Intel releases Core i7 'Clarksfield' mobile processors

[AppleInsider]

Intel this week unveiled two new high-performance Core i7 mobile processors, bringing the power of Nehalem, previously seen only in desktops, to the mobile market.

The Intel Core i7 Mobile Processor and accompanying "Extreme Edition" were unveiled this week at the Intel Developer Forum 2009. The quad-core processors, formerly code named Clarksfield, are said to offer better performance on highly threaded applications and can accelerate the processor clock speed up to 75 percent to match workloads.

"With intelligent features like Intel Turbo Boost Technology, Intel Hyper-Threading Technology and a host of others, Intel has revolutionized the laptop PC processor, delivering performance when you need it, energy efficiency when you don’t," said Dadi Perlmutter, executive vice president and general manager, Intel Architecture Group. "For the first time, mobile users can choose a laptop that delivers Internet-server like speed, right in their laps for the most demanding tasks, from intense gaming to digital video editing and social media applications."

Pricing is $1,054 for the i7-920XM model, $546 for i7-820QM, and $364 for i7-720QM. They debuted alongside the new Intel PM55 Express Chipset. Combined, Intel claims they offer the best laptop experience for gaming, digital media, photos, music, business applications and other multi-threaded tasks.

The processors run at 1.6GHz and 1.73GHz, but each can boost up to 2.8GHz and 3.06GHz, respectively, when necessary. The Extreme Edition i7-92XM runs at 2GHz.

Currently, the MacBook Pro line sports Intel Core 2 Duo processors with speeds from 2.26GHz to 3.06 GHz. The new chips could make their way into future iMac and MacBook Pro designs. However, there has been no evidence to suggest the new chips would show up in any near-term refreshes.

Intel plans to release its dual-core processors code named Arrandale in early 2010. Those chips are said to include two processor cores and graphics under a brand new 32-nanometer technology, and might be an ideal candidate for a future MacBook Pro update.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[RichL]

Mmmm... if the MBP gets i7 then it'll be time for me to upgrade.

[merdhead]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

The new chip is essentially a minor upgrade before Intel releases its dual-core processors code named Arrandale in early 2010. Those chips are said to include two processor cores and graphics under a brand new 32-nanometer technology, and might be an ideal candidate for a future MacBook Pro update.

How is a quad core processor a "minor upgrade" before "upgrading" to two cores. That's idiotic.

[mdriftmeyer]

Intel sure loves to jack over the consumer when they release a new chip.

[CdnBook]

I really need a mobile quad-core machine for editing HD video...

I've said it before and I'll say it again: If HP can do it... http://www.hp.com/united-states/camp...nvy/index.html ...for well under $2K in a notebook, why can't Apple?

I'd rather have a 4 core/ 8 thread Clarksfield i7 (with hyperthreading), and a beefy discrete Nvidia GPU... than a 2 core/ 4 thread Arrandale with a wimpy integrated Intel GPU.

8 threads would surely help me export HD video!... and justify the Pro in MacBook "Pro".

[bdkennedy1]

Good, now Apple can announce the new iMac's on Tuesday.

[anonymouse]

Originally Posted by bdkennedy1

Good, now Apple can announce the new iMac's on Tuesday.

Given that they haven't announced a media event yet, I would think a week from Monday would be the earliest possible/likely date.

[MacFinder]

Intel plans to release its dual-core processors code named Arrandale in early 2010. Those chips are said to include two processor cores and
graphics
under a brand new 32-nanometer technology, and might be an ideal candidate for a future MacBook Pro update.

It's great that Apple will upgrade MBP's CPU,
but integrated graphics anyway sucks.
It'd be better to see both NVIDIA and Intel GPU included:
NVIDIA for gaming, Intel for power saving.
If there would be only Intel GPU, then I'll not be surprised if some people will choose older MBP only because
they want NVIDIA and don't want to see their games freezing...

[Quadra 610]

But will it run Crysis?

[Bregalad]

I sure hope this Clarksfield finds its way into the iMac in place of the current dual core chips. The thermal/power envelope seems to be a match, as is the chip pricing and release date.

Actually I'd prefer the low power Xeon because it's higher clocked while only slightly more demanding from a power standpoint, but Apple is unlikely to put a "server" chip in a "consumer" Mac.

