Did anyone else notice Apple's choice on giving the us the "cheap" i7's on the rMBP 15?

magbarn

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Oct 25, 2008
2,354
1,443
I'm surprised that no one has really brought up that Apple is giving us the '20HQ' series of Skylake and not the '70HQ' version that just came out this year? OTOH the 20HQ series is the mainstream one that PC users have had since last fall... Many defenders here have stated Apple's reason for such a long delay is that they were waiting for the Iris Pro version of Quad core skylake to show up. With the previous versions of the rMBP 15 we always got the highest end iGPU in our rMBP's. Now we're getting the low end 530... So for the higher price of the new series we're also giving up the eDram that was present on the 2015 rMBP 15 regardless if you got the dGPU or not...
 

kevinkyoo

macrumors 6502a
Feb 5, 2016
618
1,946
I'm surprised that no one has really brought up that Apple is giving us the '20HQ' series of Skylake and not the '70HQ' version that just came out this year? OTOH the 20HQ series is the mainstream one that PC users have had since last fall... Many defenders here have stated Apple's reason for such a long delay is that they were waiting for the Iris Pro version of Quad core skylake to show up. With the previous versions of the rMBP 15 we always got the highest end iGPU in our rMBP's. Now we're getting the low end 530... So for the higher price of the new series we're also giving up the eDram that was present on the 2015 rMBP 15 regardless if you got the dGPU or not...
Interesting. Try telling that to people in the stickied thread up there, though I'm sure they'll block their ears out and try to ignore you
 

magbarn

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Oct 25, 2008
2,354
1,443
I don't even know what that means.
All prior of versions of rMBP 15 all got the 'Top Dog' i7's with the best available iGPU's. The previous 2013/2015 rMBP 15's even came with Iris Pro iGPU's with eDram cache which also sped up the CPU. It was frequently speculated here that the reason for the long delay in Skylake was that Apple was waiting for Skylake Quad Core i7's with Iris Pro to be released this year. Instead they put in a cpu that was available a year ago.

With this latest rMBP 15, Apple saved $50 with going with the cheaper Skylake cpu with the anemic HD530 which is 40% slower than Haswell Iris Pro and to top it off doesn't have the eDram cache that the rMBP 13 and previous 2013/2015 rMBP 15 have. It's sickening when combined with the large price increase. It matters to me as to conserve battery power I frequently use gfxcardstatus to disable the dGPU when I'm on the go.

They probably weren't concerned with the iGPU since all 15" models also have a dGPU. Are there any other differences between the two processors?
As mentioned above, about $50 in extra profit for Apple (usually less as Apple doesn't pay regular retail prices), drop of about 40% in iGPU performance, and lack of eDram cache which acts as a level 4 cache for the CPU for all CPU/iGPU processing.
 

Branflaakes

macrumors 6502
Aug 14, 2016
299
613
Yeah, I've noticed. It's obvious now that "Waiting for Intel" wasn't why Apple delayed the MBPs.

For those of you who don't know, many suspected that Apple was waiting for Intel to release chips that contained the higher end i7-6770HQ, which supports Iris Pro 580, a more computationally powerful integrated graphics solution. However now it turns out that they're wrong, and Apple is now using a processor that the Dell XPS 15" has had the whole damn year ago. However we have seen the i7-6770HQ out in the wild, in the Intel NUC system, therefore, it is valid to assume that it is being produced, and Apple just did not choose to incorporate it into the MBP 15".

Also, Apple chose to use an underperforming i5 15W chip in the non-touchbar MBP. They very well could have used a similar chip with a 15W TDP and Iris 540, the i7-6650U, however that chip is more expensive.
 

leman

macrumors G4
Oct 14, 2008
11,009
5,511
I am very sure that the reason for this are lacklustre yields for the 70HQ series. I have a very strong suspicion that Intel simply was not able to provide a steady supply of chips. Why do I think so? Well, first of all, these chips are virtually absent from the market, save very few very niche machines. Second, it would be much more convenient for Apple just to get the Iris Pro instead of handling out a complex deal with AMD for all those differently binned GPUs. Not to mention that Intel is winding down their higher-tier iGPU production and seems to be canceling Iris Pro for Kaby Lake and later.
 

magbarn

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Oct 25, 2008
2,354
1,443
Yeah, I've noticed. It's obvious now that "Waiting for Intel" wasn't why Apple delayed the MBPs.

