or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › MacBook Pro announcement may pave way for dual-core iBooks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MacBook Pro announcement may pave way for dual-core iBooks - Page 2

post #41 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by applewiz
I will NOT buy a Celeron ANYthing and do not recommend it to others. Celerons are crap processors IMHO. I only PRAY Apple never puts a Celeron in ANYthing they sell.

a celeron-m 4x0 in the ibook would make it a cheap, low-power and plenty fast machine. why would you not want that?
born to lose, live to win
Reply
born to lose, live to win
Reply
post #42 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
I didn't claim it was based on the Yonah. There's nothing particularly wrong with the current Dothan based Celeron M.

Well, nothing wrong with it apart from the fact that it doesn't support SSE3, and hence cannot run current builds of OS X without SSE3->SSE2 emulation (which is not entirely stable).

Apple could easily recompile OS X without SSE3 support, but if they were planning to use pre-Yonah chips then I don't see why they would require SSE3 on current builds.
post #43 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by Marlor
Well, nothing wrong with it apart from the fact that it doesn't support SSE3, and hence cannot run current builds of OS X without SSE3->SSE2 emulation (which is not entirely stable).

Apple could easily recompile OS X without SSE3 support, but if they were planning to use pre-Yonah chips then I don't see why they would require SSE3 on current builds.

That's peculiar. The dev docs all along have been saying not to rely on SSE3 being there. I suppose they could have changed their minds though when it got down to hardware being released and the newer OS builds.

Then again, they can change it again.

With the Celeron M 4xx series apparently delayed though, it does point at Apple using Core CPUs.
post #44 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by tubgirl
a celeron-m 4x0 in the ibook would make it a cheap, low-power and plenty fast machine. why would you not want that?

The Dothan Celeron M's have half the cache of a Pentium M, and lack enhanced SpeedStep. The lack of enhanced SpeedStep would only be a problem for users that leave their machine inactive for long periods of time while on batteries, since the Celeron M can't "deep sleep". The smaller L2 cache would only really hit power-users.

The Celeron M isn't really that bad a processor overall, but (as I mentioned in my previous post) Apple would have to remove the SSE3 requirement from OS X for it to be an option.

Edit: SSE3 is definitely a requirement of OS X itself. If you look at OSX86Project, there is all sorts of talk about patching kernels to map the SSE3 calls to SSE2 so that they can get OS X to run on their beige boxes.
post #45 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by Marlor
The Dothan Celeron M's have half the cache of a Pentium M, and lack enhanced SpeedStep. The lack of enhanced SpeedStep would only be a problem for users that leave their machine inactive for long periods of time while on batteries, since the Celeron M can't "deep sleep". The smaller L2 cache would only really hit power-users.

The Celeron M isn't really that bad a processor overall, but (as I mentioned in my previous post) Apple would have to remove the SSE3 requirement from OS X for it to be an option.

i agree. that's why i suggested a c-m 4xx which is based on core solo and do support sse3 and speedstep.
born to lose, live to win
Reply
born to lose, live to win
Reply
post #46 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
With the Celeron M 4xx series apparently delayed though, it does point at Apple using Core CPUs.

..and i'm quite sure we'll see these celerons in the intel 'ibooks' before summer.
born to lose, live to win
Reply
born to lose, live to win
Reply
post #47 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by tubgirl
..and i'm quite sure we'll see these celerons in the intel 'ibooks' before summer.

and i hope you're wrong

o-o, red iPod alert
alles sal reg kom
Reply
alles sal reg kom
Reply
post #48 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by Marlor
The Dothan Celeron M's have half the cache of a Pentium M, and lack enhanced SpeedStep. The lack of enhanced SpeedStep would only be a problem for users that leave their machine inactive for long periods of time while on batteries, since the Celeron M can't "deep sleep". The smaller L2 cache would only really hit power-users.

I think another was that the C-M FSB is slightly slower than what the P-M had.

On the tests I've seein, the smaller L2 only seems to have a marginal, practically unnoticable hit for the same clock P-M. Because the full-cache is 2M, C-M is 1M, the extra didn't seem to help many programs any more than a few percent. The only real pain that made it less desirable was the lack of good power management features.
post #49 of 74
atleast for the marketing strategy (INTEL SWITCH), i do not see Pentium-M NOT happening in MacBook/Mac Mini... i wish that way too...

