Originally Posted by Marvin
They do but there are leaked slides from Intel:
The point remains Ivy Bridge wasn't due this year.
The last image looks like production starts mid-December and can be ready for launch at the end of February. The dual-core versions could still be used by Apple in some models where the launch could be the end of March.
Yes but I still wonder if they will even bother with the dual core versions. I'd rather have a quad core in an AIR even if I ended up losing a bit on clock rate. Compilers and build tools run really well on multi core machines.
That's exactly in the timeframe of the last MBP revision (February 24th).
Just in time for an after Christmas present.
It's not cost-effective to change all the tooling for a 6 month run of machines. Plus if they could design a smaller form factor with the current chips, they would have done it. Those 45W chips couldn't go into a MBA style enclosure but 25W chips certainly can.
You have said this before and frankly Marvin it is BS. Ask any early 2008 MBP owner (like me). There is nothing to stop Apple from updating today and then coming out with a totally redesigned model in 6 months.
True, they'll have to in order to reduce the enclosure size.
Ivy Bridge might be able to offer up a radically redesigned motherboard. In other words a much smaller one. I could see a sizable battery moved to the rear of the machine with maybe a quarter of that length taken up by the circuit board. In the end you might have a more radical taper.
There was an Ivy Bridge engineering sample tested measuring a dual-core 1.8GHz model vs a quad-core Sandy Bridge model underclocked to 1.8GHz. Not a great test comparing quad to dual-core but some conclusions can be drawn.
Well they ran a bunch of useless benchmarks. This is no surprise as these so called leaks are nothing more than Intel manipulation of the market. From what I've heard the CPU cores really haven't been reworked all that much, primary enhancements went into the GPU which of course wasn't really tested. Even worst the one thing perspective AIR buyers want to hear about was never measured which is power draw.
As one of the commenters pointed out, the Cinebench score is the best to go by as it scales very well and shows 38% improvement over Sandy Bridge. Naturally, if Apple chooses to put quad-cores in the lower models, we would be looking at nearly double performance over this year. If they put dual-cores in the lower models, those refreshes will be a bit later on and 38% improvement or possibly more if the final batch gets better results.
That 38% number is wishful thinking in anything other than Cinebench. It would be interesting to know what instruction set that bench is compiled for though. In general though the performance increase is flat.
I personally think it's time to merge the two so that the 13" MBP becomes the 13" MBA.
NO NO NO and Double NO. There will be a need for a very long time for a 13" machine that is more powerful than the AIR. Sometimes power means things like faster CPU, a real GPU, longer battery life or what ever your poison is.
In my case I'm frustrated by AIRs lack of internal storage.
Right now, you get:
13" MBA 1.7GHz dual-core i5
13" MBP 2.3GHz dual-core i5
All they have to do is get a 256GB SSD and an Ivy Bridge i5. Taking the optical out of the 13" reduces it by $100. To get an extra 128GB SSD would cost about $205 so that would suggest a $1299 price point but maybe they can take a hit on that and get to a $1199 price.
I don't think it makes sense to separate the lines any more either if they all go MBA style.
A restyled MBP doesn't imply trimming to AIR standards. They have lots of options to keep it a pro class machine while giving it a fresh look.