Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

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

One guess is that they looked at the price to performance ratio and the value just wasn’t there. Maybe the significant price increase that the i7 chip would involve, for only an 8.5% performance boost, didn’t seem worth it to them. Especially for the intended audience and use cases for the MacBook Air. It isn’t a Pro machine.
[doublepost=1541837369][/doublepost]
pweicks said:
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.
Click to expand...
Or... rather than viewing what Apple says cynically, maybe take them at their word? Why assume that they want an excuse to eek out Mac updates? It might be that they are just as frustrated as we are, and don’t want their product development to be hamstrung by another company’s lack of innovation.

Personally, I look forward to what time where Apple is able to offer more frequent product updates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: raybo
pweicks said:
So you now realize that you were wrong about only ONE release every year? Now you’re gonna admit it’s “close to” one release every year? I never insinuated 180 day cycles. The average is *below* one year, which means two releases per a year on average. Which means that what I said was true. Which supports the idea that Apple has been milkin it with their MBP lineup. And you’re welcome. Glad I could help clear things up for you.
Click to expand...

  • MacBook Pro (15-inch Mid/Late 2007)
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch Early 2008)
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch, Late 2008)
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch, Mid 2009)
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch, Mid 2010)
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch, Early 2011)
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch, Late 2011) ***
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch, Mid 2012)
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2012)
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Early 2013) ***
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Late 2013)
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2014) ***
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2015)
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Late 2016)
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2017)
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2018)
That's twelve calendar years and 16 models. Three of them (***) were definitely only speed bumps (same CPU generation, no changes to features and exterior). The parallel release of an updated non-retina MBP and the retina MBP in 2012 can also not really be counted as two separate refreshes. That leaves us with twelve 'full' refreshes in twelve years plus three speed bumps.

Or said differently, a refresh cycle of 12 months and if we include the speed bumps, an average cycle of 9.6 months.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AnonMac50 and shareef777
macduke said:
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.
Click to expand...
There's zero reason for Apple to downgrade Macs to mobile processors. A laptop processor will always be drastically faster than a tablet processor, because the die is larger. Tablets use cellphone processors because they don't have any cooling and throttle easily.

The only reason that A12/A12X is pretty fast because it is 7nm tech. Even Intel's 14nm i7 laptop processors are faster than the 7nm A12X though. A laptop processor at 7nm would smoke anything you could put in an tablet to the point of embarrassment.
 
AgentAnonymous said:
There's zero reason for Apple to downgrade Macs to mobile processors. A laptop processor will always be drastically faster than a tablet processor, because the die is larger. Tablets use cellphone processors because they don't have any cooling and throttle easily.
Click to expand...
The 12" MB also has 'no cooling' (ie, no fans).
 
sidewinder3000 said:
One guess is that they looked at the price to performance ratio and the value just wasn’t there. Maybe the significant price increase that the i7 chip would involve, for only an 8.5% performance boost, didn’t seem worth it to them. Especially for the intended audience and use cases for the MacBook Air. It isn’t a Pro machine.
[doublepost=1541837369][/doublepost]
Or... rather than viewing what Apple says cynically, maybe take them at their word? Why assume that they want an excuse to eek out Mac updates? It might be that they are just as frustrated as we are, and don’t want their product development to be hamstrung by another company’s lack of innovation.

Personally, I look forward to what time where Apple is able to offer more frequent product updates.
Click to expand...
The way I look at it, Apple use to put out solid updates and covered all their bases when they did it. When they updated a machine, it was a big step forward and you knew you had a great machine when you bought it on launch day. Now it seems like they’re just spitting out half-baked updates that don’t have much thought put to them and are of little improvement compared to their predecessors. I think most people can agree that the new design they have come up with since 2016 hasn’t been a favorable one. Thinner isn’t always better.
 
pweicks said:
The way I look at it, Apple use to put out solid updates and covered all their bases when they did it. When they updated a machine, it was a big step forward and you knew you had a great machine when you bought it on launch day. Now it seems like they’re just spitting out half-baked updates that don’t have much thought put to them and are of little improvement compared to their predecessors. I think most people can agree that the new design they have come up with since 2016 hasn’t been a favorable one. Thinner isn’t always better.
Click to expand...
I’m pretty sure the reason some of these last Apple Mac updates - which I agree are half baked - are because Intel’s chip development process is literally years behind now. Remember, the original Intel roadmap had 10 nm in mainstream products in volume by 2016. As it stands now the expectation is 2019 or 2020.