For those of you who don't know, many suspected that Apple was waiting for Intel to release chips that contained the higher end i7-6770HQ, which supports Iris Pro 580, an more computationally powerful integrated graphics solution. However now it turns out that they're wrong, and Apple is now using a processor that the Dell XPS 15" has had the whole damn year ago. However we have seen the i7-6770HQ out in the wild, in the Intel NUC system, therefore, it is valid to assume that it is being produced, and Apple just did not choose to incorporate it into the MBP 15".
Exactly, a 'classic' late 2015 rMBP 15 with Skylake could've been easily released which would've been my current machine than my 2012 rMBP 15 which is on it's last legs with it's dGPU.
 

Branflaakes

macrumors 6502
Aug 14, 2016
299
613
I am very sure that the reason for this are lacklustre yields for the 70HQ series. I have a very strong suspicion that Intel simply was not able to provide a steady supply of chips. Why do I think so? Well, first of all, these chips are virtually absent from the market, save very few very niche machines. Second, it would be much more convenient for Apple just to get the Iris Pro instead of handling out a complex deal with AMD for all those differently binned GPUs. Not to mention that Intel is winding down their higher-tier iGPU production and seems to be canceling Iris Pro for Kaby Lake and later.
However, don't forget Apple always uses chips that many others don't use. For example, 28W processors aren't used often at all in 13" notebooks, with only the VAIO series being the other who incorporates them, I believe. HP, Dell, Microsoft, for example, all chose to use 15W chips in their flagship models. Same goes for the higher end chips used in Apple's 15" notebooks. Apple traditionally has always chosen to use chips a step ahead than competitors in both the 13" and 15" field. Therefore, it's quite more likely that Apple just chose not to use the more computationally powerful chipset, to

1) save $

and

2) rely more on the dGPU

than there being low yields, because no other manufacturer uses this chipset, and competition for it would be scarce, even with dramatically low yields. Remember, Intel has to supply HP, Dell, Microsoft, ASUS, Lenovo, Apple, and much more on their 15W chipset, and Apple is like...the only one along with Intel itself who would incorporate the i7-6770HQ. Even with dirt low yields, there would be a surplus for this lone customer.
 
Last edited:

Zenithal

macrumors G3
Sep 10, 2009
9,654
10,788
Because, and unless I'm reading this incorrectly on the Ark pages, the 20HQ is 100 Mhz faster at base and at Turbo. I agree with the other poster about yields. Even in this day and age, lower grade chips were actually high grade chips modified to be low grade because they lacked the qualities of better chips.
 

Blue Sun

macrumors 6502a
Feb 11, 2009
911
197
Australia
The inclusion of the lower end HD 530 is a worry if you value fluid, lag-free GUI animations while on battery power. The HD 530 is outperformed by the Iris Pro 5200 found in the previous 15" rMBP. But if you're tethered to a desk most of the time you'll likely be using the AMD dGPU anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Branflaakes

Branflaakes

macrumors 6502
Aug 14, 2016
299
613
Because, and unless I'm reading this incorrectly on the Ark pages, the 20HQ is 100 Mhz faster at base and at Turbo. I agree with the other poster about yields. Even in this day and age, lower grade chips were actually high grade chips modified to be low grade because they lacked the qualities of better chips.
Read the end of my last post about low yields. Apple's MBP 15" can be logically assumed to take up a fewer percentage of sales than the 13", and Apple's market share for the Computer market is like what.. 7%? Based on the fact that almost every other manufacturer likes to incorporate the 6700HQ instead of 6770HQ, you would logically have to supply bigger customers, Dell, HP, Lenovo, and much more like ASUS, with the 6700HQ chipset. Added together, they take up a far bigger market share than Apple does, let alone with just the 15" MBP only, which is even a smaller fraction of Apple's computer market. Therefore, even with dramatically low yields, there would be quite a surplus if Apple is Intel's lone corporate customer. Therefore, Intel purposefully is not ramping up production for the i7-6770HQ, because without Apple, there is no real customer for the chipset, other than Intel's NUC.

