New MBA

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Zero. There was never any chance of this ever. It was people manipulating stock.







    It's not "Intel's", and there's nothing stopping it from being on AMD boards. Thunderbolt is the new USB. USB is dead.



    Thanks for the clarification. After the recent Intel/Nvidia settlement, do you think there is any chance, maybe even down the road, we see Nvidia chips integrated on the SB board?
  • Reply 22 of 42
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    It's not "Intel's", and there's nothing stopping it from being on AMD boards. Thunderbolt is the new USB. USB is dead.



    "Intel Corporation today announced the availability of Thunderbolt? technology...

    Developed by Intel (under the code name Light Peak), and brought to market with technical collaboration from Apple. Thunderbolt technology is..."



    So, if people want to integrated Thunderbolt on their boards, who they should talk to?



    Thunderbolt is the new FW. And a better FW, much more high-end. If fact, it bridges the gap between USB/FW and PCIe devices. FW will be dead in a couple of years for computers. USB3/eSATA devices may be threaten depending on the adoption of TBolt on Windows PCs, but anything low-speed (keyboard, mouse, printers, low-end audio/midi devices,...) will stay under USB(2) which is perfect for what it does. Even if we set apart the need for 4x PCIe lanes for each TBolt port, that will limit the number of ports on any computer, the daisy-chaining nature of TBolt does not allow quick connect/disconnect as USB does.



    Thunderbolt is not a consumer technology even if consumers could benefit from it. Apart from some LaCie drives (still $300 and up for a 1TB HDD w/TBolt), all other planned TBolt devices for this year are expensive devices ($1000 and up, really up), those are basically pro audio/video PCIe-based devices refitted as external devices via Thunderbolt.
  • Reply 23 of 42
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    Never is a very long time! The biggest problem with Zacate Fusion is the slightly lower core performance and low clock rate. AMD could easily boost the clock rate with a process shrink and have a processor that is an interesting solution for the AIR.









    This USB is dead matra is non-sense. The two interfaces are so different that you will likely never see USB replaced by Thunderbolt. The two interfaces don't even play on the same field.



    Yes yes!!! The Apple Duo: 2011 Edition. I'll buy. The promise of MBA/TB alone is worth waiting for. I hope it makes it. One TB, one USB 2. And power. That's it. Sounds good. Of course it would be cool to see TB on the 11" but I suppose that won't happen for a few years. But eventually I imagine it will, just a matter of time and economies of scale making it cheap enough. Or do you think that is possible?
  • Reply 24 of 42
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Aquatic View Post


    Yes yes!!! The Apple Duo: 2011 Edition. I'll buy. The promise of MBA/TB alone is worth waiting for. I hope it makes it. One TB, one USB 2.



    Let's not sell USB short! I won't buy a machine with one USB port only, it is too big of a limitation. Simply put USB supports far to many interfaces that will never see implementation as a TB device.

    Quote:

    And power. That's it. Sounds good. Of course it would be cool to see TB on the 11" but I suppose that won't happen for a few years.



    You never know. With Sandy Bridge and Fusion devices we are on the verg of entirely new generations of devices. There would likely be room on the motherboard for TB today. However imagine for a moment that Intel came out with a new I/O chip for Sandy Bridge with Thunderbolt built in. TB will come to the AIRs, the only question is when. In any event the AIRs cry out for a docking solution so I would hope it is with the next rev.

    Quote:

    But eventually I imagine it will, just a matter of time and economies of scale making it cheap enough. Or do you think that is possible?



    Eventually yes! Nailing down when is a different issue. I could see Intel building an I/O support chip for Sandy Bridge tailored for Apples needs. Ultimately integration lowers cost and Apple sells a lot of laptops.
  • Reply 25 of 42
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Aquatic View Post


    Yes yes!!! The Apple Duo: 2011 Edition. I'll buy. The promise of MBA/TB alone is worth waiting for. I hope it makes it. One TB, one USB 2. And power. That's it. Sounds good. Of course it would be cool to see TB on the 11" but I suppose that won't happen for a few years. But eventually I imagine it will, just a matter of time and economies of scale making it cheap enough. Or do you think that is possible?



