Is the Rev. B WAY better?

[iDave]

Yeah, What I am saying is, SSD is going to be our future. Just needs to come down in price

I'm in total agreement there. I'll save my $700, thanks. I could buy an Air, then buy another Air when they're upgraded next year, sell the first one on eBay and still come out ahead compared to buying one with a SSD now.

But I'm usually one to buy the lower end anyway. I've never been able to justify the cost of the top of the line. Next year's low end usually exceeds today's top of the line.

 

[ppc750fx]

Is it way better? I'd say it is, for two reasons:

1. SATA drives. The original had PITA... uh... PATA drives. The new SATA drives support higher throughput. This probably won't be too noticable with the magnetic drive models, but users with an SSD will notice the increase transfer speeds. Things like... uh... Safari will be snappier
2. 45nm chips. The Rev. As used a cut-down C2D that Intel based on an old shelved design. The Rev. Bs should use chips made with Intel's new 45nm process, resulting in cooler operation.
3. NVIDIA GeForce 9400M. The X3100 in the Rev. A is fine for Core Image and Quartz Extreme -- but any gaming will be disappointing to say the least. The 9400M, while still an integrated chip, is (according to the benchmarks) a far better-performing graphics processor.

So yeah, I'd say that Rev. B is likely to be far better.

 

[epicycle]

It is worth it ...

I did a comparison between the 17" MBP and the MBA rev 2 ( tinyurl.com/5rnlsl ) ... one has the SSD 128 GB and the other a 160GB SATA HDD. I'll give in to the "unknown" long term effects of the SDD but to be honest most people have a computer for what 3 years, 5 at most now days? I'm sure it'll last that ... at least the 3 year applecare ... anyhow, the real world use of the new SSD in the MBA R2 is in my opinion faster than the SATA in my general usage. It launches apps really fast, boots amazingly fast, and overall is a very snappy drive. Is it worth the upgrade costs ... I guess it depends. I for one always like the best that is out now in order to get the most out of my hardware so it's totally worth it. Not everyone can say that is a requirement so the answer may be no for you.

Did I mention it's fast? 95 second boot for the 17" MBP, 25 second boot for the MBA. How's that for fast?

 

[duffyanneal]

Is it way better? I'd say it is, for two reasons:
[*](Unconfirmed) 45nm chips. The Rev. As used a cut-down C2D that Intel based on an old shelved design. The Rev. Bs should use chips made with Intel's new 45nm process, resulting in cooler operation.

This has been confirmed. That one change is probably more responsible for the cooler temps than anything else. When the mainstream notebooks went to the newer Penryn core system temps dropped considerably. This is the CPU that should have shipped with the first rev.

 

[jackfrost123]

Is it way better? I'd say it is, for two reasons:

1. SATA drives. The original had PITA... uh... PATA drives. The new SATA drives support higher throughput. This probably won't be too noticable with the magnetic drive models, but users with an SSD will notice the increase transfer speeds. Things like... uh... Safari will be snappier

1. 
   
   This is not the case, pata had a high enough throttle for a single ssd, it's just that the ssd is in itself better in rev. b. And of course where SATA IS indeed better is in terms of compatibility and future upgrades, while with rev. a your hands were pretty much tied. That said, you can read elsewhere in this forum that (and someone please correct me here If i am wrong) mba rev. b is not exactly sata but a subtype of sata, that I can't recall it's name, that they use.

 

[jackfrost123]

This has been confirmed. That one change is probably more responsible for the cooler temps than anything else. When the mainstream notebooks went to the newer Penryn core system temps dropped considerably. This is the CPU that should have shipped with the first rev.

Well said, the penryn's are supposed to be a whooping 10 Watt tdp cooler than the previous cheap, 25 Watt tdp that is.

 

[chocolaterabbit]

Please don't take offense to this, but it is hard to read your post and believe you share an objective viewpoint.

While SSD has faster read times, the write times have been reported to be slower. From the the Ars review of the SSD vs HDD:



Does Ars think SSD is worth the premium?



Even with the faster read times, raw computing power of a 2.0ghz or 2.4ghz macbook will still trump the macbook air.

Regarding your "proof" that the 9400m "works really well":
Your proof has never been substantiated and is just a rumor. In fact, a follow up from arstechnica says:



Before you get everybody's hopes up, I think everybody should wait until benchmarks and reviews are released to objectively judge the differences.

There's a few things wrong with your argument.
Firstly, the SSD in the new macbook air is a lot faster than the first MBA's SSD, and Ars may not recommend the first SSD, but it's likely they will recommend this one.
Secondly, you misquoted the no improvement line. They did not see an improvement when they copied the drivers for the new macbooks to the old ones, not they didn't see an improvement when they played video on the new ones. The 9400 is definitely a lot better than anything else before it.
Thirdly, a faster processor is only useful in heavy computation. You would not need a faster processor browsing the net or writing documents. You would need to write and read from disk constantly though, so SSD would be more useful than a faster processor.

 

[Maxx Power]

Well said, the penryn's are supposed to be a whooping 10 Watt tdp cooler than the previous cheap, 25 Watt tdp that is.

