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

MacBook, MacBook Pro To See Merom Upgrade Next Month?

So is VISTA

milo said:
XP 64 doesn't work on the mac pro. You need to run XP pro. I assume it will be the same on other 64 bit macs. I wouldn't expect them to bother getting XP 64 working, they'll just skip it in favor of vista.
Click to expand...

Vista should be a 64 Bit OS which also works with 32 Bit applications.
Anyone, who can confirm this? If so, the question is: will Vista work on the INTEL platform APPLEs???:confused:
 
Confusion, Fear & Uncertainty

poppe said:
Not to get off topic about 2 gigs and 64 bit, but did you all see the report by Appleinsider about Merom?

Merom's thermal specs fail to impress

I was just wondering if anyone thinks it is all true. I've heard of the Merom's going to TDP of 35 watts, but remember that CNET video where the battery lasted longer? So I suppose could anyone clarify?
Click to expand...
Yes this article inspires confusion, fear and uncertainty about where we are headed. :confused: :eek:
Erasmus said:
I noticed this a while back and put it to the pack in another thread. I think the end result was somethng like yes, it uses more heat, and draws more power when running on full power, but because it is 10-20% faster while running at full power, it takes less time to complete designated tasks. It would therefore take less effort to boost a Yonah processor out of battery saving mode than a Merom one. So simply, the extra juice is more than compensated by less time spent drawing it during calculations.

Of course, like most things to do with computers, the more power you have, the more you use. You can just imagine someone trading up to a new processor, getting three times as much done due to extra speed in an hour on a new laptop, and then complaining because the new laptop battery only lasted for half the time of the old.

It is a pity the processors only throttle down to a gigahert. 500Mhz is easily enough for word processing or even some gaming (3D included. Quake 3 runs great on my cube: Emphasis here on 3. Not 4 of course ;-) 1 Ghz (and then dual core) is complete overkill for an "idle" state in my opinion. It would be good if one core could throttle to 500, and the other shut down completely.
Click to expand...
Well that explains things pretty well. Thanks for that.
Erasmus said:
Back to topic, is support of 2Gb RAM sticks something that could be added in a near future firmware update, or even 10.4.8?
Click to expand...
I'm hoping this is one of the capabilities that will be added to the Merom MacBook Pros. I imagine it could be added to old MacBook Pros. But would the cooling system be up to the task of keeping a pair of 2GB Mods under their melting point? :eek:
 
I was under the impression the Merom Macbooks would run cooler, but now I read this may not be the case? Anybody know the true answer to this?
 
zhd05 said:
I was under the impression the Merom Macbooks would run cooler, but now I read this may not be the case? Anybody know the true answer to this?
Click to expand...

Merom is reputed to consume less power at any given clock speed than the current Core Duo (and hence generate less heat). But you just know that all the manufacturers (including Apple) will just use faster processors.

In reality what we are probably going to get is a speed bump and the same heat/power consumption that we see now... :eek:
 
thogs_cave said:
Also true, but keep in mind that Apple appears to be leading the curve. I had my MacBook for a month before I even stareted seeing ads for Core Duo machines from Dell, etc.

Personally, I like seeing tech advance, but I don't see the quality that I used to.
Click to expand...
Are Core Duos based on Pentiums?
 
So guys help me out..

I have just listed my iBook on Ebay. Badly want to jump aboard the Intel bandwagon by picking up a MacBook. Didnt know about the MErom thing til I just read this thread.

Have I chosen a bad time? I would die if they put Merom in there in a couple of weeks or even months.
 
Mac Rules said:
I think I read somewhere that they're based on the Pentium 3 architecture, could be wrong...

Cheers
Click to expand...
Based on the 8088. They stick 8 of them together into 1 core to get 64 bit computing. Then they stick 2 cores together, an voila, dual core. 1979 technology for sure.
 
