New MBA coming soon? Intel released new CPU's

[nebulos]

You're actually right! We first milk them, and then chop them into pieces and eat them. And I mean, imagine people buy the new SB MBA, it turns out to be crap and arrive to the SD's opinion. I can already imagine SD waving about his finger screaming "I told you, didn't I".

yeah, either way, however the SB MBA turns out, once its settled, i just don't know what we're gonna have left to fight about on here.

... wait, i won't care, cause i'll actually have a computer !!!

 

[KylePowers]

yeah, either way, however the SB MBA turns out, once its settled, i just don't know what we're gonna have left to fight about on here.

... wait, i won't care, cause i'll actually have a computer !!!

I can think of a couple things... Like how much better Ivy Bridge will be compared to Sandy Bridge?

Or how much better Haswell will be compared to Ivy Bridge?

Or how much better Broadwell will be compared to Haswell?

Or how much better Skylake will be compared to Broadwell?

Or how much better Skymont will be compared to Skylake?

I think we're good for at least 5 more years

 

[calvol]

Smart money will skip this upcoming SB refresh, and wait for Ivy in 2012, or the switch to ARM in 2013. The switch to SB is strictly a cost-saving measure for Apple, and adds nothing major in the way of everyday performance of the Air.

 

[nebulos]

I can think of a couple things... Like how much better Ivy Bridge will be compared to Sandy Bridge?

Or how much better Haswell will be compared to Ivy Bridge?

Or how much better Broadwell will be compared to Haswell?

Or how much better Skylake will be compared to Broadwell?

Or how much better Skymont will be compared to Skylake?

I think we're good for at least 5 more years

Skylake better than Broadwell?! Why I never!

We duel at dawn! Weapons: 1 rotten banana each.

 

[TrollToddington]

Smart money will skip this upcoming SB refresh, and wait for Ivy in 2012, or the switch to ARM in 2013. The switch to SB is strictly a cost-saving measure for Apple, and adds nothing major in the way of everyday performance of the Air.

Neither will IB provided you are satisfied with what the C2D can do. Next, 'everyday performance' is too much of a generalization.

I'd like to mention I'm happy Intel releases more and more ULW and LW processors. This means we (or at least, the computer manufacturers) will have a larger choice.

 

[Abstract]

You're actually right! We first milk them, and then chop them into pieces and eat them. And I mean, imagine people buy the new SB MBA, it turns out to be crap and arrive to the SD's opinion. I can already imagine SD waving about his finger screaming "I told you, didn't I".

I read through his post, and the accusations he made towards others made no sense at all.

All he was able to conclude was that if Apple magically crammed a discrete graphics card into the new SB MBA, it would be faster than a SB MBA using Intel's IGP. Uh.....thank you Captain Obvious. Nobody is arguing that it wouldn't be faster.

Other people's argument is that this isn't physically possible because a discrete GPU wouldn't fit into the laptop. What Scottsdale said would require magic or something, so let him fingerwag all he wants. Then he hasn't considered the effect this would have on battery life. It wouldn't have a large negative effect on the 13" MBA, but would kill the 11".

The other point is that Intel's IGP will be slower, but not so much slower that it would render the MBA not worth purchasing, or unusable. Scottsdale said it will be too slow (very assuredly, mind you), while few others said it may not be. People have used the Samsung 9 and current 13" MBP to argue for or against it, but both are poor comparisons anyway. According to the article, the new chips would have a faster clocked version of the IGP used in earlier ULV Sandy Bridge systems like the Series 9, but it would still be slower than the ones found in the higher voltage MacBook Pros. Since the Samsung 9 didn't fare THAT poorly, a new MBA with faster clocked Intel IGP may not be all doom and gloom.

 

[halledise]

shoot; this is getting serious

 

[J&JPolangin]

I can think of a couple things... Like how much better Ivy Bridge will be compared to Sandy Bridge?

Or how much better Haswell will be compared to Ivy Bridge?

Or how much better Broadwell will be compared to Haswell?

Or how much better Skylake will be compared to Broadwell?

Or how much better Skymont will be compared to Skylake?

I think we're good for at least 5 more years

...because in 5 more years there will be no new CPU/GPU technoligical advances

 

[Oppressed]

In fact, check out this review of the Samsung Series 9 which uses one of the proposed LV CPU + IGP combos. ... Of course, those with concerns can always go/stick with a 2010 MBA.

Awesome, thank you for that link to the review. This quote was eye opening for me. "You won't have much fun gaming on the Series 9, as we saw just 14 frames per second in World of Warcraft with settings at Good and maximum resolution. The Air is capable of 53 fps at its higher native resolution (1400 x 900)."

