Intel announces quad-core mobile Broadwell chips, but Apple likely to stay away

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited June 2015
Chip giant Intel on Tuesday finally unveiled new quad-core mobile processors based on its Broadwell architecture --?six months after the first Broadwell chips rolled out?-- but it may be too late to snag Apple's recently updated MacBook Pro.




Intel's new chips include the i7-5950HQ, -5050HQ, -5750HQ, and -5700HQ. Each one carries a 47-watt TDP rating with base clock frequencies ranging from 2.5 gigahertz to 2.9 gigahertz.

The processors all contain 4 physical cores --?or 8 logical cores when using Hyper-Threading --?and 6 megabytes of L3 cache. The 5950, 5850, and 5750 ship with Intel's Iris Pro 6200 graphics, while the 5700 comes with Intel HD 5600 graphics.

If Apple were to move the 15-inch MacBook Pro lineup to Broadwell, these are the chips they would use. The larger MacBook Pro was recently updated with faster storage and a Force Touch trackpad, however, while sticking with previous-generation Haswell processors.

Given the recent revamp and rumors that suggest Intel's next-generation Skylake platform will debut before the end of 2015, it seems likely that Apple will skip Broadwell in its high-performance notebooks. Skylake will bring performance and efficiency improvements, along with support for WiGig, Rezence charging, and possibly Thunderbolt 3.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 20
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,096member
    Skylake is where it's at for me. With the updated TB3, USBc, and new CPU on the horizon, there is zero incentive for me to upgrade my iMac right now. Looking forward to finally upgrading my trusty 2009!
  • Reply 2 of 20
    I am wrong but it seemed that the Tock in dual competing design teams, was late / missed the target date on the Moore's Law (still upholds it but it falls below and to right of line (doubles every 17 or so months)...
  • Reply 3 of 20
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 18,016member
    Well, that about seals it: No MBP for me until next cycle.
  • Reply 4 of 20
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,384member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post



    Well, that about seals it: No MBP for me until next cycle.

     

    Picked up a 2014 model refurb for $600 off. Awesome buy. 

  • Reply 5 of 20
    oberpongooberpongo Posts: 182member
    What was the quickest Refresh cycle with apple notebooks? Not under 6 months. So I don't see new MBP or iMacs this year anymore. :-(
  • Reply 6 of 20
    netroxnetrox Posts: 1,422member
    Intel has been having difficulties delivering chips on time and remember how Apple decided to stop using PowerPC because of IBM's failure to deliver chips as expected for notebooks?

    That could signal the end of relationship for Intel and Apple. Apple's own Ax chips are extremely efficient and blazing fast yet consuming little energy. In fact, overall A8X is just as fast as Core M. I am sure with A9, it will be as fast or faster than Core M yet retaining energy efficiency.

    http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/922000?baseline=1061742

    I wouldn't be surprised if Apple decides to break off from Intel.

    Intel is a disappointment lately with its delays and inefficiencies.
  • Reply 7 of 20
    satchmosatchmo Posts: 2,699member

    Surely Apple and Intel are in constant discussion about release dates.

     

    Is it possible Apple would have known about this and use Broadwell chips instead of Haswell?

    The new 15" MBP's were only announced a few weeks back.

  • Reply 8 of 20
    konqerrorkonqerror Posts: 685member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Patrick Byars View Post



    I am wrong but it seemed that the Tock in dual competing design teams, was late / missed the target date on the Moore's Law (still upholds it but it falls below and to right of line (doubles every 17 or so months)...

     

    They're not competing design teams. Tick is a transistor/process shrink. Tock is the microarchitecture update. Tick missed big this time. (It had a minor delay last time) It's the end of Moore's law, the limits of transistor scaling are in sight.

  • Reply 9 of 20
    foljsfoljs Posts: 390member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by oberpongo View Post



    What was the quickest Refresh cycle with apple notebooks? Not under 6 months. So I don't see new MBP or iMacs this year anymore. :-(



    MBP (retina) was announced on April.

     

    Usual update cycle for MBP has been around 230 days (7.5 months).



    That would make a November release quite conventional.

     

    But especially since Apple missed a generation of processors becaue Intel was late, and it would like to show something compelling for the Xmas market, they could also put something out in October (which is another classic month they introduce stuff).

  • Reply 10 of 20
    appexappex Posts: 687member

    Just bring Intel Skylake and Thunderbolt 3 with USB-C, and USB 3.1 and DisplayPort 1.2. Besides HDMI 2.

  • Reply 11 of 20
    Anyone heard any rumours on chip upgrades for the MacPro. I've been holding off for months :)
  • Reply 12 of 20
    portcityportcity Posts: 68member
    netrox wrote: »
    Intel has been having difficulties delivering chips on time and remember how Apple decided to stop using PowerPC because of IBM's failure to deliver chips as expected for notebooks?

