Intel Officially Brands Nehalem as 'Core i7' Processor

[milo]

Apple hasn't released a Mac at MWSF or WWDC since at least 2003 that wasn't either a new Mac, a redesign, or a revamp (Intel transition).

And a new chipset would be a revamp. I don't see why an announcement of a mac pro with these new chips would be unlikely at MWSF.

Mainstream is below the Extreme/performance segment Bloomfield is targeted at (although the lowest-end Bloomfield is upper mainstream).

Ah. I was just talking about the chips becoming widely available - with desktop chips this will be around the end of this year, not middle of next year.

Are you saying that the only chips shipping by the end of '08 would be ones that would only be appropriate for Mac Pro? If that's the case, Apple better look at their strategy, otherwise the iMacs will be lagging behind much cheaper desktop PCs for six months or more.

Nehalem has multiple variants detailed here.

Thanks for the link.

 

[JoeG4]

Mac Pro i7? ..

 

[xyz001]

Intel = moronic naming schemes!

How come Intel NEVER continue existing naming schemes any more?

Imagine if they would actually call the next processor CORE 3.

Then everyone with CORE 2 would actually want to upgrade (and wait eagerly for CORE 4)

instead they invent a new name for each upgrade, so nobody knows for sure whats fastest anymore.....How about this one:

Intel Centrino 2 Core 2 duo 2 .26 GHz ?????

That's alot of 2's, What were they thinking....

 

[vixapphire]

if they called the next processor the Core 3, they'd have to name its midlife upgrade something asinine like "Core 3 Trio".

sounds too much like a Vegan diet targeted towards pilates instructors, not enough like a computer architecture.

Of course, "Core4 Quattro" might be cool; then again, it might also be confused with an Audi automobile.

 

[Eric S.]

After all that, I'm still unsure. But given that both laptops' designs are long in the tooth, and that mobile Nehalem is more than a year away, I'm leaning towards a major overhaul in at least the Macbook, and possibly the MBP, being seen in the next month.

I think you only have to look at the hint given in the recent conference call, which mentioned a product transition that would affect revenues in Q4 (i.e., by the end of September). I doubt that the product transition is an updated mini.

My Documents
Mobile ME
Ipod/Itunes/Iphone
YouTube

Consumers are narcissistic. Probably not going away soon

Apple's i-fever started with the iMac, which stood for internet.

Intel used the i-prefix for at least a decade before the i486 was succeeded by the Pentium. The reason given for that switch was that numerical names could not be trademarked, so it is interesting to see Intel revert back to one at this point.

 

[xyz001]

if they called the next processor the Core 3, they'd have to name its midlife upgrade something asinine like "Core 3 Trio".

sounds too much like a Vegan diet targeted towards pilates instructors, not enough like a computer architecture.

Of course, "Core4 Quattro" might be cool; then again, it might also be confused with an Audi automobile.

it would probably be CORE3 Quad and CORE4 Quad/Octo which doesn't sound too bad.

Core i7 is just lame.

it's the same with microsoft, they keep changing naming schemes:

windows 3.11 (version number)
windows 95 (year)
windows 98 (year)
windows NT (complete random letters, nobody knows the meaning of "NT" for sure)
windows 2000 (year, but built on the mysterious "NT" technology)
windows ME (overhyped word "millenium")
windows CE (huh?)
windows XP (overhyped word "experience" and trying to sound like OS X)
windows vista (just plain bad name)
windows 7 (version number AGAIN?)

 

[freiheit]

Too simple == more difficult

Would Core 3 have been too easy? Seriously.

Apparently, yeah. I read a quote somewhere else that "Solo, Duo and Quad" were dropped to simplify the naming. Forgive me, but when you drop parts of a product name which are actually descriptive in the name of simplicity, you lose both.

Just how many cores does a Core i7 have? How will one know if a (for instance) Core i7 750 (which might have 2 cores but a faster speed) is better than a Core i7 740 (which might have 4 cores but a slower speed)? With the right software, more cores at a slower speed will slaughter 2 faster cores, but now that the designation of how many cores a chip has will be removed, it's going to be more difficult (less simple) to judge one chip over another.

 

[iMacmatician]

And a new chipset would be a revamp. I don't see why an announcement of a mac pro with these new chips would be unlikely at MWSF.

Santa Rosa was a new chipset, and Macs using it weren't released at an event.

Apple may announce the new Mac Pros at MWSF because Nehalem is a more significant upgrade that most other chipset changes.

Are you saying that the only chips shipping by the end of '08 would be ones that would only be appropriate for Mac Pro? If that's the case, Apple better look at their strategy, otherwise the iMacs will be lagging behind much cheaper desktop PCs for six months or more.

