text:
AMD Phenom II X4 980 Black Edition Reviewby Anand Lal Shimpi on 5/2/2011 10:42 PM EST
79 Comments
Back to Article
DMisner - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkPart of me hopes BD gets delayed so AMD will release a Phenom II X4 @ 4GHz Reply
tipoo - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link...But why? It would just look good on paper, BD is where their real performance aspirations are. Reply
DMisner - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkfor the sheer novelty of it. Thats all. Reply
Belard - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkThere is no novelty to these issues. Its business. Buy any AMD X4 965+ and OC to 4Ghz.... thats the Novelty part.
Having ALL your best products - even those costing almost $300 that is slower than the competitions $200 lower-end CPUs is not fun.
I have a #2 desktop that is rendering videos daily (converting my OLD VHS) - and I'll need to upgrade its mobo/CPU to speed up the process. A NEW CPU will speed things up at lest 4-6x. (Its an OLD AMD X2).
The Intel's use less power, there is that odd-ball combination that allows the GPU of the intel be used to help render video faster.
So yeah, when looking at a $150~200 CPU, its performance that counts - not MHz.
Still, for most people - any $75~100 CPU will DO just fine. Including gaming. Reply
GullLars - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - linkWith a $20-30 aftermarket cooler, you can hit 4GHz while undervolting a x50+ Phenom II. I haven't tried Athlon II's, but i'll be upgrading my father's Athlon X2 7550 to an Athlon II x4 645 and donate my old 1066 CL5 DDR2 sticks to it, so i guess i'll try hitting 4GHz on that too just for fun with a Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus.
My 1090T runs F@H smoothly at 4GHz with stock volt (Noctua NH-D14 cooler). Reply
JonnyDough - Thursday, May 05, 2011 - linkI agree.
Considering that the AMD Phenom II X6 1100T is only $54 more and beats the new chip in most benchmarks while using less power under load (using max turbo @ 3.7, same clocks as the new 980 BE) I'd say that this new 4 core is a poor value comparatively. Reply
JumpingJack - Sunday, September 21, 2014 - linkHindsight is 20/20, it didn't work out quite as people wanted.... Reply
StrangerGuy - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkI'm sure the PhII is already stuck at 3.8GHz at reasonable voltages and has been this way for a long time.
I wonder how AMD feels when the mobile i7-2820QM is just as fast as their 4.2GHz OCed Phenom II X4. Bulldozer single-threaded performance and power consumption has to be at least the same as Nehalem to stand a fighting chance. Reply
khimera2000 - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkprobably the same way Intel feels about AMD's video cards. Reply
Belard - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkYou ARE kidding, right?!
You can already OC to 4Ghz. And it will STILL be slower than i5-2400 ($190) which runs at 3.1Ghz.
Clock Speed doesn't mean then end-all. Remember the says of AMD64 vs P4? Even at 3~4Ghz, the $1000 P4 Extreme Editions were still SLOWER than AMD's 2.0~2.4Ghz $200~300 CPUs.
The performance wouldn't be so much an issue *IF* that i5-2400 was selling for $400, but its not. Its selling at the same price with a actual performance benefits.
The i3-2100 (I hate these stupid intel model numbers) = $125 and puts it on par with the AMD-PII 955 ($140) - which is an upper end AMD part... going against an intel bottom end Core X CPU.
Bulldozer needs to be OUT NOW. AMD makes great products, but they are late to the party. Reply
Sivar - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkIn "Gaming Performance", the last two charts show Core i5 frame rates which are a little on the low side.
Thanks for saving the images in PNG format though. You'd be surprised how many technical authors save images which have large areas of flat color in JPG format. :) Reply
gevorg - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkHow many times does AMD wants to win the worst power consumption crown? Reply
mattgmann - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkAmazing that Amd's Phenom II is still clock for clock on par with the old q6600. It might have a few more refinements in coding, and a higher clock speeds, but it's raw horsepower is still on par with a 5 year old chip.
AMD is two gens behind intel in performance, I don't see how BD can reasonably expect to be in the same ballpark as sandy bridge. I'm sure they'll compete in a budget based scenario, but the high end is a moon shot. With Intel's x58 replacement is in the que I just don't see AMD even sniffing a piece of the high end action. Reply
abhaxus - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkYou know, I am with you. But who believed that AMD would ever have released the Athlon and beaten Intel for as long as they did? I have hope, and we all should, for our own wallet's sake. AMD's inability to beat intel is the reason my Q6600 is still a fast CPU (granted, overclocked to 3.2ghz, it isn't exactly stock).
Nothing would make me happier than a fast AMD cpu to make me consider upgrading. Reply
LancerVI - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkI admit that I'm an Intel man. But I've got to say. I hope AMD pulls BD out and comes out guns blazing. My wallet could use the help!!!
Intel has been able to charge whatever for quite sometime now. It needs some furious competition to help drive prices down.
...at least I hope. Reply
mattgmann - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkDon't get me wrong, I'd love it if AMD were neck and neck with intel. Competition helps my wallet and keeps high end gear in my beige box.
It's just at this point in the game, BD cannot logically advance far enough past their last generation to compete with Intel's lineup. I'm sure that BD will be priced competitively and give some trouble to the low end sandy bridge chips. It won't be because their more advanced though, it'll be because the AMD chip will be a power hoggin, quad+ core with unlocked multipliers up against a lean locked down intel dual core. Reply
DMisner - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkThey COULD be the high end.. if they made the move to ARM.
Still though, I have faith in AMD. Reply
aegisofrime - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkMake the move to ARM, and abandon the x86 software market? Not a wise move.
Unless they used some sort of dynamic translator a la Transmeta Crusoe. Reply
Shadowmaster625 - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkAll they need to do is add a couple ARM cores to their existing bobcat design. Then they need to get in bed with microsoft and make sure that windows 8 properly implements schedulers that can seamlessly integrate ARM and x86 code. If AMD and microsoft both execute correctly, an 18 watt brazos chip is all we'd need for a desktop OS once the windows kernel is all ARM. Office would follow in a year. Antivirus and photo/video editing would go to the SIMDs. The x86 cores would only handle our legacy apps. Reply
extide - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - linkWhy would you EVER want to do that? Then you would have developers having to build apps that have to run on two architectures at the same time? If you want to do fixed function stuff do something like Intels Quick Sync for video, and then leave an x86 chip as an x86 chip. Reply
JKflipflop98 - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkARM gets CRUSHED on the desktop by x86. Reply
JimmiG - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkThe Q6600 didn't come at 3.7 GHz or overclock to 4.2 with stock cooling. Performance clock for clock doesn't really mean anything.
But I'm not disagreeing that the Phenom II is unimpressive. The Phenom II is essentially the same as the Phenom released in 2007, but with more L3 cache. The Phenom itself wasn't all that different from the K8 from 2003, which in itself was just an evolution of the original Athlon.
You could trace current Intel CPUs back to the Pentium Pro in the same way, but they have gone through many more, radical changes over the years. Hopefully those radical changes will come to AMD's CPU architecture with the release of BD. Reply
jabber - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkLook at it another way and you could say AMD have done an amazing job keeping whats essentialy an 8 year old design in the running.
When you look at it that way Intel's latest gen chips giving you an extra 10fps isnt that amazing. Reply
BSMonitor - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link"When you look at it that way Intel's latest gen chips giving you an extra 10fps isnt that amazing."
FPS are the best case scenario for older/weaker processors as they are ultimately limited by GPU performance....
"Look at it another way and you could say AMD have done an amazing job keeping whats essentialy an 8 year old design in the running."
The Core i series can be trace it's origins to the original Core Duo processors that debuted Apple's transition to x86 (5 Years ago) Intel has had 4 extremely impressive architecture changes since, each improving performance from ~20% to ~100% in some cases... AMD has executed 2. The first Phenom was a HUGE disappointment and couldn't compete with Core 2 Duo's let alone Core 2 Quads.. Phenom II, now gaining traction, is still barely competing against those same Core 2 Quads..
Your same ~10fps difference could be said of my old Core 2 E6600 against your Phenom II x6 in GPU limited scenarios...
AMD's entire success in surpassing Intel was placing the MCU on the CPU die. With that move, they blew their load. Thanks to the power hungry beast that was the netburst processors, Intel worked on improving caching algorithms, multi-threading, parallel processing, etc The end result is Intel with an extremely efficient CPU(born from it's mistakes) and an integrated MCU, AMD is left with just a so-so CPU and an integrated MCU. Reply
Action_Parsnip - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link"FPS are the best case scenario for older/weaker processors as they are ultimately limited by GPU performance...."
This sentence has no meaning.
"Intel has had 4 extremely impressive architecture changes since"
I count 3 changes. core 2 -> nehalem wasn't #extremely# impressive, just impressive.
"AMD's entire success in surpassing Intel was placing the MCU on the CPU die."
Your a fool and do not know what your talking about. Reply
MilwaukeeMike - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link"Your a fool and do not know what your talking about. "
It's you're btw. "Better to remain silent and let others think you're a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt" ;) Reply
SlyNine1 - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link""FPS are the best case scenario for older/weaker processors as they are ultimately limited by GPU performance...."
This sentence has no meaning."
Made perfect sense to me. The rendering of FPS ( Frames per Second) is a best case senario for older/weaker processors as the bottleneck is elsewhere..
I don't understand how that doesn't make sense, it makes perfect sense.
And getting on someone for saying extremely impressive instead of just impressive, Facepalm!! Reply
Action_Parsnip - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link""FPS are the best case scenario for older/weaker processors as they are ultimately limited by GPU performance...."
so is he saying the game tests in this review do not show the same trends as the other tests? That is what he is saying in effect. They look perfectly in line with expectations afaik. The sentence on it's own does mean very little if anything. He is either saying this review is doing something wrong or that gaming tests are of little/no worth.
"nd getting on someone for saying extremely impressive instead of just impressive, Facepalm!!"
Being a native english speaker, I know there is a difference between impressive and extremely impressive.
