Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
These couldn't come to the MBP sooner. I am really itching to get a notebook.


MB's sucks due to lack of graphics card.

However the current MBP's are approaching their end lifecycle.


*weeps*
 
Hopefully these new chips will drive down the prices of older models.. I wouldn't mind picking up another SR MBP or a 2.33 at a much cheaper price;)
 
I currently own a MBP 2.4Ghz model. I'll be trading it in soon. But I'll only be buying an MBP back if it is sufficiently updated. I don't want some MBP with a little fairy dust sprinkled over it.

I want a proper update.

I want a different case material, the aluminium is starting to show it's trade mark annoyances twisting and bending, and no I don't throw it around. I just hate it. Carbon Fibre please.

It could be a little lighter as well.
 
i'm still using a 1ghz PB G4 and i won't get rid of it yet as it's still coping with everything i need it for absolutely fine. Runs Leopard great!

That's good to know. I'm on the same 1ghz PB G4, and I was wondering how Leopard would do on it. How much RAM do you have?

I'm looking forward to seeing what's offered in Jan (whole new MBP line-up perhaps?), because my battery is dead as well, and I haven't upgraded to Leopard, and my hard drive is getting full, and maybe I could use some more RAM for Leopard...

So maybe it's time for a new laptop after 4 years on this one. But I want something lighter than a 15" and I don't want the glossy screen of the macbook. I'm hoping the MB Slim will be affordable... but I'm not holding my breath.

I may need to hold out for the next iteration, and it would be nice to know I could upgrade to Leopard in the meantime...
 


...the release of new mobile processors may trigger an upgrade cycle for Apple's MacBook Pro laptops, which have not seen substantial updates since June.

Meanwhile, Mac Pro desktops have not seen substantial updates since...........ever. (17 months).

The MBP is more likely to get yet another update, :rolleyes: and the desktop Penryn's are already out. Way to go Apple. :mad:
 
CPUs are fast enough.

Let's attack the real problems with computers nowadays, ok?

We call it the hard drive. Time to send the only moving mechanical item in our machine into history, and bring on the flash based computers.

I'm waiting for January. :)
 
CPUs are fast enough.

Let's attack the real problems with computers nowadays, ok?

We call it the hard drive. Time to send the only moving mechanical item in our machine into history, and bring on the flash based computers.

I'm waiting for January. :)

Yeah, chip bumps are no longer the big news for speed. Having 8GB flash for the OS and programs, as well as a nice hdd for real space would really improve performance.
 
Yeah, chip bumps are no longer the big news for speed. Having 8GB flash for the OS and programs, as well as a nice hdd for real space would really improve performance.

now that is not a bad idea!!!! thats actually a really good idea, store the OS on flash memory.

i just wish that super-dooper PRAM 1gb chips would come out ;) or something similar lol*


*clearly there is no PRAM...im just kidding
 
Why are they still 800Mhz bus tho can some one explain maybe?
If I had to guess-- power. The chipset and memory are a huge power consumer, clocking faster will just drain away the battery. They can squeeze a little more speed out of cache, apparently, before going to faster memory so they took that step first. My guess is they'll boost the memory bus when DDR3 goes mainstream.
Maybe if Apple would get off their ass and actually design a decent cooling solution for their laptops...
It's not just about heat, it's about battery life and size. Apple is fixated on making things thin. More power means more cooling and bigger batteries-- all of which leads to thick. My vote would be keep the same depth and boost the run time, but Apple seems to be happy with their current battery life and are more interested in slimming things down.
 
It's not just about heat, it's about battery life and size. Apple is fixated on making things thin. More power means more cooling and bigger batteries-- all of which leads to thick. My vote would be keep the same depth and boost the run time, but Apple seems to be happy with their current battery life and are more interested in slimming things down.

surely the batteries atm arent maxed out with full power/capacity/wattage etcetc??? why cant they put a 9-cell battery option in like dell? i would love extra battery life.
 
45nm is the size of the process technology Intel uses to make their chips, usually referred to as a "die-shrink". Basically, 45nm is the size of the smallest components on the chips. This decrease in physical size allows the chip to have a higher transistor density, use less energy, be more energy efficient per mhz, etc. The decreased power consumption allows the chips to run at a higher clock speed and consume the same amount of energy or keep/lower the clock speed and gain better battery life for a laptop.

Right now Intel has three groups of Core 2 mobile processors.
The standard Core2 Duo mobile processors which have a power rating of ~34W. There are also two categories of lower voltage chips which run much slower and cooler, but they are not used in most laptops except for small subnotebooks. (Intel Core2 Duo Low voltage (LV) and Ultra-Low Voltage (ULV)

The new "Penryn" standard line of processors will run at 35W and 29W.
In addition to the two low voltage lines, there is a new category of "medium-voltage" processors which have a 25W TDP, but which retain most of the speed, cache size, FSB speed, etc.. Which means they may show up standard laptops. I think these will be the best fit for a subnotebook or long running macbook.

In addition to the die-shrink, Penryn brings many new enhancements to the chip architecture itself, including SSE4 which will speed up multimedia-type operations (video encoding, audio encoding, rendering) for applications that are updated for it.

Just something to put these ultra-low-power chips into perspective: There are two different power consumptions. There is "TDP" = thermal design power. That is the maximum power that the chip could ever use and transform into heat, so the designer has to make sure that the computer works if that heat is produced 24 hours a day. And then there is how much the processor needs at any point in time; that is what empties your battery.

