Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Isn't this pretty much BS? The numbers compare a dual core CPU with a quad core--and the dual core model isn't even the most recent machine. How about comparing the 2019 with the 2018?

From a quick look at Geekbench, this is at most a small improvement over the 2019 MBP 13".

Clickbait much???

There was no 2018 model of this type. Therefore, this comparison is correct and useful.

It's irrelevant that a dual-core CPU is being compared with a quad-core CPU, just like it's irrelevant that a 1.4 GHz part is being compared with a 2.3 GHz part: the purpose is to compare what, for the same money, at the same power draw, and mostly same other specs (some additions, like the Touch Bar), you're getting in terms of CPU. And the answer is: quite an improvement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: manu chao
I am still rocking my MacBook Pro from mid 2012, works flawless. Ever since I graduated university, I haven’t had much use for it to be honest. I am glad when I can put down my ****** Dell from work in the evening and just use my iPhone and occasionally my iPad Pro.
 
Can it connect my external drive with all my photoshop, illustrator and indesign files, go through files and folders quickly and run the Adobe Creative Suite with a mouse?

Answer: of course not. So why should I be putting my money on a gimped device that serves only as a glorified smartphone?

You're right and wrong. It's not replacing a computer for anyone using it for more than very basic tasks. But glorified smartphone is a stretch. The iPad does offer some very good features that make it worth picking up. Niche features for sure, and you have to be that person, but it's not a big smartphone.
 
Apple being 5th largest PC maker, they are nothing special to Intel. I suspect they order unique models to avoid direct comparisons with other PC models (in specs and prices). They just want to look "special" (and charge special prices).

So just to be clear…

Your argument is that Intel isn't making custom chips for Apple because Apple is treated as a high-volume customer, but rather that they're doing it anyway because Apple wants to feel like a high-volume customer.

Yeah, OK.
 
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

I have two 2016 15" MacBook Pros and I don't love the keyboard. The lack of travel makes long periods (3-4 hours) of typing slightly numbing on the tips of my fingers, even with breaks. The keys are spaced too closely together compared to my Magic Keyboard with Numeric Keypad by just enough to make my fingers feel as though they are too close together which makes typing feel as though I am on the verge of losing the rhythm I have going on because once a finger brushes with the adjacent finger, I end up having to reorient my hands back to the ASDFGHJKL; to ensure that I don't lose too much time looking down at the keyboard. The keys also don't tend to like being struck at an off-axis position and are less than forgiving when I am not able to strike them dead-center. The crispness I like, but they are the most unforgiving when you aren't precise enough, while the keys on the 2012-2015 Retina MacBook Pro keyboard have a bit too much wobble in them and feel slightly mushy, but I can keep on typing quickly and accurately, even with an off-axis strike and I seldom ever trip over my own fingers because the spacing between keys is just right, so I don't tend to feel the sides of my fingers rubbing against each other like I do with the 2016 MacBook Pro.

I have been able to reduce my striking force on the butterfly keyboard, because it simply doesn't need as much, which does drive mechanical keyboard aficionados a little bonkers as it is almost the complete and total opposite of how they type. I briefly used a Matias Tactile Pro way back when they first released it and I liked it, but it made so much noise, my co-workers banned me from using it in the open office bullpen we shared as it sounded like a 1930's TeleType machine. My 2016 MacBook Pro is not that loud, but it is loud enough to be annoying when it doesn't really need to be.

The keyboard in the 2016 MacBook Pro is too clicky clacky on a day in day out basis for most people’s taste. While I don’t hate it, it takes practice to get into a good rhythm with it and I think that is where it falls down for most people. I would rather have a keyboard that is not only more reliable, but one that is more enjoyable. I am typing on it now as a demonstration to myself and I know that I am out of practice since I have been using the Magic Keyboard with the Numeric Keypad as my daily driver since I finally coughed up the cash for the Space Grey model (in a fit of weakness).

Switching back to the Magic Keyboard is effortless and I can move back to an old wired Apple Aluminum Keyboard without an adjustment time. Just typing on the 2016's keyboard, I was making mistakes and fumbling over my fingers. Now, once I get adjusted and get in my groove, I can hustle on it, but it's that ramp up time that I question, "Is it worth it?" And truly, my answer is, meh...I'll live with it, but it doesn't really net me anything other than a slimmer profile, which I do like in the 2016-2019 MacBook Pro, provided I don't have to worry about the battery life (which is less than stellar) or the possibility of a stuck key, and while I have had a one "flat", sort of dead feeling key (Vv) and a mushy feeling key (Tt), a quick blast of air fixed it. So I haven't had the same issues as everyone else, but my lack of use comes from lack of desire to endure the keyboard, which sometimes is what I feel like this is...endurance. This is my only nod to the form over function critics on this site...the slim profile is awesome, I love it, but the compromises (battery, heat, keyboard) are hard to take. The other "compromises" don't bother me in the least.

