That is kind of pricey I have seen core 2 quad 17in gaming laptops going for less than that. Hell, I am seeing some nice 17in machines with the new i7 for less. Then again once you add all those Dell coupons the price should be a good bit lower, I think.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Did Intel announce anything @ CES that could potentially be in the next Macbook Air
- Thread starter andygabriel
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, Im sure when you get a computer resale its going to probably be cheaper... partially because of all the bloatware they install on the systems (which most of the time is completely unnecessary) but when I simply configured dells top of the line against apples top of the line on each of their respective websites, thats what I got. I was trying to be as fair as possible... I didnt add anything to the dell to spike the price up..
Yes, people can go find what they want on the Internet to to try to prove people wrong. Most of the time, people try to find the highest end 17" Dell workstation to do that. The truth is there are closeout models in many brands that have been around for over a year (maybe closer to 18/24 months) with SIMILAR specs for less than half the price of a 15" MBP. I believe the 15" display is the common size of notebook that most people want. When comparing the 17" the MBP holds up slightly better. When comparing the 13" the MBP is a complete JOKE!
There are PC notebooks with Core i7 and have DEFINITELY TWICE THE GRAPHICS PERFORMANCE that are not really twice the power but represent that as Apple has never been willing to use higher-end components that many PC manufacturers use at 2/3 the price of an MBP. I could go find them to try to prove someone wrong, but it's pointless as there is a huge range. Some will be closer to half others will be more.
If we're talking about a 15" display, Core 2 Duo CPU and piss poor 9600m or EQUIVALENT graphics, there are plenty of "clearance" type models that are over a year old at less than HALF the price of an MBP. That's just the point, these are OLD PC notebooks that are still current when compared to an MBP; that's the sad part. Apple really is a great company to buy stock in. It really has the ability to make a sucker out of any Mac buyer.
If we all only bought Macs within two months of when they were last updated, Apple would be forced to continually compete like PC manufacturers do. It's the unaware consumer that allows Apple to get away with its system of deception (not really deception but will not disclose that they're being updated even a day before an update). I only buy my Macs during the first two months after an update. I simply cannot bare the thought of buying eight month old technology at eight month old pricing... times like right now are the absolute worst time to buy a Mac.
But in all, it was an exaggeration meant to dramatize an illustration that the MBP is far behind in computing performance power and yet it's twice the price for what can be found that's similar. It's more either/or not both... but it can be both depending on how hard you try to prove the point.
I have to say that Scottsdale is pretty on point, shame there aren't more like him.
I am pretty sure now for around the price of a the 15in MBP you can get a 15in quad core i7 machine with a bettery gpu and a wide choice of screen resolutions and optical drive options. Granted battery life won't be as good, but for some people that not a key issue, not to mention Apple is pretty good at getting solid battery life out of their machines. If Apple made a similar machine I would have to believe battery life would be pretty nice for a quad core laptop.
I am pretty sure now for around the price of a the 15in MBP you can get a 15in quad core i7 machine with a bettery gpu and a wide choice of screen resolutions and optical drive options. Granted battery life won't be as good, but for some people that not a key issue, not to mention Apple is pretty good at getting solid battery life out of their machines. If Apple made a similar machine I would have to believe battery life would be pretty nice for a quad core laptop.
It is funny for people to think that simply combining high performance components will make a high performance computer.
I worked through all of the alternatives in my mind. I had it figured out that it would be nearly 50/50 between Penryn and Arrandale. Then, after I really thought about Apple and its rumored disgust with Arrandale and Intel's IGP, I believed that it would be a Penryn SL9x00 CPU and an Nvidia GPU. Then there was the report that Intel is giving away two new Core i5 MBPs, and it turned my logic back to Arrandale. Now, I don't know which way Apple is going...
55% - Core 2 Duo SL 9x00 CPU with an Nvidia 105m (around 2.4GHz)
20% - Core i7 CPU 2.2 GHz boost to around 2.8 GHz | Intel IGP
24% - Core i7 CPU 2.2 GHz boost to around 2.8 GHz | ATI 4xxx Graphics
1% - ARM CPU with 8 Cores at 1GHz (just for the heck of it) | Nvidia
I say the key new revolutionary feature will be something with the display. It will be OLED, HD, or 3D! Something not available in any other Mac.
That's my guess... anyone else want to take a shot?
Thx for the prompt reply Scottdale. I really hoping for the Arrandale Core i7. But what make you think we're going to have OLED, HD or even 3D. Do you think they're are going to change the design of the MAcbook Air. I hope not!
