No, I imagine usb 3 will appear on mac pro long before their laptop line imo.
I agree with the black keys thing. But I really doubt anything external will change in next revamp.
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
No, I imagine usb 3 will appear on mac pro long before their laptop line imo.
I agree with the black keys thing. But I really doubt anything external will change in next revamp.
Will not flip-flop i5-i7 vs. coreduo on build to order. That would mean there are two different motherboards for the same exterior model. Apple doesn't do that. They tweak add ons (with perhaps blank spaces on motherboard where optional stuff goes) or they are plug in addons.
What see on the iMac side is that they effectively too the old high end iMac and moved it down (because it is even a year older out of date) and slide the core i5 - i7 there. Getting another 6-9 months out of a mature design doesn't seem as likely for the portables:
i. The 13" MBP line-up is just a processor + hardrive tweak. There is no "old" extra premium version to move to the bottom spot. They could try to drop in an a faster CoreDuo CPU with the old design, but that would be tempting thermal fate. Apple already has a number of machines kicking up quality problems, don't need more suffering from heat stroke.
ii. No reason not to go i5/i7 for the 17". They are priced so high that putting a CoreDuo in those who elicit all kinds of put-downs for months. $2000+ for tech from year(s) ago. Constrained on i7 perhaps by the price point that Intel wants. If significantly higher than what was asking for old CoreDuo part then Apple will skip it.
iii. The 15" is a slippery slope. There really isn't as much variation up/down the 15's 3 entry as there was in the iMac line. If the new Arrandale IGP is more lame than the 9400m then going backwards with the low end version that won't have a discrete chip. However suspect Apple may take their lumps on that if there is slightly increased profit margins in it.
The fact is the new i3/i5 chips have prices about the same as the old CoreDuo's that Apple is using now (if they match them up on price rather than GHz. ). If Intel is selling their support chip at lower price than Nvidia (likely since there is no IGP in it ) then the two chip solution is cheaper and takes less space on the board ( they could add something reasonable like USB 3.0 and folks could stop moaning about no ExpressCard slot. )
Apple is very likely to roll out the new models at exactly the current price points. Since that's where the new i3/i5 chips are targeted ..... same profit margin for Apple.
P.S. Also wouldn't be surprised to see no change in 13" ( besides minor speed bumps in processor/hardrive) but the i3/i5/i7 changes came to just the 15" and 17" models. Apple seems to run into more problems when try to change all three at the same time.
If the low end MBP 13 inch sells for $1200 with only a core i3, 2gb ram and no dedicated GPU ... that's a really big joke and I'll be really disappointed in Apple.
I wouldn't get to excited about this.
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/215201
Check that one out.
That proves a geekbench score can be manipulated.
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/215201
Check that one out.
That proves a geekbench score can be manipulated.
It's just an hackintosh?
And it can get even higher scores, the i7 920 can be stable clocked to over 4.0 ghz easily with an aftermarket cooler.
edit: I see it's a Mac Pro. Well that can make sense. The Xeon and desktop i7 are identical, they are even the same price. He could have put a i7 920 in it for fun to overclock it.
Any backstory to that link?
Operating System Mac OS X 10.6.2 (Build 10C540)
Model MacPro4,1 Motherboard Apple Computer, Inc. Mac-F4208DC8 Rev 1.xx
Processor Intel Core i7 920
Processor ID GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 26 Stepping 5
Processor Frequency 3.80 GHz Processors 1
Cores 4 Threads 8
L1 Instruction Cache 32.0 KB L1 Data Cache 32.0 KB
L2 Cache 256 KB L3 Cache 8.00 MB
Memory 12.0 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 FSB 4.80 GHz
BIOS Apple Computer, Inc. MP41.88Z.0081.B04.0903051113
Look at the bold.
There is no 3.8Ghz quad-core i7
The new Gulftown processors are 6-core. The ones that will go in the Mac Pros.
The Mac Pro 4,1 is the Sept. 2008 Mac Pro.
If this were a new , valid model the build would be 10C30XX
Etc..
It's fake. That's the point.
are there any glaring things wrong with the macbook pro one though? all of that seems ok...
I see that, but I thought geekbench was a reliable site. Was this info manipulated that easily? Seems strange.
There are 3.8 gz quad core i7 if you overclock it. And server and desktop cpu are interchangable with the i7 series. I can place a Xeon cpu on my motherboard ( no server class ) for example and it will work.