Now, on the flip side, my Apple Smart Keyboard for my 2015 iPad Pro, which also has a keyboard similar to the Macbook Pro, has been a trooper for me, but lacks backlighting and iOS specific keys and led me to switch to a Logitech Slim Combo. I have not looked back.

I don't love or hate the butterfly keyboard in my 2016 MacBook Pro, but other than a slim profile, it brings nothing earth-shattering to the table that would make me hang on to this laptop for dear life. It's not the $#!7 keyboard people here say it is, but it sue ain't a Rolls Royce either. Just my 2¢.

PS-If you really want to know what pain is, try using the 9.7-inch Smart Keyboard...that's just Apple's version of a medieval torture device, and my hands aren't exactly bear paws. What a POS!
 
Even if the specs are known, one can't compare prices because there is no other PC models with the same chip.

Why would you assume the purpose of an article with the headline "Base 2019 13-Inch MacBook Pro is Up to 83% Faster Than Previous Generation in Benchmarks" to be price comparison?
 
Well iOS 13 has mouse support and can connect via USB. done criticism solved!
First it’s iPadOS that supports a mouse. Not iOS 13. Also. It’s currently only available - in the Beta - as accessibility feature and it sucks. Seriously!
[doublepost=1562875809][/doublepost]The used Intel processors are not made for Apple, but are a spec iteration with, and here comes the most important missing part, security patches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mi7chy
Apple being 5th largest PC maker, they are nothing special to Intel. I suspect they order unique models to avoid direct comparisons with other PC models (in specs and prices). They just want to look "special" (and charge special prices).

All things being equal, Intel's CPUs have been extra un-special lately, with the rare exception. Apple tolerates UHD 6xx GPUs in the models that also have discrete GPUs and does it's best with the UHD 6xx iGPUs it must live with in order to obtain a certain form factor (mini and Air), but Apple has used Intel Iris Graphics in the 13" Retina MacBook Pro since the Late 2013 model and have been very consistent with the presence of Iris iGPUs in the 13" for the past 6 years despite Intel taking a complete whiff on the tech to try and compete with NVIDIA and AMD (Xe).

Despite opinions to the contrary, Apple cares deeply about GPUs, which is why they spec the Iris iGPU in there instead of simply throwing UHD 620 crap in there like the rest of the PC OEM market. Hell, tell me who uses those 28w TDP U-Series CPUs in their computers other than Intel (NUCs) and Apple? I cannot find them outside of the odd Gigabyte BRIX model. If that's "special" to you, you're looking at the sky from under the water, not above it. Go ask Dell, HP, Lenovo and the rest why they aren't offering 28w TDP U-Series CPUs with Iris GPUs to their customers?
 
How am I supposed to work on Indesign and Illustrator though? What about video editing? Animators? Web developers, etc?

Pretty crazy to suggest an iPad is a sufficient replacement for a laptop.

Most pros don’t do pro work on a laptop, so what’s your point?
 
I did once, but I'm now all in on the iPad Pro lifestyle.
Once you embrace the future, you'll never want to go back.
[doublepost=1562866793][/doublepost]

There are still some niche use cases, but even then there are apps that can do those things on iPad Pro.

Such as?
 
  • According to Intel, it's Coffee Lake, not Whiskey Lake. Which is odd because Coffee Lake doesn't have any other 15W parts.
  • That also makes it an eighth-generation (not ninth) product, despite having just launched. Whatever that even means at this point. It does have Bluetooth 5.0, like Whiskey Lake.
Do you know why Intel calls them "Products formerly Coffee Lake"?

