And about GPU acceleration i think it's a flop, it doesn't work in all that's not supported by Apple, it doesn't work in all new stuff, it never works! I have a 9400+9600GT on my MacBookPro, and Youtube video playback runs better with the HTML5/WebM cpu-only version. XBMC is gpu accelerated with VDPAU on my nVidia GPU, but with the 9400m it runs not so well with 1080p stuff, and 9600GT consumes more power, so i don't know if it's more energy efficient an i5/i7 Sandy Bridge processor with software decoding, or a Core 2 Duo + 320M with hardware decoding.
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 Preps 1.7GHz and 1.8GHz Processors Suitable for Next MacBook Air
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Every time, ever since I've been a member here, I get excited when Apple releases a new laptop, but there's always something that prevents me from buying my first Apple computer. When I web browse I find myself viewing a lot of YouTube content and flash video from other websites. Naturally, I always choose the best quality whenever I watch videos and I wouldn't like it if my computer struggled with playback issues.
Keeping my hopes high and fingers crossed! 
...Core/Core 2...Nehalem/Westmere...Sandy Bridge/Ivy Bridge... Two generations.
Last edited:
He's not being sensational. C2D is indeed two generations behind. Sandy Bridge is the second generation of the i3/i5/i7 processors. Significantly more powerful than the originals.
7th Generation CPU's - Pentium 4
8th Gen - Intel Core 2
9th Gen - Intel Core i3, Intel Core i5, Intel Core i7, AMD Phenom II...THEN, still in this generation, is Sandy Bridge.
Significant power gains does not automatically make it two generations. You can squabble all you want but I bet in 50 years when they are writing this history books on tech... They are going to follow this generational mode, not yours. Technically neither is wrong, it's a loose translation at this point.
The context of the guys remarks earlier made his statement sensational (and irrational as far as I'm concerned).
Attachments
Of course they do, it sounds a lot faster, and a lot better. It's clever marketing, they could care less how it's phrased. People hear second generation and they jump on it.
How can you ignore the facts when they're staring you right in the face? Core 2 is indeed two generations behind. From wikipedia:
Attachments
It's interpretive, from your 100% accurate source wikipedia...
"CPU generations are not strict: each generation is roughly marked by significantly improved or commercially successful processor microarchitecture designs."
As I said in an early post, it's a translation (i.e. interpretive). The way I have learned it is not processor release by name but architecture. When the nm architecture doubles you have entered a new generation. Processor companies may be calling them new generations, and because "generation" has no set definition, they can do that. It is not technically wrong but different from my interpretation (the original, I might add) of designating CPU generations. When we reach ivy bridge, we will be two generations behind.
So what ? Apple doesn't support it.
I don't care about hardware features if Apple doesn't provide the framework support for them, because then no one can use them on OS X. Exactly the issue with VDA... it's only supported on 3 models of GPUs, all nVidia. So any vendor using that framework doesn't support many of the currently shipping Macs (all iMacs, MBPs, Mac Pro...).
Oh they don't?
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/4
Only a matter of time before they open the API.
I would say the microarchitecture is more of a generational influence than the manufacturing process. It is hard to argue that it's not at least 1.5 generations behind and saying it's two is hardly sensationalist.
I understand that it's difficult for you to accept that your Core 2 Duo is long in tooth. But it's the truth. By your definition the Northwood Pentium 4's are only 'two generations' old.
As others have mentioned, Sandy Bridge is the 3rd iteration of the Core iX series (Nehalem ==> Westmere ==> Sandy Bridge). It is two "tocks" removed from Penryn on Intel's product cycle.
In any case, the first "Core 2 Duos" came out in July 2006. The microarchitecture is now 5 years old, and is getting long in the tooth. Granted, it was "current" as late as November 2008, but the Sandy Bridge Core i5/i7 offer many features (hyperthreading and turbo boost being the most significant, but also things like AES new instructions and AVX) not present in the Penryn chips.
Last edited:
Oh they don't?
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/4
Only a matter of time before they open the API.
Only Facetime is supported by OSX. And its still using a ridiculously high amount of resources (50-100%). I would say that it is not supported properly.
Intel lists it as the second generation core i family. I get what you are saying but Nelham/Westmere was listed under one generation. It may be completely arbitrary but i'll take their word over yours any day.
Doesn't matter, it's still supported. You stated nothing different than what the article said.
I would agree with 1.5 but two is more than far reaching by my definition. People can whine all they want, but microarchitecture is like you said, a generational influence, which is what we are talking about, generational. Saying two alone isn't sensationalist, but in the context he was using it; for his overarching claim "Apple uses outdated technology", it was sensational.
Doesn't matter, it's still supported. You stated nothing different than what the article said.
Poorly supported on one program is 'supported' (technically) but really, its grasping at straws to say that quicksync is integrated into OSX. I did say it was supported
I just said that it was not supported properly or fully. And yes it is NOT supported for anything other than facetime.Good idea, take the word of a corporate marketing campaign over that of an MIT Computer Science/Engineer Major....probably a good choice.
Poorly supported on one program is 'supported' (technically) but really, its grasping at straws to say that quicksync is integrated into OSX. I did say it was supported
Hence why I said it won't be long until they open the API.
You said nothing the article I posted didn't already say.