Intel's 'Core M' chip announcement suggests Broadwell-based MacBook Pros won't arrive until 2015

1235

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 112
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,791member
    jexus wrote: »
    Yes, this is a huge problem. Intel won't customize chips for anyone but their largest clients, and even then, they seem to have pretty stingy limits.
    The industry will leave them behind if they don't get their head out of the sand.
    As for ARM, I see this as another potential way for AMD to encroach in on Intel in the mac line. As AMD is pretty open to customization of IP, and most importantly, access to some beefy solutions(Both X86 and ARM).
    I was kinda hoping for an AMD chip in the Mini as that would be the ideal product for the chip.
    I don't know how well the current PowerVR graphics in Apple's mobile chips perform in openCL benchmarks, but I do know that AMD's GCN arch(which will be integrated into K12) is a compute monster. Integrating those with Apple's current ARM design IMO may yield potential for interesting benefits on the mac side.
    It is AMDs superior integrated GPUs that has me wanting them in a Mini. Admittedly Intel is catching up so it is more of a mixed bag now.
    If there is one thing I imagine apple would be happy to continue to push, OpenCL is one of my votes.  At least mobile wise as per the above anyway. Though I could easily see Apple just sticking with PowerVR mobile anyway, though I'm curious as to whether they'll reconsider AMD post Zen for the AIO Macs.
    Opencl is nice but I find that a lot of people don't understand it and have misplaced expectations. Applied right it is a massive advantage though.
    Of course the obvious problem would still be supply. I do remember reading that Apple was strongly considering AMD's Llano chips a few years back but ultimately backed out because AMD couldn't supply the chips to meet Apple's demands quantitive wise. They would surely have improved since then yield wise?
    I'm not sure how much truth there was in that rumor. However it does look like Global has over come most of their manufacturing problems.
    I used to believe that Intel Mobile had a shot, but I'm only ever seeing the same pattern. Outside of Windows Tablets, Intel is basically non existent and the performance of their chips on other platforms(Ala android) simply isn't enough to justify their non subsidy premiums.
    They most certainly need to get Broadwell out in a way that is suitable for the mass market. I really don't think they have a grip on the changing industry. I just hope they don't turn into the Kodak of the electronics world.
  • Reply 82 of 112
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,791member
    frank777 wrote: »
    If this innovation is truly performance-based and not simply meant to turn computers into disposable commodities to be replaced every three years, shouldn't it begin with the Pro and not the Mini? Why can I replace the RAM in a Pro and not a Mini?
    You do realize they are completely different machines servicing different user bases.

    In any event don't believe me, research what is happening at Intel and other manufactures. Consider how slow RAM is today compared the internal workings of a CPU.
    Did making the Mini's RAM non-upgradable this year make it significantly faster?
    Nope but it did allow Apple to implement LPDDR 3 RAM.
  • Reply 83 of 112
    jexusjexus Posts: 373member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post







    It is AMDs superior integrated GPUs that has me wanting them in a Mini. Admittedly Intel is catching up so it is more of a mixed bag now.

    I'll admit I was fairly impressed with Intel's iGPU advancements, having access to Nvidia's Graphics IP as a baseline of sorts for 3 years and will continue to have it for another 3 at least helps a lot.

    Quote:


    They most certainly need to get Broadwell out in a way that is suitable for the mass market. I really don't think they have a grip on the changing industry. I just hope they don't turn into the Kodak of the electronics world. 


    Honestly if they can't crank out Broadwell before the end of Q1, I think they should just kill the chip and push straight for Skylake in 2H 2015.

  • Reply 84 of 112
    shsfshsf Posts: 302member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Misa View Post





    No no no.



    What we need is a Mini, based on the highest-performing laptop chip, because the entire point of the Mini is for it to be quiet. I have two of them and I can only make the cooling in them engage by either running Prime95 or some of the various CPU-burning @HOME projects.



    The missing piece of the puzzle is that Apple doesn't have something between the Mini and the Mac Pro that isn't a iMac with a upgradable GPU.



