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's Upcoming Quad-Core "Mobile" Chip Realistic For Laptops?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
WHOA!!!
You're a pro that wants a quad core MacBook Pro in a 12"-13" screen size??
Yes I´m a pro user that wants a small computer, missing the 12" inch pro model...
I dont know if you are familiar with the possibility to connect a bigger screen to the laptop. A lot of times there is a possiblity of connect to another screen on most playses were i work. Then you have two! screens. At the same time! its amazing.
i have to COMPLETELY agree with you.
i wonder if its possible to put HD into a 12"er.
MBP Quad core comming
In the beginning of May I was informed by a reliably source that the MacBook Pro Quad Core is to be intoduced begin June.
In the beginning of May I was informed by a reliably source that the MacBook Pro Quad Core is to be intoduced begin June.
The problem with that is it would require a desktop-class CPU because the QX9300 mobile quad will not ship until later this year. And those chips have TDPs of 95W compared to the 35W of the current mobile CPUs.
Understood. And I know the TDP figure is what that chip will generate when it is pegged at 100% for a sustained period of time. But it is still 2.7 times what the current CPUs being used put out at maximum load.
So while it is very unlikely that a Mac Pro using the Q9550, Q9450 or Q9300 would need triple the cooling, it is also unlikely that the current cooling would be sufficient to prevent those chips from throttling themselves to prevent overheating, if not downright performing a thermal-induced shut-down if the temperatures exceeded the safety margins.
Mbp Q4
Of course, I won't let my day be ruined if it's not June, then I'll just have to wait, simple as that.
Apple should introduce de Q4 Macbook Pro when either Intel or AMD introduces the first mobile Quad Core CPU, because they also know that if the fail to do so, customers will be tempted to buy maybe an Windows Q4 mobile laptop.
I also heard rumours that there will be an octo core mobile MBP, does anyone have more info on that?
Of course, I won't let my day be ruined if it's not June, then I'll just have to wait, simple as that.
Apple should introduce de Q4 Macbook Pro when either Intel or AMD introduces the first mobile Quad Core CPU, because they also know that if the fail to do so, customers will be tempted to buy maybe an Windows Q4 mobile laptop.
I also heard rumours that there will be an octo core mobile MBP, does anyone have more info on that?
There is no need for 8 cores in a laptop. It would get so hot, it would set your clothes on fire or the desk it sat upon if it did not burn up the circuit board first.
Don't worry, I am just messing with you. But I doubt there will be a quad in a 12" for a very long time. I'd prefer Apple take on the uber large laptop market... give me a 19" MBP with quad core and dual HDDs to use as my mobile station and I will whip out the plastic, even if it is pushing $4000.
It may be, but I couldn't imagine trying to read anything on it. The 17" HD screen is amazing, since it has the same res as the 24" iMac or 23" ACD. The clarity is wonderful, but the text does come out smaller.
hmm, i gotta say i'm going to be tempted to unload both of my current systems in favor of a quad MBP, whenever they come out.
what i'm wondering though, is how long we're going to be stuck at 4 gigs of ram. are paired 3 gig sticks going to come next? or straight to 2 X 4?
what i'm wondering though, is how long we're going to be stuck at 4 gigs of ram. are paired 3 gig sticks going to come next? or straight to 2 X 4?
It's going to be straight 2x4 GBs.
And no matter how fast the lappies get, I will still want to have that Mac Pro with 4TB, or greater at that time, of storage/8 cores/wicked GFX/16 or 32GB of RAM/ and dual link DVI at the office or home.
hmm yes thats tru, youd have to use the good ol'
- option - '+' to zoom in hahaha.maybe thats a bad idea at the moment. they could at least put 1680xwhatever, that might be just bearable!
hmm yes thats tru, youd have to use the good ol'
maybe thats a bad idea at the moment. they could at least put 1680xwhatever, that might be just bearable!
Yeah, ever since using the 17" I have been comparing everything to it's resolution. If there was a widescreen 12" at 1440x900 or even 1280x800 it would be an improvement over the 12" PowerBook's.
yup yup. the powerbooks are 1024x768?? i cant remember haha. what about the MBAs?? they must be 1280x800? for todays technology i think thats just too stingey, it has to be at least 1440x900 in a 12"er.
Try mobile computing on a Japanese bus...
