click to expand...

the current iMac CPUs are custom designed and they have E in front of their number and not the T (which are listed in the intel price list), i doubt apple paying that much $$$

can some one elaborate what socket type used in current iMacs?
 
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