I don't think Apple will go for intel IGP since it doesn't support Open GL.
Right now the Macbook Air is capable of being the primary and sole computer for many people out there including me. I use my 2008 white macbook for (Safari, Email, iLife, Itunes and Microsoft Office). The macbook air is more than capable of handling those tasks. Correct me if i'm wrong.
Is there enough room in the Air to accommodate a discrete graphic card?
Is there hope for 4GB RAM and 256GB SSD?
You don;t think it would be either the Core 2 Duo SL or Core i7 with something like the nvidia GT305m as its suppose to bit more heat efficient?
Yes, the current MBA will do all you need it to andygabriel. To your next question about space for a dedicated graphics card, I don't know if there is enough room now. However, the 32NM Arrandale CPU/IGP takes up less space on the mainboard. In addition, technology has miniaturized significantly since the MBA was introduced in January 2008. But to be fair, Apple only made the MBA really good in October 2008 with Penryn LV SL CPU inclusion and 9400m. I would think that since other ultraportables have enough space for dedicated graphics, the MBA could easily do it too.
I don't think we will get anywhere near those graphics. If we use Apple's past as a point for predicting, the Nvidia GPU/chipset is what Apple would prefer. Since Nvidia cannot make chipsets/GPUs for the Core-i series chips, it makes sense for Apple to stick with Penryn. Honestly, we don't need an Arrandale CPU. And we should far prefer a Penryn with Nvidia GPU/chipset over an Arrandale with Intel's IGP.
According to some insiders, Apple said they wouldn't use Intel's Arrandale CPUs unless Intel removed the IGPs. I believe Apple will hold firm to this at least in low end Macs. They can use the Intel IGP as a dual graphics option in the MBPs. I think Intel will accommodate specific custom CPUs less the IGP for Apple's Mac order as it means selling Apple chipsets too.
If Apple cannot buy Arrandale without the IGP, I say Apple either goes Penryn/Nvidia chipsets or Arrandale with ATI. I really thought we were going to learn a lot with the iMac updates. At first I didn't think we learned anything. But the more I thought about it, Apple made its strategy perfectly clear. In consumer grade models, it's going to stick with Penryn and Nvidia.
Now, it could be that Apple just included Core i5/i7 CPUs in the upper end iMac because Arrandale mobile CPUs weren't available yet that would be used in the lower end iMacs.
It will be in our best interests for Apple to get custom Core i7 CPUs without the IGP. We are all going to suffer terribly if we go from 9400m to Intel's IGP. It's about 40% of the performance of the 15 month old 9400m. An updated Nvidia GPU with Penryn would improve our graphics performance.
I believe the MBA will probably get a new form factor and definitely a completely different display technology. I "just believe" is my new reason to believe, as I don't want to get flamed about why I believe if it's not true - I will just be wrong. I would rather be called "WRONG" than a Liar.
I don't think we will get anywhere near those graphics. If we use Apple's past as a point for predicting, the Nvidia GPU/chipset is what Apple would prefer. Since Nvidia cannot make chipsets/GPUs for the Core-i series chips, it makes sense for Apple to stick with Penryn. Honestly, we don't need an Arrandale CPU. And we should far prefer a Penryn with Nvidia GPU/chipset over an Arrandale with Intel's IGP.
According to some insiders, Apple said they wouldn't use Intel's Arrandale CPUs unless Intel removed the IGPs. I believe Apple will hold firm to this at least in low end Macs. They can use the Intel IGP as a dual graphics option in the MBPs. I think Intel will accommodate specific custom CPUs less the IGP for Apple's Mac order as it means selling Apple chipsets too.
If Apple cannot buy Arrandale without the IGP, I say Apple either goes Penryn/Nvidia chipsets or Arrandale with ATI. I really thought we were going to learn a lot with the iMac updates. At first I didn't think we learned anything. But the more I thought about it, Apple made its strategy perfectly clear. In consumer grade models, it's going to stick with Penryn and Nvidia.
Now, it could be that Apple just included Core i5/i7 CPUs in the upper end iMac because Arrandale mobile CPUs weren't available yet that would be used in the lower end iMacs.
It will be in our best interests for Apple to get custom Core i7 CPUs without the IGP. We are all going to suffer terribly if we go from 9400m to Intel's IGP. It's about 40% of the performance of the 15 month old 9400m. An updated Nvidia GPU with Penryn would improve our graphics performance.