The only rational explanation is Apple is abandoning integrated graphics to rely more on the dGPU for intensive tasks, and also to save some $$ in the process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xmonkey and magbarn

magbarn

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Oct 25, 2008
2,354
1,443
Because, and unless I'm reading this incorrectly on the Ark pages, the 20HQ is 100 Mhz faster at base and at Turbo. I agree with the other poster about yields. Even in this day and age, lower grade chips were actually high grade chips modified to be low grade because they lacked the qualities of better chips.
Don't underestimate the advantages of the eDram cache. In Broadwell, the edram Crystalwell cache allowed the 5775C to beat the 4790k in many benchmarks such as web browsing and compression despite a 700Mhz slower turbo speed handicap.

Read the end of my last post about low yields. Apple's MBP 15" can be logically assumed to take up a fewer percentage of sales than the 13", and Apple's market share for the Computer market is like what.. 7%? Based on the fact that almost every other manufacturer likes to incorporate the 6700HQ instead of 6770HQ, you would logically have to supply bigger customers, Dell, HP, Lenovo, and much more like ASUS, with the 6700HQ chipset. Added together, they take up a far bigger market share than Apple does, let alone with just the 15" MBP only, which is even a smaller fraction of Apple's computer market. Therefore, even with dramatically low yields, there would be quite a surplus if Apple is Intel's lone corporate customer. Therefore, Intel purposefully is not ramping up production for the i7-6770HQ, because without Apple, there is no real customer for the chipset, other than Intel's NUC.

The only rational explanation is Apple is abandoning integrated graphics to rely more on the dGPU for intensive tasks, and also to save some $$ in the process.
Agreed, only Dell in recent memory has bothered using Intel's best iGPU in their laptops. In fact, that version of the XPS 13 that had Iris Pro didn't really have a long production history and was more of an insider secret. Usually only Apple uses these chips so I really don't think production would've been that constrained. Besides, Apple had close to half a year to stockpile these chips since they were released....
 

Zenithal

macrumors G3
Sep 10, 2009
9,654
10,788
Read the end of my last post about low yields. Apple's MBP 15" can be logically assumed to take up a fewer percentage of sales than the 13", and Apple's market share for the Computer market is like what.. 7%? Based on the fact that almost every other manufacturer likes to incorporate the 6700HQ instead of 6770HQ, you would logically have to supply bigger customers, Dell, HP, Lenovo, and much more like ASUS, with the 6700HQ chipset. Added together, they take up a far bigger market share than Apple does, let alone with just the 15" MBP only, which is even a smaller fraction of Apple's computer market. Therefore, even with dramatically low yields, there would be quite a surplus if Apple is Intel's lone corporate customer.

The only rational explanation is Apple is abandoning integrated graphics to rely more on the dGPU for intensive tasks, and also to save some $$ in the process.
I did notice. The higher end chips are always lower yield. This applies to other core i's as well. It's always been like that. When Intel announced that Skylake would also offer dual core i5s, people were miffed about it. It was suspected the all around yield wasn't as good as Intel thought it would be. I'm personally waiting to see what happens with Kaby desktop before I consider upgrading or not.
 

leman

macrumors G4
Oct 14, 2008
11,009
5,511
Well, there have been reports of yield issues with Skylakes and also don't forget that Apple needs a higher quantity of chips than any other laptop manufacturer, really. Sure, PC laptops have a much higher market share altogether, but they are split before different vendors and performance tiers. How many laptops have a top-tier CPU in them? I wouldn't be surprised if MBP takes a lion's share of that market.

My take on the story is as follows: Apple doesn't adopt Skylake in 2015 because its waiting for the Iris Pro version. That one is released early 2016, but Intel can't commit to delivering enough chips. Apple starts looking for alternatives and signs a big deal with AMD (which is interestingly enough, spring 2016 according to reports, so the timing coincides).

Of course, we will never know if my interpretation of the situation is correct, but the massive impact that Apple supply chain has on the industry can be seen in the availability of the Polaris 11 chips. They are simply absent from any other laptop — and the desktop Polaris 11 is a cut down version. Its very likely that Apple simply grabbed the entire supply of good chips.
 

Zenithal

macrumors G3
Sep 10, 2009
9,654
10,788
Don't underestimate the advantages of the eDram cache. In Broadwell, the edram Crystalwell cache allowed the 5775C to beat the 4790k in many benchmarks such as web browsing and compression despite a 700Mhz slower turbo speed handicap.
Mind showing some benchmarks? I can't seem to find anything and all reviews point to the 5775C to be lackluster and a terrible overclocker.