    Literately, there is nothing that a PCIe graphics card can be put in. But to stick a 600$ video card in a box requires something 10 times larger than a Mac Mini.



    You can always add a tb external gpu, if I get the point of the post. :)

  • Reply 85 of 112
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,791member
    jexus wrote: »
    I'll admit I was fairly impressed with Intel's iGPU advancements, having access to Nvidia's Graphics IP as a baseline of sorts for 3 years and will continue to have it for another 3 at least helps a lot.
    That is a reference to Inels settlement with NVidia, I'm not sure how much actually NVidia tech is in Intels GPUs though. However the fact remains Intels GPUs went from being useless to good enough for modest needs fairly quickly. From my perspective Intels GPUs have made the AIR Mac Books viable and in the case of the new Mini offer a big step forward.

    Honestly if they can't crank out Broadwell before the end of Q1, I think they should just kill the chip and push straight for Skylake in 2H 2015.

    Yep. Unfortunately we haven't seen Intel make these drastic decisions in the past. History seems to indicate that we could get saddled with what ever they have for Broadwell all of 2015. We can only hope that this hi paves AMD the opening they need to at least come close to Intels CPU figures. Even if it doesn't matter much these days it is the CPU performance figures that many look at when it comes to judging system value. It shouldn't t be impossible for AMD to squeeze out a large bump in CPU performance if they get their ducks all in a row.
  • Reply 86 of 112
    jexusjexus Posts: 373member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post



    Yep. Unfortunately we haven't seen Intel make these drastic decisions in the past. History seems to indicate that we could get saddled with what ever they have for Broadwell all of 2015. We can only hope that this hi paves AMD the opening they need to at least come close to Intels CPU figures. Even if it doesn't matter much these days it is the CPU performance figures that many look at when it comes to judging system value. It shouldn't t be impossible for AMD to squeeze out a large bump in CPU performance if they get their ducks all in a row.

    AMD will probably give it a pretty good go with their chances. The post Carrizo designs after all will be rather high frequency. However, their ace in the hole, and thus what they're betting on is HSA. When AMD said earlier this year it was done competing with Intel in the high end processor space, I was disappointed. Of course, looking at it now I'm wondering if I simply read the statement wrong. AMD may not want to push it's CPU's head to head with intel directly, but it can leverage it's GPU IP to complement that performance via HSA. No longer would the CPU and GPU be working independently but now together. It would be a huge boon to their chip's performance.

     

    Again, isn't to say that they won't push CPU performance.

  • Reply 87 of 112
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,791member
    jexus wrote: »
    AMD will probably give it a pretty good go with their chances. The post Carrizo designs after all will be rather high frequency.
    They will have to do more than pump up the clock rate. Some of AMD's chips already run at rather high clock rates. The need to boost IPC.
    However, their ace in the hole, and thus what they're betting on is HSA.
    HSA is great for people that understand the limitations imposed by a GPU architecture. Many have a tendency to see it as a way to run any code that is suitable for the CPU. It isn't but HSA is very useful.
    When AMD said earlier this year it was done competing with Intel in the high end processor space, I was disappointed.
    I didn't hear that statement. Sounds interesting though as I see the future being a world of many core chips where the individual core performance isn't what is important.
    Of course, looking at it now I'm wondering if I simply read the statement wrong. AMD may not want to push it's CPU's head to head with intel directly,
    Realize that AMD has new leadership, that leadership has a string technical back ground. I would suspect that they would take it personally if AMD didn't at least try to better CPU performance. Given that it is rather foolish these days to rate a machines performance on what a single core can do for you. A modern operating system these days supports multiple processes and usually threading models for the apps themselves. It is pretty easy these days for the average user to keep multiple cores active.
    but it can leverage it's GPU IP to complement that performance via HSA.
    Again what a GPU can do for you economically is tied to its architecture. HSA will not always accelerate an app. That being said I do believe the importance of a GPU in a system is underestimated.
    No longer would the CPU and GPU be working independently but now together. It would be a huge boon to their chip's performance.
    Intel will be going down a similar path. By the way I'm not trying to dismiss HSA, but rather trying to temper the expectations of the less technically inclined out there. When the code base (or the problem) fits the architecture of of a GPU, the CPU doesn't stand a chance. We can already see the dramatic difference in performance with some apps.
    Again, isn't to say that they won't push CPU performance.
    It is possible that they may have been after more balanced designs. One big problem with modern chips is the available bandwidth to RAM. It is an area ripe for improvements.
  • Reply 88 of 112
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,791member
    I'm not a big fan of fool.com but they have an interesting piece here: http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/11/24/intel-corporation-14-nanometer-woes-pressure-2015.aspx. I take that reporting to indicate that 14nm is now production ready so I expecting Broadwell in early 2015. skyLake also seems to still be planned for 2015 but the details of what are planned have not been presented.

