MacBook Air processor situation gets explained

We already knew the basic details about the processor at the heart of Apple's MacBook Air, but those itching to know exactly how Apple and Intel managed to cram everything into that oh so small package may want to head over to AnandTech, which has pieced together a fairly thorough report on the matter. As the site reports, the processor is based on Intel's 65nm Merom architecture and packs an 800MHz bus, yet it uses the significantly smaller chip package that Intel had originally only planned to debut with the launch of its Montevina laptop platform later this year. That combination, along with the Intel 965GMS chipset with integrated graphics, allowed for a 60% reduction in total footprint size, and a TDP rating of just 20W, as opposed to 35W from the regular Core 2 Duo processor. If that's still not enough MacBook Air minutia you, you can hit up the link below for the full rundown.

[Via AppleInsider]

[JR @ Jan 18th 2008 4:16PM]

Just goes to show how much clout Apple has with Intel.

Wonder if Dell or Toshiba could have done the same, me thinks not.

[Brad @ Jan 18th 2008 4:25PM]

You think that Intel won't sell this to anyone besides Apple? No, I'm betting in exchange for covering a bit of their development costs (and continuing to use Intel on everything), Apple got first dibs on it. Expect this kind of stuff to show up in Dell/HP/Lenovo products in 9-18 months. They'll probably not be as thin or as tightly integrated, but they will have the benefit of 9 extra months of watching ThinAir Macs fail in the field.

[System48 @ Jan 18th 2008 4:26PM]

Not a question of clout, in the end it came down to how much Intel was going to be able to charge Apple for these "special" chips. The package would've been in the works but for 45nm not 65nm.

[DonatoM3 @ Jan 18th 2008 4:27PM]

I liked the MacBook Air better when the explanation for how they got it to fit in that small of a form factor was that little green men left Jobs a shrink ray.

[bondsbw @ Jan 20th 2008 8:20AM]

@Brad

In 9-18 months, Apple will have a refresh on the MacBook Air. I'm sure there will be problems, but it's not like Dell/HP/etc. will have an upper hand... quite the contrary, Apple will have already have sold a few million of their machines before the others start.

What I'd like to see is the other not-SO-thin MacBook lines updated with some of the features of the Air, but keeping things like the integrated optical drive.

[Dorf @ Jan 18th 2008 4:48PM]

"Just goes to show how much clout Apple has with Intel."

I doubt it has anything to do with "clout", more like some good 'ole capitolism. Apple wants X, Intel says it will cost Y, Apple figures out they can charge Z for it. They go back and forth and agree on a price and it gets done. Intel makes $$$, you know the Apple marketing machine will cash in. Everybody is happy until the battery explodes. :-)

[bob @ Jan 18th 2008 5:52PM]

apple are the last major computer manufacturer that are 100% intel so apple are very important to apple, aspecially as their growth is much bigger than the market growth as a whole.

[craig @ Jan 19th 2008 2:30AM]

Dell or Toshiba wouldn't want to do the same so the question is irrelevant. Odds are that Dell, perhaps Toshiba, could and do have far greater influence over Intel products on an ongoing basis, however. Who do you think has more input, from specifications and design through validation, on Intel products, Dell or Apple? If you say Apple then you are a fool. Intel makes more money selling parts through Dell than they do through Apple. That's where the true "clout" is.

[Thomas @ Jan 19th 2008 9:06PM]

I think with Apple they always wanted to have a say in the processor design in the next little while and that's why they left IBM's PowerPC in the first place, it is that IBM isn't doing what Apple wants them to. When Apple first negotiated their contract with Intel, I think they negotiated exclusivity in return for having a say (and a hand) in the technical development of Intel's future product in addition to early access to their technologies. This is something that I do not think a lot of players in the processor industry can offer including AMD and IBM. The closest one that I can think of that comes close to Intel could be ARM but they are a different type of company altogether (Intel is a product company, but ARM is more of an IP company). The advantage to having such tight integration with another company's product development is the potential to cut cost, I remember reading an article that Intel actually helped Apple design some of their motherboards for Apple's line of Intel computers. With access to the potential pool of developers at Intel, Apple gained engineering skills while Intel gained marketing and exclusivity that only a few years ago only Dell has.

[Aaron @ Jan 18th 2008 4:16PM]

Why is this from AppleInsider? All they did was report on what Anand at AnandTech found. You should really link to the AnandTech article which is far more verbose and informative.

[Diku @ Jan 18th 2008 7:29PM]

it's called blogspam, and engadget exists because of it.

[quandmeme @ Jan 18th 2008 5:24PM]

But at least they are being honest about where they read about it. Maybe a link to both and a shout out "as reported in" would be better. Still I like that they're not pretending.

