'Santa Rosa' Shipping from Intel Next Month (May)

[Val-kyrie]

Sorry

Those are desktop chips... highest frequency notebook chip is still the 2.33ghz Core 2 Duo.

You can see the intel lineup and price list here:
http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/irol/10/101302/Apr_22_07_1ku_Price_r3.pdf

Dueling links baby... I'm on fuego...

Those are the E-series (desktop). The notebook C2Ds are the T-series.

Sorry, I glanced at the article only very briefly this morning. You are right. But perhaps this will still be good news for iMacs if they get a new enclosure.

 

[Erasmus]

Umm,

I believe the new mobile SR CPUs do not top out at 2.33. They top out at 2.4GHz, with 2.6 coming soon, and 2.8 at the end of the year.

 

[Wie Gehts]

How cum Sony can put an express34 slot in a $1000 laptop and Apple can't?

Message to SJ, entrepreneur and all around bon vivant: put a e34 slot in the macbook.

 

[Wolfpup]

There's a few other benefits...
- smaller
- cheaper
- excellent value for money (e.g. in comparison with it's competition)
- it looks great in black
- uses a smaller power supply

These are important decisions. Not everyone needs a big beastie as some of us lug these things around daily. And seats in coach (economy) are getting well small.

Well, yeah, I mean I know those are potential benefits, but not for me. Well the price is of course (and I really don't make much), but the size is mostly a negative for me. I plan on carrying my laptop to work and back every day (I mean just to and from my car), and don't see any real difference between using a 13" and a 17" system in terms of size or weight.

Also I have to dispute the Macbook being a great deal. It's not BAD, and it was one of the better deals Apple's ever done when it launched, but on the Windows side you can get 17" notebooks for cheaper, and definitely get higher end hardware for that price...though I think Apple has some better quality in many respects (like I guess the audio doesn't "hiss" like it does on many Windows notebooks-and that's sure worth something!)

Nobody's mentioned a replacement for the 12" PowerBook that's long overdue. I do wish they'd implement a low power, long battery life, small MacBook Pro. It's definitely missing in the product line and would be a great candidate for the TurboRobsonInjection cache that hopefully will result in the hard disc spinning less, and LED backlights resulting in lower power drain.

It's possible that's really coming, going by all those rumors...but I don't understand why anyone cares. I mean dosen't the Macbook fill that role just fine? It's already 13", supports an external monitor, and has a fast CPU. I don't know what else they could put in a 12", aside from making it smaller yet and POSSIBLY throwing in a slightly better GPU.

I just don't understand the need. But then again, I'm someone who doesn't understand what the big deal of carrying a 17" laptop is, so...

 

[Val-kyrie]

Not hopeful for new hardware

And NoteBook Review has more release information from IBM/Lenovo.

According to your link, "the rollout [of Santa Rosa notebooks for IBM/Lenovo] will be gradually over a couple of months for various configurations to be available;" however, one configuration will be available in May. If this lag spreads across the OEM industry, then I doubt we will see SR based Apple laptops anytime too soon. In fact, as I previously posted, if Leopard depends on SR for the Intel Turbo Memory, then Apple might skip this initial SR release and jump to Penryn if indeed Intel thinks Penryn will be ramped for production by the end of the year, as they have stated. However, as others have pointed out, I think it is still more likely Apple will release SR based mac mini, MB and MBP, if not only because of the integrated gfx boost for the first two and in order to maintain the proper hierarchy for the MBP.

 

[AidenShaw]

History Lesson.

However, the first Intel Macs were released at MWSF06 the day after Intel announced the original Core Duo (Yonah) chip.

http://www.cnet.com/4520-6022_1-6410042-1.html

"Intel debuts Core Duo: dual-core processors come to laptops

By Justin Jaffe
Thursday, January 5, 2006

In a keynote speech today by CEO Paul Otellini at CES in Las Vegas, Intel officially unveiled its new Centrino Duo Mobile Technology. The centerpiece of the Duo Mobile chipset, previously code-named Napa, is Intel's Core Duo chip, which places two mobile processing cores on one chip. "​

http://www.apple.com/hotnews/articles/2006/01/mwsf/

"Macworld Keynote
Apple CEO Steve Jobs delivered a keynote presentation on Tuesday, January 10, at 9 a.m. PST, introducing the latest products from Apple, including the new iMac and MacBook Pro computers built with the Intel Core Duo chip..."​

It was the following week, not the next day.