    So maybe we have something to look forward too in early 2015, ideally new MBPs. Broadwell ought to be really nice in the 13" MBP if they focus on GPU performance.
  • Reply 89 of 112
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,791member
    Here is a tiny bit more on Intels and Samsungs 14 nm. Processes. http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/12/01/intel-corporations-14-nanometer-process-is-denser.aspx Of course you still have to have shipping product to be able to judge the value in the tech. What is most interesting is just how close Samsung is to Intel these days. I would not be surprised at all to see Apple deliver an A series chip built on a 14/16 nm process in 2015.
  • Reply 90 of 112
    thttht Posts: 3,209member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post



    I'm not a big fan of fool.com but they have an interesting piece here: http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/11/24/intel-corporation-14-nanometer-woes-pressure-2015.aspx. I take that reporting to indicate that 14nm is now production ready so I expecting Broadwell in early 2015. skyLake also seems to still be planned for 2015 but the details of what are planned have not been presented.



    So maybe we have something to look forward too in early 2015, ideally new MBPs. Broadwell ought to be really nice in the 13" MBP if they focus on GPU performance.



    "Now ready" is a rather ill-defined term in the semiconductor business. I'd argue Intel isn't ready quite yet. The Core M rollout has been, what, anemic? Pretty slow? Unimpressive? It's been like a pilot production project for them prior to the big rollout in 1H 2015.

     

    I'm almost at the point in thinking that Apple can simply not upgrade the CPUs in the Macs until Skylake comes out. The only really beneficial thing they can do is go Fusion standard in Mac mini and iMac, upgrade the GPU in iMacs, doubling the SSD options in MBA and MBP, double the RAM options on everything, and using Haswell-EP in the Mac Pro with a new set of GPUs. Ugh, that's about it.

  • Reply 91 of 112
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,791member
    tht wrote: »

    "Now ready" is a rather ill-defined term in the semiconductor business. I'd argue Intel isn't ready quite yet. The Core M rollout has been, what, anemic? Pretty slow? Unimpressive? It's been like a pilot production project for them prior to the big rollout in 1H 2015.
    Anemic? I'm not even sure Core M has risen to the level of anemic. What I don't know is if that is a rejection of Cire M by manufacutres or even if consumers are rejecting the devices it has been designed into so far.

    I'm just seeing indications though that Intel is ready to roll with 14 nm. The IEDM meets in December so that might present us with more info. I could see Intel releasing Broadwell shortly after that assembly
    I'm almost at the point in thinking that Apple can simply not upgrade the CPUs in the Macs until Skylake comes out.
    I'm not sure Apple will have much of a choice, the power savings alone with Broadwell will be compelling. Apple can leverage that power savings two ways, lower power devices or higher clock rates. That is if the architectures remain largely the same in Intels chips.
    The only really beneficial thing they can do is go Fusion standard in Mac mini and iMac, upgrade the GPU in iMacs, doubling the SSD options in MBA and MBP, double the RAM options on everything, and using Haswell-EP in the Mac Pro with a new set of GPUs. Ugh, that's about it.

    Well the Mini being the computer Apple loves to hate might not get an initial update but this is one of the platforms Broadwell could help a great deal, that along with the Airs and 13 MBP. The thing that all of these platforms need is better GPU performance and Broadwell can bring that to each of those platforms.

