Early Benchmarks Put Retina MacBook CPU Performance in Range of 2011 MacBook Air

[newellj]

and this is a trend that will always exist in corporate / enterprise world because the decision makers are always going to come down to pencil pushing accountants whose primary role is to budget profitability.

if a $600 workstation is more than adequate for your personnel to do all their work.

why would you approve $1,500 for them? Hence back to my point that generally speaking, there's no real Apple penetration into the corporate world.

And Apple has not gone after them in anyway.

I am a user, not an engineer, nor am I a prophet, but looking at large enterprise business users I see what could be the first distant early rumblings of a move back to something like the "dumb" terminals that Wang Labs sold so successfully in the 1980s. If that materializes (big if), it could fundamentally shake up the current computing hardware world in ways that would make the rMB look like a transitory ripple on the water.

 

[bkkcanuck]

it leads me to make a guess that the core M costs quite a lot more than the Atom x7

Close to $200 difference based on tray prices. (Atom x7 is in the $20 - $30 range - tablet CPU; Core M 5Y70 I believe is around $220).

 

[hans1972]

I am sure the MacBook will be a hit for many. However, the lack of ports, poor CPU performance, and lack of expandibility essentially put this computer into the rink of users who would be happy with a Chromebook. Sure it is aluminum, runs OS X, and has a good design, [...]
$1300 for a MacBook vs. $329 for a Toshiba Chromebook 2

First of all, this is a lot heavier. In addition the Macbook can run all of OS X software and Windows, and still have lots of documents and data locally.

I am planning to run Windows virtual machines and I am pretty sure that I will be able to run 3 Windows virtual machines at the same time without any problems.

Here are other applications that I would use it for:
Microsoft Outlook/IBM Notes
Microsoft Lync/IBM Sametime
MS Word/Excel
MS Remote Desktop/Teamviewer
Pixelmator
Many small utilities and applications

 

[newellj]

if I could see the future I'd tell you

Ideally, I'd like to see them do the following for V2

- make a 4gb ram / 128gb storage option
- add 2nd USB-C port somehow
- Start at $999

do this, and they could easily drop the MBA line and sell these things like hotcakes.

However, I'm wondering if the CPU isn't a potential barrier to cost in this particular case. I'm not sure how much the CPU is. When looking at the new Surface 3, its interesting that Microsoft opted for the Atom CPU instead of this one and was able to hit a price point nearly 1/3rd. it leads me to make a guess that the core M costs quite a lot more than the Atom x7




I'm quoting you out of order (I WENT BACK IN TIME MUHAUAHUAHUAH)

I think I've said pretty much the same thing as you in my comment above

I don't know about the economics or practicalities, but I'd almost be willing to put several hundred bucks on a bet that your three changes for v2 come true, with exactly the result you suggest. And at that point, the MBA line goes quickly and silently into the night.

 

[LordVic]

I am a user, not an engineer, nor am I a prophet, but looking at large enterprise business users I see what could be the first distant early rumblings of a move back to something like the "dumb" terminals that Wang Labs sold so successfully in the 1980s. If that materializes (big if), it could fundamentally shake up the current computing hardware world in ways that would make the rMB look like a transitory ripple on the water.

I do believe that it the current trend to work towards more centralized computing power with lower power terminal / workstations.

its far more cost effective and beneficial this way. puts far more controls in one centralized location, and makes it easier to scale up and out and give support to the new "software as a service" mentality


The advances in broadband over the last decade has made this so much more likely.

I'm currently working on something similar.

from the majority of end users perspective, this is a good piece of hardware (again, not including personal opinions on things like how well you like the trackpad and keyboard).

 

[subsonix]

Apple has made inroads into business (small, not huge) even with the high cost of hardware... but usually by companies that are trying to mix it into the decor of their "prestigious" offices.

They are doing this with the recent collaboration with IBM as well for iOS. And I think stationary PCs that run Windows is not really the issue, since they would not be affected by a hypothetical CPU switch on Macs. I always thought of this as something mostly affecting users who use BYOD, use some Windows app and a Mac, work from home, freelance etc, and of course regular users who use some Windows app that aren't available on OS X. But it would be interesting to know, how common it really is, and what apps that are most common.

 

[djgamble]

My iPad Air 2 gets 45k

----------


No, it's faster.