 

[Krovem]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Would be nice if they were released when back to school sale hits. I planning on selling my 2011 MBP 15" (2199 model). Than getting the MBA 13" and an iMac 27".

 

[xxBURT0Nxx]

you're probably talking about the 13" Macbook Pro here. Because the Airs would (most likely) use ultra-low and/or low voltage Sandy Bridge CPUs, performance on the (std voltage) 13 MBP is not comparable. Those concerned about graphics performance are not freaking out about nothing. In fact, check out this review of the Samsung Series 9 which uses one of the proposed LV CPU + IGP combos. ... Of course, those with concerns can always go/stick with a 2010 MBA.

On the other hand, as you pointed out, performance on the 13MBP is better in OSX in many situations. As far as I have read, graphics performance can depend almost as much on the graphics card itself as on the drivers for that card. it seems possible that Apple could squeeze out better performance in OSX out of the same CPU + IGP than in Windows on the Samsung.

Yes, the drives will likely be optimized and clocked at better speeds than the series 9, although probably not as good as the mbp 13"

Either way, for the tasks the macbook air is MEANT for, you will see almost no performance differences. If you are buying this computer for gaming or 3d rendering you are JOKING yourself. Even the 13 and 15 mbps shouldn't be bought by people intending to do heavy gaming, why you would buy an ultra portable and think it's going to come with high end graphics is crazy to me....

I read through his post, and the accusations he made towards others made no sense at all.

All he was able to conclude was that if Apple magically crammed a discrete graphics card into the new SB MBA, it would be faster than a SB MBA using Intel's IGP. Uh.....thank you Captain Obvious. Nobody is arguing that it wouldn't be faster.

Other people's argument is that this isn't physically possible because a discrete GPU wouldn't fit into the laptop. What Scottsdale said would require magic or something, so let him fingerwag all he wants. Then he hasn't considered the effect this would have on battery life. It wouldn't have a large negative effect on the 13" MBA, but would kill the 11".

The other point is that Intel's IGP will be slower, but not so much slower that it would render the MBA not worth purchasing, or unusable. Scottsdale said it will be too slow (very assuredly, mind you), while few others said it may not be. People have used the Samsung 9 and current 13" MBP to argue for or against it, but both are poor comparisons anyway. According to the article, the new chips would have a faster clocked version of the IGP used in earlier ULV Sandy Bridge systems like the Series 9, but it would still be slower than the ones found in the higher voltage MacBook Pros. Since the Samsung 9 didn't fare THAT poorly, a new MBA with faster clocked Intel IGP may not be all doom and gloom.

I agree with everything you have said here except for this. Any discrete gpu will definitely affect the battery a lot, regardless of notebook size. Even the 15" suffers from significant battery loss when using the discrete gpu (especially if you are even moderately taxing the processor) so there is no reason to assume the 13" wouldn't also suffer from battery loss.

It's all moot though, apple doesn't have anywhere to put a dedicated gpu in the mba anyways at this point in time so we will NOT see this scenario.

 

[Hellhammer]

If I am eventually wrong and the capabilities of Intel's IGP will run all of the same apps, give the same OpenCL performance, and not reduce overall MBA capabilities I will openly admit my ignorance. All I ask in return is those defending Intel openly admit that when the SB IGP eliminates use of apps and technologies they admit if they were the ones that were wrong. It isn't just about 3D Mark scores or "3D first-person shooter games." it's about real world results and what the old computer was capable of running and what the new computer is capable of running. It is my hope that we don't have to have that discussion as I hope the rumors are correct about the SB CPU being used but incorrect that the SB IGP will be solely used for graphics processing.

But is the support for OpenCL that great then? Nobody talks about it nowadays. If you look at any non-gaming test, the SB MBP wins the 320M MBP. If Apple is so into OpenCL, then how come it doesn't save the 320M MBP when it comes to their own apps such as iMovie, iPhoto and Aperture?

http://www.barefeats.com/mbps06.html

http://www.macworld.com/article/157893/2011/02/2011macbookpro_benchmarks.html

In my eyes, those tests pretty much show that OpenCL or the GPU in general has very little effect in other than games. Sure, the IGP in ULV and LV CPUs is still slower but it shouldn't play a big role, since the GPU is used so little.

And this time, don't get me wrong. I would love the GPU to be used more since it packs a lot number crushing power in it but right now, the GPU doesn't seem to have a big role in other than games. OpenCL was hyped a lot when SL was released but after that, nobody has said a word about it. NVIDIA's aggressive, and sometimes dubious (paying developers to use CUDA since its NVIDIA only. Same thing with PhysX, so Intel isn't the only one who is playing a bit dirty), marketing of CUDA definitely has not helped the adoption of OpenCL. CUDA support in OS X seems to be even worse.

