or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Intel's Mac-bound Ivy Bridge CPUs expected to go on sale 8-10 weeks late
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Intel's Mac-bound Ivy Bridge CPUs expected to go on sale 8-10 weeks late

post #1 of 52
Thread Starter 
Intel's next-generation Ivy Bridge processors, sized at 22 nanometers and expected to appear in Apple's updated Mac lineup, will become available eight to 10 weeks later than originally planned, one company official has said.

Sean Maloney, executive vice president and chairman of Intel China, revealed in an interview with the Financial Times that his company's Ivy Bridge processors are now expected to go on sale in June. Those CPUs were originally planned to become available in April.

The apparent delay will allow Intel more time to manufacture the smaller, more complex chips. Maloney indicated that a later June launch was not prompted by a lack of demand.

The comments support a rumor from earlier this month that indicated Intel was forced to push back shipments of its Ivy Bridge processors to June. However, that same report claimed that a "small volume" of chips would be shipped in early April.

Earlier reports had suggested that Intel planned to debut a total of 25 new 22-nanometer Ivy Bridge processors at launch. They would include 17 desktop CPUs and 8 notebook processors.

Initial chips are expected to include models 3820QM, rumored to be priced at $568, and 3720QM, $378, both of which are potential candidates for an updated MacBook Pro. AppleInsider reported earlier this month that Apple plans to radically redesign its MacBook Pro lineup this year, borrowing traits currently found in the company's thin-and-light MacBook Air line.


An illustration of Apple's notebook lineup planned for the 2012 calendar year.


Reports from late last year suggested Apple was planning to launch its updated MacBook Pro lineup in the second quarter of 2012>. It was said the Ivy Bridge-powered notebooks would feature a Retina Display-quality screen resolution of 2,880 by 1,800 pixels, exactly twice that of the 1,440-by-900 display currently found on the 15-inch MacBook Pro.

Retina Display MacBook Pros would be possible with Ivy Bridge because Intel's next-generation chip architecture will bring support for 4K resolution. That gives Apple and other PC makers the option to build a display that is 4,096 pixels across, at a resolution more than twice that of 1080p.

The new Ivy Bridge notebook processors will feature Intel HD Graphics 4000 architecture. High-end MacBook Pros with dedicated graphics are rumored to be powered by Nvidia in Apple's 2012 lineup.

[ View article on AppleInsider ]
post #2 of 52
This has nothing to do with manufacturing process issues. Intel could go straight to 11 nm and beyond (nanotechnology) if they wanted right now. It is just milking the process as much as possible.
post #3 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Intel's next-generation Ivy Bridge processors, sized at 22 nanometers and expected to appear in Apple's updated Mac lineup, will become available eight to 10 weeks later than originally planned, one company official has said.



How long is Apple going to be at the mercy of Intel? Intel makes it possible for all the crapboxes to be built. Intel has started to make Ultrabook chips, and now is going to delay Apple from giving us new Macbooks?

Intel is a boat anchor. apple needs to be free of their underhanded tactics.
post #4 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by zunx View Post

This has nothing to do with manufacturing process issues. Intel could go straight to 11 nm and beyond (nanotechnology) if they wanted right now. It is just milking the process as much as possible.

I love how an anonymous person with no knowledge of Intel's inside information can make a statement like that.

Please provide evidence for your claims.

Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

How long is Apple going to be at the mercy of Intel? Intel makes it possible for all the crapboxes to be built. Intel has started to make Ultrabook chips, and now is going to delay Apple from giving us new Macbooks?

Intel is a boat anchor. apple needs to be free of their underhanded tactics.

I'm sure they'd like to. Please explain how.

AMD failed to provide parts that met Apple's requirements. ARM is years from offering products with the performance Apple needs. So what's your solution?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #5 of 52
Well I am waiting for my purchase until the new batch of MBAs come out. I really want a 13" MBA too.
post #6 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by zunx View Post

This has nothing to do with manufacturing process issues. Intel could go straight to 11 nm and beyond (nanotechnology) if they wanted right now. It is just milking the process as much as possible.

That's an abslute pile of conjecture. Sorry, but Intel's 22nm is the best they've got. They have research, like AMD and others with a goal of targeting 11nm within 12-18 months for production, but not now.
post #7 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

Well I am waiting for my purchase until the new batch of MBAs come out. I really want a 13" MBA too.

