Base 2019 13-Inch MacBook Pro is Up to 83% Faster Than Previous Generation in Benchmarks

[manu chao]

This is exactly what I am saying. Take a 13’’ touchbar MBP and stuff in a lower spec cpu, lower spec gpu, reduce 2 TB. Pronto.
No update to the old.

There’s no other difference with the other 13’’ touchbar MBP. It’s just a lower spec touchbar MBP.

The (2017) two-port MBP differed from the four-port MBP in four ways: (1) only two ports, (2) 15-W CPU, (3) function keys, and (4) lower price. The 2019 two-port MBP retains three of those four differences (all except the function keys). It thus makes more sense to call the 2019 two-port MBP being the two-port 2017 MBP with one thing, the TouchBar, added (and of course updated processors), than the four-port MBP with three things 'downgraded'.

Unless you also want to call the (four-port) 13" MBP as just being a lower spec 15" MBP (smaller screen, lower CPU class). Of course, your actual point, which you failed to articulate, is that the two-port MBP could always been seen as just a lower spec four-port MBP. Or even more to the point that using a 15-W CPU (and fewer ports) in the same chassis as the model with the 28-W CPU without making use of the smaller thermal envelope and less space needed for ports (eg, via smaller chassis) seems to be merely a price differentiation exercise.

 

[grrrz]

ok honestly after seeing a few videos with real life tests this machine is really interesting, and apart from the outreageously small 128 Gb SSD (seriously) it's really worth its price; even when comparing it to the pc world. I used to look at used retina 15" MPB as an upgrade path but this seems a way better option this time to buy new. let's see when it hits the refurb in a few months. the upgraded ssd premium is still a total ripoff (128 Go of SSD for 250 euros seriously?)

 

[Abazigal]

Never mind (at least for me) an iPad vs an MBP for office productivity tasks—I find even a 15" i7 MBP both too slow and too small for optimum use of MS Office. I frequently get spinning beachballs when working in Word and Excel. And even my 27" external monitor is sometimes too small when comparing multiple documents in Word, or working with large spreadsheets in Excel.

When I'm coding, or working on complex Word documents, I'll sometimes put my monitor into portrait mode, to get that awesome 23.5" vertical screen dimension. It would be great if I had a 16:10 retina (220 ppi) screen with that as its vertical dimension in landscape mode! [That would work out to a 48" 9.5K monitor—ha!] Unlikely that's going to happen anytime soon, but perhaps in the near future we'll see an 8K 16:10 monitor with retina resolution which, at 220 ppi, works out to a 40" diagonal.

Yeah, I know, I'm on the wrong subforum.

Given how smoothly office runs on my work-issued windows laptop (relative to my 5k iMac), I wonder if the problem is that office simply isn’t all that well-optimised for macOS, not so much that Macs are underpowered.

 

[chucker23n1]

Doesn’t matter. Mac users will always complain.

MacRumors Forums has a surprising amount of curmudgeons who seem to evaluate products largely based on what they're used to.

(Anyone remember when Mac OS X was introduced and the Dock was considered the most terrible UI sin ever?)

 

[DNichter]

MacRumors Forums has a surprising amount of curmudgeons who seem to evaluate products largely based on what they're used to.

(Anyone remember when Mac OS X was introduced and the Dock was considered the most terrible UI sin ever?)

Yea and I certainly understand that people want/value certain things, but sometimes I feel like there are just never any positives. Apple drops the price, adds a pricey feature (although some may find gimmicky), and increases speed by 83% and it's still just complaints.

 

[CRoebuck]

The (2017) two-port MBP differed from the four-port MBP in four ways: (1) only two ports, (2) 15-W CPU, (3) function keys, and (4) lower price. The 2019 two-port MBP retains three of those four differences (all except the function keys). It thus makes more sense to call the 2019 two-port MBP being the two-port 2017 MBP with one thing, the TouchBar, added (and of course updated processors), than the four-port MBP with three things 'downgraded'.

Unless you also want to call the (four-port) 13" MBP as just being a lower spec 15" MBP (smaller screen, lower CPU class). Of course, your actual point, which you failed to articulate, is that the two-port MBP could always been seen as just a lower spec four-port MBP. Or even more to the point that using a 15-W CPU (and fewer ports) in the same chassis as the model with the 28-W CPU without making use of the smaller thermal envelope and less space needed for ports (eg, via smaller chassis) seems to be merely a price differentiation exercise.

