Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New MacBook Pro: Predict the Specs

I see this Rev as a chance to make them smaller, lighter, more sturdy, more attractive, cooler and with a longer battery life. All at a lower price point. Not a chance for a spec bump to quad core, 8gb, SLI graphics or whatever nonsense.

Processor: similar speeds to the current line are fine. But they need to bump it down to the newer cooler running and more power miserly line of Intel processors.

RAM: 2gb standard. Upgradable to 8. 2 DIMM slots.

HDD: 250-320 standard. 500 CTO option. MBP with a SSD cto option.

GPU:
MB: Integrated Nvidia.
MBP: midrange Nvidia with 256mb ram in the low end, 512 in the highend.

Display: all LED backlit. 16x9 due to cost of parts. same resolution or a small bump.

Ports:
MB: 2x USB, 1x FW800/3200, MicroDVI, headphones, microphone.
MBP: same + expresscard and maybe one more USB or FW.

Design: Thinner. Lighter. Magnetic latches across the board. a big, multitouch trackpad and the new style keyboard.

Networking: Ethernet as a USB dongle only option. 802.11abgn. BT. Built in HSDPA WWAN as a CTO option for MBP only.

wow feature: I would like to see a glass touchpad with an expanded range of multi touch gestures simply because it would feel and look better then the current pad.

Beyond that I think using it as a secondary display would be useful for some pros who need programable functions for different applications, but it would add too much cost and complexity for the average user so I dont expect it.
 
I think it would be appropriate for them to introduce it in the MBP but maybe they won't though because they would have to introduce HDMI into their product mix. If they update they would have to update not just the MBP but the MB and the ACD line to accept an HDMI signal.
 
Most of you are forgetting one key feature: DDR3. If sony, acer, and all the others who upgraded w/montevina (even though apple is prolly using an nvidia chipset) are using it, then apple will use DDR3 too. It's faster and drains less power.

As for Hybrid SLI, this isn't nonsense, it's for lower power consumption. The computer uses nVidia's integrated graphics when the full power of the graphics card isn't necessary. I expect and hope for this.

As for processors, this a complete toss-up. Apple in the past has used 35w processors.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Intel-Core-2-Duo-Penryn-CPUs.7876.0.html

But they could switch to lower power consuming ones (which also happen to cost less money but have slightly lower clocks). However, being a pro laptop, they may want to keep w/the 35w power draw and use faster processors. But from the range intel has given them it would be difficult to accomplish:

intel_montevina_cpu_prices_vrz.gif


They currently use the 241$, 316$, and 530$. But if you look at those it's 25w, 35w, 35w. They wouldn't want to drop down a spectrum and use the 209, 241, and 308$ procs because that range is lower clock speed and cache wise (2.26, 2.4, 2.53 vs 2.4, 2.53, 2.6 and 3,3,6mb vs 3, 6, 6mb).

I think the processor action will be the hardest thing to predict out of everything.
 
BryanHarig said:
I see this Rev as a...
Click to expand...
Thank you for your realism. Those are very realistic (except for 16:9 due to the invite picture).

makowb said:
As for processors, this a complete toss-up. Apple in the past has used 35w processors.
...
But they could switch to lower power consuming ones (which also happen to cost less money).
Click to expand...
No they don't. 2.53 GHz 25 W is $348, 2.53 GHz 35 W is $316.

makowb said:
However, being a pro laptop, they may want to keep w/the 35w power draw and use faster processors. But from the range intel has given them it would be difficult to accomplish:
Click to expand...
2.4 GHz -> 2.4/2.53 GHz. 2.5 GHz -> 2.53 GHz. 2.6 GHz -> 2.8 GHz.

makowb said:
They currently use the 241$, 316$, and 530$. But if you look at those it's 25w, 35w, 35w.
Click to expand...
Those are the new CPUs. The current MacBook Pros use the old 35 W CPUs.

makowb said:
I think the processor action will be the hardest thing to predict out of everything.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree - but for other reasons.
 
iMacmatician said:
2.4 GHz -> 2.4/2.53 GHz. 2.5 GHz -> 2.53 GHz. 2.6 GHz -> 2.8 GHz.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that they're going to have a differentiation in power consumption between the 3 lines? The 2.4 GHz only consumes 25w for the new procs while the rest consume 35w.
 
I see a lot of people predicting that the ram will be upgradeable to 8GB. Is there a specific reason to be optimistic about this possibility?

