Core Solo @ 2.16 Ghz ???
http://www.intel.com/products/proces..._view_core.htm
i posted this link in another post ...
link says Solo @ 2.16Ghz, possible typo error or something else ... if typo error so long to fix it?, i found this about 4 or 5 days back
this is very interesting if Core Solo going to be in MacBook...
what will be the performance gain if it is 2.16Ghz not 1.67 Ghz? will it be significant?
i posted this link in another post ...
link says Solo @ 2.16Ghz, possible typo error or something else ... if typo error so long to fix it?, i found this about 4 or 5 days back
this is very interesting if Core Solo going to be in MacBook...
what will be the performance gain if it is 2.16Ghz not 1.67 Ghz? will it be significant?
Comments
Originally posted by shanmugam
http://www.intel.com/products/proces..._view_core.htm
i posted this link in another post ...
link says Solo @ 2.16Ghz, possible typo error or something else ... if typo error so long to fix it?, i found this about 4 or 5 days back
this is very interesting if Core Solo going to be in MacBook...
what will be the performance gain if it is 2.16Ghz not 1.67 Ghz? will it be significant?
I think it's a typo on this page, all others documents on the Intel site show 1.66GHz for the Core Solo (1.83GHz expected later).
First it is my understanding that Intel will have "standard voltage" Core Solo parts plus extremely low voltage part. The idea is to exract even more of a power savings.
Second I can not see a reason for Core Solo to run any slower than its brother assumming the same chip design for the most part.
Finally there is the yield and demand issue. If there is no demand for a high speed part it is not likely to materialize.
As for the iBook I think Appple would be stupid to go with a single core processor there. That is me of course. I imagine that Apple would want to wait for an extremely low power chip for that machine. Maybe even something running below 1.6GHz. With dual core one can get the performance at that speed (es[pecially considering how the ibook is used) and save significantly on power over higher speed devices.
But like I say this is my opinion, it is likely to be awhile before we really know what is planned.
Thanks
Dave
Originally posted by wizard69
There are a couple of issue here.
First it is my understanding that Intel will have "standard voltage" Core Solo parts plus extremely low voltage part. The idea is to exract even more of a power savings.
Second I can not see a reason for Core Solo to run any slower than its brother assumming the same chip design for the most part.
Finally there is the yield and demand issue. If there is no demand for a high speed part it is not likely to materialize.
As for the iBook I think Appple would be stupid to go with a single core processor there. That is me of course. I imagine that Apple would want to wait for an extremely low power chip for that machine. Maybe even something running below 1.6GHz. With dual core one can get the performance at that speed (es[pecially considering how the ibook is used) and save significantly on power over higher speed devices.
But like I say this is my opinion, it is likely to be awhile before we really know what is planned.
Thanks
Dave
Intel is expected to come out with a 1.5gh core duo that uses 15w power. I hope that is the chip that makes its way into the new iBook.
Originally posted by backtomac
Intel is expected to come out with a 1.5gh core duo that uses 15w power. I hope that is the chip that makes its way into the new iBook.
Yes, but those low-voltage processors cost more than the regular ones (powering the current MacBook Pro).
The Core Duo LV chips would be put in high-end, ultra-portable, ultra-efficient and costly notebooks, or as an BTO option for current MacBook Pro models, if it's only a chip replacement, no other modifications needed...
regular 1.66 $241 to LV 1.5 $284 (+/- $50 premium)
regular 1.66 $241 to LV 1.66 $316 (+/- $75 premium)
regular 1.83 $294 to LV 1.66 $316 (+/- $25 premium)
Originally posted by mjteix
Yes, but those low-voltage processors cost more than the regular ones (powering the current MacBook Pro).
The Core Duo LV chips would be put in high-end, ultra-portable, ultra-efficient and costly notebooks, or as an BTO option for current MacBook Pro models, if it's only a chip replacement, no other modifications needed...
regular 1.66 $241 to LV 1.5 $284 (+/- $50 premium)
regular 1.66 $241 to LV 1.66 $316 (+/- $75 premium)
regular 1.83 $294 to LV 1.66 $316 (+/- $25 premium)
Sh*t. That sucks. When I saw that on a link, I thought that would be the holy grail for the iBook. Didn't see prices. As much as I hate to admit, it looks like the initial intel iBook gets the core solo. A much less enticing chip for me.