Skipping a stone on a lake 20 times is impressive. Walking on the water there is extremely impressive.
extide - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - link"Thanks to the power hungry beast that was the netburst processors, Intel worked on improving caching algorithms, multi-threading, parallel processing, etc The end result is Intel with an extremely efficient CPU(born from it's mistakes) and an integrated MCU, AMD is left with just a so-so CPU and an integrated MCU. "
I have said this exact same thing many times before. At this point in time making the P4 helped Intel because they had to optimize the heck out of EVERYTHING in it to even be remotely competitive, and well, now all that work is done. Reply
Ushio01 - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkActually with core/thread/clock being equal 65nm Core2 will beat Phenom II in nearly all benchmarks 45nm Core2 crushes it. Reply
medi01 - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkNow try to make price of CPU + Motherboard equal and compare again. Reply
BSMonitor - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link"Now try to make price of CPU + Motherboard equal and compare again."
Price is a function of demand. AMD HAS to sell them this cheap to move them at all. They do not sell them as cheap as they do because they are more cost effective to produce, so your comment in this context is completely irrelevant .. Reply
Action_Parsnip - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkYou misunderstand his point. Reply
kmmatney - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkYep. I've bought at least 10 cpu+MB combos for $99 at Microcenter over the last year, for clients, friends, and family. Fast enough for most purposes, and you are GPU limited in most games, and so better off spending the cost savings on a better video card. For $300, for can get a much better performing AMD system, versus Intel. Maybe not good for AMD, but good for me. Reply
silverblue - Thursday, May 05, 2011 - linkBut it doesn't. There's plenty of benchmarks around to show that a comparative Phenom II X4 gets a few wins, especially in encoding. Aside of a few very strong Intel-optimised situations, there's really very little in it, and anyway, if you ignore the very high price of the upper Core 2 Quads, you can get a faster Phenom II X4 or X6 for less. Reply
Targon - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkAMD has a new platform on the way, and that is where the focus has been. For now, any new Athlon 2 or Phenom 2 processor will just be a bit more of the same with a higher clock rate, but still has the same exact design as previous chips. Bulldozer on the other hand is the big push to get back to being competitive.
The big problem is, and remains the lack of a 32nm fab process which Intel has had for a long time now. Reply
haplo602 - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkthanks for the compilation benchmark. finaly something usable for the Linux folks :-) linux kernel compilation (or open office) would be better, but this is not a bad start ;-) Reply
macky_r - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkI knew from the beginning that AMD wants to milk more performance out of it's Deneb architecture. I wasn't surprise when I saw this item on this website that I visit from time to time.
I currently own one of the first Deneb CPUs (PH II 965 BE) w/ a clock of 3.4 GHz rated at 140W! I didn't even bother OCing this regretful purchased CPU of mine. How I wish I waited for the cooler versions, but I was in a hurry to build a PC that I can use at home for my Networking classes
I will buy the 1100T soon. I will be be OCing it at 3.7 GHz w/ turbo core disabled.
I don't wanna be negative, but I know for a fact that Bulldozer will not beat Intel's upcoming LGA 2011 CPUs. Maybe Bulldozer is meant to compete with Sandy-Bridge. Reply
Griswold - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkYea, you know for a fact... Reply
BSMonitor - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link"I don't wanna be negative, but I know for a fact that Bulldozer will not beat Intel's upcoming LGA 2011 CPUs. Maybe Bulldozer is meant to compete with Sandy-Bridge"
Exactly. Even if. Look at the turbo boost scenarios from the Intel SNB processors. There is so much headroom on these processors. Intel is already holding back performance because of lack of competition.
Intel has silicon running stock air-cooled 4GHz and beyond in house, guaranteed. Reply
Action_Parsnip - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link"I don't wanna be negative, but I know for a fact that Bulldozer will not beat Intel's upcoming LGA 2011 CPUs. Maybe Bulldozer is meant to compete with Sandy-Bridge"
Unless you've seen the prototypes you do not know for a fact. PERIOD.
"Intel has silicon running stock air-cooled 4GHz and beyond in house, guaranteed."
Unless you've been 'in-house' you cannot guarantee that. PERIOD. Reply
Orwell - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkWhat about overclocking the CPU-NB of the chip?
It has been proved useful in one of the Phenom II X6 reviews (can't find it now though), where performance in HAWX just shot right up bij about 20% I believe when upping from 2GHz to 3GHz.
It's a shame most if not all reviewers don't overclock their uncores. Or, well, at least, they're not telling you and they don't put a CPU-Z Memory Tab screenshot in the review, showing the Uncore-frequency.
I know pretty much all hope is lost for this aging design (Deneb), but as an owner of this furnace CPU called the Phenom II X4 C2 (yes, 140W at 3.4GHz), I'd like to know how much faster the Intels are compared to my 3.7GHz/2.4GHz oc. Reply
Stas - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkI haven't had an Intel CPU since P4 Willamette. I've been happy with AMD bang-for-buck, as performance seemed sufficient, and overclock always covered any shortcomings. Nowadays, I see mid-level Intel CPUs beat AMDs top-end offerings every release. And honestly, I'm really bottlenecking in the CPU department, but I don't see AMD offering a solution (running Phenom X3 @x4 3.5Ghz). I've been waiting for 2 years to upgrade the processor, and I'm getting tired of this. Don't make me cross the Sandy Bridge, AMD. Make BD happen. And it better be good. Reply
jabber - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkI often see the reviews with Intels chips running ahead.
Then I think "hang on though, the AMD chip gives me 60fps+ and costs half the price including the motherboard tax!"
Then its not so bad. Reply
starfalcon - Monday, May 09, 2011 - linkBut then Ivy Bridge comes just a few months after BD, so what happens then? Reply
raevoxx - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkWhere I work, AMD still outsells Intel by a factor of.. well... over 20-to-1 if not more. What we always tell customers, is that if price is no object, the Intel platforms are higher performance. But best bang-for-the-buck is AMD, and it's not like we're comparing an i7 to a 486-SX. We try to explain it in best terms, but there's Intel processors in our display case that are actually gathering dust. Which frankly makes an AMD fan like me happy :) But I digress.
We carry a full line of Intels, from the Celeron cheapies, all the way up to i7. And we finally closed out all of our 1156s and only sell 1155s.
Like it or not, our customers are amazed that they can pair up a decent mobo, an Athlon II 250, and 4GB of 1333, for less than $160. Most spring for the 1075T for the price, too. Whether or not it's faster than a similarly priced i5, people like the ability to say they have six cores. When they can get 75% the performance of a comparable chip, for less than 50% of the cost... people bite.
We're quite excited to start carrying Zambezi chips, when we're able to, since they'll be more competitive. But it's always going to be darkest before the dawn, and it's nice that AMD is throwing in a speed bump or two (1100T, etc) before the architecture change. Instead of letting their chips languish until BD. Reply
jabber - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkMust admit I havent ever made an Intel box for a customer, its always AMD.
I check out the Intel CPU range every now and then and check what price the bottom non Celeron Intel chip is going for, then the cheapest decent brand Intel motherboard and after seeing any profit just vaporise, I roll my eyes and go back to the AMD section.
Intel isnt worth the extra cost for most ordinary folks. Intel are total overkill. The good old 3GHz dual core Athlon with a mATX MB and 4GB of 1333DDR3 works a charm everytime.
If a customer came to me and said he wanted to do loads of transcoding and video editing and had £1200 to spend then lets go Intel. But as most come to me with a budget of £4-500 and I need to take my cut, its not going to happen. Reply
MilwaukeeMike - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkThis is exactly how I feel. I've always owned AMD because it's been fast enough and cheaper. If I had to build a PC today I'd choose a Sandy Bridge processor, but i'm not building one because my AMD 955 BE still does everything I need it to. I have tons of windows open on my 22" monitor and play my games on my 23" and have no issues.
A lot of that Intel performance gain falls into the 'can't even tell' category for many users. Reply
Peroxyde - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkThe saving made by buying AMD, would you pay it back in electricity? Let's say, after 2 years? Just want to see if the higher power consumption would translate somewhere. If any of you have done any comparison in this area, I would appreciate very much if you can give some highlights. Reply
jabber - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - linkIt would take longer than the life of the Intel i3 box to make back the £65+ extra the intel box cost me in power savings.
If the difference was £10 then yes but £65 ($104) is just too great to make back.
AMD still wins for a standard system cost wise. As these are PCs for Joe User and not overclockers then you can switch on the power saving settings anyway.
Plus they rarely run at 100% for very long.
Intel still isnt competative at the increasingly growing low end customer group.
Most people dont need 4GHz+ leviathan power CPUs anymore. If anything Intels future customers at the top end will be getting a smaller and smaller group.
How many of us here still demand the top end (or as close to) CPU we can buy? I bet many of us are now happy to make do with a mid-range or less CPU and spend the saving elsewhere. Reply
silverblue - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - linkI've undervolted my 710. Makes virtually no difference to performance or stability and seemed like a good idea at the time. More people should do it. Reply
Shadowmaster625 - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkThis is ridiculous. BD is one month from launch, and llano has been shiiping for weeks. Yet you guys dont have a single benchmark of either. Or maybe you do and are just too spineless to post them. It is sad that we had better sources of information 10 years ago. Now there is nothing because everyone seems to care too much about NDAs. Who cares about NDAs? If you know someone who has the hardware you should post their review asap, and not worry about NDAs. What good does it do to release a review the same exact day as two dozen other sites? If you want more eggs sometimes you have to sacrifice a few chickens. Reply
AssBall - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkWho cares about NDAs??? Did you really just ask that?
How about reviewers that enjoy getting engineering samples, new products to review, and support from the manufacturer's for free? How about any reputable, respectable, reviewer? How about anyone who frowns upon breaking a contract?
And your chicken analogy is full of fail. Reply
heymrdj - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkI asked myself the same thing, did he really just ask that? Someone never took ethics courses, or has any ethics for that matter. Just because you want to drool like a baby over specs is no excuse to ask these reputable authors to break NDA. On the day of release feel more than free to go view any hardware site you wish. Reply
Shadowmaster625 - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkYeah well you must be a spineless chicken too. There are plenty of ways to get chips. All those engineering samples out there, and no one can get their hands on one? Yeah right. If all NDAs were broken there would be no NDAs. Your brain is full of fail if you cannot understand that. Just a bunch of spineless cowards. Reply
Makaveli - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkIf its so easy to get one why don't you and post one on your own review site oo wait a min...... Reply
haplo602 - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkare you a total idiot ? it's called competitive advantage. if they would break the NDA, no engineering sample for them for the next round. if everybody breaks the NDA, no launch day reviews. that simple. Reply
Shadowmaster625 - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - linkThe engineering samples would go to different people, but chances are one of them would hook up with someone who has the reputation for having some freakin cojones. Especially if money was involved. There IS money to be made in this way, and its not illegal. Again, it just takes cajones. Reply
AssBall - Thursday, May 05, 2011 - linkYou go find a web review site with "cajones" then, since you are so fond of them, and please leave the rest of us in peace while we wait for the non-half-ass Anandtech review after the NDA lifts. Reply
Makaveli - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkLMAO when you understand what an NDA is and why you shouldn't break it or alteast turn 18 then come back and post.