I believe the MBA will probably get a new form factor and definitely a completely different display technology. I "just believe" is my new reason to believe, as I don't want to get flamed about why I believe if it's not true - I will just be wrong. I would rather be called "WRONG" than a Liar.
That just comes down to Apple writing the drivers, Intel does provide OpenGL support for their IGPs under Windows after all.
That's extremely unlikely.
Apple accounts for less than 5% of worldwide notebooks sales, have little desktop presence and are non-existent in the netbook, desktop replacement notebook and server markets. In short, they're small fish as far as Intel is concerned.
Couple that with Arrandale keeping core logic, such as the memory controller, on the IGP die as well as Intel rushing CPU/GPU integration specifically to combat third party chipsets taking a chunk out of their margins and I can't see it happening.
Providing an IGP-less Arrandale would not only defeat the primary purpose behind its introduction in the first place, it'd also require a redesigned CPU.
Sadly I reckon you're right about a MBA refresh that might still be stuck with Penryn due to Apple being stubborn, which would be our loss. The new Arrandale LM processors would be a significant power upgrade for the MBA after all.
The 9400M might offer better 3D performance than the new Intel IGP but it remains a sprinting contest between molasses and a glacier. The IGP has every feature the MBA needs, including switchable graphics, dual-HDMI support, dual-stream decoding of Full-HD video, audio bitstreaming and 2560x1600 support for external displays. Sure, it doesn't play anything but mainstream or casual games decently even at 1280x800 but neither does the 9400M.
I wouldn't be surprised if they went to Arrandale despite the GPU downgrade because the same thing happened with the Intel transition, but I think Penryn is somewhat more likely, since that's what the iMac did (although on the other hand Clarkdale wasn't released at that time).
If intel doesn't offer the core i5/i7 without its IGP, then how does the updated HP Envy line with i5 or i7 without the intel IGP, but with a dedicated ATI gpu, or Sony and their Vaio S line where it offers a Nvidia GT310, pair with an i5(and I think even an i7) but no intel gpu option?
The fact that the Intel IGP is there doesn't mean you have to use it or that Intel somehow didn't provide a PCe 2.0 x16 controller for other video solutions.
You English teacher called to inform you that the above sentence is an abomination.
Anyway, not making use of the switchable graphics isn't a good thing. Notebooks with a discrete GPU but without switchable graphics will have significantly worse battery life.
Apple doesn't have to use the Intel IGP even if it's there, but I assume it's still drawing power??? Anyone know the answer there? Someone mentioned fusing it off.
I don't think Apple would use a dual solution in the MBA. I think the other laptops offering ATI solutions with ATI aren't as focused on efficiency as Apple (I could be wrong... I am no expert on other manufacturers solutions).
I really hope if Apple uses ATI, and Arrandale with IGP, it uses an automatic graphics switching solution like another manufacturer introduced this week. That would be AMAZING!
I think anyone believing the Intel IGP solely would be sufficient in the MBA doesn't need to use an MBA as their primary computer OR has no care in the world about graphics performance. Going Intel IGP is going to be a 60% DROP IN PERFORMANCE over the 15 month old Nvidia 9400m.
Intel IGP SUCKS and would be a disgrace in any Mac! If Apple only uses an Intel IGP, I will NOT be buying an MBA! The Nvidia 9400m is exactly what SAVED the MBA!
I have a hard time imagining Apple accepting Intel IGP in any Mac as a sole solution as the whole point of Snow Leopard is to take advantage of things like OpenCL and Grand Central. I don't see Apple using such poor graphics given its desire to use the whole system to improve the performance for the Mac user. Also, Apple wouldn't go backwards and use a single-core solution. The point of Snow Leopard is to progress with technology.
Intel is forcing computer manufacturers to use its IGP, but it's anti-competitive in nature. In the long run, this will not be a successful strategy. Until Intel loses in court, it will strong-arm pc manufacturers to buy the whole system. Nvidia will get another chance to build chipsets, and we are all losers by Nvidia not being able to produce for the Core series CPUs.
I will be completely HAPPY with a Penryn CPU and Nvidia chipset/GPU. I will be completely happy with an Arrandale CPU with an ATI graphics card. Anything that solely uses Intel as a graphics solution is a complete failure.
Apple will not be solely using Intel's IGP, as it will be a gigantic step backwards in Mac computing. Everyone knows it including Intel.
I don't think Apple would use a dual solution in the MBA. I think the other laptops offering ATI solutions with ATI aren't as focused on efficiency as Apple (I could be wrong... I am no expert on other manufacturers solutions).
