I would suspect that the quad core would do better than dual core for battery life, assuming the both chips had the same TDP and both machines had the same battery capacity.
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.
2015 vs 2016 vs 2017 Macbook Pro - Need buying advice
- Thread starter DaGrandMastah
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Based on four cores getting the work done faster than two cores? I'd love to see a quad core 13" / hex core 15". . . I just hope Apple can get it done without them having to throttle, as the current machines seem to have some problems with that under high load.
One thing is for sure... they won't be able to make the new machines any thinner, so there's hope on that front.
thats a good question, im guessing apple would finally squeeze more battery into the 2013 model
Yet another person with a 2016/2017 keyboard problem..
what am i supposed to do when the space bar stops working. WHAT WERE THEY THINKING WITH THIS F⚠️CKING KEYBOARD https://twitter.com/CaseyNeistat/status/982430762640314370/photo/1
Literally every single day there's another high profile, well known or just someone I know of who's now complaining about the keyboard and a failure or issue.
Folks - the keyboard is a disaster on the reliability front.
Full stop.
what am i supposed to do when the space bar stops working. WHAT WERE THEY THINKING WITH THIS F⚠️CKING KEYBOARD https://twitter.com/CaseyNeistat/status/982430762640314370/photo/1
Literally every single day there's another high profile, well known or just someone I know of who's now complaining about the keyboard and a failure or issue.
Folks - the keyboard is a disaster on the reliability front.
Full stop.
And the alternative appears to be buying an overpriced 3 year old computer. I'd say just don't buy one then if you're that concerned about the keyboard (typed from my 2016 MacBook Pro)
So he rants on Twitter and then takes a chef's knife to it? Very adult.
edit: and by the look of the gunk on his "G" key and at the bottom right of the space bar he doesn't seem to be the cleanest around his machine.
I knew you in particular would continue to have a hard time accepting what's going on.
Honestly your denialist take on this is why I keep posting examples as I see them.
It's a real problem
Well, I'm glad I can tell you that yet another person I know has a refurbished machine and it's perfectly fine as well 2 months later.
Your struggle is real.
I don't have a problem accepting that there are issues. I've told you many times that I had problems with the 2016 model. . . I don't know how many times I have to say it.
Two months later!
Sweet!
I guess that means no issues there and Apple can chalk up another win!..
Right on!
lol
The keyboard reliability is a real problem and denying it or downplaying it simply isn't helpful.
We need Apple to fix this, not pretend it isn't a problem.
Well I'm glad Casey got a few followers on his Twitter / YouTube Feed from his rant.
And if you think that by telling people MY experience with many 2017 models that I'm downplaying the issues then I don't know what to tell you. Perhaps I should send loving tweets to Apple over Twitter and see if it garners me a bunch of likes too.
Let's just ignore each other bud - it's not helping the discussion with you and I wasting time responding to each other..
I'm sorry that you can't see both sides of the argument.
I'd actually be interested to know more about this because my hunch is that since a higher core frequency is what gives you faster race to sleep, and that it only happens when the core is mostly idle (ie. not running a compute-heavy workload). I don't see how going from 2 mostly idle cores to 4 mostly idle cores would improve energy efficiency unless the the operating system kernel is highly parallelized. Maybe it would be more efficient for a heavy SMP workload but then your battery is not lasting anywhere near 10 hours anyway.
There are a lot of processes running simultaneously actually. It's not as if just the main app you're running is the only thing using up CPU cycles.
Well technically none of them are running simultaneously unless they're on different cores. Even if you have many processes active, most of them are sleeping most of the time, which is why you can have 100+ processes active and still have CPU usage under 10%. The OS scheduler will service all of them and still have time to sleep for 9 times as long as it took to service them before it has to do it all again. Word spends most of it's time waiting for a keystroke, safari spends most of it's time waiting for you to request the next site or scroll the page. This is all time the processor can be asleep and saving battery.
If you're exporting video from final cut pro, none of this applies.
edit: not saying you're wrong. I'm just speculating and I'll be interested when there are actual numbers released for eg. Core i5-7500U vs Core i5-8250U
Last edited:
The 8250U is faster than the 7500U in single core (and of course absolutely destroys it in multi-core).
Cool, that's good to hear. I was reading this roundup of thinkpads and it's interesting how much performance can vary when using the same chip with different cooling systems due to throttling.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/A-performance-comparison-of-all-new-ThinkPad-notebooks.286486.0.html
I wonder if it has implications for whether the nTB 13" pro ends up getting a quad core, and if so will it run as fast under sustained load as the TB 13"