Its obvious Common sense and logic ain't strong in your family. Reply
rfle500 - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkI'm glad to see a compile test in the lineup. Can I ask - how did you choose number of threads for the test - was it the same for all (12) or based on number of physical, or hyperthreaded cores. In my experience, on AMD chips most compilations are faster with overloaded threads, say 2x number of physical cores - did you test this possibility? Reply
silverblue - Thursday, May 05, 2011 - linkSome programs don't work well with non-power-of-2 architectures either, which would harm performance of the X3 and X6 processors (Windows Media Encoder 9), or even worse, cripple things completely (DivX or XviD on VirtualDub uses just one of an X3's cores, so you need to set the affinity to two cores). I suppose logically, overstressing a hyperthreaded CPU would mean that the its execution units are fully utilised and, as such, logical cores won't actually make any difference, so it would be in these situations where the X6 could perhaps close the gap a little. Reply
Shadowmaster625 - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkIt also gives them an opportunity to remove millions of wasted cpu cycles. Reply
krumme - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkMan this is some boring news. I would prefer to get some more inside or backgroud info from AMD, Intel or Arm country, even if it takes years compared to this. But i guess this is better business :) Reply
greenguy - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkI keep checking here looking for the inevitable Llano review, but it's not here yet. How long do we have to wait? Reply
Action_Parsnip - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkIt appears you would like to marry Francois Piednoel? Reply
jabber - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - linkWho is Francois Pedofile?
Never heard of him. Reply
529th - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkI don't see this mentioned in the review nor the benchmarks, someone correct me if I am wrong but when those benches are made, are they made with Turbo disabled? If not, I don't see it as a fair comparison if you are running stock speeds when comparing a 3.3Ghz i7 2500K vs a 3.33Ghz i7 975 You have games that make use of all cores, and some that use only a few.. so you may get a higher turbo on a Sandy Bridge chip. This is not exact science but making the GHz speed into an exact comparison without Turbo enabled gives a little more insight into the product..
just sayin Reply
PubFiction - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - linkThis is just a final release to cap off Phenom 2 they know they were beat they are just giving a little speed boost to it for more value. If this was bulldozer then ya it would be bad but we already know what phenom 2 has to offer why is there so much discussion around a final revision chip. They are just throwing out what may be the most speed they can with that core until BD arrives. Reply
Casper42 - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - link"AMD originally introduced the Phenom II architecture over two years ago to compete with Intel's Core 2 lineup. Intel has since been through one major microarchitecture revision (Sandy Bridge) and Phenom II is beginning to show its age."
Am I missing something or just not counting properly.
Phenom II introduced to compete with Core 2
Intel then Introduces Nehalem/Westmere
Intel then Introduces Sandy Bridge
So wouldn't Intel have been through 2 major architecture revisions? Reply
silverblue - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - linkPhenom II came to market after Nehalem. Yes, it wasn't exactly meant to compete with it, and was more about sorting out what Phenom did wrong, but the unfortunate truth is that the i7 beat it to market.
529th - I think the issue would be that you would be disabling a feature and thus not showing accurate performance, however that in itself would show the difference given by having Turbo in the first place. Doing the same with Thuban would be interesting.
Zosma would've made more sense than continuing on with Deneb, however AMD quickly shelved that idea. Reply
GullLars - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - linkNah, it's just Intel has a huge advantage on fabs. They also have a clock for clock advantage on most workloads, but AMD's engineers are by no means incompetent. Brazos is the only recent great product though.
If both Bulldozer and Lano fails spectacularly, i'll start leaning towards your side though. The last years Intel have alienated me with horrible business ethics and artificial restrictions on processors for market segmentation with very high prices on the chips that were not gimped (disabled functional units).
Hopefully power consumption will be better with GloFo. Reply
silverblue - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - linkWeren't you banned? No? Oh.
Intel actually DOES need to make its compilers more vendor-agnostic since the settlement. If a piece of software works rather poorly on an AMD CPU and much better for an Intel offering, this isn't always down to the Intel CPU being stronger; it might actually be the result of the AMD CPU working on an inefficient codepath. Of course, it may actually be the limit of the processor. If something is compiled using a neutral compiler, I'd be far more inclined to trust the results of that.
I doubt Intel is forcing people to use their compiler nor are they making them develop for Intel-only platforms, however in the interests of fair competition it's only right that checking for the CPU ID tag be removed, if that is what they're doing. Reply
silverblue - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - linkSince you're such an expert, could you perhaps tell us, oh mighty one, what errata requires fixing? What is so buggy about an AMD processor?
If you're going to make such bold statements, it's about time you actually backed them up with FACTS. Reply
silverblue - Thursday, May 05, 2011 - linkStill waiting. Reply
silverblue - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - linkThe most popular CPUs are towards the lower end. Intel doesn't have a quad core CPU below $100 whereas AMD has multiple. There's no reason why an Athlon II X4 setup shouldn't easily undercut an i3 setup, and occasionally, four true cores will be a benefit. Reply
wh3resmycar - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - linkwhy and why would are you still guys sticking to 1680x1050? don't give me the crap about correctly segmenting processor performance hence a cpu bound resolution for gameX.
people who actually are gamers, who are looking for a quadcore and up cpu solutions are probably gaming at HD resolutions and upwards.
at least add graphs that are done on higher resolutions. your gaming performance benchmarks don't work in the real world. Reply
dhfkjah - Friday, May 06, 2011 - link
All kinds of shoes + tide bag
Free transport Reply
stimudent - Sunday, May 08, 2011 - linkThis is great hardware, but it seems that most everyone I know who is an average user has left their tower systems and switched to smart phones, iPads, and gaming consoles for the most part. These items are now being discussed at family get togethers instead of PCs as was the case just a few years ago. Some advanced users are using the latest graphics cards for computational projects instead of gaming - the CPU is no longer seen as the best way to fold. It's the graphics card doing the grunt work while the quad-core processor sits mostly idle. Reply


text:
The Basics about Bystander Intervention
This free online course provides the basics for how to encourage friends and family to deter and possibly prevent sexual violence.
Great new resource. We have a summary of a PreventConnect web conference on bystander programs that featured Dr. Baynard and Mentors in Violence Prevention. Check it out at http://tinyurl.com/l8zelt
Thanks for adding to the resource room!
Principles of Prevention
This online course offers interactive learning features and expert interviews, leading individuals working to end violence through an explanation of leading principles on violence prevention.
Check out the NSVRC's Bystander Blog, hosted by Joan Tabachnick, to join the dialogue on taking action to prevent sexual violence. http://www.nsvrc.org/blog/bystander
The Engaging Bystanders in Sexual Violence Prevention book provides an in-depth background the bystander approach and offers tools to develop greater bystander involvement. Read it here: http://www.nsvrc.org/publications/nsvrc-publications/engaging-bystanders-sexual-violence-prevention
NSVRC bystander resources are also available in Spanish, visit the Sexual Assault Awareness Month site for recursos en Espanol: http://www.nsvrc.org/es/saam/2510
Thank you everyone for your comments and resources. The Live xCHANGE ended at 3:30 PM EST. Please continue the disucssion through April 15, 2011. During this time, the forum will not be a real time discussion but the forum will be open for questions, responses and comments. The NSVRC will respond daily to posts

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Dunbar a favorite target at Saturday practice
Published: Saturday, August 17, 2013 at 5:18 p.m.
Last Modified: Saturday, August 17, 2013 at 5:18 p.m.
In the preseason projections for the Florida Gators, most were picking senior wide receiver Quinton Dunbar to emerge as quarterback Jeff Driskel's go-to guy in the passing game in 2013.
Photo Galleries
On an overcast Saturday morning in The Swamp, about 1,000 fans saw just that — a lot of Driskel-to-Dunbar, in what turned out to be the favorite combination of the day.
That was in sharp contrast to UF's first open practice Thursday night at the Dizney Lacrosse Stadium, where the receiving star of the day was true freshman wideout Demarcus Robinson.
In Saturday's practice, Driskel was looking for Dunbar, and he found him quite often. Perhaps the highlight was a 25-yard laser by Driskel that found Dunbar between three defensive backs about five yards deep in the end zone for a touchdown. The two hooked up for several more completions, including one of about 20 yards during 11-on-11 against the defense.
Here are some other observations from Saturday's practice:
*Driskel, who had a tendency to lock onto his primary receiver at times last season, seems much more comfortable now going through his progressions until he finds the open receiver. The 20-yard pass to Dunbar during 11-on-11 was a perfect example. Driskel dropped back and looked to the right side. When he saw his primary receiver covered, he checked down to the next guy and found Dunbar open over the middle.
*Offensive coordinator Brent Pease said he and the offensive coaches were a little stunned when they went back and looked at last year's numbers and discovered how little the running backs were used in the passing game. Since then, there's been a concerted effort to get the backs (especially the tailbacks) involved in that phase of the game. That was evident Saturday. The quarterbacks threw to the backs on numerous occasions, a move that helped the offense move the chains several times. And this was with UF's best pass-catching back, tailback Matt Jones, still sidelined while he recovers from a viral infection. Of the tailbacks who practiced Saturday, true freshman Kelvin Taylor appeared to have the best hands.
*The quarterbacks had to cope with a strong pass rush for most of the practice. It was especially devastating when Dante Fowler Jr. and Ronald Powell were streaking in from opposite edges. When those two are in the game at the same time, the Gators are very fast and athletic up front, especially when you factor in tackle Dominique Easley, who appears to have regained that lightning first step he had before he injured his knee at the end of the 2011 season.
*The players benefiting the most from the pass rush Saturday were the guys in the secondary, especially the cornerbacks. The starting corners — Loucheiz Purifoy and Marcus Roberson — provided suffocating coverage for most of the day, even when the quarterbacks had some time to scan the field. Florida's safeties — Cody Riggs and true freshman Keanu Neal, in particular — also appeared to have a good day in coverage (even though Riggs appeared to get away with pass interference in the end zone on one play).