    I'd like to call myself "optimistic" when it comes to Broadwell in 2015.
  • Reply 92 of 112
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,791member
    While no i86 this piece shows why Intel will be having competition for some time in tablet space: http://m.electronicdesign.com/microprocessors/multicore-64-bit-arm-based-soc-aims-mobile-market?NL=ED-07&Issue=ED-07_20141202_ED-07_861&sfvc4enews=42&cl=article_1&YM_RID=CPG05000002064437&YM_MID=578. In a nut shell everybody And there brother is getting into the ARM mobile processor business. This will keep Intel in a difficult position for sometime!
  • Reply 93 of 112
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member
    wizard69 wrote: »
    I'm thinking that some of you may be interested in what Intel is up to with XEON Phi. In a nut shell you can get some of the Xeon Phi cards at extremely large discounts if you look around a bit. We are talking somewhere in the range of 200-500 dollars. This discounting apparently is going on until the end of the year.



    One theory has it that they want to get hardware into the hands of developers. My theory is that the have a surplus to zero out before the debut of Landing or whatever the next generation Phi is. Obviously this isn't Apple related unless Apple decides to offer the Mac Pro with a XEON Phi installed. I just thought that some following this thread might be interested.

    I paid about 300 for mine, I'm still in doubt the Mac Pro will utilize it though. Where exactly would it go, the Mac Pro is already pretty packed tight and even with out the fans the Pi is a fairly large card. It's a pretty neat piece of tech none the less, I would recommend grabbing a used HP Z Wokstation from eBay if you want to play around with one, installation and support is fantastic with them.

    If your interested in seeing how the new Intel M's perform check out the new Lenovo Helix 2, it's a pretty incredible tablet, also fanless, comes in either the 800Mhz ($980, 4Gb, 128GB SSD) or 1.1Ghz ($1400, 8GB, 256GB) versions, price includes keyboard. I just might grab one, only 9.5mm thick, metal housing, sexy design, yummy.


    [video]
  • Reply 94 of 112
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,791member
    relic wrote: »
    I paid about 300 for mine, I'm still in doubt the Mac Pro will utilize it though. Where exactly would it go, the Mac Pro is already pretty packed tight and even with out the fans the Pi is a fairly large card. It's a pretty neat piece of tech none the less, I would recommend grabbing a used HP Z Wokstation from eBay if you want to play around with one, installation and support is fantastic with them.
    My thought is that the next revision Phi could replace the Xeon system processor in the Mac Pro. The update is suppose to be solid enough that it can realistically serve as a system processor. There are negatives going that way as core performance running integer codes isn't that great but on the other hand you have sixty cores. Since so much of what the Mac Pro supports is multi threaded software that can leverage lots of cores it would seem like a good fit. Especially wide vector processor cores coming in the next Phi.
    If your interested in seeing how the new Intel M's perform check out the new Lenovo Helix 2, it's a pretty incredible tablet, also fanless, comes in either the 800Mhz ($980, 4Gb, 128GB SSD) or 1.1Ghz ($1400, 8GB, 256GB) versions, price includes keyboard. I just might grab one, only 9.5mm thick, metal housing, sexy design, yummy.
    That is a neat looking device. It looks like Lenovo Is continuing the high quality that IBM had whe it owned the division. My problem is that I'm very type A personality wise and frankly I'm not sure I could tolerate the slow processor.

    [video]

    The other problem I have is that I want to build a CNC machine which is crimping my technology budget significantly.
  • Reply 95 of 112
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post





    That is a neat looking device. It looks like Lenovo Is continuing the high quality that IBM had whe it owned the division.

    I've never owned one. Others have mentioned that quality has slipped since the days of IBM. Under IBM they were quite possibly the most durable laptops ever made excluding those designed for military use. Pricing is a lot lower under Lenovo.

  • Reply 96 of 112
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,791member
    hmm wrote: »
    I've never owned one. Others have mentioned that quality has slipped since the days of IBM. Under IBM they were quite possibly the most durable laptops ever made excluding those designed for military use. Pricing is a lot lower under Lenovo.

