New MacBook Air using smaller, cheaper Thunderbolt chip
New MacBook Air models use a smaller, cheaper Thunderbolt controller that limits them to using a single external display while consuming less space on the logic board.
A report by Anandtech outlines that larger form factor Macs, including the early 2011 MacBook Pros, iMac, and latest mid-2011 Mac mini use a full sized Thunderbolt controller named Light Ridge, which features four bidirectional 10 Gbps channels and support for up to two external DisplayPort screens.
The new Thunderbolt MacBook Air uses a scaled down version of the chip named Eagle Ridge, supplying two Thunderbolt channels and support for a single external DisplayPort screen.
The report notes that the smaller, cheaper chip will likely be the choice of generic PC makers who wish to implement the new interface, which essentially exposes PCIe on an external cable, allowing for very fast data transfers and support for other interfaces such as USB, Firewire and Gigabit Ethernet.
Apple's newly announced (and as yet unavailable) Thunderbolt Display enables computers with a Thunderbolt port to interface with its 27" screen; FaceTime HD camera, mic and speakers; USB, Firewire and Gigabit Ethernet ports; and daisy-chain additional Thunderbolt devices via its integrated port.
Thunderbolt Macs outside of the MacBook Air will be able to connect dual external displays to their Thunderbolt port, while the Air's limited architecture will only support one external display.
A report by Anandtech outlines that larger form factor Macs, including the early 2011 MacBook Pros, iMac, and latest mid-2011 Mac mini use a full sized Thunderbolt controller named Light Ridge, which features four bidirectional 10 Gbps channels and support for up to two external DisplayPort screens.
The new Thunderbolt MacBook Air uses a scaled down version of the chip named Eagle Ridge, supplying two Thunderbolt channels and support for a single external DisplayPort screen.
The report notes that the smaller, cheaper chip will likely be the choice of generic PC makers who wish to implement the new interface, which essentially exposes PCIe on an external cable, allowing for very fast data transfers and support for other interfaces such as USB, Firewire and Gigabit Ethernet.
Apple's newly announced (and as yet unavailable) Thunderbolt Display enables computers with a Thunderbolt port to interface with its 27" screen; FaceTime HD camera, mic and speakers; USB, Firewire and Gigabit Ethernet ports; and daisy-chain additional Thunderbolt devices via its integrated port.
Thunderbolt Macs outside of the MacBook Air will be able to connect dual external displays to their Thunderbolt port, while the Air's limited architecture will only support one external display.
Comments
It even shows the air with one display and the pro with two.
I am curious about the fact that Apple clearly states "Expand your 15" and 17" MBP" with two displays, with no mention of the 13" MBP. DOes that mean the 13 inches has/will have the same chip as the Air?
But who expected to use a Macbook Air to do tasks that would be fitting for a larger, more powerful computer?
too true! I have a MBA and the old 24" display. I am pretty sure my MBA would beat the crap out of me if I tried to run a program that needed another display...or if I even introduced another display into the mix, let alone two thunderbolt displays loaded to the gills with peripherals
I am curious about the fact that Apple clearly states "Expand your 15" and 17" MBP" with two displays, with no mention of the 13" MBP. DOes that mean the 13 inches has/will have the same chip as the Air?
No, it means the graphics in the 13" MacBook Pro suck and can't drive two external displays. It doesn't have anything to do with the Thunderbolt chip being smaller.
Now I find out it can drive two externals? Hmmmm.....
I thought this was clear from Apple's own page for the new display.
It even shows the air with one display and the pro with two.
I am curious about the fact that Apple clearly states "Expand your 15" and 17" MBP" with two displays, with no mention of the 13" MBP. DOes that mean the 13 inches has/will have the same chip as the Air?
1) As Tallest Skil states the GPU in the MBAs aren't powerful enough to make the 80gbps Thunderbolt chip viable for the dual monitor systems.
2) What Apple puts in the 13" MBP will likely depend on whether it has an Intel integrated GPU or a discreet GPU. I'm wagering the next round of MBPs will introduce us to revamped, ODD-free systems that will give them plenty of space to stick in a dGPU so I'm guessing the full-size TB chip.
Well, this is an interesting article to read, because earlier this year when my company bought several Thunderbolt MacBook Pros, I researched the question of external displays quite a bit. All sources said the Thunderbolt chip can drive two displays, and the internal counted as one, so the MBP can only drive one external display. Here is one such reference: http://tidbits.com/article/12000
Now I find out it can drive two externals? Hmmmm.....
There was no monitor out until last week that could daisy chain multiple Thunderbolt equipped displays so it was a moot point unless you were wanting to run multiple mDP displays off your MBPs.