And unless I'm mistaken here, but the eDRAM is linked to the Iris being active. If you're buying that processor or any other, you'd be running a dedicated card which invalidates the point of the eDRAM, unless Intel designed it to be used in conjunction with a dedicated card.
 

magbarn

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Oct 25, 2008
2,354
1,443
Well, there have been reports of yield issues with Skylakes and also don't forget that Apple needs a higher quantity of chips than any other laptop manufacturer, really. Sure, PC laptops have a much higher market share altogether, but they are split before different vendors and performance tiers. How many laptops have a top-tier CPU in them? I wouldn't be surprised if MBP takes a lion's share of that market.

My take on the story is as follows: Apple doesn't adopt Skylake in 2015 because its waiting for the Iris Pro version. That one is released early 2016, but Intel can't commit to delivering enough chips. Apple starts looking for alternatives and signs a big deal with AMD (which is interestingly enough, spring 2016 according to reports, so the timing coincides).

Of course, we will never know if my interpretation of the situation is correct, but the massive impact that Apple supply chain has on the industry can be seen in the availability of the Polaris 11 chips. They are simply absent from any other laptop — and the desktop Polaris 11 is a cut down version. Its very likely that Apple simply grabbed the entire supply of good chips.
You could be right, but I think they're waiting for the 1050 to come out first. Nvidia marketing and better power/performance has killed AMD. Only Apple has been steadfastly using AMD dGPU laptop chips in the last few years. Most other design wins are for Maxwell/Pascal chips... The m460 isn't that bad for 35 watts, but Apple's obsession with thinness has them taking another 10+ watts of performance out of their dGPU's as the previous rMBP 15 chassis handled 40+ watt dGPU's with ease.
[doublepost=1477894061][/doublepost]
Mind showing some benchmarks? I can't seem to find anything and all reviews point to the 5775C to be lackluster and a terrible overclocker.
It's lackluster in the desktop space as we like to overclock in the desktop, but laptops power/performance reigns supreme.




Mind you this chip is running 700Mhz SLOWER than the 4790K...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zenithal

sinoka56

macrumors regular
Jun 13, 2013
185
202
they cheaped out on the CPUs

they used 15w CPUs on base rMBPs, 15w opposed to 28w before

they didn't include the extension cord

they didn't include at least an adapter (even a video out adapter)

they removed the glowing apple logo

they didn't include the touch id on the base rMBPs

but they increased the price, there's that
 

moep

macrumors member
Jun 9, 2004
66
88
Now we also know why they pushed for Metal and a Metal accelerated UI. Not performance. $$$.

That optimised API allows them to put cheaper and worse iGPUs into their machines and still get away with a somewhat fluid user experience.
 

fyun89

macrumors 6502
Oct 3, 2014
326
295
Wait. I thought the new 15 rMBP dont have integrated GPU ? Can someone confirm if it has BOTH integrated AND dedicated GPU?
 

Dydegu

macrumors 6502a
Mar 9, 2015
847
2,728
Pennsylvania
Noticed this as well. We were all expecting the higher end chip over in the Skylake MBP thread. I'm not too worried about it as it would have just increased the price even more and I'm getting a dGPU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WRONG

lambertjohn

macrumors 65816
Jun 17, 2012
1,239
1,186
I'm surprised that no one has really brought up that Apple is giving us the '20HQ' series of Skylake and not the '70HQ' version that just came out this year? OTOH the 20HQ series is the mainstream one that PC users have had since last fall... Many defenders here have stated Apple's reason for such a long delay is that they were waiting for the Iris Pro version of Quad core skylake to show up. With the previous versions of the rMBP 15 we always got the highest end iGPU in our rMBP's. Now we're getting the low end 530... So for the higher price of the new series we're also giving up the eDram that was present on the 2015 rMBP 15 regardless if you got the dGPU or not...
Does this really matter to us everyday Joes'??
[doublepost=1477913764][/doublepost]
they cheaped out on the CPUs

they used 15w CPUs on base rMBPs, 15w opposed to 28w before

they didn't include the extension cord

they didn't include at least an adapter (even a video out adapter)

they removed the glowing apple logo

they didn't include the touch id on the base rMBPs

but they increased the price, there's that
All about profits, my man. Gotta keep the stockholders happy!
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.