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

Intel Officially Launches First Quad-Core Ivy Bridge Processors

My guess: Under-clocked ivybridge CPU's to give slightly better performance than sandybridge with less heat and power consumption...but wait for it.....then apple touts the resulting increase in battery life as revolutionary and magic. Apple drops the "Pro", replaces it with "S", keeps the unibody design for one more year, and makes half the features of lion Macbook S exclusive for no (real) reason.
 
13" MBP with the 35W TDP quad core variant? Add a higher resolution screen and I'm sold.

Also, secretly hoping that Apple will build in Quick Sync support under Mountain Lion.
 
Price Drop?

Shouldn't we be seeing a price drop in the current machines soon (NOW) if the new machines are eminent? 😕

{to clear out the current inventory....}
 
A Good Mac Rumor

It seems as if there are no Mac rumors anymore. These Intel processors did not spur many comments. The article just before was one of the few true Mac rumors. But the rumor of dropping the 17" MacBook Pro at a time as this current Intel update is just showing that the Mac while to you & me as a long time Mac User have never seen sales so big make up only 13% of the company profit. That means the new MacBook Pro may never come out with these new Intel processors. At least those that think that the processor in the iToys can replace these new Inte processors will find out the truth. The truth that for an iToy they are good enough, but for something to multi-task a dozen programs on 6 or more displays with 100 TB of storage only the new Intel processors here & what should be in what we hope to see, the new Mac Pro, would not wrk with an iToy processor.
 
chris200x9 said:
What jokes of chips the only reason they perform better than AMD is intel's marketshare, and that's a fact!
Click to expand...

But unless we build a Frankentosh we we can only go the Intel route.

Apple used a similar statement when they changed from the PPC to Intel. They said that the PPC could not break the 3 GHz barrier & that the PPC had too slow of an update cycle. But now after 6.5 years of the Intel Mac there are very few Intel Macs that come close to 3 GHz let alone be above those speeds. then when it comes to the speed of updates just ask any Mac Pro User that wants a new model Mac Pro & they can tell you that it has been nearly 2 years since the last new Mac Pro model. And to top that one off the processor that will be used will be based on the prior Sandy Bridge chip rather than the new Ivy Bridge chip. Does this sound like more timely updates" It doesn't to me. The same thing would happen if Apple would change to AMD or allow either model. But then Apple can only make a couple of models. This reminds me of the old saying about Henry Ford making you any color of the Model T as long as you wanted "BLACK."

----------
Torrijos said:
The main question is going to be what discreet GPU is Apple going to use (if any) in its MBPro line or a revised mini.

Still I was hoping for the new line to have a lower Max TDP, allowing the use of faster discreet GPUs, but they have the same thermal characteristics...
Doesn't bode well for the MBPro to Air form factor transformation 🙁
Click to expand...

Why is there so much about an already too thin Mac laptop being turned into what is already there, the MacBook Air? Wouldn't we just have another MacBook Air?

----------
thegreypatch said:
Doubt the new macbook pro's will be released tomorrow, isnt even a leak of a possible look alike or prototype design or anything apart from hyped up rumours! Total crap!
Click to expand...

But you must remember that this is the iToy Rumor Site. The old Mac Rumor site has been dead for some time now as there are no rumors of Apple coming out with new Mac models. They will soon be changing their name to Apple iToys Inc & this website will finally change their name to what they have been for far too long, The iToy Rumors Site.
 
strausd said:
Look at the new iPad. Battery used to be like 25 watt hours and now it is ~43 in the new iPad. Battery still fits in the same space, just more condensed and packed in. Still gets the same battery life. Totally doable.



Honestly I would kind of like to keep the same design. Mainly because then I could put in my own SSD and have the hard drive in the optical bay.



Not just bigger battery in a new design, but also a more condensed battery.

And I definitely think apple will be the first to bring high resolution screens to laptops. Everybody else is too afraid to do that because no PC manufacturer wants to innovate or bring something new. Especially when it could potentially bring their prices up, and we all know that the low price is the only thing PCs have going for them. I think Apple will be the first to do it without making the price go up one penny.



Just out of curiosity, can you name some applications that take advantage of OpenCL and don't take advantage of CUDA? Because I can name a few that only take advantage of CUDA without even thinking, and the ones I am thinking of are very widely known and used. Can't say the same for OpenCL.
Click to expand...

Can you say USB 3? That is also asked of Apple.
 
Naaaaak said:
From Ivy Bridge vs Sandy Bridge @ 4.8GHz Quad-Core CPU Showdown:


That's good.


Enjoy your new HotBooks™



Corrected.
Click to expand...

After owning a Mac Pro for almost 6 years now, why would I ever purchase anything else? I only hope that Apple listens to us & continue to update the Mac Pro for many years to come.

I have an Android phone, an iPhone, iPad, PowerBook, PowerMac, MacBook Pro & my Mac Pro. Only the Mac Pro gets enough use to say that I am a Mac/iToy User. My Mac Pro is on an average of 20 hours a day. Since I run Excel as my main program I reboot daily.

----------
MacSince1990 said:
The PowerPC 601, G3, G4 and G5 🙂
Click to expand...