So I guess iPad air 2 is capable of running os x then xD

Taking into account the Intel HD 5300 graphics and an improved SSD, the Retina MacBook will outperform the aforementioned 2011 MacBook Air even though the CPU speeds are similar.

Oh wait...
So essentially, the cheapest model today is out-performing the fastest model of 2011. I have a 2010 MBP (i7, top of the range for the day) and feel this is pretty consistent.

Also not sure how Turbo Boost would play out?

1.2GHz dual-core Intel Core M processor (Turbo Boost up to 2.6GHz) with 4MB shared L3 cache
Configurable to 1.3GHz dual-core Intel Core M processor (Turbo Boost up to 2.9GHz) with 4MB shared L3 cache.

I think people are just over-reacting to the 2011 comparison. They're essentially saying that a REALLY low clocked i5 is now getting better performance than a flagship i7 of 2011, for a fraction of the cost price. Additionally it uses a LOT less power and has better graphics capabilities.

ARM CPU's (in particular Apple's) are getting to the point where you can compare them to low-end Intel CPUs. Add to this that the ARM CPUs use a LOT less power and sure... it's an apt comparison. It will be interesting to see what happens.

Definitely - Apple is leading the game when it comes to ARM CPUs and it's pretty scary (a good kind of scary). That said, how much have Intel CPUs REALLY progressed over the past few years in terms of speed? IMO the portable ones have stayed at similar clock speeds and they've focussed on less power consumption (with more speed) and significantly better graphics capabilities. Remember, AMD's got some pretty darn awesome mobile graphics chips that we're missing out on as Apple users.

 

[bkkcanuck]

I am planning to run Windows virtual machines and I am pretty sure that I will be able to run 3 Windows virtual machines at the same time without any problems.

Here are other applications that I would use it for:
Microsoft Outlook/IBM Notes
Microsoft Lync/IBM Sametime
MS Word/Excel
MS Remote Desktop/Teamviewer
Pixelmator
Many small utilities and applications

I am running Outlook right now on OS X (beta) for work emails from my office in Toronto (half a world away). Now that they finally upgraded from Exchange 2003, it makes it easier I did use Outlook through remote desktop (windows) for a while - and the OS X one is much nicer..... I have never figured out why Microsoft feels the need to overcomplicate email and integrate everything in and have 30 buttons on the main screen....

Word and Excel run on OS X. So is Remote Desktop. Not sure about Lync, never used it.

Pretty sure IBM Notes etc. runs on Mac OS X since there is a lot of Apple computers in IBM these days. Last time I used Notes was probably 13 years ago at Thoughtworks..... hope it has sped up since then

 

[KPOM]

It's not a joke, but you know what's worse; I'm not surprised.. Because every year Apple loses their ambition to make better laptops.. They put some make-up on the existing line and TaDaa Here comes 2016 Macbook or Pro or Retina or..

So how would you improve the MacBook? Intel has only a limited number of processors that fit the bill. They are using the fastest versions of the Core M available (all the way up to the 1.3GHz version that boosts to 2.9GHz). There are Core M machines out there with processors running at 800MHz.

It seems to me that Apple put a lot of effort into this. They created a brand new keyboard, a new trackpad, and crammed as big a battery as they cood into it.

 

[oakrrl]

will it run Photoshop?

I'm limping along on a late 2008 MacBook Pro (15-inch 2.53 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo). I'd love to wait for a better powered Retina Macbook but not sure my laptop will hold out.
I use a desktop iMac for most of my work but want a light laptop for when I travel. Must be retina display (really helps these old eyes) but even 13" rMBP is twice as heavy as new MacBook.
Think new MacBook will manage occasional Photoshop & Lightroom work without too much frustration?

 

[KPOM]

The 2008 MBA was not a good machine, with some major limitations. And in some ways this is like the 2008 MBA. The next revision should address these.

----------

It was once again a case of Apple being ahead of Intel. Penryn was a vast improvement on Merom. In this case, Skylake should be a vast improvement on Broadwell. Nonetheless, Apple's choices then and now were to wait for Intel to get its act together or release the product. I liked that first MacBook Air, all the issues notwithstanding. I did upgrade to the second generation, though.

 

[hans1972]

Well, if you connect to an external display, using a power source would be good. If you have a USB-C hardrive and a 27" monitor, you will require at least 3 adapters at present to make it work, if it is even possible with the new Macbook.

