savar
Sep 13, 07:17 AM
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
Older versions of OS X had severe limitations due to kernel re-entrancy...or lack thereof. There were only two locks for the entire kernel (also known as "funnels")...but Apple has revised the kernel for 10.5 and will be implementing much more granular locks, which should alleviate the re-entrancy problem.
Older versions of OS X had severe limitations due to kernel re-entrancy...or lack thereof. There were only two locks for the entire kernel (also known as "funnels")...but Apple has revised the kernel for 10.5 and will be implementing much more granular locks, which should alleviate the re-entrancy problem.
shamino
Jul 22, 12:06 PM
I'm just curious about your post. Why would anyone in their right mind maintain a website for a product/company that no longer exists? Seems like a big waste of time and resources. I can see doing something similar for archival purposes, but that link leads to a complete website that has the appearance that it is still active.
I can think of several reasons. To sell service and support to users that have no other source, and has a hobby are the biggest two that come to mind.
You might be surprised to learn that there are still a lot of Amiga (http://www.amiga.com/)-enthusiast web sites, and even one where the owners are making new hardware (http://www.a2retrosystems.com/index.htm) for Apple-II series computers. (And there appears to be a surprisingly strong demand for Apple II Ethernet cards!)
I can think of several reasons. To sell service and support to users that have no other source, and has a hobby are the biggest two that come to mind.
You might be surprised to learn that there are still a lot of Amiga (http://www.amiga.com/)-enthusiast web sites, and even one where the owners are making new hardware (http://www.a2retrosystems.com/index.htm) for Apple-II series computers. (And there appears to be a surprisingly strong demand for Apple II Ethernet cards!)
layte
Mar 31, 03:30 PM
Except Google have made it very clear with Honeycomb that they're not willing to release the source code for the foreseeable future so 'a bit' could be a lot longer than you'd think. More to the point that does manufacturers very little good. If, f'instance, Google decide to only release a version of Android as open source when they release the next version any manufacturer wanting to use it is going to have to grab the open version, make whatever tweaks they want, get it on a device, get it built in bulk and launch it into the relevant sales channel(s). By the time they do that Google is likely to have released another version of Android and they'll be hopelessly out of date.
Make no mistake about this, Google tightening up on the Android T&C's like this makes it almost impossible for anyone outside of Google's control to launch a device that really competes with the manufacturers who are on the inside track, at least from an OS point of view.
I was just pointing out that the code is still open, even if some have to wait longer than has been the case. I'm not saying everything is golden and Google are a paragon of virtue, this is certainly a bit of a sly move on their part.
I cannot help shake the feeling that some of the vitriol from certain people is the fear that a more coherent and unified Android ecosystem is an even bigger threat to the iOS platform.
Make no mistake about this, Google tightening up on the Android T&C's like this makes it almost impossible for anyone outside of Google's control to launch a device that really competes with the manufacturers who are on the inside track, at least from an OS point of view.
I was just pointing out that the code is still open, even if some have to wait longer than has been the case. I'm not saying everything is golden and Google are a paragon of virtue, this is certainly a bit of a sly move on their part.
I cannot help shake the feeling that some of the vitriol from certain people is the fear that a more coherent and unified Android ecosystem is an even bigger threat to the iOS platform.
Mac Kiwi
Jul 21, 07:24 AM
I've already got one. A SuperMac C500 to be precise! (Well, actually it's an Apus 2000, but in the US it was the C500).
SuperMac was the brandname UMAX used for thier Mac clones. Check out
http://home.earthlink.net/~supermac_insider/
:)
Ok SuperMac is definitely out then :)
SuperMac was the brandname UMAX used for thier Mac clones. Check out
http://home.earthlink.net/~supermac_insider/
:)
Ok SuperMac is definitely out then :)
ruutiveijari
Sep 19, 02:28 AM
I hate this "one week until new ******" -time of the year when I'm going to buy something new. Last time I decided to wait was with the PowerBooks. Someone said next tuesday (quite a few times) I believed it and I'm still using my PB G4.
Now I'm the market for a new MacBook and ... Well.
Damn. Though the interesting thing is I don't need the speed increase, My Core Duo iMac is too fast for my mediocre every day use. It still want Merom, badly, not knowing why.
EDIT: typo
Now I'm the market for a new MacBook and ... Well.