Didn't the non-Touch bar also have a single fan compared to the Touch Bar models dual fans (and side vents) ?

Does the new model have the lower case from the TB or nTB ? (Vents or not)

 

[chucker23n1]

Didn't the non-Touch bar also have a single fan compared to the Touch Bar models dual fans (and side vents) ?

Does the new model have the lower case from the TB or nTB ? (Vents or not)

Yeah, it had a significantly different layout. So it'll be interesting to see the teardown.

My guess is it's similar to the preview non-Touch Bar.

 

[BootsWalking]

iPad Pro cannot sustain performance like that for very long. A traditional computer can hammer the CPU for hours at a time.

This video demonstrates otherwise - the iPad had no trouble maintaining performance for long renders:

 

[CRoebuck]

Yeah, it had a significantly different layout. So it'll be interesting to see the teardown.

My guess is it's similar to the preview non-Touch Bar.

...but probably with a soldered SSD this time around ;-) (else a 1TB home upgrade would be a really popular option)

 

[manu chao]

Didn't the non-Touch bar also have a single fan compared to the Touch Bar models dual fans (and side vents) ?

Does the new model have the lower case from the TB or nTB ? (Vents or not)

Where on the chassis are those vents? I cannot see any vents on either model:
https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/...core-processor-with-turbo-boost-up-to-4.1ghz#
https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/...rocessor-with-turbo-boost-up-to-3.9ghz-128gb#

 

[theluggage]

How many apps take advantage of 4 cores? Single thread performance is what you need to look at for most things. Its not that impressive and only shines a light on multi-score.

Your Mac is never only running one task. Run Activity Monitor on your 'idle' Mac and see how many processes are using CPU time - and also how many of those have more than one 'thread'. That's before you set some tunes playing in the background, MacOS starts downloading updates and Time Machine kicks off. All of those will potentially benefit from having more cores, improving the responsiveness of the system... Geekbench basically compares single-threaded number-crunching tasks that saturate one core with multi-threaded number-crunching tasks that saturate all the cores. So sure, the multi-thread score exaggerates what you'll see in general use, but the single-thread score understates the advantage. What you really want to know is what it felt like trying to catch up on your email while single-threaded Geekbench was running...

Anyway, the reality is that the only 8th/9th gen dual-core "Core i" processors that Intel is making now are the ultra-ultra low power 7W chips used in the MacBook Air. Quad core is the new entry level, and the power-users who were shopping for quad-core processors 2 years ago are now looking at 6-8 cores - or more if they go AMD. So you shouldn't be too deliriously grateful to Apple for kindly "upgrading" their 2017 processors to the 2019 price-point-equivalent.

It thus makes more sense to call the 2019 two-port MBP being the two-port 2017 MBP with one thing – the TouchBar - added (and of course updated processors), than the four-port MBP with three things 'downgraded'.

Actually, now the confusingly-named 12" MacBook is dead, it would be easier to think of the "two-port" MBP as the new MacBook. I.e. the basic Mac laptop that you'd buy if you didn't need the performance/connectivity of the Pro or the ultra-portability of the Air.

 

[CRoebuck]

Where on the chassis are those vents? I cannot see any vents on either model:
https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/...core-processor-with-turbo-boost-up-to-4.1ghz#
https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/...rocessor-with-turbo-boost-up-to-3.9ghz-128gb#

If you look at the 3rd gallery pic on this page

https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/...-core-processor-with-turbo-boost-up-to-4.1ghz

They're on the side where the bottom plate meets the side. Zoom in, they should be clear. Running about 5 inches long on the side.

The 2 Thunderbolt version (your second link) appears not to have any side vents (same as the nTB)

 

[grrrz]

Anyway, the reality is that the only 8th/9th gen dual-core "Core i" processors that Intel is making now are the ultra-ultra low power 7W chips used in the MacBook Air. Quad core is the new entry level, and the power-users who were shopping for quad-core processors 2 years ago are now looking at 6-8 cores - or more if they go AMD. So you shouldn't be too deliriously grateful to Apple for kindly "upgrading" their 2017 processors to the 2019 price-point-equivalent.

