Skip to Content

Rumor: MacBook Pro Intel Arrandale processors in January

by Dave Caolo Dec 1st 2009 at 4:00PM

Fudzilla is reporting that Intel will release Arrandale-based processors on January 3rd, 2010. Three in fact, branded as "Core i5" and "Core i7," ranging in speed from 2.4GHz to 2.66GHz.

There are two Core i5 models. One features 3MB of cache, a 2.4GHz frequency, two cores and four threads plus Turbo Mode, while the other features two cores, four threads, Turbo Mode, 3MB of L2 cache and a 2.53GHz frequency. Fudzilla prices them at $225US and $257, respectively.

Finally, the 2.66GHz Core i7 model features 4MB of cache and Turbo Mode and can run faster. Fudzilla expects them to sell for $332. You'll remember that desktop Macs received Nehalem architecture processors earlier this year, which these Arrandale processors are based on. If built into Apple's MacBook Pros, they'd represent a significant performance boost over the Core 2 Duo processors currently in use.

[Via MacRumors]

View Tags

Related Stories

Categories

Hardware Rumors Macbook Pro

Fudzilla is reporting that Intel will release Arrandale-based processors on January 3rd, 2010. Three in fact, branded as "Core i5" and...
 

Add a Comment

Sign in »
*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

14 Comments

Filter by:
addison.royce

Many of us are ready and able to buy one of these new Core i7/i5 laptops. Yet, what is sure to follow the release of these beasts is the break in time it'll take Apple and their competitors to domesticate them.

January 04 2010 at 4:31 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Rico

How will these procs with 4 threads compare to a Core 2 Quad? Will it be like having a pseudo quad core processor, or more like a Core 2 Duo?

I ask because if I'm going to replace my black MacBook with a new MBP, I'd like to have quad-core of some sort.

December 03 2009 at 11:42 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Stephen Roberts

My poor first gen macbook pro is definitely showing her age... Just hoping to hold her together with duct tape and hope until the new rev comes out

December 02 2009 at 12:21 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Maxintech

No quad-core, no deal for me.

December 02 2009 at 7:51 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to Maxintech's comment
rds

They all have HyperThreading, though.

December 02 2009 at 9:12 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Dragon88

I unfortunately was forced into buying a new MBP, fully knowing that the new MBP were due January/February. My 2.5 year old MBP had logicboard failure and I had to send it in to Apple for a flat rate repair. The bad news is that dead week was this week, and I had papers that couldn't wait... I'm still trying to decide if I should sell this machine (15" 2.66ghz) and then wait until the new processors show up. (once I get my old MBP back that is.)

What say TUAW? I realize that the C2D is getting old, but how huge of a step up is the new architecture going to be? Or maybe I shouldn't even care because my old 2.2ghz C2D was really just fine for most of what I wanted it to do.

December 02 2009 at 2:40 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Kenny

Any guesses as to what GPU will be in the new MacBook Pro? Is there a chance of an ATI Mobility 4830 or better card?

December 02 2009 at 1:32 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
kasei

You go do that then.

December 01 2009 at 6:11 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Matt Jones

Yes, and you can enjoy the 50% lower clock at 2x the TDP, and the battery life that goes with it.

December 01 2009 at 5:54 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
tdskate

My MacBook Pro is like, a 3 year old Core 2 duo, and it has 4MB of L2 cache... Why only 3MB on the i5 and i7 ? Or am I totally missing the point?

December 01 2009 at 5:41 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to tdskate's comment
Martin

You might want to look into the new microarchitecture:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Nehalem_(microarchitecture)

The onboard memory controller (which AMD has used for a while now) means you don't have to preemptively cache as much, reducing the required cache size for decent performance.

December 01 2009 at 8:22 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
kiltbear64

Glad I've decided to wait.

Oh, and a simple request, when you go to quote specs for folks to compare, please keep the order of the specs and the nomenclature the same between items.

First you give them in the order:
cache, freq, cores, threads

Then you give them in the order:
cores, threads, cache, freq

Without a chart, consistency would be helpful. (No AR/OCD here!)

December 01 2009 at 4:35 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to kiltbear64's comment
Anthony

I had absolutely no problem with reading it the way it is until I read your stupid comment. You say you're not OCD, but apparently you actually are. Either that, or you're just plain stupid.

December 01 2009 at 8:23 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Buy an ad here

Hot Apps on TUAW

Tweets

© 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.