Arrandale, because it's merely a dual core processor, is mostly about reducing power consumption and thus extending battery life. Like the quad core Clarksfield it's clocked significantly lower than the current Core 2 Duo so it'll need to make really good use hyperthreading and turbo mode to beat the current MBP.

[blurpbleepbloop]

Originally Posted by anonymouse

Given that they haven't announced a media event yet, I would think a week from Monday would be the earliest possible/likely date.

I sincerely doubt that they'll have a media event to trot out the new iMac. It's just not big enough to justify its own event. We'll wake up one day soon to find the news splashed across apple.com, that's all.

[clickmyface]

Originally Posted by CdnBook

I really need a mobile quad-core machine for editing HD video...

I've said it before and I'll say it again: If HP can do it... http://www.hp.com/united-states/camp...nvy/index.html ...for well under $2K in a notebook, why can't Apple?

I'd rather have a 4 core/ 8 thread Clarksfield i7 (with hyperthreading), and a beefy discrete Nvidia GPU... than a 2 core/ 4 thread Arrandale with a wimpy integrated Intel GPU.

8 threads would surely help me export HD video!... and justify the Pro in MacBook "Pro".

A joke? Those dont ship for a month and they are not "well under 2k." The price is estimated $1700-1800.

[CdnBook]

Originally Posted by clickmyface

A joke? Those dont ship for a month and they are not "well under 2k." The price is estimated $1700-1800.

Ummm... Are we really getting into the semantics of what I personally think is well under 2k?... because last time I checked with myself, I thought $1700-1800 was well under 2k.

And who cares if it doesn't ship for another month... at least HP has come out and announced they're making it.

Remember when the Mac Pro got Nehalem Xeons early, before the rest of the market? What makes you think the MacBook Pro couldn't have gotten the new Nehalem Clarksfields early? Please, your lack of insight on an "insider" forum is the real joke.

[elroth]

Originally Posted by CdnBook

And who cares if it doesn't ship for another month... at least HP has come out and announced they're making it.

Remember when the Mac Pro got Nehalem Xeons early, before the rest of the market? What makes you think the MacBook Pro couldn't have gotten the new Nehalem Clarksfields early? Please, your lack of insight on an "insider" forum is the real joke.

HP has announced it - that doesn't make it exist.

[DaveGee]

To dream of the day when Apple uses an Intel DESKTOP CPU....

[debusoh]

Originally Posted by DaveGee

To dream of the day when Apple uses an Intel DESKTOP CPU....

But then they may not be able to make the case look as cool, and that is waaay more important.... for some.

[Quadra 610]

Originally Posted by DaveGee

To dream of the day when Apple uses an Intel DESKTOP CPU....

Smaller, thinner, more compact is the trend. Desktop CPUs are giving way to mobile technology, at least in the segment occupied by the average user (the largest segment.)

[CdnBook]

Originally Posted by elroth

HP has announced it - that doesn't make it exist.

Thank you for that insightful bit of wisdom

Ummm... HP is making it... so it will exist. Need I say more?

Again, if HP can do it, so can Apple.

[technohermit]

Originally Posted by CdnBook

Thank you for that insightful bit of wisdom

Ummm... HP is making it... so it will exist. Need I say more?

Again, if HP can do it, so can Apple.

Not with aluminum, it will be well under $3k $2799 will be more like it, sorry. Here's to hoping for real processors!

[CdnBook]

Originally Posted by technohermit

Not with aluminum, it will be well under $3k $2799 will be more like it, sorry. Here's to hoping for real processors!

If the new MID-RANGE Clarksfield i7 quad-core sells for about the same as a Core 2 Duo in the current 15-inch MBP, why would Apple suddenly raise the price of the MBP from $1699 to $2799??? Think about it.

Not to mention, even the mid-range Clarksfield chip outperforms the fastest Core 2 Duo... making the Clarksfield (with hyperthreading and turbo boost) an excellent performer at great value.

I seem to be encountering a lot of people in these forums who know little about the tech they're commenting on. But don't take my word for it... google it for yourselves.

[technohermit]

Originally Posted by CdnBook

If the new MID-RANGE Clarksfield i7 quad-core sells for about the same as a Core 2 Duo in the current 15-inch MBP, why would Apple suddenly raise the price of the MBP from $1699 to $2799??? Think about it.

