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

Intel Launching Next Generation MacBook Air Processors

HyperZboy said:
I never said I considered it overpriced.

I was making a point that it's now underpowered for some users and less powerful than the previous model.

And another point... I'm not really blaming Apple. Obviously, it's Intel's fault for forcing the Intel graphics on Apple, among other companies that plan to use the new CPUs and Intel logic boards.

For many people with the current model, the new Macbook Air will be a downgrade unless you really need some of the other new features.
Click to expand...

Intel is not forcing anything. You want dedicated graphics get a MBP which has Sandy Bridge + discrete graphics chipset. The MBA is for portability and Apple decided (not forced) to use the Sandy Bridge IGP which makes sense. For the majority of people buying the MBA, SB will offer up better performance than C2D+320M.

Then you always have the option of "waiting" for Ivy Bridge
 
KnightWRX said:
Intel forced nVidia out of the chipset business. :p Which is what led to this whole GPU downgrade for Sandy Bridge equipped Macs with IGPs.
Click to expand...

Well then allow me to be the broken record...

Intel isn't forcing anything. Mac Book pro's are using Sandy Bridge AND have a separate graphics chipset. :rolleyes:
 
2IS said:
Intel isn't forcing anything. Mac Book pro's are using Sandy Bridge AND have a separate graphics chipset. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Again, let me be a broken record :

Intel forced nVidia out of the chipset business, making the choice of IGPs for OEMs be Intel or Intel. Now we're back to square one, where IGP = suck. When nVidia made IGPs, at least they made half-decent ones.

The 320m is an IGP, same as the Intel stuff. Except it doesn't suck.
 
But Intel did not force Apple to use Intel's IGP, Apple could have added separate graphics chipset just as they did with the MBP. Which wouldn't really make sense on an MBA IMO.

If I didn't already have an MBA and had the option between the current crop and the SB variant, I'd pick the SB without thinking twice about it and I doubt i'm in the minority.
 
2IS said:
But Intel did not force Apple to use Intel's IGP, Apple could have added separate graphics chipset just as they did with the MBP. Which wouldn't really make sense on an MBA IMO.
Click to expand...

Intel did indeed force Apple to use their IGP by not licensing other vendors to provide IGPs. The reason the MBP 13" and MBA 13" use IGPs and not dedicated GPU is one of space. Apple can't magically conjure up space on the logic board.

2IS said:
If I didn't already have an MBA and had the option between the current crop and the SB variant, I'd pick the SB without thinking twice about it and I doubt i'm in the minority.
Click to expand...

I push the GPU more often than I push the CPU on my MBA. I doubt I'm in the minority, though I'm probably part of the minority that actual knows this little fact. ;)

No matter how much you try to spin this, Intel got greedy on this one and couldn't back their greed with competence. They have sucked at GPUs since they have been in the GPU game (Intel i740 anyone ?).
 
Most people use their MBA for browsing, youtube videos, email, office apps and perhaps video conferencing. None of which will be bottlenecked by the Intel IGP. If you're doing something above and beyond this that will be negatively affected by the IGP, you are in fact, the minority.
 
thunng8 said:
The trouble is .. I find the TDP numbers for Sandy Bridge very misleading. For example the previous i7 2.66Ghz dual core had a TDP of 35W and the current i7 2.2Ghz quad core has a TDP of 45W. Theoretically, it should only use 10W more when doing CPU intensive task, but according to anandtech who measured the task, the i7 Sandy Bridge Quad core was using almost 40W more when running cinebench.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/14

It just doesn't make any sense. Going by those figures, if the i7 dual core was 35W, the i7 Sandy Bridge quad core would be around 70W.

Not sure how this relates to potential MacBook Air Sandy Bridge processors, but keep in mind.. there must be a reason why Samsung went for the ULV processor in their 13" laptop instead of the LV one.
Click to expand...

TDP != Max power draw

The quad uses less than double the power of the older dual core when fully loaded - that makes perfect sense. It's getting more than double done when fully loaded too, so it's 4 cores -and- improvements in power usage and efficiency. That's exactly what I'd expect from the next generation product.

Under normal use he 2011 mbp gets better battery life too. Hmm.... Maybe I'll get one after all, looks very compelling. Even if Illl have to hack the opti bay.
 
2IS said:
Most people use their MBA for browsing, youtube videos, email, office apps and perhaps video conferencing. None of which will be bottlenecked by the Intel IGP. If you're doing something above and beyond this that will be negatively affected by the CPU, you are in fact, the minority.
Click to expand...

