I wouldn't want one based on a duo core CPU. I guess that I am going to pass this time; buying from a different brand with superior processing power and longer warranty. And no, the battery life is not that bad. Not to mention that it is cheaper. A hell lot cheaper even. Two candidates are up for this race, and Apple won't be one of them when they launch a duo core "pro".
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.
New MacBook Pro 6,1 on Geekbench!!
- Thread starter Steve Mobs
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I want to know when the Gulftown (isn't that right?) Mac Pros are going to launch. I need one for a studio I'm building. 
Ok, sorry for going off of the topic.
Ok, sorry for going off of the topic.
I guess those manufacturers found a way to make it happen, then.
I haven't heard of any reports of machines not booting, exploding, or creating rifts in the spacetime continuum when four sticks of RAM are used, so I'm not worried.
http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/10/hp-envy-15-review/
Given Engadget's experience with the HP Envy 15 with it's quad core Core i7 720QM, it's probably heat and battery life. The Envy 15 which is pretty MacBook Pro-esque at 5.2lbs and 1" thick with aluminum body gets uncomfortably hot on the bottom to be place on the lap and hot at the palm rest even under light load like web browsing according to Engadget. Battery life was only 2 hrs. All this despite having more room inside for fans/heat sinks and batteries due to it not having an optical drive.
Apple could presumably do better, but current 45nm mobile quad cores definitely don't seem ideal. A 32nm mobile quad core is definitely needed but Intel doesn't seem to have one planned until the next Sandy Bridge architecture which seems pushed back from Q4 2010 into 2011.
I think the same thing went through a lot of people's minds. Now, that being said. i7 4 core Clarkdale from Intel is a 45nm transistor, and the leaked spec. shows 32nm Arrandales (32nm transistors are built on 45nm), so this is the new generation processor (even though it is dual core), faster processing, more battery life and less heat.
More info. on 32nm transistors:
What does 32nm mean? For now, heres what I believe it means: transistors keep getting small and better and Innovation is alive and kickin!
* Well keep getting to see the advent of smaller, cooler and faster running computers
* It means Intel can keep bringing better performance at at relatively the same or even lower prices over time, or what we often hear: extending the benefits of Moores Law into the future
* It means more efficiencies and new features can be squeezed onto processors so that computer makers can focus on things like extending battery life of laptops, creating ever sleeker designs and building in new wireless Internet capabilities into every new compute device
For consumers, the highlight is that it will consume less and be faster (surprised?). 32nm also means that more processors can be produced from a single silicon wafer, which translates to higher yields (less defects) and lower prices (in the latter part of the produce cycle).
Source: http://scoop.intel.com/2009/02/what-does-32nm-really-mean.php
(article from early 2009, but it does explain the benefits of 32nm transistors)
http://www.intel.com/consumer/products/processors/corei7-specs.htm
More info. on 32nm transistors:
What does 32nm mean? For now, heres what I believe it means: transistors keep getting small and better and Innovation is alive and kickin!
* Well keep getting to see the advent of smaller, cooler and faster running computers
* It means Intel can keep bringing better performance at at relatively the same or even lower prices over time, or what we often hear: extending the benefits of Moores Law into the future
* It means more efficiencies and new features can be squeezed onto processors so that computer makers can focus on things like extending battery life of laptops, creating ever sleeker designs and building in new wireless Internet capabilities into every new compute device
For consumers, the highlight is that it will consume less and be faster (surprised?). 32nm also means that more processors can be produced from a single silicon wafer, which translates to higher yields (less defects) and lower prices (in the latter part of the produce cycle).
Source: http://scoop.intel.com/2009/02/what-does-32nm-really-mean.php
(article from early 2009, but it does explain the benefits of 32nm transistors)
http://www.intel.com/consumer/products/processors/corei7-specs.htm
They must be crazy to sell an i3 with onboard GPU for $1200.
I don't think it will be happening. I think the macbook will also be upgraded with a core i5.
My Predictions (Revised)
Future 13"
$1200 - 2.13GHz Core i3-350M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 3MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics
$1500 - 2.26GHz Core i3-350M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 3MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics
Future 15"
$1700 - 2.26GHz Core i3-350M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 3MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics
$2000 - 2.40GHz Core i5-520M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 3MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics + NVIDIA Optimus + NVIDIA Discrete Graphics
$2300 - 2.53GHz Core i5-540M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 3MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics + NVIDIA Optimus + NVIDIA Discrete Graphics
$2600 - 2.66GHz Core i7-620M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 4MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics + NVIDIA Optimus + NVIDIA Discrete Graphics
Future 17"
$2500 - 2.53GHz Core i5-540M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 3MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics + NVIDIA Optimus + NVIDIA Discrete Graphics
$2800 - 2.66GHz Core i7-620M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 4MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics + NVIDIA Optimus + NVIDIA Discrete Graphics
No Clarksfield (4 Cores, 8 Threads). No ATI Graphics.
