MacBook Pro/Air refresh schedule - Haswell release timeline

[skaertus]

I've noticed several conflicting reports about the release date of Haswell processors, so I wonder when the next Mac laptops refreshes will be. There are reports of MacBook Pros and Airs being refreshed next June, due to the Haswell release, but I am not convinced.

Haswell will be available from June 2, 2013. However, there are reports saying that the processors that will be available first are the desktop processors and the higher-voltage quad-cores. Therefore, processors for the 13-inch MacBook Pro and for the MacBook Air will not be available so soon. There are reports of ultra-low Haswell processors being released only in Q3 2013. In addition, the Haswell GT3 GPU (which will bring much better performance) would be released only in Q4 2013.

There will be new Ivy Bridge, low-voltage, processors being released meanwhile. Based on that, I guess that the timeframe for release of new Macs could be as follows:

- MacBook Air refresh in Q1 2013, with new ultra-low voltage Ivy Bridge processors.

- 15" MacBook Pro refresh in June 2013, with the new quad-core Haswell processors (the retina version being upgraded in June, but not sure if the non-retina version will be phased out).

- 13" MacBook Pro refresh in Q3 2013, or when 35W mobile Haswell becomes available.

- MacBook Air redesign in Q4 2013, when the ultra-low voltage Haswell is released. Due to the lower power requirements of Haswell, the MacBook Air could be even thinner. An IGZO display could be added, in order to provide retina resolutions and good battery life even in a thin design.

Do you think this timeline is feasible? How do you think Apple will handle the MacBook release schedule due to these delays in the release of Haswell?

 

[nickftw8686]

I've noticed several conflicting reports about the release date of Haswell processors, so I wonder when the next Mac laptops refreshes will be. There are reports of MacBook Pros and Airs being refreshed next June, due to the Haswell release, but I am not convinced.

Haswell will be available from June 2, 2013. However, there are reports saying that the processors that will be available first are the desktop processors and the higher-voltage quad-cores. Therefore, processors for the 13-inch MacBook Pro and for the MacBook Air will not be available so soon. There are reports of ultra-low Haswell processors being released only in Q3 2013. In addition, the Haswell GT3 GPU (which will bring much better performance) would be released only in Q4 2013.

There will be new Ivy Bridge, low-voltage, processors being released meanwhile. Based on that, I guess that the timeframe for release of new Macs could be as follows:

- MacBook Air refresh in Q1 2013, with new ultra-low voltage Ivy Bridge processors.

- 15" MacBook Pro refresh in June 2013, with the new quad-core Haswell processors (the retina version being upgraded in June, but not sure if the non-retina version will be phased out).

- 13" MacBook Pro refresh in Q3 2013, or when 35W mobile Haswell becomes available.

- MacBook Air redesign in Q4 2013, when the ultra-low voltage Haswell is released. Due to the lower power requirements of Haswell, the MacBook Air could be even thinner. An IGZO display could be added, in order to provide retina resolutions and good battery life even in a thin design.

Do you think this timeline is feasible? How do you think Apple will handle the MacBook release schedule due to these delays in the release of Haswell?

I think you bring up a good point, I just don't see how they will release a macbook air with just a lower wattage ivy cpu. They need to release new airs with haswell cpus with the much improved integrated gpu or why even upgrade? I think the better move would be to wait and release new laptops with haswell in it.

 

[Spink10]

I highly doubt any new product without Haswell.

 

[skaertus]

I think you bring up a good point, I just don't see how they will release a macbook air with just a lower wattage ivy cpu. They need to release new airs with haswell cpus with the much improved integrated gpu or why even upgrade? I think the better move would be to wait and release new laptops with haswell in it.

I think Intel will release slightly faster 17W Ivy Bridge processors along the 10 and 13W versions. Then Apple could release a small spec bump to the Air.

 

[Sully151]

Will Haswell really be that big of a difference in the Airs and 13" rMBP?

