What prevents apple from offering a 2.5 i7 in the MBP?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by bniu, Jun 29, 2011.

  1. bniu macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    #1
    I see the intel mobile i7 quad cores go all the way up to 2.5 ghz, so why doesn't Apple offer a higher MBP configuration with that processor? And also, why doesn't apple offer a 6970m GPU in the mbp? It is after all a laptop graphics chip isn't it?
     
  2. eUnique macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2011
    #2
    So they can "upgrade" to the 2.5 in the future would be my guess, or it could be heat issues.... or maybe there ROI is way better with the 2.0/2.2/2.3
     
  3. awer25 macrumors 65816

    awer25

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    #3
    I'm guessing because not enough people would buy it. They already charge too much for the 2.3 upgrade. What would the 2.5 be, $500?

    As for the GPU, it's gotta be the heat. As it is, people complain that the MBP gets too hot with the 6750. That's one drawback to the Apple minimalist design and hidden fans - sub-par heat dissipation.
     
  4. maclaptop macrumors 65816

    maclaptop

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2011
    Location:
    Western Hemisphere
    #4
    Never question Apple, Steve Jobs knows it all.

    If you don't believe me, there will be plenty of posts on this forum for you to read all about what a genius he is.
     
  5. eUnique macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2011
    #5
    If your kidding; +1

    But even if we assumed he was a genius then he would pick the biggest profit margin and/or long term mark up.

    To be honest I have know idea. :confused:
     
  6. skier777 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2010
    #6
    I would guess heat and cost.
    The faster the chip, the more heat is generated (and more battery is used, although it would probably idle around the same).
    The cost for these chips is probably pretty high and the demand pretty low. Apple wouldn't sell many but would have to keep it stocked etc which would negate the profit they would make from selling it.

    Finally, it might make the laptops too future proof...
     
  7. celticpride678

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #7
    It's either Apple doesn't see the money for it or there would be heating issues.
     
  8. Heavertron macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Location:
    UK
    #8
    Simple answer is that the 2.3 was the fastest available at launch. I think Apple got the chips from Intel even before they were available to other system builders.

    Apple don't do speed bumps mid cycle, so we have the 2.3 as the fastest chip of this years MBP.
     
  9. dusk007 macrumors 68040

    dusk007

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2009
    #9
    The MBP in its current chassis runs already on its limit. Some would argue beyond.
    The 2.5 Ghz has 55W TDP the others only 45W.
    A 6970M has a TDP of up to 100W which is more than the max power draw from the wall the current MBP supports.

    They don't use those chips because all you would get is a overheating system that would throttle most of the time and in the end be slower than what you have now. And a GPU of this level cannot be cooled in a slim notebook. You never wondred why a Gaming Notebook is usually almost 2" thick.
     
  10. grahamnp macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #10
    What he said ^^

    @OP,

    You seem to be assuming that it's possible to put any CPU + GPU combination in any laptop. The 2011 MBP already runs hot and exceeds the max power supplied by the wallwart when under load so I think its safe to assume that what it currently has is all that it can handle. Also, what it has is whatever Apple is willing to pay for.
     
  11. fat jez macrumors 68000

    fat jez

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Location:
    Glasgow, UK
    #11
  12. thunng8 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #12
    Intel charges $1096 for the 2.5ghz mobile processor. If Apple offered it as a BTO, it would be approx $700 upgrade. In any case, the combination of the 2.5ghz proccessor and 6970m would far exceed with heat tolerance of a slim laptop like the MBP. Even with the 2.2ghz quad core and 6750m is already pushing its limits.
     
  13. fat jez macrumors 68000

    fat jez

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Location:
    Glasgow, UK
    #13
    The 2.3GHz has a TDP of 45W, the 2.5GHz has a TDP of 55W. I'd also have doubts that the cooling in the MBP could cope with dissipating an extra 10W.
     
  14. thunng8 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #14
    Yeah, especially with the very deceptive TDP figures intel uses these days. For example, the Arrandale i7 has a TDP of 35w, While the quad core sandy bridge i7 has a Tdp of 45w. Anandtech measured a whopping 40w difference in power draw between the 2 systems running Cinebech which taxes the cpu only, not the 10w as suggested by the tdp rating.
     
  15. mark28 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    #15
    Yes they do. The 2.8 ghz i7 2010 MBP for example.

    edit: Never mind, i just saw someone beat me to it.
     
  16. Mr MM macrumors 65816

    Mr MM

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    #16
    the thing is you are comparing the dual core i7 with the quad core sb. If you compared the lynnfield based i7 (quads, like the 720qm, 820qm), and those were 45w tdp too.

    they wont do it because the TDP of the 6970m is unknown, but revolves around 75w, which is extremely high for the tdp of the cards in the mbp, which are also unknown but revolve around 40w or less.

    I was baffled already that they have put a quad in the new mbp line up, and glad that the gpu upgrade was quite worth
     
  17. tombubi macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011

Share This Page