Damn. Though the interesting thing is I don't need the speed increase, My Core Duo iMac is too fast for my mediocre every day use. It still want Merom, badly, not knowing why.
EDIT: typo
rdowns
Apr 27, 09:38 AM
I wish these people would just be honest and tell the American people their real motivation; we don't want a n***** in the White House.
Multimedia
Jul 21, 04:00 PM
It must take a lot of cores to RIP DVDs and seed them...:confused:I'm not ripping DVDs. I'm ripping DVD IMAGES made with Toast from EyeTV2 Digital SD and HD recordings to archive off air broadcast recordings for my personal use only. Nothing to do with seeding anything to anyone. Need more cores to encode and rip simultaneously instead of sequentially. Much faster to do a bunch of one or two shows simultaneously than larger sets sequentially. More cores will also allow for faster compacting of the edited shows - IE removal of ads - in the first place.
TrollToddington
Apr 6, 03:17 PM
Both machines would be fine, though the 13"/15" MacBook Pro is more fully-featured of a machine than the Air, and frankly at that cost, why pay for an incomplete system?
With a 13" or 15" MacBook Pro, there's little practical use for a MacBook Air unless you have a problem lifting the two extra pounds, and really, if you do, either exercise or invest in physical therapy.
Disagree, the Air is a niche product, and there is a noticeable difference in weight. 2KG 13" Pro is exactly 50% heavier than 1.3KG Air, and if you lug the laptop around all day long such weight difference is noticeable. It might be added that most Air users are never gonna need the extra computing power of the MBP. If your work requires a MBP you're never going to get an Air anyway.
I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.
Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
With a 13" or 15" MacBook Pro, there's little practical use for a MacBook Air unless you have a problem lifting the two extra pounds, and really, if you do, either exercise or invest in physical therapy.
Disagree, the Air is a niche product, and there is a noticeable difference in weight. 2KG 13" Pro is exactly 50% heavier than 1.3KG Air, and if you lug the laptop around all day long such weight difference is noticeable. It might be added that most Air users are never gonna need the extra computing power of the MBP. If your work requires a MBP you're never going to get an Air anyway.
I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.
Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
deedas
Apr 6, 02:10 PM
I didn't go through all the pages of replies, but in case some one hasn't corrected them yet, the bus speed of the 13" is 1066mhz.
HBOC
Apr 8, 02:29 AM
Best Buy is a strange store. It is the only place where you can be told a computer with an i3 and 8 gbs of ram is better then a MBP simply because it has a picture of an alien on it. Best Buys tech people are fun to talk to because they are normally so wrong and they are the reason for the stupid PC and Mac "Fanboy" arguements. When they want to sell a product they will do all that is in their power to do so.
If the store favors apple they will tell people that every single PC will get a virus and they will need to get really expensive anti-virus that needs to be updated five times a day. If the Store is Bias against apple then macs are incapable of doing PC things such as Word processing. Got to love Best Tards
Really? C'mon. Most Best Buys don't even have an employee maning the Apple section.
Not saying this story is true or false but Best Buy employs non-commissioned based sales staff. There are no quotas to speak of. This is a public company and sales quotas would be accessible to stockholders.
I do not intend to be rude, but there is a difference in HDMI cables, no matter what the Internet tells you. Conductors, shielding materials/layers and the way the connectors are put together are a few differentiators. An AudioQuest Coffee cable, for example, which is several hundred dollars ($600 I believe for a 1.5m) is made of pure silver starting with the tips and going the length of the cable. This is not the same as a no name $5 dollar HDMI cable from Amazon.
That is a little extreme. I can see perhaps there is a difference in a cable that is longer than 10 feet, but really I will not spend more than $4 on a cable. If you can afford a $600 HDMI 3 FOOT cable and are conscious when you buy it (meaning you are willingly being bent over w/o lube), than who cares. Most people that buy those cables have a theatre room, and I am not talking 20x15 rooms. Monster needs to go out of business...
If the store favors apple they will tell people that every single PC will get a virus and they will need to get really expensive anti-virus that needs to be updated five times a day. If the Store is Bias against apple then macs are incapable of doing PC things such as Word processing. Got to love Best Tards
Really? C'mon. Most Best Buys don't even have an employee maning the Apple section.
