New 15-inch Retina MacBook Pro Lives Up to Apple's Claims, Reaches SSD Throughput Speeds of 2GB/s

[mcarling]

I ordered a 2.8GHz model for $2299 and I'm looking forward to receiving in on the 1st of June.

Upgrading from a mid-2012 15" MBPr w/2.3ghz i7, would I see a major benefit running Adobe Illustrator? We do a lot of editing in Illustrator but it's only utilizes a single core of the processor. Can someone else chime in if i'll notice a difference, or whether I should stick it out for the next major upgrade.

The Intel Iris Pro graphics have improved a lot since your machine, so I expect you would notice the difference.

 

[Exhale]

Would you notice a difference between 700MB and 2GB in daily activities?

No - Amdahl's Law still applies - especially since the SSD still isn't any better (and sometimes even slower) at smaller reads than other SSDs; which is where you can encounter noticeable throttling. As raw throughput speeds get higher, the waiting point increases greatly at being the CPU again - as it needs to process and handle the data thats been read.

Anything thats compressed (e.g. video/sound) or encrypted needs to be decompressed/decrypted before its useful. That can take considerable time that isn't affected by your storage. Anything thats large and uncompressed will require massive amounts of storage - where the SSDs is usually inappropriate to begin with.

 

[splogue]

That is crazy fast, too bad about broadwell delay.
I'm gonna wait till skylake comes out.

I was planning to hold out for Skylake as well, but this is a significant improvement, which will have a real, daily impact on performance. It definitely has me thinking.

On the other hand, my guess is that the inclusion of Skylake won't just be a processor upgrade. I think it will come along with a redesign, including a new, likely even thinner and lighter, chassis and some smaller additional hardware features, like the much-overdue fingerprint reader and USB-C.

It also won't happen until next year at the earliest, and it won't be January 1st, either. I bet we are looking at essentially an entire year wait for that bad boy.

Decisions, decisions.

 

[pacalis]

I ordered a 2.8GHz model for $2299 and I'm looking forward to receiving in on the 1st of June.


The Intel Iris Pro graphics have improved a lot since your machine, so I expect you would notice the difference.

I'm not sure and would like to know more about this. The 2012s have a separate GPU, a GeForce GT 650M, so they vastly outperformed the 2013s (at the expense of battery life).

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/1...s-15-inch-2013-retina-macbook-pro-reviewed/2/

I don't know if Iris Pro caught up, but I'm not seeing anything in Apple's line up this year that makes me want to trade in the 2012 rMBP

(a rMBA or a next gen chipset might, but we have neither of those this year).

 

[mcarling]

I'm not sure and would like to know more about this. The 2012s have a separate GPU, a GeForce GT 650M, so they vastly outperformed the 2013s (at the expense of battery life).

[Deleted]

Both the integrated and the discrete graphics have improved since the 2012 (and early-2013) models.

I ordered a 2.8GHz iGPU-only model (which supports two 4K monitors) to replace a 2.8GHz early-2013 iGPU+dGPU model (which cannot support two 4K monitors).

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

The MBP is on the cusp of a major redesign and upgrade.

Now is not the time to buy a MBP.

I disagree. Looks like an excellent machine.

I am sure we'll see a new redesign this year of the 15" MBP using same design concepts of the 12" MacBook. Hopefully they can slim down the overall size, if they do, I'll be the first one in line to buy.

What in particular are you looking for?

Interesting. Personally, I expect a new design with Skylake in 3–9 months. Time will tell.

What specifically are you looking for from Skylake?

I disagree. They just updated the hardware. Also, the current Macbook Pro design is still very competitive. People who absolutely must have an über-thin super light laptop can buy the new Macbook. The MBP is the machine for everyone else.

I think the MBP is too thin already. With a more airflow, they could cool a somewhat faster GPU.

If the stars align, we could have HDMI 2.0 with true 4K and DP 1.3a with true 5K, or even 1.4a with 7K, but, the industry is dragging, so, I wouldn't bet on it in 3-9 months. HDMI 2.0 came out Sept. 2013, but, deployment is still limited. I would like to think that the higher-res stuff will be out a year from now.

 

[tgxcyan]

How Come Apple do not use nvidia gtx graphic cards?????

Okay, So I understand that there has something to do with saving battery life and all... but how come Apple do not use Nvidia GTX 970m or 980m???? I mean it's the best graphic card that is out here in 2015. Razer Blade 14 does not seem to have problem with it. They did not even sacrifice the thinness. I don't understand why Apple can't go with better graphic card so people can actually play games; edit videos, photoshopping and all other stuff. Shouldn't Nvidia GTX 970M graphic card make it better for all the things I've mentioned earlier?? Let me your opinions guys...

 

[JDW]

But if NVM is simply a Software Protocol, couldn't Apple just implement that in a future MBP15 update, further improving on the already insanely fast SSD speeds?

