Voodoo's Envy 133 using custom MacBook Air CPU?

We heard they were coming. Now it looks like we've got a second ultra-thin laptop sporting Intel's custom-built, 65-nm processor first unveiled in Apple's MacBook Air. At about 3:00 minutes into the Envy 133 video, Rahul Sood, Voodoo founder, says that his new Envy 133 uses an "off roadmap chip" of Intel design which consumes 20 watts of power. Looking at the Envy spec sheet reveals a processor running at either 1.6GHz (SP7500) or 1.8GHz (SP7700), with 4MB L2 Cache and 800MHz FSB. Right, those are the exact specs as the custom CPU found inside of Apple's MacBook Air. Also of note, LaptopMag says that Voodoo's instant-on IOS is none other than DeviceVM's Splashtop which ASUS is currently bunging into all of its motherboards. Make no mistake, this hunky chunk of carbon fiber is still magical, it's just not the mystery it seemed when launched this morning.

Read -- Splashtop
Read -- MacBook Air processor
Read -- Envy 133 specs

[Matt Keller @ Jun 10th 2008 6:18PM]

So its a bastard child of Asus and Apple then?

Does that mean it can run OS X?

[LC @ Jun 10th 2008 6:22PM]

It's just a CPU, by Intel. Apple just happened to be the first to use it. It has nothing to do with OS X or Apple.

[Kamokazi @ Jun 10th 2008 6:46PM]

Many HP products use Asus mobos built specifically for HP computers...Asus OEMs a lot of boards for different mega-manufacturers.

[happy_penguin @ Jun 10th 2008 7:00PM]

Cool avatar.

[LC @ Jun 10th 2008 6:21PM]

"Custom MacBook Air CPU?"

No. It's simply a CPU made by Intel that is available to OEMs.

If Voodoo were to first to use it would people call it the "Custom Voodoo Envy CPU"?

A better title would have been "Voodoo's Enzy 133 using same CPU as MacBook Air?"

[Saad Rabia @ Jun 10th 2008 6:31PM]

Totally agree with you, LC.

Thomas Ricker, you kind of did it wrong this time. It is not cool to claim a title hinting that Voodoo is using a chip "created" by Apple or for Apple, which is absolutely not true whatsoever!

For the love of god, it will not hurt you to change that annoying title.

[LC @ Jun 10th 2008 6:35PM]

And if that is true, clak, then obviously the Voodoo is not using the same CPU as the Air. But wait? The specification are exactly the same? Therefor it seems pretty clear that it was not specifically for Apple; As Voodoo is now using it.

[Reid @ Jun 10th 2008 6:37PM]

Likely Apple paid enough to help fund the development of the chip, and an exclusive on release, but not enough to make it an Apple-only chip. Makes sense to me.

[Thomas Ricker @ Jun 10th 2008 6:38PM]

Saad and LC,

Otellini's words are pretty clear in the video link posted by clak above. Referring to the CPU he says to Jobs, "the product that we ended up building for you." It was then likely an exclusive proc for Apple for a set period of time.

Thomas

[Thomas Ricker @ Jun 10th 2008 6:45PM]

Hey clak, you made a good point but don't blow it with your emotive comments. Bring the love, son, not the flames.

Thomas

[Andrew @ Jun 10th 2008 6:49PM]

The whole "custom CPU built for Apple!" stuff was always a bit of an exaggeration. The SFF packaging was part of Intel's roadmap long before the MBA was announced. But they were planned to be 45nm chips as part of the Montevina line of products. The MBA (and probably Envy) chip is "custom" in the sense that they're making a 65nm version when they previously didn't have any intention to do so. It's not like Apple told them to come up with a smaller CPU package and Intel went "Of course! Why didn't WE think of that?!"

[Saad Rabia @ Jun 10th 2008 6:58PM]

Thomas Ricker,

You are one of the writers of Engadget that I respect as all the others, and I have a true belief that you do a good job in reading, analyzing, then publishing news the right way and form, having said that, I do really believe that you are wrong on this.