In fact, check out this review of the Samsung Series 9 which uses one of the proposed LV CPU + IGP combos

Samsung Series 9 uses ULV CPUs, not LV.

 

[xxBURT0Nxx]

exactly why i told him he is freaking out for no reason... he acts like all of the apps he would be running on his macbook AIR are going to suffer so badly because there is no more openCL

Really the only apps that are going to take advantage of that are very high end processor intensive apps that are trying to offload some of the work to the graphics card.

NOBODY is going to be running those types of apps on their mba in the first place....

 

[sishaw]

Smart money will skip this upcoming SB refresh, and wait for Ivy in 2012, or the switch to ARM in 2013. The switch to SB is strictly a cost-saving measure for Apple, and adds nothing major in the way of everyday performance of the Air.

If that's true, the really smart money who needs a computer would buy a current Air on the refurb store after SB comes out, when prices will go down.

 

[Abstract]

Y
I agree with everything you have said here except for this. Any discrete gpu will definitely affect the battery a lot, regardless of notebook size. Even the 15" suffers from significant battery loss when using the discrete gpu (especially if you are even moderately taxing the processor) so there is no reason to assume the 13" wouldn't also suffer from battery loss.

True, but I was talking relative to the current 13" and 11" MBAs. Relative to what we have today, I'd expect a new 11" SB MacBook Air with a discrete graphics card to lower the battery life by 20-30% because the 11" MBA's Core2Duo CPU only uses around 10W TDP. The new chips would use 17W. For the 13" MBA, this would represent no change in power consumption, since it already uses a discrete GPU (the 320m), and the new chip consumes the same amount of power as the old chip (i.e. essentially no change in power consumption). For the 11" MBA , the new CPUs are going to use more power than the current C2D processor in the 11" MBA (around 7W increase), so if the new SB 11" MBA still used a dedicated GPU, you'd expect power consumption to increase by around 25%.

I always thought the 11" MBA's battery life wasn't long enough, and I can't imagine people being happy with even less battery life.

It's all moot though, apple doesn't have anywhere to put a dedicated gpu in the mba anyways at this point in time so we will NOT see this scenario.

It's crazy here, isn't it?

 

[xxBURT0Nxx]

Smart money will skip this upcoming SB refresh, and wait for Ivy in 2012, or the switch to ARM in 2013. The switch to SB is strictly a cost-saving measure for Apple, and adds nothing major in the way of everyday performance of the Air.

lol, you have this backwards, it's not going to detract from the everyday performance unless you are gaming on your ultraportable (which you shouldn't be doing anyways)

In fact it will make other tasks like encoding movies or songs, rendering video in iMovie, etc. MUCH, MUCH, MUCH faster than previous gen mba.

Also why would you think brand new SNB processors would be cheaper than 3 year old core2duo chips? I'm sure apple is not saving money, if they are not a HUGE amount, by switching to SNB.

 

[nebulos]

In my eyes, those tests pretty much show that OpenCL or the GPU in general has very little effect in other than games. Sure, the IGP in ULV and LV CPUs is still slower but it shouldn't play a big role, since the GPU is used so little.

Samsung Series 9 uses ULV CPUs, not LV.

oops, sorry! thanks.

for the record here, although its been written elsewhere, (indeed that's where i've stolen basically everything i know about this stuff) ...

the SS9 uses a ULV SB CPU, one that may likely appear in the 11", ... and possibly the 13", though it seems they can and would/should go with a LV CPU for the 13". thus, the SS9 represents a decent 'worse case scenario' for the SB Airs, being a better model for the 11". even if they use the same CPU in the 11", performance might be a bit better with better OSX drivers, although, sure, i know great drivers are not gonna magically make this a 'gaming' comp.

and I meant to clarify that, while i argued to justify people's graphics concerns, its more, if not all, about gaming performance; isn't the SS9 fine for non-gamers? Scottsdale seems to extend the predicted damage an Intel IGP will to do 'general use', and that's what a lot of people don't necessarily agree with (see above).

 

[xxBURT0Nxx]

and I meant to clarify that, while i argued to justify people's graphics concerns, its more, if not all, about gaming performance; isn't the SS9 fine for non-gamers? Scottsdale seems to extend the predicted damage an Intel IGP will to do 'general use', and that's what a lot of people don't necessarily agree with (see above).

exactly, day to day use does NOT require your gpu, contrary to scottsdales opinion. Only tasks like gaming/3d modeling/3d rendering are going to suffer from poor graphics, I don't think there are any users out there expecting an ultraportable to be good at these tasks, if they do, they are only kidding themselves.

