You could be right. I honestly don't know for sure, but I could imagine Apple getting a good deal for clearing out Intel stock, plus, since they use these chips in other notebooks there might be some sort of discount.
I really think that it's not that big of a difference any how... If it did, I selfishly hope Apple takes the cheaper option, which ever it may be.
I agree on the price if everything else was equal. I'm not about having the latest marketing term in my hands if it offers no real performance benefit.
Yeah, get back to me when you know the price instead of shooting off your mouth about how the Air costs too much for the chips it has in it without even knowing the price.
I think you are grossly underestimating how important decent graphics capabilities are to even the most basic computing tasks. Hardware acceleration of flash is huge in itself, regardless of how powerful the CPU is, it will be less efficient than a GPU designed for it. It not a coincidence that there was a jump in battery life when Apple started using Nvidia integrated graphics.
If you want better CPU's you should be arguing for AMD chips because they still offer respectable integrated graphics. I think AMD chips for all macs with integrated graphics and i5/i7 chips for macs with discreet graphics (which is already the case) is the only way that Apple can move forward. Going to an ix chip and Intel integrated graphics would be a downgrade in many ways. Why do you think Intel blocked Nvidia from providing an integrated graphics solution for ix processors? They simply can't compete.
if you took the time to read you would have noticed i said macbook pro. tsk, tsk.
Comments
Open iChat
Click File ... Go To Chat Room
Type
"appleinsider" (no quotes)
You could be right. I honestly don't know for sure, but I could imagine Apple getting a good deal for clearing out Intel stock, plus, since they use these chips in other notebooks there might be some sort of discount.
I really think that it's not that big of a difference any how... If it did, I selfishly hope Apple takes the cheaper option, which ever it may be.
I agree on the price if everything else was equal. I'm not about having the latest marketing term in my hands if it offers no real performance benefit.
Yeah, get back to me when you know the price instead of shooting off your mouth about how the Air costs too much for the chips it has in it without even knowing the price.
I think you are grossly underestimating how important decent graphics capabilities are to even the most basic computing tasks. Hardware acceleration of flash is huge in itself, regardless of how powerful the CPU is, it will be less efficient than a GPU designed for it. It not a coincidence that there was a jump in battery life when Apple started using Nvidia integrated graphics.
If you want better CPU's you should be arguing for AMD chips because they still offer respectable integrated graphics. I think AMD chips for all macs with integrated graphics and i5/i7 chips for macs with discreet graphics (which is already the case) is the only way that Apple can move forward. Going to an ix chip and Intel integrated graphics would be a downgrade in many ways. Why do you think Intel blocked Nvidia from providing an integrated graphics solution for ix processors? They simply can't compete.
if you took the time to read you would have noticed i said macbook pro. tsk, tsk.