    That would be two USB2 ports: Power/USB on one side, TBolt/USB on the other, sounds good anyway. And it would probably look better on your desk too:





    FWIW, I think that what could prevent Apple to offer a TBolt port on the 11" MBA is room for the chip/complexity of traces between the cpu/TBolt/miniDP. But in any case, the motherboard needs to be redesigned for SB cpus. It seems that the chip in itself is inexpensive (it's the cooper version, so no optical converters here), it's 15x15mm (small for what it does, but still...).



    In any case, it would be better for Apple to offer TBolt in all Macs in order to make it a standard quickly, and for 3rd parties to see more opportunities to make devices with TBolt connectivity. The versatility of TBolt is such that it can offer a wide range of devices aimed at different kinds of computers, just don't expect cheap things. A 27" TBolt display-hub would be priced between $999 (Apple LED Cinema Display) and $1699 (low-end 27" iMac), depending on what it offers, let's say $1299. And a 21.5" version could be as expensive as $999. Still, in their time, Apple's "docks" cost between $390 and $900 without display...



    I've just check the 11" MBA teardown, and the motherboard doesn't seem that crowded, so even room may not be a problem. It's just that the current breed of TBolt devices announced are not really aimed at MBAs. If other kinds of devices are announced (like docking-hub solutions)... who knows!



    ----



    Dave, I'm not so sure about Intel making chipsets integrating TBolt yet, not for Sandy bridge and probably not for Ivy Bridge (those designs are practically done already), but if TBolt's adoption is good, why not? The other thing is that chipsets already handle a lot of things (USB, SATA, Enet, Wifi, BT, FW...) and they have a limited link to the cpu, that's why it would be better to connect the TBolt chip directly to the cpu, like Apple did for the MBP, even if that cuts some PCIe lanes for the dedicated gpu. In the case of systems with integrated graphics only, those 16x PCIe lanes on the cpu are unused, great for TBolt. And when Intel will move to PCIe 3.0 on mainstream cpus, it would be even easier (8x PCIe 3.0 = 16x PCIe 2.0 for a dedicated gpu, and up to 8x PCIe 3.0 for (up to 4) TBolt controllers). Some mainstream cpus with PCIe 3.0 starting in 2012, everywhere in 2013 (when Intel may launch TBolt 2.0, 20Gb/s copper/optical).
  • Reply 26 of 42
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    TBolt 2.0, 20Gb/s copper/optical).



    Optical Thunderbolt is 100Gbps and has been since inception.
  • Reply 27 of 42
    reganregan Posts: 474member
    I am soooooooo ready to get an MacBook air. I have absolutely ZERO need for an optical drive, and frankly can't wait until Apple phases them out of their laptop lines COMPLETELY like they did with the floppy drives back in the day. I believe this will happen at the next big MacBook pro redesign...maybe in January 2012.



    But for now it's only the MacBook airs. I got a first gen iPad thinking I could edit movies and photos transferred from my canon dslr while on the road using the apple usb/sd card cam kit....but HD videos don't transfer this way. When the iPad two was announced, I thought maybe that had changed...it didn't. It's still a closed system. In fact, the new iMovie app for the iPad will ONLY edit video shot from Mac ios devices like the ipad2, iPhone and iPod touch....even if the video is transferred via iTunes from your Mac at home, it won't work.



    So...that ruled out the iPad 2.



    I'd love to get a MacBook air...but want to wait until they get updated from a core 2 duo to the sandy bridge. Thunderbolt would be nice too. I also hope 4 gigs of ram become standard! Come on Apple. 2 gigs? You're milking it. Lol.



    I know flash HDs are expensive still. If the MacBook airs come with the above, I could accept a 128 gig on an 11" MacBook air or a 256 on a 13" MacBook air. I could always get a small portable hard drive to store extra video footage and photos while traveling.



    I know I could nab the 13" MacBook pro right now and get what I need...but if the MacBook airs just get those upgrades next, i'd chose one of em over the MacBook pro anyday.



