Apple May Have Considered Releasing a 2018 MacBook Air With Faster Core i7 Processor

[MacRumors]

While the new MacBook Air with a Retina display can only be configured with one processor option, a 1.6GHz dual-core eighth-generation Intel Core i5 processor, Apple may have prototyped a faster version too.

A benchmark result on Geekbench last week has surfaced via Slashleaks for an unreleased Mac, codenamed AAPJ140K1,1, powered by a dual-core eighth-generation Core i7 processor with a base clock speed of 1.8GHz. The exact model is not listed, but its logic board has the same part number as the new MacBook Air.

As further evidence, the benchmark result lists 16GB of 2133 MHz LPDDR3 RAM, an existing upgrade option for the new MacBook Air. And the Core i7-8510Y appears to be part of Intel's low-power Amber Lake lineup, as is the Core i5 in the new MacBook Air, although it's not listed on Intel's ARK database.

The apparent MacBook Air with a Core i7 chip has a multi-core score of 8,553 on Geekbench, which would make it roughly 8.5 percent faster than the average multi-core score of the existing option with a Core i5.

Geekbench founder John Poole told MacRumors that nothing about the benchmark result looks fake to him, although that possibility can't be entirely ruled out. If real, however, it suggests that a 2018 MacBook Air with a Core i7 exists within Apple, but obviously hasn't been released to the public.

It's reasonable to assume that Apple prototypes several different versions of its products, and not all of them see the light of day. Why the MacBook Air with a Core i7 wasn't released is anyone's guess -- maybe it ran too hot, or Apple elected to keep the dual-core Core i7 a MacBook Pro option, or something else.

If Apple does plan to add the Core i7 as an upgrade option for the new MacBook Air, it's hard to envision that it would do so anytime soon considering the notebook was just refreshed. Apple has bumped up the MacBook Air's processor mid-product-cycle in the past, though, so there is some precedence for the move.

All in all, there is possibly a new MacBook Air with a Core i7 in the wild that Apple decided not to ship or may ship at a later date.

Article Link: Apple May Have Considered Releasing a 2018 MacBook Air With Faster Core i7 Processor

 

[Smeaton1724]

March 2019. Release the i7 option starting at 1599, discontinue the Non-Touchbar Macbook Pro.

Macbook 12'' M3 Dual Core 256GB 1249
Macbook Air 13.3'' i5 Dual Core 128GB 1199
Macbook Air 13.3'' i5 Dual Core 256GB 1399
Macbook Air 13.3'' i7 Dual Core 256GB 1599
Macbook Pro 13.3'' i5 Quad Core 256GB 1799
Macbook Pro 15'' i7 Hexa Core 256GB 2399

For me the 128GB MBA model shouldn't exist, it's just too low an amount of storage for that price, although the alternative option is to pay another 200! Looks good for marketing though ''The MBA 2018 only 1199 with a retina screen''.

 

[Jonathan Thomas Harpur]

I would consider a new MacBook Air over a pro if they did bring out a I7 version

 

[macduke]

It is still miserably slow compared to even the iPad Pro, much less the MacBook Pro. Apple could literally drop in an A12X as-is and blow away that i7 with much longer battery life, and I can't even begin to imagine what a chip designed specifically for the Mac would bench at. I'm really starting to think that next year is a bad time for me to upgrade my Mac unless they drop Intel earlier than expected.

 

[CWallace]

Going to hazard a guess the i7-8510Y was not ready for volume production in the time frame Apple needed to meet the launch date. So maybe early next year it will become an option.

 

[NutsNGum]

Still ludicrously overpriced for the spec.

 

[Dean Yu]

Clearly a fake benchmark done by a hakintosh laptop with Amberlake i7. There is no iBridge information in BIOS section where any T2 Mac would mention it.

 

[TehFalcon]

March 2019. Release the i7 option starting at 1599, discontinue the Non-Touchbar Macbook Pro.

Macbook 12'' M3 Dual Core 256GB 1249
Macbook Air 13.3'' i5 Dual Core 128GB 1199
Macbook Air 13.3'' i5 Dual Core 256GB 1399
Macbook Air 13.3'' i7 Dual Core 256GB 1599
Macbook Pro 13.3'' i5 Quad Core 256GB 1799
Macbook Pro 15'' i7 Hexa Core 256GB 2399

For me the 128GB MBA model shouldn't exist, it's just too low an amount of storage for that price, although the alternative option is to pay another 200! Looks good for marketing though ''The MBA 2018 only 1199 with a retina screen''.

MacBook 12" should be 1099 or 999. It's in no way better than the 128GB Air other than storage.

 

[Wags]

So what would Apple charge for this upgraded ‘entry level’ MBA. $1599 to $1699 with 256 model.

 

[dsraj]

The article says it is roughly 8.5% faster than the current i5 version. That is not a significant difference to warrant the release of another processor option.

 

[Sasparilla]

If it was a quad core i7 they'd tested, then I'd really stand up and take notice...but going from 1.6Ghz to 1.8Ghz...eh..

At this point Macbook's and Airs should all be quad core with Pro's being more. It's so far behind the phones at this point that have quads I believe (including the $750 Xr).

Amazing Intel has blown it (their manufacturing process stuck at 14nm) for so long that we're expecting dual core laptops these days.

 

[Ries]

Icelake 4c8t 15inch, no gimmick bar MacBook Air please!

 

[Bacillus]

Welcome to Immediate Obsoletion:
Products becoming underdimensioned not to disrupt or obsolete other products (MacBook)

This earmarks a new tragic episode in stalemate Mac innovation

 

[AngerDanger]

Just think of the milliseconds that could be saved performing tasks on this unreleased MacBook…

 

[ikramerica]

Performance gain likely wasn’t worth the head issues.

