That's what I was referring to, just not using the correct words. I know there's no factual basis to claim Ivy Bridge will mean quad cores in a MBP, but I'm hoping that the new smaller architecture will help.
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.
MacBook Pro Shortages Continue as Apple Struggles to Deliver Replacement Machines
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's what I was referring to, just not using the correct words. I know there's no factual basis to claim Ivy Bridge will mean quad cores in a MBP, but I'm hoping that the new smaller architecture will help.
"Shortage continues ..."
Well lets see, that has been going on for, what, a few days at most???
"Struggles ..."
Give Me a Break
Sensationalizing the lead-in title guys.
To me, that's just misrepresenting actual facts.
A sad mark against MacRumors editors.
I guess I should be happy you did not follow the title text with three or four exclamation points, to really drive it home.
That was before tick-tock was invented/publicized. Ever since then the stride has been longer in cadence. Obviously it's working well for revenues or they wouldn't do it. Yonah was also a crap part compared to Merom which was Intel's re-birth as the CPU king. They had to release it early. They are in no such situation this time. Their lead is not being challenged from the top-end. It's the bottom end they have to worry about with competitors like AMD's Zacata and ARM based devices.
Oh and the dual cores have not always been 35W. Arrandale includes the 10W IGP into the overall TDP. Likewise with the new Sandy Bridge quad cores.
I'm quite aware. Dual cores actually dropped to 25W (in some variants) for Penryn. However, when we're talking overall die TDP (not CPU), top end dual cores have been 35W for a while, and quad cores have been 45/55W since they debuted with Clarksfield. Again, I ask you to provide information that says this is going to change.
It certainly will, but you have to remember that as laptop manufacturers are now used to the 45W TDP for quad core CPUs, Intel knows it can provide a chip at that rating and get sales. If they provide a 35W TDP quad core, they may end up cannibalizing a lot of their 35W dual-cores, whose yield has to be higher (read: lower cost) given half the core count.
Guess it just really matters how tight the existing supply is and how far in advance they received fixed chips from Intel. Selling a supply constrained new MBP is better than selling no MBP at all. Either way the consumer waits.
It's also important to note that Intel has announced that they are making agreements with OEMs to ship the defective chipsets if the computers they deliver do not utilize the affected SATA ports. Apple's entire current MBP range would fall under that hood, but it seems unlikely Apple would want to ship that to the consumer, even if it had 0 detrimental effect.
http://blog.laptopmag.com/intel-and...et-issue-sandy-bridge-notebooks-to-ship-again
http://blog.laptopmag.com/intel-and...et-issue-sandy-bridge-notebooks-to-ship-again
Here's some info to help support this timeline claim via Wikipedia along with some extra little Ivy Bridge details (or speculation) here.
good eye
Your transition to a new MBP from that '04 PB G4 is going to be night and day, and that's a good thing!
I'm concerned about this too, but I need a new MBP to replace my broken '05 PB G4 so I'll have to bite the bullet on this one. Otherwise I'd be more keen to wait for Ivy Bridge too.
Aughhhhh!!! Just release it already. 8 weekes?!?! please no
hahaha, I know, tell me about it.
Last edited:
No, it wasn't. Yonah was the Tick and Merom was the Tock.
No, you aren't getting it. The HIGH END Arrandale dual cores with the processor alone is 25W. The IGP tacks on an extra 10W that didn't before and the same is with the Sandy Bridge quad cores that now have the 10W IGP tacked on that the previous Clarksfield chips didn't. You are implying that these chips have not lowered their TDP but they have. You just don't realize it because of the added IGP. You are implying that Intel has made no progress in this respect when in reality they have. If there was no tacked on IGP then we would be looking at 25W Arrandale chips and 35W Sandy Bridge quad cores. As opposed to the previous generation (that didn't have the IGP tacked on) that was the high end Penryn chips at 35W and the Clarksfield quad cores at 45W.
Uhh, if the quad cores will receive a reduction to 35W then you can bet that the dual cores will be given a reduction to 25W. Even if they don't Intel will simply lower the price of the dual cores and suddenly cannibalization 'problem' solved.
Which is old news. That was taken from IDF which is pre-Sandy Bridge snafu. We were also told Sandy Bridge might hit in 2010. Turns out it launched at CES 2011. http://www.tgdaily.com/hardware-features/49355-intel-sandy-bridge-processors-on-target-for-2010
The second article is speculation with no source. Not worth mentioning.
Yeah, woops. Yonah was the Core. The problem with it was that it still wasn't 64-bit, whereas the Athlon 64 CPUs had been eating Intel's launch. They still had an immediacy to launch, thus the short lifespan.
I know. The fact remains that the CPU die (on which the IGP is integrated) is still 35W and still dual core.
No, I'm not. I actually pointed out that Penryn dropped the dual cores to 25W. Did you not see that?
Which I've already stated. You forgot to mention the integrated PCI express and DMI though, it's not all IGP for the extra 10W.
You still haven't given me any article or any source for that matter that shows a 35W Ivy Bridge quad core.
Why in the world would they lower prices when they're selling fine as is?
Reports of tightening supplies for Apple's MacBook Pro models continue today, with one reader letting us know that he was just informed by Apple that a replacement for his faulty machine will likely not be available for 4-6 weeks, and possibly as long as 8 weeks.
The long lead time was reportedly cited for a replacement on a custom-configured MacBook Pro carrying the top-of-the-line 2.8 GHz Core i7 processor, and models with both traditional hard drives and solid state drives have been said to be subject to the same shipping timeframes.
Considering the long wait times, Apple offered the customer the option of waiting for replacement model to come available, a full refund, or a replacement with a standard configuration that would be more readily available.
