MacBook Pro Targeted 2.8GHz Core i7 Processors Due Later This Year

Lone Deranger said:
Yes! An honest to God Mac Rumor! :D

Turbo boost speeds up to 3.46GHz sounds great. How does Turbo Boost work anyways? Is that speed sustainable for prolonged periods? Say hours of continuous rendering on both cores?
Click to expand...

AFAIK, the CPU has a maximum thermal envelope. The processor slows down the extra cores and boosts the speed on one while staying within this envelope speeding up single threaded applications.
 
niuniu said:
as an option :)

I'd be happy to see the back of optical drives altogether..
Click to expand...

I concur. Replace the optical drive in the MBPs with a SSD (40gb or so?) for running the OS on. If people really need to use optical media, give them the option of a USB drive.
 
niuniu said:
as an option :)

I'd be happy to see the back of optical drives altogether..
Click to expand...

I wouldn't! What would I back up to? I need long term, permanent back ups as I imagine many others do too.

I hope we do get a bluray option. I've been trying to archive a lot of my projects to DVD and it's taking an awfully long time and many discs.
 
Aah.. I see. I guess that could still be useful for those pesky single threaded tasks that still linger in many places.
Thanks for the explanation Davewilks.

And here's another vote for the elimination of optical drives. I'd be perfectly content with an MBA solution for the MBP's. Think of all the extra space that could be put to better use! :)
How about SDXC compatible SD card slots. This would be a great alternative to optical media. Far more interesting than BluRay in my opinion.

Davewilks said:
AFAIK, the CPU has a maximum thermal envelope. The processor slows down the extra cores and boosts the speed on one while staying within this envelope speeding up single threaded applications.
Click to expand...
 
I find this misleading:

The MacBook Pro presently tops out at 2.66GHz with the Core i7 processor.

Your implying the current i7 has no turbo boost speed!! :mad::mad:

Anyway, I would expect this in new processor in January? Maybe November? Not much of a speed difference though.
 
Lone Deranger said:
Aah.. I see. I guess that could still be useful for those pesky single threaded tasks that still linger in many places.
Thanks for the explanation Davewilks.

And here's another vote for the elimination of optical drives. I'd be perfectly content with an MBA solution for the MBP's. Think of all the extra space that could be put to better use! :)
How about SDXC compatible SD card slots. This would be a great alternative to optical media. Far more interesting than BluRay in my opinion.
Click to expand...

i agree DVD and Blurays sucks but sadly most of people are still using them for work or free time. USing SDXC would much more better and smart. Removing optical drive Apple could save a lot of space!! A LOT.
 
Lone Deranger said:
Yes! An honest to God Mac Rumor! :D

Turbo boost speeds up to 3.46GHz sounds great. How does Turbo Boost work anyways? Is that speed sustainable for prolonged periods? Say hours of continuous rendering on both cores?
Click to expand...

Ok some correct me if I'm wrong...
But my dumb architects understanding of Turbo Boost is that if a workflow is more reliant on a single core or single threaded workflow and one core is idle then the core doing work can boost to a higher speed to get it done faster. The chip still has to keep itself within a power and heat range but if it has room it can use it.

So in the case of rendering which was an easy workflow to make mutli-core capable and is likely to have sustained load so the chip is going to running hot to start with especially in a laptop with restricted cooling. My understanding is you wouldn't see much the turbo boost.

However there might be some single threaded work at the start that has to done before the multi-core model engine and render can kick in. Such as a Terrain Calculator this task could trigger the boost mode. Giving you a shorter lag time between hitting go and seeing the first of the pixels in the preview.
 
Dagless said:
I wouldn't! What would I back up to? I need long term, permanent back ups as I imagine many others do too.

I hope we do get a bluray option. I've been trying to archive a lot of my projects to DVD and it's taking an awfully long time and many discs.
Click to expand...

There's always MozyHome as a back up solution. I signed up a few weeks ago - still haven't achieved full back up but I've got over 500GB out in the cloud backed up.

Why any laptops these days come standard with an optical drive is beyond me. What a great way to add weight and unnecessary space to a device that doesn't need it. If you do, optional external works for those times you really need one.
 