A core i5 was clocked over 7ghz a few days ago by Gigabyte btw
There are 3.8 gz quad core i7 if you overclock it. And server and desktop cpu are interchangable with the i7 series. I can place a Xeon cpu on my motherboard ( no server class ) for example and it will work.
A core i5 was clocked over 7ghz a few days ago by Gigabyte btw
One would have to change out the motherboard for that Mac Pro. The quad-core i7 920 is a 32nm chip. The socket on the Mac Pro 4,1 Sept. 2008 is designed for the 45nm cpu. It's impossible to switch them out.
Yes.
I had already pointed it out in "the other" thread:
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/9229898/
gianly1985 said:
So the whole "You can't fake GeekBench, you can't fake the Apple motherboard ID" was BS.
Hell, there are some DESKTOP i7 Bloomfield 920 hackintosh disguised as MacbookPro5,1 on that site!
The rumored bench could easily be a new Acer laptop with Arrandale i7 620 turned into a hackintosh.
1. 32 nm chips work on all existing motherboards, some require a bios update to fully use it.
2. the i7 920 is 45 nm and they are exactly the same as the W3xxx Xeon cpu series in the Mac Pro's except that it is branded as a "server" cpu
I have to agree. The bechmarks of the "new" MBP could have been a hackintoshed laptop with a i7 dual core.
this blows
maan if all this is true and the new MBPs are going to have core duos again, im going to stick with windows and get a windows 7. I was excited about all the hype regarding the new MBPs but the upgrade isnt all that great...
ill still wait to see the specs once released but i most likely will end up with a windows again... heck i guess ill be saving some money by staying with windows while at the same time having higher specs than the MBPs...
i wish BMPs were just better priced with the actually hardware contents that they come with.
maan if all this is true and the new MBPs are going to have core duos again, im going to stick with windows and get a windows 7. I was excited about all the hype regarding the new MBPs but the upgrade isnt all that great...
ill still wait to see the specs once released but i most likely will end up with a windows again... heck i guess ill be saving some money by staying with windows while at the same time having higher specs than the MBPs...
i wish BMPs were just better priced with the actually hardware contents that they come with.
having more cores doesn't mean "higher specs" ...
BTW good luck with your windows-based notebook. In my house any Windows-based computer is simply banned ...
Agreed (although personally I wouldn't switch back to Windows; still getting BSODs on my Win7-gaming PC). I know Apple is in a tough situation here, what with their ambitious goals regarding battery life and Intel not really delivering on the mobile CPU front right now, but come on - it's 2010, dual-cores have no place in a "pro"-machine. I'd love to get a new MBP, but at this point it seems like there are major innovations just around the corner that won't make their way into these laptops. Within the year, we might see blu-ray in Macs (please God [Steve], pleeeaaase), we will see Sandy Bridge, Light Peak and USB 3.0, cheaper, faster and bigger SSDs - but I doubt any of this stuff will make it into these new MBPs (prove me wrong Apple, I'd be delighted). I don't doubt that they will be nice, fast machines, but I'm not sure if they will be viable long-term investments, and I have to be able to regard an MBP as a viable long-term investment to justify its price.
This year is going to ring in some pretty impressive updates for the Mac line! Time for me to part with some cash.
you are probably right
It' s a pity that I'm not going to change any of my Macs (or iPhone) this year, all bought in the second half of 2009. So I'm looking forward to 2011 ...
I definately hope not either!
I was thinking about the fact that if they would bump the CPU speeds to i5/i7 and the GPU speeds to ATI 5 series of the MBP'S , they would actually be faster in graphics than the iMacs and almost as fast in CPU. Therefore the mbp update may be postponed till the imac is updated...or the speedbumps are going to be not that significant i think.
now the only question that remains: which graphics cards!
I can't believe Apple is gonna sell their 13" MBP with an integrated Intel GPU that is far slower than the previous model.... i just can't see them justify that!
Obviously IF they do it, no Steve, no Phil and nobody else will ever comment on the issue
... the bold move would be to put a dedicated gpu in all of them, but frankly, they're far too greedy for that.
I can't believe Apple is gonna sell their 13" MBP with an integrated Intel GPU that is far slower than the previous model.... i just can't see them justify that!
Obviously IF they do it, no Steve, no Phil and nobody else will ever comment on the issue
... the bold move would be to put a dedicated gpu in all of them, but frankly, they're far too greedy for that.