I would prefer a 20" MBA.
post #8 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

i'm sure they'd like to. Please explain how.



$100,000,000,000.00.
post #9 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by OriginalMacRat View Post

I would prefer a 20' MBA.

I'll raise your 20 foot MBA and ask for 20 yard one. Now that would be some laptop.

Mac Pro, 8 Core, 32 GB RAM, nVidia GTX 285 1 GB, 2 TB storage, 240 GB OWC Mercury Extreme SSD, 30'' Cinema Display, 27'' iMac, 24'' iMac, 17'' MBP, 13'' MBP, 32 GB iPhone 4, 64 GB iPad 3

Reply

Mac Pro, 8 Core, 32 GB RAM, nVidia GTX 285 1 GB, 2 TB storage, 240 GB OWC Mercury Extreme SSD, 30'' Cinema Display, 27'' iMac, 24'' iMac, 17'' MBP, 13'' MBP, 32 GB iPhone 4, 64 GB iPad 3

Reply
post #10 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I love how an anonymous person with no knowledge of Intel's inside information can make a statement like that.

Please provide evidence for your claims.



I'm sure they'd like to. Please explain how.

AMD failed to provide parts that met Apple's requirements. ARM is years from offering products with the performance Apple needs. So what's your solution?

You're speculating on AMD.

Now this conference will be very interesting: http://www.itproportal.com/2012/02/1...latform-forum/



Quote:
Samsung Electronics, IBM And Global Foundries To Showcase Technological Advances At Common Platform Forum

Common Platform Technology Forum 2012: http://www.commonplatform.com/tf2012/

This year's Common Platform Technologies Forum will see Samsung Electronics, IBM and Global Foundries showcase a selection of their finest future silicon technologies, with the forum to take place at the Santa Clara Convention Center on March 14th.

The three companies have collaborated to develop Common Platform technology - described by IBM officials as the world's biggest chip-making consortium. Samsung, IBM and Global Foundries will also be addressing next-generation semiconductor innovations that cover topics including 14-, 20- and 28-nanometre processes as well as various innovations that are beyond 14nm plus 450mm wafer manufacturing.

General manager of IBM's microelectronics division, Michael Cadigan, explained: "The Common Platform alliance is built on an unmatched legacy of invention and deep commitment to research and development from IBM," as reported by Tech Week Europe UK.

Samsung Electronics, IBM and Global Foundries as well as more than 20 other technology outfits are the driving forces behind these new technologies which are likely to revolutionise the industry in a completely new direction.

The soon to be held Forum will have keynote addresses made by industry leaders as well as presentations to be delivered by Common Platform partners' managements and senior members from a wide range of technical teams .

KEYNOTE SPEAKERS:

http://www.commonplatform.com/tf2012/agenda.asp
  • Dr. Gary Patton, Vice President of Semiconductor Research & Development Center, IBM
  • Gregg Bartlett, Chief Technology Officer, GLOBALFOUNDRIES
  • Dr. Jong Shik Yoon, Senior VP of Semiconductor R&D, Samsung
  • Simon Segars, EVP and General Manager, Physical IP Division, ARM
post #11 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

That's an abslute pile of conjecture. Sorry, but Intel's 22nm is the best they've got. They have research, like AMD and others with a goal of targeting 11nm within 12-18 months for production, but not now.

I think you mean 14 nm. The drop is always 1/3 of the prior size because when this is squared to make an area it reduces size by 1/2. So 32 nm went to 22nm and then 14 and then 10. A jump to 11 would effectively skip a whole process node.
post #12 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario View Post

I'll raise your 20 foot MBA and ask for 20 yard one. Now that would be some laptop.

Like this?
post #13 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

$100,000,000,000.00.

$100 billion, are you suggesting Apple is saving up to buy Intel?

Imagine the fear and furore from the rest of the PC industry!

I don't think such a move will make it past the regulators.
post #14 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post

Like this?

Sure, that's the 20 footer.

You'd have to get some neighborhood kids to help you type stuff out on a 20-yarder.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #15 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiA View Post

$100 billion, are you suggesting Apple is saving up to buy Intel?