I'm a big virtualization user and got rid of my Macbook due to the cap at 4GB. 6GB would be nice for a mobile setup for me. 8GB would be absolutely GREAT!
 
makowb said:
Most of you are forgetting one key feature: DDR3. If sony, acer, and all the others who upgraded w/montevina (even though apple is prolly using an nvidia chipset) are using it, then apple will use DDR3 too. It's faster and drains less power.
Click to expand...

ddr3 is not faster it just use less voltage and has a larger bandwidth. Ram has only gotten slower in terms of latency; ddr>ddr2>ddr3
 
Here's mine, from the thread about prices (yes, it's copypasta of myself from 10 minutes ago. Deal with it)

Low end 15:

15.4in 1440x900 LED display
2.4Ghz Core 2 Duo (BTO option for 2.53Ghz Core 2 Duo)
2GB DDR3 1066Mhz (BTO option for 4GB and 8GB at insane prices)
ATI 3670
250GB 5400 RPM HDD (BTO option for 320GB 5400RPM and 250GB 7200 RPM)
8X SuperDrive
$1999


High end 15:

15.4in 1440x900 LED display
2.53Ghz Core 2 Duo (BTO option for 2.8Ghz Core 2 Duo or [costlier option] 2.26Ghz Core 2 Quad)
2GB DDR3 1066 (BTO option for 4GB and 8GB at insane prices)
ATI 3670
320GB 5400RPM HDD (BTO option for 250GB 7200RPM)
8x SuperDrive
$2499


17:

17in 1680x1050 LED display (BTO option for 1920x1200 LED)
2.53Ghz Core 2 Duo (BTO option for 2.8Ghz Core 2 Duo or [costlier option] 2.26Ghz Core 2 Quad)
2GB DDR3 1066 (BTO option for 4GB and 8GB at insane prices)
ATI 3670
320GB 5400RPM HDD (BTO option for 250GB 7200RPM)
8x SuperDrive
$2799




All will have the new case we've seen, complete with a glass trackpad (no screen in it, just a glass pad, as they are cooler looking and do not stain or wear down as easily as the current ones), a user-swappable HDD and RAM, and a magnetic latch.


And about the quad.....there were report at the Intel Developer Forum that said they were 35w.......so...maybe
 
It is my personal belief that the MacBooks and the MBPs will be combine into one line.

Cant Speculate on the MacBooks, but the MBPs should have at least:
And that they will Offer Core 2 Duo's up to 2.8GHz 1066FSB
Up to 8GB DDR3 1066 Ram
NVidia Chipset with Integrated Graphics + a 9650M GT 512MB with Hybird SLI Capabilities
SSD Drive BTO, As well as 500GB 5400rpm Drives, or 320GB 7200rpm Drives
Blu-Ray Burner BTO, Blu-Ray Player Standard
 
The pictures don't show an HDMI port, so no HDMI, and no BluRay. Done.

Of course, the picture was of a Macbook which has all of it's ports on the left side and a CD drive on the right. Perhaps the CD drive will move to the bottom and more ports will be added to the right? Not likely.

Starting with 2.53Ghz -> 2.66Ghz -> 2.8Ghz.
13.3" screen means 16:10 is still the norm. 1440x900 LED for the MBP.
GPU - Totally up in the air IMO. If the chipset is Nvidia's, it's a fair bet to assume the GPU will be too. Absolutely not expecting something high end, anyone can see that. Mid range, just like every other PowerBook and MBP before it.
Magnetic latch (duh).
DDR3, 2GB standard on everything except possibly the base MB. 1066Mhz. Upgradeable to 8GB. As someone above said, expect prices to be in the stratosphere.

It would have to be a bit better than this to make me sell my 1.5 year old Vista build for it, but it's on my mind.

Kind of funny that most of the predictions are the same ;p
 
Habusho said:
I think it would be appropriate for them to introduce it in the MBP but maybe they won't though because they would have to introduce HDMI into their product mix. If they update they would have to update not just the MBP but the MB and the ACD line to accept an HDMI signal.
Click to expand...

m1stake said:
The pictures don't show an HDMI port, so no HDMI, and no BluRay. Done.
Click to expand...

Ummm... HDMI is not in any way a requirement for Blu-ray. While many Blu-ray notebooks feature HDMI outputs, many (especially pro) models from Lenovo, Acer, Dell, etc. don't have HDMI outputs.