Originally posted by Cosmos 1999
As for yield: Core Solo processors come from "bad yield parts" since they are Core Duo processors with a disabled core because this one didn't pass the tests from Intel factories.
If that's true then there should be a core solo at each speed right?
Like
1.66
1.83
2.00
2.16
I read an article that at anandtech that showed tests and in a lot of applications(more that I had thought) a core duo didn't really have a gains over a core solo.
So I think a high clock speed core solo would probably be fine, would still like the duo though no doubt.
But would a 2ghz solo really be that much worse than a 1.66 duo?
Originally posted by ecking
But would a 2ghz solo really be that much worse than a 1.66 duo?
nah.. but it would cost you the same, so why not go duo?
Ask anyone who has used a Dual Processor Mac for any period of time and they will tell you how much better it is even when it only gives marginal direct performance boost.
If Apple goes with Core Solo they're being cheap and short-sighted. Going Core Duo platform-wide means serious business and only costs slightly more and I hope this is the route we go.
I for one will never buy a single core machine again. Dual (or Quad!!) all the way baby!
personally i like to see some form of DUO in iBooks and Mac Mini, knowing come June Merom going to be in MacBook Pro ...
Originally posted by shanmugam
any thoughts from THT/melgross/ageisdesign/kim kap sol
personally i like to see some form of DUO in iBooks and Mac Mini, knowing come June Merom going to be in MacBook Pro ...
I thought Merom got pushed back to next year?
Originally posted by backtomac
I thought Merom got pushed back to next year?
It seems Merom will come this year, by September.
We'll learn much more about Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest and their availability at the IDF, March 7-9. Intel is going to detail this "Next Generation Micro-Architecture".
Originally posted by Cosmos 1999
It seems Merom will come this year, by September.
We'll learn much more about Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest and their availability at the IDF, March 7-9. Intel is going to detail this "Next Generation Micro-Architecture".
That doesn't help me. I'm waiting until April to see what/if new iBooks come out. Then I'm choosing between iBook or Macbook pro. I've been configuring a Macbook pro at Apple's website and after I add in sufficient memory and Applecare the bill is almost $2500. A bit more than what I would like to spend.
was the next generation chipset Santa Rosa. Santa Rosa is suppose to push the bus from 667 mhz to 800mhz, and also it comes with support for 802.11n and/or wimax. The desktop version of merom ( conroe ) is in oem hands right now with a shipping date of Q'3 of this year. As we see everything is in place, oh before i forget, Santa Rosa got pushed back, so computer companies can make some cash with the current chipset Napa.
Originally posted by ghstmars
backtomac, merom the chip itself did not get pushed back, what got push back
was the next generation chipset Santa Rosa. Santa Rosa is suppose to push the bus from 667 mhz to 800mhz, and also it comes with support for 802.11n and/or wimax. The desktop version of merom ( conroe ) is in oem hands right now with a shipping date of Q'3 of this year. As we see everything is in place, oh before i forget, Santa Rosa got pushed back, so computer companies can make some cash with the current chipset Napa.
Right, the latest info I have is:
Conroe: july
Woodcrest: Q3
Merom: Q4 (but likely october)
Santa Rosa: march 2007
from ibook, which is obvious, whats next due to the timeline you
presented? i really want macbook pro 13", but with intel and knowing
their roadmap, whats next with apple? what you think?
Originally posted by ghstmars
mjteix, what do you think will be the next major revision? aside
from ibook, which is obvious, whats next due to the timeline you
presented? i really want macbook pro 13", but with intel and knowing
their roadmap, whats next with apple? what you think?
Hi ghstmars, sorry it took me so long to answer.
I think (like most of us) that Apple will keep the same price points as the current G4/G5 products when switched to Intel, like they have done for the iMacs and the 15" MacBook Pro.
I believe there still room for a 13" MacBook Pro (dual core, alu enclosure...), I'd rather see REAL 13" MacBook Pro (with the exact same specs as the 15" MBP: backlit kb, expresscard slot) even if it is at $1699 instead of the current $1499 price point for the 12" PowerBook.
That would bring a better differentiation between the 2 lines of notebooks, and more consistency inside the Pro line. My wishes:
$999 13" MacBook (single core) same config as the current 12" iBook
***I think Apple cannot put a Core Duo in a $999 notebook (but I could be wrong). I think they will use a Celeron M4xx series at 1.6/1.7GHz, 533MHZ FSB and 1MB of cache.
