04-08-2009, 11:14 AM

Now that I've started looking into future Nehalem processors there's 2 different types of Nehalem processors the Macbook could use: Westmere (Arrandale: 35nm) or Clarksfield (55/45nm). Westmere is the shrink series of the Nehalem processors (has mobile and desktop processors) and Arrandale is the mobile shrunken processor of the Westmere series. It's smaller than the Macbook's current processor yet the amount of cores is the same. It does do 2 threads per core which 1-ups the Core 2 Duo one and shares other technology found in Nehalem processors.

Clarksfield has 4 cores and 8 threads but some say the Macbook Pro may take this one because it'd use a lot of power. Some say it's unlikely that Clarksfield will come to a laptop as small as the Macbook and that it may just go to other high end notebooks. Apple may just use the same type of processor for the Macbook and Pro but offer them at higher speeds for the Pro. The question is will Apple use the more powerful one or the more energy efficient one, which just does another thread per core?

Some say, why wait? I've noticed a Macbook trend lately. Intel has a processor release schedule dubbed 'Tick Tock'. In Tick years they release a new silicone architecture (Nehalem in this case). In Tock years they make a new micro-architecture process (e.g. shrinking 45nm Nehalem and making it the 35nm Westmere series). When the new silicon architecture comes out they use a lot of power so in order for them to be in notebooks then they need to be shrunken to use less power. Intel will do this ever year. Nehalem debuted in 2008 and Westmere will debut end of this year according to their schedule. What I've noticed is that the Macbook, Macbook Pro, iMac and Mac mini get the Tock year processors (Penryn, Core 2 Duo) and Apple's other computer lines get the Tick processors (Mac Pro and Xserve right now have Nehalem). The thing is Nehalem debuted with Core i7 and hasn't been implemented in Macs until now, and according to sources Westmere will be in production at the end of Q4 '09. So, will Apple get them early and put them in Macbooks and Pros in November as a silent update or will they wait until 2010?? That's all it comes down to.

Who knows what Apple will do but I'll see what the buzz is around September. If the Macbook won't see Westmere processors this year then I'll just get the Macbook after Update 2. In the meantime, take a look at the Westmere:Arrandale processor.

04-09-2009, 01:33 AM

Wow still on this huh? You sure really want a quad core Mac. >_>"

I'm kind of over it now, it's nice to have but so far there isn't that many applications that takes advantage of 2 cores let alone 4 cores.

Plus do you really need that much CPU power? I really only see people that do 3D renderings and heavy audio encoding needing 4 cores.

Regardless of what's happening in November I'm totally going to update as well.

04-09-2009, 11:37 AM

Hey man, it's been a while ^^". Yeah I'm still on it but just because processors are on the verge of being updated. I'm just educating myself really.

In terms of the Arrandale it looks to be a great option for the Macbook and will be 32nm small. It does 4 threads and has 2 Cores plus integrated graphics on the processor. The Westmere ones will be the first processors to be that small and will have the features of Nehalem.

You're right though, 4 cores of power is currently not even utilized by the average consumer and many applications out there. This will change significantly in 2010 after SL and Windows 7 are out. Developers up to now didn't know how to tap into multi-core power. To be honest I don't know when I will have the guts to even buy a Macbook since the computer I have still works, it's just a little slow at times. It'll be sad finally getting rid of it because I don't think it will ever die.

The current Macbook would be sufficient for me and probably more than what I need, I just want the next best processor that's coming to the Macbook when it comes out. At this point I just want the fastest config possible since power doesn't really matter. That looks to be Arrandale at the very least. I just hope it's in the Macbook in Q4 09, if not then I'll go without it. At that point I would've waited for nothing. Hopefully they put better batteries in the Macbooks this year. That at least will be worth it. Tell me when you get yours though.

04-09-2009, 06:34 PM

Been so busy with school so I barely have any time to do much else. Plus I'm working and doing an internship in the midst of all that. T_T"

I'm saving up, and I should probably be able to update in Jan most likely.

04-09-2009, 07:03 PM

Hmm, I thought you said November? I guess I'll tell you when I get mine then because it will most likely be after Update 2. I thought Apple would update the Macbooks by now but if not April then it must be May, then November. That's how they used to update the Macbooks at least. Oh well, I hope school gets better for you because my university year ends in a few weeks for summer break. Can't wait.

04-14-2009, 12:51 PM

Do you guys think this is likely the path Apple will take?

08-27-2009, 07:32 PM

REALLY?!?!?! People not needing that much power? Let me give you a run down of my day: as an UNDERGRADUATE student at the University of California, Irvine, I spend ~5 to 6 hours a day developing scientific programs in a biology laboratory on my Macbook Pro. When analysis of a few seconds of video from a Total Internal Reflection Microscopy capture takes 25 minutes to run on a single core, you don't think we're making use of as many cores as possible? My macbook pro gets ample use in class, in lab, at home, encoding video, running hard core Photoshop, and developing running some algorithms that take some serious iron.

Having a powerful laptop is the difference between spending ~6 hours on a lab desktop or as much time as I want in my cushy apartment office looking at a 24 inch screen and rocking out.

I think that kind of defines me as a Pro user, and a Pro laptop should meet my needs. Yeah, sure, a desktop would offer more power, but nowhere near the flexibility required of an undergraduate or graduate researcher. And using your an Apple Pro laptop is a reality for a huuuge number of mainstream scientists these days. That being said, I think Apple will continue to produce Pro laptops that will meet my needs, but only because they compete at the price-points Apple finds attractive. If laptop manufacturers side with you, and only cater to the netbook toting consumer, we're in trouble (and hellooo Lenovo)!