Well they are, but the problem with the Pentium 4 was that it was very poor at calculations per cycle, and instead of improbing the number of calulations, it increased the speed = increased cycles, so thats why Pentium 4's go all the way to 3.9GHz, but the Core Duo microarchitecture is more focussed on calculations per cycle finally, and it's a very, very powerful consumer chip. With the ever increasing speeds, huge amounts more of work are able to done over the Pentium 4 with the Core Duo. My P4HT is 3.2GHz and personally I don't feel is too sluggish, so I can't wait to see Core Duos at 3.2GHz lol

Cheers
 
Core 2 Duo Not Core Duo • Merom Not Yonah • 64-Bit Not 32-Bit

Project said:
So guys help me out..

I have just listed my iBook on Ebay. Badly want to jump aboard the Intel bandwagon by picking up a MacBook. Didnt know about the Merom thing til I just read this thread.

Have I chosen a bad time? I would die if they put Merom in there in a couple of weeks or even months.
Click to expand...
The Merom Core 2 Duo is a 64-bit mobile processor that will probably be in the MacBook by Thanksgiving. Could be as soon as late September. MacBook Pros will get it in September for sure. MacBook may be a little later. Worth waiting for. You'll be lucky to get much for your iBook so go ahead and sell it ASAP. It is getting worth less every day you keep it. :)

This upcoming processor is in the mobile family - Merom - of the processor that's in the new Mac Pro - Woodcrest.

Read the Intel Mirco Architecture Roadmap. Click this link for the Current Products section.

Here's the chart that shows all the Merom processors' specifications and their street prices. The street prices are like what you would pay Fry's for one, not the price Apple pays for them. But it helps to know the street price 'cause then you have an idea why each one goes with what models.

MacBook Pro will get:
Core 2 Duo T7600 - 2.33 GHz (4 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) $637
Core 2 Duo T7400 - 2.16 GHz (4 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) $423

MacBook will get:
Core 2 Duo T7200 - 2.00 GHz (4 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) $294
Core 2 Duo T5600 - 1.83 GHz (2 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) $241

Mac Mini will get:
Core 2 Duo T5600 - 1.83 GHz (2 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) $241
Core 2 Duo T5500 - 1.66 GHz (2 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) $209
pianodude123 said:
eek....I've heard that we might be waiting until Macworld 07 to see upgrades?? :eek:
Click to expand...
You heard wrong. It's all happening in the next three months.
fastlane1588 said:
oh man, and here I thought they were based on the newest of new technology!
Click to expand...
You are correct sir. They are.
 
oh god i hope it's not gonna be too much longer. this might be a very dumb question, but if the mac book pro does come out much earlier than the macbook, is there a huge difference between the two? im ready to buy whichever comes out, so that the core 2 duo will last for the rest of my college career. appreciate y'alls time.
 
College Students Will Want MacBook Pro Anyway • Has Backlit Keyboard

UmaThurman said:
oh god i hope it's not gonna be too much longer. this might be a very dumb question, but if the mac book pro does come out much earlier than the macbook, is there a huge difference between the two? im ready to buy whichever comes out, so that the core 2 duo will last for the rest of my college career. appreciate y'alls time.
Click to expand...
For college you porably want the MacBook Pro anyway 'cause it has a backlit keyboard you will find handy in dark rooms. So you should be able to get one by end of September at the latest. :)

And you are right to wait for it so you will not be held back through college. Top speed will be 2.33 GHz.
 
zhd05 said:
I was under the impression the Merom Macbooks would run cooler, but now I read this may not be the case? Anybody know the true answer to this?
Click to expand...

I strongly doubt it. However, I really don't think Meroms will go into the consumer MacBooks until much later to help differentiate between the consumer and Pro models.
 
So what will be the difference?

I know the differences in the cache/speed/architecture between the Core Duo and Core 2 Duo - but how much of a perf gain will there be, and how much better will the Core 2 Duo be at perf per watt? Is that informaiton available anywhere? I want to buy a PC to run mac and windows via parallels, and I'm thinking the price difference between a mac book running a core duo at 2.0 ghz won't be much slower than a mac book pro running 2.3 ghz - and will probably run cooler.

I can feel the bottoms of the 2.16 ghz mac book pros, and I'll say, they're much hotter than the 2.0 ghz mac books.

thoughts?

It looks like the sweet spot may be the mac books running Core 2 Duo at 2.0 ghz.

I can see switching to 64 bit next time around - after all, WinXP64 has been out for a while, and you still can't get all the drivers. I imagine apple will be the same way in it's shift to 64 bit.
 
