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

Ivy Bridge Mobile CPUs for Next MacBook Air and Pro Models Due around May

thekev said:
Didn't he say "MBP"?
Click to expand...
Trace the quotes back. We were responding to this question:
Ptdr said:
Does it mean that the macbook air could get 8gb of ram?
Click to expand...
I answered that, yes, the MacBook Air could have an 8GB BTO option six months from now if 4Gb DRAM chips continue dropping in price the way 2Gb and 4Gb DRAM chips have been dropping in price lately.

thekev said:
Numbers have been all over the place. I'd say you're being pretty optimistic.
Click to expand...
It's straight physics. Go from 32nm to 22nm, ceteris paribus, and power consumption drops by a factor of (32/22)^2. Of course, the transition from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge is nowhere near ceteris paribus. Most of the gains from the process shrink are used by Intel for performance and features rather than reducing power consumption. Also, the 22nm process will not be as well optimized in early 2012 as the 32nm process is now.
 
Whenever they come out is fine. I hope they don't redesign the MBP for the sake of it - it looks just about perfect as it is.

I understood that Ivy Bridge will bring a roughly 20% performance increase - not double. And that the biggest improvement will be from improving the integrated graphics.
 
thekev said:
You're comparing totally different machine designs. The macbook pros and elitebooks /precisions are absolutely nothing alike. I'm not sure now but some of them have used desktop internals in the past on their top models with weird exotic cooling solutions. They're made for engineers doing field work where they absolutely cannot take along a workstation. Some of them hold up to 4 hard drives and 32GB of ram or more with workstation graphics. Anyway combined with the lower volume of such a machine, they do cost way way more to produce than a macbook pro.

Personally I'd buy a macbook pro as I don't need to do my heaviest work on a laptop, but dude..... you were just so far off there. The only thing the macbook pros have in common is a $2k+ price tag (fyi I use a mac).
Click to expand...

F my A, I was off there quite a bit. Should have used Envy and the Latitude perhaps. I could have swore they made an Elitebook that was thin with an awesome dreamcolor display. I think I got the Dell models mixed up. Anyway point was it would be sweet if you could have a better choice of screen sizes for the 1k range. Samsung's 7 series is VERY comparable an 500-800 cheaper depending. All moot though if consumers keep setting the value that high.
 
Last edited:
redesign

does anyone think there will me a mac pro redesign at last to:

1) replace superdrive with SSD
2) sort out the 3 /6 gbps problem of the SSD cabling
3) Get the battery life upto speed as it is only half what it says it is on current version

If you believe any of this - what evidence or factors support it??

also, i heard a rumor that they gonna start soldering the drives on form now on so you cant upgrade to ssd's - any truth in that??


Chher

ss
 
soundseeker said:
does anyone think there will me a mac pro redesign at last to:

1) replace superdrive with SSD
2) sort out the 3 /6 gbps problem of the SSD cabling
3) Get the battery life upto speed as it is only half what it says it is on current version

If you believe any of this - what evidence or factors support it??

also, i heard a rumor that they gonna start soldering the drives on form now on so you cant upgrade to ssd's - any truth in that??


Chher

ss
Click to expand...

1) No
2) Yes
3) Probably

1) given that The optical drive is still being toted as a feature on the MacBook Pro page, my guess is that it'll linger for a few more generations as a premium "Pro" feature as the general idea that Apple is proposing is that consumers don't need an internal optical drive, which as much as I personally hate it, is probably true.

2) I didn't know that this problem existed. My guess is that if it wasn't fixed with the Late 2011 generation, it'll be fixed in the next go around.

3) Doesn't seem to be a common issue, but my guess is that Ivy Bridge will probably be more power efficient as that's the direction Intel keeps heading in. Who knows though. My guess is that it won't get worse.
 
Yebubbleman said:
Apple can charge the cost of a MacBook Air because people will buy it. You think that Apple will have as many people paying that much more for their computer just so it can be thinner?
Click to expand...
That much more for what? :rolleyes: Do you even know what profit margins are?


