MacBook Air's custom-built CPU going PC?
Filed under: Laptops
Relevant Posts
- Intel slips new Core 2 Duo "S" processors out the door (16 days ago - 25 Comments)
- MacBook Air with Penryn launch imminent? (24 days ago - 54 Comments)
- Supposed iPod nano 4G really unboxed (Yesterday - 174 Comments)
- Apple introducing new iPods on September 9th? (13 days ago - 169 Comments)
- New iPod nano and touch revealed by case manufacturers? (12 days ago - 137 Comments)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
effzehn @ Jan 31st 2008 7:45AM
You mean "thinnest".
jakem @ Jan 31st 2008 7:47AM
Exactly what I was going to say.
JAmerican @ Jan 31st 2008 7:50AM
Agreed. I don't understand how Engadget keeps confusing Ultra thin with Ultra Portable and Thin with small.
Let's get this straightened out. Air is not a UMPC and never will be unless Apple decides that they are ready to release a cheap EEE competitor. Apple in all its arrogance may not be ready to "lower" it self to such an affordable platform.
In the meantime, just get a EEE or Cloudbook and DIY.
JAmerican @ Jan 31st 2008 7:54AM
Great work. They actually changed it to the correct term-thinnest.
BrianB @ Jan 31st 2008 8:06AM
Can't apple make a cheap desktop? Dosn't have to be very environmentally friendly; just cheap like what Asus is working on:
http://www.maccomplainer.com/news/asustek-going-after-apple-computers/
DownwardMonkey @ Jan 31st 2008 8:16AM
Arrogance JAmerican? The MBA does what I want an easy to carry laptop to do, the EEE PC doesn't. Should I still buy an EEE PC just because it's cheap?
Frankly I don't care if people want to call it an UMPC or a laptop, and I'm starting to think Apple see it this was as well. There are the people out there that look at the MBA and think "wow a laptop that is really easy to carry around and is still full sized and easy to use. JUST what I need" and there are people out their that whine that it doesn't have this or that or this. The latter all tend to be nerds that can't seem to accept that not all of the world thinks in terms of CPU power or expansion ports they will never use.
From my point of view Apple just hit on my perfect laptop, the only probably I have with it is price. If that's arrogant because the EEE doesn't suit my needs then so be it.
Kizorblade @ Jan 31st 2008 8:25AM
@ BrianB
They have to be environmentally friendly... Greenpeace will moan, groan and kick their arse until they are.
BrianB @ Jan 31st 2008 8:34AM
Sorry, here's engadget's own link:
http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/30/asus-extending-eee-brand-to-desktops-tvs-and-all-in-one-pcs/
@kizorblade. Don't we have more pressing issues than arsenic on our laptops, like, and this is just on the top of my head, the economy?
Liam @ Jan 31st 2008 9:50AM
BrainB, without the environment there would be no one, and no economy, so i think the environment comes before the economy....
Kizorblade @ Jan 31st 2008 9:59AM
Recession, environment, this, that, and whatever. We're screwed.
bluvg @ Jan 31st 2008 4:21PM
Not the thinnest, either. What about Sharp's laptop (from 2005, no less) that was .62"??? No surprise that Apple is stretching the truth... again.
Jay @ Jan 31st 2008 7:49AM
Yawn. I'd rather see beauty this in a PC iny day.....
http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2008/01/30/new-45nm-cell-processor-boasts-greater-efficiency/
Jay @ Jan 31st 2008 7:50AM
*any
Jay @ Jan 31st 2008 7:53AM
Oh bu**er. Looks like I really ballsed up on that post.
I'd rather see this beauty.....etc.
Up all night with my newborn rugrat. Sorry. We need an edit button......
Samo @ Jan 31st 2008 7:59AM
Don't worry, we understood what you mean anyway ;)
I always thought Intel were going to do this anyway, I mean if you have a superior chip, then why not share the love to all platforms?