*The left tackle on the No. 2 offense Saturday was Maryland transfer Max Garcia, who is the starter at right guard while senior Jon Halapio is out with a partially torn pectoral muscle. Also, true freshman Cameron Dillard ran with the second team at center, while Kyle Koehne took some reps with the No. 1 offense at center. Koehne provides depth at center and both guard positions and is the back-up to Jonotthan Harrison at center. On the defensive line, true freshmen Jay-nard Bostwick and Caleb Brantley got reps at tackle on the No. 2 defense.
*Several players talked earlier in the week about how mammoth offensive tackle Trenton Brown makes everyone else look small. Well, in Saturday's practice, Brown certainly made true freshman linebacker Alex Anzalone look undersized on one play. Anzalone, who is 6-foot-3, 230 pounds, tried to get past Brown on a pass rush, but Brown got his hands into Anzalone's chest and gave him a mighty shove that sent Anzalone flying. Anzalone rolled twice after hitting the turf. Anzalone is not the only defender who has had problems getting around or through the 6-foot-8, 363-pound Brown in camp. Brown, by the way, is running with the second team at right tackle and figures to see significant playing time this season.
*Senior linebacker Darrin Kitchens, a projected starter in the opener, practiced in a non-contact jersey Saturday. He was not on the injury list that coach Will Muschamp revealed to the media before Friday's scrimmage. … Matt Jones watched some of Saturday's practice from the south end zone. Although he looked fine and has started doing cardio work, there still is no timetable for his return.
Contact Robbie Andreu at 352-374-5022 or email@example.com. Also check out Andreu's blog at Gatorsports.com.
Reader comments posted to this article may be published in our print edition. All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.


text:
Larry Thor, a staff announcer turned actor with an expressive and powerful voice, played the role of Detective Danny Clover. His beat was Broadway, and each week he narrated a new tale of nighttime drama along the Great White Way.
Writers Morton Fine and David Friedkin delivered scripts of elegant intricacy that turned routine description into near poetry. Three soundmen worked in unison to create one of the densest soundscapes on radio - capturing the chaotic buzz of the New York night as a counterpoint to the music and dialogue. Produced and directed by Elliott Lewis, it was the most lyrical crime show on the air.
In eight digitally remastered episodes, when quiet women and well-off men meet unfortunate ends, Clover is there - backed up by loyal friends Sgt. Tartaglia (Charles Calvert) and Sgt. Muggavan (Jack Kruschen).
Includes a Program Guide by Elizabeth McLeod.
Episodes Include: The Sybil Crane Murder Case 05-09-53, The Barbara Hunt Murder Case 05-16-53, The Robin Forrest Murder Case 05-23-53, The Ruth Shay Murder Case 05-30-53, The John Nelson Murder Case 06-06-53, The George Lane Murder Case 06-13-53, The Joan Parker Murder Case 06-20-53, The Sophie Bretton Murder Case 06-27-53
Related Products


text:
In collaboration with the talented team at Wool and the Gang, we introduce Stone Washed, a beautiful, 100% cotton tape yarn, perfect for simple stitch textures and stripes. Stone Washed is available in four shades of blue, from Light Aged to Indigo Aged, Denim Aged and Dark Aged.
Made with 100% natural linen, our Pure Linen has a soft sheen and a relaxed drape. This yarn is ideal for light weight and elegant summer knits, that are easy and cooling to wear.
A wonderful cotton drape yarn which shows texture and cable detail. Softknit Cotton is also interchangeable with Handknit Cotton.
This cotton is a wonderful machine washable soft handle cotton yarn which is perfect for all year round knitting.
This cotton is perfect for all year round knitting especially cable and textured knits.


text:
on orders $75+
Read 349 Earth's Balance reviews, with an average rating of 4.8 out of 5 stars, to help determine which pet products are right for you.
Earths Balance pet care products includes a comprehensive line of natural and effective treatments for common pet problems and ailments, including itching, hot spots, dander, lawn spots and more. Earths Balances team of researchers and scientists believes that the key to optimal health is found in nature and that the best products are grown at home. Rest assured that every product bearing the Earths Balance name is made and bottles in the United States.Earths Balance pet solutions draw on over 70 years of pet care experience thats plenty of time to figure out what works and what doesnt! Earths Balance is proud to offer their fellow pet owners innovative solutions for quality nutrition, first aid and general health, pet homes, grooming supplies, odor control and accessories for cats, dogs and small animals. Above all, Earths Balance desires to enhance the bond between pets and their people.
Be sure to browse all of our Earths Balance pet products to make sure you find just the right helpful, practical solution for all of your most common pet issues. Pet Mountain is pleased to be a leading vendor of great Earths Balance pet products.Pet Mountain is proud to offer you a wide selection of Earths Balance pet products, at the very best prices available anywhere! Take a look at all of our huge selection of great deals! Cant find something youre looking for? Let us know! Wed love to help. Be sure to check out our online coupons and discount shipping on all your favorite products.Pet Mountain your have everything, online low price leader for all pet supplies!
Free shipping on all orders over $75, even the BIG STUFF that weighs a ton. No code. No hassle.
We want you to be happy with all your purchases at PetMountain. If not, we will make things right.
We won't be beat on price. Always shop with confidence with our low price guarantee.
We guarantee that every brand we sell is new and 100% authentic. Shop over 300 trusted pet brands.
We're confirming your subscription now. We want to make sure your email isn't already on the list.


text:
Apple's 13-inch MacBook Pro (Early 2010) Reviewed: Shaking the CPU/GPU Balanceby Anand Lal Shimpi on 6/9/2010 12:15 AM EST
- Posted in
- Mac
- Apple
- Intel
- MacBook Pro
93 Comments
Back to Article
oldbriones - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkGlaringly missing in display evaluation is any mention of the viewing angle. Anandtech probably knows that the supposedly "Pro" models have cheap TN LCD type thus resulting in crappy viewing angles. I expect Anandtech to educate its readers about availability of better screens so that manufacturers will respond to the market demand. Reply
Zok - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkGood point, but when was the last time you've seen a laptop not sporting a TN LCD? Reply
Penti - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkOnly tablet-PCs don't and they are only on IPS-based tech since recently and in smaller sizes, as far as I'm aware of there is no 15" low power laptop panel in existence or being manufactured. They can't use something that aren't manufactured, and a display like that isn't in the catalogs of the Korean and Taiwanese panel manufacturers and are frankly out of most of theirs capability. Many of them simply don't make any IPS screens at all. Haven't seen PVA panels in those sizes and power envelope or anywhere near.
IPS screens in devices like iPad was unheard of before LG put one together for Apple and hard to imagine. As netbooks and low cost devices use TN panels and e-readers use reflective technology.
Every photoguy knows the macbooks screens aren't worth a shit and that they need a calibrated external screen for referencing and work. So I hope it doesn't come as a surprise to anybody. The MBP screens aren't worse then any others. But it's still pretty useless for a lot of things. Any way that's what the review of monitors is for. They have done more detailed reviews of laptop screens too, but they only confirm that they are horrible. I'm pretty sure also that the screens for high-end tablet PCs isn't that good when it comes to color accuracy their usage is for viewing angles. And that isn't everything. Reply
Penti - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkAnd when I say based on IPS (IPS-based) I mean AFFS panels. They exist for up to 14". They are actually 262k color panels, while they have good viewing angles though. LG haven't invented a unique macbook screen yet. Reply
BlendMe - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkNow that Apple is shipping the iPad and iPhone 4 with IPS panels it might not take to long till they move the tech up to their MacBook line. The iMac already have it but they're not power limited like laptops. Reply
ksherman - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - link"Every photoguy knows the macbooks screens aren't worth a shit..."
That all depends. if you shoot in AdobeRGB, yeah you would be left wanting. I shoot almost exclusively in sRGB because that's what everyone seems to want anyway. As such, near 80% coverage of the AdobeRGB spectrum works just fine.
The bigger problem is an uncalibrated display. Calibrate the display and it will get you close enough in almost ever situation.
Of course though, it always depends on your medium/use for the pictures. I shoot for newspapers. They compress the details right out of the pictures online and the half-tone process kills and color correction or detail anyway.
If I shot for a magazine, it might be a different story. I'd have a lot more money and probably wouldn't be editing and transmitting from my car more often than not.
Anyway, I love my (first gen) unibody 15" MacBook Pro, but I'm lusting after the matte high-res display and awesome battery life. Reply
bji - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkWhat an interesting job you must have compared to those of us who sit in front of a computer in a cubicle all day ... Reply
rpottol - Monday, June 14, 2010 - linkIPS were dropped from the Thinkpads because they could no longer be obtained in the quantities that they needed them, Apple would need them in far greater quantities (given that they were only on a few high end Thinkpads, as opposed to what apple ships).
We may long after them, but for now, we are stuck with the cast offs from the TV market. Reply
oldbriones - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkIt was only a few years ago (granted that is a long time in tech-years) that there were beautiful high quality IPS LCD options on laptops such as IBM/Lenovo T43, T60, etc. Lately most consumers got seduced into cheap but seriously compromised (display-wise) machines, and then suffer afterward searching for that elusive head and body tilt to view the movie at. Then again, many people probably don't even know what they are missing. Reply
Stokestack - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkThe asinine glossy screen is a much bigger defect. What is with Apple's continued ignorance on this matter? I'm using a MacBook Pro with a glossy screen right now, and it is abysmal in ALL lighting conditions. From a pitch-dark room to a sunny office.
To charge extra for a matte option on the other two MBPs is bad enough, but then they don't even offer it on the computer that's most likely to leave the house and be used in a variety of lighting. There's no excuse, because the size of the computer has nothing to do with this feature.
Sad. Reply
runebinder - Saturday, June 26, 2010 - linkHuh? I have a glossy screen too, abysmal is certainly not a word I'd associate with it. I'm sitting in a brightly lit room atm and having no issues with the screen at all. In a pitch dark room it's great. Yes the colours may be more accurate on the matte, however I much prefer the glossy, the contrast ratios are better and everything looks more vivid.
If yours looks that bad I suggest you get it looked at as it sounds defective. Reply
Aenslead - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkAnother rather irrelevant review of an outdated, expensive, fruit-themed, fanboi toy that still cannot convince me to try it over an ASUS or CLEVO notebook.