    So I wait....
  • Reply 28 of 42
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Optical Thunderbolt is 100Gbps and has been since inception.



    You're completly wrong. This will happen around 2020. That's Intel's long-term plan: 100Gb/s within 10 years. Don't be confused. Intel's original plan was to release 10Gb/s LightPeak (optical) from the beginning, but they didn't. Tech issues? Cost issues? Lack of partners? Who knows? The fact is Thunderbolt is half of LightPeak, the other half was the optical converter. That's the reason why the "copper" version (Thunderbolt) was brought to the market so quickly since the first time it was revealed (4 months ago?).



    Think about this: if TBolt needs 4x PCIe 2.0 lanes to offer 10Gb/s, for 100Gb/s you would need about 40x PCIe 2.0 lanes , or about 20x PCie 3.0 lanes, or 10x PCIe 4.0, or 5x PCIe 5.0. When do you think that will happen?
  • Reply 29 of 42
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,354moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    everywhere in 2013 (when Intel may launch TBolt 2.0, 20Gb/s copper/optical).



    Thunderbolt is already 20Gbps - it has two-channel 10Gbps:



    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380890,00.asp



    The reason not to go optical was:



    "Thunderbolt was shifted back to copper for reasons of cost, according to Jason Ziller, director of Thunderbolt planning and marketing. That would have placed the onus of designing, buying and integrating the optical transceiver on the OEMs, a burden they were unwilling to bear, Ziller said."



    Ultimately, to go optical, everyone's going to have to play along and good things are in store if they do:



    http://www.semiconductor-today.com/n...TEL_050810.htm



    For now, Thunderbolt will be limited to 10Gbps per channel and since it's a 2 wire pair cable, to get more bandwidth will likely mean more wires, new ports etc just like USB 3.0.



    The best they could do is have thunderbolt-only ports that support 20Gbps by connecting more PCI lanes to each port. So x8 PCIe 2.0 per port or x4 PCIe 3.0.



    You could have 4 ports with 20Gbps bandwidth each and the end one with 10Gbps for video from one x16 PCIe 3.0 slot.



    Not that anyone really needs to do that though. USB 3.0 will be enough for the majority of peripherals including storage and Thunderbolt for external PCI devices. I mainly see Thunderbolt killing off ExpressCard and FW800. USB3 and wifi kills off ethernet.



    Hardly any PCI cards come close to saturating the ports except for GPUs in Cross-Fire or SLI.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix


    That would be two USB2 ports: Power/USB on one side, TBolt/USB on the other, sounds good anyway.



    I think they'd use the Mini-DP port i.e 2 x USB 2.0 + MDP/TB on the MBA. I expect they will add TB support in the interests of boosting the format but also killing off the MB, which has FW800. Because it supplies 10W of power, they can have a bus-powered FW800 adaptor.



    Plus, there are a lot of big companies on board with Thunderbolt so likely quite a few high-speed peripherals coming out.
  • Reply 30 of 42
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    You're completly wrong.



    You're completely wrong. Did you even read my post? Copper Thunderbolt is 20Gbps. The plan for optical Thunderbolt has always been 100Gbps.



    Quote:

    Intel's original plan was to release 10Gb/s LightPeak (optical) from the beginning, but they didn't.



    See? You even agreed with me in your post about me being wrong.



    Quote:

    When do you think that will happen?



    Q4 2011 when the first PCIe 3 devices come out.
  • Reply 31 of 42
    marvfoxmarvfox Posts: 2,275member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    Intel does have a lower power processor to use - you have to remember that their TDP is the CPU + GPU. There are some ULV chips that can go in that are out already.



    I suspect that to get Thunderbolt support, they will have to go with Intel's chipset. Maybe not but I think it's likely.



    Right now, the white Macbook has not been updated to match the 13" MBP and it normally is. It would be a good move for Apple to drop the white model at the back to school season, switch the Air to an i5/i7 ULV.



    What's interesting is that Intel have said Ivy Bridge will go quad-core and could be introduced in the second half of 2011 so that may be a possibility and they will most likely bump up the Flash sizes to have 128GB entry because Toshiba are jumping to 25nm.