 

[el-John-o]

This is discussed alot, but folks, a June Haswell is not going to happen, sorry.

Haswell is slated for release in the first week of June. Intel has a history of being late now and again! But let's assume it's June 1st! (For the mobile processors too, not just the rumored desktop chips) Apple typically releases computers with the latest chips 2 to 3 MONTHS after those chips are launched. Sometimes Apple is as quick as 4 weeks (and that's rare). So BEST CASE SCENARIO is a Haswell equipped model (perhaps a retina MBP) the first week in July. Looking at Apples track record, late July, August, or even September is a lot more likely. Personally, I'm leaning towards mid-july as 6 to 8 weeks seems to be Apples timeline as of late.

For the record, Ivy Bridge with Intel HD4000 graphics was released at the beginning of April 2012, with the first Apple models (MacBook line) announced with Ivy Bridge coming in June of 2012. The iMac in October.

Apple has never released new models alongside Intels latest chips. It's always been at LEAST a few weeks (usually around 2 months)

If Haswell mobile chips come later, I think it could also be expected that Apple could do the reverse of what they did last year, and refresh the iMac FIRST, waiting for Haswell. I could see them going to the latest Ivy Bridge chips to avoid going over 12 months between model changes, though, and a quick refresh after to Haswell chips. At the same time though, IF they did that, a lot of folks would be pretty unhappy! (Like, what was it, the fourth gen iPad that just suddenly came out right after the third gen?)

Will Haswell really be that big of a difference in the Airs and 13" rMBP?

Marginal performance improvements, but the focus of Haswell is power consumption more than anything. That could spell a boost in battery life for either model, could also spell a reduction in weight (Apple reducing the size of the battery to save weight, but keeping the same battery life due to the lower consumption of the haswell chip).

I'm thinking the former, I don't think Apple will make any drastic changes with Haswell, just a quick refresh. But, you will get a mild bump in battery life and a mild bump in performance with a Haswell chip. Intel isn't making any wild claims about big performance jumps or anything this time around, right now they are focused on reducing heat and reducing power as there is a shifting demand towards thin and light so called 'Ultrabooks' (like the MBA).

It could, potentially, offer a pretty good performance boost for the Air, as it would be able to run a full-speed notebook chip instead of one of the slower (but cooler running) chips. If Haswell runs cool enough and uses low enough 'juice', it could potentially mean a Haswell quad in the 13" Pro, or even if not that, the same CPU in the 13" Air as you get in the 13" Pro (not a slower chip in the air due to heat, like now)

 

[bugout]

This is discussed alot, but folks, a June Haswell is not going to happen, sorry.

Apple has never released new models alongside Intels latest chips. It's always been at LEAST a few weeks (usually around 2 months)

Never huh?

https://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/05/apple-gains-early-access-to-intels-z68-chipset-for-new-imacs/

 

[el-John-o]

Never huh?

https://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/05/apple-gains-early-access-to-intels-z68-chipset-for-new-imacs/

That was a chipset. And that's nothing new. Lots of manufacturers have gotten early access to Intels latest chipsets, often so that Intel can have a range of motherboards with the chipset available at launch.

I'm referring to the chips themselves, the actual processors. i.e., Haswell.

 

[skaertus]

Apple has never released new models alongside Intels latest chips. It's always been at LEAST a few weeks (usually around 2 months)

Well, that depends. I've taken a look at the three latest MacBook Pro releases:

June 11, 2012: the processors were released in April 23, 2012, 50 days earlier.

October 24, 2011: the processors were released between September 4, 2011 and October 2, 2011, between 23 and 51 days earlier.

February 24, 2011: the processors were released between January 5, 2011 and February 20, 2011, between 5 and 51 days earlier.

So, it is possible that Apple releases computers with Haswell processors a few days after they are released by Intel.

 

[el-John-o]

Well, that depends. I've taken a look at the three latest MacBook Pro releases:

June 11, 2012: the processors were released in April 23, 2012, 50 days earlier.