Yes, given the current state of CPUs Apple uses. (There is also the high-end desktop CPUs to be released this year, but Apple doesn't have a Mac that uses desktop CPUs.)

This is one reason why I was in the Apple + PA Semi + Intel custom chipset to replace Montevina group. Because then they can release features beyond those of mainstream (Montevina) chipsets and CPUs.

 

[milo]

Apple may announce the new Mac Pros at MWSF because Nehalem is a more significant upgrade that most other chipset changes.

My point exactly.

And Apple really needs to look at using desktop chips for their desktops. I know, what a radical idea.

 

[Cloudsurfer]

it would probably be CORE3 Quad and CORE4 Quad/Octo which doesn't sound too bad.

Core i7 is just lame.

it's the same with microsoft, they keep changing naming schemes:

windows 3.11 (version number)
windows 95 (year)
windows 98 (year)
windows NT (complete random letters, nobody knows the meaning of "NT" for sure)
windows 2000 (year, but built on the mysterious "NT" technology)
windows ME (overhyped word "millenium")
windows CE (huh?)
windows XP (overhyped word "experience" and trying to sound like OS X)
windows vista (just plain bad name)
windows 7 (version number AGAIN?)

NT stands for New Technology. It was based on the New Technology File System (NTFS), hence the naming. Of course, it is now no longer anywhere near new technology.

 

[diamond.g]

My point exactly.

And Apple really needs to look at using desktop chips for their desktops. I know, what a radical idea.

They sorta can. As long as Intel is willing to customize desktop chips to fit in mobile packages. Otherwise the problem is one of heat. The desktop CPU's can run much hotter than the mobile ones. With Apple not liking noisy systems you would have a hard time cooling the rig when doing things that ramp up the CPU utilization.

 

[CWallace]

Intel comments on their new naming schema:

http://blogs.intel.com/technology/2008/08/getting_to_the_core_intels_new.php

 

[Eric S.]

Intel comments on their new naming schema:

http://blogs.intel.com/technology/2008/08/getting_to_the_core_intels_new.php

Right, that's basically what they've been saying since the announcement: "Just wait a while, it will make sense later."

 

[xyz001]

NT stands for New Technology. It was based on the New Technology File System (NTFS), hence the naming. Of course, it is now no longer anywhere near new technology.

according to the wikipedia entry there is no real explanation for the "NT" aside from various insider stories about its origin.

Only later was it for marketing purposes expanded to "New Techology" which was especially lame since windows 2000 was then

"built on New Technology Technology".....

 

[milo]

They sorta can. As long as Intel is willing to customize desktop chips to fit in mobile packages. Otherwise the problem is one of heat. The desktop CPU's can run much hotter than the mobile ones. With Apple not liking noisy systems you would have a hard time cooling the rig when doing things that ramp up the CPU utilization.

It's not apple not liking noisy systems as much as apple wanting systems in skinny, trendy boxes. Style over substance in the case of a desktop machine.

You can cool most desktop CPUs quietly without too much trouble, it just takes more space than cooling a laptop CPU. And even laptop CPUs can be pretty noisy when all the fans have to kick on.

 

[Rorikynn]

The new "boards" are Montevina - out now in all other laptops...

The Montevina platform is essentially Santa Rosa with a spec bump. In other words, nothing radical. The layout of the mother board probably won't change. So, no reason to redesign a case. I wouldn't be surprised if some of Apples portables skip Montevina all together.

Calpella on the other hand will be ditching FSB all together and will be pinned for Nehalem. A substantial board redesign. A good time to redesign and optimize for the new board layout and TDP requirements.

 

[BullMooseFilms]

The Montevina platform is essentially Santa Rosa with a spec bump. In other words, nothing radical. The layout of the mother board probably won't change. So, no reason to redesign a case. I wouldn't be surprised if some of Apples portables skip Montevina all together.

Calpella on the other hand will be ditching FSB all together and will be pinned for Nehalem. A substantial board redesign. A good time to redesign and optimize for the new board layout and TDP requirements.

The Montevina chipset offers smaller layouts, and therefore a savings of space to make a case redesign worthwhile at this point. This doesn't mean they won't further tweak with Calpella/Nehalem.

The notebook line will have new cases this month or next.

 

[Eric S.]

The Montevina chipset offers smaller layouts, and therefore a savings of space to make a case redesign worthwhile at this point.

I think that's only true of the Small Form Factor, which hasn't been released yet for Montevina, right?

