People seem to not know that Intel intentionally cripples system RAM options to differentiate between Xeon and Core2Duo lines.
There is nothing keeping the Core2Duo from having 32GB of Motherboard System RAM, it's just that Intel wants those folks to be targeting Xeon only systems and thus the more expensive ECC setups.
When Mac Pros move to 64 GB or 128GB you'll see 8GB or 16GB iMac/Macbook/Macbook Pro options. Hell, Apple has intentionally limited the Mac mini RAM options from 4GB -> 2 GB.
That's an over-generalization If I ever heard one. Nvidia had a temporary problem with their manufacturing process that led to some of their boards having problems, but this has been corrected. As far as running "hot", we'll have to wait and see. These Intel-platform chipsets are brand new and will be using low-power integrated graphics. I think overall this is an excellent development. Nvidia's integrated graphics are many times more powerful than Intels, and have much superior H264/VC1 video decoding and enhancement. Also, because the GPU will be based on the Nvidia standard GPU architecture, this should give the Macbook future compatibility with Snow Leopard's OpenCL.
I track these things rather closely, and I've heard little good said about Nvidia boards other than that they are SLI enabled. Even the newer 8200G (newest Nvidia integrated chipset) runs hot and has a ton of bugs, vs the AMD and Intel chipsets. Performance is good, better than Intel and about on par with AMDs 780G chipset.
People seem to not know that Intel intentionally cripples system RAM options to differentiate between Xeon and Core2Duo lines.
There is nothing keeping the Core2Duo from having 32GB of Motherboard System RAM, it's just that Intel wants those folks to be targeting Xeon only systems and thus the more expensive ECC setups.
When Mac Pros move to 64 GB or 128GB you'll see 8GB or 16GB iMac/Macbook/Macbook Pro options. Hell, Apple has intentionally limited the Mac mini RAM options from 4GB -> 2 GB.
This is how they create hardware market segments.
It isn't that it's intentionally done for nefarious reasons. The memory designs are different, and the Xenon's use different memory as well. If Intel were to have all their chips of the present generation have the ability to use more RAM, they would all be using FB-DIMMS. Would you want that? I don't think so.
Cpu's and their chipsets that are designed for high end use in servers, and expensive workstations, have larger power supplies and cooling systems. Owners of such machines have a larger energy budget, and well as a higher budget in general.
Intel is doing what they have to. To keep costs down for mainstream machines, they have to cut somewhere. The same thing is true for power and heat.
The new Nehalem chips are the same there. The Xeon weight line will have three memory channels, while less expensive machines will have two.
If you want more, you will have to pay for it. Those are the design considerations that must be made.
It isn't that Intel is screwing the lower end user. Rather, it's that Intel is giving them lower cost systems from the cpu and through. That's what people want, and need.
"My boyfriend who works at Nvidia last night showed me pictures on his iPhone of the unreleased nvidia based MacBook. He said it is scheduled to be released by Apple on October 14th. There is no design changes just speed bumps as well as the new Nvidia based video, getting rid of the Intel based video ?cards"."
I personally hope it's true that they haven't messed with the design if the black + silver look is where they would have gone. I actually don't think there's anything wrong with the current design.
The news about the new manufacturing process make me wonder about the Macbook Pro images that were posted a while back. They said that the process would allow them to avoid using screws to hold it together.
Not sure how they would avoid using screws but I imagine they could have access to some of the main computer parts via the keyboard opening. In the event of a motherboard failure, maybe they will simply seal it in and replace the entire bottom shell. It could be more cost effective to do that than have an engineer unscrew it all, replace the mobo and put it all back again.
Thats not really good news. If you look in the PC world, Nvidia chipsets are known for running extremely hot, and as being less reliable than Intel chipsets.
This is untrue. Like every hw some models can have problems, but NVidia is famous for better performance. Much more better than the GMA series which can be ok but on OSX we haven't decent drivers.
I personally hope it's true that they haven't messed with the design if the black + silver look is where they would have gone. I actually don't think there's anything wrong with the current design.
Me too. I need a new laptop, and I've been waiting for this release, hoping it's not a clone of the 6+ year-old aluminum design.
My BlackBook has been one of the best portables I have ever owned. After numerous metal PowerBooks & MacBook Pros, I love having almost double the WiFi range that the plastic enclosure delivers. I would be totally bummed having to return to aluminum's limited WiFi functionality!
You don't buy PA Semi who can do what Apple needs to separate their systems from general Intel specs and then turn to Nvidia for the solution.
False.
