2019 13” MBP 1.4ghz quad-core benchmarks?

[0906742]

Nobody else really not seeing any darker shade banding in Lagom gradient test with True Tone ON?
Just open this page with Safari http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/gradient.php. Zoom test image to largest size and dimmer environment to see test pattern clearly. Also Night Shift causes the same thing with my Pro.

I guess mine must be broken if so. My Air has same banding with night shift on but I heard it was normal for that machine.

Could as many as possible with new entry Pro check that so we'll see if mine is broken or this is just normal as in Air 2018.
[doublepost=1563271943][/doublepost]

5. Contrast does seem to my eyes to be a bit lower than the most expensive Pro range or maybe not but I'm fine with this as long as the display is consistent

Black level is pretty similar to Air 2018 but Pro gets a little brighter whites so it has little bit better contrast than Air.

 

[Ploki]

I actually think that the 1.4-3.9Ghz (i5 8257U) chip is a highly binned version of the 2.3-3.8Ghz (i5 8259U) chip running at extremely low voltages.
It’s even more shocking that the 1.4 chip with single fan runs cooler than the 2.3 with dual fans.

You can actually increase performance by doing this Mod (1-2mm thermal pads on the heatsink - will NOT void warranty):

View attachment 848214

Or like this....:

View attachment 848213

I'm happy with it for now since i don't get any dropouts for the workload it gets (Mini is for heavy lifting), but I just find it hard to wrap my head around this.
If the 1.4 were a newer chip I'd buy it, if it's not, i don't get why they just don't make a 4 TB3 port/2 fan version of it since it should boost even higher than the single fan version

 

[0906742]

I took a photo of gradient banding (look at the upper left part of the photo.). Nobody seeing this in their Pro in Lagom gradient test with True Tone ON?

Just open this page with Safari http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/gradient.php
Then zoom it as much as possible to see better.

 

[kp98077]

Further review on temps here.

10 x cinebench r20 runs, averaging a score of 1,583 at 86c. @2.6 - 2.7ghz

Seems like no throttling issues.

https://appleinsider.com/articles/1...ng-in-base-model-mid-2019-13-inch-macbook-pro

that's a nice review by AI!

 

[kp98077]

And you saw nothing even zooming pattern to max size? DO you use 1680x1050 resolution? I have been using that always. Does even toggling night shift on in yours cause any banding in that pattern?

Anyone else with with Pro models especially with FMX panel, please check Lagom gradient test with and without True Tone and also try night shift to see if yours have any banding in that pattern. Mine definitely have. Is my panel then broken? I doubt because my Air has exactly the same problem with night shift on, so I'm afraid it is something similar here too but I want to make sure.

I also just finished testing screen brightness with different settings like night shift on / off between my Air 2018, Entry level Pro and iPad 2018. At least with True Tone off and night shift off my Pro is brightest of them. Not huge difference but it is the brightest. Then with all night shift and True Tone gimmick on difference gets smaller, maybe Pro is still a tiny bit brighter. Definitely that 500nits is possible only without True Tone and night shift on.

I agree with ssd size you said. Like I said in my desktop Windows 256GB ssd has only 72gb data but I got some spare for the future. So yeah, at the moment 128GB is enough for my Pro but I hope it will be in the near future too. I just could not justify myself 256 version price difference, You can buy several name 256 ssd drive with that extra they charge from 128 to 256 Pro versions.

No, but I don't have the best eyes in the world, LOL... maybe a little banding but nothing differently than my 2.4 2019 MBP for example...........maybe try resetting your machine? I had one before that the display looked not right, I reset and colors seemed much better......

 

[0906742]

No, but I don't have the best eyes in the world, LOL... maybe a little banding but nothing differently than my 2.4 2019 MBP for example...........maybe try resetting your machine? I had one before that the display looked not right, I reset and colors seemed much better......

It is not so noticeable especially if not viewing test image zoomed max and in dimly lit room. But I guess you saw something similar to what in the photo I posted (camera changing it a bit but pretty much how it looks).
There is no banding in my machine with TT off, so I hardly think display panel would be broken.
Also I have same issue with my Air when Night Shift is turned on, and I also have that with my new Pro, so NS and TT both individually used cause banding also.

