As opposed to the more rationale Apple fans who follow Apple's well published road map.
Edit: I welcome any news that isn't iPhone related 😱
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 Promising Faster Integrated Graphics in Next Laptops, But Fast Enough?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
As opposed to the more rationale Apple fans who follow Apple's well published road map.
Edit: I welcome any news that isn't iPhone related 😱
it doesn't matter if it's faster than their own current integrated graphics, it's gotta beat out nvidia/ati or else it's gonna be quite the downgrade if apple moves back.
1. The graphics processor isn't really built into the chip. It is two separate chip, dies, placed inside of one package. In the sense you are putting two dies inside of one package, yeah that saves space by itself. However, that isn't the only functionality being incorporated into the Arrandale package.
2. The 9400M already does this. Only it is the 'chips' to handle the other I/O, memory, and the graphics all go into one package. So the 15" and 17" need the 9400M not only to do graphics but to do USB, talked to the disk, etc.
[ Arrandale slides the memory and graphics to a different package. but doesn't pull out everything the 9400M does. ]
3. If Arrandale is paired with with a discrete chip haven't saved huge space.
upper end 15" and 17" now.
Core2 Duo package + 9400M package + 9600M + video RAM.
later
Arrrandale package + southbridge I/O package + discrete video + video RAM.
perhaps some difference in 9400M and southbridge package size. However to some extent just done a balloon squeeze. Some pinout complexity goes to the CPU package and some leaves the I/O package. The stuff these two packages as a set are connected to on the outside didn't really change much.
Likewise for the low end 15" and 13". Just take off the last two elements of the above. Still left with the same number of packages and in total the same number of pin out connections. ( actually maybe more depending on how the Analog/Digital output is done from the Arrandale IGP. )
iMac maybe, Fudzilla is also reporting that Clarksfield is 45W. An iMac could be engineered to handle that power level, but I'd burn my legs with that in a 13" or 15" MBP.
I'm far more interested in the Ion2 for both C2D chips and nehalem-based chips. The Ion2 has 2x the graphics performance of the 9400M. So you'd get graphics close to what the 9600M GT offers now but in a cheaper single package.
As said unlikely. Unless Apple gives up on thickness/volume , battery volume, and a few other constraints/features of the current line, then likely will have major thermal problems in a mode where the discrete graphics are going full blast along with the CPU inside the container. I for one don't want a computer that craps out over an extended period of time when push it hard.
If you look carefully at that demo laptop that had Clarksfield it may look "somewhat thin" but that that thing is huge relative to the MBPs 15". There is a built in physical numeric keypad. That likley means wider. Wouldn't be surprised if it died after 3-4 hours being unplugged too.
It is possible to build some quality laptop with Clarksfield. I just just think Apple puts a number of non-CPU oriented constraints on the laptop design that will preclude that happening.
iMacs there is a bit more wiggle room, but again Apple's dogmatic "keep the design constraints streamlined for themselves" is going to be a counter acting force. Apple seems to be institutionalizing that. Getting tweaked over folks acting like what they act like ... just setting yourself up for mismatched expectations.
Just like Intel will give you a roadmap of what is up for the next 12 months, Apple will not. Not even for products that might have something like a 12 month sales cycle. One day you wake up and "surprise" ! That is how they do business.
With an Arrandale processor the next iMac would be faster than the current iMac. Apple will sell that aspect.
45 W Clarksfield ≈ 35 W Penryn.
Clarksfield is more possible with the iMac than the MacBook Pro but I still don't think we'll see it in the iMac. And I think they'll emphasize the CPU and de-emphasize the GPU with Arrandale.
notsofatjames
macrumors 6502a
Fudzilla reports that the graphics performance of the integrated graphics in Intel's next-generation mobile processors (Arrandale) will exceed the performance of the current Intel mobile platform (Montevina).
I find it odd how they say they "should" be better. I would hope that technology gets better overtime...
gkarris
macrumors G3
People are still happily buying NetBooks with not only a whimpy CPU (Atom) but with the GMA950 as well... 😱
Ion2, like the 9400M, incorporates a memory controller. Have to look past graphics and at the whole picture. The mismatch with the placement of the memory controller with the Nehalem-based chips is a problem.
