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 Targeted 2.8GHz Core i7 Processors Due Later This Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes! An honest to God Mac Rumor!
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?
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.
as an option
I'd be happy to see the back of optical drives altogether..
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.
same here.. I have been waiting for apple to put place USB 3.0 into their macbook line since last year!! it should be about time by now!
as an option
I'd be happy to see the back of optical drives altogether..
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.
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.
Better to have a good gfx than i3 imho. I'm very happy with my new MBP 13". naturally sooner of later they will use i3/i5
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!!
Anyway, I would expect this in new processor in January? Maybe November? Not much of a speed difference though.
The MacBook Pro presently tops out at 2.66GHz with the Core i7 processor.
Your implying the current i7 has no turbo boost speed!!
Anyway, I would expect this in new processor in January? Maybe November? Not much of a speed difference though.
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.
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.
Yes! An honest to God Mac Rumor!
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Time to go look for some custom skin protection for this thing though, so the resale value will be good.
Great, now I have to wait more
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
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?
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?
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.
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
2012/13 I'd say
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.
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
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
probably for those who already have picked up the most recent refresh, but for those of us getting ready to pull the trigger not so much.