Anyway, it would be interesting if others could also check that test pattern and comment. Thanks!

I finally made some mesurements about panel brightness because I did not believe my tired eyes anymore.
I was using my very old colorimeter that has drifted but I had several machines side by side and I was able to measure difference between them all. In short, yes display in my Pro is the brightest of them all, around maybe 525nits, Air comes to around 425-430nits, iPad 505nits. That was without NS or TT activated. Using TT and or NS drops brightness in all of them (of course) but still Pro is the brightest so that NS on 415 nits while Air 320nits. My Pro with both TT and NS activated is around 370 nits. I guess problem with evaluating display with just naked eye is problem because color temperature is slightly different in all of them and it makes evaluating very difficult. Also room lightning causes problem when comparing them in the dark our eyes compensate and difference may not look so big but today I compared them in bright room with some sunlight difference was clearer, again Pro is the brightest.

 

[alias99]

Nice video here -

Good comparison between the new base vs the 2.4ghz one.

Everything considered including ssd speeds, the new base does a good job. I think its helped me decide which one to get.

 

[lJoSquaredl]

Nice video here -

Good comparison between the new base vs the 2.4ghz one.

Everything considered including ssd speeds, the new base does a good job. I think its helped me decide which one to get.

Damn why the speakers gotta be weaker, that’s like Apples thing is a clear banging set of laptop speakers. Bit of a bummer but that 13 inch baseline is still super tempting right now. Up the SSD and RAM, keep the CPU, get an eGPU for home use and have a nice cheap on the go solution for safer travels

 

[kp98077]

Nice video here -

Good comparison between the new base vs the 2.4ghz one.

Everything considered including ssd speeds, the new base does a good job. I think its helped me decide which one to get.

seems like I made the right choice! I had the $1799 model, but went ultimately with the 1.4/256 and honestly can barely tell a difference, except maybe for the speakers, but to me I don't use my laptop for listening to music all that much... so really the price difference is $1499 vs 1799 like he says....

 

[strangeguy]

Has anyone read yet if the 512gig ssd is also slower than the one in the higher priced model? We already know that the 128 and 256 ones are but I have not yet seen any tests of the 512 one.

 

[garethjs]

No one can say the slower SSD speeds in the 128gb model is justifiable. The writes are basically that of a fusion drive... a reason alone to pay that bit more and get a 256gb model

 

[ghanwani]

The 256 doesn’t do that badly. It has nearly equal write speed, only the read speed is slightly lower.

If someone was OK with a 2 year old machine they likely won’t even notice.

 

[09872738]

The 256 doesn’t do that badly. It has nearly equal write speed, only the read speed is slightly lower.

If someone was OK with a 2 year old machine they likely won’t even notice.

I agree. However, the upgrade price (250 over here) from 128 G to 256 G is - again - off the scale expensive. We're not even talking top notch SSDs any more, we arrived in central mediocre land with these ones.

256 G should be standard anyways in a 1500 currency unit device.

 

[ghanwani]

I agree. However, the upgrade price (250 over here) from 128 G to 256 G is - again - off the scale expensive. We're not even talking top notch SSDs any more, we arrived in central mediocre land with these ones.

256 G should be standard anyways in a 1500 currency unit device.

Totally agree but Apple has to ding us at every place they can. I don’t know who is buying the min spec machines since most colleges tend to recommend at least 256 GB and all the machines in the local Apple store on display were 256 GB with 100+ GB in use.

 

[kp98077]

Totally agree but Apple has to ding us at every place they can. I don’t know who is buying the min spec machines since most colleges tend to recommend at least 256 GB and all the machines in the local Apple store on display were 256 GB with 100+ GB in use.

surprising last weekend at the apple store, most people I saw were buying the 128 which I thought was strange too, several teachers, etc.... they just said they use the "cloud" which I get I do and have a TON of stuff including 18,000 photos and still at 175 of 156 gb....so plenty to go!

 

[ghanwani]

surprising last weekend at the apple store, most people I saw were buying the 128 which I thought was strange too, several teachers, etc.... they just said they use the "cloud" which I get I do and have a TON of stuff including 18,000 photos and still at 175 of 156 gb....so plenty to go!