I don't think that PA Semi/Apple even has a license to produce chipsets for Intel processors. AFAIK, only NVIDIA and SiS have licenses for producing Intel-based chipsets. And AFAIK, PA Semi has no experience with building a competent, ATI/NVIDIA-class mobile graphics processor.
That Apple would use nvidia GPUs on the MacBook: I can believe that. Especially if those GPUs can be effectively used by Snow Leopard in the long run.
That Apple would use nvidia chipsets on the MacBook (or other Macs): I can also belive that, but not the MCP7A-U which is a DESKTOP chipset in the class of Intel's G45 chipset. If Apple was to use a nvidia chipset on the MacBook, it would be the MCP79.
I don't believe Apple would let prototypes or even final MacBooks go outside Apple, if they needed nvidia engineers to work on them, they would have ask them to go to Cupertino under heavy NDA.
there are a lot of photographers and filmmakers who do on location editing for things like photoshoots, news items, music festivals etc.
the portability of a laptop is very important but also the graphics card.
as it is now I can edit a movie on my macBook, but have to find a macpro to bounce to tape for exporting the video.
if there are better graphics involved, I'll be very tempted to sell the blackBook and buy a new one.
I just hope it won't be the horrible, horrible aluminium shell with a black keyboard.
I really don't like that look..
i definitely agree with you. I want the more portable computer but i also want professional power.
i dont understand why other people dont get this point
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
But then you buy a professional machine, and that has a gpu.
Macbooks aren't meant for professional graphics use of any kind. They are usable for Photoshop, because it doesn't require much there, and the screen resolution helps, but otherwise, no.
Indeed they are made for the every day consumer, but*, There are professionals such as myself who need a smaller notebook and must be very portable. The power can be put into the macbooks without a doubt. Apple for some reason doesnt want to put another small pro model out.
for the record. I think the best laptop design they've released was the 12" powerbook.
This is untrue. Like every hw some models can have problems, but NVidia is famous for better performance. Much more better than the GMA series which can be ok but on OSX we haven't decent drivers.
You cannot compare Nvidia's dedicated GPUs to Intel's integrated chipsets. Look at Nvidia integrated chipsets. Then go to a PC forum where they recommend motherboards for a HTPC, nobody will recommend Nvidia, they'll say, Intel or AMD. Why? First of all, as I stated the Nvidia chipsets run hot. For example, the Intel G31 ran about 60ºC, while the Nvidia 8200G chipset would run in the 80ºC range. Sure its better, graphically, but is it a good chipset? Not if you want a notebook that isn't melting down or having the fans running at 5000+ RPM all the time.
Intel's PM45 northbridge supports 8GB of RAM. Nvidia's competitor most likely will too, whether it is used by Apple or not. Have fun looking for 4GB SODIMMS.
From what I read online, people did try putting over 4GB into a Intel 965 MacBook but only 4GB were used by the system. Everything above 4GB was ignored. There are limitations in other non-chipset hardware areas, as I understand.
for the record. I think the best laptop design they've released was the 12" powerbook.
My first Mac.
For the record, it's the most complicated computer to service I've ever seen. The suction cups needed for the aluminum iMac are more convenient than that.
For the record, it's the most complicated computer to service I've ever seen. The suction cups needed for the aluminum iMac are more convenient than that.
well, i was referring to a 12" pro aluminum model. very compact and sleek
I actually don't think there's anything wrong with the current design.
Point of interest: Time's coverage of the G4 flat-panel iMac's genesis includes an interview with Ive where he describes showing Jobs his renderings/models of the successor to translucent iMac and Jobs told him that there was "nothing wrong with it," which Ive explains means "total fail."
It was basically a much much thinner version (i.e. LCD instead of cathode tubes), he described.
I'm actually blocked from visiting the link itself right now, but reading about how they arrived at the final design is crazy.
Comments
Apple uses back-to-school to clear out old inventory before the release of new portables, apparently. It's been like this every year.
Yes they do and have done for over a decade.
There is nothing keeping the Core2Duo from having 32GB of Motherboard System RAM, it's just that Intel wants those folks to be targeting Xeon only systems and thus the more expensive ECC setups.
When Mac Pros move to 64 GB or 128GB you'll see 8GB or 16GB iMac/Macbook/Macbook Pro options. Hell, Apple has intentionally limited the Mac mini RAM options from 4GB -> 2 GB.
This is how they create hardware market segments.
