Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MBA Sandy Bridge CPUs
- Thread starter vingochr
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
25nm NANDs should bring the prices down at least a bit. E.g. Crucial C400 512GB is "only" ~800$ while other 34nm 512GB SSDs I've seen are +1000$. Still doubt that we will see 512GB in MBAs this year though.
Interesting link. So to summarize:
- Battery life is slightly improved
- Graphics is a bit worse, especially in Windows (better Nvidia drivers in Windows perhaps)
- CPU blows the pants off the previous generation
- The fan blows harder
The next few generations of MacBooks should be good. Looking forward it.
im not excited about a 11 inch sandybridge macbook air. look how loud the 13 inch sandybridge processors are now. they turned the mac into a hair dryer. no thanks i dont want less battery life on my 11 inch and be noisier.
everyone says sandybridge runs cooler. that is not what ive seen so far with what people are experiencing with fan noise. so i dont care what specs says i care what mr cpu fan says.
everyone says sandybridge runs cooler. that is not what ive seen so far with what people are experiencing with fan noise. so i dont care what specs says i care what mr cpu fan says.
Although true, what's the point? It's not like you can take the i5 CPU and pair it with the 320m. You get either the HD3000 + i5 or the C2D + 320m. I Would MUCH rather have the i5+ HD3000 than the C2D +320m. From my experience with the i7dual core 13" it is all around faster than the 2010 13" I had before and both with SSD.
128 GB Flash standard
128 GB Flash standard across and
low voltage CPU in 11" (instead of ultra low voltage) and
turbo boost/32nm helps battery life and performance ...
128 GB Flash standard across and
low voltage CPU in 11" (instead of ultra low voltage) and
turbo boost/32nm helps battery life and performance ...
lower clocked intel IGP is a worry in 17w/25 watts compared to 35watt parts ...
Igp
Apple never aimed the MBA at the video-intensive market, so I really don't see how this would be an issue, especially as the lower clocked IGP in the 2.3GHz MBP 13" has performed fairly adequately against the 320M. Add to that the driver upgrades from intel that are bound to extend performance and functionality, the lower clocked (compared to the MBP) IGP isn't going to be an issue.
Apple never aimed the MBA at the video-intensive market, so I really don't see how this would be an issue, especially as the lower clocked IGP in the 2.3GHz MBP 13" has performed fairly adequately against the 320M. Add to that the driver upgrades from intel that are bound to extend performance and functionality, the lower clocked (compared to the MBP) IGP isn't going to be an issue.
Agreed. The 13" MBP has the 35W version, which is different than MBAs would receive.
Anyone remember the Nvidia CEO saying Apple would use the 320m GPU/chipset for a long time? I think it could mean through 2011 and Apple would wait for Ivy Bridge or find a way to pair AMD GPU or even switch to AMD for both CPU and chipset.
I really questioned the June MBA update rumors until I read Apple sold 1.1m MBAs in the 4th quarter of 2010. At the same time I don't see many complaining or saying they will not buy an MBA with C2D.
I wish Apple would just do a light bump and increase RAM to 4GB std, add backlit keyboard, add Thunderbolt, and switch to USB 3.0. Keep the same CPU and GPU the same. Would love switch to AMD for GPU with SB. Not happening but I can dream.
Anyways I agree people might be better off with Nvidia 9400m than the HD3000 in lower voltage SB chips. I really don't think Apple can do this. I think the losses would be so great as to affect the line and give it a designation as the incapable MacBook rather than the better than Pro current MBA.
Will you guys stop dissing the Intel HD 3000 IGP before its actually been shown to be a lot less powerful than the 320M. It's definitely NOT slower than the 9400M which is 2-3x slower than the 320M. Apple have literally no use to keep the C2D with the 320M when they can make a more money on a much more powerful and competitive all-rounder ultra-portable. The current MBA has a very-very good IGP, which is practically redundant for almost everybody's uses. It makes much more sense to go with a very powerful, very efficient CPU and IGP solution from Intel Sandy Bridge line than to harp on about graphics with Nvidia which will be outperformed when Ivy Bridge comes.