$1299 13" MacBook (dual core) same config as the current 14" iBook
***all I would like to see is faster (5400rpm) HDs and a 64MB GPU.
$1699 13" MacBook Pro same config as the current 15" MacBook Pro 1.83GHz
***with maybe only a 64MB GPU
The Mac mini should have the same treatment as the iBook:
$499 Mac mini (Celeron M4xx at 1.6/1.7GHz) standard configuration.
$699 model with Superdrive, Wireless bundle and bigger HD
$799 Core Duo model (based on the $1299 MacBook)
IMO, his is the SPRING line-up.
The SUMMER would bring the new PowerMacs.
Most of the users would want to see more internal space for drives and eventuelly more PCI-e slots. Depending on the price of the chips, Apple may only use Woodcrest to have a common architecture (1333 FSB and multi-processor capabilities) instead of a mix of Conroe-based PowerMacs (1066 FSB, mono-processor) and Woodcrest-based PowerMacs. My wishes:
$1999 Dual-core 2.33GHz
$2499 Dual-core 2.93GHz or the Dual-Core XE Conroe @ 3.33GHz (1333 FSB) for a marketing reason (the 3GHz promise)
$3299 Quad-core 2.93GHz
For the FALL, Merom should be used to update the notebooks: as the first version of Merom share the same hardware platform as Yonah, it should be very easy for Apple to update. Merom will be 64-bit, a little faster than the Core Duo and with a little increase in GHz speed too.
13" MacBook Pro from 1.67 to 1.83
13"/15" MacBook Pro from 1.83 to 2.00
15"/17" MacBook Pro from 2.00 to 2.16
15"/17" MacBook Pro from 2.16 to 2.33 (BTO)
Apple may also use Merom on the iMacs (or Conroe, if the chip is not too hot for the iMac enclosure). Conroe is cheaper than Merom at the same speed.
17" iMac from 1.83 to 2.00 (Merom) or from 1.83 to 2.13/2.40 (Conroe)
20" iMac from 2.00 to 2.16 (Merom) or from 2.00 to 2.40/2.67 (Conroe)
***Some think that a 23/24" iMac may be released also.
And as the WINTER comes, it would be nice to update the MacBooks and the Mac minis either to Merom (for the "better" models) or to Core Duo (for the basic models). It will also depends on what Apple wants: everything 64-bit or everything dual-core:
$999 13" MacBook from [email protected] to Core Duo 1.67 or Merom SC 1.83
$1299 13" MacBook from Core Duo 1.67 to Merom DC 1.83
$1699 13" MacBook Pro from Core Duo 1.67/1.83 to Merom DC 1.83/2.00
$499 Mac mini from [email protected] to Core Duo 1.67 or Merom SC 1.83
$699 model with Superdrive, Wireless bundle and bigger HD
$799 from Core Duo 1.67 to Merom DC 1.83
I won't talk a lot about the XServes, I believe they will use Woodcrest CPUs in various configurations. And maybe Apple could release a low-cost server (Xserve mini) using the soon-to-be-available Sossaman CPU (server version of the Core Duo @ 2.00GHz).
The only thing missing here are the mid-range headless Mac, that a lot of people are waiting for. I'm still not sure that Apple would release such a new form-factor Mac. But I surely would be interested in one with the following specs:
- Enclosure: maybe 13"x13"x1.75", like a small XServe, that could be used horizontally (like an audio/video component), vertically (mini-tower close to the screen or on the floor) or in a rack (like the XServe), using adapters.
- Processor: if it is to released this spring: Core Duo and Sossaman, if it is for the summer or fall or winter: Conroe.
- 2 HD bays (Ã* la XServe)
- 2 PCI-e slots (like the XServe): one for the video card, the other for whatever you want, or for one of those crazy video cards that use 2 slots spaces. My wishes for the spring versions:
$999 Core Duo 1.83 (the living-room Mac)
$1299 Core Duo 2.16 (the gamer's Mac)
$1699 Quad (2 dual-core) Sossaman 2.00 (the "mini" audio/video... workstation)
My wishes for a summer/fall/winter release:
$999 Conroe 2.13 (the living-room Mac)
$1299 Conroe 2.67 (the gamer's Mac)
$1699 Conroe XE 3.33 (the "mini" audio/video... workstation)
It's a really long post, it has not a lot to do with the title of the thread, but I hope you have all the information you wanted. Please, consider that those are my thoughts about what's gonna come: a mix of facts and dreams. Nothing is real yet.
macbook pro!