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.
Apple Launches Retina MacBook Pros with Faster Haswell Processors, More RAM Standard
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My mid-2010 MBP should get me through another year or two, running the Yosemite beta pretty well. This update isn't impressive enough to upgrade.
I'd wait, honestly.
If you had bought a model with too little RAM, or too small of an SSD, then possibly. But you specified "high end", so that shouldn't be a problem.
Compared to the high end 2012 model, then, this update's high end has a slightly faster processor (but not all that much faster, because the newer Haswell architecture in the 2013 and 2014 models was mostly designed to improve battery life rather than speed), and a 750m graphics card vs a 650m.
The difference between the 750m and the 650m is surprisingly small, because they both use the Kepler architecture. NVIDIA increases the first number in their graphics cards every year (in this case, 6 to 7), regardless or not of if it's actually a major advance.
So all in all, the difference between the 2012 rMBP and the 2014 rMBP is a pretty minor spec boost, to be honest.
Next year, though, looks to be quite a bit different. Intel's finally due to release it's long awaited Broadwell architecture, which will be about 40% faster than Haswell. In addition, this update also means that Apple will have to completely update the internals of the rMBP, which means it is incredibly likely that the ageing 750m will be replaced by a GeForce 800- or 900-series GPU, based on the updated Maxwell architecture (which is both a third faster and much, much more power efficient, meaning a better battery life).
In addition to all of that, next year's update will probably be big enough to feature in a keynote, which usually means updates to the I/O, SSD, price, RAM etc. Apple loves to look good on stage. In any case, that's an all-round upgrade.
So if I were you, I'd definitely wait. This generation isn't much better than the one you have, and it's virtually indistinguishable from last year, meaning that you may as well have updated last year instead, which defeats the point of waiting two years for better tech. But that's just me.
So are you suggesting I take my iMac to my clients every day? 32GB is NOT a lot if you want to run multiple VMs.
I need to replicate my customer's environments and typically have a Domain controller, database server and an application server running on my 16GB Macbook Pro, plus sometimes one or two workstation images. I've been postponing building a SharePoint 2013 dev environment, since minimal memory requirement is 24GB. I know that's insane, but I need to be able to run it regardless. And this is today. 2 years from now 32GB may not even be enough.
- Apple won't release redesigns without new CPU tech, only as Broadwell, etc.
- 32 GB of RAM isn't physically possible within the rMPB, only with DDR4.
- The 850m requires slight changes within the rMBP, unlike the new CPU's which are hot-swapabble due to the variety of clock speeds they offer. This is why the 750m is still used.
P.S - I'm glad at the high cost that 16 GB of RAM is a given, some areas in technology aren't evolving fast enough IMHO.
- 32 GB of RAM isn't physically possible within the rMPB, only with DDR4.
- The 850m requires slight changes within the rMBP, unlike the new CPU's which are hot-swapabble due to the variety of clock speeds they offer. This is why the 750m is still used.
P.S - I'm glad at the high cost that 16 GB of RAM is a given, some areas in technology aren't evolving fast enough IMHO.
Typo: the $1799 13" is i5, not i7 - the i7 is BTO for another 200 bucks.
Wake me up when the 1TB SSD is a bit more affordable.
IMO, they could've been a bit more bold with this update.
Storage should be 256GB/512GB/1TB and 512GB/1TB. 128GB are ridiculous on a "Pro" machine.
The RAM upgrade was nice though.
Oh and prices in Portugal remained the same.
Storage should be 256GB/512GB/1TB and 512GB/1TB. 128GB are ridiculous on a "Pro" machine.
The RAM upgrade was nice though.
Oh and prices in Portugal remained the same.
Last edited:
The need for RAM applications is not changing so fast...So if you really need at least 32GB you can go with 17" laptops and no need for VMs
In the UK/EU, you get two years warranty under consumer law providing criteria is met, so if you buy from Apple, you're covered. But again, that's only two years. Anything after, claiming free repair in the UK '6 years of service' becomes a little more tricky and you'd have to prove the issue was present at point of delivery. It's on Apples site http://www.apple.com/uk/legal/statutory-warranty/
A fusion drive is both an SSD and a spinning HD.
Basic stuff that should be in the mbp's.
SSD for OS and apps and spinning HD for data.
Until everyone can afford the 1TB+ SSD's ofc.
Blame Apple for taking out the superdrive and making it thinner instead of sticking in an SSD+HD combo (i.e. Fusion Drive)
If all you do is surf the web and check your emails then ya, sure, a single small SSD will be fine for you.