October 24, 2011: the processors were released between September 4, 2011 and October 2, 2011, between 23 and 51 days earlier.

February 24, 2011: the processors were released between January 5, 2011 and February 20, 2011, between 5 and 51 days earlier.

So, it is possible that Apple releases computers with Haswell processors a few days after they are released by Intel.

That's true I forgot about the early 2011 MBP. Those ended up being just a couple weeks behind and was a pretty aggressive push for Apple.

But still, A) It's not the same day like people keep saying (People say, very matter-of-factly on this forum that the next MacBook pro's are slated for the first week in June... that's just not very likely AND it's based off of LEAKED Intel roadmaps, it might not even be the haswell release date!) and B) It's still rare.

I'm ready to be proven wrong. Heck, Apple could release Haswell equipped models tomorrow! But I just don't see it, at least, not so matter of factly. People are touting it like it's a FACT that Haswell Macs are coming the first week of June, and it's just baseless. It doesn't fit with the history of the line at all, and would be a rare feat for Apple.

 

[skaertus]

That's true I forgot about the early 2011 MBP. Those ended up being just a couple weeks behind and was a pretty aggressive push for Apple.

But still, A) It's not the same day like people keep saying (People say, very matter-of-factly on this forum that the next MacBook pro's are slated for the first week in June... that's just not very likely AND it's based off of LEAKED Intel roadmaps, it might not even be the haswell release date!) and B) It's still rare.

I'm ready to be proven wrong. Heck, Apple could release Haswell equipped models tomorrow! But I just don't see it, at least, not so matter of factly. People are touting it like it's a FACT that Haswell Macs are coming the first week of June, and it's just baseless. It doesn't fit with the history of the line at all, and would be a rare feat for Apple.

Well, in fact, I think there is more to Apple's release schedule than the timeline of release of Intel processors. There are other components which must be ready for the release, including the dedicated video cards that equip the 15-inch model.

Still, the last MacBook Pros were released in June 2012. If Apple doesn't release a spec bump, and it probably won't (since it hasn't done it so far), then the next refresh will likely come with Haswell. Given that Haswell was delayed and will only be released in June 2013, the current MacBook Pro will be a year old by then. Apple will need a refresh soon to boost sales. Due to this fact, I think Apple will release the MacBook Pro refresh shortly after Haswell is released. If Haswell is released June 2, as reports are saying, I don't doubt Apple will release the MacBook Pro refresh in June.

 

[Ccrew]

.

For the record, Ivy Bridge with Intel HD4000 graphics was released at the beginning of April 2012, with the first Apple models (MacBook line) announced with Ivy Bridge coming in June of 2012. The iMac in October.

Apple has never released new models alongside Intels latest chips. It's always been at LEAST a few weeks (usually around 2 months)

Umm, Apple was a launch partner with Intel on Sandy Bridge, and released the MBP refresh in March of 2011 with the processor announcement from Intel. Not to say it won't happen again.

While someone above was quoting earlier Intel missed the launch window.

And the focus of Haswell is not just power consumption, but power consumption coupled with dedicated GPU level integrated graphics on-die that further reduces overall power needs and size.. For the OEM that's looking for a minimal footprint that's the larger benefit than just consumption.

 

[dusk007]

If Haswell is released June 2, as reports are saying, I don't doubt Apple will release the MacBook Pro refresh in June.

It is not just a question of whether they want to but also whether they can. Apple has grow quite a bit more popular than 5 years ago and usually rolls out a new line entirely replacing the old. When Intel launches a new processor it doesn't mean they can immediately provide any number of them. The plants spill out chips at a very constant rate and only with better yield that rate grows. Apple needs lots of chips of the higher end mobile ones which probably have the worst yield early on.
Other companies only exchange a few models and still sell the old alongside. They can release those models and only need fairly few chips comparably.

I very much doubt they will release them in June unless Intel is very conservative with their launch date.