That's all I have to say. Have a nice one. Reply
mathias_mm - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkSeriously, I wish people like you could just get banned. Why do you care to comment on the article if you have nothing constructive to say? It really is just flamebaiting, and everyone knows the Mac users will never stop using Macs because of crap like that, just like it's quite apparent you'll never even try a Mac. Reply
Aenslead - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkIt's my opinion and I'm entitled to express it as I see fit. I'm an avid AT reader and I will share my thoughts whenever I want, however I want, regardless of what you think. And the fact that you replied means it wasn't an irrelevant comment for you. :)
I as well have been reading AT since it began, and don't quite fancy how now every 5/10 reviews are somehow Apple related.
And yes, I will never get a Mac. Reply
mathias_mm - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkOkay, maybe I overreacted with the whole banning thing. I'm just sick and tired of this endless flaming it always ends up with, and it always starts with someone writing fanboi or whatever, in a comment saying "I'll never have none of that" or something else that means nothing. Why is that discussion so important to so many people? Is it a matter of pride to support x company instead of y?
And that is why i decided to comment. The comment itself remains irrelevant, but the tone and the purpose of it (or at least the effect it usually has), is relevant if you value a meaningful discussion in the comments. Which i do.
I also fail to see how the amount of time you've been here is relevant at all. I've been reading the site for what i guess must be around the same time, some times more often than others, but that doesn't mean i can come here and post whatever. And if Anand prefers to write more about Macs, too bad for you, I really doubt he ever started the site for you in the first place.
And I will also state you should try a Mac seriously some time. I'm not saying buy one, but try t out somehow. Can it ever hurt? :) Reply
Aenslead - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkTotally agree. I do not think someone like Anand would care to please me - he is bright enough to do whatever he pleases with HIS site, which, I must say, is the one I fully trust in reviews and comments.
My post was not meant to be productive, constructive or helpful at all - it was a rant. I complained about something I didn't like. Sort of like "why do women get PMS?!"
I've gone through hell with Mac's, honestly. The business I own provides support for Mac and PC users alike - my latest fight was trying to get a conventional cablemodem-router network to work with a MacBook Pro, a 27" iMac, and some PCs. the MBP kept acquiring 189.170.xx.xx addys, whereas the DHCP was enabled and configured to 192.168.1.xx - setting it manually helped, but it did not enable discovery of the MBP, and could not configure a Calendar program to share schedule with the rest of the PCs.
I found them less intuitive, more complicated, hardly friendly-user than even a Windows 95 PC.
I have a PowerMac G4 and a 15" MBP (GF8500, C2D) at the office for software testing and I even tried once or twice to use them as my main working machines, but failed. Linux-failure type, you know? "It's cool, but... I just don't find my way through it".
Maybe I'm a PC fanboi. Maybe it's what I enjoy the most, besides ranting. I will take a Core i5 Alienware M11x ANY DAY over this Mac. Reply
B3an - Friday, June 11, 2010 - linkAenslead, i totally agree with you.
And i think Apple in general get way more press and coverage than they deserve, especially on yank sites.
Also do not like how Anand always seems to be a little bias when reviewing Apple gear, he does not point out obvious floors like he would in other hardware reviews. Reply
zer0sum - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkMaybe put a little more thought into your opinion next time...
The last ten Anandtech reviews are as follows:
Acer Ferrari One
OSX Steam performance
AVADirect Clevo W860CU
Value SSD Roundup
ASrock X58
HP ZR30w LCD
Asus U30Jc
Nvidia GTX465
Throw in at least 3-4 other stories about Asus Computex, Eee Pad and tablet as well.
Hell, they haven't even mentioned the iphone 4 yet!!
Whilst you might find an Asus or a clevo more to your liking a lot of people buy a 13" MBP pro because it has some truly impressive features over other brands
Design, dimensions, weight, build quality, battery life, operating system, trackpad and gestures, firewire800, applications, etc.
For reference I have a new 13" MBP, a 2008 15" MBP and a new MSI GX640.
There is no perfect laptop for me and they all have their pros and cons obviously... Reply
Johnmcl7 - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkAgreed - for a technical site there's an awful lot of Apple coverage even when there's little to write about while genuinely innovative and more technologically advanced machines are ignored. Specifically I'm surprised the site has never covered the new Sony Z series - Sony have managed to do what Apple claim isn't possible by having up to an i7 processor in a 13in chassis with an Nvidia GT 330m that's smaller and lighter than the 13in Apple Macbook as well as pack in *four* SSDs and packing a 1080p display. Despite all the power it packs, its hybrid graphics setup allows for long batterylife, it also offers an extended battery. I think there's a lot to benchmark and test there particularly the likes of Trim support and general performance of the quad SSDs. Reply
Tros - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkCare to mention a model number? I can only find the 13-inch Vaio VPCZ1190X on Sony's website, which comes with NONE of those features, except for a disclaimed 7.5-hour battery life. If you halved pretty much all of those specs and got rid of the GT330m, that matches the Vaio VPC1190X.
And innovative? Not really. A keyboard backlight is innovative (and Sony was beaten to the punch by a few years). Auto-adjusting screen brightness is innovative (IIRC, Alienware did this a long time ago). Utilizing an accelerometer to shutdown HDDs before crash-impact is innovative (credit to IBM ThinkPads). The multi-touch finger gestures are innovative (first saw this in X11). Switching to a LLVM compiler to transparently take advantage of GPGPU power when it's magnitudes faster/efficient than CPU computation is innovative (Apple). This Vaio laptop? This is doubling transistors among of a sea of manufacturers that believe doubling transistors is the only way to make a better PC. The 13-inch MBP gets special attention for the innovations it brings to the tech-world, while nearly all PC manufacturers depend heavily on CPU-upgrades to sell their machines. More power to AT for focusing on innovations, rather than every variant of laptop that has a few hundred more megahertz. Reply
Johnmcl7 - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - link"Care to mention a model number? I can only find the 13-inch Vaio VPCZ1190X on Sony's website, which comes with NONE of those features, except for a disclaimed 7.5-hour battery life. If you halved pretty much all of those specs and got rid of the GT330m, that matches the Vaio VPC1190X.
The model in the UK is the VPCZ11Z9E/B (probably a different number in the US) and has the spec I mentioned above:
Core i7-620m @ 2.66Ghz (3.33Ghz maximum)
6GB ram
256GB quad SSD (4 x 64GB)
DVD+-RW (BD-R/RW drive optional)
13.1in 1920x1080 screen
Nvidia GT 330M + Intel integrated graphics
Onboard WWAN
1.4kg carbon fibre chassis
Having read through the article I can't see what innovations this Macbook brings at all, in fact it inherits many of its features from older Vaio machines (although people tend to falsely credit Apple as Sony simply don't market their innovations well enough). The Vaio Z11 on the other has a specification which exceeds even the 17in Macbooks yet remarkably it's smaller and a kilo lighter than the 13in Macbook which has a signficantly lower spec. To be able to produce such a small and lightweight machine in itself is impressive but to be able to pack in features such as discrete graphics cards and quad SSDs is extremely innovative particularly when you compare it to the competition.
John Reply
Tros - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkThat model is quite different, and far more impressive. To be fair though, Sony UK either has to loan this machine to AT, or AT pays some 2,400 British Pounds (~3,500 USD) out of their own pockets.
And yeah, both this article and Sony's UK site doesn't pronounce a lot of the neat things that make either laptop more usable. I think those kinds of reviews come with something completely different though (IE, aluminum unibody, or OS-upgrade), or absurdly better specs compared to everything on the market. They don't fit for a casual review. I mean, Ars Technica covered the changes from OS X 10.5 to 10.6, and that took some 23 pages. And I think that was the "primer" version.
Anyway, that laptop is a beast of a 13-inch machine, but I think it's in a direction Apple's not interested in. IE: A 1080p screen might be too much DPI for some, and the OS would have to implement resolution independence to appease all users (No OS and set of popular applications does so yet). The reduced battery (58 WHR) is also a direction they can't go (the lunatics throw tantrums when a spec goes down in number). I'd also bet the reason for avoiding the strongest processors, is because x86 is not the right architecture to do heavily threaded tasks on. At least, not the kind you'd want a laptop to do (non-server).
I will still hold though that machine is doing something wrong though, because of the diminishing returns after one good SSD. Having four tells me that you have four mediocre ones, and need to compensate with brute force. It kind of defeats the gained battery life by having 1 SSD over a mechanical HDD if you instead use 4x the power. That machine deserves a dissection over a review to see what's so awesome about it. Reply
JPForums - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - link
Another rather irrelevant review of an outdated, expensive, fruit-themed, fanboi toy that still cannot convince me to try it over an ASUS or CLEVO notebook.
I'm no fan of MACs, but I would say this crosses the line from negative comment to not useful.
1) If this review is irrelevant, then how can you use it to come to the conclusion that ASUS or CLEVO is a better option.
2) I'll agree that the notebook in question is underpowered in some respects, but the model is new and similar models are still being sold be ASUS. I wouldn't call that outdated, but rather aging.
3) Expensive, ..., I've got to agree with you there, but it is apparently worth it to many people.
4) "Fruit-themed", "fanboi toy" I don't know about everyone else, but when I hear labels like "Fruit-themed", I get the feeling I'm listening to a PC "fanboi".
This review is relevant for the very reason you think its irrelevant. Comparing reviews of Apples offerings to similar offerings from ASUS and CLEVO tells you exactly why you should get one versus the other. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to get a MAC. However, they don't apply to me. You have to concede that some people value form over function. For these people, MACs are hard to beat. Another example is the professional video industry. For instance, despite the latest and greatest features of Adobe's Master Collection coming to PC first, MAC has the established ecosystem and they have the features that matter. It's the same kind of legacy following that x86 in general has.
What I do get frustrated about is when people buy into the MACs just work mantra. I've seen quite a few problems with MACs (screens with gradients, low quality motherboard builds, etc.) and in some cases the customer service won't even admit there is a problem to fix. However, exempting critical hardware issues, I can say fairly confidently that the biggest difference between a system "that works" and one that doesn't is the end user, not the OS. The end user has to make the decision on the quality and performance of the hardware hardware purchased, what type of software to use, browsing habits, ect. Apple just seems to want to make more and more of those decisions for you. Note what happens when they make the wrong decision.
To be fair, many of Apple's problems exist for some of the largest PC manufacturers as well, however, they don't have massive ad campaigns trying to tell people otherwise. Reply
JesperL - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkI've been a reader af Anandtech for many years now. Ive been coming here since shortly after it started, from what i can quickly figure out it must be more than 10 years. Probably closer to 11.
