Are the non-touchbar MBPs upgraded to kaby lake as well?

[Xil3]

The processors are clocked so differently, that it's tough to tell sometimes.

Based on the article, it indicates that they are, but I wanted to make sure. Other than the lower clocking, and lack of touchbar (which I think is useless), are there any negatives about it? Does it have the same fast SSDs?

 

[Mr Retina]

They failed to mention that the nTB model Is only cheaper because the gutted the SSD size down to 128GB instead of the previous standard of 256GB.

 

[Xil3]

Yeah, I customized the higher end nTB MBP (bumped up to 512 SSD and 16GB RAM), and it pushed the price up a lot (in-between the lower and higher end TB version.

I'm also curious, the nTB has "2.3GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor", and cannot be customized to use the same as the TB version (3.1GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor). That's what makes me question if the nTB is even kaby lake. Is it just using a much lower end chip that cannot be clocked anywhere near?

 

[slipper]

I'm also curious to know

 

[NathanD]

Yeah, I customized the higher end nTB MBP (bumped up to 512 SSD and 16GB RAM), and it pushed the price up a lot (in-between the lower and higher end TB version.

I'm also curious, the nTB has "2.3GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor", and cannot be customized to use the same as the TB version (3.1GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor). That's what makes me question if the nTB is even kaby lake. Is it just using a much lower end chip that cannot be clocked anywhere near?

The nTB uses a 15W CPU with Intel Iris 640 graphics, whereas the TB MBP uses a 28W CPU with Intel Iris 650. They're both Kaby Lake but they're not the same.

 

[PaulKemp]

The nTB would be the option for me, if it was available with higher SSD configs. I really dislike this. :/

 

[leman]

It's all Kaby Lake. The non-touchbar version is just using weaker 15W CPUs.