Next.
Well, this is an interesting article to read, because earlier this year when my company bought several Thunderbolt MacBook Pros, I researched the question of external displays quite a bit. All sources said the Thunderbolt chip can drive two displays, and the internal counted as one, so the MBP can only drive one external display. Here is one such reference: http://tidbits.com/article/12000
Now I find out it can drive two externals? Hmmmm.....
depends what size MBP you have. Only MBP >13" can drive two displays.
depends what size MBP you have. Only MBP >13" can drive two displays.
1) Remember that the 13" MBP is really a 13.3" display so your comment could be read as the 13" MBP as being able to drive two external displays.
2) AnandTech says the Thunderbolt chip used in the 2011 iMac, MacBook Pro and Mac mini supports 4x channels (80Gb/s) but this MBA chip only supports 2x channels. I can't find any of Apple documentation supporting that data but it could mean that you can run three displays on the 13" MBP.
Well, this is an interesting article to read, because earlier this year when my company bought several Thunderbolt MacBook Pros, I researched the question of external displays quite a bit. All sources said the Thunderbolt chip can drive two displays, and the internal counted as one, so the MBP can only drive one external display. Here is one such reference: http://tidbits.com/article/12000
Now I find out it can drive two externals? Hmmmm.....
It can run Dual-DVI which means it can run the 30" Cinema Display.
Daisy chaining Thunderbolt monitors is how you run two of the new Apple Displays.
I don't think folks would really believe the Air would support two external displays anyways. I ordered th 27" thunderbolt display and that will be more than enough. Anything more, and then you're going into MacBook pro's territory.
The wonderful thing, that most people won't notice, is that on the MacBook Pro 15/17, Mac Mini and iMac, you can add two Thunderbolt monitors, each of which has ITS OWN HD camera, speaker subsystem, microphone, gigE, FW800 and 3 USB 2.0 ports.
This makes the MacBook Air 11 an incredible machine. Oh so portable, still an i5/i7 processor, and when you get home or to work, you have a massive display and all the peripherals of a full-fledged iMac except for the Superdrive.
This makes the MacBook Air 11 an incredible machine. Oh so portable, still an i5/i7 processor, and when you get home or to work, you have a massive display and all the peripherals of a full-fledged iMac except for the Superdrive.
You're not trying to say the MBA can come close to an iMac in performance are you? If so, I'd like to know why because then maybe I'd get a MBA or MBP + external display (or two) instead of an iMac for audio / graphics stuff. How does the performance compare with a "15 MBP and an iMac? Would like to avoid buying a bigger iMac and buy a MBP or MBA if there isn't much difference in performance.
.
I just hope the next iPhone has the needed TB chip in it. Then again, that will mean I'll be buying a new iPhone and MBP within a very short timeframe so maybe I should rethink my wish.
What is the point of adding a TB port to the iPhone? It feels a bit like adding a turbo-charger to your bicycle because your car has one.
Why would Apple want to replace the dock connector with a thicker plug? Right now the speed of the iPhone processor and flash storage is the limiting factor (plus the inefficiency of iTunes), not USB 2.
1) Remember that the 13" MBP is really a 13.3" display so your comment could be read as the 13" MBP as being able to drive two external displays.
2) AnandTech says the Thunderbolt chip used in the 2011 iMac, MacBook Pro and Mac mini supports 4x channels (80Gb/s) but this MBA chip only supports 2x channels. I can't find any of Apple documentation supporting that data but it could mean that you can run three displays on the 13" MBP.
One 27" display is 2.25 m pixels, each with 24 bit of colour, add a refresh rate of 75 Hz and you get: 4 Gbit/s. If a 2x channel is 40 Gbit/s, you could run 10 displays. Or what am I overlooking here?
I'm holding out for a TB/DP to dual DVI adapter that gives you the option of plugging in 2 standard DVI monitors. Mainly for the MacBook Pro -- but I can only hope :-D
too true! I have a MBA and the old 24" display. I am pretty sure my MBA would beat the crap out of me if I tried to run a program that needed another display...or if I even introduced another display into the mix, let alone two thunderbolt displays loaded to the gills with peripherals
If you have an Nvidia320M MBA you can drive another 24" display no worries
One 27" display is 2.25 m pixels, each with 24 bit of colour, add a refresh rate of 75 Hz and you get: 4 Gbit/s. If a 2x channel is 40 Gbit/s, you could run 10 displays. Or what am I overlooking here?
Er... for one thing Video RAM? Not just for the framebuffer but also for textures, antialiasing etc. since a lot of the interface actually uses 3D acceleration and so on.