While it has been mentioned, for those that forgot, the june 2 launch will only come with quad cores so all the dual core and new faster GPU, amazing power saving Haswell, pretty much the real deal will come later. The quad cores will only be slightly faster, slightly more power efficient but nothing that really sound good in marketing language to people that don't give a damn about tech and whether it is a new chip. If all else on the 15" is the same, all they can really push into the spotlight is a lower price. The rest won't shine. They won't pay more money for the chips just to get every chip before the competition if there is no real benefit to them.

 

[HurryKayne]

So,basically no quad core for the Air right?
I hope to see the quad ones for the 13 retina at least.
When all Macs will shift to quad cores?
Desktops have,now is it time for notebook?
Does it make sense a line up like this?
Air Quad core + hd4600
13 retina quad core + Discrete Gpu
15 retina quad core + Powerful Discrete Gpu
or like this?
Air Dual core + Hd4600
13 Retina Quad Core + Hd4600
15 Retina(and Classic) Quad Core + Discrete Gpu?
What i know for sure its that i will buy a Quad core notebook,not less,the
13 plus quad core will be perfect.. don't wanna see it with dual cores even on 2013.

 

[skaertus]

While it has been mentioned, for those that forgot, the june 2 launch will only come with quad cores so all the dual core and new faster GPU, amazing power saving Haswell, pretty much the real deal will come later. The quad cores will only be slightly faster, slightly more power efficient but nothing that really sound good in marketing language to people that don't give a damn about tech and whether it is a new chip. If all else on the 15" is the same, all they can really push into the spotlight is a lower price. The rest won't shine. They won't pay more money for the chips just to get every chip before the competition if there is no real benefit to them.

There are new reports (as of today) stating that Intel may release ultra-low voltage Haswell processors (the ones to equip the MacBook Air) in June, together with the quad-cores. The reports are from CPU World: http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2013/2013020501_Intel_to_launch_Haswell_ULV_CPUs_at_Computex_show.html

----------

So,basically no quad core for the Air right?
I hope to see the quad ones for the 13 retina at least.
When all Macs will shift to quad cores?

Does it matter if all Macs will be released with quad-cores or not? More cores are useful only because the clock of processors can't get any higher than 5 GHz without becoming very unstable.

A quad-core should be much more energy-efficient than it is, and would have to heat less than it does, to fit a MacBook Air. To do that, Intel would have to reduce the clock of these processors, and performance would be reduced too.

Desktop have,now is it time for notebook?
Does it make sense a line up like this?
Air Quad core + hd4600
13 retina quad core + Discrete Gpu
15 retina quad core + Powerful Discrete Gpu
or like this?
Air Dual core + Hd4600
13 Retina Quad Core + Hd4600
15 Retina(and Classic) Quad Core + Discrete Gpu?
What i know for sure its that i will buy a Quad core notebook,not less,the
13 plus quad core will be perfect.. don't wanna see it with dual cores even on 2013.

Doesn't make sense for me.

MacBook Air with a quad-core processor: not going to happen now. All ULV Haswell processors will be dual-core.

13" MBP Retina with quad-core: probably not going to happen with Haswell, although there will be at least one 35W quad-core Haswell processor that could fit the 13". But it is not likely to be adopted by Apple now.

13" MBP Retina with discrete graphics: not going to happen. Too much battery consumption and heat. Intel is going to release better integrated graphics along with Haswell, and Apple will want to benefit from that. No point in using discrete graphics in this scenario.

15" MBP quad-core and discrete graphics: yes, just like the current generation.

Apple will keep using similar processors and video cards of the next generation in the future products. It has always done that. By doing that, costs and production issues will remain the same.