    That could signal the end of relationship for Intel and Apple. Apple's own Ax chips are extremely efficient and blazing fast yet consuming little energy. In fact, overall A8X is just as fast as Core M. I am sure with A9, it will be as fast or faster than Core M yet retaining energy efficiency.

    http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/922000?baseline=1061742

    I wouldn't be surprised if Apple decides to break off from Intel.

    Intel is a disappointment lately with its delays and inefficiencies.

    If Apple didn't have enough faith in the A9 to use it in the new MacBook there is no chance they will use their own processor in place of the i5 or i7. Apple knows that Intel is light years ahead of the competition with desktop and laptop processors, so it's a partnership that benefits both companies
  • Reply 13 of 20
    Dudes Thunderbolt was not that great for me. Not that many drives when it first came out and they cost more. The cables were expensive and they didn't have a great plug-in feel. Ok, it's faster. I get that. But the same low availability of choice is gonna apply to Tbolt 3. Not stoked.
  • Reply 14 of 20
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    oberpongo wrote: »
    What was the quickest Refresh cycle with apple notebooks? Not under 6 months. So I don't see new MBP or iMacs this year anymore. :-(

    Apple will do whatever they want and what makes sense to them. As a buyer of an early 2008 MBP I know full well that new hardware could come this year. That is the potential is there, what actually happens is of course unknown. What I do know is that Apple had to ship something for the back to school season which is well underway. I can easily see new hardware coming out in the October/November time frame.


    As an aside Apple has to be extremely pissed off with Intel right now. I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple plug an AMD chip into a Mini or something, just to thumb their noses at Intel and their disgraceful performance over the last couple of years. Releasing these chips a few weeks after Apple launched their new MBP has got to ruffle feathers.
  • Reply 15 of 20
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Anyone heard any rumours on chip upgrades for the MacPro. I've been holding off for months :)

    The new Mac Pro will ship when all the hardware is inplace to make the upgrade worthwhile. You then have to define what is worthwhile. My position is that there is limited worthwhile hardware available at the moment. So no Mac Pro update until late in the year.
  • Reply 16 of 20
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    portcity wrote: »
    If Apple didn't have enough faith in the A9 to use it in the new MacBook there is no chance they will use their own processor in place of the i5 or i7.
    It has little to do with faith.
    Apple knows that Intel is light years ahead of the competition with desktop and laptop processors, so it's a partnership that benefits both companies

    But they aren't. Apples A series matches M series for most uses. To compete with other Intel hardware they need more performance but that is only a clock rate bump away. Of course that sounds easier than it is but it isn't impossible.
  • Reply 17 of 20
    wizard69 wrote: »
    It has little to do with faith.
    But they aren't. Apples A series matches M series for most uses. To compete with other Intel hardware they need more performance but that is only a clock rate bump away. Of course that sounds easier than it is but it isn't impossible.
    How do you know that A matches M? Have you run OS X on an A before? Or are you just guessing?
  • Reply 18 of 20
    auxioauxio Posts: 2,728member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ttollerton View Post



    How do you know that A matches M? Have you run OS X on an A before? Or are you just guessing?

     

    iOS is OS X at the core.  So one could get a good sense by comparing an iPad Air 2 to a MacBook (using Mail, iWork apps, Safari, etc).  I don't have either device, so unfortunately I can't do such a comparison.

  • Reply 19 of 20
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by netrox View Post



    Intel has been having difficulties delivering chips on time and remember how Apple decided to stop using PowerPC because of IBM's failure to deliver chips as expected for notebooks?



    That could signal the end of relationship for Intel and Apple. Apple's own Ax chips are extremely efficient and blazing fast yet consuming little energy. In fact, overall A8X is just as fast as Core M. I am sure with A9, it will be as fast or faster than Core M yet retaining energy efficiency.



    http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/922000?baseline=1061742



    I wouldn't be surprised if Apple decides to break off from Intel.



    Intel is a disappointment lately with its delays and inefficiencies.

     

    Intel has encountered trouble with process shrinks just like pretty much every other company at this point. IBM was significantly behind intel in performance, which isn't the case here. Your speculation relates to the Core M, which currently represents a small portion of Apple's lineup. In fact they only just introduced a model that utilizes Core M. If they were going to use ARM, especially in the near future, they could have debuted it with that.

     

    If Intel just now has Broadwell quad core cpus available, why would anyone expect the same variant in skylake this year?

  • Reply 20 of 20
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    Apparently the Broadwell Iris Pro is a 20% improvement over the Haswell Iris Pro and Skylake is at least a 70% improvement over Haswell and around 50% over Broadwell.
Sign In or Register to comment.