No, I will not stop dissing Intel's HD3000 IGP until Intel plays fair and its IGP is capable with Nvidia integrated GPUs at a minimum.
In reality it's really bad compared to the 320m other than some HD playback. Intel plays dirty, and I hope the JD continues investigating how Nvidia's license was cancelled. Intel couldn't compete so they played disgustingly dirty. In the end, consumers all lose big time.
We have had an MBA with Intel's IGP before, and I suspect another one would leave it incredibly underpowered and incapable vs what it already is with 320m.
In addition, the user I quoted made an incredibly accurate point and the lower voltage CPUs have far inferior version. Just how bad does it have to be for Apple to bypass it???? I hope we will see Apple find an alternative to not have its MBA suffer the same setbacks of the original MBA.
What has made the MBA so incredibly capable is Nvidia's GPU/chipset, and I hope Apple doesn't forget that even though many here apparently have...
I seriously understand how powerful the 320M is, but have an open mind mate: Intel have done a really good job here.
Here's some points for you:-
1) have you read my first post about what I deduce Apple will choose for the refresh MBAs and why? (NB I changed to i5 and i7 for 11" now for reasons stated in a different post in this thread)
2) do you realise that any current benchmarks for the HD 3000 will always be a low-end estimate as drivers for the Intel IGP will be improved in time, whereas Nvidia obviously has very mature drivers as it manufactures mostly GPUs and has been doing this for a VERY long time.
3) why would Apple go with a ~12W IGP (the 320M) when SB processors have a built-on-die IGP at no extra TDP? Especially as Apple can't upgrade the CPUs without losing the 320M.
(This may change in the future when Intel allow Nvidia IGPs again, but with latest trends, Apple look mostly to keep to AMD. This may be due to Nvidia's competition in the handheld market for processors competing with Apple's own A4/A5 chips)
4) what applications would someone use the MBA for now that they couldn't use it for with the SB CPUs? AND how many people actually have to use those programs on a MBA?
5) According to benchmarks from http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html the Intel HD 3000 is only slower than the 320M in 3DMark Vantage, and is faster in everything else (most likely due to the drivers). The slightly lower clocked ULV and LV SB HD 3000's will perform very similarly to the MBA's 320M. Remember most of the benchmarks are peformed on more powerful notebooks for both the 320M and the Intel HD 3000.
https://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=274684&d=1299456167
6) the HD 3000 is 2-3x as powerful or more than the 9400M in almost everything according to http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html. In practicality, it may be slightly less, again depending on what notebooks the 9400M benches are done on.
https://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=274685&d=1299456167
7) everybody knows that laptops are all about compromise. Apple had to use the C2D for a time until SB with the MBPs because the previous Intel graphics were not good enough. The 320M was Apple's sort of the 'finger-up' to Intel saying "your IGP is so bad we're still putting C2D's into our 13" MBPs and we've got a IGP which we think you'll never better!" Intel really stepped up their game, so Apple decided that the new HD 3000 was 'adequate', so Apple uses it, which is great because now we have REALLY fast CPUs and much better power saving features.
8) I've researched this very thoroughly, and although the 320M made the MBA rock in graphics, the SB processors will be a large improvement overall as the IGP is not much worse (if at all) and the CPU is WAY better.
Attachments
I realize that morals and ethics in business is incredibly important but Intel cannot find a righteous path and plays dirty. First and foreplay, consumers are being damaged by Intel's dirty play. I feel that is more important than you obviously.
Next you keep comparing the Intel IGP that ships with 35w and 45w chips to the Nvidia 320m in the MBA. The faster the CPU the faster the IGP. Intel's HD3000 is very misleading because people like you are comparing it like it is an integrated GPU chipset that runs the same regardless of the CPU, but what it really is is an IGP on the CPU that is going to be drastically worse in 17W and 25W CPUs than 35W and 45W CPUs. Do some more research of the exact IGP that will be in the MBAs before you use the 35W and 45W numbers as though they're the same or even similar even though they're not.