Not to mention, even the mid-range Clarksfield chip outperforms the fastest Core 2 Duo... making the Clarksfield (with hyperthreading and turbo boost) an excellent performer at great value.

I seem to be encountering a lot of people in these forums who know little about the tech they're commenting on. But don't take my word for it... google it for yourselves.

At least you are enthusiastic about it, but there are other things to consider. You seem to think Apple will just ho-hum throw the chips in and that's it there's the upgrade. However, there are other things to consider. Blu-ray, for example, and the associated licensing. Apple will be more expensive than HP or Dell because of the Aluminum enclosures, for one. They also have illuminated keyboards, for two. If HP's 15" is $1700, I don't need Google to tell me Apple's will be more money.

HP's isn't running any operating system you want, with a 7 hour battery and the best hand gesture trackpad on the market in a laptop.

If HP releases for $1700-$1800 as you claim, Apple's prices will go up. They will blame it on the Blu-Ray and won't cry about lost sales in the papers, either.

For someone who loves to compare tech and Google stuff, start with business and marketing to learn why Apple can raise their prices and get away with it.

[CdnBook]

Originally Posted by technohermit

At least you are enthusiastic about it, but there are other things to consider. You seem to think Apple will just ho-hum throw the chips in and that's it there's the upgrade. However, there are other things to consider. Blu-ray, for example, and the associated licensing. Apple will be more expensive than HP or Dell because of the Aluminum enclosures, for one. They also have illuminated keyboards, for two. If HP's 15" is $1700, I don't need Google to tell me Apple's will be more money.

HP's isn't running any operating system you want, with a 7 hour battery and the best hand gesture trackpad on the market in a laptop.

If HP releases for $1700-$1800 as you claim, Apple's prices will go up. They will blame it on the Blu-Ray and won't cry about lost sales in the papers, either.

For someone who loves to compare tech and Google stuff, start with business and marketing to learn why Apple can raise their prices and get away with it.

Wow. Do I really have to repeat myself?:

If the new MID-RANGE Clarksfield i7 quad-core sells for about the same as a Core 2 Duo in the current 15-inch MBP, why would Apple suddenly raise the price of the MBP from $1699 to $2799??? Think about it.

I'm not talking about blue-ray or the other features in the HP... I'm just saying, if the new mid-range Clarksfield chip costs as much as the current Core 2 Duo chip, the current price of the MacBook Pro ($1699) should stay the same. The two chips cost the same... get it?

[technohermit]

Originally Posted by CdnBook

Wow. Do I really have to repeat myself?:

If the new MID-RANGE Clarksfield i7 quad-core sells for about the same as a Core 2 Duo in the current 15-inch MBP, why would Apple suddenly raise the price of the MBP from $1699 to $2799??? Think about it.

I'm not talking about blue-ray or the other features in the HP... I'm just saying, if the new mid-range Clarksfield chip costs as much as the current Core 2 Duo chip, the current price of the MacBook Pro ($1699) should stay the same. The two chips cost the same... get it?

I was actually hoping you wouldn't even comment again, let alone repeat yourself. And since you cannot or will not read what I wrote above, I'll do my best to explain something. Even though I shouldn't because you are a smart ass.
What I'm saying is, Apple will not just switch the chips and call it a day, same price notebook, no other features in my opinion. Apple DOES NOT include Blu-ray at the moment, and when they add it it will cause the price of their laptops to increase. They most likely will pass this hit to consumers, because they are already experiencing a drop in their bottom line with this lineup.
Another thing is, do the associated components have a higher price point, ie, the board, socket, ram etc? Just because the chip is the same price point, I have trouble believing giving people 6GB's of faster RAM and such will remain the same price.

[CdnBook]

Originally Posted by technohermit

I was actually hoping you wouldn't even comment again, let alone repeat yourself. And since you cannot or will not read what I wrote above, I'll so my best to explain something. Even though I shouldn't because you are a smart ass.
What I'm saying is, Apple will not just switch the chips and call it a day, same price notebook, no other features in my opinion. Apple DOES NOT include Blu-ray at the moment, and when they add it it will cause the price of their laptops to increase. They most likely will pass this hit to consumers, because they are already experiencing a drop in their bottom line with this lineup.