It seems the base CPU speed for the 15-W TDP parts dropped significantly once they went quad-core (i5 versions):
  • 7360U, Kaby Lake, 2.3 GHz (3.6 GHz Turbo), dual-core, Iris Plus 640, Q1 '17, used in 2017 2-TB port MBP
  • 8350U, Kaby Lake R, 1.7 GHz (3.6 GHz Turbo), quad-core, UHD 620, Q3 '17
  • 8365U, Whiskey Lake, 1.6 GHz (4.1 GHz Turbo), quad-core, UHD 620, Q2 '19
  • 8257U, Coffee Lake, 1.4 GHz (3.9 GHz Turbo), quad-core, Iris Plus 645, Q3 '19, used in 2019 2-TB port MBP
Note that there are also 7260U, 8250U, and 8265U that are slightly lower clocked (but otherwise the same as the 7360U, 8350U, and 8365U) but there is no 8357U part. Maybe going quad-core and having an Iris Plus required that small concession.

Apple clearly wanted the Iris Plus, maybe adding it is part of the reason why the clock rates slightly dropped compared to the Kaby Lake R and Whiskey Lake versions. Otherwise the differences between the three eight-gen processors are pretty slim.
 
Last edited:
Are all the apps snappier? Does one still monitor the laptop's temperature and fan speed knowing from past experience that Macbooks can have serious meltdowns? Are you gun-shy now - like me - wondering if the battery is slowly expanding in the case, cutting off airflow? Of course. That's the burden we all bear buying the next new Macbook and all because of the emotional investment in an OS which is superior to the competition in terms of human interaction and productivity, not to mention any physical/topographical investments into a unified system in the home. I just recently downloaded what will likely be the last security updates to my Airport Express routers. Why did you kill these, Apple? Oh - they're not flawless by any means. Perhaps I have to reset them more often than other devices *but there are no other devices that setup as easily as these do that I'm aware of*. Someday books will be written about the emotional investment Mac hardware owners spent over a lifetime. Was it worth it? YES.
 
It's possible Ice Lake-U (10nm) ships in volume by winter, and then Apple could maybe bump some MacBooks to it in spring.

Please don't take this post as me being combative or even being directed at you, but I have been listening and reading about how Ice Lake is just around the corner for the past three years and I have yet to believe Intel is going to ship 10nm at any point in calendar year 2019 (the whole CPU), in any significant volume, that holds any significant performance lead over 14nm++.

All the while, AMD is handing them their @$$ on the desktop and server end while they simply pork it up with high margins on S-Series CPUs at the expense of enthusiasts that keep buying them up instead of asking Intel when they are going to reach the end of the line with things they can code name Lake. Intel's response, "Have a couple of more cores that we don't want to give you, kiddo, but have to since AMD is finally firing on all cylinders and even though we can't see straight through beer goggles, here's a 10-core CPU and we only raised the price a hundred dollars!" Oh, and have some completely useless Optane Memory on us, because we like you and we still don't think the hard drive is dead. At least that's what Apple told us, har har, guffaw!":|

I hate to give anyone too much credit, but these articles cannot be that far off from a reality that intel is too proud to admit is true - https://www.semiaccurate.com/2019/04/25/leaked-roadmap-shows-intels-10nm-woes/

Otherwise...Comet Lake, Tiger Lake, Cooper Lake, Ice Lake and Cannon Lake would be just catchy unused codenames, but I digress.

Thanks...sorry to tirade off of your post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Apple Fritter
Do you know why Intel calls them "Products formerly Coffee Lake"?

If you mean the "formerly" part, they pretty much always do that. They pre-announce with a code name, then when the product is actually out give that codename as "formerly" in the spec sheet.

It seems the base CPU speed for the 15-W TDP parts dropped significantly once they went quad-core (i5 versions):
  • 7360U, Kaby Lake, 2.3 GHz (3.6 GHz Turbo), dual-core, Iris Plus 640, Q1 '17, used in 2017 2-TB port MBP
  • 8350U, Kaby Lake R, 1.7 GHz (3.6 GHz Turbo), quad-core, UHD 620, Q3 '17
  • 8365U, Whiskey Lake, 1.6 GHz (4.1 GHz Turbo), quad-core, UHD 620, Q2 '19
  • 8257U, Coffee Lake, 1.4 GHz (3.9 GHz Turbo), quad-core, Iris Plus 645, Q3 '19, used in 2019 2-TB port MBP

Sure, which makes sense. You have the same thermal headroom and want to place twice as many cores in it. It doesn't quite mean that you have double the requirements, since that package also includes the GPU and some other stuff, but it does significantly increase the requirements. So they compensate by reducing clock.

Note that there are also 7260U, 8250U, and 8265U that are slightly lower clocked (but otherwise the same as the 7360U, 8350U, and 8365U) but there is no 8357U part. Maybe going quad-core and having an Iris Plus required that small concession.

Yup.

