Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Will the 13" MBPs ever get the ix processor?
- Thread starter RedJeans
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hopefully by next year. I will be in the market for a new laptop then and would absolutely love a 13" MBP, but only if it has an iX processor.
I'm no expert but I think the size issue is ********. People say that they can't fit the i5 into the 13" because it is simply too small... the Sony Vaio Z is a 13" computer and rocks an i7.
I think it's got to do with the battery. They want this to be a super portable machine that can last ages on a single charge (which it can, with the C2d) The iX must have severely hampered battery life, and they overlooked it.
Battery might get better by next year/next update and we may see iX's in em!
I'm no expert but I think the size issue is ********. People say that they can't fit the i5 into the 13" because it is simply too small... the Sony Vaio Z is a 13" computer and rocks an i7.
I think it's got to do with the battery. They want this to be a super portable machine that can last ages on a single charge (which it can, with the C2d) The iX must have severely hampered battery life, and they overlooked it.
Battery might get better by next year/next update and we may see iX's in em!
Eventually maybe, but the Intel IGPs have to get better than they are now or low power GPUs have to be implemented. It#s a tiny notebook afterall.
The size problem isn't with the processor itself, it's with the non-integrated graphics Apple would have to use because they don't want to use Intel's crappy IG, and there is no current way to use nVidia IG with Nehalem boards.
while this isn't strictly on topic i feel i need to say this - in the UK Apple Store Online - the low end 13" MBP 2.4GHZ is £999, whereas the 2.66GHZ 13" MBP with only a 70GB bigger HDD is £1249... what's up with that? is 0.26GHZ that much faster? 
For Intel's previous mobile CPU lines, they have offered 3-4 classes of chips: standard/full voltage (~35W), medium voltage (~25W), low-voltage (~17W), and ultra-low-voltage (~10W). Clockspeeds on standard and medium voltage parts are nearly comparable, with SV parts going a step or two higher than MV and MV otherwise just being highly binned chips. Meanwhile clockspeeds quickly start scaling down for LV and ULV.
Intel is currently only offering SV and ULV Core i3/5/7 parts, which means you either put up with a 35W chip, or you get a chip that only runs at 1.06GHz. However Apple has always used MV parts in the 13" line in order to preserve battery life and to keep heat down. Without a MV i3/5/7 chip from Intel, Apple doesn't have a suitable chip to put in to the 13" MacBook. Worse, Apple needs an OpenCL-capable GPU (which Intel doesn't offer), which means there also needs to be an allowance for a discrete GPU when it comes to the i3/5/7.
If you look at the reviews for the existing i3/5/7 laptops, they're almost universally 14" or bigger. For the few smaller models they all have terrible battery life and often have awkward batteries that protrude from the laptop itself due to size.
You're not going to get a core i3/5/7 CPU into a 13.3" laptop with today's technology and meet Apple's high standards. Intel simply doesn't offer a mid-power chip suitable for such a device.
Intel is currently only offering SV and ULV Core i3/5/7 parts, which means you either put up with a 35W chip, or you get a chip that only runs at 1.06GHz. However Apple has always used MV parts in the 13" line in order to preserve battery life and to keep heat down. Without a MV i3/5/7 chip from Intel, Apple doesn't have a suitable chip to put in to the 13" MacBook. Worse, Apple needs an OpenCL-capable GPU (which Intel doesn't offer), which means there also needs to be an allowance for a discrete GPU when it comes to the i3/5/7.
If you look at the reviews for the existing i3/5/7 laptops, they're almost universally 14" or bigger. For the few smaller models they all have terrible battery life and often have awkward batteries that protrude from the laptop itself due to size.
You're not going to get a core i3/5/7 CPU into a 13.3" laptop with today's technology and meet Apple's high standards. Intel simply doesn't offer a mid-power chip suitable for such a device.
They will. Or they will get left behind more so by the industry. : )
I seriously just wish iNTEL would take the stock of Pentium, Celerons, and Atoms out back of their building and burn em.
I seriously just wish iNTEL would take the stock of Pentium, Celerons, and Atoms out back of their building and burn em.
Wasn't IX the technology planet in Dune, where they made all the machine stuff that was prohibited by the Padishah Emperor Shaddam IV?
That Sony is also thicker than the MBP and has 6.5 hours battery life vs 10 hours of the MBP.
This makes perfect sense. Though Apple could have dropped the internal Superdrive to make room for a larger battery. They could also have made a build to order option of either 6 hour battery with internal superdrive or 10 hour battery with external superdrive. Then everyone would be happy
(except for people whom find something else to complain about).
