Quad i7 MBP's


aiqw9182

macrumors 65816
Apr 22, 2010
1,089
0
Just letting you know you're going to be waiting until 2011 when Intel's new Sandy Bridge processors are released.
 

iMacmatician

macrumors 601
Jul 20, 2008
4,249
55
Just letting you know you're going to be waiting until 2011 when Intel's new Sandy Bridge processors are released.
Possibly even longer than 2011, since quad-core Sandy Bridge-MB is 45 W, like Lynnfield now. That includes the integrated GPU, so it could be turned off (and the discrete GPU turned on) for lower TDP (~35 W?).

No problem. Intel says Q4 of 2010, though.
Late 2010 production, early 2011 release. Like Clarkdale/Arrandale.
 

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,076
580
Finland
Possibly even longer than 2011, since quad-core Sandy Bridge-MB is 45 W, like Lynnfield now. That includes the integrated GPU, so it could be turned off (and the discrete GPU turned on) for lower TDP (~35 W?).
Can the IGP be turned off? Especially in SB as they are on same die (no dual die like in Nehalem). Has it been confirmed that they'll all be 45W? Die shrink and new architecture should allow 35W quads with reasonable clocks
 

cyclical

macrumors regular
Apr 22, 2010
104
0
AFAIK Huron River (the platform for Sandy Bridge) isn't due until Q1 2011. In any case, I wouldn't bet on Apple implementing the quad-core version – the quad-core has a TDP of 45W, vs 20W for the dual-core (according to wikipedia).
 

iMacmatician

macrumors 601
Jul 20, 2008
4,249
55
Can the IGP be turned off? Especially in SB as they are on same die (no dual die like in Nehalem). Has it been confirmed that they'll all be 45W? Die shrink and new architecture should allow 35W quads with reasonable clocks
No actual confirmation but that's what the reports are saying.

I don't actually know if the IGP can be turned off; it's just an assumption I've been making. I think 35 W quad-core is possible on 32 nm, just that the IGP adds ~10 W.
 

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,076
580
Finland
No actual confirmation but that's what the reports are saying.

I don't actually know if the IGP can be turned off; it's just an assumption I've been making. I think 35 W quad-core is possible on 32 nm, just that the IGP adds ~10 W.
Ahh, that's valid point! Why can't Intel just get rid of those IGPs, they are useless!
 

iMacmatician

macrumors 601
Jul 20, 2008
4,249
55
Integration saves space and I think it's cheaper too. Also that stops other integrated GPUs (NVIDIA) from being placed in the computers.

Eventually Larrabee cores will replace the IGP but that may be in 5 years' time. Until then it might be GMA all the way.
 

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,076
580
Finland
Integration saves space and I think it's cheaper too. Also that stops other integrated GPUs (NVIDIA) from being placed in the computers.

Eventually Larrabee cores will replace the IGP but that may be in 5 years' time. Until then it might be GMA all the way.
I understand them in low-end CPUs as they are fine for most users but I don't get it why they have to use them in high-end chips as well! Especially in desktops. Sure if auto-switching (Optimus etc) becomes more popular and for ATI too it might be handy but the extra 10W ain't nice :(
 

iMacmatician

macrumors 601
Jul 20, 2008
4,249
55
I understand them in low-end CPUs as they are fine for most users but I don't get it why they have to use them in high-end chips as well! Especially in desktops.
Quad-core Sandy Bridge-DT isn't next year's Bloomfield but it does go from i5-750 to i5-870/i7-930.

So in 2011, it looks like desktop CPUs below ~$400 will have an integrated GPU and be limited to 4 cores.
 

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,076
580
Finland
Quad-core Sandy Bridge-DT isn't next year's Bloomfield but it does go from i5-750 to i5-870/i7-930.

So in 2011, it looks like desktop CPUs below ~$400 will have an integrated GPU and be limited to 4 cores.
That's sad, especially as Phenom x6s are out :( Hopefully the mainstream CPUs will be fairly priced at least. LGA 1356 CPUs will replace LGA 1366 CPUs right (Bloomfield -> SNB-HEDT)?
 

