This! I have the money, just waiting for the update.
Maybe manufacturers can get the CPU's before this date? I don't know if we're talking retail CPU's here or to OEM.
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.
Ivy Bridge Processors Launching as Early as April 8?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This! I have the money, just waiting for the update.
Maybe manufacturers can get the CPU's before this date? I don't know if we're talking retail CPU's here or to OEM.
Good, the current crop of machines are fantastic in price and performance save for the Mac Pro. I am in the market for a new workstation and have been eyeing that iMac for a while. Waiting for a new revision so I. An either by refurbed or new, but if the Mac Pro is finally updated I may just rush to that.
I can't wait to see the new MBP's...I'm really hoping for a redesigned 13" as right now it has too many trade-offs versus the Air to be considered a "Pro" model IMO.
- Low screen res (1280x800...same it has been for 5 years now since the first 13" Macbook)
- Only glossy (Glass) option (MBA wins when in direct sunlight or near a window)
- Processor is only faster by a around 1 Ghz, which is only going to shave off a few seconds when rendering an HD video (Versus having a quad-core like the rest of the line.)
- No discrete graphics (Ditching the optical drive would give plenty of room for this...)
- Battery life only marginally better
- And finally, it is more expensive when you stick an SSD in it (Compared to a 13" Air.)
Give me a 13" MBP like this and I will line up on day one (well...at depending on how much I can get for my current Air.)
- 1440x900 screen
- Anti-glare option
- thinner body because of loss of optical drive
- reduced screen bezel giving it a smaller footprint.
- SSD boot drive built in (64GB or so, for OS and Applications folder)
- 7200 RPM HDD
- Discrete graphics chip
- Ivy bridge
- 9-10 hours battery life.
That is the perfect 2012 13" MBP in my opinion.
- Low screen res (1280x800...same it has been for 5 years now since the first 13" Macbook)
- Only glossy (Glass) option (MBA wins when in direct sunlight or near a window)
- Processor is only faster by a around 1 Ghz, which is only going to shave off a few seconds when rendering an HD video (Versus having a quad-core like the rest of the line.)
- No discrete graphics (Ditching the optical drive would give plenty of room for this...)
- Battery life only marginally better
- And finally, it is more expensive when you stick an SSD in it (Compared to a 13" Air.)
Give me a 13" MBP like this and I will line up on day one (well...at depending on how much I can get for my current Air.)
- 1440x900 screen
- Anti-glare option
- thinner body because of loss of optical drive
- reduced screen bezel giving it a smaller footprint.
- SSD boot drive built in (64GB or so, for OS and Applications folder)
- 7200 RPM HDD
- Discrete graphics chip
- Ivy bridge
- 9-10 hours battery life.
That is the perfect 2012 13" MBP in my opinion.
You'll be lucky to get a higher resolution display. Everything else is nice but may not happen. You can't have your cake and eat it too by removing the optical drive for discrete graphics and make it smaller and lighter. You gotta at least pick one or the other.
Those are the Xeon E3's. Those will move in April/May because were released Sandy Bridge versions in April/May this year (2011). The E3's share die with the "mainstream" Core i die; only ECC and a few other features are enabled. They have the same cap on cores and allocate substantive transistor budget to integrated graphics.
The Sandy Bridge-E and Xeon E5s came at the tail end of the overall Sandy Bridge release cycle ( SB-E in Nov, E5 likely in January). That isn't going to change for Ivy Bridge. The "greater than 4 core" processor packages will come at the tail end of the release cycle ( Q4 2012 / Q1 2013).
The Mac Pro isn't going to use E3's for several reasons ( can't go dual package, limited PCI-e lanes , etc. ). So in many discussions about Macs "Xeon" is often taken to be "Xeon E5".
Apple could do a E3 based derivation of the Mac Pro (where chopped down the size of the box ), but that remains highly speculative. They didn't do it last year when the E3 was available. And it would be on an odd cycle since the E3's are updated about 6-8 months separated from the E5's.
I still wonder why no one has really tapped into the 15" thin notebook without an optical drive.
Now everyone is rumored to make a 15" ultrabook.
:They say, get a 15"
:They say, get a 15"
: You said "Ditching the optical drive would give plenty of room for this..." so you want both?
:I'd like that
:100% agree and think it's quite reasonable to have this.
:They say, get a 15"
:They say, get a 15"
:Given
:Mmm, probably not. I think it's going to be a break even w/ size changes & discrete graphic. CPU won't really change much.
And that my friend is why you'll never see it.
The ODD isn't driving the thickness. There are useful performance enhancements that can be used by that space. Versus throwing it away in exchange for "nothingness".
You'd have to punt the HDD also to remove thickness. You'd need some of that ODD volume for that second SSD drive.
Another option would be to use a 20-40GB SSD drive as a cache accelerator for the HDD.
