Intel Launches Dual-Core and Ultra-Low Voltage Ivy Bridge Processors

[DakotaGuy]

As I quoted the article, it stated Apple may not update the Mac Pro, as Intel's Sandy Bridge E processors have been out since March while Ivy Bridge is just coming to fruition and the Mac Pro hasn't been updated since 2010. Logically, Apple seems less interested in updating said device. I didn't state an opinion, just an observation so I don't understand the hate ?

Apple has stated over and over that we have entered a Post PC era. I'd say just be glad they appear committed to the iMac for the time being. Apple may let Windows and PC builders have the pro market and considering how small and likely unprofitable that market I can't say I would fault their decision if they do that.

The Mac Pro market is very small and I'm afraid putting too many resources into this market could result in a net loss. Apple doesn't build a product line that create a loss. iDevices are where the big money is being made and that should be Apple's main focus going forward if they want to make the most money they can.

With that said it will be nice to see the portables and possibly iMac updated soon.

 

[wwchris]

Huh?

Wow.
Dual Core in 2012 in Apple laptops when other manufactures are going quad or higher on their laptops. Image

Huh? What am I missing? I am using a Quad Core i7 Macbook Pro I bought 6 months ago.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Is it possible for the 13 inch pro to have quad core? I remember hearing a reason but was hoping that was no longer the case after all this time.

Yes

 

[PVisitors]

The 13" quad core chip potentially throws the Pro line up in the air.

Do we see a dual core base model, quad core upper model. Or do we see quad core across board and a dGPU in the higher end 13" model to then distinguish good and proper between the Air and now slimmer MBP with no ODD.

WWDC will be interesting.

 

[guzhogi]

Huh? What am I missing? I am using a Quad Core i7 Macbook Pro I bought 6 months ago.

What size? Just looked at the online Apple Store. I think he's referring to 13" MBPs. 15 & 17" MBPs come with quad core. 13" have only dual cores.

 

[adildacoolset]

(Why vote this posting down, I'm only reporting FACTS, don't dislike "my post" due to Intels poor decision on how the new CPU'd are built.) Don't shoot the messenger just because you don't like the message!


/

Huh, I voted you down because you are showing off what device you have on for signature. I don't like it when people boast, grrr...

 

[Colpeas]

I would love to see i5-3360M in the base 13" MacBook Pro along with the retina display. Or maybe even i7-3520M, but i guess this i7 might be a little too expensive for a $1199 MacBook. Perhaps as a BTO option...?

This is how I see processors in 2012 MBP 13" lineup:

$1199: i5-3360M, with BTO option of i7-3520M for additional $150
$1499: i7-3612QM

Likely or not? What do you think?

 

[GSPice]

No they are worse.
Rather than use proper decent soldered on heat spreaders on the CPU's that Sandybridge has/has they are using cheap and nasty thermal compound so the chips are being found to run hotter due to the worse cooling of this change.



http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2171299/intel-admits-ivy-bridge-chips-run-hotter

http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/...-due-to-intels-thermal-paste-choice-20120514/

http://www.overclockers.com/ivy-bridge-temperatures

I guess the "Managers" thought they could save a few cents per chip by doing this, and hence ruin them

To make it even worse and even more unforgivable, it appears from one of those articles, replacing the cheap heat sink compound with a higher quality one, drops loads off the CPU temps.
Now only have they switched to compound rather than solder them on (Sandybridge) but they appear to have used really cheap and poor performing compound.



/

Are you going to be running these processors out of spec? Aren't overclockers (such as yourself?) always coming up with unique, uncommon, and unorthodox ways to keep their processors cool? Don't tell me that it's ok to build systems with "creative" forms of passive and active cooling, but it's not ok to switch out the thermal paste the cpu ships with.

If you're *not* an overclocker, then I ask again, why would you be running this processor out of spec? And on a Mac? Within spec, there's no problem.

 

[Jaro65]

Apple: Just release your updated computers already!

 

[nick_elt]

Huh? What am I missing? I am using a Quad Core i7 Macbook Pro I bought 6 months ago.

hes talking about the macbook air chips but they use ulv chips and almost all ultrabooks are dualcore (are there any quad core ultrabook? so his point is mute. hes just trolling, ignore and move on.

 

[IlluminatedSage]

Apple has stated over and over that we have entered a Post PC era. I'd say just be glad they appear committed to the iMac for the time being. Apple may let Windows and PC builders have the pro market and considering how small and likely unprofitable that market I can't say I would fault their decision if they do that.

