Yeah the 6S to 7 jump would be marginal, at best. The thing I like best about the bigger phone is the larger Full HD screen. I held off on getting the + variant until the 7 because I used to think it was just too big. I'm now used to the size and I couldn't go back to the smaller phone, tbh.
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.
Buy or no?
- Thread starter nameste
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah the 6S to 7 jump would be marginal, at best. The thing I like best about the bigger phone is the larger Full HD screen. I held off on getting the + variant until the 7 because I used to think it was just too big. I'm now used to the size and I couldn't go back to the smaller phone, tbh.
More like 0-5%. Kaby lake is a very minor overclock of sky lake with a very few optimizations. Cannon lake will be more of the same. The name keeps changing, but it's still the same chip.
The longer you wait, contemplating things, the more sense it makes to wait for the next one. Either take the plunge or content yourself with the thought that you're waiting for the Late 2017 model.
Spending $4100 to watch movies, surf, and chasing a mythical "top of the list" seems not to be the best plan to me. I'm currently using a Lenovo Yoga 910 and the 4K screen is wonderful for movies and Netflix 4K streaming. Though Itunes on Windows is an embarrassment. 4K 14 inch screen, 512GB, 16 GB memory, Kaby lake I7, for around $1500. A one TB SSD is only another $150 or so. It has replaced my 12.9 Ipad Pro and Surface Book. I briefly owned a 512GB new 15 inch rMBP nice but way too expensive for the capabilities, But it is pretty. I use a 7 Plus 256GB with Apple leather case, best phone out there for me.
Last edited:
There's a class of people in tech that just have to have the best of the best of the best. It's like an obsession [or, as my wife calls it, insanity]. Sometimes logic and reason just do not enter the equation
There's a class of people in tech that just have to have the best of the best of the best. It's like an obsession [or, as my wife calls it, insanity]. Sometimes logic and reason just do not enter the equation
i agree on your post but after looking at the specs the lower mbp models looks very slow for my taste.I know the base model should serve my usage but as our dear forum friend mentioned my wife also calls me sick, because cant stop myself buying new hardware like cameras,cellphones,racing simulators etc. My vision is rather buy the best or dont buy anything .I know i am kinda late to the 2016 mbp party but i will be really dissapoint if a new mbp with better specs come in less than 6-7 months.I know i can sell try to sell this but i dont think many people in my country can offer that amount of money or if they can they rather buy a new model ,decisions decisions...
I think you are confusing Kaby Lake with Cannonlake. Cannonlake appears to implement considerable performance improvements with desktop CPUs (so the MBP laptop CPUs might also benefit substantially, but there's no guarantee here even, and with Intel falling behind their timeline, there's no way to know even when Cannonlake will be launched.)
Kaby Lake improvements are likely going to be marginal-to-insignificant for most Users, IMO. The biggest single difference would likely be if Apple updates the discrete GPU, but they might or might not do this, and it might or might not bring significant performance benefits.
Nope, it's going to be another optimization of the 14nm process that skylake is built on. Honestly, though, TECHNICALLY speaking every new iteration is going to be "better". . and by the time you buy one machine another one will already have been released by SOMEONE that's technically "better"
If you really have to have the best of the best of the best get a 17" Blade Pro and call it a day. 6700k with a GTX 1080
I was under the impression that 10nm was still happening for desktop CPUs and some laptop CPUs? Intel is claiming 15% improvement with their Cannonlake desktop CPUs over Kaby Lake. Would that only apply to their 10nm chips? (and if so, I guess the 10nm desktop chips are irrelevent to the future of the MBP.)
http://hothardware.com/news/intel-claims-cannonlake-15-percent-faster-kaby-lake-launches-2h-2017
Last edited:
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/ne...ake-15-faster-and-again-a-14nm-processor.html
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3168...ss-as-other-core-cpus-ease-into-new-tech.html
I may be getting confused with the names between coffee lake and cannon lake. . . that's what happens when they both start with CO..... that said, I suspect that there are going to be 2 more 14nm optimizations before 10nm hits desktop CPUs, as Intel has already stated that their first set of 10nm chips are going be to server chips and not consumer grade. The reason for this is speculatively because the yields on 10nm is so relatively bad that server applications are the only way they can recoup the cost of manufacturing,.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3168...ss-as-other-core-cpus-ease-into-new-tech.html
I may be getting confused with the names between coffee lake and cannon lake. . . that's what happens when they both start with CO..... that said, I suspect that there are going to be 2 more 14nm optimizations before 10nm hits desktop CPUs, as Intel has already stated that their first set of 10nm chips are going be to server chips and not consumer grade. The reason for this is speculatively because the yields on 10nm is so relatively bad that server applications are the only way they can recoup the cost of manufacturing,.
Well crap. That is confusing as hell, and I didn't realize 10nm chips were going to be so restricted.
The last three generations using the same size hasn't exactly seen shocking performance changes. How is Intel expecting to get over 15% performance increases using the same 14nm process and presumably the same number of cores? Mainly by an increase in clock speeds?
That's essentially what they did with Kaby Lake over skylake. Between lack of competition and the frightful complexities of moving to 10 NM, it appears that Intel has painted themselves into one heck of a corner. They're still working R&D on fringe technologies like quantum computing, but that research is still in it's infancy.
Not that I'm necessarily complaining, as it appears that Ryzen will finally [HOPEFULLY] put AMD back on equal footing with Intel. Maybe it'll get intel to get off their rears and start doing some REAL work again
Not that I'm necessarily complaining, as it appears that Ryzen will finally [HOPEFULLY] put AMD back on equal footing with Intel. Maybe it'll get intel to get off their rears and start doing some REAL work again