 

[HurryKayne]

This year will be just Air Dual core + Hd4600 and
13 Retina Quad Core( i strongly hope it) + Hd4600,
but i decided to skip the 2013 generation because i see the 2014 more important,
-first i have more time to save money,my wallat had a major happy bleeding with my new late Imac27,
-secondly in the 2014 Broadwell will bring 14nm and a 40% more powerful Intel Hd compared to the next to come hd4600 ( which is between 40-60% the Hd4000 ),
-third the thunderbolt chipset,with Broadwell will land also the Falcon Ridge which is 20 Gb/s ,instead this year will arrive the Redwood Ridge which is still 10 Gb/s,
-fourth,the 14 nm will make possible to have Quad cores even in the Air..so..
in the worst case (in 2014)a 13 inch retina QuadCore MacBook Pro will be more than a dream..even of i hope to see it already this Summer-Fall and in the best case all Macs will complete the transition to Quadcores.
I love the idea to have a Macbook Air Quad core in the 2014.
Don't you?
Meanwhile i will buy a Retina Ipad mini to bridge me till 2014.

----------

There are new reports (as of today) stating that Intel may release ultra-low voltage Haswell processors (the ones to equip the MacBook Air) in June, together with the quad-cores. The reports are from CPU World: http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2013/2013020501_Intel_to_launch_Haswell_ULV_CPUs_at_Computex_show.html

----------



Does it matter if all Macs will be released with quad-cores or not? More cores are useful only because the clock of processors can't get any higher than 5 GHz without becoming very unstable.

A quad-core should be much more energy-efficient than it is, and would have to heat less than it does, to fit a MacBook Air. To do that, Intel would have to reduce the clock of these processors, and performance would be reduced too.



Doesn't make sense for me.

MacBook Air with a quad-core processor: not going to happen now. All ULV Haswell processors will be dual-core.

13" MBP Retina with quad-core: probably not going to happen with Haswell, although there will be at least one 35W quad-core Haswell processor that could fit the 13". But it is not likely to be adopted by Apple now.

13" MBP Retina with discrete graphics: not going to happen. Too much battery consumption and heat. Intel is going to release better integrated graphics along with Haswell, and Apple will want to benefit from that. No point in using discrete graphics in this scenario.

15" MBP quad-core and discrete graphics: yes, just like the current generation.

Apple will keep using similar processors and video cards of the next generation in the future products. It has always done that. By doing that, costs and production issues will remain the same.

Maybe you're right,but a retina 13inch without even a quad core it doesn't make sense..retina its not enough for me for making me buying instead the Air,
it doesn't differentiates..a lot,ok..except for the prices.. .

As i wrote i hope/expect to see this year
Dual Haswell Air
Quad Haswell 13 Retina
Quad Haswell 15 Retina with Discrete Gpu.
Then we have the 128 New Ipad..different machine but..many i know (knowing Ios its not Osx but having Apple Desktops)are asking for it instead of the 11 Air..lets see what will come next,as you pointed me new UlV Quad cores are showing ,even if i read that all the U A Cpu will be dual...maybe i didn't understand well..http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2013/2013020501_Intel_to_launch_Haswell_ULV_CPUs_at_Computex_show.html
By the way My year is the 2014 now,for a 13 Inch Retina Quad core..MbPro or Air.
(ps.maybe we will have to have to wait more..i started considering that if Apple puts this year the retina on the Air then they could put a Quad core in their 13MbPro..but if they don't and all remains like today we could have quad and retina just in the 13 inch for the 2014 and Quad in the Air too for the 2015..maybe with retina in the Air only in the 2016..ok..i'm exagerating a bit but only because i see 13 and Air really close as specs even if i know there are major differences..but this is not how the normal mass market works..i suppose.)