As an article writer you should not claim things based on a word told on video that has no absolute proof in its meaning nor in its grammar usage. Mr. Otellini said that this product was built for Apple, but he never mentioned it was exclusively for Apple, and he never also said it was named after Apple too.

When Intel comes up and says "we built this for you", it doesn't show any figure of exclusivity for Apple, it just gives us a little understanding on how Apple helped with the making of that chip, which lead to Intel, bringing that chip "for Apple" and showing their gratitude to Apple, which I totally understand, but it is never exclusively for Apple, nor named after Apple and will not share any money or credits with Apple.

I really believe that it is just wrong to see what you are doing there Thomas, and we are not asking you to say that Apple wasn't involved in the making of that chip, but you also can't claim or hint that voodoo, is using a chip made exclusively for Apple.

I'm not a good writer, and I'm sure that you know better words to use than what I can give you or what you wrote in that title.

Thank you.

[Thomas Ricker @ Jun 10th 2008 7:05PM]

clak, take a lesson from Saad on how to argue your case with intelligence. Don't stoop to the level of the mindless haters, you look just as bad.

Saad, we'll just have to disagree on this. The title is correct in that it is a "custom MacBook Air CPU" and it first appeared in the MacBook Air.

Thomas

[o rly @ Jun 10th 2008 7:12PM]

Does anyone have a link to a whitepaper or press release where Apple and/or Intel are claiming this is a custom chip? That could possibly settle this.


OT: lol at Reid being both an Apple & BMW fan.

[Nohone @ Jun 10th 2008 7:23PM]

Awwww, I am so sorry, clak, that we are ruining your experience here at Engadget. I now see that this site exists solely for you, and that everybody else should leave so you can have it all to yourself. I ask that all the Engadget writers only write pro-Apple/anti-every one else stories and all comments should follow the same rules to make sure that you can be happy at all times. On behalf of every one here, let me take the time to apologize for the hardships that we have put you through. I will immediately start a fund to make reparations, so that we can make it up to you at once. You speak the full, un-biased, wholesome truith about everything. While we roam about, scratching our balls, drooling, foolishly worshipping that demon Bill Gates.

Again, accept our sincerest apology.

[happy_penguin @ Jun 10th 2008 7:25PM]

The video says it all. In fact, I remember watching that right after it was posted by Apple and it's quite clear that the chip was designed for Apple and even alongside Apple's own engineers. I believe Thomas is right. I also believe that Intel always intended to bring the chip to a wider market.

[ef15e @ Jun 10th 2008 7:32PM]

Wow you people are in denial...it IS a CUSTOM CPU built by intel specifically for Apple, if you watched Macworld 08 you would know,
"Jobs asked Intel a year ago to design the package, Otellini said, and Intel wasn't totally sure it could be done at the time. Otellini thanks Jobs for allowing Apple and Intel's engineering teams to work so closely together, and Jobs returns the love."
Out of intels Ceos mouth and you idiots are denying it...wow
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-9850085-37.html

[Kris @ Jun 10th 2008 7:34PM]

Thomas Ricker, "The title is correct in that it is a "custom MacBook Air CPU" and it first appeared in the MacBook Air."

I'm sorry but that makes no sense. Where is your proof that this _is_ a custom processor for the MacBook Air and why would it matter if it appeared first in the MacBook Air?

I'm sorry but you'll never go any further in a journalism career if you're going to take criticism like that.

"The title is wrong and here's why..."

"We'll just have to disagree. The title is right"

SENSE IT MAKE NOT

[Kris @ Jun 10th 2008 7:37PM]

@ef15e, you quoted something regarding creating a package (which would include a chipset) and you're stating that it is a custom CPU? That makes no sense. This process may have been developed with Apple and possibly with Apple's support but it's still an OEM processor that others are [obviously] using.

What happens if 50 more computers end up using this process. Are you _still_ going to call it a custom MacBook Air CPU? Even if it was specific designed and custom built for the MacBook Air that still wouldn't make sense because it's obviously gone into OEM and is no longer a custom built CPU for a specific type of computer.