You're absolutely right, but the fact remains that since 2018 performances on most of the mac line have seen a crazy bump, if you compare it to the 6 or seven years of complete stagnation that came before, of course for increasing the core count default to 4 for lower end and 6 and 8 for higher end. I've been using a late 2011 15" model (used) for a few years and there was no upgrade path that was worth it before it (unless dumping 2500 euros on a computer that is, which is pretty hard to justify). The 2017 13" base model still had a lower geekbench score than my 2011 15" model, and they were bought new for almost the same price.
This new base model outperforms all the 15" models that came before the touch bar model. This is huge. It's a very intersting machine because it gives the most affordable macbook pro with this level of performance since the pre-retina models (when the base 15" was priced almost the same as the base 13" now)

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

Yea and I certainly understand that people want/value certain things, but sometimes I feel like there are just never any positives. Apple drops the price, adds a pricey feature (although some may find gimmicky), and increases speed by 83% and it's still just complaints.

All valid points, except the main rubbing point for me (and many others) is that the base model comes with a ridiculous 128GB SSD, and to upgrade to a more reasonable 256GB is $200. $200 for what is about $30 worth of parts. Want a 500GB SSD, then add $400 for a $50 part. 500GB SSD's (fast ones) are available everywhere for Windows systems for $50-$100. Memory? 8GB for $200? And old DDR3 at that! Laughable.

And of course, with everything soldered to the system board, no option to EVER upgrade it. So you have to buy it now and you have to buy it from Apple. Two words -- RIP. OFF.

So, sure, Apple is ripping off their customers LESS now, but stop gouging them for necessary upgrades. Who expects to make do with 128GB SSD for 5+ years without being encumbered by needing internet access to store things in the slow iCloud?

Get rid of the 128GB base configuration, make it 256GB, and either start at 16GB memory or make it a $100 upgrade.

 

[theluggage]

iPad Pro cannot sustain performance like that for very long. A traditional computer can hammer the CPU for hours at a time.

This video demonstrates otherwise - the iPad had no trouble maintaining performance for long renders

Silly argument, really - people wanting to do hours-long video renders for pro purposes aren't going to be looking at either the iPad Pro or the low-end MacBook Pro (and we've yet to find out how these new MBPs behave under sustained load - odds are they'll get toasty and throttle like any thin Intel-based laptop).

The reality is that the iPad Pro is now powerful enough to do many of the things that people get 12" rMB, MBAs and low-end MBPs - but whether or not it "works for you" depends on your workflow... but of course, this is the Internet and everybody assumes that whatever they do is the one, true dictionary definition of "pro*".

...and if Apple do decide to make ARM-based Macs there's no reason to think they'll just stick an A12X in a Mac chassis without taking the opportunity to either juice up the processor or improve the cooling. Putting full MacOS on an iPad Pro (and making a 'smart keyboard' with a trackpad) would be a better starting point (I'd buy one out of sheer curiosity...).

Apple certainly seem to be improving "iPadOS" in ways that address some of the limitations with iPad, but that's a work in progress at this point. After WWDC, I suspect their "ARM transition" plans involve growing the iPad and letting it become more laptop-like rather than 'switching' the Mac.

Plus, we've seen rumours about Apple completely dumping Intel in favour of ARM - then, suddenly, Intel is giving Apple first dibs on a previously unavailable 15W + Iris Plus combo. Sounds like that could be "mission accomplished!" to me!

(*Personally, my requirement has always been 'whatever I need/want to do this week' so I'll pick the one that doesn't depend so much on 'workflow' - plus, those of us who remember lugging a 1990s 'laptop' around don't really see the problem with carrying a modern MacBook and an iPad).

 

[aknabi]

Yes, when I'm running Xcode builds that take 10+ minutes.

Yeah, you think us devs are Apple "Power Users"... that's so pre-Cook thinking... Apple Power Users are Kardashian(and their wannabes), influencers and fashionistas... they just need the fastest "thin and beautiful" filters possible

 

[manu chao]

If you look at the 3rd gallery pic on this page

https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/...-core-processor-with-turbo-boost-up-to-4.1ghz

They're on the side where the bottom plate meets the side. Zoom in, they should be clear. Running about 5 inches long on the side.

The 2 Thunderbolt version (your second link) appears not to have any side vents (same as the nTB)

You're right, I should have zoomed in more.
[doublepost=1562934931][/doublepost]

Actually, now the confusingly-named 12" MacBook is dead, it would be easier to think of the "two-port" MBP as the new MacBook. I.e. the basic Mac laptop that you'd buy if you didn't need the performance/connectivity of the Pro or the ultra-portability of the Air.

Except that the Air is cheaper.

 

[chucker23n1]

Actually, now the confusingly-named 12" MacBook is dead, it would be easier to think of the "two-port" MBP as the new MacBook. I.e. the basic Mac laptop that you'd buy if you didn't need the performance/connectivity of the Pro or the ultra-portability of the Air.