    From this point, the updates will probably go:



    April - iMac/Mini, all Thunderbolt, Sandy Bridge and a Mac Pro minor refresh with TB

    June - iPhone 5

    August/September - Macbook Air update to either 2-core Sandy Bridge or 4-core Ivy Bridge with 128GB SSD entry and white Macbook dropped

    November - Mac Pro updated to have 8-core chips so up to 16-cores

    January 2012 - more Ivy Bridge chips. It may launch here which means MBA will get SB



    What about all the new MBP any news on them as yet?
  • Reply 32 of 42
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by marvfox View Post


    What about all the new MBP any news on them as yet?



    We just had MacBook Pro updates. There won't be another one for nearly a year.
  • Reply 33 of 42
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    Thunderbolt is already 20Gbps - it has two-channel 10Gbps:



    And a 2.0GHz quad-core cpu is already 8GHz.

    USB3 is already 10Gb/s via 2 ports.

    The MP is already 160Gb/s via its PCIe slots.



    Quote:

    Thunderbolt was shifted back to copper for reasons of cost,



    Cost issues?



    Quote:

    That would have placed the onus of designing, buying and integrating the optical transceiver on the OEMs, a burden they were unwilling to bear.



    Technical issues?



    Quote:

    Ultimately, to go optical, everyone's going to have to play along



    Lack of partners?



    I've mentionned all those reasons in my previous post.



    Quote:

    The best they could do is have thunderbolt-only ports that support 20Gbps by connecting more PCI lanes to each port. So x8 PCIe 2.0 per port or x4 PCIe 3.0.



    So what is it? Current TBolt at 20Gb/s or future TBolt at 20Gb/s?

    One of the other reasons why Intel has to move faster is to support DisplayPort 1.2. I don't think they will release TBolt as data-only anytime soon.

    So now you understand that to get faster, TBolt needs more PCIe lanes... good for you.



    Quote:

    Hardly any PCI cards come close to saturating the ports except for GPUs in Cross-Fire or SLI.



    Every gpu that can run at 4x speed will saturate TBolt, every RAID card that can run at 4x speed will saturate TBolt, some DSP cards will saturate TBolt, and if you add a display to the chain... Consumers will probably never saturate TBolt because of the few/types of devices they will use, but pro users will easily saturate the one port that is currently offered on MBPs.



    Quote:

    I think they'd use the Mini-DP port i.e 2 x USB 2.0 + MDP/TB on the MBA. I expect they will add TB support in the interests of boosting the format but also killing off the MB, which has FW800. Because it supplies 10W of power, they can have a bus-powered FW800 adaptor.



    Plus, there are a lot of big companies on board with Thunderbolt so likely quite a few high-speed peripherals coming out.



    What does this have to do with the fact that the MBA already has 2 USB ports, not one?



    Anyway, I don't think will see "adaptors" of any kind, those would need a TBolt receiver and the controller for the protocol choosen (in this case FW). We will probably see hubs for multiple USB3/eSATA/FW800 ports or multi-protocol hubs (docking stations).

    There are a dozen of big companies on board, most of the devices will be for pro audio/video users except a couple of products from LaCie.
  • Reply 34 of 42
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    You're completely wrong. Did you even read my post? Copper Thunderbolt is 20Gbps. The plan for optical Thunderbolt has always been 100Gbps.



    See? You even agreed with me in your post about me being wrong.



    Q4 2011 when the first PCIe 3 devices come out.



    Now that you have established that you master "copy and paste", what else...



    Oh, time wrapping! Good one. Now you can cram 10 years of R&D in 3 quarters. Intel will be happy. I can't wait to play with TBolt at 100Gb/s next Christmas.
  • Reply 35 of 42
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    Now you can cram 10 years of R&D in 3 quarters. Intel will be happy. I can't wait to play with TBolt at 100Gb/s next Christmas.



    Never said anything about 100Gbps Thunderbolt. I only said the bandwidth would be there when PCIe 3 comes out.
  • Reply 36 of 42
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Never said anything about 100Gbps Thunderbolt. I only said the bandwidth would be there when PCIe 3 comes out.