Not saying this story is true or false but Best Buy employs non-commissioned based sales staff. There are no quotas to speak of. This is a public company and sales quotas would be accessible to stockholders.
I do not intend to be rude, but there is a difference in HDMI cables, no matter what the Internet tells you. Conductors, shielding materials/layers and the way the connectors are put together are a few differentiators. An AudioQuest Coffee cable, for example, which is several hundred dollars ($600 I believe for a 1.5m) is made of pure silver starting with the tips and going the length of the cable. This is not the same as a no name $5 dollar HDMI cable from Amazon.
That is a little extreme. I can see perhaps there is a difference in a cable that is longer than 10 feet, but really I will not spend more than $4 on a cable. If you can afford a $600 HDMI 3 FOOT cable and are conscious when you buy it (meaning you are willingly being bent over w/o lube), than who cares. Most people that buy those cables have a theatre room, and I am not talking 20x15 rooms. Monster needs to go out of business...
aafuss1
Aug 6, 05:26 PM
I think they'll go UDI instead of HDMI (and save fees). The really interesting question here though is HDCP and what means for all existing hardware including cinema displays...
HDMI is very common-as many brands have it now. Some PC's also use it. UDI is better-but not a lot of devices may have until 2007.
HDMI is very common-as many brands have it now. Some PC's also use it. UDI is better-but not a lot of devices may have until 2007.
gnasher729
Jul 14, 05:20 PM
A 2.66 Ghz Woodcrest will probably be faster than a 2.93Ghz Conroe. A 1.83Ghz Yonah is faster than a 3.2Ghz Pentium, right?;)
Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest all use Intel's new "Core Microarchitecture" (a bit confusing: Core Duo does _not_ use "Core Microarchitecture", it is basically an improved Pentium III. The Core 2 Duo chips use Core Microarchitecture).
All three chips produce the same performance at the same clockspeed. Cache size may make a difference, but the Conroe models starting at 2.4 GHz all have the large 4 MB cache. So a single 2.66 GHz Woodcrest will be substantially slower than a 2.93 GHz Conroe. Not that it matters; the 2.93 GHz Conroe is extremely overpriced and unlikely to be used in any Macintosh.
I personally would expect 2.0GHz Conroe, 2.66 GHz Conroe, 2 x 2 GHz Woodcrest and 2 x 2.66 GHz Woodcrest for a wide range from cheap to maximum performance.
Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest all use Intel's new "Core Microarchitecture" (a bit confusing: Core Duo does _not_ use "Core Microarchitecture", it is basically an improved Pentium III. The Core 2 Duo chips use Core Microarchitecture).
All three chips produce the same performance at the same clockspeed. Cache size may make a difference, but the Conroe models starting at 2.4 GHz all have the large 4 MB cache. So a single 2.66 GHz Woodcrest will be substantially slower than a 2.93 GHz Conroe. Not that it matters; the 2.93 GHz Conroe is extremely overpriced and unlikely to be used in any Macintosh.
I personally would expect 2.0GHz Conroe, 2.66 GHz Conroe, 2 x 2 GHz Woodcrest and 2 x 2.66 GHz Woodcrest for a wide range from cheap to maximum performance.
Multimedia
Jul 21, 05:59 AM
With all these new technologies with 4, 8 and eventually 24-core capacities (some time in the not too distant future) all running at 64-bit, we musn't forget that software also has tobe developed for these machienes in order to get the most out of the hardware. At the moment we aren't even maximising core-duo, let alone a quad core and all the rest!!!!
Besides, for 90% of what non-pro users do, these advances will help very little. Internet will still run at the same spead and my ipod will still chug along with USB2 etc.
Pros with pro apps acn rejoice, only if software keeps the pace!!!
Let's hope so!!!Not exactly. Multiple cores is as much about multitasking multiple applications or multiple instances of the same application simultaneously as it is about running one or two that use all the cores. The OS X system delegates multicore use to some extent already. I'm sure that all the developers will be looking at how to use all the cores Intel can throw at them at this year's WWDC. :)
I can tell you from experience that it is very easy to fill up four cores with work and max out what you can do simultaneously on the G5 Quad. So for those of us who do the kind of work that needs a lot of cores, 8 core Macs won't come soon enough.