The Mac Pro market is very small and I'm afraid putting too many resources into this market could result in a net loss. Apple doesn't build a product line that create a loss. iDevices are where the big money is being made and that should be Apple's main focus going forward if they want to make the most money they can.

With that said it will be nice to see the portables and possibly iMac updated soon.

This is just ridiculous. Apple certainly has an interest in iPad's and iPhones becoming the golden standard for mobile / tablet computing, where they are microsoft like in their dominance. But... lots of us use Mac's and many professionals need the power to do great things.

it is more than stupid to say that this market isn't worth getting served. Apple has not updated the Mac Pro in about 2 years. 2 years.

When the company is reaping more profits than entire nations GDP... Apple can do better by this market.

Apple ought to have a Midrange tower and a high end tower for the professional/power user market. period.

imac's just doing have the power, and many people need to choose their own monitors and add on's. no a mac mini wont do the trick for most of these people

 

[Piggie]

Are you going to be running these processors out of spec? Aren't overclockers (such as yourself?) always coming up with unique, uncommon, and unorthodox ways to keep their processors cool? Don't tell me that it's ok to build systems with "creative" forms of passive and active cooling, but it's not ok to switch out the thermal paste the cpu ships with.

If you're *not* an overclocker, then I ask again, why would you be running this processor out of spec? And on a Mac? Within spec, there's no problem.

The point is, if a chip runs hotter a chip runs hotter at any temp.
The very last thing you want in ANY Apple product (due to overly snug designs) is any component running hotter. You always want to get the heat out of the CPU and into the cooling parts of your computer design.

 

[ankehuber]

Apple, just hurry up, pick one and shove it in an iMac. I have money I want to throw at you!

 

[CountSessine]

Wow.
Dual Core in 2012 in Apple laptops when other manufactures are going quad or higher on their laptops. Image

Huh? WTF are you talking about? Apple has been all quad-core at 15" and above for ages now. I can tell you that Lenovo in particular makes you pay through the nose (think MacBook Pro prices but without the MacBook Pro build quality) for quad core at any size.

 

[macmastersam]

In what way does the announcement of Ivy Bridge processors have anything to do with the Mac Pro either coming out or not coming out?

It's entirely unrelated.

As for me, I'm putting faith in this.

you are totally right. ultrabook hardware has nothing to do with mac pros....

 

[charlituna]

In what way does the announcement of Ivy Bridge processors have anything to do with the Mac Pro either coming out or not coming out?

It's entirely unrelated.

Yep it really doesn't say anything about Apple doing anything or when. But the rumor sites will always make such claims. Just like the ones about how Apple is going to announce new hardware at their software conference. And so on

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

Are these better all round than Sandy-Bridge? Or just for things like integrated Graphics? Is it much of a benefit in a machine with a dedicated video card?

Ivy Bridge CPU: Up to 25 percent more performance, up to 20 percent less heat*.
Ivy Bridge IGP: Up to 60 percent more performance, and less heat*.

The maximum Turbo Boost frequency is also higher, because the CPU/GPU produces less heat. Intels Quick Sync VC-1, MPEG-2 and H.264 decoder/encoder is up to 40 percent faster*.

(*compared with Sandy Bridge)

 

[DakotaGuy]

This is just ridiculous. Apple certainly has an interest in iPad's and iPhones becoming the golden standard for mobile / tablet computing, where they are microsoft like in their dominance. But... lots of us use Mac's and many professionals need the power to do great things.

it is more than stupid to say that this market isn't worth getting served. Apple has not updated the Mac Pro in about 2 years. 2 years.

When the company is reaping more profits than entire nations GDP... Apple can do better by this market.

Apple ought to have a Midrange tower and a high end tower for the professional/power user market. period.

imac's just doing have the power, and many people need to choose their own monitors and add on's. no a mac mini wont do the trick for most of these people

It might appear to be ridiculous to the few that have such a use for a professional work station, but there just isn't money to be made in that market. HP is pushing forward and releasing the latest and greatest high end workstations and where has it gotten them? Massive layoffs and concern about profits. If Apple wants to maintain a pro class workstation then fine it can be a hobby, but I doubt little time and effort is going to be spent on it. I know Steve isn't running things anymore, but he was always a visionary and exited markets or got rid of certain outdated technology before anyone else.

They might quietly release an update in the next 6-12 months to the Mac Pro, but I can promise there will never be a midrange tower. Apple has moved far away from that.