You are passionate, and I appreciate that, but I believe you're incorrectly making conclusions based on Intel's poor scheming unwillingness to differentiate the IGPs by labeling them the same rather than describing them as they truly work. In addition, I think you're missing the big picture and buying into Intel's marketing and accepting their business practices as ethical and fair when they are disgusting.
I hope the numbers don't prove you wrong because I think Apple will value the MBA too much and not want to tarnish its image with an Intel IGP that ruined the image of the original MBA.
Next you keep comparing the Intel IGP that ships with 35w and 45w chips to the Nvidia 320m in the MBA. The faster the CPU the faster the IGP. Intel's HD3000 is very misleading because people like you are comparing it like it is an integrated GPU chipset that runs the same regardless of the CPU, but what it really is is an IGP on the CPU that is going to be drastically worse in 17W and 25W CPUs than 35W and 45W CPUs. Do some more research of the exact IGP that will be in the MBAs before you use the 35W and 45W numbers as though they're the same or even similar even though they're not.
You are passionate, and I appreciate that, but I believe you're incorrectly making conclusions based on Intel's poor scheming unwillingness to differentiate the IGPs by labeling them the same rather than describing them as they truly work. In addition, I think you're missing the big picture and buying into Intel's marketing and accepting their business practices as ethical and fair when they are disgusting.
I hope the numbers don't prove you wrong because I think Apple will value the MBA too much and not want to tarnish its image with an Intel IGP that ruined the image of the original MBA.
If Apple just put a decent i7 Sandy Bridge processor in the Air with 4 GB of RAM and a backlit keyboard I would be all over that. Even perhaps a slight screen design refresh as well, and I would be in laptop heaven.
That won't happen, the current chipset doesn't support ThunderBolt, and even Sandy Bridge doesn't support USB 3.0.
They'd have to go Sandy Bridge to support ThunderBolt, and it makes sense because CPU-wise it's a great upgrade, and if the GPU is good enough for the MBP they certainly won't hesitate to put it in the Air.
ThunderBolt does require an extra chip though so I wonder if there'll be space for it. Although on the other hand, the 320M is rather large and I expect the Sandy Bridge chipset to be much smaller since it hardly does anything anymore (memory controller and GPU are now in the processor itself). So they might find some space for it.
I totally agree with vingochr, I think the next one will have Sandy Bridge with built in GPU and it will be an even better machine than the current ones.
I´d like that!... but, that would be killing the MBP 2011!... who is going to buy the new MBP if the MBA 2011 has same processor, thunderbolt, 4 ram and backlit keyboard adding beauty and lightweight?
or i guess part of me wants new release to be not so good so I don´t feel guilty of buying the MBA now!!
Well, Apple had no problems using the Intel HD 3000 in 13" MacBook Pro so it should be a no-brainer for MBA.
Maybe you should see the Foxconn factories where MBAs are made before you start saying what is ethical and what isn't. Business is business and only profit matters. No matter how unethical Intel's choices are, it doesn't give us any extra options. A perfect chip won't suddenly fall out of the sky.
Last edited:
Because it won't be the same processor. The Ultra-low voltage CPU's that go into the 11" are way lower in CPU speed, will only be dual core, etc. So the 11" will still be a lot slower than the MBP in terms of CPU speed and there won't be a quad-core option for either the 11" and 13".
Edit: The top-range 13" might be the same as the MBP 13" base model (both 2.3 Ghz) but it will also be a lot more expensive, as it is now.
And yes I'm really hoping for a 3G module too!
No, there's one ULV i5 dualcore, and two i7 dualcores. 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6Ghz respectively. There are no Sandy Bridge single cores at all. Not mobile ones anyway.
Specs: 2537M i5 1.4Ghz, 2617M i7 1.5Ghz, 2657M i7 1.6Ghz.
And the 320M is not a discrete GPU.