Can't wait to see what power they can squeeze out of the MBA's. I just wish that larger flash drives were cheaper!
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 Launches Dual-Core and Ultra-Low Voltage Ivy Bridge Processors
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
While I am all for the existence of long-battery-life machines, I would pay serious money for a machine with specs even just as-good-as a gaming laptop that ran OS X without being a hackintosh. There are times when I want long battery life, and there are times when I am going to be running off mains but I want to be able to take the machine with me when I travel, and would like the performance.
That my $3k MBP is noticably slower than my $1.2k PC laptop, and runs hotter while being slow, is sort of depressing to me. I understand that my interest in stuff that requires processor time and GPU capacity is really not Apple's primary market, but I longingly remember the days when performance users were at least a secondary market who got thrown an occasional bone.
Turbo Boost has been out for what, two or three years now?
No, it's not BS. It is a brilliant feature, and makes a VERY noticeable performance difference in a whole lot of workloads.
While there's a lot of stuff people do that really does use multiple cores, a fair bit of the time my machines end up with one single-threaded non-multicore-friendly task that needs all the CPU time it can get, and some background noise that might use a quarter of the capacity of a core. On machines with Turbo Boost, that one thread runs noticably faster. And by no small coincidence, that's the circumstance where I am most wanting extra performance -- stuff that's already multicore friendly is usually fast enough.
Exactly. If we were to wait for the "next best thing", we would never upgrade!
Ivy Bridge has just been released and people are talking about Haswell already.
Single chip ULV, eDRAM, and 40 EU IGPs are something to talk about.Exactly. If we were to wait for the "next best thing", we would never upgrade!
Ivy Bridge has just been released and people are talking about Haswell already.
I agree with you, those specs are definitely something to talk about.
I just meant that some people are considering not upgrading to Ivy Bridge just because Haswell will be (obviously) better. So will the next thing after Haswell.
As drool inducing as those features are for me, my MacBook is 5 years old. Web browsing on it is a chore much less h.264 decoding.I agree with you, those specs are definitely something to talk about.
I just meant that some people are considering not upgrading to Ivy Bridge just because Haswell will be (obviously) better. So will the next thing after Haswell.
I will probably be getting Haswell for my desktop as much as I would like it for my notebook.
Last edited:
A nick past my tech level, but VERY interesting. I can only plead "insufficient data" on missing that one. When T-Bolt was unveiled, I kind of felt that having the data and display protocols shared could be a bit of a limitation - a drawback of the "everything" port approach.
None the less, If implemented as you describe, I'd LOVE to see that. Since the Mac Pro has historically had it's display connectors on the graphics card, not the motherboard, that would solve the weirdness with implementing T-Bold in the tower configuration. But it would only be meaningful in actual use if there were more than one T-Bolt port on the case.
Still, leaves interesting places for conjecture. Knowing Apple's zest for consolidating product lines, I know they'd love to EOL the 27" Cinema Display for the Thunderbolt Display. But a pro-class machine rightly should have more than one T-Bolt port. One of the whole points of having a tower is to not have to figure out an annoying daisy chain of external devices. Anyone remember SCSI and how much of a pain in the ASS improperly terminated devices were? And of course, we would still want to be able to attach third party displays to the machines, especially the Video pros, who need to view their work on Broadcast Monitors.
Yeah I'm a bit behind... my latest computer is from 2006. I wasn't calling TurboBoost "BS", but it just sounded a bit fake to me. Thanks for informing me.
What makes your MBP cost up to $3K?? I am so curious to know more. Moreover I never understand why people have to get a GAMING LAPTOP?? WHAT'S THE POINT OF GAMING ON A AT MOST 18" SCREEN WHILE YOU CAN DO GAMING ON A ALL-IN-ONE OR A DESKTOP WITH A 27" SCREEN AND COST YOU LESS??
MacBook is more a business machine than a gaming machine isn't it? I don't find any PC laptop would beat a MacBook on backup and battery life. Can you get 7 hrs of battery life out of a Windows Laptop even without WIFI on? Moreover I doubt the Windows on your PC laptop would receive all your documents and images downloaded from your SD card without passing through hundreds of security checks.
Honestly speaking if I want to go casual gaming and I want a Mac instead of anything else, I would go for a refurbished iMac which costs at least $120 less than a refurbished 15" MBP. That's why during my first degree, I bought a $929 13" MBP instead of a $3K MBP because I know what it is for.
do you really think Apple would discontinue their best and really only mass market laptop line? No LOL. it would be like them discontinuing the iPhone or iPod touch LOL. The MacBook Air is okay, but its way under powered for what I do, I need Firewire since some of my camera equipment can only be controlled via firewire.
