I'm new to this game... Who are VMware Fusion's competitors? If VMware is slower, what is the advantage to using it?
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'm new to this game... Who are VMware Fusion's competitors? If VMware is slower, what is the advantage to using it?
Their competitors are Parallels Desktop and Sun VirtualBox. Do a quick search and you'll find threads comparing the trio of products. Each has its own distinct advantages and disadvantages.
If we're to reason that Apple currently sells the 17" MacBook Pro w/ 6MB of L3 cache, and wouldn't downgrade their next revision to having 4MB of L3 cache, then this GeekBench is a 15" MacBook Pro, because it shows itself as having 4MB of L3 cache.
Therefore, if this GeekBench a dual core MacBook Pro 15", it goes to reason that the new 17" MacBook Pro will have 6MB of L3 cache (as it does now), and the processor should be one of the Quad Cores, whether a 720/820/920, and potentially all of those options could be up as available processor upgrades for CTO builds.
fwiw, i find parallels to be the most efficient for my uses (aimed at ttttttttttttttttttttttttttt9).
you should do some research, the current 17" mbp has 6mb L2 cache not L3....very big difference.
more cache does not mean better.
Looks up to me. They've got a sale going on Macbook/MBP/iMac. (Ending Monday 2/15)
What what what and er, what??
Sorry but if you think Clarksdale will appear in ANY Macbook Pro, it won't. It cost too much for Apple and it also runs WAY too hot, it'll also suck the battery dry in no time, basically totally against everything Apple is trying to do.
Best place for Clarksdale is in an Alienware, and speaking of them, the new M11X is bloody nice and it has the GT335M Nvidia in it with 1GB of ram, so I full expect the new MB Pro's to have better.
In fact I just love all the incorrect information in this thread, no one bothered to read the 'waiting for arrandale' thread then?
thuuuh, No, ONLY when the Apple Mac Store goes down on Apple.com can you think something is happening. Nobody else posts new computers for sale before they do, unless they are leaking info or make a mistake.
So could macmall know the release date and have a sale up to the 15th to be ready for new stock coming Tuesday 16th?
um yea
Um yea I think this pretty much points to an update on the 16th, unless Macmall does this frequently.
Does any more experienced apple user remember if macmall has done this before a mbp update in the past?
Um yea I think this pretty much points to an update on the 16th, unless Macmall does this frequently.
Does any more experienced apple user remember if macmall has done this before a mbp update in the past?
Well they have a sale on iMacs too so I suppose it the discounted
Mbps could be irrelevant to an update.
You mean Macmall?
No, only Apple and *maybe* Nvidia would know the release date of the refresh. If retailers were notified, there'd be way more leaks than what we currently have. My money is still on the 9th cuz it's when Optimus will be announced - The most likely reason Nvidia chose this date was to jointly re-introduce their hybrid graphics with the new MBPs.
Or maybe they know that if they only discounted MBP's, we would all be extremely suspicious and assume an update for the MBP's. So maybe they discounted iMac's too so we wouldn't be AS suspicious.
that doesnt change this argument. But what does is the fact that macmall would not know of an update ahead of time
This is MacMalls second extension it was at one point the 2nd of february they extended they are probably guessing on when they are going to be released too. MacMall has everything on sale anyways not just the MBPs. I agree with the Optimus release date, it helps with sales, why not release your new product with another new product. My question is do you think Optimus will be on every model since its new?
That depends upon on what the delay access times are. For example if it takes 6 cycles to get to the Core Duo shared L2 and also 6 cycles to get to the shared i7 L3, then about the same (assuming clocked about the same speed).
The i7's L2 access time can be lower than the old Core Duo step up because it is not shared. Related for programs spinning or just looping on something in the L2 you won't get cache access contention in the i7 setup whereas you will on the CoreDuo. Less stepping on each other toes if have multiple unrelated things in flight (where one of them has small footprint.)
For same memory technology and controllers, typically does.
However, the i7 has better bandwidth to main memory. That will drop some of the pressure on the cache. So smaller isn't necessarily a deficient.
Likewise, most likely the clock rate on the CPU package will be lower with the i7 than it was with the old Core Duo solution. Again similar in MHz to MHz comparisons. Same architecture... bigger ---> typically better but when compare across architectures, bigger not as much so.
This is easy to get around with Marketing since they'll use "benchmarks" rather than "bigger cache" or "faster clock" to sell the thing.
I think so, but I don't think they'll be using 210m. I have a feeling it'll be a new 300-series integrated gpu on all of them, that would be able to run jointly with a discrete gpu for the 15" and 17", unlike the previous MBPs which could only run on one at a time.