[johnnychipface @ Jan 18th 2008 4:18PM]

Actually yes.

[dsfrantz @ Jan 18th 2008 4:19PM]

i think the macbook air is a mistake, and i suspect it will suffer a fate similar to that of the G4 cube..

HOWEVER,

the board design is incredible, and i'm quite excited about the future possibilities it may hold. an imac that looks like a regular cinema display (no jay leno chin)? a mac mini, half as tall? intel core chips in a new iphone?

[BrianB @ Jan 18th 2008 4:35PM]

It's not what Apple fans are used to as far as MacBooks are concerned, but MBA will eventually find its own niche.

Here's a summary of the opinions, so far.

http://www.maccomplainer.com/macbook-complaints/macbook-air-reviews-already-trickling-in/

I know Engadget will delete this, but I hope they'll take the question of MBA's market viability into consideration. I mean seriously think who and how many of these whos will purchase MBA.

[Hax Or @ Jan 18th 2008 4:36PM]

I think the negative responses from most people will make Apple hesitate. Apple may now be under the impressino that people LIKE their notebooks big and heavy, because people want all of the technology from 1993.

It's a shame. I think the MacBook Air is a great first step, but the reception from the public has been 99% 'angry-disappointment'.

Could it be the price? I think the product would be 99% 'adored' if the price was half what they are asking.

They did the same thing with the iPhone. They charged way too much for it (starting out).

[helloUser @ Jan 18th 2008 4:45PM]

a headless imac sould be better. slap an apple branded mobo into a normal case similar to that of a mac pro case, use normal (faster and cheaper) DDR ram and give mac users the option of having an intel core2quad extreme. THEN you have a fast macintosh.

Although, apple doesnt believe in choice, so its never going to happen. And if it does, the word 'choice' will be near non-existent.

[Darren @ Jan 18th 2008 4:20PM]

The question is, what other Apple products will this little puppy make it into this year? (cough) Tablet (cough).

[Hax Or @ Jan 18th 2008 4:39PM]

Why would Apple think the consumers want that?

The complaints of hardware being slow would remain, missing stuff like ethernet plug-ins, and the high price would not go away with a Tablet.

And as far as I know, Tablets are still a niche-product in the Notebook category.

[John @ Jan 18th 2008 8:03PM]

I have a tablet (which I am using right now), and really, I'd rather use a wacom pad. when you're working at a desk, it's much preferable to have the screen in front of you instead of looking down over it, and resting my hand on the screen, much less drawing on it with the pen, just doesn't sit well with me.

[ark_v2 @ Jan 18th 2008 4:22PM]

I just hope they do place more usbs the next decade.

[Bender Bending Rodriguez @ Jan 18th 2008 4:24PM]

If it's Merom-based then why does Apple's developer site state that it supports SSE4?

[Bender Bending Rodriguez @ Jan 19th 2008 6:15PM]

Update: They removed the SSE4 listing the day after I posted my original question.

[adrian @ Jan 18th 2008 6:13PM]

@Brad

We don't really know for certain whether the Macbook Air will fail of not, only time will tell. The typical high price and low feature count does not help it's cause. Whether you like Apple or not, they are prepared to take risks with their new products. You don't see that often in the Windows based world.

[Brad @ Jan 18th 2008 7:46PM]

Actually, by failures I meant individual product failures - specifically from thermal or torque issues. What happens when someone bends the board a little bit each time they stick it in their backpack, and over time you wear out some connections. What happens when you leave the laptop running for days on end under a blanket? Tight physical integration has its costs...

[Lack @ Jan 18th 2008 4:31PM]

So that's essentialy the same guts a Lenovo X61s has for some time now, but in smaller and more expensive package.

[ethana2 @ Jan 19th 2008 8:11AM]

There's one extra chip in there that should be illegal. Anyone want to take a guess? It's the only real difference between PC's and macs, besides the fact that OSX's hardware support is /horrible/ outside of apple hardware...
...and the reason I've decided never to support Apple with my money.
And I'm not the only one, of course... How could I be?
I am who I am... because of who we all are.
Apple tried to push elegance and stability with loads of money. Turns out the real key is complete freedom.

[Stephen Levinson @ Jan 18th 2008 4:31PM]

That's interesting and all, but the real question is, is that grey box bigger or the same size on the smaller chip? ;)

..ahh, tricking your mind!

[David Gloria @ Jan 18th 2008 4:31PM]

Doesn't that mean the MacBook air will be obsolete come May? ... With the new 45nm cpu's and all?

[ethana2 @ Jan 19th 2008 8:16AM]

The Law of Diminishing Returns is disinclined to acquiesce to your request.

...means no.

