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

MacBook Pro Specs, LightPeak Known As ThunderBolt?

Have Germans always used inches to denote screen size and not centimetres?

Makes me a bit suspicious.

Edit: Just checked the German Apple store and they have.

An i5 in a 13" sounds a whole lot better than the i3.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

The MagSafe does look odd. But if you look at it closer then the blur over one side continues down the length of the IO ports. I think that's the cellophane transit cover. Don't think it's a fake photo. Might bs z photo of a fake mock up however.
 
nsdjoe said:
This is not true. The current model has the GeForce 320M.
Click to expand...

The 320M is integrated into the chipset. The new Intel HD 3000 is integrated into the CPU.

The NVIDIA GeForce 320M is an integrated chipset graphics card for Core 2 Duo based laptops and successor of the GeForce 9400M. It does not feature dedicated graphics memory but uses the systems main memory instead (shared memory, in Mac OS X 256 MB from the main memory).
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-320M.28701.0.html
 
Does anyone else suspect that this is a new Macbook? Rumors say they axed the white one so this could be its replacement.
 
If this is true, I'm seriously boycotting Apple. Time to go to bed (almost 5:30am here).
 
Thunderbolt ;D

*Draws thunderbolt above his mDisplayPort on MBA 11"*

I ALREADY HAVE A THUNDERBOLT PORT! WOOPWOOP
 
KnightWRX said:
Your calculations seem way off. Let's say that video cards do push the entire framebuffer out to the monitor 60 times per second (on each vertical sync), that gives us a need to push out 5308416000 bits (5184000 kilobits, 5062.5 megabits, 4.94 gigabits using the 1024 CS notation) per second at 2560x1440x24 bpp.
Click to expand...

I didn't do the calculations myself, I just grabbed the data from wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort) which is using CVT with vertical blanking methods.

GL
 
papierbox said:
the intel hd 3000 is as fast as the nvidia 320m in the actual macbook 13''. so with the fast cpu all is fine.
Click to expand...

That is NOT true. Intel HD 3000 is as fast as the 310M which is ridiculous, it’s merely slightly faster than 9400m.
 
papierbox said:
no! the intel hd 3000 is as fast as the nvidia 320m. please read first the benchmarks and tests.
Click to expand...

Reading through the benchmarks and tests does show it to be slower than the 320M. No MUCH LESS, but definately not up to par with the 320M.

Don't just look at the bars, look at what is tested and remember the 320M is running with a Core 2 Duo processor which is slower than the Sandy Bridge processor used in combination with the Intel 3000 HD graphics.

The only time the Intel graphics were on par or higher than the 320M is when you had a CPU bound scenario and what was being benchmarked was the ability of the processor to feed the video hardware essentially. All GPU bound tests showed the 320M on top.

Going from the 320M to the Intel 3000 HD is a GPU downgrade. The CPU upgrade that comes with it manages to equalize things in certain scenarios which are not graphics intensive.

That's the gist of it.
 
Some of you are being played better than Yo-Yo Ma's cello. Too funny. I'd try to cash a $3 bill before I believed the info at the top of the post.
 
And here we have Apple's usual "half a feature": "Here, we are going to take a standard, mess it up because we are just so hardcore and have to be against the grain, like with the old MBA superdrive USB standard violation, and then in a year or two when we decide to update the machines again finally, we might give you the other half of what you were expecting. Here's light peak, but we're going to cripple it by making users choose between their data transfer, or usage of an external monitor. Or, we might make you buy a $99 adapter to make ANYTHING else work with it.

Stay tuned for 2 years from now when it finally runs the way you thought/expected it to run, and how everyone else will have been doing it."

Apple gets old sometimes.
 
ArmCortexA8 said:
As for those out there claiming this is simply an "altered" display port connector, look at the big difference with a real DisplayPort connector pic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Displayport-cable.jpg - notice no notch in the middle at the bottom?
Click to expand...

The picture you linked is a standard Display Port cable, used by everyone EXCEPT Apple. Apple insists on using their own proprietary implementation, called Mini Display Port, that looks just like the thunderbolt port in the picture.
 
Bad news if it's true! Intel Graphics, still ODD, no SSD, and an unuseful non-standard lightpeak/minidp. And the 1280x800 screen resolution is crap, lower than MacBookAir! It's no sense.
 
Idk...I'm convinced this is either the most basic model of macbook pro you can possibly get, or it is not a MBP at all, but a normal macbook.
 
KnightWRX said:
Reading through the benchmarks and tests does show it to be slower than the 320M. No MUCH LESS, but definately not up to par with the 320M.

Don't just look at the bars, look at what is tested and remember the 320M is running with a Core 2 Duo processor which is slower than the Sandy Bridge processor used in combination with the Intel 3000 HD graphics.

The only time the Intel graphics were on par or higher than the 320M is when you had a CPU bound scenario and what was being benchmarked was the ability of the processor to feed the video hardware essentially. All GPU bound tests showed the 320M on top.

Going from the 320M to the Intel 3000 HD is a GPU downgrade. The CPU upgrade that comes with it manages to equalize things in certain scenarios which are not graphics intensive.

That's the gist of it.
Click to expand...
Exactly my point. This is a clear downgrade.

No current game will run faster on Intel 3000 than it does on 320, tho. It’s a graphic accelerator thing, not CPU which does not handle the tasts.
 
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