Well, great, now that you know what I'm talking about you are only serving to demonstrate a clear lack of politeness and maturity. Or is that your aim?
Click to expand...
LOL, that's funny. Nice job trying to back peddle on your claim. I quoted you clear as day and you said design. I never said thickness. Clearly you can't comprehend the difference between the two. Then when I confronted you on it you switched position. Is this Mitt Romney I'm talking to?

I never said that a discrete GPU in the 13" Pro would cannibalize sales of the 15" Pro. I said that it's not worth it to Apple to make that change in the 13" Pro as only a small minority of customers of that machine care and don't want the 15" Pro as an alternative.
Click to expand...
Then as I stated prior, if the 13" MBP doesn't get a discrete GPU then it doesn't have enough to differentiate itself from the 13" MBA line and will likely be killed off. Read my posts.


Yes, the left I/O board, just like I said. What's funny is that you don't see that it's two different parts. Want me to send you the service manual for that machine in which the second part is not only listed, but a part number is also supplied? Or you wanna keep on trollin'?
Click to expand...
Oh god, you're so right. :rolleyes: Sorry, I forgot the inch of space to the side of the machine. :rolleyes:


Take one apart, you'll see that you don't know what you're talking about. Space is very limited as it stands.
Click to expand...
Which is why I said they need to remove the optical drive and hard drive to make this possible. Are you even paying attention?


You are wrong. Take one apart and you'll see for yourself. Or continue to argue what you don't know to someone who does this **** for a living. Be my guest.

See. It. Naked. I've repaired dozens of these things. I've gutted more than my fair share. Citing stock pictures and pictures from iFixIt that you can't even see clearly doesn't accomplish anything for you other than trolling and shooting YOURSELF in the foot. But again, be my guest.
Click to expand...

I'm looking at one right now, bro. I happen to own one. :rolleyes:

My point was that they can make room for the ethernet port even IF they decided to make it thinner at the top. I never said they would.
 
mcarling said:
It's straight physics. Go from 32nm to 22nm, ceteris paribus, and power consumption drops by a factor of (32/22)^2. Of course, the transition from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge is nowhere near ceteris paribus. Most of the gains from the process shrink are used by Intel for performance and features rather than reducing power consumption. Also, the 22nm process will not be as well optimized in early 2012 as the 32nm process is now.
Click to expand...

Scaling is never perfect, either. You are usually looking at roughly 70% scaling if everything is good, so 22nm SNB chip would use roughly 33% less energy than the same chip at 32nm, assuming the scaling would be 70%.
 
Hellhammer said:
You are usually looking at roughly 70% scaling if everything is good, so 22nm SNB chip would use roughly 33% less energy than the same chip at 32nm, assuming the scaling would be 70%.
Click to expand...

No, the scaling is along two dimensions, not just one.
 
oiuh151 said:
That much more for what? :rolleyes: Do you even know what profit margins are?
Click to expand...

Why yes, I do. Do you know what price points are?


oiuh151 said:
LOL, that's funny. Nice job trying to back peddle on your claim. I quoted you clear as day and you said design. I never said thickness. Clearly you can't comprehend the difference between the two. Then when I confronted you on it you switched position. Is this Mitt Romney I'm talking to?
Click to expand...

Am I a GOP front-runner? Or am I someone who didn't make a distinction to someone who's needlessly nitpicking on a forum for the sole purpose of being rude and insulting?

oiuh151 said:
Then as I stated prior, if the 13" MBP doesn't get a discrete GPU then it doesn't have enough to differentiate itself from the 13" MBA line and will likely be killed off. Read my posts.
Click to expand...

You are probably right about that. Either way, I don't get the feeling that Apple will go out of their way to make such a 13" MacBook Pro with such a GPU, optical drive or not.

oiuh151 said:
Oh god, you're so right. :rolleyes: Sorry, I forgot the inch of space to the side of the machine. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

661-5792. Look it up.

oiuh151 said:
Which is why I said they need to remove the optical drive and hard drive to make this possible. Are you even paying attention?
Click to expand...