 

[Hastings101]

I saw this article today on Motley Fool about Intel's SkyLake launch dates:

Hope it's correct. That means possible Macbook Pro R, iMac and Mac Pro refresh in September or so.

http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...orations-skylake-launch-schedule-reveale.aspx

I hope so, I'm finally ready to replace my 27" iMac from 2010 but am waiting on something more recent than the current non-retina models. Afraid to get a retina iMac as I've heard some people say the GPU in them is too weak for the resolution.

 

[pacalis]

No. Both the 2012 and 2015 rMBPs were/are available either iGPU-only or iGPU+dGPU. Both the integrated and the discrete graphics have improved since the 2012 (and early-2013) models.

I ordered a 2.8GHz iGPU-only model (which supports two 4K monitors) to replace a 2.8GHz early-2013 iGPU+dGPU model (which cannot support two 4K monitors).

I'm pretty sure all the 2012 15s all had dGPUs, where as 2013 the 15s were as you described. The point being that the base 2012s could have better graphics performance than many 2013s and maybe even 2014s.

Put another way, does a 2012 with a 650M perform about the same or better (cinebench etc..) than an 2014 or 2015 iGPU? Because that narrows the argument for an upgrade.

 

[cwt1nospam]

... but how come Apple do not use Nvidia GTX 970m or 980m???? I mean it's the best graphic card that is out here in 2015.

Since the Radeon is newer, I'm guessing it performs better overall, and I'd like to think their engineers confirmed this. Remember too that Apple isn't selling gaming rigs, even if they do get used for gaming.

 

[Comancheria]

Bought one fully loaded:

In my case, I very much doubt that I will ever need the 2.8 Ghz, the discrete GPU, or even the default 16 GB of RAM. Spec-wise, I probably could get by with the new, tiny MacBook. 95 percent of what I do consists of typing documents, surfing the Web, and emailing. Here were my reasons for going with the 15" rMBP:

(1) I use a laptop as a just that--a laptop. I tried out the little guy on a stool at Best Buy and it slid all over my lap. I will be coming off a 9-pound Gateway that sits on my lap like the anchor of an aircraft carrier. I rarely travel, and then, only to and from a heavy duty pickup and into the hotel and back.

(2) the larger screen is way easier for me to see with my aging eyeballs. (My old friend Mister Gateway is a 17 inch.

(3) A full TB of SSD will relieve any anxiety I might have about running out.

(4) I MIGHT in future want to do some audio processing and even some Photoshop.

So I maxed it out--just in case. And even if I do some piddling with photos, audio, or even videos, this machine should be adequate--I kept the Gateway for 8 years and it now has a date with the sledge hammer--as soon as the Big Bad Brown truck arrives.

 

[bkkcanuck]

No - Amdahl's Law still applies - especially since the SSD still isn't any better (and sometimes even slower) at smaller reads than other SSDs; which is where you can encounter noticeable throttling. As raw throughput speeds get higher, the waiting point increases greatly at being the CPU again - as it needs to process and handle the data thats been read.

Anything thats compressed (e.g. video/sound) or encrypted needs to be decompressed/decrypted before its useful. That can take considerable time that isn't affected by your storage. Anything thats large and uncompressed will require massive amounts of storage - where the SSDs is usually inappropriate to begin with.

I am assuming you are talking about small reads and few of them.... there is still quite a bit of difference when you start getting deeping queue depths (large read) even if it is random in nature..... Also since this is "probably" (I am making an assumption) that this is the NVMe version of flash that difference will be quite a bit larger.

 

[trip1ex]

Nice. I can't complain except not sure I would notice the difference between 2GB/s and 500MB/s in day to day use.

 

[patohi]

Skylake will be out this fall!!!!!

Mark the calendars for September!!!!

Look this isn't just about Apple.....

A lil thing called Windows 10 is coming out. Intel sells a ton more chips for Windows machines. This holiday season will see both companies pushing real hard!

I can't see Apple just standing still.

People saying don't wait cause you won't see anything till next year are absolutely wrong.

Yall save that money n get yourself a Skylake Mac this fall.

 

[junkstory]

Okay, So I understand that there has something to do with saving battery life and all... but how come Apple do not use Nvidia GTX 970m or 980m???? I mean it's the best graphic card that is out here in 2015. Razer Blade 14 does not seem to have problem with it. They did not even sacrifice the thinness. I don't understand why Apple can't go with better graphic card so people can actually play games; edit videos, photoshopping and all other stuff. Shouldn't Nvidia GTX 970M graphic card make it better for all the things I've mentioned earlier?? Let me your opinions guys...

Um... We don't know the real performance of the R9 M370X. There are no benchmarks yet, but if Apple picked it, there must be a good reason. AMD probably nailed it in terms of balanced performance and efficiency.

rMBPs have never used the top of the line gfx cards. i.e. gt 750m and not the gtx 780m. Again, the primary focus is battery life and not for the hardcore gamers.

 

[Quu]

It is an incredible boost. The 1TB 2013 Model I had was sporting read speeds of about 1.01GB/s and write speeds around 890-950MB/s

This is effectively twice the read speed and 40% more write speed. That's a massive jump. I know the 512GB and 256GB 2013 models were around 750MB/s read speed and write speed so that's like 135% faster reads there too.