A good reason to keep the thickness; more battery. The discrete graphics (and additionally cooling) is going to require more power and therefore bigger battery.
Likewise Discrete graphics + VRAM + FAM can go into the old ODD volume.
The MBP 13" isn't exactly "thick" now. If really pressed to remove volume and scrafice performance the MBA is already there. There is no reason for the MBP 13" to try to push into the MBA's differentiating features. Instead, it should separate from the MBA by enhancing its own differentiating features (e.g., higher performance ).
There are still going to be dual core Ivy Bridge chips. The MBP 13" will likely get one. Intel is extremely unlikely to push the quad core prices down to levels low enough to get selected for the MBP 13".
Because the "thin" is a bit of a misnomer. If you look at most folks who want "thin" they really are talking about minimizing weight and limiting volume.
11-13" screens (+ glass) weigh less , take up less volume, and operate in confined spaces (e.g., airplane meal trays with seat reclined).
A 15" system that punts HDD and ODD to weigh as much as a 13" system that has a HDD and ODD doesn't really win on weight, likely don't win much on volume, and still don't work in confined spaces.
P.S. I can see trading a SDD (in DIMM format ) for a ODD drive so that have either HDD cache or faster OS/Apps drive. But that isn't necessarily going to make the 15" thinner. The numerous conversion kits for second drives point to the already existing market for this. That isn't necessarily an "ultrabook".
Same TDPs as the current generation. Although there are rumours of an OEM only 35W Quad Core chip...
W -- Watt ... a unit of measure for energy.
$ -- Dollar ... a unit of monetary value/price.
Two different things. It won't matter if there is a 35W quad core if it is priced too high.
Likely also won't matter if the GHz is throttled too low either.
It is a lower clocked OEM only part. Why do you believe it will be priced higher?
help???
hi , I was going to buy a mbp 17 inch in january , but now I am try to make a decision wait till 2012 update or buy right now ?
also I wanna add that this will be my first mac , I have a crappy laptop and an acceptable desktop pc
what do you recommend me??
ps: please dont tell me that I am the only one who knows what and when I need it!!!!!
hi , I was going to buy a mbp 17 inch in january , but now I am try to make a decision wait till 2012 update or buy right now ?
also I wanna add that this will be my first mac , I have a crappy laptop and an acceptable desktop pc
what do you recommend me??
ps: please dont tell me that I am the only one who knows what and when I need it!!!!!
Because I believe Apple would stick to the non-embedded market targeted offerings. Not some special corner case offerings. In the current mainstream offerings, quads cost more than duals. Intel is unlikely to change from that formula. Indeed, for leaked price quotes for desktops the pricing is unchanged from Sandy Bridge.
http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2011/2011121902_Prices_of_Ivy_Bridge_desktop_CPUs.html
Sure they could cripple a quad to putting it into a lower envelope to for the specialized embedded market, but I really didn't think those were relevant to what is possible as a MBP 13" part. Still don't.
So to get an price even with a dual they would suck the performance out of the offering (set the base GHz low .. e.g. , 1.2GHz so that it only Turbos up to what the current candidate versions.). Again that would loose generally loose out in a competition to be placed in a MBP 13".
Would a 1.2GHz quad be useful in a Small-Medium business targeted NAS box, a Windows Home Server, or low energy server? Sure. I imagine there will be a 35 (or lower) W Xeon E3 part also. The Core i3/i5/i7 version will get use from some embedded markets too.
Baby steps towards a 24 hour battery
Speaking of which... whatever happened to those fuel cell batteries that were supposed to be powering our laptops for by now?
Is the laptop so crappy that you can't do productive work on it anymore? Are you loosing money because laptop isn't fast enough?
Or is this "it works well enough, but I wish it was smoother/faster/better" situation?
Is the laptop so old can't get security updates or run some new/updated applications that you need?
If loosing money or large amounts of time then it is probably not worth waiting. If blocked on apps and/or security updates ... again probably not worth waiting.
If just want some "faster" because that is "nicer" then it is a toss up. Depend on just how sloooooow your current laptop is and how long you typically spend between upgrades.
If you usually buy something every 2 years. Then just buy. That will just get you closer to the update 2 years after that (which will be better than what Apple releases in May/June. )
If you usually buy something every 4-5 years then waiting is an option if can minimize laptop usage.
ps: please dont tell me that I am the only one who knows what and when I need it!!!!!
You only need to ask yourself the right questions. But it is true that only you know the answers.
----------
Fuel cell based on what fuel ?????
Most of those are not weight/Watt competitive with batteries. They can generally be refilled faster, but that isn't what counts with a portable, weight limited device.
There is already a Corei7 Quad-Core Ultimate 13" MBP I think; released Feb 2011 as a BTO?
You are thinking about this much too deeply. The 35W quad core is a standard OEM offering.