 

[CWallace]

It is not Montevina, per se, that allows smaller form factors, but the new 22mm package Penryns that Montevina supports.

 

[Eric S.]

It is not Montevina, per se, that allows smaller form factors, but the new 22mm package Penryns that Montevina supports.

The Montevina SFF has not been released yet, although it's possible that Apple is waiting for that before announcing new MBs. But the SFF processors top out at 2.4GHz, so if they're used in MBs we won't see any speed increase in the new models. And they certainly wouldn't be used for the MBP.

Unless the MB is redesigned to be a lot more like the Air I wouldn't think it would use SFF. A case redesign is more likely for aesthetic reasons.

 

[iMacmatician]

The Montevina platform is essentially Santa Rosa with a spec bump. In other words, nothing radical. The layout of the mother board probably won't change.

Chipset is 40% smaller.

Calpella on the other hand will be ditching FSB all together and will be pinned for Nehalem. A substantial board redesign. A good time to redesign and optimize for the new board layout

Most of the first Intel Macs used the same or similar case as their PowerPC predecessors… chipset/motherboard redesigns don't always mean case redesigns.

and TDP requirements.

The TDPs of Nehalem is the same as the TDPs of Montevina. Montevina will have the option of a 25 W CPU instead of a 35 W CPU, lowering total TDP.

 

[iMacmatician]

Phonetic reasons

Fudzilla gives some details on the Core i7 branding.

We had a pleasant meeting with a nice chap from Intel that told us the story of the Nehalem brand. As you should probably know by now, the Nehalem Bloomfield desktop CPU will end up branded as Core i7.

Intel explained that Core brand was very well accepted but at the same time, Intel had too many variables, such as Core 2, Core 2 Quad, Core 2 Extreme and so on. It was too confusing and therefore Intel simply decided to keep Core.

The letter i and number 7 are there mainly for phonetical reasons, Core i7 as a whole sounds and pronounces good. The small "i" doesn't actually stand for anything, explains Intel. Even the number 7 doesn't mean its the seventh generation processor, it is just a number.

This might give you an idea that future Nehalems might end up branded as Core i6, Core i5 and so on, but this is not something Intel wanted to talk about. Intel simply hopes that this will get things a bit more simpler than it was. So, now you know.

Weird…

I'm even more interested in how this turns out. I'm also wondering if variants will have different names depending on core count as well as market segment.

 

[Eric S.]

Weird…

Indeed. The Core brand "too many variables," so they decided to invent another, meaningless one?

 

[mjteix]

Chipset is 40% smaller.

Most of the first Intel Macs used the same or similar case as their PowerPC predecessors… chipset/motherboard redesigns don't always mean case redesigns.

The TDPs of Nehalem is the same as the TDPs of Montevina. Montevina will have the option of a 25 W CPU instead of a 35 W CPU, lowering total TDP.

the regular Montevina chipset (PM45/GM45) is the same size as the Santa Rosa chipset:
MCH 34x34mm, ICH 31x31mm
Montevina's SSF chipset (GS45) is smaller than the regular ones (like the MBA one):
MCH 27x25mm, ICH 16x16mm

We don't now yet the exact TDP of mobile nehalems (the cpus), but it looks like, with the addition of the memory controller, it will be higher:
Penryn/Montevina 25W will become 35W under Nehalem
Penryn/Montevina 35W will become 45W under Nehalem
Penryn/Montevina 45W will become 55W under Nehalem

What will change is the TDP of the chipset, reduced to a single IO hub that may have a 10W TDP.

What is for sure, it's that the heat repartition will be different with Nehalem because of the more powerful cpus and the single IOH (instead of the current 3 chips design).

 

[diamond.g]

the regular Montevina chipset (PM45/GM45) is the same size as the Santa Rosa chipset:
MCH 34x34mm, ICH 31x31mm
Montevina's SSF chipset (GS45) is smaller than the regular ones (like the MBA one):
MCH 27x25mm, ICH 16x16mm

We don't now yet the exact TDP of mobile nehalems (the cpus), but it looks like, with the addition of the memory controller, it will be higher:
Penryn/Montevina 25W will become 35W under Nehalem
Penryn/Montevina 35W will become 45W under Nehalem
Penryn/Montevina 45W will become 55W under Nehalem

What will change is the TDP of the chipset, reduced to a single IO hub that may have a 10W TDP.

What is for sure, it's that the heat repartition will be different with Nehalem because of the more powerful cpus and the single IOH (instead of the current 3 chips design).

I also believe that the GPU is supposed to be integrated with the CPU for mobile Nehalem. That should be most of the heat production. The memory controller shouldn't produce 10W of heat...