 

[fyrefly]

At least that is a little better GPU news, but it still affects a lot more than "3D first-person shooter games" as someone else tried to convince people of. How about OpenCL, loss of many games and apps people may have already purchased that work on current MBAs and those back to October 2008, and etc?

Please tell me one "App" that is not a game from 2008 that will be hampered by the Intel HD 3000?

...we have no clue as to why Apple isn't using discrete GPUs in the 13" MBP and whether or not Apple will continued with this failed policy or right the ship before it damages the core Mac brand.

Where's the proof that the Intel HD 3000 is a "failed policy"? The 13" MBP is cannibalizing the 11"/13" MBA sales. MBA sales fell 40% from Feb-March after the new MBPs were introduced. How is that a "failed policy"? And how is it "damaging the core Mac Brand"?

I would actually bet that it has more to do with cost and branding of Intel CPUs than space or TDP limitations. Apple recently switched MBP CPU TDP limitations in 15" and 17" versions. It could easily have eliminated the antiquated optical drive if space was truly the issue in at least the 13" MBP.

Of course that's true. It's cheaper for Apple to just have the i7 chips in the 13" MBP and not have the added cost of a GPU on top of it.

I'd also be willing to bet that most users of the 2011 13" MBP have no idea what the Intel HD 3000 graphics chip is, or even care how/why it's different from the 320m or any other graphics chip.

Same goes for the potential buyers of the (still theoretical) 2011 MBA.

I am not willing to write off Apple's intentions so quickly, as I have hope that Apple will not wish to have its current MBA customers to completely lose capabilities when "upgrading" to the next MBA. It will affect far more than "3D first-person shooter games."

Will it? Again, I want to see any sort of proof that OpenCL affects day-to-day computing. Will the Intel HD 3000 affect Facebook? EMail? Safari? Nope. Hellhammer has even shown that it won't affect Photoshop and other more beefy applications.

And I maintain that other than us techies in these forums, the main audience for an updated 2011 MBA will not be people who bought the 2010 MBA. It'll be new Apple switchers, or people coming from older Mac Portables.

And those people won't "lose" a darn thing with the Intel HD 3000. Hell, a bunch of them will be coming from Intel GMA950's and X3100's.

If Apple switches to SB for the IGP and there is a huge backlash, I would hope that Apple is prepared to take either the complete AMD switch option using a future AMD APU or GPU chipset with AMD CPU or the AMD discrete option.

Just yesterday, Intel asserted that Apple helps them shape their processor roadmap. With such sway over Intel, and such preferential treatment, I see absolutely no rhyme of reason for Apple to kick Intel in the proverbial nards by switching to AMD processors.

It is sad, and I feel compelled to tell people the truth of what they're begging for. And it's usually a few misinformed "geeks" who brag about specs who overlook real world results of overall impact to push for a product and misinform the masses following them.

Who's mis-informing anyone? You've been spouting stuff about how the HD3000 will have trouble doing everyday tasks, and how it's omission of OpenCL will not allow people to use Apps that the 2008-era MBA will use. That's just plain wrong. If it's not, I'd love to see proof of stuff that the 9400m MBA can do that the HD3000 can't.

If I am eventually wrong and the capabilities of Intel's IGP will run all of the same apps, give the same OpenCL performance, and not reduce overall MBA capabilities I will openly admit my ignorance. All I ask in return is those defending Intel openly admit that when the SB IGP eliminates use of apps and technologies they admit if they were the ones that were wrong. It isn't just about 3D Mark scores or "3D first-person shooter games." it's about real world results and what the old computer was capable of running and what the new computer is capable of running.

Not sure exactly what "real world results" means in this context.

You mean, like the time it takes to unzip an archive? The time it takes to load an App? How long it takes for iTunes to convert a song to M4A?

Other than games, there will not be any Applications that the Intel HD 3000 can't use. And the SB CPU will Spank the C2D CPU in many other "general use" scenarios.

Also, I'd say that those of us that are less doom-and-gloom about the HD3000 GPU are less "Intel defenders", than just not holding out for some far-fetched situation to appear.

In 2011 there won't be a switch to AMD. There won't be a switch to ARM. There's no room to put a discrete GPU. So our only option is to use the Intel HD 3000 or have no MBA update at all. We're not "defending Intel" - just hoping for an update, and not waiting for Ivy Bridge in 2012.