...I mean, except if Apple made them sign an exclusivity contract worth $X, of course!
Andir3.0 @ Jan 31st 2008 9:00AM
Sorry, but the first time I read your post I interpreted "bu**er" as butter :p
Zeus.:God @ Jan 31st 2008 9:51AM
Cells are over rated- full blown cores will always have more power.
Kizorblade @ Jan 31st 2008 10:03AM
"Sorry, but the first time I read your post I interpreted "bu**er" as butter :p"
Haha, same.
And I'm pretty sure bugger ain't a bad word, at least where I'm from. For higher class people.. Maybe it is
JLTate @ Jan 31st 2008 11:29AM
> Zeus.:God
For the sake of not going off on a tangent I'll keep this simple. I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but if you look at what AMD and Intel are coming up with as far as their GPU-on-CPU tech goes you'll see that it's very similar in design -- many small simple in-order cores specialized for high performance computations coupled with few out-or-oder cores specialized for general purpose. Heck, Intel has stated they want to make a video card that uses in-order x86 processors as the processing units. Just what do you think a Cell is?
Andir3.0 @ Jan 31st 2008 2:03PM
@JLTate: Knowing Zeus, it's a ploy for Sony to make money ripping people off.
But seriously, you would never need 64 general processors/cores in a computer. That's a lot of wasted silicon on tasks that just don't need it. I mean, how many processors need to be able to manage memory? Give the sub-processor the memory it needs, and let it work. Each core doesn't need the ability to manage memory. It would be a nightmare. How many processors actually NEED branch units? I mean, sure. If your running 1000 applications on your computer, each one will run at better speeds all the time, but your wasting a bunch of silicone etching a predictor on every core. Going the route of a few general purpose cores for program flow and whatnot and having multiple specialized cores is the most efficient and logical path. Now if we can get some of the logic of separating tasks in silicon to distribute to these cores that aren't being used, you'd be onto a hell of a scalar processor.
This is why GPUs are bypassing typical processors in processing ability. They are composed of hundreds of very specific floating point processor that don't need to worry about all the crap a general processor core does. And they can concentrate on making it fast.
snife @ Jan 31st 2008 8:07AM
This is not news unless you believe the Apple hype machine. These chips were not custom-built for Apple, they were always part of Intels roadmap and are available to all the big OEMs, Apple just got them out the door first. The new ThinkPad X300 will use them and make the MacBook Air ashamed of its lack of ports
Generic @ Jan 31st 2008 10:38AM
Hey, my Intel 3.0 GHz CPU with hyper-threading was custom built for my PC. If you don't believe me ask all those millions of guys who have the same CPU and they will confirm it. So don't talk non-sense about God-sent MacBook Air and the Apple hype machine.
Tim Brown @ Jan 31st 2008 10:44AM
I wonder if they will end up in the EEEpc 3/4/5? Although if they were in a thinkpad I would be sorely tempted.
cmonkey @ Jan 31st 2008 12:17PM
Thank you, that is the comment I came here to make.
There is some information about the new package that goes beyond mindless marketing-speak repetition here: http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3203&p=1
dan2600 @ Jan 31st 2008 8:13AM
OK well...I'm glad you made it clear that when the 45nm stuff comes out in a few short months this processor will be grossly outdated...It disgusts me that the macbook air is coming out right before the 45nm drops with a 65nm processor in it and people are calling it revolutionary. Crappy consumerism on apple's part, oh wait, this is how they ALWAYS releases their stuff and fallows there awful business model, "make it outdated as quickly as possible and prevent upgrades as much as you can". Maybe if people would realize apple constantly screws over their loyalists with scams like this there fan base would be a lot less.