Geez. I'm NOT talking about Blu-ray... I don't want Blu-ray... never wanted Blu-ray... could care less if the HP has Blu-ray... even Steve Jobs doesn't want Blu-ray. What I'm saying is...

If HP can make an i7 Clarksfield quad-core notebook... than so can Apple, particularly when Apple DOESN'T put Blu-ray players in their notebooks, and when the chip in discussion (the whole point of this thread!) costs as much as the chips Apple currently uses.

[technohermit]

Originally Posted by CdnBook

Wow. Do I really have to repeat myself?:

If the new MID-RANGE Clarksfield i7 quad-core sells for about the same as a Core 2 Duo in the current 15-inch MBP, why would Apple suddenly raise the price of the MBP from $1699 to $2799???

Oh, and which Core2Duo? The mid-range Core2Duo is $1999 at the moment. Also, the 2.8Ghz is $2299. There are a lot of things you just assume people know that you thought them. Please elaborate on what you think might be affected by a switch from 2 to 4 cores, if anything at all, including price.
I'm really hoping to learn something about these new chips, the whole eliminating the FSB, and all that. I am, admittedly, a little behind on my technology,

[CdnBook]

Originally Posted by technohermit

Oh, and which Core2Duo? The mid-range Core2Duo is $1999 at the moment. Also, the 2.8Ghz is $2299. There are a lot of things you just assume people know that you thought them. Please elaborate on what you think might be affected by a switch from 2 to 4 cores, if anything at all, including price.
I'm really hoping to learn something about these new chips, the whole eliminating the FSB, and all that. I am, admittedly, a little behind on my technology,

Wow... you need to wake up and realize we're talking about the price of CHIPS and subsequent relative price to Apples current MBP ($1699).

Go back and read the original article about the mid-range Clarksfield... "$546 for i7-820QM" (which is about the SAME price as the CURRENT Core 2 Duo CHIPS, in the CURRENT MBP). But if you really want to, you can google it too.

[technohermit]

Originally Posted by CdnBook

Wow... you need to wake up and realize we're talking about the price of CHIPS and subsequent relative price to Apples current MBP ($1699).

Go back and read the original article about the mid-range Clarksfield... "$546 for i7-820QM" (which is about the SAME price as the CURRENT Core 2 Duo CHIPS, in the CURRENT MBP). But if you really want to, you can google it too.

So much for civilized discussion. The article might have been about the price of the new chip, but our discussion was about why I said the notebooks would increase. You just want to hear yourself type I guess. I don't need to wake up honestly, I'm fully functioning at the moment. You are just a teenager looking to see how many posts you can get and how many people you can scoff at. Not worth any further comments, honestly.

[applebook]

I wish that Apple would release a thicker iMac with a desktop Quad, but Apple has always used laptop chips in the iMacs even though the prices are higher than desktop counterparts and performance slower (voltages and power consumption much lower though, but this isn't a major issue with a thicker iMac case).

[CdnBook]

Originally Posted by technohermit

So much for civilized discussion. The article might have been about the price of the new chip, but our discussion was about why I said the notebooks would increase. You just want to hear yourself type I guess. I don't need to wake up honestly, I'm fully functioning at the moment. You are just a teenager looking to see how many posts you can get and how many people you can scoff at. Not worth any further comments, honestly.

Actually, I'm an adult with a university degree... furthermore, I should have clued in when you mentioned the MBP at $1999 & $2299... you're quoting Canadian prices!

I've been quoting US prices all along (ie, MBP for $1699, not $1999). I'm Canadian myself, but I compare everything in US prices, because that's the currency of the Clarksfield chips mentioned at the top of the page, as well as the Clarksfield equipped HP's I've been talking about. Ironically, you gotta compare apples to apples ( US$ to US$), and I think my posts will make a lot more sense now if you go back and read them again

[technohermit]

Originally Posted by applebook

I wish that Apple would release a thicker iMac with a desktop Quad, but Apple has always used laptop chips in the iMacs even though the prices are higher than desktop counterparts and performance slower (voltages and power consumption much lower though, but this isn't a major issue with a thicker iMac case).

Many people would love that, I'm sure. I'm still looking for a MDD replacement, and we all know by now I'm never gonna see it

[technohermit]

Originally Posted by CdnBook

Actually, I'm an adult with a university degree... furthermore, I should have clued in when you mentioned the MBP at $1999 & $2299... you're quoting Canadian prices!