[ef15e @ Jun 10th 2008 7:49PM]

Just because other companies are using the CUSTOM CPU ORIGINALLY MADE FOR THE MACBOOK AIR....SO SAYS OTELLINI INTELS CEO, DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACTS that it is and will always be intel and apples cpu designed FOR the Macbook Air.

[Juaquin @ Jun 10th 2008 7:53PM]

Thomas also happens to be one of the most stubborn writers, often refusing to change or edit posts which are misleading or partially incorrect.

I agree with the others - it is not a Custom MacBook Air CPU. It is a custom Intel CPU, which was produced first for Apple but was always intended to be used in other devices. Therefore it is not custom to the Air, but custom to Intel's normal processor line. A small distinction, but an important one in the perception of biases.

[Grimble Crumble @ Jun 10th 2008 8:11PM]

So its exclusivity is kinda like how Core2Duo was "exclusive" to PCs?

[Jagster @ Jun 10th 2008 8:39PM]

Hey guys, look! Macbook Pro is using a Dell Latitude CPU. It's a Dell Latitude CPU because it was used there first and therefore it should always and forever be referred to as the Dell Latitude CPU, no matter that it was made by Intel or that is in another OEM's PC. Makes perfect sense, right Thomas?

[Decoy @ Jun 10th 2008 8:54PM]

One things for sure. It's not PowerPC. Har har har.

[daedric @ Jun 10th 2008 9:06PM]

Hmm...I guess the Macs must be using custom made PC CPUs. This blogger is an idiot/apple fanboy. You know, I switched from reading engadget and gizmodo depending on how fanboyish and stupid they get. I first read engadget til they became too much of little fangirls for apple, then I went to gizmodo, and then that changed to bunch of apple fangirls too while engadget was less of that. Now I think I'm going to switch back, you are making an article about a CPU to relate back to apple product you stupid fanboy.

[daedric @ Jun 10th 2008 9:07PM]

Oh I read your post just now jagster, beat me to it.

[sinai @ Jun 10th 2008 9:09PM]

clak, how do you reply so fast with only one hand?

[Richard Lai @ Jun 10th 2008 9:27PM]

Guys,

It's fair enough that Thomas Ricker used this title: the CPU did first appear in the MacBook Air, hence it can be called the "MacBook Air CPU" while it is only present in that device alone.

In this context - and regardless of whether it really was exclusive for Apple or not - the term "MacBook Air CPU" should just be taken lightly as "the CPU that was first put into the MacBook Air".

If we take it too seriously, we'll just end up being the extreme opposite of clak.

Regarding the video: I agree with Saad that the video is not a good proof for the argument, since the conversation did not specifically say if Apple had actually made a deal with Intel on designing that CPU, in contrast to the possibility that they could have meant Jobs casually challenged Otellini on making the CPU smaller.

If we were to argue that the title is inappropriate because Apple didn't take part in designing the CPU, or that Intel never made the CPU exclusive to Apple, then we would need:

1. the patent with the list of engineers that took part in the design
2. an official statement (addressed by an officer to the press) saying that there was never contract signed by Apple and Intel on any exclusivity

Point 1 might not help unless we can spot who works for Apple (I doubt they would put another company's name on the list, just human names), and Point 2 would never happen unless Intel and Apple unexpectedly get sour over some misunderstood terms & conditions / PR mishap regarding the CPU.

Hence me saying: if you're anti-"MBA CPU" then the title should just be taken lightly - no point in arguing about something that neither side can show proof.

[Jagster @ Jun 10th 2008 10:02PM]

@ clak

LOL.. your "your mamma" joke is soooo witty.. LOL

Wow, I thought those went out in the 80's. If your gonna do a "your mamma" joke, at least make it funny and not sound like some despirate 12 year olds attempt at a harse insult. There is no way you are older than 15 (at least mentally) with that kind of comeback.

[Thomas Ricker @ Jun 14th 2008 5:53AM]

Coincidentally, Fortune just published an article titled, Apple and Intel: Best buddies. In it, they say:

"Months earlier, Apple had come to Intel looking for a special order: a small, thin chip package %u2013 the sort of component you would need to build an uncommonly slender computer. Apple didn%u2019t say exactly what it needed the package for, and Intel engineers at first thought they couldn%u2019t help. %u201CInitially we either said, %u2018We don%u2019t have that,%u2019 or %u2018We have that on a roadmap 3-4 years from now,%u2019 %u201D Rattner says.