In this example, all of the applications are running slower than they would with 8 cores. They are already slowed down by virtue of only having 4 cores to work in. Both Toast 7 and Handbrake can use more than two cores for each instance. I sometimes run as many as three of each simultaneously. They each have to run dog slow in that circumstance due to lack of core volume. So 8 is a start. 16 would be much more helpful to me immediately.
Besides, for 90% of what non-pro users do, these advances will help very little. Internet will still run at the same spead and my ipod will still chug along with USB2 etc.
Pros with pro apps acn rejoice, only if software keeps the pace!!!
Let's hope so!!!Not exactly. Multiple cores is as much about multitasking multiple applications or multiple instances of the same application simultaneously as it is about running one or two that use all the cores. The OS X system delegates multicore use to some extent already. I'm sure that all the developers will be looking at how to use all the cores Intel can throw at them at this year's WWDC. :)
I can tell you from experience that it is very easy to fill up four cores with work and max out what you can do simultaneously on the G5 Quad. So for those of us who do the kind of work that needs a lot of cores, 8 core Macs won't come soon enough.
In this example, all of the applications are running slower than they would with 8 cores. They are already slowed down by virtue of only having 4 cores to work in. Both Toast 7 and Handbrake can use more than two cores for each instance. I sometimes run as many as three of each simultaneously. They each have to run dog slow in that circumstance due to lack of core volume. So 8 is a start. 16 would be much more helpful to me immediately.
zoran
Oct 15, 02:55 PM
... hmmm ... i just ordered a mac pro quad 3ghz ... 8 cores would be somehow nicer ;)
.a
cancel the order while its not too late! :)
.a
cancel the order while its not too late! :)
balamw
Aug 7, 06:39 PM
Norton's GoBack, which was purchased from some other company
Yeah, I recommended GoBack to a number of users back in the day (I think it was Adaptec that owned it at one point). No-one seemed to like it at the time.
As I and others reminisce it's a feature that has been around for well over 20 years in VMS. It's only relatively new to personal computers.
B
Yeah, I recommended GoBack to a number of users back in the day (I think it was Adaptec that owned it at one point). No-one seemed to like it at the time.
As I and others reminisce it's a feature that has been around for well over 20 years in VMS. It's only relatively new to personal computers.
B
Eidorian
Aug 26, 05:50 PM
Anyone know of benchmarks comparing the core duo with the core 2 duo?http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom#Benchmarks
gugy
Aug 11, 02:47 PM
You guys are looking about a $500.00 phone...atleast.
not just that, it's just not happening.
come on, too much stuff on a phone.
If we get a basic GOOD phone with contact list ala Apple design and ipod, that's enough. You start adding so much crap on a phone and in the end it just get overkill.
not just that, it's just not happening.
come on, too much stuff on a phone.
If we get a basic GOOD phone with contact list ala Apple design and ipod, that's enough. You start adding so much crap on a phone and in the end it just get overkill.
notjustjay
Apr 27, 10:33 AM
Really? So you're telling me that the location saved, of the cell tower 100 miles away, is actually really MY location?
Wow!
I think it's not as bad as what the media would have you believe, BUT it is worse than what Apple wants you to think.
Sure, cell towers could be up to 100 miles away. And when I ran the mapping tool and plotted my locations, and zoom in far enough, I do indeed see a grid of cell towers as opposed to actual locations where I've been standing. All anyone could know is that I've been "somewhere" in the vicinity.
(And this isn't new. Some time ago I came upon a car crash and called 911 on my cell phone to report it. They were able to get the location to send emergency services just by where I was calling from. It wasn't 100% accurate -- they asked if I was near a major intersection and I told them it was about a block from there.)
However, if it's also tracking wifi hotspots, those can pinpoint you pretty closely. Most people stay within 30-50 feet of their wireless router, and the ones you spend the most time connected to will be the ones at home, at work, and and at your friends' houses.
Wow!
I think it's not as bad as what the media would have you believe, BUT it is worse than what Apple wants you to think.
Sure, cell towers could be up to 100 miles away. And when I ran the mapping tool and plotted my locations, and zoom in far enough, I do indeed see a grid of cell towers as opposed to actual locations where I've been standing. All anyone could know is that I've been "somewhere" in the vicinity.