Apple is reaping more profits then entire nations GDP because they have focused on their products that have the best return on investment. Apple could discontinue the entire Mac line tomorrow and continue to be extremely profitable... possibly even more so since the return from investment from iDevices is so good. Now I don't want them to do this and there is no way it is going to happen, but it is something to think about.

 

[charlituna]

Apple has stated over and over that we have entered a Post PC era. I'd say just be glad they appear committed to the iMac for the time being. .

Sorry but that comment just shows that you either haven't listened to Apple's comments about what the Post PC era is or you didn't understand what they were saying when you heard it. I'm going for the former since most folks seem to be getting their info sixth hand on that bit.

Apple never said that computers are going away full stop. Just that the computer is and will continue to be less and less THE device of use. No longer will we be always running to the computer to check email, surf the web etc. We are moving to an age of one device per user rather than use and that device for the vast majority will be an iPhone, iPad or similar product from other companies. The computer, especially at home, will be a hub for those devices. Not the key access point.

 

[3282868]

you are totally right. ultrabook hardware has nothing to do with mac pros....

I was just making a comment about this in the article:

tions to upgrade its entire Mac product line. Apple is expected to use Ivy Bridge throughout its Mac lineup with the exception of the Mac Pro, which would take advantage of Sandy Bridge E server chips released in early March should Apple choose to issue an update to that line.

I know it has nothing to do with Ivy Bridge processors, the article mentioned Mac Pro's, not me.

 

[DakotaGuy]

Apple never said that computers are going away full stop. Just that the computer is and will continue to be less and less THE device of use. No longer will we be always running to the computer to check email, surf the web etc. We are moving to an age of one device per user rather than use and that device for the vast majority will be an iPhone, iPad or similar product from other companies. The computer, especially at home, will be a hub for those devices. Not the key access point.

Your right and as that happens there will be less and less incentive to push forward dropping massive amounts of money on PC innovation and more and more incentive to spend those R&D dollars on those mobile products. That is where Apple is heading and is exactly the reason why we are seeing their focus shift. I predict in the future we will see more time between releases of the Mac product line and those releases will become less substantial in terms of change. There is nothing wrong with that since users are moving away from using a traditional PC just like you stated.

That is why I just don't see where the Mac Pro or some sort of midrange standalone tower really fits into Apple's future plans. I guess we will soon see what happens.

 

[DragonJade]

I can't wait for the next update!

 

[hartemop]

The 13" quad core chip potentially throws the Pro line up in the air.

Do we see a dual core base model, quad core upper model. Or do we see quad core across board and a dGPU in the higher end 13" model to then distinguish good and proper between the Air and now slimmer MBP with no ODD.

WWDC will be interesting.

I see what you did thar

 

[gibbo132]

I don't think Apple will get rid of the mac lineup anytime soon. After all at the moment we need a mac to make apps for our iOS devices! I can't see apps being made on an iPad! Even typing this message is annoying with the onscreen keyboard!
I could potentially see them licensing OSX on non apple computers if the mac business was not profitable anymore. Doubtful though!
Also, if I think of all the people I know/ work with/ meet everyday they all still love the mac. If there is a consumer want for the mac then there will always be a professional need for a mac pro.

 

[notjustjay]

But... lots of us use Mac's and many professionals need the power to do great things.

it is more than stupid to say that this market isn't worth getting served. Apple has not updated the Mac Pro in about 2 years. 2 years.

On an emotional level I agree with you, but you have just disproved your own point. In those two years since Apple has not updated the Mac Pro, how many iPhone and iPad versions have they released? How many millions of units have they sold? How many iPods have they sold? How many millions of dollars has Apple made on apps, downloaded music, and movies?

It's very clear that Apple has decided that it is more profitable to sell iPads than it is to sell Mac Pros. The fact that the Pros haven't been updated in two years suggests one of two possibilities: one, that they are SO busy working on a FANTASTIC Mac Pro update that when it comes out everyone will think it was well worth the wait, or, two, they simply don't care about that market anymore. Expect the Pro to be discontinued or perhaps kept on life support with minimal updates, using up minimal resources so Apple can focus their personnel on what REALLY makes them money, which is iOS.

The argument that "pros need powerful PCs" is becoming less of an issue these days as the technology gets more and more powerful. I remember setting up a video-editing PC 12 years ago and spec'ing powerful hardware with equipment that nobody else needed: huge hard drives, FireWire, etc. Today even your $199 Best Buy special has more than enough power to do the same tasks. We are increasingly spreading our computing and storage tasks between our home PCs, cloud storage and mobile devices like tablets. There is less of a general need for super-powerful server or gaming rigs, and there are plenty of other companies willing to play in that space.