I've been quoting US prices all along (ie, MBP for $1699, not $1999). I'm Canadian myself, but I compare everything in US prices, because that's the currency of the Clarksfield chips mentioned at the top of the page, as well as the Clarksfield equipped HP's I've been talking about. Ironically, you gotta compare apples to apples ( US$ to US$), and I think my posts will make a lot more sense now if you go back and read them again

I don't know, I thought I was looking at the US store. I tried again, and it seems I see 6 MBP's, three of which are 15". They are $1699, $1999, and $2299 respectively.
Perhaps a summary of my thoughts is in order, one last time.

The price of the chip, while very similarly priced to the current Core2Duo, will require other options and technologies in relation to a new lineup of notebook offerings from Apple. This new offering will cost more due to those factors, setting aside the fact that the chip itself will not cost Apple much more, if at all.

[applebook]

Originally Posted by CdnBook

Thank you for that insightful bit of wisdom

Ummm... HP is making it... so it will exist. Need I say more?

Again, if HP can do it, so can Apple.

The Envy is 2.5mm thicker than the 15" MBP, and while this might seem insignificant, when we're dealing with already ridiculously thin notebooks, that 2.5mm is quite a bit. With that extra space, HP could use substantially better and cooling with larger fans. I'm not so sure that Apple CAN put a Clarksfield in the 15" MBP and have it run at stock speeds without cooling issues.

The 1.6 Quad's 45W TDP versus the T9000's 35W is a notable difference.

[technohermit]

Originally Posted by applebook

The Envy is 2.5mm thicker than the 15" MBP, and while this might seem insignificant, when we're dealing with already ridiculously thin notebooks, that 2.5mm is quite a bit. With that extra space, HP could use substantially better and cooling with larger fans. I'm not so sure that Apple CAN put a Clarksfield in the 15" MBP and have it run at stock speeds without cooling issues.

The 1.6 Quad's 45W TDP versus the T9000's 35W is a notable difference.

Perhaps they can make them out of carbon fiber and thin the walls of the unibody enclosure.

[anonymouse]

Originally Posted by blurpbleepbloop

I sincerely doubt that they'll have a media event to trot out the new iMac. It's just not big enough to justify its own event. We'll wake up one day soon to find the news splashed across apple.com, that's all.

I think it depends on how much of a redesign, how much performance improvement there is. If it's
minor, you're probably right. If it's more significant, and includes the MacBook and iMacs, then they a media event is more likely. Then again, I'm expecting one on the basis of SJ's, "See you again soon," comment at the end of the iPod media event.

[CdnBook]

Originally Posted by technohermit

I don't know, I thought I was looking at the US store. I tried again, and it seems I see 6 MBP's, three of which are 15". They are $1699, $1999, and $2299 respectively.
Perhaps a summary of my thoughts is in order, one last time.

The price of the chip, while very similarly priced to the current Core2Duo, will require other options and technologies in relation to a new lineup of notebook offerings from Apple. This new offering will cost more due to those factors, setting aside the fact that the chip itself will not cost Apple much more, if at all.

Yes... there are 6 "MacBook Pro" models, and the mid-range is a 15" which sells for $1699... and the two chips in discussion are very similar in price, which I've been saying all along.

Though you need to read up on the i7... it has an integrated memory controller in the chip now, which requires less "tech" in the notebook. And the people who keep saying it's too hot for the MBP aren't realizing that it makes up for it by reducing the total TDP by getting rid of the hot memory controller that sits outside of the chip in Core 2 Duo notebooks.

Not to mention, when Apple releases new products, they tend to offer more performance at the same price or less (than their previous models). A quad-core is the next logical step for increasing performance, seeing as how Core 2 Duo's have plateaued... and these new i7's are really affordable.

[sippincider]

Originally Posted by applebook

I wish that Apple would release a thicker iMac with a desktop Quad, but Apple has always used laptop chips in the iMacs even though the prices are higher than desktop counterparts and performance slower (voltages and power consumption much lower though, but this isn't a major issue with a thicker iMac case).

Careful, sir; you're treading on gospel here. Thicker is not the Apple way.