The faster chips _can_ run fast and use lots of power, but they can also run slow and use much less power. The low power chips _always_ run slow and use much less power. That doesn't mean they use much less power than the current chips if both run slow. The main difference is that the designer can make the fans smaller because the low power chip _cannot_ run fast and consume lots of power.
 
Hopefully these new chips will drive down the prices of older models.. I wouldn't mind picking up another SR MBP or a 2.33 at a much cheaper price;)

Type "Intel Price List" into google, then have a look at the price of a Core Duo (not Core 2 Duo) or even Core Solo chip. They aren't cheaper. They are actually more expensive than the Core 2 Duo chips.

Just because Intel produces a newer, better chip doesn't mean the older ones get any cheaper to produce.
 
Okay - So I am looking at buying an imac and mb as gifts, yet the with all of the recent rumors and news the question still remains: how soon can I expect upgrades to come? I would hate to give a picture of an imac/mb and say, "upgrade coming soon, you will be glad I didn't buy it now," only to have upgrades come 4 months later. Any thoughts?

As always, don't get caught up in these games. If you want/need a computer now, buy it. If you wait because something faster might be coming, you'll never get a computer.

Not to mention, of course, that this mattered in the days when you could buy a 4 MHz computer today or an 8 MHz computer next month. The difference between today's MPB and iMac and the next speed bump won't make a hill of beans difference to most users.
 
Why does Penryn skip 2,2 and 2,3 GHz?

Anyway, I think the next MBP will be bumped up to 2,4 for the low-end model and 2,6 for the two higher-end models. Hopefully, the lower-end MBP will also see an increase in VRAM to 256 MB (with the others recieving a bump up to 512 MB).
 
Doesnt this mean the MBPs will get the chips first and then later on the MBs. Basically its safe to say the MacBooks won't jump to any new processor upgrades soon

Because they currently have a 4MB cache and going to 3MB would be a downgrade?
 
but the release of new mobile processors may trigger an upgrade cycle for Apple's MacBook Pro laptops, which have not seen substantial updates since June

OMG, please say it ain't so! A whole 6 months, you say?

There hasn't been a substantial update for the Mac Pro since August of 2006. That's 16 months.

How about a new Mac Pro first, then worry about the MacBook Pro!
 
surely the batteries atm arent maxed out with full power/capacity/wattage etcetc??? why cant they put a 9-cell battery option in like dell? i would love extra battery life.

The batteries are most certainly "maxed out." They are the hardest component of the entire laptop to engineer. Apple has been getting steadily more capacity out of them in each revision for years. Unfortunately, people keep asking for brighter screens and faster, hotter CPUs, so battery life stays about the same. (It's almost identical between the SR MBPs and the last-generation HR PowerBooks.)

The high-capacity batteries are physically bigger and weigh more. Have you seen the tumor that sticks out of Dell or Lenovo laptops when they're equipped with the big battery?

FX120 said:
Maybe if Apple would get off their ass and actually design a decent cooling solution for their laptops...

In other words, you want Apple to repeal the laws of physics? They are already offering the lightest and thinnest high-power laptops in the business. The only "laptops" using the 44W CPU are battery-challenged, 9+lb. monsters.

Apple already pushes tons of air through the case, and uses the case itself as a big heat sink (a major reason for the aluminum). Pushing more air would require more and noisier fans and more ugly vent holes. Do I really need to tell you why liquid-cooling a laptop is a bad idea? ;)

Wild-Bill said:
and the desktop Penryn's are already out.

No, they're not. They've only been announced. HP and Dell have announced machines, but they're not shipping yet. Apple will announce when it can actually ship. Getting mad at Apple for not shipping a machine when Intel hasn't provided the chips for the machine is pretty pointless.
 
OMG, please say it ain't so! A whole 6 months, you say?

There hasn't been a substantial update for the Mac Pro since August of 2006. That's 16 months.

How about a new Mac Pro first, then worry about the MacBook Pro!

don't you get it? the mac pro get's updated when the macbook pro is quadcore/octocore. then the macpro will be updated to match the macbook's performance. unless of course apple need all the engineers to work on the iphone 2.:(

i'm waiting till end 2008. hopefully by then a quadcore mbp with hybrid hd and decent wifi reception as desktop replacement is available. till then my G4 mac's will do just fine.
 
Y'know, screw CPU speeds. I bet a faster FSB would do wonders for this system.

Maybe if Apple would get off their ass and actually design a decent cooling solution for their laptops...

...and that too.

Hey! A "newbie" with something insightful to say! That's a first. Still, it's a little on the bitter side... Pretty soon we'll have you cranked up to "scathing." ;)

-Clive
 
CPUs are fast enough.

Let's attack the real problems with computers nowadays, ok?

We call it the hard drive. Time to send the only moving mechanical item in our machine into history, and bring on the flash based computers.

I'm waiting for January. :)

If only Intel made hard drives, then maybe they'd throw some R&D that way...
 
I might have to wait for the next update to the MacBook Pro. I am really hoping to get a dual 2.8GHz 17" MacBook Pro. Don't know if I can hold out till May or June for that. Knowing Apple it won't come until WWDC anyway.

I really REALLY hope that the MBP would get some better technology than the current offering. I am hoping for the dual drives. One SSD and another HDD. One for fast boots and the other for holding the real information. And how about some built in 3G and a new latching system.
 
current 2.8 ghz?

This may be stupid question but I have the current iMac with the BTO 2.8 ghz processor. As far as I knew the iMacs used a mobile chipset but according to that chart, the current fastest mobile processor is a 2.6 ghz. What am I missing?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.