In fact, Intel soon discovered it had the requested technology close at hand. Years earlier, researchers had dreamed up a similar chip in a tiny package, but the idea had been put on the back burner after PC makers gave it a ho-hum reception. The concept just had to be dusted off. %u201CWe had that small chip package pretty much sitting on the shelf,%u201D Rattner recalls. Within a year, Intel had updated it to meet Apple%u2019s needs and delivered it in volume."

Justin Rattner is Intel's CTO

Bottom line: Intel customized a chip specifically for Apple's MacBook Air. In other words, a custom MacBook Air CPU

http://bigtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/06/13/apple-and-intel-best-buddies/

Thomas

[Andrew @ Jun 10th 2008 6:24PM]

It's likely. The Montevina SFF is still quite a long way from release so if the Envy is being released soon it's probably using the Merom version that's not officially part of their roadmap.

[Pochi @ Jun 10th 2008 6:39PM]

I think the bigger story here is that Voodoo, a company based 100% on raw performance, is using a completely shitty CPU.

[Thomas Ricker @ Jun 10th 2008 6:42PM]

yeah, they're pitching this as a luxury item, not a gaming rig.

Thomas

[Lamp @ Jun 10th 2008 10:56PM]

I thought companies were based on money...
Strange.

[Pochi @ Jun 11th 2008 8:53AM]

@Lamp

WOAH, you got me, man!

I guess there's no companies out there specializing in a particular market and/or type of product!

Tool.

[Chris @ Jun 10th 2008 6:47PM]

But like the Air, it doesn't have an optical drive. :-(

[Aguiluz @ Jun 10th 2008 6:51PM]

http://blog.laptopmag.com/wpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/envy-133-keyboard.jpg

Why is the CTRL key labeled "CRTL?"

Typographic errors, I guess...

[blooper @ Jun 10th 2008 7:00PM]

I cant wait for Sony to get a hold of these. Maybe they can make an upgraded x505.

[SoloSalsa @ Jun 10th 2008 7:20PM]

Only a handful of us actually know how awesome Sony's 505 laptops are. If they made a X505 v.2, it would be as thin as a Moto RAZR!

[happy_penguin @ Jun 10th 2008 7:13PM]

"Saad Rabia @ Jun 10th 2008 6:58PM

When Intel comes up and says "we built this for you", it doesn't show any figure of exclusivity for Apple, it just gives us a little understanding on how Apple helped with the making of that chip, which lead to Intel, bringing that chip "for Apple" and showing their gratitude to Apple, which I totally understand, but it is never exclusively for Apple, nor named after Apple and will not share any money or credits with Apple."

He basically said that Jobs/Apple "challenged" them to come up with a processor for the Mac Air. But I agree that he didn't say it was an Apple exclusive product. The thing is, Apple did help to power the advancement of this chip so credit where credit is due. It is a "custom" Macbook Air chip in that it was designed originally with the Mac Air in mind, but I don't believe it was ever intended to be exclusively Apple. I believe that Intel certainly had their sights set on a much larger market.

[Jonyah @ Jun 10th 2008 7:36PM]

the xps1330 still blows both of these away.

[Kris @ Jun 10th 2008 7:37PM]

@ef15e, you quoted something regarding creating a package (which would include a chipset) and you're stating that it is a custom CPU? That makes no sense. This process may have been developed with Apple and possibly with Apple's support but it's still an OEM processor that others are [obviously] using.

What happens if 50 more computers end up using this process. Are you _still_ going to call it a custom MacBook Air CPU? Even if it was specific designed and custom built for the MacBook Air that still wouldn't make sense because it's obviously gone into OEM and is no longer a custom built CPU for a specific type of computer.

[Hamidxa @ Jun 10th 2008 7:52PM]

Misleading and spurious title to say the least.

Apple has nothing to do with the processor other than using said technology.

Apple wouldn't know how to manufacture a processor of that complexity to save their lives for that matter, it's obviously an Intel part (goes without saying really).

