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

Dontdothat317

macrumors member
Original poster
Mar 29, 2007
62
12
The current 15" and 13" laptops do not vary as much in size as they do in power. 8 cores vs 4 cores, 32gb vs 16gb of RAM, the presence of dGPU vs not for only a 15% increase in volume. I've found the 13" rMBP platform to be the perfect size that balances mobility, power and future-proofing. I don't understand why anyone would even consider the Air other than price.

The new Dell XPS that released earlier this month offers a 6 core i7 in a 13" form factor, but still only offers 16gb of RAM. Obviously hardware limitations are probably due to available motherboards and power constraints in the 13" designs. But it seems to me that hardware developers just aren't giving enough attention to this product segment, and maybe don't realize that this could be the perfect platform that balances power, capability and mobility for a large percentage of the market who don't want to lug around a 15" and doesn't need that much screen real estate.

I'm hoping 2020 will bring at least a more powerful 13" with more cores and comparable RAM to the 15/16". A dedicated GPU I can do without with the eGPUs that now allow your mobile 13" to become a graphics powerhouse.... assuming it isn't CPU limited.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KPOM and Never mind
The new Dell XPS that released earlier this month offers a 6 core i7 in a 13" form factor

But that 6-core Comet Lake is barely any faster than the quad-core in the MBP, while the GPU is much slower. It does have an edge on single-threaded performance, but this is just Intel flooding the market with myriads configurations of the same chip trying to bite more of that market.

I'm hoping 2020 will bring at least a more powerful 13" with more cores and comparable RAM to the 15/16".

Don't hold your breath. There are no faster CPUs in that power bracket in any known roadmap. The most that can happen is that the 13" gets updated with the quad-core Ice Lake — according to preliminary benchmarks it's performance is on-par or higher than the hexa-core CPUs in the Dell (especially as Apple traditionally uses higher TDP), and its GPU performance is competitive with lower-end dedicated cards and is somewhere between the 2015 and 2016 15" MBP.


Edit: links to some relevant benchmarks:



 
Last edited:
The current 15" and 13" laptops do not vary as much in size as they do in power. 8 cores vs 4 cores, 32gb vs 16gb of RAM, the presence of dGPU vs not for only a 15% increase in volume. I've found the 13" rMBP platform to be the perfect size that balances mobility, power and future-proofing. I don't understand why anyone would even consider the Air other than price.

The new Dell XPS that released earlier this month offers a 6 core i7 in a 13" form factor, but still only offers 16gb of RAM. Obviously hardware limitations are probably due to available motherboards and power constraints in the 13" designs. But it seems to me that hardware developers just aren't giving enough attention to this product segment, and maybe don't realize that this could be the perfect platform that balances power, capability and mobility for a large percentage of the market who don't want to lug around a 15" and doesn't need that much screen real estate.

I'm hoping 2020 will bring at least a more powerful 13" with more cores and comparable RAM to the 15/16". A dedicated GPU I can do without with the eGPUs that now allow your mobile 13" to become a graphics powerhouse.... assuming it isn't CPU limited.
All good points, but I think an important consideration is that the processors in even the base 13” Pro and Dell XPS 13 you mention are overkill for about 90% of the population. I do agree with you that the 13” Pro is a better deal than the Air (I’m disappointed they couldn’t get the Air closer to 2.4 lbs). Since it is more than enough for most people, including professional users, hardware makers are less likely to push the envelope.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valdna
Personally I think most people choose 15” or 13” due to form factor more than power. Quad core is more than sufficient for most people, even for demanding tasks.

If you’re truly concerned with power these days, you’d just get a desktop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ascender and Valdna
The Razer Blade Stealth manages to squeeze a GTX 1650 into a laptop that is very close to the size and weight of the 13 inch MacBook, so it can absolutely be done. I suspect the thermals and noise are beyond what Apple is willing to sell, but it can be done.
 
The Razer Blade Stealth manages to squeeze a GTX 1650 into a laptop that is very close to the size and weight of the 13 inch MacBook, so it can absolutely be done. I suspect the thermals and noise are beyond what Apple is willing to sell, but it can be done.

True but at the same time remember that there isn't any option for Nvidia over here on the Mac world :p... Only if AMD has something comparable come Navi
 
You start running into thermal issues with a small case. If Apple goes to a slightly larger case with the rumored 14" display I think you will see a large jump in performance.
 
The Razer Blade Stealth manages to squeeze a GTX 1650 into a laptop that is very close to the size and weight of the 13 inch MacBook, so it can absolutely be done. I suspect the thermals and noise are beyond what Apple is willing to sell, but it can be done.
Well I don't have the late 2019 Razer Blade Stealth with the GTX 1650, but I do have the early 2018 Stealth with the quad core i7-8550U/16GB/512GB with only Intel UHD 620 graphics and it can get fairly hot and fan noticeably audible when doing things that make it work. It's louder than my 2018 15" MBP (i9/32GB/2TB/560X). I can only imagine how the GTX1650 Stealth must feel (heat-wise) and sound.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.