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

Intel's Clarksfield (Mobile Nehalem) 45/55W... Whats Apple gonna do?

I

iBunny

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Apr 15, 2004
1,254
0
So all the info out there right now is that The Intel Clarksfield Processor, which is the mobile version of Nehalem is due in Q3 2009. Perfect for a release in October or whatever. Great.

But every site right now is reporting it at 45/55Watts. Thats a drastic step up from the 25watts we are using now in the Core 2 Duos.

Now sure, you probably get alot more performance since its a Nehalem core etc, but how is big :apple: gonna cool that thing inside a nice nifty unibody MBP?
 
Maybe they will implement the new battery technology in the 17" Pro to the 15" and improve on it. Also, just because it's the latest and greatest doesn't mean Apple will adopt it right away. We may not end up seeing Intel i7 MacBook Pros until mid 2010. By then it may have lower power requirements.
 
I have a feeling the mbp unibody's will be updated to those specs. Technology moves fast and ever since the switch to intel, Apple has to keep up. Especially those are pretty huge updates with a whole new architecture. You can bet your ass they will update it.
 
I think they will update only if there is a 35W available. Maybe keep the MacBooks at C2D and MacBook Pros to i7. That would at least justify the price more for the leap. But I doubt we'll see this earlier than late this year, probably mid next year.
 
It will be Arrandale, the 32nm dual-core/northbridge all-in-one. Intel canned the low-power 45nm Nehalem since apparently Westmere was going well enough that they could bump up the launch, and it made it so the C2D > Nehalem > Westmere jump would all happen in about 6 months. Which is absurd, so they just cut in line straight to 32nm.
 
Not long time ago there was a news about Apple patent for laptop liquid cooling system - next issue will be called "blurp blurp blurp" syndrom ;-) But to be more serious - Apple should eliminate external graphic accelerator if they use 3D accel integrated with chipset. These laptops will be never ever real gaming machines that could handle new games in the high details, so I can not see a sense to put midrange graphic card like NVIDIA GF8600GT/9600GT and simulate that Macbook Pro laptops are gaming machines. If you need real speed you will not buy quiet and comfortable electrical vehicle but racing car with screaming HEMI or Boxer engine. I think that integrated graphic card like GF9400M is sufficient to run some game from time to time and to work with professional 3D appz. If you need real gaming laptop go for MSI with HD4870 or GF9800 etc. Less heat - more customer satisfaction, less graphic card overheating issues. This is especially important because Apple chose long time ago own way of laptop cooling system - heatpipe connected with bottom case; laptops will be thinner and lighter. I can not see other solutions now because nm technology will meet physical limitations pretty soon - on the other hand chips have more transistors even if nm process is smaller. Unfortunately still there is no spectacular progress regarding cooling methods.
 
My bet is with Cathode's thoughts, mid 2010 at best. The C2D will be faster for 90% of the buying public than a Quad core at a lower clock speed. If Apple was focused on making "gaming" machines maybe, but that has never been their focus so would be hard to get the same profit margins out of a 2500 MBP with an i7. Not to mention the power usage and heat issues with the thinner unibody design.

Considering they just updated the MBP line, I see no way they would update the processor again this year.
 
Let's hope the Core 2 Duo doesn't become the next PowerPC G4 in terms longevity in Apple's portable products.
 
I'm betting that Apple would stick to C2Ds on both the Macbook & Pro lines until Westmere comes out in 2010, or perhaps even Sandy Bridge in 2011.

If they didn't even put in a quad-core into the iMacs, what makes you think they'd put it into a notebook?

Plus, the general public has no need for a quad-core yet.
 
jaw04005 said:
Let's hope the Core 2 Duo doesn't become the next PowerPC G4 in terms longevity in Apple's portable products.
Click to expand...
thats what i'm worried about... i bought my powerbook g4 and within 6 months they released the macbook pro:mad:

i dont want that to happen again
 
cathyy said:
Plus, the general public has no need for a quad-core yet.
Click to expand...

Do you have some statistic to back this up? This seems to be the new trademark slogan on our forum.

The fact is the general Windows-buying public has been enjoying quad-core processors in their mid-class desktops for some time. They may not know they have a quad-core processor, but if they've spent $800+ on a new PC in the last 6-12 months there's a pretty good chance they have quad-core processor.

And whether they know it or not, tasks like photo manipulation, home movie editing and dvd creation benefit greatly from quad-core (or more) processing.

What's sad is the people that use Apple's consumer software are the direct target market of these processors. Who doesn't want their iPhoto face detection or their iDVD project to process faster?

If you're heavy into multimedia (and as a Mac user you should be as the tools are right in front of you, built-in), these multi-core processors will be a big deal.

I'm running Mac OS X on a Core i7 920 PC and you wouldn't believe how fast the iLife applications scream on that machine and the public build of 10.5.6 doesn't even officially support the 920 processor yet (apparently, 10.5.7 does).
 