Fixed that there for you. ;)

Goes both ways really. It's just that more casual tasks (ie, gaming and watching videos) max out the GPU more than they do the CPU. CPU bottlenecks are usually caused by niche tasks like video editing/raw photo editing/scientific number crunching.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

Hellhammer said:
orthorim said:
TDP != Max power draw
Click to expand...

It's not. See my earlier post in this thread. Maximum power dissipation is usually 20-30% more.
Click to expand...

But in the case of the Sb quad core the figure seems to be in excess of 50%, not 20%
 
KnightWRX said:
Intel did indeed force Apple to use their IGP by not licensing other vendors to provide IGPs. The reason the MBP 13" and MBA 13" use IGPs and not dedicated GPU is one of space. Apple can't magically conjure up space on the logic board.



I push the GPU more often than I push the CPU on my MBA. I doubt I'm in the minority, though I'm probably part of the minority that actual knows this little fact. ;)

No matter how much you try to spin this, Intel got greedy on this one and couldn't back their greed with competence. They have sucked at GPUs since they have been in the GPU game (Intel i740 anyone ?).
Click to expand...

I don't think 2IS is getting that IF Intel allowed Nvidia to continue making sandy bridge chipsets, Nvidia could've easily integrated a 320m successor into the south bridge. This would give you the best of both worlds, the downclocked Low-voltage Intel HD graphics when on battery or basic surfing, or the 320m successor in the south bridge when playing games or aperture photo editing. All this WITHOUT raising the motherboard chip count that putting a separate discrete (on it's own, not integrated into the chipset like 320m) would entail.
 
magbarn said:
I don't think 2IS is getting that IF Intel allowed Nvidia to continue making sandy bridge chipsets, Nvidia could've easily integrated a 320m successor into the south bridge. This would give you the best of both worlds, the downclocked Low-voltage Intel HD graphics when on battery or basic surfing, or the 320m successor in the south bridge when playing games or aperture photo editing. All this WITHOUT raising the motherboard chip count that putting a separate discrete (on it's own, not integrated into the chipset like 320m) would entail.
Click to expand...

I thought the 320m was also integrated? Wouldn't that mean that would be your only graphics card were nvidia allowed to add them to sandy bridge? I don't see why you would have integrated intel hd 3000 along with an integrated 320m (or successor).
 
thunng8 said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)



But in the case of the Sb quad core the figure seems to be in excess of 50%, not 20%
Click to expand...

CPU isnt the only component drawing power. AMD 6750M has higher TDP compared to 330M as well
 
xxBURT0Nxx said:
I thought the 320m was also integrated? Wouldn't that mean that would be your only graphics card were nvidia allowed to add them to sandy bridge? I don't see why you would have integrated intel hd 3000 along with an integrated 320m (or successor).
Click to expand...


Why not ? A 320m successor would just destroy the Intel HD 3000 which is sub-par compared to the current 320m. Why not use 2 IGPs and go for a 2 chip solution instead of using a dedicated GPU and have to rely on a 3 chip solution if that 2nd IGP just blows away the first ?

Heck, just disable the Intel 3000 HD entirely.

Intel got greedy.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

Hellhammer said:
thunng8 said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)



But in the case of the Sb quad core the figure seems to be in excess of 50%, not 20%
Click to expand...

CPU isnt the only component drawing power. AMD 6750M has higher TDP compared to 330M as well
Click to expand...

I have already mentioned that the 40w difference measured was when it was running cinebench which does not tax the gpu at all. Gpu tdp should not be a big factor.
 
The backlit keyboard thing kinda makes me laugh. Every macbook Ive ever owned has not had the backlit keyboard. I even bought a aluminum unibody and still got screwed out of a backlit keyboard. Finally I got a 2010 mac pro and got the backlit keyboard. what did i do? enjoy it for 2 days then turn it off to save battery life. the keyboard light is always off now and the brightness is set to minimum. so much for that.
 
Acorn said:
The backlit keyboard thing kinda makes me laugh. Every macbook Ive ever owned has not had the backlit keyboard. I even bought a aluminum unibody and still got screwed out of a backlit keyboard. Finally I got a 2010 mac pro and got the backlit keyboard. what did i do? enjoy it for 2 days then turn it off to save battery life. the keyboard light is always off now and the brightness is set to minimum. so much for that.
Click to expand...

Sorry not all of us are blessed with 'night vision' I dunno about your advanced genetics, but using my MBA on minimum setting will give me a headache in about 3 minutes.
 
magbarn said:
Sorry not all of us are blessed with 'night vision' I dunno about your advanced genetics, but using my MBA on minimum setting will give me a headache in about 3 minutes.
Click to expand...

Majority of laptops don't have a BL keyboard yet the majority of people still manage just fine despite not having it or night vision.
 
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