DailyTech - Apple MacBook Gets Faster Processor, 10-hour Battery

Submit News

Gadgets Apple MacBook Gets Faster Processor, 10-hour Battery
Brandon Hill (Blog) - May 18, 2010 7:24 AM

40 comment(s) - last by quiksilvr.. on May 21 at 11:15 AM

MacBook gets an upgrade, sticks to $999 price tag

The final piece to Apple's notebook puzzle is now in place. The company today officially unveiled a slightly revamped entry-level MacBook (the update was actually leaked over the weekend).

The latest polycarbonate white MacBook now features a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo processor, NVIDIA GeForce 320M integrated graphics solution, and a new 10-hour battery. The previous model came with a 2.26GHz Core 2 Duo processor, NVIDIA GeForce 9400M integrated graphics, an a 7-hour battery.

Other features like 2GB of DDR3 memory, 250GB hard drive, and 8x dual-layer SuperDrive remain unchanged.

This latest innards upgrade brings the MacBook in line with the entry-level 13" MacBook Pro. It still, however, lacks the Pro model's aluminum shell, backlit keyboard, Secure Digital slot, and Firewire 800 port.

Despite the slight feature bump, the latest MacBook is still priced at $999.

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: So

By Highter on 5/18/2010 12:26:46 PM , Rating: 1

There is size. Both the Macbook and the 13 inches Macbook pro use Core 2 Duo because the i3 would require a discrete GPU, and it wouldn't fit inside the case. Also Nvidia doesn't have a license from Intel to produce IGPs for i3, so Apple can't package the 320M with them.

Parent

RE: So

By Johnmcl7 on 5/18/2010 12:34:48 PM , Rating: 2

Yet Sony managed it with a smaller and lighter machine, the Vaio Z11 packs in up to a dual core i7 with discrete graphics and quad SSD's.

John

Parent

RE: So

By Highter on 5/18/2010 12:48:11 PM , Rating: 2

Interesting. I found the notebook you are talking about at Play.com. Size limitation was the reason given by Apple for not being be able to do it, but it looks like Sony engineers didn't have any problems.

Parent

RE: So

By CallmeTater on 5/18/2010 1:10:38 PM , Rating: 2

That's a pretty impressive laptop going by the specs over on SonyStyle, but it is very spendy. I'd guess that there is no way that Apple could bring equivalent kit to the MB line and still stay in a price range below that of the MB Pro, but I don't see any engineering reason they couldn't do it in the MB Pro line since Sony has already demonstrated the feasibility.

Parent

RE: So

By omnicronx on 5/18/2010 1:51:30 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
Also Nvidia doesn't have a license from Intel to produce IGPs for i3

I'm pretty sure that was the 'license agreement does no include the use of chips with integrated memory controllers', which has nothing to do with this.. Furthermore the case has gone nowhere, Intel has just started litigation, and considering the current FTC suit against Intel, i doubt this will go anywhere.

Apple chose not to include it, they have already claimed many reasons as such, licensing between Intel and Nvidia was not one of them, and you are crazy if you don't think Apple would not have shifted the blame if this were the case.

I also don't understand your descrete graphics statement. The 320 chip being used here is pretty much the same size as the die included on descrete 330 being used on the Mac Pro, with the only difference being the use of system memory vs dedicated. i.e I don't buy the size issue, especially when the i3 is smaller in the first place..

Parent

RE: So

By Highter on 5/18/2010 3:05:55 PM , Rating: 2

Take a look at this article: http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/why-the-...

The guys at Ars can explain this better than me. It's for the MBP, but since both are roughly the same size, I believe the points are valid for the MB also.

Parent

RE: So

By Johnmcl7 on 5/18/2010 5:52:53 PM , Rating: 2

I think a lot of that article is incorrect simply because as above Sony were able to pack a core i7 (dual core), a discrete graphics card and even quad SSDs into a smaller and lighter chassis. The part about low cost I suspect is the only reason for the C2D processors.

John

Parent