620LM and 640LM would probably be suitable as they are 25W and there is no need for Northbridge in Nehalems as it's integrated into the CPU itself but they are just too expensive (+300$). 6xxLM would leave space for dedicated GPU though but as I said, the price is killing it.
35W i3s would fit in 13" but the lack of space for dedicated GPU would again kill the whole idea.
If Intel comes up with cheaper and faster 25W CPUs or CPU without GPU, we might see one.
Intel is going to be releasing low voltage core iX processors sometime this summer (idk for sure) but I think apple will wait until those are released and so they will have better performance and by then hopefully the Intel-Nvidia issue is resolved (probably not) and so we could have a better graphics card then the Intel HD (complete bs graphics) or some other better one released. GL, short most likely but not soon. Maybe in 9 months or more
$300 more would have been a perfect fit for the higher-end 13" machine. They are already charging that much of a premium for the higher-end machine but it is stuck with a 2.66 C2D. I think Apple is just much more interested in spending technical resources on the ipad than redesigning the 13" motherboard to accommodate the iX chips. I don't know when this will change so I'm actually not expecting a 13" update until the next iteration of the iX with sandy bridge. If sandy bridge comes out in January 2011, hopefully it won't take Apple 4 months to adopt the new processor like it took them with this update.
I honestly don't see why people make such a stink out of getting an i7 in a MBP 13. I keeping hearing people complain about it. If someone REALLY needs an i7, and most people don't, go get a MBP 15. The MBP 13 is not positioned as a product to "encode 4 hours of 1080p video while you wait", the case won't handle the i7 and additional GPU, nor could it handle the heat. Oh yeah, I honestly doubt many people would buy an i7 MBP 13 when the price would about the same as the i7 MBP 15.
The MBP 13 is positioned for cost and/or Mobility.. the i7 hurts both of those objectives badly.
The MBP 15/17 are the "desktop" replacement candidates.
As I read this, I realized that the tone might have more harsh than I intended. I'm not trying to be mean. I'm just baffled.
I honestly don't see why people make such a stink out of getting an i7 in a MBP 13. I keeping hearing people complain about it. If someone REALLY needs an i7, and most people don't, go get a MBP 15. The MBP 13 is not positioned as a product to "encode 4 hours of 1080p video while you wait", the case won't handle the i7 and additional GPU, nor could it handle the heat. Oh yeah, I honestly doubt many people would buy an i7 MBP 13 when the price would about the same as the i7 MBP 15.
The MBP 13 is positioned for cost and/or Mobility.. the i7 hurts both of those objectives badly.
The MBP 15/17 are the "desktop" replacement candidates.
As I read this, I realized that the tone might have more harsh than I intended. I'm not trying to be mean. I'm just baffled.
No one that I've seen has commented on the i7 in the 13. It's just getting an 'i' core (3/5, etc) in there at all. It's an understandable request and presumably just a matter of time till we see it show up in there.
This makes perfect sense. Though Apple could have dropped the internal Superdrive to make room for a larger battery. They could also have made a build to order option of either 6 hour battery with internal superdrive or 10 hour battery with external superdrive. Then everyone would be happy
That would violate the Steve Jobs Doctrine: Don't Confuse Your Customers With Choices.
I've seen lots posts specifically asking for i7 or iX, including this one. To some degree I understand the question. I will say this though, I've had about 6 notebooks, 4 currently with C2D. I've opened them all including my MBP 13. The MBP 13 is BY FAR the most crowded internally. I can't see how Apple could add another discrete GPU, dissipate the heat and maintain the battery life.
The i3 chip is more money I believe, and would certainly require more of a design.. which means more cost. From everything that I've seen the i3's performance is about the same as the C2D... so why would apple increase cost for little additional gain?
Apple will learn some lessons using the i7 and i5 and they will work their way into the MBP 13. Apple still has some issue that they are working out with GPUs, trying to get Intel to make some concessions on the iX CPUs, they still didn't add USB 3.0 (5 Gbs beats 800 FireWire and eSATA), and the list goes on.
I'm really not trying to be an ass or anything, it's just that sometimes I feel that people take a product that is actually very nice designed (All the MBP are designed nicely for their role) and start asking for it do something that it was designed to do...
+1. Seriously. People freak out because they have a perfectly capable computer, but ZOMG it doesn't have an iWhatever, it's a POS. And I have also seen the inside of my computer, which I presume is very similar to the 13" MBP, and there is no way you could fit another GPU in there. And IIRC, the Arrandales don't even support USB 3.0, so they couldn't even use it. Definitely agree on the point of it being a portability notebook, not a desktop replacement. I don't know why people are so insistent on making a desktop replacement out of it, when they should be using an i5/i7 iMac or better.
First of all, that Sony looks awesome, but it costs a hell of a lot more than the entry level Macbook Pro.