I assume you're both confusing HDCP (which IS required for digital video output of Blu-ray video) with HDMI (which itself is just a port that supports HDCP). HDCP is also supportable over DVI and DisplayPort, and both of those can fully support Blu-ray as a result. The lack of an HDMI port means nothing in terms of Blu-ray support. I would imagine since Apple maintains a more enclosed "ecosystem" than other PC manufacturers do, they'll likely drop the DVI port and move to DisplayPort on the new models, which has many benefits over both others. The physical port is small (perfect for ridiculously thin notebooks), it can support dual-bandwidth DVI-D (for 30" displays), includes audio support, and with a small DP-HDMI adapter can output both audio and video to an HDMI HDTV or monitor. It's the best of all worlds.

Also, the current (aging) CDs don't support Blu-ray, not because they lack HDMI, but because they don't support HDCP over DVI, which is something Apple should have addressed long ago (like all other monitor maker's did), but then I guess they couldn't force all their customer's to buy all new monitors for their Blu-ray-enabled MBPs next week. ;)
 
GPU: nVidia 9650M at best, or ATI 3650.

Can't see them fit anything else than those in there.

And I hope for HDMI or DisplayPort. If they stick with DVI, it would be to protect their HD downloads and Apple TV. Would be typical Apple...
 
By standardizing components (trackpads, keyboards, and probably power chargers) across all 3 notebook lines, along with dropping older technology (FW400), I think that's how Apple is going to be able to drop the prices and still keep a decent profit margin.

Is anyone else worried that these crazily thin (1/2" thick for the MB, if the picture is accurate, slightly thicker for the MBP) cases are going to effect the specs of the new machines? The old ones already run extremely thin, and the cases prove a loss of fullsize DVI and FW400 (which explains the total drop from the iPod line, Apple is refocusing on FW800 and beyond as S1600 and S3200 are backwards-compatable, unlike FW400, it saves them headache later on). This means we may lose other features once on the MBP, but I hope otherwise.

If they don't get gimped, I think Tallest Skil is most likely to be correct on specs. 16:9 is possible due to the cheaper panels (again helping drive down costs).

My theory on the new display port: I think due to the size, it's some sort of direct link to the motherboard, and what attaches to it could be a sort of breakout box with DVI, HDMI, etcetera. This way Apple can save space and stay compatable with everything else. The only downside is its yet another dongle (along with a FW400 > 800 cable) to lug along.
 
The most obvious change hasn't been spec'd. 16" LED with 16:9 aspect ratio.
 
Brien said:
By standardizing components (trackpads, keyboards, and probably power chargers) across all 3 notebook lines, along with dropping older technology (FW400), I think that's how Apple is going to be able to drop the prices and still keep a decent profit margin.

Is anyone else worried that these crazily thin (1/2" thick for the MB, if the picture is accurate, slightly thicker for the MBP) cases are going to effect the specs of the new machines? The old ones already run extremely thin, and the cases prove a loss of fullsize DVI and FW400 (which explains the total drop from the iPod line, Apple is refocusing on FW800 and beyond as S1600 and S3200 are backwards-compatable, unlike FW400, it saves them headache later on). This means we may lose other features once on the MBP, but I hope otherwise.

If they don't get gimped, I think Tallest Skil is most likely to be correct on specs. 16:9 is possible due to the cheaper panels (again helping drive down costs).

My theory on the new display port: I think due to the size, it's some sort of direct link to the motherboard, and what attaches to it could be a sort of breakout box with DVI, HDMI, etcetera. This way Apple can save space and stay compatable with everything else. The only downside is its yet another dongle (along with a FW400 > 800 cable) to lug along.
Click to expand...

.5in? Excuse me? Not if they plan to keep RJ45 ethernet (like the pics seem to show) they won't. That's a 2/3rd inch tall port. And it sits on top of the logic board, which also needs to be lifted off the base to keep it from shorting out into the metal of the case (and to leave room for the heatsinks). Then there is the screen. They're going to be around 1in. Go look at the leaked shells, look at where the ports come to, then go look at the current MBP. They'll be about the same
 
It'd be nice if they sticked to 25 watt processors for all but the 17/18", that way you could have a more powerful video card without the entire thing melting down.

To anyone saying 3670 and 9600M GT, both those cards are ancient and no better than the current pathetic 8600M GT, imo it's between the 9650M GS and 9650M GT, unless Apple decides this time to build the MacBook Pro around it's specs and give us a card representative of the price.
 
Yixian said:
To anyone saying 3670 and 9600M GT, both those cards are ancient and no better than the current pathetic 8600M GT, imo it's between the 9650M GS and 9650M GT, unless Apple decides this time to build the MacBook Pro around it's specs and give us a card representative of the price.
Click to expand...

I'd prefer the 9600m GT. Inviting more heat into the laptop isn't a priority, when the 9600m GT does what the already sufficient 8600m GT did and better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back