I really hope if Apple uses ATI, and Arrandale with IGP, it uses an automatic graphics switching solution like another manufacturer introduced this week. That would be AMAZING!
I think anyone believing the Intel IGP solely would be sufficient in the MBA doesn't need to use an MBA as their primary computer OR has no care in the world about graphics performance. Going Intel IGP is going to be a 60% DROP IN PERFORMANCE over the 15 month old Nvidia 9400m.
Intel IGP SUCKS and would be a disgrace in any Mac! If Apple only uses an Intel IGP, I will NOT be buying an MBA! The Nvidia 9400m is exactly what SAVED the MBA!
I have a hard time imagining Apple accepting Intel IGP in any Mac as a sole solution as the whole point of Snow Leopard is to take advantage of things like OpenCL and Grand Central. I don't see Apple using such poor graphics given its desire to use the whole system to improve the performance for the Mac user. Also, Apple wouldn't go backwards and use a single-core solution. The point of Snow Leopard is to progress with technology.
Intel is forcing computer manufacturers to use its IGP, but it's anti-competitive in nature. In the long run, this will not be a successful strategy. Until Intel loses in court, it will strong-arm pc manufacturers to buy the whole system. Nvidia will get another chance to build chipsets, and we are all losers by Nvidia not being able to produce for the Core series CPUs.
I will be completely HAPPY with a Penryn CPU and Nvidia chipset/GPU. I will be completely happy with an Arrandale CPU with an ATI graphics card. Anything that solely uses Intel as a graphics solution is a complete failure.
Apple will not be solely using Intel's IGP, as it will be a gigantic step backwards in Mac computing. Everyone knows it including Intel.
Obviously it'll draw some power, the entire chip can't be gated off since the memory controller is on the same die as the IGP. That said the IGP does downclock/downvolt automatically and if running on a discrete GPU you'll free up the majority of the IGP power draw.
However, due to the nature of turbo boost - which applies to both the CPU and GPU - that means the CPU will likely run on higher turbo-modes more often since it'll still be within the TDP allowance.
In short, running on a discrete GPU will net you back most of the power but not all.
Disregarding for a moment the fact that anyone using an ultralight as their primary computer have very insignificant computer needs to begin with, especially graphics-wise, you're post is too much FUD and too little reality.
Lets say it's 50% slower, numbers don't quite support that but it's close enough. 50% slower in what exactly? Synthetics? Sure. Reasonably modern, non-casual, games? Absolutely.
Do keep in mind we're talking about the difference between 7-10 and 10-15 FPS here though, it's not like using the 9400M would suddenly make Crysis playable on your MBA.
Indeed, if gaming is your primary concern why are you playing on a notebook to begin with? Let alone an ultralight notebook built by Apple, that's hardly a good mix for graphics performance.
For the vast majority of tasks one could want a MBA for you'd notice absolutely no difference. It's not like using an Intel IGP instead of the 9400M will suddenly make your window scrolling twice as slow or anything like that.
Intel offers OpenGL support in their Windows drivers and are quite strongly pushing OpenCL as well. Both of those fact are quite irrelevant though as it's up to Apple to come up with the relevant MacOS drivers. It's by no means impossible, though I'm willing to believe that Apple would rather continue pushing severely outdated tech than write new drivers.
It's pretty much irrelevant whether or not Intel lose that particular case as far as the IGP is concerned. Even if nVidia could design chipsets for Arrandale what would that constitute, a southbridge?
By including an IGP, and a very competent IGP at that, on-package Intel has pretty much killed off any reason to create a third party chipset. It's going to be cheaper, and more efficient, to just include a switchable discrete GPU to complement the Arrandale CPU/IGP and the Intel southbridge than creating a full chipset replacement that duplicate existing functionality.
The courts can rule in favor of nVidia as far as their chipset production is concerned but they can't dictate that Intel must not include an on-package IGP in their CPUs.
Indeed, CPU and GPU has been slated for reintegration for some time and you won't see any future Intel chips without it either. Sandy Bridge, the new Intel architechture aimed for late 2010/early 2011 further integrates the IGP by moving it on-die. This will reduce power draw further and help the CPU by reintegrating the memory controller back into the die as well.
Apple may well choose to stick to Penryn for the MBA and low-end MBP but rest assured it's due to appearances and laziness on their part more than any actual drop in performance. For the MBA and MBP 13 an Arrandale-class CPU would be a much more significant upgrade than moving from the 9400M to the Arrandale IGP would be a downgrade.
The vast majority of users simply wouldn't notice any difference.