    Interesting, I have not heard that but then agian my interest in laptops is mostly focused on Macs. As far as being cheaper that is likely something any company could accomplish given IBM's business structure.
  • Reply 97 of 112
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post





    Interesting, I have not heard that but then agian my interest in laptops is mostly focused on Macs. As far as being cheaper that is likely something any company could accomplish given IBM's business structure.



    I don't have a good confirmation on any of that. I've just read it repeatedly. Most of them still seem satisfied with the newer ones, but suggest that things are flimsier than when they were made by IBM. I've seen the IBM ones. They were tanks, and they even made Apple's notebooks at the time look inexpensive. This was long before Apple had a $900 Air. I didn't mean slightly cheaper. The difference was considerable. Lenovo's markup is very high on thinkpad ram, but it's easily user serviceable.

  • Reply 98 of 112
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member

    I have been holding my hand out with my wallet open for Apple for so long my hand is gonna fall off. C'mon already with the 14 or 15" Air.  Fanless would be a neat bonus although I wonder how it would work for those of us in a hot climate, using it on a summer day in a car, and firing up a Flash video? Can see some thermal issues there.  I am sure Apple will be one of the first to go fanless if that becomes an engineering/business reality but I don't know if the tech is there yet, what with things like Flash turning a computer into a blazing griddle.

  • Reply 99 of 112
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,218moderator
    aquatic wrote: »
    C'mon already with the 14 or 15" Air.  Fanless would be a neat bonus although I wonder how it would work for those of us in a hot climate, using it on a summer day in a car, and firing up a Flash video? Can see some thermal issues there.  I am sure Apple will be one of the first to go fanless if that becomes an engineering/business reality but I don't know if the tech is there yet, what with things like Flash turning a computer into a blazing griddle.

    Putting aside the environment temperature, if a chip is designed to work at <5W, it can't produce any more heat no matter what processes are being run on it. Take an iPad for example that has no fan:


    [VIDEO]


    It doesn't matter how long they run those games, the iPad can't get hot enough to cause problems because it's designed to operate in those power limits. iPads and iPhones can overheat due to the environment though:

    1000

    This might not be such a huge concern for laptop owners as the sun usually wouldn't be heating up the laptop base but they can always have an emergency solid-state fan:


    [VIDEO]


    [VIDEO]


    It doesn't have to be that design. They might not be able to call it fanless but it doesn't really matter. It would only kick in under extreme temperatures. They can come up with some other marketing term that emphasizes the quietness of the operation.
  • Reply 100 of 112
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,791member
    aquatic wrote: »
    I have been holding my hand out with my wallet open for Apple for so long my hand is gonna fall off. C'mon already with the 14 or 15" Air.
    You do realize that it is Intel that has screwed up here not Apple?
     Fanless would be a neat bonus although I wonder how it would work for those of us in a hot climate, using it on a summer day in a car, and firing up a Flash video?
    it probably won't work that well. Everything I've read about 14 nm is great but the power savings while at the same clock rate aren't good enough to go fanless in my estimation. This means ether a lower clock rate device or thermal throttling. The big unknown here is how well the enhanced GPU hardware can accelerate things. Flash being Flash could take a beating on these fanless machines depending upon how well everything works out.
    Can see some thermal issues there.  I am sure Apple will be one of the first to go fanless if that becomes an engineering/business reality but I don't know if the tech is there yet, what with things like Flash turning a computer into a blazing griddle.
    Well the obvious answer here is to avoid anything Flash based at all costs. A site with excessive amounts of Flash content can literally turn a PC into a Vic20.

    Personally I'm hoping that a fanless Air or better yet another product does not remove from the line up the fan cooled Airs. Here is reality, put a 14 nm processor in an Air at the same power level and you end up with a massive performance boost with no loss in the machines other qualities. To me this is the great promise of 14nm, it is the significant and real performance boosts one could see in models like the Mac Book Airs. I'd much rather have a machine (MBA) that can perform as well as a MBP from a few years ago. That is very possible with Intels continued focus on the GPUs.
Sign In or Register to comment.