MacBook Air would be okay for light use I can't imagine final cut studio or the new X would run very well on the little 11'' model.
Intel Core i7-3612QM Processor (6MB Cache, 2.10GHz)
Genuine Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit)
14.0" W HD (1366 x 768) LED AntiGlare, Midnight Black
Intel HD Graphics (WWAN or mSATA capable)
4 GB PC3-12800 DDR3 (1 DIMM)
Keyboard - US English
UltraNav with FingerPrint Reader
320GB Hard Disk Drive, 7200rpm
DVD Recordable
6 cell Li-Ion Battery 62WH - 75+
65W AC Adapter - US (2pin)
ThinkPad 1x1 b/g/n
Web price: $694.00
You save: $655.00
Total $694.00
Estimated ship date: 6/9/12**
Ouadcore i7
Priced just now at the Lenovo site. For $1,200 Apple should definitely have a quadcore processor inside. The only reason it does not is to further distinguish the 13" Pro from the even more egregiously priced 15" model that sells for $600 more.
The only thing the new iPad can replace is an iPad2.
Well, you've chosen not to tell us all the model number here. The only laptop on the Lenovo website that has a 3612QM and is even close to $694 (at least on the Canadian site) is the IdeaPad Z-series. You're not seriously comparing an IdeaPad to a MBP are you?
I was going to ask you how you could possibly configure a ThinkPad for less than $1500 with a quad core i7, and then I noticed that the W520 does in fact come in for about $1200 with an i7-3612QM. This is the W series with the plastic case that shatters into a million pieces when you drop it on the floor at the airport. If you want the more durable and work-appropriate T-series with the magnesium skeleton, ie the ThinkPad that everyone is thinking about when they rave about the ThinkPad series, you pay more. You buy a T-series, and you're buying something that's a lot closer to the build quality and durability of the MBP. I'm typing this on a T-series now.
But you priced out an IdeaPad? It wasn't even a ThinkPad?
Have you ever bought an IdeaPad, or a Dell Inspiron? Or anything made by Acer? If you really think you can live with one of these $600 PC consumer laptops, and all of the annoyances and productivity-blocks they come with, you know where to get them. You could have one as early as the 9th, apparently.
To me the fact it is this close on specs and price, yet Mac has non-price and spec bennies, means one simple thing.
Apple wins.
Apple wins.
-_- I meant TDPs.
But actually it has everything to do with volts.. what are you talking about lol? Amperage*Voltage = Wattage....
It says "Thinkpad" right in the specs. The model is the Thinkpad E430. I typed "thinkpad" into Google, was brought to the Lenovo site, saw the E430 and priced it out and posted the specs.
You were flat out WRONG.
Deal with it.
Try to deal with it like an adult.
After seeing this post, I'll be pretty disapointed if the "base" model 13" doesn't have the i7-3612QM quad core processor at $500 more than the Lenovo.
- Still doesn't have a magnesium skeleton
- Chassis was designed for an i3 (which is the recommended configuration). All battery life estimates are based on the i3. God only knows how this thing is going to perform with an i7 jammed into it.
- Can't accomodate full-height 2.5" hard drives
- Even the i3 model has poor battery life
- Tepid reviews all around the internet for the E-series
- I have a Lenovo and the screen sucks, even compared to my MBP's 6-bit TN panel.
- Still not a real ThinkPad (any more than the W-series is). Don't kid yourself.
Pardon me? Aren't you the one who stumbled into this thread belly-aching about how Apple wouldn't give you a pony and PC laptop manufacturers would? And then you pull a severed pony head out of a bag and say, "See? A pony!"
Mr. DVD9, if you say,
1. X is equal to Y
2. Y is known to be equal to Z
...then yes, we can assume that transitively,
3. X is equal to Z
can't we? That's sort of what you did here. But let me point out something -
1. X is NOT equal to Y (an E-Series laptop is not remotely comparable, in construction, durability, design, ALL parts cost, or day-to-day utility to a Macbook Pro)
An E-series ThinkPad is a piece of crap, even compared to Lenovo's other laptops like the W-series, which is probably why Lenovo has had such a hard time getting decent reviews for it. That leaves your second big point (which you posted originally)
2. Y is known to be equal to Z (an E-Series laptop is known to be had for $600)
hanging, and kind of irrelevant, don't you agree? Which pretty much devastates your implied argument,
3. X is equal to Z (the real value of a MacBook Pro is anywhere close to $600)
Last edited:
As opposed to overheat under normal circumstances, which is the misconception one might have when superficially reading the article which stemmed this "overheating" issue.
Would a better dissipation solution be preferable? Yes.
Does it mean the current dissipation solution is not enough under normal circumstances? No.