I have never signed up to say anything here, but just now i did.
But im about to leave. If Anand wants to just spend his time on Macs, there is not much reason for me to be here. The guy writes some of the best tech articles around, but the subject does matter. Fact is, this used to be PC, its now turning into Mac. No hard feelings, but i feel obliged to post a note saying this.
Some people dont mind this turn, im sure, but i do. Reply
Ratman6161 - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkFor example if you go to the mobile area ( http://www.anandtech.com/tag/mobile ) you have to go a long way down the page to find an article on an Apple product. Lots of stuff on Acer, Asus, HP, gateway, nVidia, Intel etc. before you get to the first Apple article.
Personally I can't stand Apple or Mr. Jobs for a variety of reasons I won't go into here. But I don't think it's fair to accuse AnandTech of some kind of pro Apple bias.
Note that even in the Macbook pro article he points out that the machine gets 50% better framerates in games in Windows than it does in OSX. Reply
Ratman6161 - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkHere is another example: http://www.anandtech.com/show/3759/mac-os-x-steam-...
It's a whole article on how gaming is slower under OSX than under Windows. Does that seem like a pro-Apple bias to you? The Apple fanboys are probably screaming that it's an anti-apple bias. There is just no way to win with the angry finger pointers on either side of the issue. Reply
bji - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkI've been reading Anandtech for a long time too.
I don't own and never have owned a Macintosh computer but I enjoy reading about a variety of technologies so I would have the opposite opinion as JesperL.
Please keep reviewing different technologies regardless of their company of origin. Reply
Tros - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkI for one am grateful for Anand's review, for taking a PC-like scrutiny to something that wasn't quite a PC six years ago. And for Anandtech, for taking that extra step, beyond comparing numbers from synthetic benchmarks, to pay attention to how the machines interface with people. That last step is really why I can't visit TH, with all their ad-crap and mal-scripts, and only visit AT now. Reply
Ninjahedge - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkAgreed.
PC World is just Fanboi Flamebait Central (on both sides) and rarely has an article that is more than press release or opinion on what is happening in the world of fruits and transistors.
TH lost my vote when they trimmed/amputated the "other" section where tech diehards like myself used to wander freely into the depths of depraved 1st and 2nd generation tech hounds that were tired of reading the same RTFM questions and ill-informed rantings.
As JPF listed, I think the main problem with Apple is not necessarily the product, or even the price they sell it at, but their denial of any problems in their ads (sometimes quite insulting, "I'm an Apple"......)
I think it is good that Apple is starting to use some higher end graphics on its machines as most of us will not be transcripting video, doing large scale PS'ing or complex Finite Element Analysis on a smaller laptop anyway. Laptops this size are meant for general workload, multitasking, and entertainment. The needed attriobutes for that are memory, resolution, battery life and GPU.
Do I think that this makes these Apples into Pie? Nope, but it looks like they are starting to try to merge a bit more into the fold as their sales in this sector move(d) ahead of its compeditors.
Aside: You think that, just maybe, Dell could come out with a line of machines called "Orange"?
I think it would be funny as hell if we could compare Apples to Oranges. Reply
hybrid2d4x4 - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkRE: "for taking a PC-like scrutiny"
For the most part, I'd agree with you, but I got the impression that he treated the mac with kid gloves in the gaming section. If you look at a typical laptop review by Jarred, Vivek, et al, they usually include the results for the panel's native res (unless the lower 8x6 result is abysmal). I thought this was seriously lacking in the WoW benchmark. If I got a good framerate at 800x600, I`d step the res up to native and if it wasn`t playable, I'd turn down the shader quality,etc. This is especially true when you're talking about running a res with a different aspect ratio than the display, causing nasty stretch-induced loss of image quality.
Unless the system was too weak to handle it, I'd always run the native res, so I was baffled as to why not a single one of the gaming charts uses 1280x800. Sure, they are still useful to illustrate how it compares to the previous gen and the GT330 in the 15", but I don`t see why the tests weren't ran at the native res. That would seem to be the most practical/relevant demonstration of gaming ability on this laptop. Reply
Setsunayaki - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkWhile I am not a fan of Apple by any means in any sector, I like their consistency within battery life. They offer laptops that at least wont discharge rapidly. I don't like the 1280x800 resolution simply because I do more things, and if the resolution was so low...
then I rather opt for something much cooler...
Rather than spend money on this and everything needed to get started, I prefer spending that money to build my own desktop PC to have at home and buy a netbook as well. The combination of the two would be far more valuable for the money, considering in my own usage..
I don't play many 3D games on the road, or do many heavy things on a laptop...unless I am working off-site with a team of course. Reply
intelpatriot - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkIs there that meaningful a difference between a core 2 and an i5 (even an i7), anyway?
I'm guessing it's going to be nothing like the performance gain stepping up a GPU price bracket/generation. Reply
Calin - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkThe performance gain for stepping up a GPU price bracket and/or generation might be zero if you don't even use Aero and the most difficult graphic activity on your laptop are sliding menus.
Games are a totally different thing, and some people don't use games (or other applications) that benefit from high performance graphics.
As for Core2Duo (E6550) versus Core i7 920:
Over 10% faster in worst case (Fallout 3 1680x1050 medium quality), and triple the speed in a couple of benchmarks (Sorenson Squeeze pro5, Cinebench R10 multithreaded). The E6550 is similar (slightly better) to one of the first "high performance" Core2Duo that appeared, and I think the price at launch was somewhat similar. Reply
Howierr - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkHas anyone tried using a X-25M G2 (80gb or 160gb) in the early 2010 MacBook Pro 13", and installing Windows 7 through Bootcamp? I tried this with 2 different brand new X-25M SSDs, and the MacBook has a hard time detecting the SSD consistently on boot up. When installing Windows 7, sometimes no disks are detected, and it takes many reboots to get the SSD to be detected. But after a successful installation, whenever I reboot the MacBook Pro, there is a very good chance that the question mark icon shows up, meaning that it cannot detect any bootable devices.
I installed one of the X-25M into a mid-2009 MacBook Pro 13", bootcamp Winodws 7 and it works flawlessly reboot after reboot.
Could this be an isolated incident, or do all early-2010 MacBook Pro 13s dislike the Intel X-25M G2? Reply
Zok - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkNot quite to your question, but I installed a 160 GB G2 into my 2010 i5 15" MBP and have had no issues whatsoever. There have been reports that the NVIDIA chipset's SATA implementation is somewhat subpar compared to Intel's, as is in the new 2010 15" MBPs. Reply
Jamor - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkWould it be possible to get WoW results in OSX at similar settings?
That'd give something to compare Portal/Half Life results to.
My gut feeling is, the OSX/Win performance difference is more in the drivers and the way OS handles 3D, less in the porting. Reply
Meaker10 - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkHow can a 2 chip platform (core i series) not fit when a 3 chip platform (core 2) already does? Reply
BlendMe - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkWell the Core i platform in itself is a 2 chip solution, but only if you stick with Intel's graphics. If you want something more powerfull you have to go with a discrete GPU which makes it a 3 chip solution (like on the 2010 15" & 17").
The C2D platform in the 13" is a 2 chip solution, because you have the CPU and a Nvidia chipset with integrated GPU, which is much more powerfull than Intel's on-chip graphics.
I am disappointed about the missing Core i in the 13", but then I kinda understand Apple's decision. Reply
gcor - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkLast June I reluctantly bought a 13" MacBook Pro for university as it seemed the only 8+ hr machine with big enough screen and performance to get me through the day.
Having been a Windows person since 3.11 (I used to be a sys admin & software engineer), I was not looking forward to the learning curve of OS-X and becoming savvy enough to fix problems.
I got to say though, the laptop has meet all my needs admirably, with a tiny learning curve. Also, maybe I was just unlucky with the ~15 PC's I had beforehand, but the machine seems rock solid stable in comparison. It's definitely saved me a ton of time in terms of; no BSOD's, no driver compatibility issues, no anti-virus machine hogging, no bloatware, no OS patches killing the machine, etc.
Basically, when I want to use it, I just lift the lid and I'm away. I never turn it off & have re-booted no more than a handful of times in a year.
About the only trouble I've had is the occasional Office crashes (I wonder if the manufacturer has done this intentionally?)
Anyway, after a one year experiment, I feel the additional price has been well worth it. It's an absolute work horse that is always ready to let me get the job done. Other than games, there is nothing I miss from Windows that would convince me to swap back.
To all the die hard Windows folks out there (like I was), if you want a machine to get your job done without needing to mess about with the machine itself, I strongly recommend giving one a go. Keep a PC around for gaming and you'll be fine. Reply
killerclick - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkI've been trying to convince all my moron friends who can't handle Windows to give Mac a try. "It's so simple, an idiot could use it!" I keep saying but to no avail, most of them insist on struggling with an operating system which is clearly too taxing on their mental abilities. I wish we could simply force all Windows users to use a Mac for a day, that would do the trick! Reply
piroroadkill - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkI have a brand new Macbook on my desk here at work, as well as newish (Phenom X3) desktop with Windows 7.
For a while it's been the case that I don't really care which OS I use for random tasks.
On balance, I prefer windows simply because I can game when I want to.
I never have the huge number of problems people seem to run into. Infact, I've had to force the Macbook off by holding down the power button more than once, so neither is perfect. Reply
Ninjahedge - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkBeen there, done that.
After my mother had her laptop crash consistantly when using school scheduling and grading software that the schools tech staff could not fix (many lost days in productivity) I have to say Apple is not necessarily always golden.
Does that mean that PC is better for this? Not necessarily (as I do not have any direct experience with that. Apple has done a good job flooding the Education segment with their products from almost day one. Hell, I still remember "computer" class on an Apple IIe!!!!!)
The only frustrating thing I find about the Mac is simply, well, simplicity. One person put it on another post it is the difference between "tone" and a 40 band graphic equalizer. Apple has a good amp, and a simple "tone" knob". PC's have that equalizer. Problem with PC's is that 4 BILLION different companies make those equalizers and YMMV (The Yiddish Equalizer puts Bass on the RHS!!! ;) )
Anyway, that 1 day thing is a crock. I DO AGREE however, that you need to use BOTH for more than a few minutes to get a feel for them, their OS, their available programs and hardware and how they fit your lifestyle.