Meanwhile Apple is already there (TSMC 7 nm, which is roughly equivalent) with their own A12 and A12X chips.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pweicks
manu chao said:
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch Mid/Late 2007)
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch Early 2008)
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch, Late 2008)
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch, Mid 2009)
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch, Mid 2010)
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch, Early 2011)
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch, Late 2011) ***
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch, Mid 2012)
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2012)
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Early 2013) ***
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Late 2013)
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2014) ***
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2015)
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Late 2016)
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2017)
  • MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2018)
That's twelve calendar years and 16 models. Three of them (***) were definitely only speed bumps (same CPU generation, no changes to features and exterior). The parallel release of an updated non-retina MBP and the retina MBP in 2012 can also not really be counted as two separate refreshes. That leaves us with twelve 'full' refreshes in twelve years plus three speed bumps.

Or said differently, a refresh cycle of 12 months and if we include the speed bumps, an average cycle of 9.6 months.
Click to expand...
If doesn’t matter if they’re just minor updates or big releases. It still proves my point that Apple has been updating on average more often than a year and a minor speed bump is enough for many of enthusiasts to feel like they have to upgrade, therefore making Apple more money. The 2016 design and since has been plagued with sporadic and irregular updates due to apples lack of engineering. Year-old CPUs, broken keyboards, underpowered GPUs. The new space gray models are what I’m referring to. In my opinion, previous to that, the Mac was fine besides its GPUs being on the weaker side. But when they released a new model you knew it was a solid new choice to purchase. Apple decided to follow the same path they did with the iPhone, with the Mac, trying to make it as thin as paper, and not prioritizing the quality and specs of their machines.
[doublepost=1541858134][/doublepost]
EugW said:
I’m pretty sure the reason some of these last Apple Mac updates - which I agree are half baked - are because Intel’s chip development process is literally years behind now. Remember, the original Intel roadmap had 10 nm in mainstream products in volume by 2016. As it stands now the expectation is 2019 or 2020.

Meanwhile Apple is already there (TSMC 7 nm, which is roughly equivalent) with their own A12 and A12X chips.
Click to expand...
I said the same thing in my initial comment. Totally agree with you. But I’m sure Apple has been taking advantage of Intel’s lack of schedule-keeping as an excuse to make more often and sporadic updates. More money for Cook and getting closer to 2 trillion one MBP at a time. And I’m sure if they weren’t so worried about thinness, they could have sunk some more powerful CPUs (even though they’d be older gen still) into the new MBPs that would have made them much more future-proof.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AnonMac50
What if Apple discontinues the nTB MacBook Pro and introduces a new MacBook Air that has similar or better specs than the nTB MacBook Pro. Raise the price by a $100 if needed, would still be a bring in lots of buyers I think. At this point, I think most people wouldn’t mind buying the nTB MBP over a MBA, or at least would think twice about buying a MBA once the MBP is in the picture.
 
EugW said:
What are you trying to do for hours that is a heavy power draw on a MacBook Air?
Click to expand...

30~ Chrome tabs.

FYI I ran Geekbench with nothing open on battery power and got a better single-core result but worse multi-core result than on power so I again don't think it's a good real world comparison.
 
Jonathan Thomas Harpur said:
I would consider a new MacBook Air over a pro if they did bring out a I7 version :)
Click to expand...

With what is apparently a 20% slower processor?
[doublepost=1541881843][/doublepost]
pweicks said:
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.
Click to expand...

“Enthusiasts” and “MacBook air” should not go in the same sentence. Unless they’re the enthusiasts of overpaying for substandard performance, in which case they’re being served well.
?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CWallace said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yup. Intel seems to be having a hard time shipping this generation in volume.
 
