What CPU will Apple laptops use after the Core 2 Duo?
Filed under: Computers, Laptops | By: Peter Chubb
Posted on: August 27, 2008 | 3 Comments
Apple’s range of laptops has been using the Core 2 Duo chip and it has certainly been doing the job very well. However Computer World has asked what Apple will choose to use next once they feel that the Core 2 Duo CPU has outlived itself.
Apple seem to launch new products very quickly, so it will not be that far away until we see a new MacBook and MacBook Pro on the market. Will Apple decide to stick with the trusted Intel Core 2 Duo or will the new laptops demand something different.
As laptops have more features they demand more performance from a processor, the norm for a while now has been a dual core processor, but I believe that laptops will soon need to use the new Quad Core Chips that are being used in many desktops.
Apple will have a tough decision to make though; if they introduce a new chip they know that it will demand more power. The more power the bigger drain on the battery as it demands more cooling, Apple already found that out with the Macbook Air.
So far the Intel Core 2 Duo has done a great job, but for how long can it keep doing that.
What CPU do you think that Apple will use once they do away with the Core 2 Duo?
CLICK HERE to keep updated with the latest news, share a comment or problems with products and services. Follow us on twitter or read more apple news.
I think they have to stick with Intel given the compatibility successes they have had.
I also think they have go to a Quad Core Processor but possibly with the ability to reduce it to Dual Core for battery power saving.
I hope that the new MacBook’s rather than being more powerful are more in line with the rumoured tablets which have been going around.
Jim Stevenson
http://www.bletchleygroup.com
Ditching PowerPC remains a big mistake — especially given the acquisition of PA Semi, which before Apple bought it was producing PowerPC chips with performance/power figure that made Intel’s specs look as embarrassing as their instruction set architecture.
As for cores - it’s been clear for 15 or more years now that anything more than about 1.5 symmetric cores on a single user computer is a waste. This of course is why Intel’s latest roadmap highlights processors that let you throttle back the second core to conserve power. [Whadd'ya mean, you didn't check the manufacturers' announcement s before writing this column?]
PA Semi doesn’t produce any of their designs themselves. With supply problems on IBMs end who was Apple going to have manufacture all those (admittedly awesome) PPC chips? One thing you can’t ignore is the immense wealth and muscle of Intel. They just dropped $3 billion on their 45nm fab (fab32 in Arizona) and have been cranking out tons of the best consumer CPUs available.
As for the comment about multicore CPUs being a waste… that’s how things scale in real life so we have to deal with it. I do think multicore has benefits, but that’s not really relevant.
I won’t even get into the benefits of using the x86 arch. Embarrassing or not there is a veritable ton of existing code (& binaries, yuck) that runs on the x86 ISA. Ignoring that is a mistake.
There may be some technical drawbacks to using Intel over PA Semi’s PPC and I won’t deny that, but if you look at Apple’s bottom line it seems that the Intel switch paid off.