EDIT: My bad, I didn't know what I was talking about. .

Too bad Nvidia and Intel didn't make nice with each other. Now we're back to Intel chipsets.

You'll get your nvidia on these boxes as dedicated GPUs. That isn't the problem with the business Nvidia is exiting--the custom controller market where Nvidia replaces the Intel north/south bridge set up with their own.

Folks you'll still see nvidia or ati chipsets in a hybrid format on the Macbook Pro.

Great. New MacBook Pros. The question is: When? January?

That only affects computers that use Intels integrated graphics (mac books).

Why? There aren't any Xeons marketed for notebook use, and it's needlessly expensive. There are some very low power Xeons, but still, it goes back to the price again.

I guess we are down to ATI as the only mobile graphics provider. That's what you get for being greedy Intel.

I wonder if i5 or i7 will make it into MBP13... though i7 will probably be 17' only. Also I predict 16:9 aspect ratio.

There are always new MacBook Pros on the horizon.

Why the suggestion of the Radeon 4500s? That's a step sideways if not backwards. If the new MBPs are going the ATI graphics route, They should be using the midrange 5500/5600 series (which should be out by the time the refresh happens). Or, hell with it, a 4670.

Normally I'm a supporter of ATI, especially with them on a role since the HD4000 series, but please no. Despite the ever creative marketing names the Mobility HD4500 series is not a mid-range GPU, but a low-end GPU. Even the fastest, HD 4570 is slower than the 9600M GT.

The 9600M GT has a TDP of around 23W. Direct replacements candidates include the nVidia GT240M which has 48 SPs (50% increase) with higher clocks and the ATI HD4600 series which looks to be faster than the GT240M. Both are DirectX 10.1 parts and are produced on a 40nm process. Personally, I'd love to see a Mobility Radeon HD4670 in 512MB and 1GB configurations, but I could live with the GT240M in 256MB and 512MB configurations which is probably more likely.

I'm also curious about what Apple is going to do about quad core Clarksfield. There are only 2 models that have the lower 45W TDP (reasonable given the previous 35W CPU + ~10W northbridge), but 2 models isn't enough to make a whole MacBook Pro product line. The clock speeds are also pretty unimpressive with the lower clock Core i7-720QM at 1.6GHz in quad core mode and 2.4GHz Turbo in dual core mode and the Core i7-820QM at 1.73GHz in quad core mode and 2.8GHz Turbo in dual core mode. The means that it's quite possible that the average user who only really needs a dual core could see no performance gain or could even lose performance compared to the generally higher clocked dual cores we have now with their larger L2 cache which is more useful in common desktop applications and games than a small, fast L2 cache and large, slow L3 cache as in Clarksfield. Hopefully, if Apple can't squeeze the 2GHz Core i7-920XM into the MacBook Pro as a BTO, they'll be able to convince Intel to release a 45W 1.86GHz Clarksfield early. Presumably either Apple will get first dibs on dual core Arrandale this year or will wait for Arrandale next year until they refresh the MacBook Pro lineup. Certainly the 13" MBP will be completely Arrandale and perhaps the 15"/17" models will come with Arrandale standard too, and leave Clarksfield as a BTO.