Nov '09 | iMac 21.5" C2D 3.06 Ghz | Intel 330 240GB SSD | ATI

Sep '12| Toshiba 14" 1366 x 768! | i5 3rd Gen 6GB| Intel x25-m 120GB SSD | Win 7|  Viewsonic VX2255wmb 22" LCD
iPhone 4S| iPad 2 wifi

Reply

Nov '09 | iMac 21.5" C2D 3.06 Ghz | Intel 330 240GB SSD | ATI

Sep '12| Toshiba 14" 1366 x 768! | i5 3rd Gen 6GB| Intel x25-m 120GB SSD | Win 7|  Viewsonic VX2255wmb 22" LCD
iPhone 4S| iPad 2 wifi

Reply
post #50 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by AppleInsider
Apple's announcement today that it has dropped the 1.67GHz Intel Core Duo processor from its professional MacBook Pro line -- in favor of using faster chips -- presents the possibility that the company may now adopt that low-end 1.67GHz dual-core processor for use in its forthcoming consumer iBook notebooks.


Here's a quandry - why has Apple delayed all or virtually orders of the MBP? I can't believe Apple is delaying all preorders just so they could give the buyers a free upgrade. Why is it everybody is speculating on the ibook but no questioning of what the heck is going on with the MBP?
post #51 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by dutch pear
Well, my brand new 20" core duo iMac shure feels and operates like a prime time machine to me 8)

And hope to heaven nothing goes wrong with it either as well as a lack of available software being your issue. What utility you going to use to defrag or repair your OS? Also next year they'll get MUCH faster as well as the software being there for the most part.......Early adopters and the bleeding edge...no thanks. Not Interested. Yet.
Impossible is a word found only in the dictionary of fools: Napoleon Bonaparte
Reply
Impossible is a word found only in the dictionary of fools: Napoleon Bonaparte
Reply
post #52 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by DVD_Junkie
I can't believe Apple is delaying all preorders just so they could give the buyers a free upgrade.

Neither is anyone else.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #53 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by applewiz
And hope to heaven nothing goes wrong with it either as well as a lack of available software being your issue. What utility you going to use to defrag or repair your OS? Also next year they'll get MUCH faster as well as the software being there for the most part.......Early adopters and the bleeding edge...no thanks. Not Interested. Yet.

Defrag? Why?

As for repairs, is there a reason that those programs can't run in Rosetta? As long as it isn't a CPU-heavy and often used program, Rosetta performance should be good enough.
post #54 of 74
My guess: The Intel iMac was rolling off the assembly lines and ate all the chips Apple could get their hands on. They had assumed that they could also feed the MacBook Pro line when it finally was up running.

But the only way Intel could deliver was to spread it over three (and a half) different speeds and thus pre-deliver update.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #55 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by Anders
My guess: The Intel iMac was rolling off the assembly lines and ate all the chips Apple could get their hands on. They had assumed that they could also feed the MacBook Pro line when it finally was up running.

But the only way Intel could deliver was to spread it over three (and a half) different speeds and thus pre-deliver update.

FYI the Intel iMac has no 1.67GHz processors, so why did Apple cancel all the 1.67GHz MBP orders?
post #56 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by DVD_Junkie
FYI the Intel iMac has no 1.67GHz processors, so why did Apple cancel all the 1.67GHz MBP orders?

Because those are being stockpiled (and dropshipped to assembly plants) for the forthcoming 13.3" widescreen MacBooks (aka iBook & 12" PowerBook replacement) & Mac mini updates...?!?
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #57 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by ryanh
The 1.6 Core Duo will be used in a 13.3" MacBook Pro that will effectively replace the 12" PowerBook G4.

The Core Solo's will still be used in iBooks [MacBooks?] and probably the mac mini's until 2 Rev's down the road or so. By that time there will be a big enough disparity between the the MacBook Pros and the consumer based notebooks.

How do you know? Are you making those decisions for Apple?

God, I hate it when people spew opinions like they're fact.
post #58 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by applewiz
And hope to heaven nothing goes wrong with it either as well as a lack of available software being your issue. What utility you going to use to defrag or repair your OS? Also next year they'll get MUCH faster as well as the software being there for the most part.......Early adopters and the bleeding edge...no thanks. Not Interested. Yet.

Defrag - not necessary
lack of software - all software I want is available as a UB apart from aperture
repair the OS - with the OSx install disk that came with my iMac. I'm going to do regular disk-backups on an external harddisk also
next year much faster - sure, when is this not the case??? it is in every case bleeding fast compared to my athlon 1400 xp POS it replaces
Bleeding edge - well thusfar it just works

I'm pretty happy thusfar!
post #59 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by MacRonin
Because those are being stockpiled (and dropshipped to assembly plants) for the forthcoming 13.3" widescreen MacBooks (aka iBook & 12" PowerBook replacement) & Mac mini updates...?!?

Yes grasshopper.

Methinks a Core Solo iBook replacement will be whereas Core Duo iBooks would be !
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
post #60 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by minderbinder
Funny, this article basically says what I've been saying in postings for the last month.

It just makes sense, people. Who is going to pay $1299 for an ibook with HALF the performance of a $1499 macbook?