I make music and video.
I already have to keep offloading my music, video and photo's onto an external drive every few months with my current 256GB SSD + 1.5TB HD late 2011 mbp.
...and don't start going on about the "average consumer". This is meant to be a Pro laptop.
If you are a pro you're going to have multiple external hard drives. 128 GB for a pro consumer is perfect.
Well, I need one.
I work in a school and being able to play songs from CDs requires a drive, and I like to rip DVDs as it's way cheaper than renting.
I have 250GB of music, not much by titles but all aiffs. I have kids so 250GB of photos. 70GB for my graphics and website design stuff. 30GB of apps. 600GB total.
So, to be able to access all my stuff in one package whenever I want to would cost me using "that old thing" $1,249 (8GB/1TB/Education discount).
To buy the retina equivalent would cost $2,228 (8GB, 1TB, USB super drive/education discount).
Thats as good as double.
My intention a few years back when I last bought a macbook was to replace it with what ever entry level macbook they had that did the job after about 2 years, so always having a machine that would more that adequately do all I wished.
This machine sadly has not been upgraded in anyway. On the plus side neither has it been deleted.
The whole purpose of a laptop to me is for one single unit that slips into a bag. A portable computer no less. Not having to carry about an external CD reader, an external drive for photos and so on.
For $2.300 I can buy a macbook for myself AND my daughter.
Maybe I am the only one in this position. Who knows. But I hope apple continues with the macbook pro.
Tim
This is great. As the RAM is non-upgradable, including the maximum 16GB as standard and either cutting the price/keeping it the same is a very welcome move.
This'd make the stock high-end 15" perfect for me now. Just I can't justify the upgrade yet and may change to an iMac for my audio work (although I had this exact deliberation last time, and that the MBPs were the first Macs to get i7 processors swung my decision).
This'd make the stock high-end 15" perfect for me now. Just I can't justify the upgrade yet and may change to an iMac for my audio work (although I had this exact deliberation last time, and that the MBPs were the first Macs to get i7 processors swung my decision).
A fusion drive is both an SSD and a spinning HD.
Basic stuff that should be in the mbp's.
SSD for OS and apps and spinning HD for data.
Until everyone can afford the 1TB+ SSD's ofc.
Blame Apple for taking out the superdrive and making it thinner instead of sticking in an SSD+HD combo (i.e. Fusion Drive)
If all you do is surf the web and check your emails then ya, sure, a single small SSD will be fine for you.
I make music and video.
I already have to keep offloading my music, video and photo's onto an external drive every few months with my current 256GB SSD + 1.5TB HD late 2011 mbp.
...and don't start going on about the "average consumer". This is meant to be a Pro laptop.
You are jesting right? A Fusion drive would be much much slower than a pure SSD. Fusion drives are more like HDD with larger cache which will suffer from many misses if you ever want to try something new.
SSDs are the future and spinning drives are on their way out, even in servers. Deal with it.
If you really a 'pro' at video and music production then you'd be able to afford a 1TB SSD easily or a thunderbolt raid or even a mac pro.
I'm happy with this. I needed a MBP for uni this September and a minor speed bump + £100 off every model I would consider purchasing is excellent.
Now all I need to do is decide between 13" high-end or 15" low-end.
Losing the portability and sacrificing half the SSD space against more real estate + Iris Pro + extra 8GB of RAM is a tricky balance!
Now all I need to do is decide between 13" high-end or 15" low-end.
Losing the portability and sacrificing half the SSD space against more real estate + Iris Pro + extra 8GB of RAM is a tricky balance!
I agree that 16 is bare minimum for running several VM's while still keeping the Mac apps available. You seem to do similar work for your clients as I do for mine and I really wanted to get a rMBP with at least 32GB of RAM.
I have been eyeing the W540 from Lenovo for a while and their spec's are good for this type of work but I really don't want to have to carry two laptops everywhere. Apple, give me 32GB for the Pro.
I have a gut feeling that this dependency upon Intel for CPU's will only hasten Apple's transition to their own chip foundry. I don't see Apple relying on a supplier who cannot meet their deadlines or timelines for much longer. I'd hate to see the first iteration, but maybe an A10 CPU in a rMBP may not be so difficult to imagine. I really don't care as long as I can run all of my apps. I cannot afford any downtime in supporting my clients.
Why would they update the design now? Surely if that's going happen it will be at a media event when they announce new Broadwell machines.