I have no experience with it but I'm guessing they must be used to waiting for their files to open, instead of having them open near-instantaneously. Compared to that the difference in the read speed of 2TB vs 4TB models is miniscule.

 

[kp98077]

I have no experience with it but I'm guessing they must be used to waiting for their files to open, instead of having them open near-instantaneously. Compared to that the difference in the read speed of 2TB vs 4TB models is miniscule.

LOL! well, I have as well the 2.4 model so the (top line) 2019, and I can tell you there is basically no difference in how files open, get read etc....and I think the video you attached earlier confirms most of this. So unless you have 1TB then I guess... lol, I am not patient, but not for this $$$$

 

[fokmik]

seems like I made the right choice! I had the $1799 model, but went ultimately with the 1.4/256 and honestly can barely tell a difference, except maybe for the speakers, but to me I don't use my laptop for listening to music all that much... so really the price difference is $1499 vs 1799 like he says....

So, the diff you get for that 300$ are
-double amount and better SSD
-slightly better speakers
-slightly better cpu/igpu
-double the amount of ports/tb3


I still think just for 500$ more, to have double the ports/ssd space is worthy but again ,everybody knows his workflow

 

[Howard2k]

So, the diff you get for that 300$ are
-double amount and better SSD
-slightly better speakers
-slightly better cpu/igpu
-double the amount of ports/tb3


I still think just for 300$ more to have double the ports/ssd space is worthy but again ,everybody knows his workflow

And 50% faster wifi.

 

[ghanwani]

So, the diff you get for that 300$ are
-double amount and better SSD
-slightly better speakers
-slightly better cpu/igpu
-double the amount of ports/tb3


I still think just for 300$ more to have double the ports/ssd space is worthy but again ,everybody knows his workflow

You get the same size SSD, just slightly faster. If you go with 1/2 the SSD price difference is $500.

 

[kp98077]

So, the diff you get for that 300$ are
-double amount and better SSD
-slightly better speakers
-slightly better cpu/igpu
-double the amount of ports/tb3


I still think just for 300$ more to have double the ports/ssd space is worthy but again ,everybody knows his workflow

Nice screen name btw
No, I think you are mis interpreting the video. For $300 you get maybe a 5-8% increase. Not double or near SSD. It obviously depends if that $300
Is worth it to you .... me, no I dont keep them over two years.

 

[lJoSquaredl]

And 50% faster wifi.

Whats up with the wifi? It's listed as the same under tech specs on Apple's site.

 

[Howard2k]

Whats up with the wifi? It's listed as the same under tech specs on Apple's site.

Apple's tech specs are crap, they just provide the bare minimum information. I'm not sure why it's so hard to find good info.

Both are 802.11ac, but all the MBPros from 2015 onwards have been 3x3 antenna systems, except for the nTB and 1.4 TB, which are 2x2. If all you're doing is surfing the net then there's not likely to be a huge difference as the Internet connection is more likely to be your bottleneck. 3x3 means you have an extra antenna. In close proximity to a capable router with 3x3 you can get 1.3Gb/s, vs. 867Mb/s on 2x2.

But if you are using a super fast Internet connection and/or if you're using a local network for storing files, backups, etc., the difference might be more noticeable.

The Air is also 2x2.
The 12" MacBooks were 3x3 IIRC.

 

[lJoSquaredl]

867Mb/s on 2x2

Yeah I wouldn't think that'd be an issue for around here or most places in the states at least. I'm barely scraping 200Mb/s and people say my internet is the best they've ever heard of. Maybe a few specific cities but

 

[Howard2k]

Yeah I wouldn't think that'd be an issue for around here or most places in the states at least. I'm barely scraping 200Mb/s and people say my internet is the best they've ever heard of. Maybe a few specific cities but

Yeah for sure. I only have 40Mb/s downstream Internet.
But I do use NAS for external storage so for that reason I'll take the extra 50%.
Certainly 2x2 doesn't suck. Even that's better than some competitors notebooks with 1x1.

There is the argument that it provides "longer range" too. It actually doesn't provide longer range, but it means that as you move further away from the access point you maintain a higher speed.