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

Dwalls90

macrumors 603
Feb 5, 2009
5,427
4,412
How quickly does everyone think the new SB CPUs will be in the MBPs? I want to get a MBP now, but this is kind of holding me back at the moment.

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2011/2011071401_Intel_to_refresh_Core_i7_mobile_family_in_Q4_2011.html

Going by what Apple has done in past recent years (not Powerbook years), they will either ignore this altogether as Ivy Bridge will be MAYBE months away by the time these CPU's hit the street (late 2012 as the article clames), or they will be BTO options. The 2820QM already costs $568+, and Apple's margins would be hurting if they were to replace the 2720QM and 2820QM with these new CPU's, instead of making them BTO.
 

hcho3

macrumors 68030
May 13, 2010
2,783
0
MBP was updated only 5 months ago. We are still in mid cycle. No new MBP for another 4 months at earliest.
 

akhbhaat

macrumors regular
Sep 30, 2010
127
0
Those processors are just minor spec bumps over the existing models. Nothing you would really see much of a difference from in practice.
 

gorskiegangsta

macrumors 65816
Mar 13, 2011
1,281
87
Brooklyn, NY
Talking about Ivy-Bridge? Well, you definitely won't see a 2x performance boost as going from Nehalem processors (in the 2010 models) to Sandy Bridge (in the 2011 models). From what Intel's been telling us, the primary goal of Ivy Bridge would be to shrink the die to 22nm and to add more features such as USB3 and PCIE3 support.
 

dsio

macrumors regular
Jun 19, 2011
216
9
Australia
The speed bump from these "refreshed" processors would tend to appear more slight of hand than actual improvement. The thing with Sandy Bridge and processors with the "Turbo" modes is that the existing 2.7Ghz I have already can do 3.4Ghz in theory, and does 3-3.2Ghz quite easily. Pushing the base clock up to 2.8Ghz doesn't really change anything, and it will still do 3-3.2Ghz quite easily. If during actual use it performs the same as the current 2.7Ghz under the same thermal conditions and workload they don't really care, as it will still meet both its minimum clock requirement (2.8) and be able to briefly hit its peak of 3.5Ghz.

The quads will be the same, its the same chip as the one already in use, comes off the same production line, the only difference is that its configured for a base clock 100 or 200 higher, and a peak clock 100 or 200 higher, while the actual performance level which will be dictated not by the chip but by available cooling will end up identical to the old chip, since it still is the old chip, so the variable speeds it reaches, that are between the base and peak clock will most likely be the same.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.