 

[skaertus]

This year will be just Air Dual core + Hd4600 and
13 Retina Quad Core( i strongly hope it) + Hd4600,
but i decided to skip the 2013 generation because i see the 2014 more important,
-first i have more time to save money,my wallat had a major happy bleeding with my new late Imac27,
-secondly in the 2014 Broadwell will bring 14nm and a 40% more powerful Intel Hd compared to the next to come hd4600 ( which is between 40-60% the Hd4000 ),
-third the thunderbolt chipset,with Broadwell will land also the Falcon Ridge which is 20 Gb/s ,instead this year will arrive the Redwood Ridge which is still 10 Gb/s,
-fourth,the 14 nm will make possible to have Quad cores even in the Air..so..
in the worst case (in 2014)a 13 inch retina QuadCore MacBook Pro will be more than a dream..even of i hope to see it already this Summer-Fall and in the best case all Macs will complete the transition to Quadcores.
I love the idea to have a Macbook Air Quad core in the 2014.
Don't you?
Meanwhile i will buy a Retina Ipad mini to bridge me till 2014.

----------



Maybe you're right,but a retina 13inch without even a quad core it doesn't make sense..retina its not enough for me for making me buying instead the Air,
it doesn't differentiates..a lot,ok..except for the prices.. .

As i wrote i hope/expect to see this year
Dual Haswell Air
Quad Haswell 13 Retina
Quad Haswell 15 Retina with Discrete Gpu.
Then we have the 128 New Ipad..different machine but..many i know (knowing Ios its not Osx but having Apple Desktops)are asking for it instead of the 11 Air..lets see what will come next,as you pointed me new UlV Quad cores are showing ,even if i read that all the U A Cpu will be dual...maybe i didn't understand well..http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2013/2013020501_Intel_to_launch_Haswell_ULV_CPUs_at_Computex_show.html
By the way My year is the 2014 now,for a 13 Inch Retina Quad core..MbPro or Air.
(ps.maybe we will have to have to wait more..i started considering that if Apple puts this year the retina on the Air then they could put a Quad core in their 13MbPro..but if they don't and all remains like today we could have quad and retina just in the 13 inch for the 2014 and Quad in the Air too for the 2015..maybe with retina in the Air only in the 2016..ok..i'm exagerating a bit but only because i see 13 and Air really close as specs even if i know there are major differences..but this is not how the normal mass market works..i suppose.)

Is there any specific reason why you want a quad-core processor?

Quad-core processors are not necessarily faster or more powerful than dual-core processors. It just have more cores, but speed will depend on the clock and on cache memory. In addition, heavier multi-threading is needed to take advantage of more cores, so the software you use may not be optimized to actually use the four cores to the maximum.

If Intel could produce a low-power quad-core processor that is more worth than the low-power dual-cores already in the market, you bet Intel would do it. However, quad-core processors only make sense these days if they have reasonable clock rates, and that requires an amount of power that makes it unsuitable for standard laptops.

Said that, there will be at least one 35W quad-core Haswell processor, and I guess it will have a 2 GHz clock. However, Apple may or may not use it in its 13-inch MacBook Pros. It is likely that Apple doesn't make use of it yet. Note that this specific quad-core processor is not necessarily faster, and may be even slower, than a higher-clocked dual-core processor.

Then, again, is there any specific reason why you want a quad-core, given that more cores doesn't necessarily mean more power?

 

[HurryKayne]

Yes because we use a lot of Audio and Video Soft on the go and i need to have the most in the tiny size possible.
While we work in the facilities we need to be fast and to set in less time possible.
Handbrake,Final Cut,Logic,Cubase,Motion,Photoshop,..believe me here we i live they pretend from us the best for less and fast and cheap without investing in your tools but using yours,if you can't you're out.,this is Italy.. .
Then is there a specific reason why you "hate" so much quad cores?
By the way its up to Apple which path will be in the next Air and 13Mbro,i know cores aren't the measure of the power ,its the architecture beside,the ram speed,the ssd or the odd,cache,clock etc etc there is a whole machine to consider before,thats why i'm really interested in the next 2013-2014 for the Air and 13 retina news.
Today i'm using an Imac late 2012 27 at home and a Classic 15 MB Pro on the go.