If the new chips are 45/55 Watts then wont that might be a problem for the one inch thick Macbooks/Pros? Won't it cook it?
 
jaw04005 said:
Do you have some statistic to back this up? This seems to be the new trademark slogan on our forum.
Click to expand...

Kinda read up somewhere about how Intel's Atom is hurting their own sales because the Atom is powerful enough for the average computer user. The article didn't have any statistics though.

I believe it. I mean, my friends and family would be considered quite IT-savvy, and they barely have any use for dual-cores.
 
jaw04005 said:
And whether they know it or not, tasks like photo manipulation, home movie editing and dvd creation benefit greatly from quad-core (or more) processing.
Click to expand...

No they dont, not unless your using a multi thread open cl application which most home applications dont. :rolleyes: And there aren't even many quad core games, Crysis is a pretty famous example and its boring anyway.
 
kastenbrust said:
No they dont, not unless your using a multi thread open cl application which most home applications dont yet have. And there aren't even many quad core games, Crysis is a pretty famous example and its boring anyway.
Click to expand...

Fixed it for ya ;)

Will Intel spring the chip out September / October? The MB MBP lifecycle - get an update out in April/May, then what's the possibility of it being ready October? Q3 being July-September

Is there there a lack of want for Clarksfield? Doesn't seem to be too much activity on it, even though Nehalem is showing that it's big leap in comparison (see the server side improvements, the benchmarks for the Mac Pros, and the possibilities in conjunction with 10.6...)

So whilst OEMs might be wanting to hold back to get rid of stock, and Intel might not mind - why wouldn't Intel let Apple have first dibs on the new Clarksfield?

Tom's Hardware has Intel down as holding "tech talks on its Nehalem-based Xeon processors this Thursday and Friday, April 2nd and 3rd 10 am - 12 noon PDT."
Is that still on? Seems like they're launching some info today/last night, so why the Thurday Friday event?
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/Intel-Nehalem-Xeon-3500-5500,news-30789.html
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/intel-nehalem-xeon-core,news-30788.html
 

Attachments

  • intel_westmere_nehalem_client_roadmap_february_2009.jpg
    intel_westmere_nehalem_client_roadmap_february_2009.jpg
    119 KB · Views: 254
Apple will have to go back to Intel chipsets for i7 because Nvidia has no license to rights on the i7 protocols.

I see C2D architecture having at least 2-3 years more life in them just due to the fact that DDR3 ram is not well optimised for it. Also, Nvidia could still do more R&D to improve on MCP79m and come up with Rev B and Rev C with better options like eSATA and potentially USB3.

During that time the i7 better get optimised for the desktop mode before coming to mobile. I see manufacturers pushing out these things quickly to create/market demand without giving much benefits. That will not last if the price points stays high.
 
jaw04005 said:
Do you have some statistic to back this up? This seems to be the new trademark slogan on our forum.

The fact is the general Windows-buying public has been enjoying quad-core processors in their mid-class desktops for some time. They may not know they have a quad-core processor, but if they've spent $800+ on a new PC in the last 6-12 months there's a pretty good chance they have quad-core processor.

And whether they know it or not, tasks like photo manipulation, home movie editing and dvd creation benefit greatly from quad-core (or more) processing.

What's sad is the people that use Apple's consumer software are the direct target market of these processors. Who doesn't want their iPhoto face detection or their iDVD project to process faster?

If you're heavy into multimedia (and as a Mac user you should be as the tools are right in front of you, built-in), these multi-core processors will be a big deal.
Click to expand...

Honestly, most people won't care. When it's doing its magic people can do something else like write an article or surf the net or have a bite to eat. My current dual core Macbook Pro is no better for most everyday tasks than my quad core Hackintosh. As long as it's not going to take all day people typically won't mind waiting a bit.

Likewise on Windows side there is only a handful of programs that benefit from going dual core to quad core. Most of these are not used by the average user at all.

If Apple is to offer a quad core, it'll be only in the 17". IMO it's more likely that they'll skip mobile quad cores altogether until Intel develops a version with a much lower TDP and higher clock speeds.
 
iBunny said:
But every site right now is reporting it at 45/55Watts. Thats a drastic step up from the 25watts we are using now in the Core 2 Duos.
Click to expand...
45 W Clarksfield has similar heat to 35 W Penryn.

bossxii said:
I'll take that bet :)

You say quad cores in Oct..

I say no Quads till 2nd Qtr 2010... (the MBP line)

I will send you a cookie if your right :D

Now we wait...
Click to expand...
I say no quad-cores until 2011…
 
Arrandale chips, dual core nehalem with low thermal envelops for notebooks, are supposed to be released in 1Q 2010. So we can expect January 2010 updates to macbook pros. Arrandales have integrated graphics chips but apple will probably include some form of discrete graphics chips on the high end macbook pros.
 
Who's ever said apple would use Clarksfield.

My guess is that arrandale will be the chip of choice for apple wiht its lower TDP.
 
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