That's an over-generalization If I ever heard one. Nvidia had a temporary problem with their manufacturing process that led to some of their boards having problems, but this has been corrected. As far as running "hot", we'll have to wait and see. These Intel-platform chipsets are brand new and will be using low-power integrated graphics. I think overall this is an excellent development. Nvidia's integrated graphics are many times more powerful than Intels, and have much superior H264/VC1 video decoding and enhancement. Also, because the GPU will be based on the Nvidia standard GPU architecture, this should give the Macbook future compatibility with Snow Leopard's OpenCL.
I track these things rather closely, and I've heard little good said about Nvidia boards other than that they are SLI enabled. Even the newer 8200G (newest Nvidia integrated chipset) runs hot and has a ton of bugs, vs the AMD and Intel chipsets. Performance is good, better than Intel and about on par with AMDs 780G chipset.
People seem to not know that Intel intentionally cripples system RAM options to differentiate between Xeon and Core2Duo lines.
There is nothing keeping the Core2Duo from having 32GB of Motherboard System RAM, it's just that Intel wants those folks to be targeting Xeon only systems and thus the more expensive ECC setups.
When Mac Pros move to 64 GB or 128GB you'll see 8GB or 16GB iMac/Macbook/Macbook Pro options. Hell, Apple has intentionally limited the Mac mini RAM options from 4GB -> 2 GB.
This is how they create hardware market segments.
It isn't that it's intentionally done for nefarious reasons. The memory designs are different, and the Xenon's use different memory as well. If Intel were to have all their chips of the present generation have the ability to use more RAM, they would all be using FB-DIMMS. Would you want that? I don't think so.
Cpu's and their chipsets that are designed for high end use in servers, and expensive workstations, have larger power supplies and cooling systems. Owners of such machines have a larger energy budget, and well as a higher budget in general.
Intel is doing what they have to. To keep costs down for mainstream machines, they have to cut somewhere. The same thing is true for power and heat.
The new Nehalem chips are the same there. The Xeon weight line will have three memory channels, while less expensive machines will have two.
If you want more, you will have to pay for it. Those are the design considerations that must be made.
It isn't that Intel is screwing the lower end user. Rather, it's that Intel is giving them lower cost systems from the cpu and through. That's what people want, and need.
this really would be a killer feature in a laptop. especially for those of us that run multiple virtual machines... i'd snap one up immediately.
Of course. A "pro" who needs it for work will pay any price. And anyone else... doesn't need it.
Plus DDR3 prices are going to fall a long way over the next 12 months.
Yup. If you need portability and 8GB of RAM in a laptop, a sweet MacBook Pro with 8GB would be worth the cost, compared to lugging a Mac Pro around.
Yeah, in about one year's time 4GB RAM sticks will be quite normal, just as 2GB is now, and how 1GB is close to becoming as worthless as 512MB sticks.
http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/10/03...ng-october-14/
"My boyfriend who works at Nvidia last night showed me pictures on his iPhone of the unreleased nvidia based MacBook. He said it is scheduled to be released by Apple on October 14th. There is no design changes just speed bumps as well as the new Nvidia based video, getting rid of the Intel based video ?cards"."
I personally hope it's true that they haven't messed with the design if the black + silver look is where they would have gone. I actually don't think there's anything wrong with the current design.
The news about the new manufacturing process make me wonder about the Macbook Pro images that were posted a while back. They said that the process would allow them to avoid using screws to hold it together.
The case here clearly has screw-holes on it:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._revealed.html
Not sure how they would avoid using screws but I imagine they could have access to some of the main computer parts via the keyboard opening. In the event of a motherboard failure, maybe they will simply seal it in and replace the entire bottom shell. It could be more cost effective to do that than have an engineer unscrew it all, replace the mobo and put it all back again.
Thats not really good news. If you look in the PC world, Nvidia chipsets are known for running extremely hot, and as being less reliable than Intel chipsets.
This is untrue. Like every hw some models can have problems, but NVidia is famous for better performance. Much more better than the GMA series which can be ok but on OSX we haven't decent drivers.
I personally hope it's true that they haven't messed with the design if the black + silver look is where they would have gone. I actually don't think there's anything wrong with the current design.
Me too. I need a new laptop, and I've been waiting for this release, hoping it's not a clone of the 6+ year-old aluminum design.
My BlackBook has been one of the best portables I have ever owned. After numerous metal PowerBooks & MacBook Pros, I love having almost double the WiFi range that the plastic enclosure delivers. I would be totally bummed having to return to aluminum's limited WiFi functionality!
You don't buy PA Semi who can do what Apple needs to separate their systems from general Intel specs and then turn to Nvidia for the solution.
False.