Show me a $1499 macbook and i'll buy it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleinsider vBulletin Message

You have been banned for the following reason:
Three personal attacks in one post. Congratulations.
Date the ban will be lifted:...
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleinsider vBulletin Message

You have been banned for the following reason:
Three personal attacks in one post. Congratulations.
Date the ban will be lifted:...
Reply
post #61 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by Xool
Yes grasshopper.

Methinks a Core Solo iBook replacement will be whereas Core Duo iBooks would be !

No weedhopper, you are too slow to snatch pebble from palm...

Me, I really want a nice little low voltage Core Duo tablet from Apple...

I see room for 3 sizes:

An 8.x" model, for the PDA/Pocket PC (aka; admins, geeks & medical staff) niche...

A sweet 13.3" model for the educational & consumer markets...

And an especially sweet model for the graphics pros, probably a nice 17.x" model...

Everything should be widescreen...

;^p
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #62 of 74
well, if apple puts a core duo in the ibook, how are they going to differentiate the ibook and the macbook pro 12"/13"/whatever-inch...?
are they going to resort to crippling the ibook with silly hacks this time around too?

why not let a single core cpu, like the core solo (or even the oh-no-dont-go-there-'cus-i-had-a-compaq-wintel-with-a-similar-named-cpu-back-in-the-nineties celeron-m?!) , to be the lacking feature in the consumer laptop differenting it from the 'pro' laptop?
(i think it would be nice having actual useful features, like dvi-out with spanning, without having to pay $500+ more just for that...)
born to lose, live to win
Reply
born to lose, live to win
Reply
post #63 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by tubgirl
well, if apple puts a core duo in the ibook, how are they going to differentiate the ibook and the macbook pro 12"/13"/whatever-inch...?
are they going to resort to crippling the ibook with silly hacks this time around too?

why not let a single core cpu, like the core solo (or even the oh-no-dont-go-there-'cus-i-had-a-compaq-wintel-with-a-similar-named-cpu-back-in-the-nineties celeron-m?!) , to be the lacking feature in the consumer laptop differenting it from the 'pro' laptop?
(i think it would be nice having actual useful features, like dvi-out with spanning, without having to pay $500+ more just for that...)

Well celeron makes sense from a marketing and economic standpoint. They are a cheaper and would give the pro models a decisive performance advantage over the iBook. However most of us were not looking forward to the Intel transition so that we could get Macs with celeron chips. Not trying to sound so to harsh, but is this(celeron chips) the part of the Intel roadmap that is supposed to be better than ppc chips? It very well may be, but most observers were thinking Yonah, Merom, and Conroe.
post #64 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by backtomac
Yonah

sigh, we have been through this a hundred times before...

THE CELERON-M 4XX IS A YONAH BASED CHIP!!!


...look what you made me do, caps and all...


edit: basically, what i've been trying to say altrough this thread is that celeron-m doesnt suck just because it's namned 'celeron-something', in fact it's a very capable, modern and cost-effective chip.

edit2: doh
born to lose, live to win
Reply
born to lose, live to win
Reply
post #65 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by tubgirl
sigh, we have been through this a hundred times before...

THE CELERON-M 4XX IS A YONAH BASED CHIP!!!


...look what you made me do, caps and all...


edit: basically, what i've been trying to say altrough this thread is that celeron-m doesnt suck just because it's namned 'celeron-something', in fact it's a very capable, modern and cost-effective chip.

edit2: doh

You are probably more knowledgable on this topic than I am but I thought that celeron m and Yonah chips were derived from the pentium m line. The celeron m being 'crippled' compared to the pentium m while the Yonah is enhanced. Whats the performance of a celeron m compared to a core solo and duo?
post #66 of 74
[(or even the oh-no-dont-go-there-'cus-i-had-a-compaq-wintel-with-a-similar-named-cpu-back-in-the-nineties celeron-m?!) , [/B][/QUOTE]

Man that name has some negative connotations. If it is a good chip then they should change the name. It's like Mercedes coming out with a new model and calling it the pinto.
post #67 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by backtomac
You are probably more knowledgable on this topic than I am but I thought that celeron m and Yonah chips were derived from the pentium m line. The celeron m being 'crippled' compared to the pentium m while the Yonah is enhanced. Whats the performance of a celeron m compared to a core solo and duo?

The current Celeron M 3xx series is based on the 90nm Pentium M Dothan and has a 1MB L2 cache and speeds up to 1.6Ghz. It doesn't support some of the power saving functions of the Pentium M or Core. It has a 400Mhz FSB. There's a 1.7Ghz part expected around now.

The Celeron M 4xx series is based on the 65nm Core Solo running up to 1.83Ghz with a 533Mhz FSB and I'd guess a 1MB L2 cache still. The Core Solo has 2MB and a 667Mhz bus. I don't know if it'll support the same SpeedStep power saving technology.

That makes the Celeron M 4xx series pretty much a dead ringer for what was the previous Pentium M but in 65nm and therefore lower power and supporting SSE3.

