[Moogs]

Seems both of the variants of the Nehalem Xeon CPU that are used in the 2009 Mac Pros, will be updated (Lynnfield) and shipping to customers next month or soon thereafter. Could be a nice tie-in to have some Mac Pro refreshes with the introduction of new 64 bit pro apps and SL (though the apps will probably come out later in the fall). Also new Nehalem laptop variants (Clarksfield) will be shipping, so that would be a major upgrade for the MBP line and iMac, as it would require a new architecture. With the improved screens and a much faster architecture than what the laptops currently have, this could be a pretty great way to promote the pro side of things this fall as the new OS and apps are readied.

http://www.macworld.com/article/1416...7/nehalem.html

[Looks like the Xeon speeds will be 2.13, 2.66, 2.8 and 2.93 still, at least according to Wikipedia - not sure where the performance increases would come from.]

[Robo]

I'm pretty sure Clarksfield has a higher TDP than any MBP processor in recent memory, though. So yes on iMac, no on MBP. We'll probably see a Nehalem MBP early next year, after Arrandale starts shipping in Q4.

I think we'll see an iMac/Mac Pro/possible Pro Apps event in late September or October, after an iPod event on or around September 8.

[Moogs]

TDP? Being a CPU amateur I may need clarification on this point.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Moogs TDP? Being a CPU amateur I may need clarification on this point.

Thermal Design Power/Point - in layman's terms, "wattage." For example, the 2.53 GHz processor in the current MacBook Pros, the P8700, has a 25W TDP. Clarksfield is supposed to have a TDP of around 45W, making it a good candidate for the iMac (which usually uses 45W processors) but a poor fit for any notebook with the MBP's cooling system. The MBP (in all likelyhood) isn't designed to adequately cool 45W processors.

[scratt]

It would be truly amazing if they managed to get those into a MBP without it melting!

[Moogs]

So same is true of Lynnfield then? Basically no different than the current i7 variations, just a tad faster at the high end and lower wattage per clock?

[Partial]

How long has Peryn been in the MBP, then? It's gotta be coming up on a year already now, right?

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Moogs So same is true of Lynnfield then? Basically no different than the current i7 variations, just a tad faster at the high end and lower wattage per clock?

For comparison, the current Core i7 (Bloomfield) has a 130W TDP, and Lynnfield has a 90W TDP. Lynnfield is still very much a "traditional desktop" processor, with the exception of one ~65W model designed for all-in-ones.

Apple will likely continue their course of using mobile processors in virtually all of their products, including the Mac mini and iMac.

[Moogs]

Right. I'm mostly (personally) concerned with Mac Pros, so that's why I asked about Lynnfield.

[PB PM]

I don't think the next line of Core i7 chips will offer much more than what is available now, which is fine. Unless you want to wait for the die shrink to 32nm, don't wait.

[hmurchison]

Also Lynnfield is aimed squarely at the volume market as opposed to enthusiast.

It integrates items like PCI Express support right into the die so that making low cost systems will be easier.

It doesn't have Core i7 Bloomfield's QPI link (it as something called DMI) but that doesn't matter as much in single socket systems.

It's smaller than Bloomfield as welll so the yields should be better making for a cheaper proc.

[Moogs]

Would adding them to Mac Pros make said machines less expensive then?

[Partial]

Originally Posted by Moogs Would adding them to Mac Pros make said machines less expensive then?

Ha! Unlikely for Apple's big money maker. They're expensive, but if you need the power, they're worth it. I have one at work and it is wonderful!