[sinai @ Jun 10th 2008 7:55PM]

typically, companies copy the visual aesthetic of apple products. but by copying the functional aspects of the macbook air, i'm inclined to think this product will fail. hard.

[monteb @ Jun 10th 2008 7:56PM]

@Pochi

It's really only shitty on the Macbook Air because the overheating puts it into thermal protection all the time. The number of times my Air just decides to jerk along (and it's been back three times for repair - which is pretty much par for the course for everything Apple. Crud quality/engineering where you can't see) when it's halfway balmy is just... well, shitty.

I dunno about the Envy. I like the general idea and I'm sure the performance will be more stable than the Air but it's overweight IMO - A Sony SZ will kill either of these machines for all-round performance, it'll go for about twice as long as the Envy if you really squeeze the juice and it's only 200g or so over the HP, I mean Voodoo. I'm not sure if it looks droolworthy in the flesh, but I think they might have missed a trick with the Envy.

The Omen on the other hand... I'm assuming it's north of $10K for a Skully-based machine but I am very, very tempted.

[Hamidxa @ Jun 10th 2008 7:56PM]

Wish I could edit posts on here but wanted to simply add that my post above was little more than a "master of the obvious" post but one needed nonetheless because it appears as if Apple fanboys would lap this bit of news up like mindless sheep otherwise, if not spelled out for them explicitly.

My point still stands however, the title is poorly worded, it's misleading, disingenuous, and should be corrected so as to eliminate any inevitable obfuscation.

[wilcoholic @ Jun 10th 2008 8:06PM]

Sony vaio TZ uses the U7X00 processors wich is twice as energy efficient as this custom made CPU. The fastest U7X00 processor is the U7700 wich has a whopping 1.33GHz C2D clockspeed.

But IMO do you really need brute force for such devices? Do you need to have a powerhouse at all even for your main computer? What kind of processes are you going to run that require alot of computational power. And 2nd at this point the processor isnt the bottleneck anymore. Its the combination of harddrive, RAM, OS, videocard and processor together.

[wilcoholic @ Jun 10th 2008 8:11PM]

I strongly recommend the sony vaio TZ. I cannot speak highly enough of it. It has even more features then the Lenovo X300, twice the battery life and looks much sexier then the MBA.

The sony Vaio TZ is much smaller too and IMO at this point does thinnes even matter? The TZ is already razorthin at 1 inch thickness and has a much smaller footprint too boot. I highly recommend it. Do a side by side comparisson with the X300, the HP and the MBA. The Sony vaio TZ comes out on top feature wise, price wise and design wise.

[Some Kid @ Jun 10th 2008 8:17PM]

um what is the point of even manufacturing a C2D at 1.33 GHz
i dont care how many cores there are it is slowwwwwwww
now the specs of the MBA custom C2D are impressive and voodoo would be the first pc manufacturer of ultrathins to get their head out of their asses and figure out how to copy Intels apple chip
and their main competetor, the X300, uses a Ultramoble C2D like the vaio, but it is clocked at a whopping......
1.2 GHz
though the X300 may have better specs, they need a ultemoble proc like the MBA and Envy one to use them well
good job VooDoo
but i still cant get over the fact that it is plated with Carbon Fiber!

[izolutionz @ Jun 10th 2008 11:23PM]

Here's what Rahul Sood had to say on his blog (rahulsood.com):

"Intel Core2 Duo Processor with low voltage platform
... the good people at Intel figured out a way to shrink their incredible platform into a tiny form factor. Thus the Voodoo Envy was born over a year ago – however we did not launch until now due to the added engineering HP applied to the platform."

So it's possible it WAS custom-built for MBA, so HP engineers had to undo (or improve) some of it to fit their platform. But if the point is that it's no longer a mystery what's inside, then I say... it was never a mystery. All the specs are there.

Voodoo IOS is probably using DeviceVM splashtop in some customized fashion. HP came out with QuickPlay years ago. And it recently invented the memristor which will make all these products useless in years to come because you won't have to boot at all. True instantly-on is the future (present?), folks. I like!