    What bandwidth? In any case, you have to learn to answer to the whole question.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix


    Think about this: if TBolt needs 4x PCIe 2.0 lanes to offer 10Gb/s, for 100Gb/s you would need about 40x PCIe 2.0 lanes , or about 20x PCie 3.0 lanes, or 10x PCIe 4.0, or 5x PCIe 5.0. When do you think that will happen?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil


    Q4 2011 when the first PCIe 3 devices come out.



    If/when Intel dedices to double Tbolt speed (at 20Gb/s per bidirectional channel), it will not be when PCIe 3.0 is launched, but when it's mainstream, on all kinds of cpus not just Xeons, so probably not before late 2012, early 2013.
  • Reply 37 of 42
    tailpipetailpipe Posts: 345member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    Still, that's what Apple offers in the brand new 13" MBPs (Sandy Bridge no dedicated graphics). If Apple thinks that's an upgrade over 2.40/2.66 C2D + 320M, the same will probably be true for the MBA.



    With ULV versions at 1.40-1.60Ghz, LV versions at 2.10-2.30GHz, and integrated graphics of the same series (HD3000, at a lower clock of course, but that's probably also the case with the current 320M in the MBAs), the 11.6" model may not get a huge boost (still with hyperthreading and turbo-boost, you should be able to tell the difference), but the 13" (up to 2.30GHz + SSD) could be a real threat to the 13" MBP with HDD, in terms of "pure" snappiness!



    FWIW, I think that the MBA is the perfect design for Thunderbolt provided appropriate "docking" devices are available. A TB display that could be an iMac without cpu/gpu/ram, would be perfect to compensate for the MBA "shortcomings": more USB ports, FW, Enet, additional storage?, and display/charging from a couple of wires...



    i think your comments are spot on. If a 13" MBA appears in June with the right SB processor and GPU combination, then it should be close to the redesigned 13" MBP that everyone was hoping for but didn't arrive.



    I have certainly looking forward to seeing what the next Air revision brings. A month ago, I said that I thought any PC without a 500 Gb hard drive was pointless. I have an MBP with 256 GBs and because i have no space left I've been saving stuff on an additional hard drive. I checked that drive's capacity today and discovered that I'd used 300 GB in 6 months. So I'm already screwed with a 500 Gb drive. So i reckon that 1 TB is the new standard. So give me a MacBook Air with a 1TB drive please.
  • Reply 38 of 42
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tailpipe View Post


    i think your comments are spot on. If a 13" MBA appears in June with the right SB processor and GPU combination, then it should be close to the redesigned 13" MBP that everyone was hoping for but didn't arrive.



    I have certainly looking forward to seeing what the next Air revision brings. A month ago, I said that I thought any PC without a 500 Gb hard drive was pointless. I have an MBP with 256 GBs and because i have no space left I've been saving stuff on an additional hard drive. I checked that drive's capacity today and discovered that I'd used 300 GB in 6 months. So I'm already screwed with a 500 Gb drive. So i reckon that 1 TB is the new standard. So give me a MacBook Air with a 1TB drive please.



    At least you're funny. The only gpu combination with SB cpus in a MBA is Intel's HD 3000 (but IMO it's good enough), and unfortunatly, I think you're really screwed on the storage issue: the best you can hope for is a 512GB SSD blade, and that's not a sure thing. AFAIK, the biggest 2.5" SSD to date is Intel's 600GB, at a "reasonable" price... maybe next year, Spring/Summer 2012, with Ivy Bridge cpus...
  • Reply 39 of 42
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,354moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    USB3 is already 10Gb/s via 2 ports.

    The MP is already 160Gb/s via its PCIe slots.



    Thunderbolt is 20Gbps via 1 port - despite half being for display output. You're not getting 160Gbps out the Mac Pro either as the double-wide x16 slot is used by the GPU so you get 96Gbps left.



    Now of course one 10Gbps data port doesn't immediately match 96Gbps but there are ways round it and they will develop over time.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    Cost issues? Technical issues? Lack of partners? I've mentionned all those reasons in my previous post.



