Why you will not see an Nvidia chipset for Core i7 any time soon in the M17x/M15x

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Nvidia-Chipset-Nehalem-Core-i7,8810.html

As I have stated many times but no one seemed to actualy read, Nvidia cannot legally make shipsets for the i7 (or any nehalem) CPUs. And since Intel seems to think these CPUs are too high end to pair with an IGP, this means there will be NO IGPs for nehalem systems for some time. This is a sad blow to mobile users who utilize these IGPs for good battery life and has been first manifested in the new M15x - which gets a worse battery life than the much beefier M17x.

Just thought I would share

 

it's all about performance for me.

i don't really care about battery. i would like 1 hour min and 2 hours average and i'll be happy. my hp had 3 1/2 hours and it was great but i prefered my whitebook with 45-60min multitasking and 2 hours for max power settings.

 

doesnt mean they remodify the machine to make room for an I7 by the time they have done enough remodelling for it, they might as well rebrand it and release it as a new model

Not to mention there are no SLI capable I7 laptops

Rumour mill i have an ear to has pointed to Q2 next year before we see one

 

Same here. Let nVidia concentrate on GPU's and not chipsets for mobile use. As I have said in previous posts the PM55 is the way to go for performance and compatibility with ATI and nVidia cards. I think we will learn of a SLI PM55 before the end of this year.

 

Fair enough. Still, as an end user, as long as I can get an i7 for my next refresh, I don't care which chipset maker is used. Eventually I have to believe SLI/CF will become available i7 laptops....

Yes, I totally agree. While I understand some people want long battery life for their M17x, I accept the trade off for performance for battery life.

That's what netbooks are for lol....

 

Like usual i have a small graph of this lol, these will be released on 7 january. They are arrandale processors.

Core i7 620M 2,66 GHz/3,33 GHz 766 MHz 2/4 4MB rPGA989 35W $332
Core i5 540M 2,53 GHz/3,06 GHz 766 MHz 2/4 3MB rPGA989 35W $257
Core i5 520M 2,4 GHz/2,93 GHz 766 MHz 2/4 3MB rPGA989 35W $225
Core i7 640LM 2,13 GHz/2,93 GHz 566 MHz 2/4 4MB rPGA989 25W $332
Core i7 620LM 2 GHz/2,8 GHz 566 MHz 2/4 4MB rPGA989 25W $300
Core i7 640UM 1,2 GHz/2,26 GHz 500 MHz 2/4 4MB rPGA989 18W $305
Core i7 620UM 1,06 GHz/2,13 GHz 500 MHz 2/4 4MB rPGA989 18W $278

 

All the Arrandale processors are dual core though. I'd rather have a 2GHz quad than a 2.6GHz dual. (Which ironically is the choice I made, just not over an i7 dual or i7 quad) I wish they'd release a 32nm quad i7 as well.

It sucks in a way though about the whole nVidia chipset thing. They gave hope to ultraportable/netbook users with the 9400M for decent graphics performance. Now as soon as ultraportable/netbooks move onto i7, the 9400M will be missed indeed.

 

Nvidia chipsets suck anyway. I'd much rather have an Intel Chipset that supports SLI and Crossfire just like on my Desktop. And frankly, I don't care about that 9400M/Hybrid SLI thing, it's more trouble than it's worth.

 

this sucks .

 

Definitely waiting for that


And I agree, the 9400M will definitely be missed, but hasn't intel made IGPs in the past? why not incorporate that into their chipsets for the purpose of longer battery life? not necessarily performance.

 

I saw that article earlier today.

The 9400M is a successful chipset and found its way into a lot of notebooks. From a battery life standpoint, the Intel chipsets/integrated graphics can't be beat, but they can't hold a candle to the 9400M's performance.

From a desktop standpoint, good riddance . . . Nvidia's desktop chipsets were garbage.

 

Thanks sook for posting this and taking time to share. Hopefully people will learn to read first one day .

it is great to have a 9400'm for power and battery ... It can handle wow, aoe3 ,and older games like that no problem while giving you great battery .....

I must say in the laptop world chipsets are not as important as the desktop world ...

 

well isn't that becuase of the bios limitations such as voltages, ram timings, etc...

 

Yea that's what I'm saying it's less of a factor in laptops. Even the basic chipsets max out the vcore or thermal threshold

 

It was still useful for the likes of light gaming on the go while preserving battery life. While you wouldn't be playing Crysis on it, it'd still handle the likes of WoW and UT3 not badly, even if not maxed out

However the 9400M will be very sorely missed in my opinion in the ultraportable market. It offered light at the end of the tunnel for them; an ultraportable that could actually do light gaming (such as the MacBook Air) especially considering the 9400M is about 5 times as powerful as Intel's IGPs

 

While Intel makes good CPUs, hasn't all their integrated graphics been, shall we say, sorely lacking in performance?

I give the 9400 its due, as an integrated graphics solution, it held its own pretty good.

 

Fortunately the PM55 SHOULD support both SLI and CF as the desktop versions do so SLI will not be missed. The issue here is just making a laptop that can feed power to 2 discrete gpus AND a huge i7 CPU.

The main reason it is sad though is the loss of the 9400m, as several people pointed out

 

Intergrated graphic is not meant for power any one who is mad that it's not powerful needs to be checked

 

I just miss it for the battery life option that it offered Moo.....no need to be hating

 

Me to I agree with you 100% I love the 9400m I know what it can do

I am just saying I see people complaining their inspiron 15 can't rune re 5 ???!???

 

gotcha

10char