Despite some hints that a MacBook Pro refresh may occur in the near future, questions have been raised about whether a design error with the chips expected to be used in the updated models would delay a potential launch. But just yesterday Intel announced that it will begin shipping the dual-core Sandy Bridge chips that would presumably appear in the MacBook Pro on February 20th, meaning that Apple could release updated machines relatively soon after.
Article Link: MacBook Pro Shortages Continue as Apple Struggles to Deliver Replacement Machines
Not to nitpick, but we knew about February 20th for the dual-core Sandy Bridge CPUs for at least a month already. I'm not ruling out the notion that the chipset screw-up/delay will have something to do with the release of dual-core Sandy Bridge notebooks until Intel mentions it in their press release.
They've acknowledged it and announced a contingency plan to ship some defective chipsets with various OEMs that agree not to use SATA ports 2-5.
Fair enough, but all signs are still pointing towards a late 2011 release and you haven't proven otherwise.
This was irrelevant to the point I was making in reply to what you were saying.
You were only talking about the lower end processors then followed by saying all of the high end dual cores have stayed at 35W.
And you haven't shown me any article or source that says there won't be a 35W quad core. The fact is that Intel has been reducing the TDP in their chips and the chances of Ivy Bridge containing a 35W quad core is more likely than not.
Err... if they release 35W quad cores you were saying that it would cannibalize the 35W dual cores.
Here's hoping.
Hey guys. First-time poster, long-time lurker.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/08/intels-partners-can-resume-shipping-sandy-bridge-laptops-if/
Agree muchly: I'd be concerned if they shipped the defective chips, regardless of not utilising the bung ports. Given that the leak would effect a subset of transistors on the die and in the long-term either degrade performance or have the ports die entirely, what's to say that it wouldn't effect any components surrounding the area?
(Man, I've been waiting to get a desktop replacement since November when my 5yo desktop fell over. I really don't want to wait any longer, but when I expect to take the plunge with a Mac for a first time and have it be a specc'd 17", I rather suffer in the short-term than the long)
Hey guys. First-time poster, long-time lurker.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/08/intels-partners-can-resume-shipping-sandy-bridge-laptops-if/
Agree muchly: I'd be concerned if they shipped the defective chips, regardless of not utilising the bung ports. Given that the leak would effect a subset of transistors on the die and in the long-term either degrade performance or have the ports die entirely, what's to say that it wouldn't effect any components surrounding the area?
(Man, I've been waiting to get a desktop replacement since November when my 5yo desktop fell over. I really don't want to wait any longer, but when I expect to take the plunge with a Mac for a first time and have it be a specc'd 17", I rather suffer in the short-term than the long)
Their past history suggests otherwise.
So you're acknowledging I said it then?
Because there's no reason to think there will be. What is your basis for saying it will be more likely than not? You say that the die shrink will allow it to happen, but Intel didn't even bother to offer a quad-core Arrandale and even with Sandy Bridge we're still sitting at 35W + 10W. These numbers appear again because it's usually a sweet spot in terms of performance and power draw. You need to explain why that won't be the case this time.
Yes, they would, assuming they were priced the same as now. You then suggested lowering the price of dual cores to avoid this. I pointed out that it would be foolish to lower prices when they have no sales problems.
I have the new iMovie 11 running on a 2008 macbook 2.4 ghz dual-core with 2gb ram. I don't find it all that bad. Adobe Premier Elements 9, and iMovie HD 6 are hogs. Yes, I still use HD 6 for some things. HD 6 is a hog, because it renders everything as you import them into the app for adding to your movie.
I could never master FCE though. I get my movie looking perfect, and then render it and end up with a blue screen saying "no movie rendered!"
Clarksfield to Arrandale was not that big of a leap in time.
What? You said that the high end 35W processors have always stayed at that and made no progress while this simply wasn't true. The 25W Penryn processors had nothing to do with it.
I'll let you in on a little secret: Apple could use Sandy Bridge quad cores in this refresh if they wanted to.
Mid 2009 MBP had a 35W Penryn chip WITH a 12W 9400M which equalled 47W.
Ivy Bridge just makes it more likely than ever.
This was IF they had cannibalization which you were suggesting they would if they released 35W quad cores alongside 35W dual cores.
The warranty replacement of the machine in the original story would likely be a refurbished machine with similar specs, no? I'm not sure that a refresh would affect this.
But arrandale offered no refresh to the quad cores. There were no dual core clarksfield chips. So when arrandale came out, it had been since Penryn that the dual cores had been updated. The clarksfield chips being replaced now have been on the market almost 1.5 years.
No, that's always been their high end. Even though the 25W penryn appeared, that savings got absorbed back into the 35W TDP when they added IGP and DMI.
Of course they could, but they'd have to increase the CPU TDP. The current MBP is 35W + 23W for the discrete GPU. The 47W you are quoting was not in one location. The 9400M was separate from the CPU which was separate from the discrete GPU (if present). They've never had a 45W TDP chip in a laptop since they switched to Intel.
I still don't understand one thing:
If they are going to adopt Sandy Bridge, what GPU will they adopt?
As I understood, nVidia is not making the chipset for their GPU on Sandy Bridge and Intel's IGP is equivalent of the 320m but the 330m is way more powerful and was adopted on high-end MacBook Pros.
So what are the CPU/GPU possibilities?
If they are going to adopt Sandy Bridge, what GPU will they adopt?
As I understood, nVidia is not making the chipset for their GPU on Sandy Bridge and Intel's IGP is equivalent of the 320m but the 330m is way more powerful and was adopted on high-end MacBook Pros.
So what are the CPU/GPU possibilities?