If either stank, they would not be around this long.
Period. Reply
The0ne - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkDon't blame you guys for wanting some simple and stable to run on. You have what is essentially given as-is to you. You work within its limitation as well, as with all Apple products. So while this type of "closed" product is good for some it's not so great with others.
Then you have the Windows OS PC side where you should expect issues. That's because just about everyone has a thing for it. If they screw up the PC screws up. But there's great flexibility there and you do have spend time to find the right products; which in itself is a fun thing for some :)
So other than bashing one of the other, just enjoy how the PC suits your needs currently. And if you need should change, as it usually does, just pray that whatever product you have will allow it :) This to me the the most crucial. Reply
gcor - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkThat's a rather insulting reply.
In the past I've been professionally employed as a systems engineer, integrating Windows, unix and mainframe (IBM, Fujitsu, etc) systems. I've architected, designed and developed large scale multi-tier transaction processing systems across all these platforms, including middle ware products.
From there I moved into the R&D of a 3G mobile network, actively architecting, designing and implementing parts of one of the most successful 3G networks currently being operated.
If this makes me one of the people you consider a "moron" and that Windows is "clearly too taxing on their mental abilities", then so be it.
Thank you for your considered and polite input to the debate. Reply
BlendMe - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkDo any of you remember Anand's first Mac article?
Good stuff! Reply
effortless - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkI do not see how people can even allow themselves to complain. The MacBook Pro 13 features great construction quality (UniBody), has got premium speakers and a premium display, along with the best battery in the business. After all, nearly 10 hours web browsing with that performance behind is an incredible unmatched ratio.
That it is thin and does not all excessive bulk anywhere (pretty much a flat surface), is to me more important than some ultra-portables weighing a few 100g less. Volume is what matters when you put it into a bag or similar.
Otherwise everything about it just reeks of quality. I've tried the trackpad and the keyboard, and they both instantly became my favorites among the few notebooks I've tried with chicklet keys.
Additionally, if you go to college, you can get an iPod Touch, eligible for upgrade to the new iOS4, for free. Considering how the trends state that you get more money in return when selling your Mac, than a PC, I personally consider the price tag a steal.
I am really not weary to understand the hate against Apple. Sure, they do not support all standards, as they place bets only on the horses they in the future predict will be predominant. An adapter can solve pretty much any video output issue, whereas you have BootCamp in case you need Windows for something. Since let us face it, few among you have heard about people returning from OSX to Windows, as the former is simply superior in terms of user interface. Then what is there left to complain about? That they use dirty tricks in their marketing? I think most businesses do, and Apple has made a clear effort to actually improve their products to become eco-friendly and efficient. So even if their thoughts are somewhere else entirely (money & profit), these changes to apply to changes in reality. Reply
The0ne - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkNo complaints from me this time. The review was nicely done with little to no "ohh, woww, OMG" type of personal inputs. That I can live with as I'm actually reading a review rather than having to sort through all the irrelevant, persuasive comments.
This time, I don't see how some could bash the review hahaha Nice work Anand. Reply
KoolAidMan1 - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkThe PC fanboys seem absolutely threatened by any Mac reviews on this site, its lunacy.
I myself use and like both Windows PCs and Macs, so whatever Reply
Exodite - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkIt seems clear to me that the new 13" MBP is really the best the new lineup can offer.
While many of my pet peeves remain, such as the glossy display, poor resolution, lack of good connectivity choices etc. the improved graphics performance, battery and bumped minimum specs actually puts it back in the running as an option for a truly portable computer.
While the lack of a 'modern' CPU is an issue on paper I have to say nothing about the actual performance seems that bad to me. Reply
sil0nt - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkAnand,
I'd like to see an SSD comparison on one of the Mac platforms to understand which drives hold up the best in the non-TRIM aware OX S. There are some benchmarks out there, but none with your rigorous testing methodology. Reply
damianrobertjones - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkI noticed a real world article with regards to battery life and for the life of me cannot recall the link.
Anyhow, the guy grabbed six laptops of various battery life etc and simply played a dvd.
The macbook (Not sure which he used) lasted around 5.5 hours continuous play... the same as the other laptops.
Baffled?? Reply
damianrobertjones - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkP.s. I also think that this article gives me nothing that hasn't been said before and wonder why it's been written? Reply
BlendMe - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkAT readers have been asking for a review of the new 13" and the 320M, so he delivered. Reply
tim851 - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkSeriously, am I getting so old that I am the only one who thinks 1280x800 is sufficient for a 13.3" screen? Reply
Ninjahedge - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkYes.
/me hands tim a pair of bifocals. Reply
Dennis Travis - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkDo you have a pair for me also? :D Reply
Ninjahedge - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - link/me snaps bifocals at bridge.
Bifocal Monocles for both!!!!!!! Reply
FATCamaro - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkhahahaha. nice Reply
rfadream - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkHey Anand are you sure those temps you measured are in Fahrenheit and not Celsius? Reply
jabber - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkIts amazing the type of quality product you can get from using just slave labour to make it.
Well done. Reply
cheinonen - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkWhy do people treat Apple like they're the only person that uses Foxconn? HP, Dell, and others use them as well. I'm not excusing anything at Foxconn, but to single out Apple as only being able to do this because of who they use for manufacturing, when most other top companies use the same vendor, is ridiculous. Reply
james.jwb - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - link@jabber
Your comment pretty much applies to 80% of everything you buy, period. You are living in a bubble and possibly even a hypocrite to get on your high horse about this product, or Foxconn so singularly.
But hey, it is being heavily talked about at the moment and it is in your face, so good for you for having this fleeting feeling of misplaced superiority that will no doubt disappear just as quickly as the misplaced headlines. Reply
jabber - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkFully aware that any electronic device has blood sweat and tears on it so I am fortunate enough to purchase it.
I have been very aware of this for years.
However, it's been pretty apparent that many havent been aware of this and seem to wish to keep their heads in the sand so they dont have to feel guilty about it.
"I dont care what goes on as long as I get my new iPhone upgrade gimme gimme!"
The suicides at Foxconn are not necessarily Foxconn's fault.
It's OUR fault!
Our fault for wanting to only pay the minimum for more and more good such as these Macbooks, motherboards, GPUs etc. etc.
I just hope from events this past few weeks might make a few people think a little bit more before they purchase their next unnecessary electronic gadget.
Same goes for cheap, shoes, clothes, jewellry etc. Reply
zorxd - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - link95% of mac users don't use their GPU. The Intel GMA HD GPU would have been more than enough for this kind of laptop. The Geforce 320M is too slow for gaming anyways so I don't see the point. Reply
jabber - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkNoooo, dont be silly. The Geforce 105M in my Dell is more than enough to play a lot of the games I mess around with such as BF2 and Eve online. Eve plays at high settings and gives around 60fps.
We dont all play Crysis and Call Of Donkey Modern Warfare 4 whatever. Reply
Ninjahedge - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkMaybe more would if it HAD a GPU to begin with.
If the current Mac users do not buy their machine to game on (or any other GPU intensive task) because there is no good GPU present, what is to say they will not buy and utilize it if it is included? Reply
KoolAidMan1 - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkNot true, the OS X desktop has always leaned heavily on the GPU. The other thing is OpenCL which shipped with OS 10.6. Apple has to be prepping some major GPU computing in the next version of OS X, especially since it is a part of 10.6.
I believe this is the "thing" Anand is waiting for, we'll see. It makes sense why Apple would put such a relatively high baseline on their GPUs, otherwise they'd just go with the Arrandale's anemic graphics and call it a day. Reply
bang222 - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkThey took away support for jumbo frames in the Broadcom ethernet chip.
Big minus if you tune your NAS. Reply
CharonPDX - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - link
There's not enough motherboard real estate to include an Arrandale Core i3/i5 CPU plus an NVIDIA discrete GPU like Apple does in the new 15 and 17-inch models.
Uh, I call bull.
Apple fit a three-chip solution in the first MacBook Air. Yes, the CPU was on a smaller mount, but it was still a three-chip solution on a microscopic board. If they really wanted to, they could slap a three-chip solution in the 13" MBP. Reply
solipsism - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - link1) The MBA had the CULV C2D and GMA950 or 9400M. That's two!
2) The MBA is 13" but it also using a SFF chip, has low power and low heat, thereby needs less venting and can use a smaller fan and heatsink.
3) The MBA has a 1.8" drive, not a 2.5" drive.
4) The MBA has no optical drive whilst the MB and 13" MBP do.
— MBA internals: http://s1.guide-images.ifixit.com/igi/WPhHIikf5jBW...
— MBA MoBo: http://www.ifixit.com/igi/KJJyYGCKwbfhmAJI
— 13" MBP internals: http://s2.guide-images.ifixit.com/igi/FkpKKrqQlYsg...
— 13" MBP MoBo: http://s1.guide-images.ifixit.com/igi/XaPYhlwqukef...
If you're going to call "bull" then i assume that you have detailed info as to where all this extra room is that a Core-i chip + dGPU + additional fan would go in this system.
it seems to me that the only way they could add the items you think are so easily included which altering the dimensions of the internal space is to reduce the size of the battery (which is still too lower than most people would like it to be at) or remove the optical drive (which oft goes unused, is slow, mote prone to break due to moving parts, and takes up 25% of the internal space). I'm going with the latter. Reply
jasperjones - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkI find it highly inconsistent that AT doesn't test MBPs like any other laptops. Why do the charts compare the MBP to other MBPs instead of comparing it to laptops from Acer, ASUS, Lenovo, etc. that have been tested on this site? Reply
synaesthetic - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkI assume because those laptops cannot (legally or for drivers/compatibility reasons) run OSX. Reply
DaveninCali - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkBack on May 20th, I commented that the reason why we don't have discrete graphics for the 13" MB and MBP was because of space constraints. In response, I got this from Jarred Walton,
"The "motherboard space" argument is absolute garbage."
How can an Anandtech staff member tell me my argument is complete garbage just 2 weeks before the editor-in-chief reviews the MBP saying that the reason we don't have discrete graphics is motherboard space? That doesn't make sense to me. Don't you guys talk to each other.
Of course, you can say that Apple can completely redesign everything but that doesn't make the reason why there is no discrete graphics because of space constraints any less valid. That's the reason given the current design.
So what will you give up if you redesign the motherboard for more space to accommodate discrete graphics? Smaller battery and therefore less battery life? 1.8" vs. 2.5" HDD therefore less disk space? Etc.