That seems like too short of a list, but good work!!!
 
tido2012 said:
I just hope that they come out with a 13" laptop with discrete graphics card capabilities since these things are getting less and less upgradeable.
Click to expand...

But the rumor is that all MacBook Pros will be downgraded to MacBook Airs. This means no ports & no easy upgrades or updates.
 
you can't compare clock speeds across architectures

heisetax said:
Apple used a similar statement when they changed from the PPC to Intel. They said that the PPC could not break the 3 GHz barrier & that the PPC had too slow of an update cycle. But now after 6.5 years of the Intel Mac there are very few Intel Macs that come close to 3 GHz let alone be above those speeds.
Click to expand...

Ah, the old MegaHertz Myth again....

But, the "near 3 GHz (or slightly above)" Ive Bridge processors are much faster than the "near 3 GHz (or slightly above)" Merom/Penryn/Nehalem/SandyBridge/ processors.

Intel is working on doing "more per MHz" with newer chips, since going above 3 GHz is a problem.

Look at the benchmarks - the "close to 3 GHz" Intel chips absolutely devastate the "close to 3 GHz" PPC chips!
 
AidenShaw said:
Ah, the old MegaHertz Myth again....

But, the "near 3 GHz (or slightly above)" Ive Bridge processors are much faster than the "near 3 GHz (or slightly above)" Merom/Penryn/Nehalem/SandyBridge/ processors.

Intel is working on doing "more per MHz" with newer chips, since going above 3 GHz is a problem.

Look at the benchmarks - the "close to 3 GHz" Intel chips absolutely devastate the "close to 3 GHz" PPC chips!
Click to expand...

You already know the old Mac story of the processors used in Macs do more work per cycle than the competitors models do. So we are already in agreement to what MHz actually means.

I was only making comments on the Apple statements of why they switched from PPC processors to Intel processors. One of the main reasons stated at that time was the inability of the PPC processor to hit & exceed the 3 GHz speed point. This means that the cpu speed had something to do with it. The fact that the new Inte cpus do more work per clock cycle seems to fall in line with the old PPC argument? Does this now mean that we will be seeing the AMD or some other processor replacing the old aging, not able to go much faster than the 3 GHz speed level after 6 years of trying plus getting more work per cycle, the old argument is coming back.

This doesn't mean you're wrong, it just menas that you need to see things in a little more open light. Its the same arguments for the same reasons.
 
strausd said:
Ivy Bridge is the first to fully support TB and USB 3, so I fully expect it.
Click to expand...

Ivy Bridge includes USB 3.0, but it does not have T-Bolt support.

Correction: Ivy Bridge and Thunderbolt - Featured, not Integrated

by Anand Lal Shimpi on 6/1/2011 4:48:00 PM

Intel just emailed me to clarify a point from its Ivy Bridge presentation on Tuesday. While USB 3.0 will finally be integrated into the chipset, Thunderbolt will not. Intel clarified that the interface will be featured on some 2012 platforms but it wouldn't be on all and it won't be integrated into the chipset.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4406/correction-ivy-bridge-and-thunderbolt-featured-not-integrated
Click to expand...


heisetax said:
I was only making comments on the Apple statements of why they switched from PPC processors to Intel processors.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying, I took this line

But now after 6.5 years of the Intel Mac there are very few Intel Macs that come close to 3 GHz let alone be above those speeds.​
as a complaint against Intel, so I pointed out the improved IPC.
 
Last edited:
AidenShaw said:
Ah, the old MegaHertz Myth again....

But, the "near 3 GHz (or slightly above)" Ive Bridge processors are much faster than the "near 3 GHz (or slightly above)" Merom/Penryn/Nehalem/SandyBridge/ processors.

Intel is working on doing "more per MHz" with newer chips, since going above 3 GHz is a problem.

Look at the benchmarks - the "close to 3 GHz" Intel chips absolutely devastate the "close to 3 GHz" PPC chips!
Click to expand...
Still, AMD and Intel are pushing the previous and current generation of chips well above 3.0 GHz at stock. Haswell might see another slightly drop in raw clock speed with an increase in IPC. Piledriver (Trinity) is going to push up Llano's somewhat disappointing stock speeds.

strausd said:
Then whats the deal with this?
Click to expand...
Ivy Bridge will have more hardware with Thunderbolt but it is still an additional controller beyond the the PCH.
 
heisetax said:
Apple used a similar statement when they changed from the PPC to Intel. They said that the PPC could not break the 3 GHz barrier & that the PPC had too slow of an update cycle. But now after 6.5 years of the Intel Mac there are very few Intel Macs that come close to 3 GHz let alone be above those speeds.
Click to expand...

Clock speed wasn't the main issue. The desktop machines were actually really fast and competitive with what intel was offering. Problem was the mobile chips, the G5 had been in desktops for a while but laptops were stuck with G4 (hence the old joke "G5 powerbook on tuesday!" that you'll still see).

Main reason for the switch wasn't that motorola couldn't get their chips fast enough, they could get the speed but they struggled with them being too hot and using way too much power (bad battery life).
 
Didnt know where to post!!!

ok intel just releases the intel core i5 and i7 ivy bridge processors!!!! now we wait until wwdc and then get way cooler macs!!!! YYYAAAYYY!!! ps. this is the first I've read about ivy bridge so if it came out relier, well sorry!
 
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