Core 2 Duo Are 20% Faster At Same Clock Speed • 64-bit Leopard Ready

JackSYi said:
I strongly doubt it. However, I really don't think Meroms will go into the consumer MacBooks until much later to help differentiate between the consumer and Pro models.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of differences besides the processor that make MBP worth more. Merom will be in MacBooks before Thanksgiving.
louden said:
I know the differences in the cache/speed/architecture between the Core Duo and Core 2 Duo - but how much of a perf gain will there be, and how much better will the Core 2 Duo be at perf per watt? Is that informaiton available anywhere? I want to buy a PC to run mac and windows via parallels, and I'm thinking the price difference between a mac book running a core duo at 2.0 ghz won't be much slower than a mac book pro running 2.3 ghz - and will probably run cooler.

I can feel the bottoms of the 2.16 ghz mac book pros, and I'll say, they're much hotter than the 2.0 ghz mac books.

thoughts?

It looks like the sweet spot may be the mac books running Core 2 Duo at 2.0 ghz.

I can see switching to 64 bit next time around - after all, WinXP64 has been out for a while, and you still can't get all the drivers. I imagine apple will be the same way in it's shift to 64 bit.
Click to expand...
Can't tell 'til MacBook Pro ships. Likely to be a redesign including easy HD swap out feature from MacBooks. You want 64-bit because Leopard is all about 64-bit. So you want to be ready for Leopard when it ships next Spring.

I agree the 2GHz Merom MacBook will likely be the best value. Still has the 4MB L2 cache. But the IG may be some people's problem if they need 3-D capaabilities. Also no backlit keyboard which may be important to students who take notes in dark lecture halls. Intel claims they manage battery life better as well. But this has yet to be proven in released Macs.
 
I'd like to see a speed bump in the imac or maybe even a imac pro :) I'd like to see a 24/25" imac pro released in macworld with the latest core 2 duo or woodcrest.

As for the macbook, I would own one now if they had dedicated video cards. I'm holding off until they do something with the macbook video cards, I'd like to see a x1600 in the macbook and maybe a x1800/x1900 in the macbook pro/imac.
 
I am so anxious to upgrade my 17" Powerbook.

It's less than a year old, but I think the Intel leap has been that significant in terms of speed.

My hopes for an update:

1. 2.33 Core 2 Duo
2. 160 gig HD
3. ATI x800
4. Power brick back to <70 Watts so I can use it on a plane
5. No more sloppy quality problems (e.g. heat, uneven lighting on the screen, crappy fit.)

Fingers crossed my list is coming in a week...
 
Its funny how the 'pros' still use dual G4 power macs.. or the first gen G5s.. with high speed SCSI drives for their work, and they do just fine.. while all the non-pros here salivate at the release of a slightly faster processor.. and get massively depressed because they just bought a top of the line computer a few weeks ago.

I understand the need for upgrading, but seriously, most of the comments here just amuse me. Its like, wow, you really like to waste money don't you? Or do all of you go and purchase the 2007 model of a toyota camry as soon as it comes out, even though you have the 2006 version? :rolleyes:
 
Music_Producer said:
Its funny how the 'pros' still use dual G4 power macs.. or the first gen G5s.. with high speed SCSI drives for their work, and they do just fine.. while all the non-pros here salivate at the release of a slightly faster processor.. and get massively depressed because they just bought a top of the line computer a few weeks ago.

I understand the need for upgrading, but seriously, most of the comments here just amuse me. Its like, wow, you really like to waste money don't you? Or do all of you go and purchase the 2007 model of a toyota camry as soon as it comes out, even though you have the 2006 version? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You're assuming, though, that pros and non-pros are doing the same things. The pro isn't trying to boot into Windows XP to run UT 2007 or Crysis on very high quality and high resolution, and expect good/steady FPS.

Now if a non-pro isn't planning to do something like gaming, then I agree with your point. I personally am awaiting a better graphics card in the MBP (like the mobile x1800) so that I can keep it for both gaming and working for a couple years to come. The processor speed is just icing on the cake that'll help in processor-intensive games, probably like Spore and Oblivion.
 
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