The MacBook Pro 13"
I think that some people must have been disappointed that Apple stuck to the Core 2 Duo line of processors for the new MacBook Pro 13" models. To be exact, they are using the P8600 and P8800 processors, instead of using the new i3 or i5 processors.
Looking at the Intel processor range though, I can understand why. The i3 would have been the i3-330M processor, while the i5 would have been the i5-430M (so as not to compete with the Mac Book Pro 15" base model which uses the i5-520M).
The i3-330M runs at 2.13 GHz and is not capable of turbo-boost, while the i5-430M runs at 2.26 GHz and can be turbo-boosted to 2.533 GHz. Both support hyper-threading, and are rated at 35W (Max TDP).
Looking at the P8600 and P8800, they run at 2.4 GHz and 2.66 GHz respectively, and are rated at 25W (Max TDP). So, the i5-430M is unlikely to produce any performance advantage over the P8800, and the i3-330M really would pale against the P8600, both consuming more power.
I guess you could say that they could fit the base 13" model with the i5-430M and the second one running the i5-520M. Especially when the indicative price of the i5-520M is actually less than the P8800, and that Apple is still using the P8800. Unless they had already committed to a volume that they have not achieved already (unlikely), or that Intel is truly short of the the i5 mobile chips and cannot supply Apple that many chips (definitely more likely).
Looking at the Intel processor range though, I can understand why. The i3 would have been the i3-330M processor, while the i5 would have been the i5-430M (so as not to compete with the Mac Book Pro 15" base model which uses the i5-520M).
The i3-330M runs at 2.13 GHz and is not capable of turbo-boost, while the i5-430M runs at 2.26 GHz and can be turbo-boosted to 2.533 GHz. Both support hyper-threading, and are rated at 35W (Max TDP).
Looking at the P8600 and P8800, they run at 2.4 GHz and 2.66 GHz respectively, and are rated at 25W (Max TDP). So, the i5-430M is unlikely to produce any performance advantage over the P8800, and the i3-330M really would pale against the P8600, both consuming more power.
I guess you could say that they could fit the base 13" model with the i5-430M and the second one running the i5-520M. Especially when the indicative price of the i5-520M is actually less than the P8800, and that Apple is still using the P8800. Unless they had already committed to a volume that they have not achieved already (unlikely), or that Intel is truly short of the the i5 mobile chips and cannot supply Apple that many chips (definitely more likely).