(And this isn't new. Some time ago I came upon a car crash and called 911 on my cell phone to report it. They were able to get the location to send emergency services just by where I was calling from. It wasn't 100% accurate -- they asked if I was near a major intersection and I told them it was about a block from there.)
However, if it's also tracking wifi hotspots, those can pinpoint you pretty closely. Most people stay within 30-50 feet of their wireless router, and the ones you spend the most time connected to will be the ones at home, at work, and and at your friends' houses.
brownpaw
Jun 11, 03:50 PM
I used to work at radioshack too and the resources there suck. Activation will take longer than usual and they can mess up your account/credit. I hated activating phones cause it was a hassle since we were not connected directly with carriers.
Now for Radioshack. Brother-in-Law goes and his credit gets run twice by child who works at Radioshack and signs him up to expensive plan. So they have to call their 3rd party service provider and the manager there and employee make a big mess of his ATT account and turns out the phone they had was from a customer return, not even brand new. He ends up just getting bad credit after 4 hrs in the stuffy dusty shack. We go to apple next week, now he has to put deposit cause his credit was messed up but guess what? thats right apple waived it as they saw the mistake and he gets a brand new phone. :) Radioshack = worse place to get any phone Apple = smart well trained employees
I just talked about these cases closest to me but I'll tell you those Radioshack employees are the worst to buy any cellphone from. you take a risk with your credit, used phone possibly, long activations, and bad locale.
Just wanted to say that generally when people have these types of experiences, they are at RadioShack franchises and not company-run (corporate) stores. I have worked at both in the past, and though it's been about 6 years, I can say that things were definitely very different.
Franchise stores, at the time, did indeed work through 3rd party processors for cell phones so it was easier to mess things up. However, it was all through a web interface so more often than not the problems stemmed from the interface crashing or it not being up to date with the latest promotions, etc, than actual user error.
Corporate stores also ran through a web interface but it was directly through the carrier so it was much more reliable.
The bigger problem with cell phones at RadioShack was consistency. The sales flyers would always talk about this deal or that deal, and oftentimes that deal wasn't even offered to franchise stores.
I think a bit of this has been resolved, and I wouldn't mind getting a phone through RadioShack nowadays if there was a good promotion.
However, as someone else said, RadioShack prices on most other things are ridiculously high. I felt terrible when I saw a guy at our store sell this old man a 30-ft HDMI cable for $300. Not kidding at all. I don't know how they stay in business, their prices on most things are not competitive at all.
sw
Now for Radioshack. Brother-in-Law goes and his credit gets run twice by child who works at Radioshack and signs him up to expensive plan. So they have to call their 3rd party service provider and the manager there and employee make a big mess of his ATT account and turns out the phone they had was from a customer return, not even brand new. He ends up just getting bad credit after 4 hrs in the stuffy dusty shack. We go to apple next week, now he has to put deposit cause his credit was messed up but guess what? thats right apple waived it as they saw the mistake and he gets a brand new phone. :) Radioshack = worse place to get any phone Apple = smart well trained employees
I just talked about these cases closest to me but I'll tell you those Radioshack employees are the worst to buy any cellphone from. you take a risk with your credit, used phone possibly, long activations, and bad locale.
Just wanted to say that generally when people have these types of experiences, they are at RadioShack franchises and not company-run (corporate) stores. I have worked at both in the past, and though it's been about 6 years, I can say that things were definitely very different.
Franchise stores, at the time, did indeed work through 3rd party processors for cell phones so it was easier to mess things up. However, it was all through a web interface so more often than not the problems stemmed from the interface crashing or it not being up to date with the latest promotions, etc, than actual user error.
Corporate stores also ran through a web interface but it was directly through the carrier so it was much more reliable.
The bigger problem with cell phones at RadioShack was consistency. The sales flyers would always talk about this deal or that deal, and oftentimes that deal wasn't even offered to franchise stores.
I think a bit of this has been resolved, and I wouldn't mind getting a phone through RadioShack nowadays if there was a good promotion.