Except the Air is $200 less, so it's clearly the entry model (as it has been since 2011-ish).

 

[theluggage]

You're absolutely right, but the fact remains that since 2018 performances on most of the mac line have seen a crazy bump,

Not denying that for a moment - just pointing out that it is almost entirely because Intel basically added 2 extra cores across the range, probably in response to competition from AMD and ARM who have less powerful cores but can cram more of them onto a chip. That doesn't make it a bad thing.

As I said, even for 'general use' 4 cores are always better than two but you're only going to see those 50-100% speed increases suggested by the multi-thread Geekbench scores on jobs like video transcoding that have been heavily optimised for multicore.

NB: some of the recent security fixes have reduced the effectiveness of hyperthreading too, so some of that performance gain is going to be clawed back. Again, I'm not sure how well Geekbench reflects hyperthreading (...which works better with a 'mixed' workload).

 

[Steve121178]

Silly argument, really - people wanting to do hours-long video renders for pro purposes aren't going to be looking at either the iPad Pro or the low-end MacBook Pro (and we've yet to find out how these new MBPs behave under sustained load - odds are they'll get toasty and throttle like any thin Intel-based laptop).

You do now.

 

[Return Zero]

Finally the base model Pro actually feels like it belongs to the Pro family. The lineup definitely has a lot more clarity now, which was severely lacking. I still can't wait for them to bring back a smaller fanless line like the 12" (maybe ARM-powered), but it simply wasn't a great value proposition, even though it is generally well-loved by owners.

 

[theluggage]

Except that the Air is cheaper.

Except the Air is $200 less, so it's clearly the entry model (as it has been since 2011-ish).

...hardly the end of the world when the "MacBook" has been more expensive and smaller and lighter than the Air since 2015.

Point is - with a 15W processor and only 2 TB ports - these new machines need a name to distinguish them from the MacBook Pro "proper".

Also, not 100% clear why these are more expensive than the Air - I'd normally expect to pay more bucks for less bangs if I wanted ultra-portable. Certainly, some of the ultra-low-power Intel chips cost as much as higher-powered ones (of course, these are currently Apple-exclusive so we can't check).

 

[torana355]

Yea and I certainly understand that people want/value certain things, but sometimes I feel like there are just never any positives. Apple drops the price, adds a pricey feature (although some may find gimmicky), and increases speed by 83% and it's still just complaints.

I think the macbook line is pretty good at the moment, Apple lost thier way for a while but it seems they are really trying to put more effort into macs again. I just got a 2018 macbook air and it's a fantastic little machine. I think once the keyboard reliability is completely fixed more people will start to appreciate the current line up.

 

[Shirasaki]

Serious, does anyone really need a laptop that is even faster? What is big the hurry?

Tons of professional relying on MacBook to meet the deadline. Every minute for them matters. So, they need better Mac.

iOS 13 has external drive support and Adobe's full Photoshop version for iOS is already in beta. And native stylus support.

Oh, ok. Sounds cool, then what? Can iPad play desktop games? Can iPad run full version of MATLAB? Can I save pictures from websites using developer tools?

God bless...less keys that could fall from the butterfly keyboard
The touchbar is more reliable

Time for full screen keyboard, completely programmable keyboard. A stunning sheet of glass with touch support.
[doublepost=1562937741][/doublepost]

the fastest MBP 13 from 2012 that I found was 6600, so your answer makes no sense in reality. If you had a higher end 15 inch from 2012, the Geekbench was 12000, so yah even pretty much faster than that, especially comparing the high end in the 2012 to to the low end now as you are doing. Of course if you compared the high end 15" MBP today, that is 30,000

Your cynicism does not appear accurate in the least

And if all you look at is a Geekbench score, fine.
For real world use though, it is more like 20% or so speed boost, which is something but may not be enough to entice people shelling money to upgrade.

 

[Shirasaki]

Its funny, everyone who actually has one, loves it. Except of course the people who write-up lots of complaints in articles. Buy a sleeve, don't trust your laptop to dust in backpacks, et, and you will be fine. And, if not, free repairs for 4 years! Thats way better than Dell

A repair program after 4 years and 4 generations of redesign and Band-aid solutions Is not that great.
My Dell Inspiron computer runs great over 3 years, no major hardware hiccup. I am very happy about it. After disabling Windows update, it is even better.