Why did they downgrade the cpu?

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by puffnstuff, Oct 14, 2008.

  1. puffnstuff macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
  2. Drumjim85 macrumors 68030

    Drumjim85

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Location:
    DFW, TX
    #2
    possibly to keep the prices competitive... :confused:

    led screens aren't really that cheap.... but either way it sucks, technology shouldn't be moving backwards.
     
  3. maclover001 macrumors 6502a

    maclover001

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    #3
    Because you touch yourself at night.





    (jk :p I think it's because the price went down to $999)
     
  4. SevenInchScrew macrumors 6502a

    SevenInchScrew

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Location:
    Omaha
    #5
    So, I guess the 33% faster 1066mhz FSB and the move to 65% faster DDR3 doesn't mean anything to you guys? It should, because those two things alone will make up for a meaningless loss of 0.1ghz.

    The main GHZ number you see listed for a CPU is fairly meaningless by itself. Its the sum of all the parts in the chipset that determines how quick a computer runs, not just that ONE SINGLE number.
     
  5. puffnstuff thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    #6
    Ok thanks for that info
     
  6. Drumjim85 macrumors 68030

    Drumjim85

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Location:
    DFW, TX
    #7
    oh, without looking into it, i was told it was the same chip set... ok then, that makes sense.
     
  7. mike... macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    #8
    Same chipset? Who told you that? They're using an nVidia chipset now.
     
  8. puffnstuff thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    #9
    Calm the frack down with out looking at the specs in detail I did not see the FSB speed
     
  9. SevenInchScrew macrumors 6502a

    SevenInchScrew

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Location:
    Omaha
    #10
    I'm totally calm. Please note that I'm NOT the one who started a thread about a 0.1ghz decrease.

    I was simply pointing out to you, and anyone else wondering, that there are other factors involved in the performance of a computer. And those other parts play a much bigger part than that one number everyone gets so focused on.
     
  10. puffnstuff thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    #11
    I posted this thread to understand something whats so wrong with that even if it is minute in your world. Yes, I understand that you were trying to point something out and I do appreciate your explanation but it came off as very rude.
     
  11. tofudc5 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    #12
    there was nothing "rude" about what he said
    it's just like people jumping to the conclusion that a digital camera with a larger Megapixel number automatically assumes it's a "better" product.

    should do more reading before asking
     
  12. Macchino macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    Location:
    Copenhagen
    #13
    Its a .4 downgrade, since the old 1299 model had 2,4Ghz... it was the 1099 that had 2.1 Ghz;-)
     
  13. agbot macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Silicon Valley
    #14
    "Sum of all the parts in the new model > old model" and "I'm NOT the one who started a thread about a 0.1ghz decrease." aside, it's a valid point for discussion. Apple's been running the three tiered good/better/best type layout for quite a while now, and dropping a slower processor in the middle tier leaves an odd marketing rough spot.

    I'd bet a good number of non-pro shoppers out there don't know what FSB and DDR3 means to them, but they probably notice things like that $1299 2.4Ghz 2GB/160GB/SuperDrive MacBook model that was available yesterday is now only 2.0Ghz. Yeah, better video at $1299 I know, but come on... Apple is usually a bit smoother than that.
     
  14. tofudc5 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    #15
    very good point!

    it sounds like Apple are restricted by the hardware suppliers and had to manage their profit margins etc...
     
  15. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #16
    The tear apart was interesting, surprising how quick it hit. :p
     
  16. drewx2 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    #17
    This doesn't fit when ALL the processors are made by the same company (Intel) versus MP sensors made by a variety of companies.
    And yes, a 0.4 decrease does suck, and yes its true that there are other factors. However, your analogy doesn't really apply in this case.
     
  17. eidrunner247 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2006
    Location:
    Arizona
    #18
    Lol - too funny!
     
  18. ayeying macrumors 601

    ayeying

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2007
    Location:
    Yay Area, CA
    #19
    ignore the ghz number drop, are they using the same penryn processors?
     
  19. twoodcc macrumors P6

    twoodcc

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Location:
    Right side of wrong
    #20
    i am wondering the same thing
     
  20. Drumjim85 macrumors 68030

    Drumjim85

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Location:
    DFW, TX
    #21
    I posted that in sept and the mods erased it (its a good thing someone quoted me on it)
     
  21. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #22
    Because the base clock is higher, to prevent the maximum from getting too high (to the point that is possible that the processor may not function or the yields would be too low), Intel decreased the multiplier.
     
  22. makowb macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    #23
    The processor is a penryn-based processor designed for use with centrino 2 (or montevina). It is a core 2 duo p7350.

    Also, I would assume they'll be about the same speed as the 2.1 just because of the bus speed and faster RAM, as for the 2.4, it will almost assuredly be slower, but not very noticeable for what you'll need to do w/a macbook.
     

Share This Page