I'm considering the i5 imac for video editing (avchd lite) reasons, but don't need a 27" monstrosity. So I'm looking at the c2d 21" options instead. But the fact that the mac books are getting upgraded first makes me hesitate. If the macbook pro line gets upgraded to i3, i5, i7 soon, wouldn't any one of them be a more powerful processing solution than most of the present imac options until "june"? That doesn't make sense to me, that the macbook would be a better option for either price or performance than an imac. Am I missing something?
OK, thanks that helps, let me get this straight then:There are also mobile versions of i3, i5 and i7 that use 4 cores. They're called clarksfield. Intel uses 3,5 and 7 to differentiate the amount of features each processor have-- not necessarily because they're stronger.
Mobile version of nehalem dual cores are arrandale. Desktop version of nehalem dual cores are clarkdales.
If the macbookpros get any type of new processor, I'm betting it's the arrandales, because their current form factor won't allow the heat produced by clarkdale. Arrandales being faster than desktop grade core2duos in current 21.5 inch iMacs? I highly doubt it. Maybe for video editing though, but only very slightly.
But the Core i7 Extreme 920XM (high-end Clarksfield) goes up to 3.2GHz with Turbo. Arrandale is better bang for buck but if using apps that can actually take advantage of quad, Clarksfield wins 100-0. The cheapest Clarksfield (i7 720QM) is only 364$ and goes up to 2.8GHz with Turbo (1.6GHz without Turbo) so I would really like to see it in 17" MBP at leastThe desktop nehalem quad cores in the high-end 27 inch iMacs are lynnfield. They are newer generation compared to the original i7 desktop quad cores (bloomfield) they have higher core speed and better turbo boost, but less memory bandwidth.
It might be possible for apple to use clarksfield (mobile quad core nehalem) in their macbookpros, but the clarksfields are very expensive while having lower clockspeed than the arrandales. The "extreme" edition clarksfield is the only one to even reach 2ghz clockspeed, but it costs a whopping 1000 usd!
I can't make the call about waiting for new macbook pros or not. There probably is some site somewhere on the internet that gives video editing/encoding benchmarks between arrandales, clarksfields and high-end wolfdales (the core2duos currently in iMacs)
I'll try to find one.
<5%So, what the chance of the next 21.5" models being quadcore?
Actually, that's not a big boost either http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=875286Damn.. Oh well, i'll still wait 'till the next revision because of the gpu (should be radeon 5***)
That's desktop 5670 and 4670..It's not the same thing, so you can't compare them.At least a bit better
I think it's pretty obvious the next 21.5" iMac will have at least the 5670 so that and only that is already enough for me to buy that one instead of the current one. Combine that with maybe quad or probably core 2 duo/quad, 1.5TB HD and 4GB ram, and you have a beast for a decent price! Now i just have to wait 'till june/september
Yeah but it's 1000 usd! Imagine a laptop with Apple price markup that has a 1000 usd processor.But the Core i7 Extreme 920XM (high-end Clarksfield) goes up to 3.2GHz with Turbo. Arrandale is better bang for buck but if using apps that can actually take advantage of quad, Clarksfield wins 100-0. The cheapest Clarksfield (i7 720QM) is only 364$ and goes up to 2.8GHz with Turbo (1.6GHz without Turbo) so I would really like to see it in 17" MBP at least
The problem is that Mobility 58xx series is based on desktop 57xx (Juniper) while mobile 48xx is based on desktop 48xx. Desktop 57xx is about as fast as desktop 48xx so that's why there is no much difference between mobile 48xx and mobile 58xx.Unless it's a mobility 4870 or mobility 5870, it's not gonna be much better than current gpus offered in the iMacs-- not better than the mobility 4850 at least, but better than mobility 4670. Mobility 4870 is HUUGE jump in performance simple because it uses GDDR5 memory, which is on a whole nother level when compared to GDDR2/3 or 4.
5k series doesn't necessarily mean it's better, just newer technology. Ati usually puts the higher performing gpus of a series with a higher number (*870 for example)
Well, 17" MBP isn't cheap but I'd like to see that as a BTO at least though it would likely cost near 5000$...Yeah but it's 1000 usd! Imagine a laptop with Apple price markup that has a 1000 usd processor.
I think you meant the Core i7 620M, as it's the best one and suitable for MBPs (TDP of 35W). It's 2.66GHz (3.46GHz with Turbo) so it would be a nice jump in performance but only costs 332$.Arrandale 540m would be a likely candidate for high-end macbook pros, and the turbo boost on those would reach 3.33ghz when one core is active (compared to 3.33 ghz dual core on current baseline iMacs) The only question remaining would the newer architecture and hyperthreading make up for lower clockspseed when it comes to video encoding? Definitely shows a difference over the current mobility core2duos in macbookpros (article on macrumors) the performance gain was around 25%-- but how does that compare with high-end wolfdales?