 

[dusk007]

The Quad Cores are almost always faster because even if the load only needs two cores, turbo mode makes sure those two cores are fast.
Intel already sells a 35W Ivy Bridge Quad Core. The 13" MBP and rMBP could both handle the TDP. I think Apple only holds back to make the 15" look better and especially with the rMBP provide some killer feature next time. It sells good now because of the screen and initial reviews don't complain as much about heat. Next time they can put in a Quad and say we are oh os great and innovative. It is probably also a price issue given the IB Quad is way more expensive than the slow cheap standard voltage CPUs that are now in the rMBP.
Price won't change with Haswell.

 

[skaertus]

Yes because we use a lot of Audio and Video Soft on the go and i need to have the most in the tiny size possible.
While we work in the facilities we need to be fast and to set in less time possible.
Handbrake,Final Cut,Logic,Cubase,Motion,Photoshop,..believe me here we i live they pretend from us the best for less and fast and cheap without investing in your tools but using yours,if you can't you're out.
Then is there a specific reason why you "hate" so much quad cores?

I don't hate quad-cores. In fact, I've got two quad core machines: a desktop with a Core i7-870 with four cores running at 2.93 GHz each, and a laptop with a Core i7-2720QM running at 2.2 GHz.

These two processors are fast and provide a good level of performance. However, I notice that there is a misconception in the sense that more cores mean more power and are better. It's not always the case, for different reasons.

A 2 GHz quad-core processor is not equal, in terms of performance, to a 4 GHz dual-core. In this case, the dual-core will be much faster for most tasks. Most software is not optimized to make use of several cores and, for this reason, more cores may not much to the speed of such software. A higher clock rate will mean better performance in most cases.

The best scenario, of course, would be to have a quad-core processor with a high clock rate. You get the best of both worlds. That is perfectly feasible for desktops, but not for laptops, for two reasons: heat and power consumption.

A laptop must have processors that don't get very hot. A quad-core, high clocked, processor gets very hot. In addition, laptops are also supposed to have good battery life. The thing is: the more cores and the more clock speed, the less battery.

As a result, Intel has to make compromises to keep heat and power consumption low: it should keep four cores and reduce the speed of the cores, or keep the speed and reduce the number of cores.

35W processors, which are suitable for the 13" MacBook Pro, get up to 2.9 GHz. 17W processors, which are suitable for the Air, get up to 2 GHz. Quad-core processors with such TDPs would have cores clocked lower.

The quad-cores that equip the 15" MacBook Pro are more powerful, but they have a TDP of 45W and are too hot and power hungry for the smaller models.

By the way its up to Apple which path will be in the next Air and 13Mbro,i know cores don't give the measure of the power ,there is the architecture beside,the ram speed,the ssd or the odd,cache,clock etc etc there is a whole machine to consider before,thats why i'm really interested in the next 2013-2014 for the Air and 13 retina news.
Today i'm using an Imac lage 2012 27 at home and a Classic 15 MB Pro on the go.

Yes, it's up to Apple. But Apple will choose to keep equivalent processors, at it has always done. It will probably put 35W dual-cores in the 13" MacBook Pro, and 17W dual-cores in the Air, as it has done in the previous generations. Haswell quad-cores don't seem suitable for these laptops yet. The 13" Pro will get it first than the Air, though.

----------

The Quad Cores are almost always faster because even if the load only needs two cores, turbo mode makes sure those two cores are fast.

That's for sure. But we're talking of 45W quad-cores most of the time. They are more powerful, but also more power hungry.

Intel already sells a 35W Ivy Bridge Quad Core. The 13" MBP and rMBP could both handle the TDP. I think Apple only holds back to make the 15" look better and especially with the rMBP provide some killer feature next time. It sells good now because of the screen and initial reviews don't complain as much about heat. Next time they can put in a Quad and say we are oh os great and innovative. It is probably also a price issue given the IB Quad is way more expensive than the slow cheap standard voltage CPUs that are now in the rMBP.
Price won't change with Haswell.

