Those of us following the Intel/Nvidia, debacle will be aware that, in a nutshell, due to Intel refusing to grant a license to make graphics chipsets compatible with Core-i CPUs, manufacturers can't use Nvidias amazing low TDP graphics chipsets with Core-i as they had been doing with Core 2 Duos eg 9400m in the Macbook Air.
The result is that if any notebook wants to use a Core-i, they have to either stick with Intel's on-board integrated GPU or they can also add a discrete Nvidia/ATI GPU.
The problem is that the Intel graphics chipset is significantly weaker than Nvidia's chipsets, even the MBA's 9400m, which is years old. This poses a major problem in the premium ultraportable market, and even in the standard notebook market.
Steve Jobs recently expressed Apple's decision not to opt for a Core-i in the 13" Macbook Pro specifically because of this reason (so they stuck with a Core2 Duo to include the Nvidia 320m chipset).
The assumption by many then is that the Macbook Air can't possibly use a Core-i as it will then take a big graphics hit (up to 50% less powerful than even Nvidia's LAST GEN card). They could use a discrete graphics card however with the thermal envelope constraints, it's less likely (unless Apple either choose to tolerate the higher temps or they can muster a Toshiba-esque cooling breakthrough).
The question I want to ask is, and I've been thinking about lately, is that if Apple do opt for Core-i only for the MBA, what impact is that going to have on our day-to-day tasks?
Despite the increased utility of the GPU by OpenCL/Grand Central Dispatch, I'm not entirely certain how significant the reduced graphics power would be noticed by me
Games: I won't play any graphics-intensive games on the MBA anyway, so no issue there.
YouTube: I don't stream much else. I imagine this will be the biggest performance reduction in my own day to day tasks, and I'll just have to load less windows simultaneously. I'm under the impression that the intel IGP will be ok for even HD youtubing though I've yet to read reports of specifically Intel IGP-only youtubing on OSX. However the increased grunt of the Core-i CPU may alleviate the IGP shortcomings- I'm not certain here as to which will be processing the video here.
Watching HD movies: As above.
Photoshop/rendering etc: I don't use any such graphics application, so again no effect on me.
Video editing: I only do a small amount of this, though I would certainly like the option of doing it well and as fast as possible. However I'm under the impression the CPU will take the strain, not the GPU. And here again, I'd benefit from a Core-i more than a core2duo.
Web Browsing: Again, flash/SW-related strains possible, though uncertain as to how significant, especially given the extra grunt of the Core-i.
Word processing/email: I do a lot of this, should have no bearing at all.
Any other scenarios for possible performance problems if the next MBA has Intel IGP only?
I have to say, from my admittedly brief thought on this so far, the prospect of Intel IGP only isn't looking as bad as I had feared. And I would more than welcome the added cooling (a MASSIVE factor for me) and the extra battery.
I'd appreciate any insights illuminating why the Intel IGP- only route is more significantly detrimental than I'm imaginig so far
The result is that if any notebook wants to use a Core-i, they have to either stick with Intel's on-board integrated GPU or they can also add a discrete Nvidia/ATI GPU.
The problem is that the Intel graphics chipset is significantly weaker than Nvidia's chipsets, even the MBA's 9400m, which is years old. This poses a major problem in the premium ultraportable market, and even in the standard notebook market.
Steve Jobs recently expressed Apple's decision not to opt for a Core-i in the 13" Macbook Pro specifically because of this reason (so they stuck with a Core2 Duo to include the Nvidia 320m chipset).
The assumption by many then is that the Macbook Air can't possibly use a Core-i as it will then take a big graphics hit (up to 50% less powerful than even Nvidia's LAST GEN card). They could use a discrete graphics card however with the thermal envelope constraints, it's less likely (unless Apple either choose to tolerate the higher temps or they can muster a Toshiba-esque cooling breakthrough).
The question I want to ask is, and I've been thinking about lately, is that if Apple do opt for Core-i only for the MBA, what impact is that going to have on our day-to-day tasks?
Despite the increased utility of the GPU by OpenCL/Grand Central Dispatch, I'm not entirely certain how significant the reduced graphics power would be noticed by me
Games: I won't play any graphics-intensive games on the MBA anyway, so no issue there.
YouTube: I don't stream much else. I imagine this will be the biggest performance reduction in my own day to day tasks, and I'll just have to load less windows simultaneously. I'm under the impression that the intel IGP will be ok for even HD youtubing though I've yet to read reports of specifically Intel IGP-only youtubing on OSX. However the increased grunt of the Core-i CPU may alleviate the IGP shortcomings- I'm not certain here as to which will be processing the video here.
Watching HD movies: As above.
Photoshop/rendering etc: I don't use any such graphics application, so again no effect on me.
Video editing: I only do a small amount of this, though I would certainly like the option of doing it well and as fast as possible. However I'm under the impression the CPU will take the strain, not the GPU. And here again, I'd benefit from a Core-i more than a core2duo.
Web Browsing: Again, flash/SW-related strains possible, though uncertain as to how significant, especially given the extra grunt of the Core-i.
Word processing/email: I do a lot of this, should have no bearing at all.
Any other scenarios for possible performance problems if the next MBA has Intel IGP only?
I have to say, from my admittedly brief thought on this so far, the prospect of Intel IGP only isn't looking as bad as I had feared. And I would more than welcome the added cooling (a MASSIVE factor for me) and the extra battery.
I'd appreciate any insights illuminating why the Intel IGP- only route is more significantly detrimental than I'm imaginig so far
