That’s the catch. The 8th gen Intel base MBP has 3 year old tech and subpar graphics performance. That is NOT 80% faster. You’ll only see those improvements on the 4TB port models. Should be the same gpu in the 2020 i5 MBA? Don’t quote me on that but I think it’s the same iris plus chipset.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
13-Inch MacBook Pro Benchmarks: $1,799 Model Up to 16.5% Faster Than $1,299 Model
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That’s the catch. The 8th gen Intel base MBP has 3 year old tech and subpar graphics performance. That is NOT 80% faster. You’ll only see those improvements on the 4TB port models. Should be the same gpu in the 2020 i5 MBA? Don’t quote me on that but I think it’s the same iris plus chipset.
It's 16.6% for multi-core, and 33.3% for single-core. The GPU is also way faster. And, perhaps most importantly, the thing probably has more thermal headroom and thus should be able to sustain this performance for longer.
I was just thinking, if the ARM is coming next year, WWDC 20 is the place to be announced.
If they want support from devs, off course.
If you fell asleep in 2012 with your internet browser on the Apple's Macbook Pro page, woke up in 2020, and refreshed your page, you would think you napped for a couple hours.
Looking forward to your tests and feedback as your spec (i7/32GB/2TB) is the sweet spot. The i5 2020 already beats the 2019 i7 model on GB5 from what I can see via their browser.
Other than the laptops being 3x faster CPU, 5x faster graphics, 5x more storage, 5x faster WiFi, lighter, much better screen with retina resolution, TouchID, vastly improved and larger trackpad w/ 3D Touch, much better speakers and microphones
But go ahead and piss on other's efforts that do not meet your standards
This is what happened when Apple had to abandon the shaped battery design in the 2016 13” mbp.
I think it’s better to release something incremental on time with intent to get do more substantial things (Like design and component changes that take too long.
You see this in the iPad Pro as well. I think it is a norm of product delivery now.
They can probably calculate risk better after the Touch Bar and keyboard issues.
I also think the AirPower fiasco influenced their view of risk and quality testing of hardware.
Big upgrades may be handled entirely differently due to risk of offering innovations.
Many reviewers have stated that they cannot see any reason for 32GB RAM, so I ordered the 10th Gen 2.3/16/1TB. And the 1TB might even be overkill.
Get a 2018/2019 on refurbished or used. No point stating this year is holding your back from getting a 13" Non-Touch Bar model.
[automerge]1588866491[/automerge]
Adobe CC and other photo editing seems to eat RAM like crazy (or 5 windows of Chrome with 30 tabs each lol).
Logic, Final Cut Pro I'm sure also uses more RAM. Yet with the speeds of the PCIe based storage being equal to Samsungs EVO 970 NMVe removable storage I'm also curious if more RAM would make a difference? Maybe over the long haul.
This is uninformed and frankly... a bit daydreaming.
Intel has always been using the 15W parts on the 2x TB ports model so they won't be using 1038NG7 (28W) but its 15W variant like 1035NG4 or something.
The issue with this is that 1035NG4 15W model only offers marginal performance improvement vs the 8257U 8th gen model while increasing cost. This might be why they chose to stick with the 8th gen CPU
I think that is exactly what Apple was going for with this update...anyone who can afford it would be mad not to move up to the 16 inch model.
It's just $100 difference if you spec the two with equal RAM/SSD. Worth it if you wanted extra RAM/storage anyway.
I wish they switched to newer WiFi modules. Sad that they’re still using a Broadcom BCM4360 variant WiFi chipset that’s like 5-7 years old.
The Ice Lake CPU already has the AX chipset built into it. All that Apple needed was to add the RF module. Guessing contract with BCM still not over or BCM might have been cheaper. Hopefully next year maybe different.
Had a similar 3x3 BCM4360 card inside my sister’s XPS that I replaced with a 2x2 Intel AX200 card (same WiFi chipset is built into the current Ice Lake CPUs) for $20 much better range and performance, despite being a two stream card. My MBP 16” is faster at close ranges when both are on HT80 mode but 15-20ft from the router the XPS now has better signal/performance. With HT160 the AX200 is faster at all ranges. Probably not a big deal for most but if you do a lot of large transfers or in low signal areas it can make noticeable difference.
The Ice Lake CPU already has the AX chipset built into it. All that Apple needed was to add the RF module. Guessing contract with BCM still not over or BCM might have been cheaper. Hopefully next year maybe different.
Had a similar 3x3 BCM4360 card inside my sister’s XPS that I replaced with a 2x2 Intel AX200 card (same WiFi chipset is built into the current Ice Lake CPUs) for $20 much better range and performance, despite being a two stream card. My MBP 16” is faster at close ranges when both are on HT80 mode but 15-20ft from the router the XPS now has better signal/performance. With HT160 the AX200 is faster at all ranges. Probably not a big deal for most but if you do a lot of large transfers or in low signal areas it can make noticeable difference.
Last edited:
13-inch MacBook Pro (2020) review: Two laptops, one keyboard
The most important feature of the new 13-inch MacBook Pro is the keyboard. With the addition of the new Magic Keyboard design originally introduced in late 2019 with the 16″ MacBook Pro to th…
sixcolors.com
This review has some.
Well, you do get two more thunderbolt ports, better speakers, and higher ram options, so while the value per dollar with the higher sku is indeed worse than the budget model (as it usually goes), there are valid reasons to go for the worse value, higher price one
So, the Ice Lake upgrade (10nm) to the $1799 model gives 14% increase at that model. This means the old $1799 was barely faster (2.2%) than the old / current $1299 model. Something seems wrong.
intel is dead as a consumer play.
Who's going to pay 38% more to get a 16% faster chip. No one ever notices 16%.
But not just that. That's their super delayed 10th gen chip higher voltage chip vs the two+ year older 8th gen lower voltage. So much about progress...
Who's going to pay 38% more to get a 16% faster chip. No one ever notices 16%.
But not just that. That's their super delayed 10th gen chip higher voltage chip vs the two+ year older 8th gen lower voltage. So much about progress...
I agree, but then there is no point of buying a MacBook air. For 300$ more you would get double ram and ssd, better display, better cooling and graphics performance.
I believe that the 14.1" will be reserved for Arm-based MacBook/MacBook Pros. What would be a kicker is if Apple introduced it at WWDC and only let devs buy it first like they did with the Intel transition kit.
This basically sum up the problem of the current gen
Of course some folks can justify to spend 2k+€ for a 13" laptop, but this makes the OS really really expensive IMHO
Unfortunately we will not see the sell figure for each type of MBP13 because it would be interesting if people buy the 10th gen version
Why though? If we drop the "fanboi" eyes it's really not that great, objectively speaking. Minus the usual good stuff that's on an Apple laptop (screen, track pad, OS)... the hardware inside is rather meh. I mean... 8th gen CPU? You have to pay $1800 or more to get 10th gen, which has been pretty standard for most laptops for awhile.
Honestly their Macbook Airs are better than this lineup really.
Yes, but 300$ more it's 30% more, some people (students in majority) doesn't need these extra and could save 300$