Notebook with Hexacore-CPU

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by jazer, Mar 20, 2010.

  1. jazer macrumors member

    Feb 2, 2010

    I dont call this for good, but it shows what is possible and that others work an Core i7-980X laptop while we get only C2D chips.

    6 vs. 2 Cores for equal prices (sure not egual quality and it's very ugly) and Apple is still cool and thinks we are all happy with our mac's.

    If this six core could run OSX, I would think about it. But I still hope for a 17"MBP with 4 cores. Even this is unsure if it would come out till June.

    Very disappointing this all...
  2. spinnerlys Guest


    Sep 7, 2008
    forlod bygningen
    Have you read the article?

    5878€ for 4.5Kg using a 130W CPU if you expand it to the highest level.

    And it still has FW400, but at least eSATA.

  3. MrBrekke macrumors 6502


    Oct 1, 2009

    there is the page where you can customize your system. And the price...
    $ 3.439 with the i7-980x

    first it is ugly and so fat that you could put 2 MBP's inside of it.

    2nd. it is a gaming laptop.

    3rd. what is wrong with the c2d in the MBP?
    have you ever waited for your CPU to complete any tasks?
    Have your dual core ever been working flat out at max for a period longer than 10 minutes?

    why can't people stop complaining about the CPU. the CPU is almost never the component slowing a system down.

    Get a decent SSD instead. not a cheep MLC. Get a SLC SSD.

    I have only been waiting for the CPU on my MBP 2-3 times. i needed to do some rendering in Cinema4D and one time in Matlab.

    this kind of tasks are normally not intended to be done on a laptop, It is intended to be done on a workstation.
  4. jazer thread starter macrumors member

    Feb 2, 2010
    Well, it is in my case. I'm looking for a 17"MBP, which is a desktop replacement for me and not a High-Mobility worker.

    Most of my apps like PS, Final cut, Eclipse, Xcode and a VM for TV watching... This is not possible with with MBP C2D 2,5GHZ. The limit is VM & Chrome at the same time with not less then 90% CPU usage. A six core would improve that.

    Also MKV transcoding on the fly... not possible with the C2D (and yes, the transcoder can use multiple CPU's).

    So why not having a six core? SSD would improve much for that.
  5. MrBrekke macrumors 6502


    Oct 1, 2009
    are you serious?

    a VM and Chrome as the max?

    That is news for me. as i currently have 3 VM's running (windows server 2003, server 2008R2 and windows 7 ultimate) and a fairly huge amount of applications open and still the CPU is not working much. 40 - 45 % usage of CPU.

    running a move in background in vlc still no issues with CPU usage.

    The only bottleneck now is the RAM 4 GB is not enough for this.

    I don't know what in earth for type of VM you plan to run that constantly takes 90% of your CPU. since a web browser should hardly use any CPU power.

    I agree that 6 cores would be nice but there is not really a need for it since the current CPU can push way more than the other devices in the laptop.

    When Light Peak is implemented and laptops come as standard with SLC SSD's in raid 0. then there will be need for faster CPU's and more cores.

    just did a calculation in Matlab 100.000 decimals in pi total time spent 2 minutes and 17 seconds.
    what happened:

    CPU up to using 200% (100% CPU load)
    that lasted for around 1,5 minutes, The rest of the time spent was simply waiting for the created data to move from RAM to the SSD.

    of course direct encoding Love CPU power so if that is your main work load i can understand that a 6 core would be nice so you can do other things at the same time. also since you say that this will be you desktop replacement.
  6. gfiz macrumors 6502


    Dec 18, 2009
    lol, we're hoping to see eventually dual core with hyperthreading...and who knows when that's finally going to happen. And we're talking 6 core MBP's? :eek:

Share This Page