AppleHaterLover said:
With what is apparently a 20% slower processor?
[doublepost=1541881843][/doublepost]

“Enthusiasts” and “MacBook air” should not go in the same sentence. Unless they’re the enthusiasts of overpaying for substandard performance, in which case they’re being served well.
[doublepost=1541881999][/doublepost]

Could you please elaborate on how a computer with what’s apparently top of the line hardware will be outdated in two years?
Click to expand...
Enthusiasts as in those who purchase a brand new model the day that it launches. And the specs won’t be outdated. The machine will just cease to function properly because it runs on a more opened OS compared to MacOS.
 
pweicks said:
So you now realize that you were wrong about only ONE release every year? Now you’re gonna admit it’s “close to” one release every year? I never insinuated 180 day cycles.
Click to expand...

Yes, you did.

"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."

pweicks said:
The average is *below* one year,
Click to expand...

That's technically true but quite misleading.

There are very few recent examples of more than one update in a year, and your original post about a "marketing strategy" is bollocks.
[doublepost=1541888451][/doublepost]
MX20 said:
The Intel Kaby-Lake R CPU is supposed to be inside 2018 MacBook Air that offer superior performance without the trade off of a great battery like every other 2018 ultrabook that came out by the end of 2017.
Click to expand...

They could've done that, but it would've drawn more power and made the chassis thicker. If you want a more powerful CPU, that option already exists; it's called the MacBook Pro.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
chucker23n1 said:
Yes, you did.

"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."



That's technically true but quite misleading.

There are very few recent examples of more than one update in a year, and your original post about a "marketing strategy" is bollocks.
[doublepost=1541888451][/doublepost]

They could've done that, but it would've drawn more power and made the chassis thicker. If you want a more powerful CPU, that option already exists; it's called the MacBook Pro.
[doublepost=1541888539][/doublepost]

You don't seem to be enjoying your $700 laptop a lot, though.
Click to expand...
They’re adding the option to build MBPs with Vega graphics next month, which is December, right in the middle of the holidays. That’s not marketing strategy?? They could have released them with that option to begin with, but instead they’ll wait til the month of Christmas to add it on.
 
pweicks said:
They’re adding the option to build MBPs with Vega graphics next month, which is December, right in the middle of the holidays. That’s not marketing strategy?? They could have released them with that option to begin with, but instead they’ll wait til the month of Christmas to add it on.
Click to expand...

The MBPs were already a bit late, and Vega Mobile wasn’t even announced until last week. So no, they couldn’t.
 
chucker23n1 said:
The MBPs were already a bit late, and Vega Mobile wasn’t even announced until last week. So no, they couldn’t.
Click to expand...
It still shows that they had the ability to put more powerful cards in their machines to begin with, which is one of the MBP’s weakest points.
 
chucker23n1 said:
They could've done that, but it would've drawn more power and made the chassis thicker. If you want a more powerful CPU, that option already exists; it's called the MacBook Pro.
[doublepost=1541888539][/doublepost]
Click to expand...

Disagree with that because there is a fan inside the 2018 MacBook Air and it's capable of using a better CPU for $1199 and the MacBook Pro non-touch bar model isn't supposed to classify as Pro with a dual core CPU.
 
Was going to get the pro 15 but since the new Air came out I was considering it but need a little more than the 1.6 and 16gm ram so I guess pro it is.
 
MX20 said:
Disagree with that because there is a fan inside the 2018 MacBook Air and it's capable of using a better CPU for $1199
Click to expand...

Apple is currently looking for 219 Mac hardware engineers. Knock yourself out! https://jobs.apple.com/en-us/search...arning-HRDWR-MCHLN+industrial-design-DESGN-ID

MX20 said:
and the MacBook Pro non-touch bar model isn't supposed to classify as Pro with a dual core CPU.
Click to expand...

There isn’t a suitable newer Intel chip to bring it to four cores at this point.
 
FrostyF said:
What's wrong with the quad-core i5 processor found in the 2018 touchbar model?
Click to expand...
Different class of chip.

The quad i5-8259U in the Touch Bar MacBook Pro has a 28 Watt TDP.
The dual i5-7360U in the non-Touch Bar MacBook Pro has a 15 Watt TDP.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back