 

[Episteme]

This was so convincing that I had to check it up. You're closer to the truth than I was, but still wrong. The 965 chipset has 36 bits addressing space, allowing the CPU to address 64GB of "memory", with addressing set aside for 8GB of DRAM memory. So even if we "waste" more on non-RAM addressing than before, we will still be able to use the full 8GB. Not that I'd expect any notebook to support more than 4GB (or 2 memory banks), though. 4GB should be adequate for me for the next 3 years, so I'm fine with that.

Doh.

Mea Culpa on the IO range, I'd assumed it was part of the 8GB that was addressable. That's what I get for just skimming the spec-sheet.

Still, I was several orders of magnitude closer

I assume the reason for RAM being restricted to 8GB is number of lines on the RAM controller.

There's also one possible, albeit temporary, proviso -- does Tiger use PAE mode? It still runs in 32bit mode, so without PAE, nothing changes regardless of what the chipset supports. With PAE, you might be able to work around the addressing limits somewhat. AFAIK the reason that can't be done on current machines (945-based) is that the 945 ICH/MCH doesn't support anything but a single flat 32bit address space.

I assume Leopard will remove any such issues tho'.

 

[Episteme]

Umm,

I believe the new mobile SR CPUs do not top out at 2.33. They top out at 2.4GHz, with 2.6 coming soon, and 2.8 at the end of the year.

2.6/2.8GHz parts are part of the "Extreme" range tho', with equally "extreme" pricing. I have doubts we'll see one in a Mac before Penryn. Post Penryn release, I'd expect at the very least the 2.6GHz chip to move into the "performance mainstream" segment.

 

[Episteme]

How cum Sony can put an express34 slot in a $1000 laptop and Apple can't?

Message to SJ, entrepreneur and all around bon vivant: put a e34 slot in the macbook.

Apple wants you to buy an MBP, not an MB.

 

[Episteme]

According to your link, "the rollout [of Santa Rosa notebooks for IBM/Lenovo] will be gradually over a couple of months for various configurations to be available;" however, one configuration will be available in May. If this lag spreads across the OEM industry, then I doubt we will see SR based Apple laptops anytime too soon. In fact, as I previously posted, if Leopard depends on SR for the Intel Turbo Memory, then Apple might skip this initial SR release and jump to Penryn if indeed Intel thinks Penryn will be ramped for production by the end of the year, as they have stated. However, as others have pointed out, I think it is still more likely Apple will release SR based mac mini, MB and MBP, if not only because of the integrated gfx boost for the first two and in order to maintain the proper hierarchy for the MBP.

Intel Turbo Memory, (aka Robson) is an optional part of the SR platform. Apple can launch a notebook without it now and one with it come 2008. They'll probably upset a bunch of people if they do, but they'll upset a bunch of people no matter what they do so...

I also think Apple will want to maintain "bulletpoint parity" with the PC market.

 

[Wie Gehts]

Apple wants you to buy an MBP, not an MB.

Well put me in a prom dress and call me norman. MBP too much money.
How about 2 seperate fw busses in a MB then?

 

[Episteme]

Well put me in a prom dress and call me norman. MBP too much money.
How about 2 seperate fw busses in a MB then?

Guten Tag, Norman. Nice dress you've got there.

I respectfully refer you to my previous answer...

 

[Glenny2lappies]

I plan on carrying my laptop to work and back every day (I mean just to and from my car), and don't see any real difference between using a 13" and a 17" system in terms of size or weight.

I guess it's where it's used and what it's used for. More business (OK, we all know the getamac ads oriented users will often rate small size as more important than large screen.

Where this is really important is if you're commuting any distance by public transport. It's much nicer to have a small machine than a big one - certainly the 17" is too big for use on a train. When it comes to planes, then bigger is definitely not better. Most coach seats are barely big enough to fit a person, let alone a lappie. The 15.4" screen just won't fit whereas the 12" PowerBook was just perfect as it fitted into the 'hole' left by the tray in the seat in front. And it's got a better battery life than the MBP.