What say you Mr. Walton? Reply
synaesthetic - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkI enjoyed reading this review, Anand. Too often Apple product reviews are fanboy drool-fests that do little to point out the product's shortcomings. I, too, am very disappointed in Apple for making this new 13" MBP such an incremental upgrade.
Yeah, the new IGP is "nice," but I've heard from people who have it that the 320M (also used in some HP laptops) is bunk and the Windows drivers are even *more* bunk. Lots of crashes, games refusing to run properly, etc. It's nice to see that in OSX, it runs quite well.
I'm a longtime PC user, and while I've been meaning to pick up an older 13" MacBook so I can learn OSX for professional reasons, I am hardly a fanboy of either. I do not like Steve Jobs, his attitude or his company, and I *do* think that Apple products are generally *a bad deal.*
I was pleasantly surprised with the massive upgrade they gave the iPhone 4 over the 3GS; I figured, due to the iPad's existence, that they would make the iPhone 4 a weak incremental upgrade. But instead they virtually invalidated the iPad's existence by tossing an A4 SoC and forward-facing camera into the new iPhone! (Here's hoping we get an iPod Touch 4, too, but I'm not holding my breath.)
What irritates me about Apple is that they are not cost-effective. You pay so much for so little computer. It makes me sad. Reply
KoolAidMan1 - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkIt depends on the machine. The majority of the 27" iMac's price is in the display. The same 27" display is $1100 from Dell, it'll be around $1500 from NEC. The 27" iMac starts at $1700. Given the performance, display quality, and all-in-one design, I'd hardly call it a bad deal.
Similar thing with the notebooks given their extremely light weight without compromising battery life and performance. Then you have the best trackpad on the market with multitouch gestures (some of which even work in Windows via Boot Camp), the best keyboard outside of a Lenovo, the best international power adapter and airline seat adapters out there, and you can see why some people would want to drop a few extra dollars on them (or not even spend much more if we're comparing with a Sony or a business class Dell or HP). Reply
osideplayer - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkI am actually an avid PC user who was considering getting a MAC because of the new GPU's recently installed. I loaded a SSD with Ubuntu instead, but it's good to know I would have made a good decision. Considering I am graphics oriented and nobodies probably reading this anymore, so I guess im gonna go fart. Reply
vicbdn - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkIf Sony and Alienware can fit an i5/i7 and discrete graphics in the vaio Z and m11x, what is stopping Apple from doing that in the 13 in macbook? Sounds like B.S. to me. Reply
vicbdn - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkForgot m11x doesn't have a dvdrom drive...so nvm about that. Reply
overzealot - Wednesday, June 09, 2010 - linkYou say that memory is entirely responsible for the faster load times/app performance.
I think the increase in disk density (and, therefore sequential transfer rate) probably makes a decent impact as well. Reply
evilpaul666 - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkApple's strangely, poorly threaded iTunes is going to use OpenCL to transcode video in a future update.
Wild speculation on my part, yes, but that's what its OpenCL everywhere push is all about. Reply
adamjohari - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkthis is slightly off topic, but i wish some of you guys know the answer to this. right now i'm using a mac mini with a logitech mouse, and the movement of the mouse is just terrible. i did some research online and it says it's because of the mouse acceleration is different in macs. my question is, if i were to buy the magic mouse... would the acceleration be any different than me using my logitech mouse right now?
thanks in advance. again, sorry for diverting.
adam Reply
Jamor - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkI've never noticed a difference between mac or other mouses and I've used mainly logitech mouses on my macs. There are logitech mouse drivers which I've never bothered to install, might help you though. Also try fiddling with system preferences/mouse settings. Reply
tipoo - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkThe acceleraiton would be no different, that is an OS related thing. However you may find the Logitech has faster tracking than the Magic Mouse.
You can get little programs that "fix" OSX's different acceleration curve, one is called MouseFix or something like that.
Good luck Reply
stormmonkey - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkI'm very happy with my 2010 13" MBP and just Tuesday upgraded to Seagate's new Momentus XT. Aside from a 20mb/sec average read speed increase over the stock drive, it's caching to flash storage gives a great overall boost to everyday use. Reply
Oxford Guy - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - link"For the past 1.5 years every single Mac has shipped with some form of NVIDIA graphics, standard, regardless of price."
I was just on Apple's website and found iMacs that have Radeon GPUs in them. Reply
hallubalooza - Thursday, June 10, 2010 - linkI know this wont mean anything to anyone who already has their mind made up. But I have a ridiculous desktop for running games and any intense windows apps. However I also have a 13" macbook pro that is awesome. It stays charged for a very long time even running a virtual machine (vmware fusion is great) for when i need to do something in windows xp or 7. I have it partitioned with windows 7 which I can either boot into if I really need the extra performance for something or I can load it in vmware to get any files I may need. It has some useful terminal commands built in and the trackpad is hands down the best I have ever used. Using any other laptop feels gimmicky compared to the multitouch and all the stupid hand swipe gestures that surprisingly increase productivity! It does cost more, but it isnt plastic and I really feel that people complain about the glossy screen just to find something to complain about. I would never buy an apple desktop but I feel that the 13" mbp is a great computer. Reply
howmoney - Friday, June 11, 2010 - linkbest buy com hardware
http://www.com-hardware.com Reply
Hrel - Saturday, June 12, 2010 - linkIf someone could do a review on the laptop that I
currently suspect is the best "bang for your buck" out
there. It's made by compal, and available on Cyberpower.com who's
machines you've reviewed before.
If you'd like it configured like I did, which I think is the best bang
for buck, do this:
Go to the website.
mouse over 15.6" Laptops and click on the $999 Xplorer X6-8500. It has a 1080p screen.
(I'm not sure why the people who run this site do this, but even though the other
configurations use the same chassis when personalized they
come out to cost more than this one; annoying since it makes me configure all 3
or 4 machines built on the same base chassis to figure out which one is
cheapest/best for me.)
Then I configured
it with the Core i7-620M CPU. (to get it over 1K so I can take advantage of the 5%
off.) 4GB 0DDR3-1333, hopefully 7-7-7-21, probably not, but
320GB 7200rpm HDD (I did this cause I'm gonna take that HDD out
and use the Seagate Momentus XT 500GB, thanks for that
Everything else on that page I left untouched.
The only thing I did on page 2 was switch to Intel wifi with bluetooth;
Though I'm curious if the MSI option is
equal/better; 17 bucks isn't nothing.
It has HDMI out and a fingerprint reader. This page says 3 USB ports,
the specs sheet says 4USB ports; not sure which is true. (I do wish
they were USB 3.0 ports, but I was hoping you guys would test some stuff and
tell me if that even matters for use with an external hard drive, mechanical
disk 7200rpm. Transferring large files like movies and games mostly.)
On page 3 I select "none, format only" for
the OS. And select "LCD perfect assurance" cause even 1 dead pixel is
unacceptable to me.
This brings the total to $1008.90 after 5% off, or $992.75 if
you get the MSI network card.
So yeah, I really hope you guys can get a hold of one of these
for review; as a loner or given as a review unit or maybe
someone will just buy one and review it cause it's really tempting me right now...
like a lot!
If you're review is good I'm gonna start
saving up and hopefully be able to buy it around Christmas. Thanks
guys! A loyal reader. - Brian Reply
CompSciSTL - Saturday, June 12, 2010 - linkHave you installed Windows 7 on the new 13" MBP? I'd be curious to know what kind of battery life you get using Win 7. Reply
paihuaizhe - Sunday, June 20, 2010 - link(nike-alliance).(com)=>is a leading worldwide wholesaler company (or u can say
organization) Reply
runebinder - Saturday, June 26, 2010 - linkHi there, just waded through a few pages of comments to see if anyone had already posted it, gave up in the end as more of it was PC Vs Mac then anything else, so apologies if this has already been reported.
Got an i7 15" MacBook Pro and installed a 120GB Vertex 2E today, checked System Profiler to see if Apple were limiting SATA speeds as they have previously have and noticed mine has TRIM Support: No listed as well. Just thought I'd mention it as the article states that this is limited to the 13" only. If it's old news then just ignore. Reply
tno - Wednesday, December 29, 2010 - linkThis was reported on, and all signs do point to an eventual adoption of TRIM in OS X; as well as a more aggressive use of the GPGPU. Maybe Lion? Maybe Liono? Reply
tno - Wednesday, December 29, 2010 - linkA user commented:
"I know this wont mean anything to anyone who already has their mind made up. But I have a ridiculous desktop for running games and any intense windows apps. However I also have a 13" macbook pro that is awesome. It stays charged for a very long time even running a virtual machine (vmware fusion is great) for when i need to do something in windows xp or 7. I have it partitioned with windows 7 which I can either boot into if I really need the extra performance for something or I can load it in vmware to get any files I may need. It has some useful terminal commands built in and the trackpad is hands down the best I have ever used. Using any other laptop feels gimmicky compared to the multitouch and all the stupid hand swipe gestures that surprisingly increase productivity! It does cost more, but it isnt plastic and I really feel that people complain about the glossy screen just to find something to complain about. I would never buy an apple desktop but I feel that the 13" mbp is a great computer. "
This is exactly what the usage scenario of which Apple is taking advantage. What's the best way to play video games? On a console or on a Windows PC. Would Apple like a piece of that pie? Sure and they're working on it but that's never going to be a driving influence behind a Mac purchase. But let's move "play" then into the category of "consumption," that is the user of a consumption device is consuming a media, in this case a game. Apple designs their laptops and desktops for "production," they want their machines to be devices you work on. And this has always been so.
So, will the gamer find their Starcraft 2 or Call of Duty performance inadequate? You bet. But that's why they make gaming laptops. Apple doesn't sell those.
To everyone else, and that includes casual gamers that make up the vast majority of computer users, getting work done on a Macintosh is great. Is it better than on a Windows machine? Windows 7 has come along way but I still find the windows management aspects of OS X vastly superior and that makes it worth it for me. Consumption is not the primary aim of Apple computers. That's the purview of . . . their consumption products. Want to listen to music? iPod/iPhone. Want to watch a movie? Apple TV. Want to read a book? iPad. Want to play a game? iOS. Two divisions of Apple, two different missions.
I belabor this point because I think it's important to keep in mind when discussing these products. Losing perspective is, to paraphrase an idiom, like discussing the citrus characteristics of an apple. Reply