Yes I am, but your point is moot. The end.


oiuh151 said:
I'm looking at one right now, bro. I happen to own one. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Talk to me when you have removed the logic board and can actually get a good look at the inside of the chassis. Simply having the machine in front of you without seeing it gutted does you no more than that stock image does, unless you want to show off your membership to the elitist 13" MacBook Pro Owners club that you belong to, but even then, most people in that club probably haven't taken their machines apart either which does nothing for the purposes of this argument.

oiuh151 said:
My point was that they can make room for the ethernet port even IF they decided to make it thinner at the top. I never said they would.
Click to expand...

And my point is that you are wrong; with the current thickness you barely have room for the Ethernet port as is. If you made it THICKER at the top and tapered it down, you could do it. But if you reduce thickness and it's at the minimum needed to have an Ethernet port, do the ****ing math, man.
 
soundseeker said:
also, i heard a rumor that they gonna start soldering the drives on form now on so you cant upgrade to ssd's - any truth in that??
Click to expand...

I would suspect not much at all.

The current plugin option allows them to use empty volume required by the height of Processor/HeatSink and tapering to batteries, so that the SSD and RAM are all contained within the same board footprint. Soldering would mean either the SSD goes on board and takes up more motherboard space or just does the same job of securing the board in place as well a screw.
 
Yebubbleman said:
Why yes, I do. Do you know what price points are?
Click to expand...
Yes, and they won't have to change them because of their huge profit margins. Like I already stated.

Am I a GOP front-runner? Or am I someone who didn't make a distinction to someone who's needlessly nitpicking on a forum for the sole purpose of being rude and insulting?
Click to expand...
Strawman, moving on.

You are probably right about that. Either way, I don't get the feeling that Apple will go out of their way to make such a 13" MacBook Pro with such a GPU, optical drive or not.
Click to expand...
If they are already going out of their way to redesign it, why not?


661-5792. Look it up.
Click to expand...
The only logical way to do the tapered design is to make the logic board go horizontal across the majority of the top, whether or not that spans the entire machine is irrelevant. If Apple made it tapered they would HAVE to change the current logic board and make it something that spans across the top.


Yes I am, but your point is moot. The end.
Click to expand...
My point is moot now because I'm suggesting changes that have to be made in order to support the design change? Ok, whatever helps you sleep at night.

Talk to me when you have removed the logic board and can actually get a good look at the inside of the chassis. Simply having the machine in front of you without seeing it gutted does you no more than that stock image does, unless you want to show off your membership to the elitist 13" MacBook Pro Owners club that you belong to, but even then, most people in that club probably haven't taken their machines apart either which does nothing for the purposes of this argument.
Click to expand...
I actually own a early 2011 15" (which has been in my signature since before we started this conversation) MacBook Pro that has been taken apart by myself for re-application of the thermal paste. You were saying? ;)

And my point is that you are wrong; with the current thickness you barely have room for the Ethernet port as is. If you made it THICKER at the top and tapered it down, you could do it. But if you reduce thickness and it's at the minimum needed to have an Ethernet port, do the ****ing math, man.
Click to expand...
There's a wedge below that straight line on the machine. If they simply reduced the size of the wedge at the bottom and made the UI ledge slightly larger it could easily work without making the machine ANY THICKER.
 
Last edited:
oiuh151 said:
Yes, and they won't have to change them because of their huge profit margins. Like I already stated.
Click to expand...

Yes, but I'm sure they don't want those profit margins to get any smaller, and they would have to make them smaller if they were to mandate SSDs across the entire MacBook Pro line, but maintain the same price as SSDs are still EXPEN$IVE. Or do you disagree?

oiuh151 said:
If they are already going out of their way to redesign it, why not?
Click to expand...