I'm quite surprised that they've not filled the gap left by the PowerBook 12". OK, they've got the numbers, but from my experience I saw a lot of the 12" machines - far more of the PowerBook than the iBook. But then again, I might just move in those kind of circles?!

But then again, I guess that's what the BlackBook's for. I just wish it had an option for a half-decent graphics card (and full-size DVI, and backlit keyboard, and matt screen...).

 

[Wolfpup]

Umm,

I believe the new mobile SR CPUs do not top out at 2.33. They top out at 2.4GHz, with 2.6 coming soon, and 2.8 at the end of the year.

The current chips top out at 2.33GHz. 2.4 is what's coming with this update. (At least officially. Dell sells one model with an optional factory overclocked 2.66GHz Core 2...and I have a feeling it's semi-official with Intel.)

 

[tristan]

I believe the new mobile SR CPUs do not top out at 2.33. They top out at 2.4GHz, with 2.6 coming soon, and 2.8 at the end of the year.

2.4ghz? That's only a 3% increase from today's high-end. I dunno... Intel just did a price drop in April and the top mobile CPU was 2.33ghz and it cost almost $700. They usually do price drops every 3 months, so I would imagine that the next batch of CPUs aren't coming out until June or July, and I guess we could see a 2.66ghz then. Is that what you mean?

Also, does anyone have any info on the Robson cache aka Turbo memory? Is it a big deal or just a gimmick? Why not just put more RAM in the computer to start with?

If it's just about fast boot-up time and you want to save the post-boot up memory state, you can save that to the first track of the hard drive and just load it all at once - assuming the starting config doesn't change.

 

[Wolfpup]

2.4ghz? That's only a 3% increase from today's high-end. I dunno... Intel just did a price drop in April and the top mobile CPU was 2.33ghz and it cost almost $700. They usually do price drops every 3 months, so I would imagine that the next batch of CPUs aren't coming out until June or July, and I guess we could see a 2.66ghz then. Is that what you mean?

Also, does anyone have any info on the Robson cache aka Turbo memory? Is it a big deal or just a gimmick? Why not just put more RAM in the computer to start with?

If it's just about fast boot-up time and you want to save the post-boot up memory state, you can save that to the first track of the hard drive and just load it all at once - assuming the starting config doesn't change.

Presumably it'll work as well as Vista's support of USB flash drives does-or probably better, since it should be a bit faster. In tests (in Vista) it did make a difference, although the difference was far more dramatic in systems that were RAM starved than those equipped with 2GB of RAM already.

 

[Episteme]

2.4ghz? That's only a 3% increase from today's high-end. I dunno... Intel just did a price drop in April and the top mobile CPU was 2.33ghz and it cost almost $700. They usually do price drops every 3 months, so I would imagine that the next batch of CPUs aren't coming out until June or July, and I guess we could see a 2.66ghz then. Is that what you mean?

Not 2.66, 2.6Ghz. The new systems use an 800MHz FSB (well, 200MHz quad pumped really), so it'll be a 3.25 multiplier. That's the reason for the change from 2.33GHz to 2.4GHz.

I had another look at the roadmap and I just noticed there's a non-extreme 2.6GHz part (T7800) set for 4Q07. The "Extreme" part (X7800) is 3Q07.

When the T7800 appears, it seems likely Intel will follow SOP and move the prices of all other processors down a notch.

Also, does anyone have any info on the Robson cache aka Turbo memory? Is it a big deal or just a gimmick? Why not just put more RAM in the computer to start with?

If it's just about fast boot-up time and you want to save the post-boot up memory state, you can save that to the first track of the hard drive and just load it all at once - assuming the starting config doesn't change.

Vista uses "ReadyBoost" which basically caches prefetch info. HDs are generally faster for sustained xfer but by the time you add the latency for seek times etc., flash will often beat it for a smaller xfer.

Whether this will be put to a similar use on the MBP though, I've no idea. We don't even know IF a putative SR-based notebook would include it.