    You asked which it was and Intel said it was cost. There are enough partners but they don't want to be out of pocket.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    So now you understand that to get faster, TBolt needs more PCIe lanes...



    I don't see the point you're trying to make here. Wouldn't 16 PCI 3.0 lanes be fast enough (128Gbps)? They're coming with Ivy Bridge:



    http://semiaccurate.com/2011/03/28/l...or-ivy-bridge/



    Why couldn't Apple ditch FW800 and ethernet and put on two or three extra TB ports, which are smaller?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    Every gpu that can run at 4x speed will saturate TBolt, every RAID card that can run at 4x speed will saturate TBolt, some DSP cards will saturate TBolt, and if you add a display to the chain...



    If you add a display to the chain, it doesn't matter because it's on a separate 10Gbps channel and as I said, you're not going to run all these completely different expansion devices at once nor will they all saturate the port.



    Apogee have a 32-channel ExpressCard device:



    http://www.gak.co.uk/en/apogee-symph...book-pro/22482



    32 channels over a 2.5Gbps port. It may be possible to saturate an audio card on a 10Gbps port but probably not that likely.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    pro users will easily saturate the one port that is currently offered on MBPs.



    'easily' would suggest common usage scenarios. I don't think there are too many common scenarios that will saturate even a single TB port.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    Anyway, I don't think will see "adaptors" of any kind, those would need a TBolt receiver and the controller for the protocol choosen (in this case FW).



    Like this type of thing you mean?



    http://www.sonnettech.com/product/fw...esscard34.html



    TB is essentially the next ExpressCard but 4x the speed and much more compact.
  • Reply 40 of 42
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    Thunderbolt is 20Gbps via 1 port - despite half being for display output. You're not getting 160Gbps out the Mac Pro either as the double-wide x16 slot is used by the GPU so you get 96Gbps left.



    Now of course one 10Gbps data port doesn't immediately match 96Gbps but there are ways round it and they will develop over time.

    ---

    You asked which it was and Intel said it was cost. There are enough partners but they don't want to be out of pocket.

    ---

    I don't see the point you're trying to make here. Wouldn't 16 PCI 3.0 lanes be fast enough (128Gbps)? They're coming with Ivy Bridge:



    http://semiaccurate.com/2011/03/28/l...or-ivy-bridge/

    ---

    Why couldn't Apple ditch FW800 and ethernet and put on two or three extra TB ports, which are smaller?

    ---

    If you add a display to the chain, it doesn't matter because it's on a separate 10Gbps channel and as I said, you're not going to run all these completely different expansion devices at once nor will they all saturate the port.



    Apogee have a 32-channel ExpressCard device:



    http://www.gak.co.uk/en/apogee-symph...book-pro/22482



    32 channels over a 2.5Gbps port. It may be possible to saturate an audio card on a 10Gbps port but probably not that likely.



    'easily' would suggest common usage scenarios. I don't think there are too many common scenarios that will saturate even a single TB port.

    ---

    Like this type of thing you mean?

    http://www.sonnettech.com/product/fw...esscard34.html

    TB is essentially the next ExpressCard but 4x the speed and much more compact.



    If 20Gb/s was that easily achieved on a TBolt port, don't you think Apple/Intel would have mentionned it in the litterature? Both speak about TBolt as a 10Gb/s technology, that's what it is. So it's ok to calculate TBolt bandwidth including the video, but not on the MP? Wow. In any case, what prevents me from using a GPU card in one 4x slot and use 36x lanes for data? Even if you can achieve 20 or even 40Gb/s total with multiple devices on a single TB port, you can do more than that with what's left of PCIe slots in a Mac Pro. If you already know a way around, maybe you should tell Intel/Apple, they will certainly appreciate it. Honestly, I don't see the point in comparing what TBolt may offer in the future vs the current capabilities of a MP. Because the development on the MP (or other computers with slots) will not stop while TBolt evolves.

    ---

    I don't think that 10 partners on TBolt is enough.