People should really get it out of their heads that Celeron = bad. A 1.6Ghz Celeron M 4xx with a 533Mhz FSB and 1MB cache would blow away the old G4 models.
post #68 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by backtomac

Man that name has some negative connotations. If it is a good chip then they should change the name. It's like Mercedes coming out with a new model and calling it the pinto. [/B]

Back in the day, the hottest BeOS rig you could build was a dual 366Mhz Mendocino Celeron overclocked to 550Mhz on an ABIT BP6 motherboard. Essentially they were identical to the Pentium II but with less cache. For some reason Intel slipped up with their chip protection and didn't switch off the SMP capability on that batch of Celerons so you could run two and clock them up reliably by switching from a 66Mhz to 100Mhz FSB. I've still got my Dual Celeron box which has been running overclocked to 550Mhz for almost 7 years now.

It's running Linux now though I might put BeOS back on for nostalgia's sake.

The first Celerons however were a complete joke as they had no L2 cache at all. Intel seemed to overcompensate for their mistake with the Mendocino to the point where the performance was almost identical to the Pentium II but you could buy a 366Mhz CPU for about $50.
post #69 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by MacRonin

Me, I really want a nice little low voltage Core Duo tablet from Apple...

I see room for 3 sizes:

An 8.x" model, for the PDA/Pocket PC (aka; admins, geeks & medical staff) niche...

That size isn't pocket anything except for the cargo pants set. I'd love a tablet computer, but I can't justify the additional cost vs. a regular notebook. I hope Apple can revitalize the market segment, but it still seems to be a niche.
post #70 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by minderbinder
Funny, this article basically says what I've been saying in postings for the last month.

It just makes sense, people. Who is going to pay $1299 for an ibook with HALF the performance of a $1499 macbook?

You are following the assumtion that computer performance increase is linear with the number of processors when it simply isn't the case.

I don't understand why some Mac fans were surprised that the dual core iMacs weren't 2x faster than the previous single processor revision, especially given that many of the programs in the tests such as what Macworld used scales very poorly with added processors.
post #71 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
I don't know if it'll support the same SpeedStep power saving technology.

afaik, it does.
without speedstep i would argue it's not a good chip for the ibook.

benchmarking of the pentium-m (2mb cache) and the celeron-m (1mb cache) (both dothan based) show there's almost no difference in real-world performance at equal clockspeeds.
i think there would be a similar relationship between a yonah-based celeron-m and core solo.
born to lose, live to win
Reply
born to lose, live to win
Reply
post #72 of 74
Here's my logic:
Apple, just like most other companies, seems to spread its products out over price points. For example, the ipod prices are 69, 99, 149, 199, 249, 299, and 399. With the current MacBooks, Apple does not have anything under the $1999 mark. To my way of thinking, Apple will need to spread out its products over this price range, which means we can expect portables at least at about $1499 and $999, and probably lower and higher. Given Apple's iPod success at the low end, they might want to offer iBooks at prices lower than $999.

My point is that Apple has plenty of price point room to offer anything it wants among what people are guessing, so right now, we don't have enough information to make very informed guesses. What we do know is that just about anything is possible, including a 13" MacBook Pro with a 2 Ghz processor and a $1799 price point, or an iBook with the cheapest single core chip, 40 gb HD, CDRW-DVD drive for $799. Keep in mind that it would still be faster than the current iBook on UB apps.
post #73 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
The current Celeron M 3xx series is based on the 90nm Pentium M Dothan and has a 1MB L2 cache and speeds up to 1.6Ghz. It doesn't support some of the power saving functions of the Pentium M or Core. It has a 400Mhz FSB. There's a 1.7Ghz part expected around now.

The Celeron M 4xx series is based on the 65nm Core Solo running up to 1.83Ghz with a 533Mhz FSB and I'd guess a 1MB L2 cache still. The Core Solo has 2MB and a 667Mhz bus. I don't know if it'll support the same SpeedStep power saving technology.

That makes the Celeron M 4xx series pretty much a dead ringer for what was the previous Pentium M but in 65nm and therefore lower power and supporting SSE3.

People should really get it out of their heads that Celeron = bad. A 1.6Ghz Celeron M 4xx with a 533Mhz FSB and 1MB cache would blow away the old G4 models.

Thanks for the info. Guess I'm going to have to open up my mind to the celeron m.
post #74 of 74
Quote:
Originally posted by backtomac
Thanks for the info. Guess I'm going to have to open up my mind to the celeron m.

dont feel too bad about it, almost everyone reacts the same way...

maybe intel will change the name of it, now that it's being delayed and all?

core celeron, core lite, core banana, just 'intel core'...? i dont know..
born to lose, live to win
Reply
born to lose, live to win
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › MacBook Pro announcement may pave way for dual-core iBooks