As for A12x MacBook. Would be nice if they doubled the cores and upped the graphics (P series for Pro?). Then, even with Roseta 2.0 running translation for Intel apps, would be faster than most machines out there.

Problem Apple would Face is that pro apps that exist because of the intel chip would fade away, as coding and compiling for P-series would add cost to development for a smaller installed base.

 

[Smeaton1724]

MacBook 12" should be 1099 or 999. It's in no way better than the 128GB Air other than storage.

Footprint and weight are big selling points. I have the Macbook and wouldn't consider the new Air, I would have gone with the Pro but I hate the touchbar, I had one in 2016-2017 and didn't use it much at all and went with the smaller footprint due to travelling alot. The Macbook is closer to the iPad Pro, the Macbook Air is closer to the Macbook Pro.

As for pricing, couldn't that be said about - iMacs that still ship with HDD's and havent been updated, Mac Mini with 128GB storage, iPhone Xs, iPhone XR, Macbook Pro 15's. In-fact what isn't overpriced by 150-250, maybe Airpods and the normal iPad 9.7?

 

[ncmrnc]

I don't see how this could be a production issue on Intel's part this late into the life cycle.
I would bet it is so that it doesn't cannibalise Pro sales given it's exact screen size. Although the screen is calibrated differently, Apple's strategy of late seems they want people to choose Pro models over others, possibly better ROI.

 

[JPack]

I'm sure Apple considered it, but it would compete with the MacBook Pro.

The Retina display already encroaches on MacBook Pro territory. Given Apple's love for feature rationing in several of their product lines, I'm not surprised the final decision came down to 1.6 GHz. I wouldn't be surprised if a 1.4 GHz version of the Air comes out later for $1,099.

 

[TehFalcon]

Footprint and weight are big selling points. I have the Macbook and wouldn't consider the new Air, I would have gone with the Pro but I hate the touchbar, I had one in 2016-2017 and didn't use it much at all and went with the smaller footprint due to travelling alot. The Macbook is closer to the iPad Pro, the Macbook Air is closer to the Macbook Pro.

As for pricing, couldn't that be said about - iMacs that still ship with HDD's and havent been updated, Mac Mini with 128GB storage, iPhone Xs, iPhone XR, Macbook Pro 15's. In-fact what isn't overpriced by 150-250, maybe Airpods and the normal iPad 9.7?

Well considering the design is nearly identical, minus it being an inch bigger of a screen, portability really isn't that much different now. Don't get me wrong, I have a 12" MacBook and love it, but it lacks the power and touch ID that the air has and should then be priced lower. I can't see something an inch smaller, less powerful, and less secure selling for $100 more.

The move would only make more sense since the 11" MBA is gone which was the lowest priced Apple laptop.
[doublepost=1541783968][/doublepost]

I'm sure Apple considered it, but it would compete with the MacBook Pro.

The Retina display already encroaches on MacBook Pro territory. Given Apple's love for feature rationing in several of their product lines, I'm not surprised the final decision came down to 1.6 GHz. I wouldn't be surprised if a 1.4 GHz version of the Air comes out later for $1,099.

The i7 is still a low power dual core, in no way would it really compete with the MacBook Pro.

 

[JPack]

The i7 is still a low power dual core, in no way would it really compete with the MacBook Pro.

Consumers look at GHz, because it's what Apple advertises.

Air: dual-core 1.8 GHz i7
MBP: dual-core 2.3 GHz i5

It competes heavily with the Pro.

 

[TehFalcon]

Consumers look at GHz, because it's what Apple advertises.

Air: dual-core 1.8 GHz i7
MBP: dual-core 2.3 GHz i5

It competes heavily with the Pro.

Except that the i5 is not a low power one, performs alot better. The GHz is also higher on the MBP so I fail to see what you mean by that?

 

[shareef777]

It is still miserably slow compared to even the iPad Pro, much less the MacBook Pro. Apple could literally drop in an A12X as-is and blow away that i7 with much longer battery life, and I can't even begin to imagine what a chip designed specifically for the Mac would bench at. I'm really starting to think that next year is a bad time for me to upgrade my Mac unless they drop Intel earlier than expected.

Then just get the iPad Pro and be done with it. Why cripple the laptop line with the A12X and the limited OS that would go along with that.

 

[PatriotInvasion]

If those benchmarks are accurate, it looks like the Single Core is on par or a bit slower than most of the i5 benchmarks and the Multi Core score increase is minor enough that doesn't seem all that worth it. Either way, wouldn't be shocking if the i7 option is added at any point over the coming months for those that think they'll get a benefit.

 

[pweicks]

They’ll give the enthusiasts six months to buy their maxed out i5 models and then they’ll release this mysterious i7 model to make them all feel like they gotta get that one instead. This has been Apple’s marketing strategy with their Mac lineup for the past few years, whether intentional or not. I’m sure they’ll just blame it on Intel for not being able to keep up with their upgrade cycles as usual... You’d wonder why the heck Apple would ever opt to move to their in-house ARM and away from Intel when they can always just use Intel as an excuse for upgrading their Macs every few months.

 

[PatriotInvasion]

If those benchmarks are accurate, it looks like the Single Core is on par or a bit slower than most of the i5 benchmarks and the Multi Core score increase is minor enough that doesn't seem all that worth it. Either way, wouldn't be shocking if the i7 option is added at any point over the coming months for those that think they'll get a benefit.