LedCop

macrumors regular
Apr 7, 2008
249
0
Yeah but look how long it took to get the Core i5/i7s in MBPs. Just because intel releases it doesn't mean it'll be ready for mass production.
Intel had trouble making Arrandale i5/i7s because they were transitioning to the 32nm process with those processors. Fabrication plants had to be overhauled, etc. But Sandy Bridge is also 32nm so Intel won't face that problem and so its factories should hit the ground running once production starts.


Ahh, that's valid point! Why can't Intel just get rid of those IGPs, they are useless!
Everyone blasts Intel integrated graphics, especially Mac users when Apple started using nVidia integrated graphics so it's funny that when the i5 and i7 MacBook Pros came out one of the biggest complaints is "why is my MacBook Pro turning on the nVidia card." :rolleyes: So they're not exactly useless.
 

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,076
580
Finland
Intel had trouble making Arrandale i5/i7s because they were transitioning to the 32nm process with those processors. Fabrication plants had to be overhauled, etc. But Sandy Bridge is also 32nm so Intel won't face that problem and so its factories should hit the ground running once production starts.
SB ain't just renamed Nehalem so of course there can be issues, with e.g. IGPs.

Everyone blasts Intel integrated graphics, especially Mac users when Apple started using nVidia integrated graphics so it's funny that when the i5 and i7 MacBook Pros came out one of the biggest complaints is "why is my MacBook Pro turning on the nVidia card." :rolleyes: So they're not exactly useless.
Well, not useless but it would be nice to have CPUs without IGP. Also, IMO it's ridiculous in e.g. quad-core desktop CPUs. They are good in laptops, especially with Optimus
 

LedCop

macrumors regular
Apr 7, 2008
249
0
SB ain't just renamed Nehalem so of course there can be issues, with e.g. IGPs.


Well, not useless but it would be nice to have CPUs without IGP. Also, IMO it's ridiculous in e.g. quad-core desktop CPUs. They are good in laptops, especially with Optimus
I know the design is a major change and is perhaps as big a step as Penryn to Nehalem but it's just that, a design. So with Sandy Bridge, the IGP is just one component of the processor die like cache is and shouldn't (to my layman mind) be any more difficult to produce.

I wouldn't mind my desktop having switchable graphics, actually. Performance won't be impacted when I play games because the dedicated card would be used but when I read MacRumors my dedicated and power hungry graphics card can turn off and save electricity and reduce heat.
 

dsprimal

macrumors 6502a
Mar 27, 2010
628
0
ooo sandy bridge, how sexy you sound! I'll probably end up selling off my current mbp for one of those before their released, just because its quad core, i wonder what will be after quad cores? hmmm
 

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,076
580
Finland
ooo sandy bridge, how sexy you sound! I'll probably end up selling off my current mbp for one of those before their released, just because its quad core, i wonder what will be after quad cores? hmmm
We haven't said SB will be quad-core in MBP :rolleyes: MAYBE, but MAYBE not
 

Erasmus

macrumors 68030
Jun 22, 2006
2,655
165
Hiding from Omnius in Australia
I think there's definitely a hole in what Wikipedia says. I don't think Intel would only release CPUs at either 20W for dual core or 45W for quad core. That's a big gap, that it seems likely a few 30-35W CPUs will fill.

If not, I highly doubt Apple will go for 20W CPUs in the 15" and 17" MBP at least, as they are likely to be quite slow. More likely they are destined for the MBA. Especially as with just a small redesign, or slight underclock, Apple could fit a quad core in there that would blow the present i5/i7 away.
 

kny3twalker

macrumors 65816
Oct 25, 2009
1,241
0
AMD had/has a tri-core processor. Maybe intel will make a mobile variant of their own in the future?
 

mark28

macrumors 68000
Jan 29, 2010
1,632
2
AFAIK Huron River (the platform for Sandy Bridge) isn't due until Q1 2011. In any case, I wouldn't bet on Apple implementing the quad-core version – the quad-core has a TDP of 45W, vs 20W for the dual-core (according to wikipedia).
The dual-core is a Low voltage CPU for netbooks and stuff like that. So I'm 99,99999% sure the new MBP at the end of 2010 will be the 32nm quad-core Sandy bridge CPU. A Pro machine, needs Pro power. They already have a weak GPU, if they go for the dual-core Sandy bridge, they also have a weaker CPU which makes it more of a trendy consumer machine.

And possibly the Macbook Air will have the dual-core version with 20W.