[dan2600 @ Jan 20th 2008 11:22AM]

first thing i thought, apple likes to make there products outdated as fast as possible...the reason no other company cares about these custom 65nm chips is that they are already preparing to roll out 45nm systems

[BrianB @ Jan 18th 2008 4:32PM]

Anandtech got there (the explanation) first.

http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=3203

[lokiju @ Jan 18th 2008 4:33PM]

Seems like this could be used in Mini-ATX boards also to bring the size down even more.

That'd be sweet.

[zzebi @ Jan 18th 2008 4:33PM]

The article is not 100% correct.
The 35W Core 2 Duo is not the desktop version but the mobile version. It means that the 20W MBA CPU is almost twice as efficient as the standard mobile Core 2 Duo while the frequency is nearly the same.

[dan2600 @ Jan 20th 2008 11:24AM]

ya but the 45nm that everyone is using in a few months is even more efficient then that...so why bother with a 65nm chip???

[echiu @ Jan 18th 2008 4:37PM]

"the MacBook Air either means that Moore's law has caught up with our desires or Apple is going to make it so you can no longer have children."

yikes.

[Kizorblade @ Jan 19th 2008 1:04AM]

Better take a long long think before buying one of these. It'll make you sterile!

[Aaron Wanker @ Jan 18th 2008 4:37PM]

@BrianB

Isn't that what he said in the post?

"...that oh so small package may want to head over to AnandTech, which has pieced together..."

[BrianB @ Jan 18th 2008 4:44PM]

Sorry about that. I read the AnandTech article so long ago, it feels like, I thought this was a wholly different article.

[System48 @ Jan 18th 2008 4:53PM]

It's the Core 2 Duo LV L7500, the 1.8Ghz is the L7700. Intel had already unvieled plans for this package size but no one was expecting to see it until the 45nm chips came out. Hopefully when they do come out Apple will update the MBA with the new ones.

[squirgle @ Jan 18th 2008 4:55PM]

Whether this succeeds or fails is almost a non-issue. It's like a concept car you can actually buy and the technology that went into it will inform Apple products from here on out. They will be able to make the next generations of iMacs and macbooks and everything else smaller and sleeker and less power hungry because of what they learned making this. Oh, and the rest of the industry will then take everything Apple learned and then apply it to their own products, 'cause, you know, that's what they do. So everybody wins. Even though all you hear is bitching.

[Mike @ Jan 18th 2008 5:05PM]

its nice an convenient that its small and all, but all you really pay for is the size. Other than being super tiny and lightweight it has nothing good compared to other laptops. And if you're not even into macs you can get an hp/gateway/toshiba laptop that is 10x better than this (performance wise) for the same price. Its super expensive because its tiny. Well that's not enough for me to shell out $1800. I could build 3 computers for that price.

[Reid @ Jan 18th 2008 6:14PM]

Benchmarks on the 10x or BS flag.

[paulwlee @ Jan 18th 2008 6:28PM]

Uhh.. that's the whole point. A small size is an expensive feature, both monetarily and in terms of tradeoffs with other features. Smaller machines are both less powerful and more expensive for any manufacturer. Some people need and/or like the small size enough to pay more and make do with fewer features and less computing power. For people for whom size isn't worth all the tradeoffs, there are the other models, both from Apple and other manufacturers.

[Za @ Jan 18th 2008 10:14PM]

I want to make a distinction. You say super-small. The Macbook Air is not super-small. The Toshiba R500 and Sony TZ are lighter and have less volume, and also have an optical drive, gigabit, 2 usb ports, memory card slot, VGA out, and firewire.

I understand what you are trying to say - by buying it, you'd be paying for thinness and the "coolness" factor, but I don't think it should be described as "super-small" because, let's face it - it isn't. My 4 yr old Sony T250 was smaller with better battery life, an optical drive, and more IO options.

[whatishalo? @ Jan 18th 2008 5:06PM]

Macintel just doesn't ring like Wintel....

[Aaron @ Jan 18th 2008 5:14PM]

That's why they're called Intel Macs.

[Yahhoun23 @ Jan 18th 2008 5:29PM]

Excellent.

[- k E n - @ Jan 18th 2008 5:45PM]

You know, looking from intel's various partners point of view, i think they feel really ignored at the moment.

Kind of like you (intel's other partners) have been trying to get that hot chick (intel) by bringing her out for lunches, dates, etc only to find out that she has been sleeping with another guy already (apple) and that guy gets all the "custom" fun.

Haha. Poor partners.

[John @ Jan 18th 2008 8:07PM]

I'm guessing that Apple ponied up some serious dough for this. There's not much leverage for Apple as long as Intel remains on top in terms of processors.