• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

two-core i7

M

mikeblas

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - May 2006
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
12,777
I was surprised to find that the i7 shipped in the 15-inch MacBook Pro machines is an M620, so it's only two cores (with two more hyperthreading cores) ... at least, according to the reviews. I simply can't find this information on the Apple website.

Is that just how Apple rolls?
 
a quad core would generate too much heat for the aluminum chassis, and would degrade the battery life below current levels. Apple doesn't release new product with less battery life than prior models.

I have to say I'm a little disappointed myself, I was really hoping for at least an i5 quad core.
 
KaosDG said:
Let me rephrase.

You really expected a quad-core in a portable laptop?
Click to expand...

Dell's Lattitude and Precision lines are no less portable then a 15 or 17 Macbook Pro. I don't think it would have been that hard to make the i7-720QM an option, it is a 45w part versus the i7-620M being a 35w part though.
 
that 10 watts would cut the battery life by at least an hour, if not 2 or 3. And the laptops you are talking about in the lattitude/precision lines are much bigger than a MBP, as well as have horrid battery life in comparison
 
jrdonnaruma said:
that 10 watts would cut the battery life by at least an hour, if not 2 or 3. And the laptops you are talking about in the lattitude/precision lines are much bigger than a MBP, as well as have horrid battery life in comparison
Click to expand...

Sure the 10 extra watts may hurt battery performance somewhat, but that's the price you'll pay for a more powerful processor. I currently have a Latitude D820, it's not much larger then a MBP, smaller then the 17" and it certainly isn't any harder to travel with. It also has 1920x1200, 15.4" screen, something you can't get with the MBP 15. I can get 7 hours of battery life with the bay battery and I'm sure battery performance has come a long way since when it was new. It's 3 year warranty is up in May and I'm looking at replacing it and was considering a 15" MBP, but lack of a 1920x1200 and a true quad are turning me off, even though I'd like another Mac since I currently don't have one.
 
jrdonnaruma said:
that 10 watts would cut the battery life by at least an hour, if not 2 or 3. And the laptops you are talking about in the lattitude/precision lines are much bigger than a MBP, as well as have horrid battery life in comparison
Click to expand...

Ya so what if it cuts battery life in half, Some people don't mind trading battery life for performance. Atleast have an option for a Quad in your lineup. Who cares what Steve thinks.:rolleyes:
 
To each his own, personally, i would rather have a fairly powerful system i dont have to have attached to a wall, than a really powerful system that has to be plugged in every couple hours.

Personally I dont need a quad, as much as I would like it, in my laptop.
 
KaosDG said:
Let me rephrase.

You really expected a quad-core in a portable laptop?
Click to expand...

Sony VAIO F1190X, for example; and it's between a half and a third of the price of the MacBook Pro, depending on configuration.
 
jrdonnaruma said:
To each his own, personally, i would rather have a fairly powerful system i dont have to have attached to a wall, than a really powerful system that has to be plugged in every couple hours.

Personally I dont need a quad, as much as I would like it, in my laptop.
Click to expand...

Some of us use are laptops as our primary workstations, I run Server 2008 with Hyper-V running vms on mine for instance. I'm willing to take 6 hours of battery life over 8-9 for those extra 2 cores. Frankly, I don't hang out at a coffee shop eating scones and biscuits for more then 6 hours at time, so it hasn't been a problem in the past, but if that's your thing, then yes those extra 2 to 3 hours may come into play.
 
what does the i7 processor truly help with? I only ask because I'm considering between the i5 and i7 and hope to make my new purchase a HTPC on my TV.
 
The MBP i5 and i7s look to be identical save for cache and speed. the i5 is 3mb cache, 2.4 and 2.53, and the i7 is 4MB L3 cache and 2.66
 
Cowcaster88 said:
what does the i7 processor truly help with? I only ask because I'm considering between the i5 and i7 and hope to make my new purchase a HTPC on my TV.
Click to expand...

Between the base i5 520M and the highest end i7 620M there's not too much. Same core count and both have HT so 2 cores/4 logical. The 520M has an 18 multi with turbo up to 22, the 620M has a 20 multi with turbo up to 25, so turbo mode goes a step higher compared to the standard clock. Then the 520M only has 3 MB of cache to the 620M's 4 MB. Other then that, they appear the same.

The optional middle tier i5 540M is just like the 520M with a 19 base multi which can go to 23 with turbo.
 
2 cores 4 virtual threads.

core 2 = 2 core 2 threads.

Better than nothing. Although I do think that in order for a Macbook to be labeled "Pro", it needs a quad and at least a 1vrm GPU.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top