I don't think that PA Semi/Apple even has a license to produce chipsets for Intel processors. AFAIK, only NVIDIA and SiS have licenses for producing Intel-based chipsets. And AFAIK, PA Semi has no experience with building a competent, ATI/NVIDIA-class mobile graphics processor.
So your comment has little cred.
That Apple would use nvidia chipsets on the MacBook (or other Macs): I can also belive that, but not the MCP7A-U which is a DESKTOP chipset in the class of Intel's G45 chipset. If Apple was to use a nvidia chipset on the MacBook, it would be the MCP79.
I don't believe Apple would let prototypes or even final MacBooks go outside Apple, if they needed nvidia engineers to work on them, they would have ask them to go to Cupertino under heavy NDA.
there are a lot of photographers and filmmakers who do on location editing for things like photoshoots, news items, music festivals etc.
the portability of a laptop is very important but also the graphics card.
as it is now I can edit a movie on my macBook, but have to find a macpro to bounce to tape for exporting the video.
if there are better graphics involved, I'll be very tempted to sell the blackBook and buy a new one.
I just hope it won't be the horrible, horrible aluminium shell with a black keyboard.
I really don't like that look..
i definitely agree with you. I want the more portable computer but i also want professional power.
i dont understand why other people dont get this point
But then you buy a professional machine, and that has a gpu.
Macbooks aren't meant for professional graphics use of any kind. They are usable for Photoshop, because it doesn't require much there, and the screen resolution helps, but otherwise, no.
Indeed they are made for the every day consumer, but*, There are professionals such as myself who need a smaller notebook and must be very portable. The power can be put into the macbooks without a doubt. Apple for some reason doesnt want to put another small pro model out.
for the record. I think the best laptop design they've released was the 12" powerbook.
This is untrue. Like every hw some models can have problems, but NVidia is famous for better performance. Much more better than the GMA series which can be ok but on OSX we haven't decent drivers.
You cannot compare Nvidia's dedicated GPUs to Intel's integrated chipsets. Look at Nvidia integrated chipsets. Then go to a PC forum where they recommend motherboards for a HTPC, nobody will recommend Nvidia, they'll say, Intel or AMD. Why? First of all, as I stated the Nvidia chipsets run hot. For example, the Intel G31 ran about 60ºC, while the Nvidia 8200G chipset would run in the 80ºC range. Sure its better, graphically, but is it a good chipset? Not if you want a notebook that isn't melting down or having the fans running at 5000+ RPM all the time.
If the world is coming to an end, might as well get a sweet rig while I still can.
If I am the only human with a MacBook post-apocalypse, I will rule the world!
Right up until your battery runs out
Intel's PM45 northbridge supports 8GB of RAM. Nvidia's competitor most likely will too, whether it is used by Apple or not. Have fun looking for 4GB SODIMMS.
From what I read online, people did try putting over 4GB into a Intel 965 MacBook but only 4GB were used by the system. Everything above 4GB was ignored. There are limitations in other non-chipset hardware areas, as I understand.
If I am the only human with a MacBook post-apocalypse, I will rule the world!
Right up until your battery runs out
If you were the last person on the planet, you could scavenge batteries from all the other MacBooks in the world.
Or you could get a generator and run it off of all the fuel sitting in the tanks at the gas stations around the world.
Or you could set up a solar system to charge your batteries.
Or you could set up a wind turbine, or a water turbine?
Or, or, or?
I am sure if you were the last person on the planet, you could find a way to provide power for your electronics for the rest of your (lonely) life?
for the record. I think the best laptop design they've released was the 12" powerbook.
My first Mac.
For the record, it's the most complicated computer to service I've ever seen. The suction cups needed for the aluminum iMac are more convenient than that.
My first Mac.
For the record, it's the most complicated computer to service I've ever seen. The suction cups needed for the aluminum iMac are more convenient than that.
well, i was referring to a 12" pro aluminum model. very compact and sleek
I actually don't think there's anything wrong with the current design.
Point of interest: Time's coverage of the G4 flat-panel iMac's genesis includes an interview with Ive where he describes showing Jobs his renderings/models of the successor to translucent iMac and Jobs told him that there was "nothing wrong with it," which Ive explains means "total fail."
It was basically a much much thinner version (i.e. LCD instead of cathode tubes), he described.
I'm actually blocked from visiting the link itself right now, but reading about how they arrived at the final design is crazy.
www.time.com/time/covers/1101020114/
well, i was referring to a 12" pro aluminum model. very compact and sleek
...right. The PowerBook.