The reason for using a Flash-based caching solution over RAM is it's significantly cheaper than RAM in terms of per-gigabyte. Of course, it's also less useful.

 

[Wie Gehts]

Guten Tag, Norman. Nice dress you've got there.

I respectfully refer you to my previous answer...

Ich möchte fünfzehn blumenkohl Fleischerei

How about a MB being able to use a memory stick shoved into a usb port to boot from? Hows about a single fw port being able to actually do what its spec claims (ie, daisychaining more than one device) so I can hook up both a fw audio interface and recording drive together without having to spend over 2g's for 2 fw ports or/and e34 slot?

 

[Episteme]

Ich möchte fünfzehn blumenkohl Fleischerei

How about a MB being able to use a memory stick shoved into a usb port to boot from? Hows about a single fw port being able to actually do what its spec claims (ie, daisychaining more than one device) so I can hook up both a fw audio interface and recording drive together without having to spend over 2g's for 2 fw ports or/and e34 slot?

LOL

You'd like fifteen cauliflower .. something? Sorry, my high school German's failed me on this one...

As for the rest -- blame Apple

 

[tristan]

Not 2.66, 2.6Ghz. The new systems use an 800MHz FSB (well, 200MHz quad pumped really), so it'll be a 3.25 multiplier. That's the reason for the change from 2.33GHz to 2.4GHz.

Ahhh... I understand now. The 800mhz multiplier. The 2.6ghz comes out in the summer, the 2.8 ghz in the fall, and then Penryn picks up at the 3.0 ghz range. That makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.

Steve Jobs, you think you're so smart but I've got you all figured out. Your switch to Intel and their new policy on public disclosure has made it so I can predict your every move. How the mighty have fallen...

 

[Evangelion]

If someone can afford MBP Im sure buying 360, PS3 or Wii will NOT make a significant dent in his budget.

Why is it so difficult for some people to understand that a console might not be an alternative? I like to play games on occasion. And consoles absolutely suck for the type of games I like to play, or they are not available at all on the console.

This "if you want to play games, get a console!"-argument is getting really old, really fast. It's more or less same as "if you want to play games, get a deck of cards!". Yes, you can play games on a console. But console-gaming is not necessarily an alternative to computer-gaming.

 

[Erasmus]

Why is it so difficult for some people to understand that a console might not be an alternative? I like to play games on occasion. And consoles absolutely suck for the type of games I like to play, or they are not available at all on the console.

This "if you want to play games, get a console!"-argument is getting really old, really fast. It's more or less same as "if you want to play games, get a deck of cards!". Yes, you can play games on a console. But console-gaming is not necessarily an alternative to computer-gaming.

Agreed.

You can't run SolidWorks or Matlab on a console. They will run far better on a MBP with a decent GPU, with gaming on the side, than on a MB.

 

[MArcoetpolo]

Erasmus Wishes!

Yess erasmus lol , i love the kind of new MBP you want!

After considering the CPU , let's try to imagine which GPU could be present in the next Macs!!

I think( and like) the X1800 or even the X1900 for ATI
And Maybe if they switch to Nvidia a 7900!!
So guys? (and girls ^^)

 

[iamsleepy]

Yess erasmus lol , i love the kind of new MBP you want!

After considering the CPU , let's try to imagine which GPU could be present in the next Macs!!

I think( and like) the X1800 or even the X1900 for ATI
And Maybe if they switch to Nvidia a 7900!!
So guys? (and girls ^^)

Why not X2600? lol

 

[Episteme]

Ahhh... I understand now. The 800mhz multiplier. The 2.6ghz comes out in the summer, the 2.8 ghz in the fall, and then Penryn picks up at the 3.0 ghz range. That makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.

Steve Jobs, you think you're so smart but I've got you all figured out. Your switch to Intel and their new policy on public disclosure has made it so I can predict your every move. How the mighty have fallen...

The 2.6GHz debuts as an "extreme" part (X7800) in 07Q3, then a "regular" version arrives in 07Q4 (T7800), when the 2.8GHz "extreme" (X7900) arrives. I doubt we'll see those parts in the MacBook while they're in their "extreme" phase -- the Mac usually uses the ~$530 part and they'll be $795 on launch.