    ---

    If you use the 16x PCIe 3.0 lanes on the future Ivy Bridge cpus for TBolt, where do you connect dedicated graphics? In any case TBolt being a dual channel technology, if you want two channels at 100Gb/s, you would need almost twice the number of PCIe 3.0 lanes. The fact that Intel's TBolt controller works with 2 channels at 10Gb/s doesn't mean it will magically work at 100Gb/s, Intel hopes to achieve this within 10 years. Not all Ivy Bridge cpus will get PCIe 3.0 at launch, I think that Intel/Apple will wait for PCIe 3.0 to be standard before thinking about offering a faster version of TBolt (probably at 20Gb/s per channel).

    ---

    I am certainly not against multiple TBolt ports on certain models (the Mac mini server would be a prime example, I already stated this), but you have to understand that multiple ports would use more PCIe lanes and need at least a displayport output each to be fully compliant. So 16x PCIe 3.0 lanes would offer 8x PCIe 3.0 lanes for a dedicated gpu and 8x PCIe 3.0 lanes for TBolt ports that could translate to up to 4 TBolt 1.0 ports (if enough displayport outputs are available, that depends on the gpus). In most (Apple) designs that would probably translate into 2 TBolt ports (FW removed). That same configuration would also work for TBolt 2.0 (20Gb/s per channel) when Intel will have a controller chip supporting 20Gb/s per channel).

    ---

    Saturation. I'm talking about 1 TBolt port at 10Gb/s.

    1- if video uses one channel, then you only have one channel for data.

    2- pure audio interfaces are not devices that use lots of bandwidth, there are FW interfaces that can handle 32 I/O, but in a pro audio environment 32 I/O is not much (remember that it is only 16 inputs and 16 outputs).

    3- DSP processing does, RAID systems do, probably some video interfaces/converters too...

    4- You don't seem to understand that in a typical PRO audio setup (I'm not talking about home recording, even by a pro) you will have one or multiple audio interface(s), DSP processing, and storage, (and eventually multiple displays) working all together at the same time. Currently this is done on separate cards (Apogee symphony for I/O, UAD-2 cards for DSP, for example, or combo cards (I/O+DSP) from AVID), and multiple internal/external drives on a MP, translate this to a MBP, and everything has to be external including the storage. So If you use a display, one channel would be used for video, and one channel for data, so minimum 1 audio interface + a RAID storage device + some DSP processing devices will share one channel, I can assure you that 3 to 4 UAD-2 QUAD cards will saturate that channel.

    5- Consumers may never get there, I agree, but pro users will. Hell, Magma doesn't make PCIe extension racks for fun, it's for people that need to put more cards connected to a MP (or other computers, they use ONE 4x or 8x slot to offer 4 to 8 additional PCIe slots.

    6- If a pro user moves from a MP environment to a MBP environment using similar equipment, he could easily saturate a single TBolt port. Put it simply, TBolt offers up to 4x PCIe performance, four 1x devices working at the same time + a display will saturate a TBolt port. There are not too many common scenarios in the consumer realm, because TBolt is not a consumer technology, nor will most of the upcoming TBolt devices. If you had seen some of the Pro Tools setups that I've seen, you'd be asking for 100Gb/s and multiple independant ports, right now.

    ---

    Oh no, not at all, there will be hubs and I hope really good/useful ones! Just not single port adaptors: one miniDP on one side, one FW on the other. That's what I meant by adaptors.

    ---

    Other than that TBolt is great. Before the end of the year we may see all Macs (non MP) with one TB port, the MMS hopefully with two. And next year, we could see 2 independant TBolt ports on the MBP and iMac too, replacing the FW port. And the year after that: TBolt may offer 20Gb/s per channel. Great potential.



    I'll even go further and say that TBolt would be great on the MP too. Why? Because each TBolt port will be able to handle 6/7 devices that don't require more than 1x PCIe 2.0 performance, leaving the (few) internal PCIe slots available for the faster devices (GPU, RAID, DSP,...). That alone would do more for the TBolt ecosystem, than offering 2 TBolt ports on mainstream computers.
Sign In or Register to comment.