From what I remember, the old C2D chips in Rev.A were all 20 watt custom parts based on the L7700 and the L7500 which are both low voltage chips to run cool. The L7700 and L7500 are both 17 watt TDP parts but due to the smaller form factor and what Anandtech concluded was the electrical problems, the TDP for the smaller form factor equivalent L7500 and L7700 used in the Rev.A's were not as low as their traditional socket counterparts.

In the new Rev.B, I remember reading that the chips used are the SL9300 (1.6ghz) and SL9400 (1.86ghz) small form factor chips. The S denotes small form factor and L denotes low voltage. These are supposedly 17 watt TDP parts, about 3 watts less than the Rev.A's.

The 25 watt penryn's you mentioned are "standard voltage" parts, they are used in the macbook and pro's except the fastest one. They are not used in the Rev.B air, the Rev.B air's cooling subsystem probably can't handle that additional heat production...

 

[dubhe]

These new specs make me think my next MB will be an Air, and that will be May or June next year. My BlackBook was an upgrade from my 12" PB but just doesn't have the quality as far as I am concerned.

Any ideas when Rev C will be out? Which processor will that be sporting? Can't believe I am looking to Rev C when B isn't even shipping yet!

 

[fyrefly]

These new specs make me think my next MB will be an Air, and that will be May or June next year. My BlackBook was an upgrade from my 12" PB but just doesn't have the quality as far as I am concerned.

Any ideas when Rev C will be out? Which processor will that be sporting? Can't believe I am looking to Rev C when B isn't even shipping yet!

It took Apple 10 months to update the air from revA to RevB. Expect it to take just as long to get RevC. There wont be any/many portable updates till the mobile versions of Nehalem aka Core i7 ship in late 09.

http://www.macworld.com/article/136223/nehalem.html

 

[Molopo]

I don't see why anyone would buy a higher end MBA with an SSD when they can wait like 1-2 months and get an SSD with the same capacity + speed for half the price you'd pay buying from apple.

 

[mac jones]

I don't see why anyone would buy a higher end MBA with an SSD when they can wait like 1-2 months and get an SSD with the same capacity + speed for half the price you'd pay buying from apple.

Someone dismantled this new Air on this forum and said that it has a ZIFF connector (SATA) Ziff

If this is true you would probably have a very hard time getting an aftermarket SSD for this new version. The drives have the Apple brand on them and Samsung is not even mentioned (except fot the original Samsung part number)

very odd if true about the sata ziff.

 

[netdog]

The current MBA line has no problem playing 720p/1080p x264 files with the CPU independently anyway.

The Rev A MBAs stutter with SD iTunes videos.

As for the drive, isn't it now SATA? That should make it a lot faster.

 

[botkiller]

Best Buy is selling the Rev. A Macbook Air for $1299.

Apple's education store is selling the Rev. B Macbook Air for $1699.

I'm struggling between paying less or getting the new features. So, for those who have experience with both, are the improvements in the 2nd gen worth the $400 increase?

 

[amsukalski]

I can't find anything about the ZIFF connection. NC MacGuy was the one who dismantled his Rev. B Air... maybe he could confirm it? I actually can't find much of anything about Ziff SATA connectors in general.

Someone dismantled this new Air on this forum and said that it has a ZIFF connector (SATA) Ziff

If this is true you would probably have a very hard time getting an aftermarket SSD for this new version. The drives have the Apple brand on them and Samsung is not even mentioned (except fot the original Samsung part number)

very odd if true about the sata ziff.

 

[mac jones]

I can't find anything about the ZIFF connection. NC MacGuy was the one who dismantled his Rev. B Air... maybe he could confirm it? I actually can't find much of anything about Ziff SATA connectors in general.

Actually, it's a LIF connector (says right on it in the pict in the thread above)

LIF is a like a ZIFF (zero insertion force-but the LIF is probably 'low' insertion force ) I'm guessing. This must be a first-SATA LIF.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Lif_connector_toshiba_mk4009gal.jpg

So if you want a SSD in this model your going to have to get it like that cuz it's probably gonna be a while before you see these things on ebay.

 

[mlemonds]

Best Buy is selling the Rev. A Macbook Air for $1299.

Apple's education store is selling the Rev. B Macbook Air for $1699.

I'm struggling between paying less or getting the new features. So, for those who have experience with both, are the improvements in the 2nd gen worth the $400 increase?

yes, but if you cant afford the extra $400 just get the 2.4 GlassBook.

 

[dudup]

yes, but if you cant afford the extra $400 just get the 2.4 GlassBook.

I completely agree. But go for the MBA rev B f you can. It's worth it.

 

[rittchard]

Best Buy is selling the Rev. A Macbook Air for $1299.

Apple's education store is selling the Rev. B Macbook Air for $1699.

I'm struggling between paying less or getting the new features. So, for those who have experience with both, are the improvements in the 2nd gen worth the $400 increase?

It really depends on what your intended long-term intended use for the machine is. If you are satisfied with the hard drive size (80GB) and graphics capabilities (X3100), the Rev A is an awesome machine on its own.

If you are looking toward the future for graphics and other capabilities, or have aspirations of playing the latest game releases, you will want to pay the extra for the new chipset. Take a look not just at Apple's site but also nVidia:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_9400m_g_us.html

Things like PureVideo and CUDA/PhysX have yet to be fully taken advantage of (for Mac OR PC), so having the 9400m has big potential upside for the future (on top of just enhancing gaming performance ~300-400%).