And we know this how? Because people on the Internet claiming to be "insiders" say they are? Because they haven't been claiming that the MacBook Pro will have a case redesign for the last three revisions? Oh wait, they have! Whoops! We had the last external case design for 6 years, from the introduction of the first 17" PowerBook G4 in 2003 until the introduction of the first Unibody 17" MacBook Pro in 2009. The current design turns 4 in October; we still have time unless there proves to be a design/engineering flaw in the current design to force Apple to change it up sooner, and as best I know, there isn't any.

oiuh151 said:
The only logical way to do the tapered design is to make the logic board go horizontal across the majority of the top, whether or not that spans the entire machine is irrelevant. If Apple made it tapered they would HAVE to change the current logic board and make it something that spans across the top.
Click to expand...

You're proven wrong and now it's irrelevant? Sure, whatevs. One less thing to engage in a needless argument about. That said, I agree with you that such is the only logical way to redesign the MLB for a tapered MacBook Pro design, but I don't agree with the notion that it's something that Apple would do.

oiuh151 said:
My point is moot now because I'm suggesting changes that have to be made in order to support the design change? Ok, whatever helps you sleep at night.
Click to expand...

Your point is moot because it's not something Apple would do anyway. Also, people who can't seem to have a debate without being needlessly rude hardly keep me awake at night.

oiuh151 said:
I actually own a early 2011 15" (which has been in my signature since before we started this conversation) MacBook Pro that has been taken apart by myself for re-application of the thermal paste. You were saying? ;)
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

I was saying that you're wrong! Or were YOU not paying attention? Again, I've worked on dozens of these suckers. It's how I make my living. You cannot allow room for the Ethernet port while making it thinner than it currently is at some points without making thicker at others. Plain and simple.

oiuh151 said:
There's a wedge below that straight line on the machine. If they simply reduced the size of the wedge at the bottom and made the UI ledge slightly larger it could easily work without making the machine ANY THICKER.
Click to expand...

And it looks like you're agreeing with me here, albeit using the word "larger" instead of "thicker" and by changing the shape of the bottom plate rather leaving it unaltered and just making it thicker in the back, but hey, whatevs, you came to the same conclusion. One less thing to engage in an argument about. Either way, the wedge design is needlessly stupid. It serves to allow the MacBook Air to have more ports and slots than it ever did beforehand, but it does nothing for the MacBook Pro.
 
Hellhammer said:
((22/32)^2)*0.7 = 0.33 = 33%
Click to expand...

(22/32)^2 = 0.47

For a variety of reasons too technical to go into here, we cannot rely on 2 significant figures of precision. The best estimate is 50%, not 47%, power consumption per unit of performance for Ivy Bridge relative to Sandy Bridge.
 
mcarling said:
(22/32)^2 = 0.47

For a variety of reasons too technical to go into here, we cannot rely on 2 significant figures of precision. The best estimate is 50%, not 47%, power consumption per unit of performance for Ivy Bridge relative to Sandy Bridge.
Click to expand...

That's with perfect scaling but scaling is never perfect. We are looking at something like 70% power consumption for 22nm SNB die when compared to 32nm die. And this is without increased performance, that will eat up efficiency.
 
Yebubbleman said:
Yes, but I'm sure they don't want those profit margins to get any smaller, and they would have to make them smaller if they were to mandate SSDs across the entire MacBook Pro line, but maintain the same price as SSDs are still EXPEN$IVE. Or do you disagree?
Click to expand...
They made their profit margins smaller when they moved to the new 27" iMacs by using display panels that cost 3x for the size they were using before was. It's not unheard of and it's 100% a possibility.

And we know this how? Because people on the Internet claiming to be "insiders" say they are? Because they haven't been claiming that the MacBook Pro will have a case redesign for the last three revisions? Oh wait, they have! Whoops! We had the last external case design for 6 years, from the introduction of the first 17" PowerBook G4 in 2003 until the introduction of the first Unibody 17" MacBook Pro in 2009. The current design turns 4 in October; we still have time unless there proves to be a design/engineering flaw in the current design to force Apple to change it up sooner, and as best I know, there isn't any.
Click to expand...
LOL, what are you even clamoring on about? This whole conversation is theoretical. We are discussing the possibilities of a redesign IF it were to happen and how it would work. Or at least that's what I'm discussing.