No. Intel is beholden to Apple's competitors.
post #16 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

How long is Apple going to be at the mercy of Intel? Intel makes it possible for all the crapboxes to be built. Intel has started to make Ultrabook chips, and now is going to delay Apple from giving us new Macbooks?

Intel is a boat anchor. apple needs to be free of their underhanded tactics.


You and your boat anchors. You don't even know what a boat anchor IS! : ) Intel has some leverage here and is applying it, as would Apple. You do know that Apple very nearly went with AMD in 2011 for the Airs and decided against it? Who would you recommend for the chips if not Intel or AMD? Who currently supplying major computers is capable of producing 25% of a world run of any Apple line?

A boat anchor? You have no idea.
post #17 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

No. Intel is beholden to Apple's competitors.

Oh jeez. Intel is happily the tail wagging the dogs, all of them. Apple's "competitors" are more beholden to Intel, breathlessly awaiting new chips every time around, same as Apple, than Intel is to them or anyone. And now that AMD publicly failed the Apple test Intel can do whatever the heck they please, same as Apple or anyone does.

Intel is hardly "beholden" to anyone.
post #18 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd View Post

Oh jeez. Intel is happily the tail wagging the dogs, all of them.

Are you saying that Apple is one of the dogs, and is getting wagged by Intel?

Is that the best possible position for Apple to be in?
post #19 of 52
I love some of the comments here Intel has a 'level playing field' when it comes to top tier OEM's (Apple, HP, Dell, etc.) getting access to their latest/greatest microprocessors. Only Intel knows the reason for Ivy Bridge delays. Everything I've read says systems, with Ivy Bridge, will be shipping sometime in June...
post #20 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiA View Post

$100 billion, are you suggesting Apple is saving up to buy Intel?

Imagine the fear and furore from the rest of the PC industry!

I don't think such a move will make it past the regulators.

I wonder what would happen if they bought AMD? Apple management style and corporate philosophy should be able to turn them into a serious threat to Intel. All the pieces are there, they just need to be brought into the proper focus. You know, sort of like the MP3 player market, the smartphone market, the netbook market...
post #21 of 52
"It was said the Ivy Bridge-powered notebooks would feature a Retina Display-quality screen resolution of 2,880 by 1,800 pixels, exactly twice that of the 1,440-by-900 display currently found on the 15-inch MacBook Pro."

Actually, twice the width AND twice the height mean that the diaplay will be exactly four times the number of pixels.
post #22 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by donkoller View Post

Actually, twice the width AND twice the height mean that the diaplay will be exactly four times the number of pixels.

STOP IT.

The article is not wrong. You are not wrong. PLEASE understand this. It certainly wasn't worth breaking your eight year vow of silence to erroneously correct.

Also, who the frick actually thought we'd be getting retina Macs this early? No way.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #23 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

It certainly wasn't worth breaking your eight year vow of silence to erroneously correct.

2004 and one comment? Is he posting from a monastery?
post #24 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

2004 and one comment? Is he posting from a monastery?

ISTM that there are many, many accounts on AI that are held in reserve by some people. Are they the same person?
post #25 of 52
Does this delay have any bearing on the pending iMac release?
post #26 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedrick View Post

Does this delay have any bearing on the pending iMac release?

Since we never had a launch date for Ivy Bridge desktop chips and never expected it earlier than summer, I'd imagine those are pushed back, too.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #27 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Since we never had a launch date for Ivy Bridge desktop chips and never expected it earlier than summer, I'd imagine those are pushed back, too.

Afraid of that -- thanks. (Guess it give me more time to save up!)
post #28 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

Are you saying that Apple is one of the dogs, and is getting wagged by Intel?

Is that the best possible position for Apple to be in?


That's like saying wouldn't GM be in a better position if they made their tires and had their own steel mills and refined their own gas. Talk about boat anchors.

There are exactly two possible sources of chips for Apple in 2012, AMD and Intel. What is your solution? Apple making their own chips is the complete polar opposite approach of their ascent to uber profitability. And you called Macs boat anchors?
post #29 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post

I wonder what would happen if they bought AMD?....

They'd just be pissing away money on a dying company.