I still find it interesting that it was apparently easier to use Coffee Lake and scale that to 15W than use Whiskey Lake (which is already at 15W) and upgrade the GPU. I guess it's because Coffee Lake already offers Iris Plus?

Apple clearly wanted the Iris Plus, maybe adding it is part of the reason why the clock rates slightly dropped compared to the Kaby Lake R and Whiskey Lake versions. Otherwise the differences between the three eight-gen processors are pretty slim.

Yup. They definitely wanted an Iris Plus part and Intel wouldn't offer one at 15W in Kaby Lake R (hence why there was no upgrade to this MacBook Pro for about two years), so now Intel took a particularly low clock rate (albeit with decent turbo) to make that work.
 
Fair point about the same money for a different CPU. Most folks won't see a difference in everyday use, because most folks who buy an entry level machine aren't using it for heavy multi-threaded or simultaneous app use. In fact, I bet the percentage of people who buy it for that kind of use is in the single digits, at most.

So, yeah, a better machine for the money. And, yeah, a clickbait article.

There was no 2018 model of this type. Therefore, this comparison is correct and useful.

It's irrelevant that a dual-core CPU is being compared with a quad-core CPU, just like it's irrelevant that a 1.4 GHz part is being compared with a 2.3 GHz part: the purpose is to compare what, for the same money, at the same power draw, and mostly same other specs (some additions, like the Touch Bar), you're getting in terms of CPU. And the answer is: quite an improvement.
 
Please don't take this post as me being combative or even being directed at you, but I have been listening and reading about how Ice Lake is just around the corner for the past three years and I have yet to believe Intel is going to ship 10nm at any point in calendar year 2019 (the whole CPU), in any significant volume, that holds any significant performance lead over 14nm++.

Actually, I agree:

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...2-security-chip.2189156/page-10#post-27531381

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...2-security-chip.2189156/page-11#post-27532763

Which is why I think Apple shipped these now, rather than wait a few months until Ice Lake-U is scheduled and ship much nicer ones (in theory) then: Apple either isn't confident Intel can ship in volume, or Intel themselves aren't either and wouldn't commit to the volume Apple was asking.

(Not to mention we don't know when or if Intel would ship an Ice Lake-U Iris Plus at 15W. They haven't for Kaby Lake R nor Whiskey Lake.)

All the while, AMD is handing them their @$$ on the desktop and server end while they simply pork it up with high margins on S-Series CPUs at the expense of enthusiasts that keep buying them up instead of asking Intel when they are going to reach the end of the line with things they can code name Lake. Intel's response, "Have a couple of more cores that we don't want to give you, kiddo, but have to since AMD is finally firing on all cylinders and even though we can't see straight through beer goggles, here's a 10-core CPU and we only raised the price a hundred dollars!" Oh, and have some completely useless Optane Memory on us, because we like you and we still don't think the hard drive is dead. At least that's what Apple told us, har har, guffaw!":|

I mean, AMD's competition is appreciated and may have been an influence on Coffee Lake-H going 6 and 8 cores, but I'd like to see AMD go to the laptop market. There are hardly any Ryzen laptops out there, and Ryzen 3 so far offers no parts.

I hate to give anyone too much credit, but these articles cannot be that far off from a reality that intel is too proud to admit is true - https://www.semiaccurate.com/2019/04/25/leaked-roadmap-shows-intels-10nm-woes/

Otherwise...Comet Lake, Tiger Lake, Cooper Lake, Ice Lake and Cannon Lake would be just catchy unused codenames, but I digress.

Thanks...sorry to tirade off of your post.

It does pain me that, in Q2 2020(!), the likely next revision of the 15-inch or 16-inch MacBook Pro will have ten cores… but still not 10nm. Which means still no Sunny Cove. No LPDDR4. Minor improvements since Skylake.
 
If you use a laptop to build iPad apps, you have an iPad to test your apps on, unless you’re a bad developer who doesn’t believe in QA and testing that is. So you already put your money in it.

If you don’t build ipad apps then your example is a lie.

The developer tools come with ios device simulators. Not even big companies want to waste their money buying every device available for test much less a small developer.

But the point was you cannot do the development on the device itself. The notion that people should move to iPads over traditional computers when they can’t even sustain their own ecosystem much less other platforms is silly.
 
You're not, at least not yet. But to suggest the iPad is a "glorified smartphone" when it will soon be able to run the full version of the most powerful and popular photo editing app in the world is absurd.
Then what is stopping your iPhone?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.