However, as someone else said, RadioShack prices on most other things are ridiculously high. I felt terrible when I saw a guy at our store sell this old man a 30-ft HDMI cable for $300. Not kidding at all. I don't know how they stay in business, their prices on most things are not competitive at all.
sw
jeffereyj
Apr 6, 01:12 PM
sorry but if you're trying to do "pro" work on a MBA, ur doin it wrong.
i'm glad Apple has their MBA line for ultra-portability, plus the MBP line for intensive portable work.
i'm glad Apple has their MBA line for ultra-portability, plus the MBP line for intensive portable work.
chrmjenkins
Apr 6, 11:36 AM
That isn't what this story reads, and I don't think anyone but you and I have even read the actual facts supposed here.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in Tue graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I could assailed things all day, but that isn't the story written.
Given Apple's willingness to go with it on the 13", I'm inclined to go with the reasoning that they'll use it here. The argument that it will be a big step down from the 320M is kind of moot given that anyone will say you're crazy if you try to insist that a MBA should be used for anything like gaming or graphical work (read anyone as Apple). You also have to remember that the 320M is downclocked in the MBAs too compared to the 13", so the drop isn't as drastic as you state.
The combination of a lower or equal TDP, a GPU that doesn't need its own heatsink because its integrated into the CPU and the very likely prolonged battery life for the MBA, it's pretty much a done deal for the MBA.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
He didn't quite tell the whole story. A LV and ULV chip likely went through different binning as their performance at the same settings varies because the process they are built on varies. The chips that work at the extremes (say Intel's extreme desktop processors or the lowest voltage CPUs they offer) are likely the top performers in their binning tests. Just because a chip can function as a LV doesn't mean it would meet the requirements for ULV, for example. However, if the ULV chip were to be scaled to the LV's parts speed and voltage, it would function just fine.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in Tue graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I could assailed things all day, but that isn't the story written.
Given Apple's willingness to go with it on the 13", I'm inclined to go with the reasoning that they'll use it here. The argument that it will be a big step down from the 320M is kind of moot given that anyone will say you're crazy if you try to insist that a MBA should be used for anything like gaming or graphical work (read anyone as Apple). You also have to remember that the 320M is downclocked in the MBAs too compared to the 13", so the drop isn't as drastic as you state.
The combination of a lower or equal TDP, a GPU that doesn't need its own heatsink because its integrated into the CPU and the very likely prolonged battery life for the MBA, it's pretty much a done deal for the MBA.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
He didn't quite tell the whole story. A LV and ULV chip likely went through different binning as their performance at the same settings varies because the process they are built on varies. The chips that work at the extremes (say Intel's extreme desktop processors or the lowest voltage CPUs they offer) are likely the top performers in their binning tests. Just because a chip can function as a LV doesn't mean it would meet the requirements for ULV, for example. However, if the ULV chip were to be scaled to the LV's parts speed and voltage, it would function just fine.
starflyer
Apr 6, 01:41 PM
Oh yeah, well just wait until people find out iOS is a closed system and the Xoom uses Android which is open....
oh nevermind :D
oh nevermind :D
rdowns
Apr 27, 08:35 AM
Really disappointed in him caving in to the wingnuts.
****ing Trump is on TV live claiming credit for its release and questioning whether it's real or not.
Why does our media insist on enabling him?
****ing Trump is on TV live claiming credit for its release and questioning whether it's real or not.
Why does our media insist on enabling him?
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 09:26 AM
Just returned from Radio Shack.
I turned in my 32GB 3GS (with all accessories)
which was in almost excellent condition except
for a chip and a scratch and received a $247 credit.
They handed my SIMM card back to me so essentially
the phone is rendered useless.
That falls between what their website pays for
a pristine phone ($301) and a moderate wear ($226).
So, not bad, a $247 credit off of iPhone 4.
Radio Shack is taking preorders starting Thursday.
Essentially, they special order the phone for you.
That pretty much guarantees you a phone on opening day.
All you need to do is leave a $50 deposit when ordering.
They are not certain if they will have the phone
accessories or not.
I turned in my 32GB 3GS (with all accessories)
which was in almost excellent condition except
for a chip and a scratch and received a $247 credit.
They handed my SIMM card back to me so essentially
the phone is rendered useless.
That falls between what their website pays for
a pristine phone ($301) and a moderate wear ($226).
So, not bad, a $247 credit off of iPhone 4.
Radio Shack is taking preorders starting Thursday.
Essentially, they special order the phone for you.
That pretty much guarantees you a phone on opening day.
All you need to do is leave a $50 deposit when ordering.
They are not certain if they will have the phone
accessories or not.