I wonder if the 1TB this time round is even faster? But more than that I'm most interested about that M370X - Wish they would have got the one with dedicated GPU and benched it.

 

[Tankmaze]

I was planning to hold out for Skylake as well, but this is a significant improvement, which will have a real, daily impact on performance. It definitely has me thinking.

On the other hand, my guess is that the inclusion of Skylake won't just be a processor upgrade. I think it will come along with a redesign, including a new, likely even thinner and lighter, chassis and some smaller additional hardware features, like the much-overdue fingerprint reader and USB-C.

It also won't happen until next year at the earliest, and it won't be January 1st, either. I bet we are looking at essentially an entire year wait for that bad boy.

Decisions, decisions.

My late 2011 mbp still runs great with 16gb ram. The reason i'm waiting for skylake is because I would rely on the integrated graphics. My radeongate mbp still runs fine, and I will hold the upgrade.

If you can hold out for at least 6-8 months I suggest just wait.

Edit : I still think Apple would release skylake mbp this fall if Intel can keep their promise,
Looking at Apple release in the past if they launch new mbp in early year there would be new hardware in the fall. Broadwell delay for the 15" really screw Apple timeline for new mbp.

 

[coolspot18]

Given that a 3rd Party 250GB PCIe SSD costs $400, with a 1TB costing almost $1000 just to barely get 800-1000 MB/s, I don't think Apple is overcharging for their storage.

Well, the Samsung SM951 is only $250 for $250GB on Amazon - it can hit 2,260/1,260MB/s read/write. It's probably what's inside the Macbook Air. Also, now that PCs have M.2 slots, PCIe SSDs are no longer necessary.

And people will still wonder how on par Win machines seem cheaper and faster... Yeah

PCs have M.2 slots as well, so these speeds are not that surprising.

 

[thekev]

With such improvements at every release, we'll see Macs without RAM in the near future. Just drop an SSD capable of doing 16000MB/s and we'll get a memory space as large as the free space on the SSD.

This seems like a weird concept to me, considering practically every subdevice gets its own ram. The concept of ram isn't likely to go anywhere soon.

The Intel Iris Pro graphics have improved a lot since your machine, so I expect you would notice the difference.

Illustrator doesn't directly benefit from any gpu frameworks.

No. Both the 2012 and 2015 rMBPs were/are available either iGPU-only or iGPU+dGPU. Both the integrated and the discrete graphics have improved since the 2012 (and early-2013) models.

I ordered a 2.8GHz iGPU-only model (which supports two 4K monitors) to replace a 2.8GHz early-2013 iGPU+dGPU model (which cannot support two 4K monitors).

You're incorrect regarding the 2012 model. The 650m was used in the base model. Here's a link from everymac. This was the cheapest of the rmbps. The cmbp from 2012 used the same thing with less vram. The 13" models used iGPUs, but he didn't seem to be referring to them.

 

[holydude]

This is why apple is so superior to every other company. They are masters craftsmen.



Oh wait...


Thank you samsung.

 

[brdeveloper]

i dunno, my 2010 mac pro ramdisk only shows 2gb/s

I presume that RAM disks have some file system overhead, so they're not a really useful benchmark for RAM access speeds.

 

[mcarling]

I'm pretty sure all the 2012 15s all had dGPUs, where as 2013 the 15s were as you described.

You're incorrect regarding the 2012 model. The 650m was used in the base model.

I stand corrected. Thank you.

 

[brdeveloper]

Trust me, it's not.

My wife has a 2009 C2D, and I have a 15-inch, Early 2011 2.2 GHz Intel Core i7 that I got with a 256 GB SSD and it smokes the C2D. Considering that the new models are probably 30% (or more) faster at the same clock speed as my i7 and their SSDs are probably 5 or 10 times faster, the C2D will feel like an arthritic drunk trying to keep up.

Edit: I just ran Disk Speed Test on my i7 with its 2011 SSD. It's getting around 180 MB/second read speeds and around 130 MB/second write speeds, so the new SSDs are more than 10 times faster.

Both my Late-2009 Macbook and my Early-2013 15" rMBP perform pretty similar in daily tasks. Both have 8GB of RAM and SSDs. The Samsung 840 EVO on the Macbook does around ~250MB/s while the Early-2013 rMBP reaches ~390MB/s. My wife has a 2015 MBA whose SSD goes up to 1300MB/s, and guess what? They all look the same when just browsing or watching movies up to 720p.

Which brand is your SSD? Seems to be pretty slow for a SATA-III capable Mac.

 

[elmateo487]

Okay, So I understand that there has something to do with saving battery life and all... but how come Apple do not use Nvidia GTX 970m or 980m???? I mean it's the best graphic card that is out here in 2015. Razer Blade 14 does not seem to have problem with it. They did not even sacrifice the thinness. I don't understand why Apple can't go with better graphic card so people can actually play games; edit videos, photoshopping and all other stuff. Shouldn't Nvidia GTX 970M graphic card make it better for all the things I've mentioned earlier?? Let me your opinions guys...

you are talking about going from a graphics card with a 50w TDP to 125 W TDP. lol