Your point is moot because it's not something Apple would do anyway. Also, people who can't seem to have a debate without being needlessly rude hardly keep me awake at night.
Click to expand...
Apple wouldn't do something they've already proven works with the MacBook Air... ?

I was saying that you're wrong! Or were YOU not paying attention? Again, I've worked on dozens of these suckers. It's how I make my living. You cannot allow room for the Ethernet port while making it thinner than it currently is at some points without making thicker at others. Plain and simple.
Click to expand...

I never said they were going to make it thinner. I said the top of the machine would stay the same thickness as it is now, which is where the ethernet port would be.

And it looks like you're agreeing with me here, albeit using the word "larger" instead of "thicker" and by changing the shape of the bottom plate rather leaving it unaltered and just making it thicker in the back, but hey, whatevs, you came to the same conclusion. One less thing to engage in an argument about. Either way, the wedge design is needlessly stupid. It serves to allow the MacBook Air to have more ports and slots than it ever did beforehand, but it does nothing for the MacBook Pro.
Click to expand...
No, you said you would have to make the MACHINE thicker. I'm saying all they have to do is make the ledge the ports on larger at the top while making the wedge at the bottom smaller if they can't fit the Ethernet port on a slanted manner like the MBA.
 
oiuh151 said:
They made their profit margins smaller when they moved to the new 27" iMacs by using display panels that cost 3x for the size they were using before was. It's not unheard of and it's 100% a possibility.
Click to expand...

You could get hit by a bus tomorrow, so could I; that's 100% a possibility. That doesn't at all mean that it's a likely one.

oiuh151 said:
LOL, what are you even clamoring on about? This whole conversation is theoretical. We are discussing the possibilities of a redesign IF it were to happen and how it would work. Or at least that's what I'm discussing.
Click to expand...

While it's nice to discuss what Apple can do, it's kind of pointless if it's not something that they actually would do. My apologies if you disagree there.

oiuh151 said:
Apple wouldn't do something they've already proven works with the MacBook Air... ?
Click to expand...

MacBook Air != MacBook Pro; these are two different machines with two different customer bases and end goals in mind. MacBook Pro customers typically don't want a MacBook Air and vice versa. What works for one doesn't necessarily work for the other, and save for the MacBook Air-obsessed community on these forums, I don't think the wedge-design would work for those actually wanting a MacBook Pro and not a MacBook Air.

oiuh151 said:
I never said they were going to make it thinner. I said the top of the machine would stay the same thickness as it is now, which is where the ethernet port would be.
Click to expand...

If design is tapered, and top of design retains thickness, then bottom of the design gets thinner. Sounds like basic geometry to me unless we're arguing semantics or unless you are doing a poor job of communicating your design idea.

oiuh151 said:
No, you said you would have to make the MACHINE thicker. I'm saying all they have to do is make the ledge the ports on larger at the top while making the wedge at the bottom smaller if they can't fit the Ethernet port on a slanted manner like the MBA.
Click to expand...

I said that you would have to make SOME PART of the machine thicker, to the best of my knowledge, this is still true in your theoretical machine, it's just not making the whole machine thicker. It doesn't really matter either way, I see what you're saying and arguing about it is kind of pointless.
 
You two really need to stop bickering. This thread is no longer a discussion, but a spitting match.

I know I don't have to read it, but I would really like to get some opinions and speculation instead of your squabbling.
 
emaja said:
You two really need to stop bickering. This thread is no longer a discussion, but a spitting match.

I know I don't have to read it, but I would really like to get some opinions and speculation instead of your squabbling.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that there's no shortage of that here. If you are having problems finding the plethora of opinions and speculation, look no further than every single thread starting the words "Ivy Bridge".

Though, Spoiler Alert: very little of it here is grounded in reality. In fact, say what you will about my sparring partner here, he is one of the few people on here that I've encountered that at least factor in the laws of physics when it comes to speculation.
 
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