I don't know why ANYONE would invest in this processor anyway...I can't think of a good analogy...but I'm sure there is one...haha
word of the wise to all people out there, if your planing on buying a high end laptop, wait until May.
dan2600 @ Jan 31st 2008 8:15AM
oh man...typo city...sorry folks...haven't finished my morning redbull -_-
Kizorblade @ Jan 31st 2008 9:09AM
Err wait, so it disgusts you about them releasing a 65nm CPU with 45nm coming soon?
If it does what it it's supposed to do, then perfect. Whatever tools it uses to do it's job doesn't matter. And currently it's not designed to push some insane fps in a game or render some complex scene. It's got the correct tools for what it's supposed to do: light work
Oh and, ""make it outdated as quickly as possible and prevent upgrades as much as you can"" is full of BS. Look at the Macbook Pro, 230+ days it hasn't been updated, and you know what people are doing? Complaining for updates. Apple usually updates their products every half year, so if people are complaining about that then they've not bought a computer before: things get outdated fast
I'm sorry but the amount of FUD you're spreading is amazing
JLTate @ Jan 31st 2008 11:35AM
45nm doesn't mean higher performance. It means lower power consumption and heat output. Which equates to longer battery life, which is particularly important in a poorly design computer that doesn't have a user replaceable battery.
BowserUSC @ Jan 31st 2008 8:27AM
Im assuming that this won't be the only generation of MBAs, so they'll probably create a 45nm chip (or if something smaller comes out soon, you never know) that's also reduced in size, etc. So if PC manufacturers do pick this up, they'll probably have that option too.
snife @ Jan 31st 2008 8:44AM
Its not revolutionary of course but the main thing from a design perspective is the reduction in the packaging size rather than the die itself, the first batch of 45nm chips from Intel would likely have the standard packaging so would not really be suitable for a system such as the MacBook Air
dan2600 @ Jan 31st 2008 8:44AM
of course they will come out with a 45nm version of the MBA...so everyone who buys a first Gen MBA feels like a idiot...which they are :-p
sorry to get so touchy on the subject...I bought the "NEW" version of the G4 PPC right before they went over to intel (I got mine in December for Christmas...the intel stuff came out right after)
I'll never forgive apple for that.
Serengeti @ Jan 31st 2008 8:43AM
It really doesn't matter why the chip was designed, nor what PC manufacturers do with it. The fact is, the Mac Book Air set the tone for this year in laptops. Everyone else is playing catch up. Sounds familiar, doesn't it?
Of course, don't give too much credit where it isn't due: The custom Core 2 Duo chip is only one small (no pun intended) part of why the Air is as thin as it is. Do you really think that the space saved by that extra half inch wide and tall on the custom chip is what made the Air so thin??
Andir3.0 @ Jan 31st 2008 9:05AM
What are you talking about, this is the computer industry. It only takes one company to make anything the next big thing! /sarcasm
Tim Brown @ Jan 31st 2008 10:54AM
What makes the MBA so thin is the non-user replaceable battery and no optical drive or ports. these are the bulky parts of most laptops. So when the battery dies in a year, all those MBA's will have to go in for servicing and get charged a rather hefty sum for a new battery and the service charge. You are probably looking at £300($500)+ a year for your MBA for the rest of its life, and that's on top of the £1200($1800) so that gives you, for the average laptop life time of three years, a £2100($3300) laptop. WOW, hats off to Apple for raping their customers wallets so beautifully.
Mike Botros @ Jan 31st 2008 12:49PM
the cost of battery replacement is the same as buying a new battery. no labor charge. apple said so.
wrabbit @ Jan 31st 2008 9:39AM
What, you thought intel would keep this chip only for apple just so that apple can stay "special", like intel gives a rat's ass. They wanna make money off of it, and money is in the PC market not Mac.
jtc970 @ Jan 31st 2008 10:58AM
claims that a pair of PC makers will use the MBA processor.
*correction
claims that a pair of PC makers will use the same processor that the MBA uses.
MBA doesn't make processors.
ibsnowedin @ Jan 31st 2008 11:02AM
So... a PC processor is going into a PC... BIG surprise! now send the troops the world is falling apart!