Future 13"
$1200 - 2.13GHz Core i3-350M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 3MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics
$1500 - 2.26GHz Core i3-350M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 3MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics
Future 15"
$1700 - 2.26GHz Core i3-350M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 3MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics
$2000 - 2.40GHz Core i5-520M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 3MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics + NVIDIA Optimus + NVIDIA Discrete Graphics
$2300 - 2.53GHz Core i5-540M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 3MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics + NVIDIA Optimus + NVIDIA Discrete Graphics
$2600 - 2.66GHz Core i7-620M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 4MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics + NVIDIA Optimus + NVIDIA Discrete Graphics
Future 17"
$2500 - 2.53GHz Core i5-540M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 3MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics + NVIDIA Optimus + NVIDIA Discrete Graphics
$2800 - 2.66GHz Core i7-620M, 2 Cores, 4 Threads, 4MB L3, 1066 FSB
Intel Integrated Graphics + NVIDIA Optimus + NVIDIA Discrete Graphics
No Clarksfield (4 Cores, 8 Threads). No ATI Graphics.
I'm surprised Apple has waited this long to release the updated MBPs honestly. I figured it'd be FOR SURE in January. Wonder how much longer the wait will be?
What exactly does "32nm transistors are built on 45nm" mean?
32nm transistors really mean they can achieve similar transistor switching performance at lower voltage for lower power consumption or faster transistor switching performance at the same voltage for higher performance. Architecturally, Westmere is not a major change from Nehalem with just the addition of AES instructions. Clock for clock performance is similar. Unlike Penryn which did have architectural improvements over Merom. Westmere's advantage is that it seems to be able to achieve noticeably higher clock speeds for 2 cores at lower power consumption, which is most beneficial for most users. If you can truly use 4 cores, then Clarksfield will be faster, but otherwise Arrandale's higher clock speeds are not a bad idea.
Two questions:
1. Will it have Sata 3.0 at 6gbs? I think ha would offer a huge performance boost when paired with the latest SSDs...
2. What are they going to do with the graphics? ATI? As long as they don't do that switchable but not without rebooting crap again between two chips...
1. Will it have Sata 3.0 at 6gbs? I think ha would offer a huge performance boost when paired with the latest SSDs...
2. What are they going to do with the graphics? ATI? As long as they don't do that switchable but not without rebooting crap again between two chips...
The quad core only uses 45W while the dual core only 35W, it's no problem. And the heat using the 45nm architecture is no problem also since the Sony laptops with their quad core i7 runs under very good temperatures.
Given my prediction record and yours, how about we watch and see. You said "nowhere near". Within 20%? 40%? 60%? Let's at least bracket it.
Rocketman
If Sony can do it, then Apple can do it. I expect to see a switchable GPU during without restarting
If Sony can do it, then Apple can do it. I expect to see a switchable GPU during without restarting
This will happen with NVIDIA's Optimus.
On monday, next week, I'll be ready to splash out for a much needed 3rd MacBook Pro for our family - it's the 13" version I'm going for this time.
Almost perfect timing I hope.
I'm seriously not hoping that the graphics will be downgraded from the current 9400m though.
Almost perfect timing I hope.
I'm seriously not hoping that the graphics will be downgraded from the current 9400m though.
I think you are on to something. I just downloaded and ran Geekbench myself and the "submit" button is millimeters away from the X button to close out the window. I could see him accidentally going to click the X and he clicked submit by accident. Or someone else using the tester's computer who didnt know what they were doing clicked submit by accident.
Mine also. After playing games on the gf's 9400M when she's not been using it, I'm loving it waaay too much to downgrade. Can't imagine how great the GT must be.. but I'm hoping for GT performance + in even the basemodels
I Browsed the Hp Envy 15 geekbench result and it shows 4797 in a 32 bit version
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/210797
So the core i7 MBP scores better than the envy and it only has 2 cores.
Man this thing should be amazingly fast..
MBP Core i7 - 5280 > 4797 - HP Envy 15
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/210797
So the core i7 MBP scores better than the envy and it only has 2 cores.
Man this thing should be amazingly fast..
MBP Core i7 - 5280 > 4797 - HP Envy 15
I wouldn't worry too much about it. Apple is well know for removing features and accessories from their products, to the point that they hamper their functionality for the sake of elegance and simplicity, but they have never downgraded a CPU, HDD, GPU or RAM from their computers in a refresh or redesign, EVER!
Since Geekbench is a synthetic benchmark, we could compare other theoretical indicators such as Dhrystone which is an indicator of theoretical integer performance and is really the only figure I can find for ARM A9 at this time anyways. Integer performance is most relevant for average consumer usage anyways.
http://www.arm.com/pdfs/ARMCortexA-9Processors.pdf
ARM's documentation claims up to 2.50 DMIPs/MHz (page 5) for the ARM Cortex A9.
http://my.ocworkbench.com/2008/ecs/ECS_945GCT-D_Atom_board/b1.htm
In contrast, a well configured 1.6GHz Atom computer can get around 4000 DMIPs (Dhrystone measure for ECS 945GCT-D (Intel Atom 1.6GHz) Vista) which works out to a similar 2.50 DMIPs/MHz.
That means that in theoretical integer performance an ARM Cortex A9 is clock for clock fairly equivalent to an Intel Atom. And even first gen Intel Macs with the Yonah Core Duo are significantly faster than an Intel Atom, something like 2 times faster clock for clock for a single Yonah core vs a single Atom core with HT. A first gen 2006 Mac Pro with 4 cores starting at 2GHz using the Merom Microarchitecture would be even faster.
Clock for clock, I would widely guess 1 Merom based core (2006 era) would be 3 times faster than an ARM Cortex A9 core. Although there are so many factors like memory bandwidth, compiler optimizations, what type of instruction you are stressing like integer, floating point, vector, branching, etc. so this estimate really isn't worth much.