AMD don't fabricate chips any more. Global Foundry does this for them. AMD designs generally have been a poor match for the computers Apple make. LLano may be an exception, we don't really now. But the fabrication deficiencies, poor yields and lagging Intel as far as shrinking the process, that have plagued AMD would still continue even if Apple bought them.
post #30 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post

I wonder what would happen if they bought AMD? Apple management style and corporate philosophy should be able to turn them into a serious threat to Intel. All the pieces are there, they just need to be brought into the proper focus.

Apple focuses on making excellent consumer electronics, not on supplying processors and chipsets to competitors.

Apple with a fraction of its cash could have purchased AMD yesterday if it led to greater Apple products.

AMD allegedly had an opportunity to impress Apple last year and they blew it, they failed to deliver a better product.

Some posters seem to have already forgotten why Apple switched to x86 in the first place, it was because neither IBM nor Motorola could deliver enough suitable and competitive chips for Apple's computers.

None of the people moaning about Intel can point to any credible, superior alternatives.
post #31 of 52
i am more excited about the new ipad than the new macbooks.
with apps like iTeleport, i am finding myself using my Mac less and less everyday ;-)
post #32 of 52
I just hope they release new MacPro's soon, I need to replace 4 of them that are feeling their age.
post #33 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd View Post

That's like saying wouldn't GM be in a better position if they made their tires and had their own steel mills and refined their own gas. Talk about boat anchors.

If GM products were held up by tires, steel or gas, then it might be an equivalent.

As of now, that would be senseless.
post #34 of 52
Will you guys EVER learn math?
A retina display that has double the dpi has FOUR TIMES THE RESOLUTION, not double the resolution, because resolution goes by the square. e.g. You have a 1 by 1 square pixel and now that will become a 2 by 2 square if you double the dpi; but a 2 by 2 contains 4 pixels while a 1 by 1 contains 1 pixel; as you see the resolution, i.e. pixel count is quadrupled not doubled.
As you can see, this can be solved without the use of advanced math; yet AI gets this CONSISTENTLY WRONG. Would the editors please take note?
post #35 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

Will you guys EVER learn math?
A retina display that has double the dpi has FOUR TIMES THE RESOLUTION, not double the resolution

Twice the resolution = four times the pixels.

Super Hi-Vision, for example, has four times the resolution and 16 times the pixels as 1080p. Get it?

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #36 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by zunx View Post

This has nothing to do with manufacturing process issues. Intel could go straight to 11 nm and beyond (nanotechnology) if they wanted right now. It is just milking the process as much as possible.

Sometimes you read a thread and you see something so utterly stupid that you just want to become a hermit away from all the rest of humanity.

This is nearly one of those times.
post #37 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by karmadave View Post

Only Intel knows the reason for Ivy Bridge delays.

Problems with the 22nm process:

"Maloney attributes the "adjustment" to "the new manufacturing process needed to make the smaller chips."
post #38 of 52
The Mac accounts for an increasingly smaller percentage of Apple's revenue each year so why waste money buying Intel or AMD. Apple probably wouldn't get the chips any sooner anyway.

Any such takeover would almost certainly be blocked by the US and EU regulators as being anti-competitive.
post #39 of 52
From Forbes.com:

I reached out to Intel this morning and received the same feedback. Jon Carvill, at Intel Media Relations, reiterated via email that the reports of an eight week delay were inaccurate and that the schedule had only been impacted a few weeks. He went on to say that they were on track with their launch guidance to be in-market for spring and they expected to ship 50% more units of Ivy Bridge in the first two quarter of production as compared to Sandy Bridge parts.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickm...ase-calm-down/

And a few other blogs are updating their reports (well, re-reports) consistent to this timeline.
post #40 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hattig View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by zunx

This has nothing to do with manufacturing process issues. Intel could go straight to 11 nm and beyond (nanotechnology) if they wanted right now. It is just milking the process as much as possible.

Sometimes you read a thread and you see something so utterly stupid that you just want to become a hermit away from all the rest of humanity.

This is nearly one of those times.

I second that. The technology to profitably mass-produce chips at smaller feature sizes than 22 nm simply does not exist yet. It's all still experimental. That Intel is even managing to produce at 22 nm can almost be called a miracle (and considering these delays, apparently they aren't actually managing it all that well, at least not yet).

Source: my employer, who makes about 80% of the optical lithography gear used by foundries and chip manufacturers around the world, including Intel.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Intel's Mac-bound Ivy Bridge CPUs expected to go on sale 8-10 weeks late