Hope I'm wrong, but I doubt there'll be a 12" MB/MBP for a long time (ever), period. Seems like Apple's going to try to cover that market with a tablet-thingy/oversized iPhone. The masses will get the 13" moderately heavy and unsexy but dependable MB, maybe with some aluminum styling and a bit thinned down. Well-heeled biz travelers will get sexy but underpowered MBA. And whomever Apple views as PowerUsers will get increasingly powerful/fast big-footprinted zeppelins.
Again, hope I'm wrong, but seems like those of us who want the natural heir to the 12" PB (bless its aging heart) will be waiting for Godot.
Hope I'm wrong, but I doubt there'll be a 12" MB/MBP for a long time (ever), period. Seems like Apple's going to try to cover that market with a tablet-thingy/oversized iPhone. The masses will get the 13" moderately heavy and unsexy but dependable MB, maybe with some aluminum styling and a bit thinned down. Well-heeled biz travelers will get sexy but underpowered MBA. And whomever Apple views as PowerUsers will get increasingly powerful/fast big-footprinted zeppelins.
Again, hope I'm wrong, but seems like those of us who want the natural heir to the 12" PB (bless its aging heart) will be waiting for Godot.
Hope I'm wrong, but I doubt there'll be a 12" MB/MBP for a long time (ever), period. Seems like Apple's going to try to cover that market with a tablet-thingy/oversized iPhone. The masses will get the 13" moderately heavy and unsexy but dependable MB, maybe with some aluminum styling and a bit thinned down. Well-heeled biz travelers will get sexy but underpowered MBA. And whomever Apple views as PowerUsers will get increasingly powerful/fast big-footprinted zeppelins.
Again, hope I'm wrong, but seems like those of us who want the natural heir to the 12" PB (bless its aging heart) will be waiting for Godot.
yeah, i'm afraid you're probably right. it's too bad, really, at least for me. (and probably other people like me, that use macs for music stuff and thusly don't need tons of screen real estate.)
Excuse me
It was not my intention to spew garbage, I just read a rumor on one of the forums here, but first QuadCore mobile!
It was not my intention to spew garbage, I just read a rumor on one of the forums here, but first QuadCore mobile!
Maybe what you read was 8 threads on a quad-core mobile cpu, this is coming with high-end nehalem mobile processors mid 2009, some of those may be cool enough, under 45W cpu+chipset, for a notebook.
Even high-end workstation cpus won't get 8 cores with Nehalem (quad+multi-threading). What is expected late 2009/early 2010 is 6 cores + multithreading on high-end workstation cpus on a 32nm process (westmere).
As far as mobile quad-core computing is concerned, the next step is Intel's Q9100 (quad 2.26GHz 35W) that should be available late 2008 and could come as a BTO option for the MBP at MWSF 2009.
Only a small sub-set of customers will be tempted. The QX9300 will allow system-builders to create smaller and lighter quad-core laptops then the ones now using desktop chips that need large cases for ventilation and the high-capacity batteries to get more then 90 minutes of life, which is a definite plus.
But putting a QX9300 in a MacBook Pro will result in a minimum price rise of $500. The latest Intel price sheet I have seen shows the QX9300 at $970 each (in quantities of 1000). The 2.8GHz T9600 will be $530, or almost half (and the same price as the T9500 2.6GHz is now).
So that means if you swapped the T9500 with the QX9300 today, the 15" MBP would be $3249 and the 17" would be $3449. Depending on how Apple updates the machines with HDD and GPU and FW and such, we might see the quad-core BTO 15" be $3499 and the 17" be $3799 - a $1000 premium over their current pricing.
That is a tremendous amount of money for a laptop - even a MacBook Pro. The market for that model is going to be a very small percentage of Apple's current market. So they may just say "no" and wait until WWDC 2009 when they can release dual-core Nehalems for the current price points ($2499/$2799) which will likely match or exceed the Penryn quad-cores in performance and will almost certainly exceed them in battery life.
I *highly* suspect if it comes in at 35W it'll be 17" only as that has a far bigger area to cool the chip and I again suspect it'll be a £200/300 extra option.
However, I shall be getting it when its released
However, I shall be getting it when its released
However, I shall be getting it when its released
That makes two of us. I suspect Apple is well on its way to become the standard in computing.
I tried to introduce Apple at the office last week, but I got a lot of resistance from the ICT-manager, while my research on the subject of corporate implementation of Apple computers shows that on the long run all costs will decrease, who keeps hiding behind the walls of the known.
Of course the one and only counter argument I heard was that the initial costs of an Apple-computer is to high for budget.
I could see mobile quad cores being useful for those who purchase systems like the Dell Precision series. Perhaps it could make sense in a 17" MBP, though in any case I wouldn't have need myself.