Although I do agree: Would it really hurt Apple to (!!gasp!!) go a couple mm's thicker so the iMac could handle a cheaper & faster desktop chip?

Or is this just about keeping the iMac from cannibalizing the Mac Pro?

[Zoolook]

Originally Posted by CdnBook

Wow. Do I really have to repeat myself?:

If the new MID-RANGE Clarksfield i7 quad-core sells for about the same as a Core 2 Duo in the current 15-inch MBP, why would Apple suddenly raise the price of the MBP from $1699 to $2799??? Think about it.

Because they'll need a battery from the 27th Century to make it last more than 10 mins.

Check out the battery life of these processors... start at Anandtech.



That's at idle... 69 minutes! Even with Apple's super-duper batteries, you're looking at less than 1.5 hours battery life if you just stare at the screen and don't do anything.

And is this the ugliest Laptop ever, or what?

http://www.anandtech.com/GalleryImage.aspx?id=6888

[technohermit]

Originally Posted by CdnBook

Yes... there are 6 "MacBook Pro" models, and the mid-range is a 15" which sells for $1699... and the two chips in discussion are very similar in price, which I've been saying all along.

I was only considering 15" MBP's, where the $1999 would be the middle ground. Doesn't matter.

Originally Posted by CdnBook

Though you need to read up on the i7... it has an integrated memory controller in the chip now, which requires less "tech" in the notebook. And the people who keep saying it's too hot for the MBP aren't realizing that it makes up for it by reducing the total TDP by getting rid of the hot memory controller that sits outside of the chip in Core 2 Duo notebooks.

Actually, I was playing Intel's online game this morning They are impressive....poor AMD.

Originally Posted by CdnBook

Not to mention, when Apple releases new products, they tend to offer more performance at the same price or less (than their previous models). A quad-core is the next logical step for increasing performance, seeing as how Core 2 Duo's have plateaued... and these new i7's are really affordable.

I don't refute that, other than this particular sequence of upgrades. As I've said many times in this thread, which you steadfastly disagree with or completely want to ignore, is that Apple needs to add some things that their competitors have had or will be shortly releasing. These additions are going to bring productions costs up for their lineup. It was already pointed out in either the Q conference call or the end Q report, can't remember where exactly. Apple basically told everyone to expect lower earnings per unit due to these factors, and at that point they dropped the price of their line. It used to be higher actually, before the unibody. These prices are what people were paying for the 2.4Ghz Santa Rosa's on educator's discounts, if I remember right.

However, when Apple (if?) decides to finally add Blu-Ray and i7 chips, I don't think the consumer will be paying these low prices. Especially given that HP is putting out something with all the pizazz, and at $1700. It just doesn't compute that Apple will have better technology (read: batteries, enclosures) and yet cost LESS than HP's offering. If you prove to be correct Cdn, believe me that would be awesome. I just don't think so.

[CdnBook]

Originally Posted by Zoolook

Because they'll need a battery from the 27th Century to make it last more than 10 mins.

Check out the battery life of these processors... start at Anandtech.



That's at idle... 69 minutes! Even with Apple's super-duper batteries, you're looking at less than 1.5 hours battery life if you just stare at the screen and don't do anything.

And is this the ugliest Laptop ever, or what?

http://www.anandtech.com/GalleryImage.aspx?id=6888

lol... by a 2Ghz "idle", they mean not turbo'd up to 3+Ghz. When all four cores are maxed out, the chip "idles" the clock speed back to 2Ghz. That's when it's maxed out at full load on all four cores. In actuality, the Clarksfield is far more energy efficient because it can run one core (two threads with hyperthreading), and cut power off to the other 3 cores... lasting for hours. The Clarksfield is a mobile chip people... read about it.

[Zoolook]

Originally Posted by CdnBook

Though you need to read up on the i7... it has an integrated memory controller in the chip now, which requires less "tech" in the notebook.

It's very odd that this has not translated to the price of Motherboards in the desktop arena. i7 Mobos are still seriously expensive. The cheapest are over $200, and that's on a site like NewEgg. A good one will $400. OK, there are one or two that just sneak in under $200, but they're laggy latency crap. Phenom II Mobos or even Core Dup Mobos are less than half that amount.

Now obviously mobile solutions are a bit different, but your point about the 'external tech. being cheaper because there is more 'inside the chip' is untrue.