Ion2 is aimed at the hot Mobile Internet Device market. So far Apple's answer for that is "iPod". That means ARM which, again, means Ion2 isn't a player.
If Apple tries to stretch out the Mac mini forever like the last cycle ... maybe the straggling C2D it will probably have would get matched to Ion2. ;-)
Intel is moving the cannonical pairing for the Atom to the GMA500 ( which is powervr based ). Not sure people are "happy" with the GMA950 as much as tolerate it on netbooks. There wouldn't be the loud buzz about the Atom+Ion pairing if folks were truely happy with the GMA950 solution.
The 950 is old, which means less expensive at this point. If folks are happy it also is for the money left over still in their pocket.
Beerfloat
macrumors regular
Shh relax sit down for a bit, or your heart attack might have a heart attack itself soon. We didn't know you cared, alright? We apologise profusely.
You mean the sub $400 computer that Apple sells, but can't "really" sell because all sub $400 computers are crap and Apple can't possibly make one? LOL 🙂
Yeah Atom and Ion2/Ion might make sense. Intel isn't going to make that ancient Pentium forever (some older chips are going to start to get dumped with the upcoming new branding effort) . Neither is Nvidia going to make that ancient GeForce either. More likely Ion/9400M since it will become "old" and hence cost less. Plus Apple would have tons of experience with it at that point (can reuse all the optimized code already built).
Assuming that the low end Atom's price drops to that of the ancient Pentium M 1.0 GHz they are using. Also assuming can get inexpensive component out with the 9400M graphics abilities. In short, if the component costs are approximately the same, they'll do it.
Also don't think they'd do Ion2 because more folks probably would hack them as "even less expensive" Mac mini's.
However, if Intel adds even basic hardware support for decoding HD class video they also could be a player for this device.
DELLsFan
macrumors 6502a
I can. There is nothing about Intel Graphics that even remotely excites me. They have long been the bottleneck in any serious discussion of computer graphics ... and I think - always will be.
BJB Productions
macrumors 65816
wywern209
macrumors 65832
i can see apple placing the clarksfield in the 15 in and 17 in macbook pros because due to the smaller size of the manufacturing process , a 45W clarksfield might not run as hot as a 45W penryn. but arrandale does seem likely for the macbooks because of lower hear consumption.
wywern209
macrumors 65832
heck yes. please just let nvidia and ati do its thing and intel u do urs .SSD and processors.
whats wrong with a 1 Ghz pentiun m? lol and the geforce go 7300? lol
Edit: and 256 MB of 400 MHz ram
Yea, so Nvidia just turns off the memory controller. Big whoop. Maybe they spin a second chip w/o the IMC and go from there. The point was graphics performance - getting 40SPs (or whatever Nvidia calls them) is what counts.
Says who?
Those W ratings are Intel's suggestion as to how much power you should expect the chip to dissipate. I'd use those as a good target as to what kind of enclosures you can put them in.
Errr... if both chips packages have a TDP of 45W then that the design envelope you have to work with. Thermal Design Point is chip geometry agnostic.
You can do a cheesy design where counted on users not going to max power much and cut the power management corners. I don't see paying a price premium for such a device though. For instance, could count on most users not having 4 core problems. Many users wouldn't have problem because never really ran something that consumed 4 cores for any substantive period of time anytime. However, customers who buy and use the machine to its abilities would crap out if designed using the "it really isn't 45W" as constraint.
I bet a whole truckload of Clarksfield laptops sold by some manufacturers this Fall crap out 2-3 years from now (most of them after the warrantee expires).
Arrandale has a 45nm graphics chip in there with a 32nm CPU cores. Penryn and the graphics die ... same tech. Going to have similar TDP.
Intel doesn't just shrink with Arrandale but they also threw a bunch more "stuff" in there. Memory controller, etc. . If don't add anything (more cache , more math circuits , more formerly off die functionality, etc. ) then a shrink typically gets you less power consumption. That isn't what is being done.
I dual set up of NVidia cards would be great in the 13" Pro but i'm under the impression that there is not enough room on the logic board? Anyway, Apple should stay with NVidia and upgrade next year 512mb in the Pro's as standard?