Michael Ray @ Jan 31st 2008 11:02AM
"..I bought the "NEW" version of the G4 PPC right before they went over to intel (I got mine in December for Christmas...the intel stuff came out right after)"
Yes, and I bought a G5 for $400 dollars last summer and it runs 10.5 just great. You are a brat.
Reid @ Jan 31st 2008 12:12PM
You guys are attacking a straw man here. I don't think anybody really thought that this chip was for the MBA only. Apple has a lot of money, but they're not stupid, and can't afford to bankroll an entire chip design. No doubt Apple pushed Intel to bring this chip to market, and lots of sharing was going on during the design process. Apple no doubt paid Intel a lump sum of money and guaranteed a minimum number of chips bought, in exchange for a 3- or 6-month exclusivity for the chip.
Everyone wins -- Apple gets to introduce a new product using a chip nobody else has access to so they are a leader for awhile, and Intel vastly cuts down the risk involved in designing a new product with uncertain market potential. And the PC world as a whole also gets access to this new chip.
Without such an arrangement, Intel might never have created this chip, Apple wouldn't have had the chip to use, nor would any other PC manufacturer, and the consumers never would have had the benefit.
Jeff Lewis @ Jan 31st 2008 2:24PM
You're partly right. No one with a brain really thought Intel created this chip for Apple exclusively.
However, Jobs did make a point during the keynote of implying (if not outright saying) that Intel made the chip just for them.
Here's the actual quote taken from the transcript posted at furrier.org:
10:18am - “We’ve got a great relationship with Intel — they’re engineering driven, we challenge each other. We said we want the Core 2 Duo, but we need to go to smaller packaging. It sounds easy — it’s not. They invested a lot of engineering to create this for us. The same chip in a package that’s 60% smaller — one of the reasons we can build the MacBook Air. I’d like to say thank you, Intel.”
10:19am - “I’d like to invite Otellini on stage…” Paul O gets up there, another appearance. Paul: “About a year ago you challenged us to get the world’s best CPU into this machine. When we started this project we didn’t think it was possible. What we built for you is the width of a dime, thick as a nickel… it’s been a challenge, we sweated over it, and we did what we do best together. Innovate.”
I think that's why everyone's so quick to jump on this one.
Jonyah @ Jan 31st 2008 12:14PM
First Apple now engadget. Does anyone know what the processor is? This processor isn't any smaller than the normal one. The process is the same size, it's the gray part in the middle. All that is smaller is the pcb that it's attached to. It makes sense for intel to switch to the smaller pcb because it costs less to manufacture. It also takes less engery to move electrons across a shorter distance, so yes it's less power hungry. The only thing stopping them from doing it across the line is that it's incompatible with current sockets. The only thing that will shrink the processor is a smaller process (ie 45nm coming up). Then they'll most likely stick with this new smaller pcb and force everyone into new motherboards (most of which are sold by intel).
Yes apple did jump too early on the macbook air and should have waited for the new chip, but then again, how many other manufacturers do you think will have something that thin with these 45nm chips? Apple just had to be first to say they created the market. Fortunately the screwed up so much on this first gen air, it won't be tough for anyone to outdo them. Let the user change the battery and add a few more ports...
TRAFFICBLOWS @ Jan 31st 2008 12:45PM
perfect for my home server!
ark_v2 @ Jan 31st 2008 1:19PM
OMG, please, no. It's a desktop, seriously, we don't need less consumption as in a portable.
required @ Jan 31st 2008 2:51PM
Isn't Sony's thinner, smaller and lighter than the MBAir?
dog_p00p @ Feb 1st 2008 4:11AM
Not going to read all the comments. I have to say this, intel did not make the "glue" smaller for the MacBook Air. The Die is the same size, only the logic and glue is smaller. Apple might have gotten it first (smaller glue and logic) but intel did not make this a unique feature for Apple.