You will not see USB 3.0 before 2011 with new Intel 6 series chipsets.
Currently every notebook with USB3.0 needs an extra controller chip and Apples logic board is jam-packed already. It is probably to much work necessary to support USB 3.0. With Sandybridge they get it for no work at all. They will wait for this.
I hoped they put in e-SATA as that really would be very difficult but it will never show up on a MAC I guess. 2011 they will have Light Peak/USB 3.0 combo and everyone will be happy.


How does Turbo work?
If one core is idle it overclocks the other 3 to 4 bins (multiplicator steps, 1 step 133Mhz) and put the idle core in C6 power saving mode. If both cores have a lot of work it also trys to overclock them and give each one extra bin. This will only happen though if the GPU signals it is not using all the TDP as it isn't when a dedicated GPU is running. If the GPU is busy the standard clock is as far as it can go.
Thus it will for a longer time overclock by one bin 2,8 -> 2.93 Ghz both cores if the integrated GPU has only little to no work.

The TDP of an Arrendale is actually 27.5W for the CPU and about 12W for the 45nm DIE. Add this up and you will see that 35W is less than this but they both share 35 W as the total max. The CPU uses 22W the GPU may max out and use its own turbo. The GPU uses only 7W the CPU can go all the way up to 27.5W.
 
No quad core i7 = Lame Apple decision

Yawn... It's not a quad core processor. I'm sure fanboys will defend that decision, but there really is no rationale for not using one of the currently offered quad core i7 processors (that are currently available) in a "Pro" machine. If the rationale is that the case would have to be redesigned, that is still not an excuse. A "Pro" machine should not put form over function to the extent that a performance difference between a dual core i7 and a quad core i7 is considered not significant enough to warrant a case redesign.
 
as existing benchmarks have shown, there is not a significant difference between i5 and i7 series. not a reason to upgrade...
 
Quad-core Core i7 (720QM) for MacBookPro

My guess is that the quad-core Core i7 (720QM) will be available for the MacBookPro line right after the WWDC.
 
When are we going to see a redesigned MBP??, its been updated with new design in 2008. When is the next expected design? Maybe thinner:)
 
We'll see, I'm not gonna hold my breath. I'm gonna try to be satisfied with my i5 2.4 and IF they should bring the option to upgrade the 15" to a i7 2.8 I'll probably sell this one and upgrade. My guess is, having recieved this one no sooner than May 18th (!) we'll be in 2011 before this upgrade happens - hopefully I can keep away from the awaiting threads and spend my time more wisely. After all, if speed and rendering times is what we're all about, what about spending less time on stuff like this, time-management is probably more time giving in the long run than a small processor upgrade.

Time to go look for some custom skin protection for this thing though, so the resale value will be good.
 
uaecasher said:
Great, now I have to wait more :(
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is the way it is with being into Apple hardware. They've just released a long awaited update to the MBP last month. And now there's a new rumor that makes one want to wait. Maybe it would be a good idea to stay away from rumor sites in between the expected major update times :rolleyes:
 
MattInOz & Dusk007, both excellent explanations. Thank you for elaborating.

I take it the lack of a quad core CPU is because of thermal reasons as well?
Surely the removal of the bulky optical drive could pave the way?
What is Apple waiting for? :confused:
 
Apple's laptop prices are way to high compared to HP & Acer laptops, i5 with 1024 mb graphic nvidia gt 330. Costs 1200$, i really feel apple should do something so their MBP.
 
Let's not go there shall we? That line of discussion leads to a bottomless pit of strife and decay. Too many threads already go that way.

Baadshah said:
Apple's laptop prices are way to high compared to HP & Acer laptops, i5 with 1024 mb graphic nvidia gt 330. Costs 1200$, i really feel apple should do something so their MBP.
Click to expand...
 
Baadshah said:
When are we going to see a redesigned MBP??, its been updated with new design in 2008. When is the next expected design? Maybe thinner:)
Click to expand...

I think apple has reached their limit with the thinness of the MBP. It get hot enough as is. The MBP out now is thinner than any other performance notebook. In the next case redesign it would be cool to have some kind of LED display on the trackpad or hey... how about an LED screen :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top