Yes, Intel makes the i7-3612QM at 2.1 GHz, and the i7-3632QM at 2.2 GHz, both with four cores. The maximum clock speed, with one core running, is 3.1 GHz and 3.2 GHz, respectively. These two processors are more expensive than the dual-core i7-3520M, that runs at 2.9 GHz with two cores and at 3.6 GHz with only one core.

Intel is certainly moving towards 35W quad-cores, but, if you ask me, it won't be ready for prime time in 2013. I hope I am wrong, though.

 

[HurryKayne]

You're right,there's misconception but sometimes there is also some kind of presumption people are always thinking like that.
Mine is a real need,while i understand all the "limits",thats why i'm looking for the BROADWELL which is 14nm and better in terms of watt,tdp,energy saver...etc etc ,also this is why i have a mid 2012 MacBook Pro Classic with Quad inside and another one which sits on my desk within my late 2012 27 iMAC...basically for this year i'm fitted... .
My needin is because we work with very sick and violent people ,we work with elderlies with Alzheimer,with psychiatric ones,we work and this the worst case with people with law problems...so we need to have the best in the tiny package to document fast our sessions of music therapy...we use a lot the Cloud services,just in case something goes broken or stolen we have all our datas saved....we have a lot of strategies to make it...basically now i work with my Ipad mini..its not the powerful ipad but it fits well hidden in my jacket (this is in the "risky" sessions ).
So its just not cores related..but i have to tell that i really like the idea of a Quad Core Broadwell Air in the 2014.
Till there i will continue to use my Big QUADS as usual.

 

[Doc. Caliban]

I've been reading all of these threads looking for two things:

1. Will the next chip refresh bring a significant performance boost? Sounds like, 'No'.

2. How much longer will the non-retina MBP be around?

I have the money to buy now, but not the need. I do not, however, intend to miss purchasing a non-retina MBP before they are phased out.

Is there a significant reason to wait for a possible refresh, or should I just buy now?

-Doc

 

[dusk007]

1. The CPUs will barely be any faster. Maybe 10 %. A 13" might be quite a bit faster if they finally put a Quad Core in but that they could do now. It will only be optional most likely.
The GPU on the Dual Core mobile chips without any dedicated will be a lot better. Battery life especially for the Air should be much better.

2. Nobody knows. I would say 70% they stick around 30% they drop them the next iteration. In 2014 I think the cMBP will be drop almost definitely.

As I said in various posts. For the 15" I don't see much reason to wait other than hoping for a price drop. The 13" is worth a wait if you care about GPU performance for gaming or stuff.

 

[Doc. Caliban]

Thank you for your reply.

In my case, I would be looking at the 15", and GPU isn't super important to me because I game on a purpose-built PC.

A slight price drop would not be reason enough for me to wait, and the sooner that I buy, the sooner that my current Air will go to my girlfriend. (Her Windows laptop is ready to go.)

My only fear is purchasing now, and then some amazing whiz-bang update happens to the non-retina in the next 6 months or so. It sounds unlikely that such a thing will happen.

Still on the fence, but less so now.

I will either get the base model and install 8GB of RAM and an M4, or get the bumped up version with 8GB preinstalled and opt for the 7,200 RPM 750GB drive and call it good. The only real difference between the two is 0.3Ghz on the CPU and another 512MB of VRAM. I don't game on it, so the latter isn't wroth anything to me.

If I go with the first option, I get a 512GB SSD out of it for the tiny CPU sacrifice. That's the direction that I'm leaning in.

Thanks again,

-Doc

p.s. Talking about it does give me an itchy trigger finger ...

 

[dusk007]

In my case, I would be looking at the 15", and GPU isn't super important to me because I game on a purpose-built PC.

For the 15" there wouldn't be a difference in GPU performance anyway. The IGP will be largely the same on the Quad Core and the 650M won't get a "real" replacement until then. Nvidia might rename the 650M but it will be essentially the same GPU. AMD and Nvidia won't release any really new GPUs until either very late in 2013 but most likely Q1 2014.