Connecting to a monitor for longer period of times is one of the few real weaknesses I see with this machine for its intended audience. It is solved by a dongle or by hooking up to the screen for less than lets say 8 hours.

USB-drives is much easier to get rid of. I do not use USB drives anymore regularly and the few times a year I would need it, I would not have a problem disconnecting the power or the screen. And this is only for USB-C devices. For old USB devices the dongle would solve the problem.

 

[LordVic]

I'm limping along on a late 2008 MacBook Pro (15-inch 2.53 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo). I'd love to wait for a better powered Retina Macbook but not sure my laptop will hold out.
I use a desktop iMac for most of my work but want a light laptop for when I travel. Must be retina display (really helps these old eyes) but even 13" rMBP is twice as heavy as new MacBook.
Think new MacBook will manage occasional Photoshop & Lightroom work without too much frustration?

yes.

It might struggle on some of the largest of jobs due to the cpu, but you should be fine for it.

I run Lightroom on my 2011 MBA with only 2gb of ram. its' not ideal. and does bog down after a while, but it runs, and I have used it for a quick touchup or two.

problem i have is the MBA screen is so dog awefull that i can't trust it's display to be anywhere near what I actually expect to see

 

[radio893fm]

So many years in this forum and I still can't get over the people defending Apple at all costs, no matter how wrong the company is. Heck, they can start killing whales and a lot of you are going to find excuses and reasons why it is a good thing.

This is a glorified Netbook. Something Tim Cook said it was a "confused" move by the PC manufacturers. Just because this is glossy and has the Apple logo, it doesn't make it more than a Netbook.

The design is good. Usability not so.

So... for the next iteration you will see everything we are complaining about changed. More ports... yes, you will see more ports, make no mistake about it. Better Webcam. Better specs... and more importantly, a lot less pricier.

 

[bkkcanuck]

Also not sure how Turbo Boost would play out?

Open up your System performance thing and observe.... you will see your CPU sits mostly idle most of the time (most users). Most people only use the CPU in spurts, and if you did not you would find your laptops without battery power in no time at all . For all intensive purposes it means the CPU will speed up when you need it, and the rest of the time run in a more energy efficient mode.

Also not sure how Turbo Boost would play out?

1.2GHz dual-core Intel Core M processor (Turbo Boost up to 2.6GHz) with 4MB shared L3 cache
Configurable to 1.3GHz dual-core Intel Core M processor (Turbo Boost up to 2.9GHz) with 4MB shared L3 cache.

I think people are just over-reacting to the 2011 comparison. They're essentially saying that a REALLY low clocked i5 is now getting better performance than a flagship i7 of 2011, for a fraction of the cost price. Additionally it uses a LOT less power and has better graphics capabilities.

CPUs are bound / limited by the fact that everything that it has to connect to .... is orders of magnitude slower (memory, devices, and hard disks/ssds). So often when people buy a computer and they splurge and buy a top of the line processor that gives them 30% more speed.... in reality it is a mere fraction of that in improvement.

The single greatest improvement in performance for computers during the last few years was due to SSDs.... which gave a much more snappy feeling when using the computer.

 

[hans1972]

This thing is literally a $1300 iPad. The only thing it has going for it is 8GB of RAM and a 256 SSD. However, with an iPad level processor, you aren't going to be doing anything that requires 8GB of RAM. It's frivolous.

You can run 3 virtual machines with Windows 7 fine on this machine! And then 8Gb RAM and 256Gb SSD will be of great use!

 

[bkkcanuck]

You can run 3 virtual machines with Windows 7 fine on this machine! And then 8Gb RAM and 256Gb SSD will be of great use!

2 operating systems fighting over 2 cores..... is not the best situation.... 4 operating systems fighting over 2 cores.... that would be a nightmare

 

[bpfesq]

I think these benchmark scores don't really tell the full story.

I thought CPU processing power isn't now and hasn't been the bottleneck for general consumer use for quite some time. Rather, it was the speed of the GPU, RAM and SSD. That's why you get these Dells, HPs, etc. that have this super fast processor and under-powered GPU and **** RAM and the computer is slow as death. They highlight these specs like CPU speed and you can't tell how bad the GPU/RAM is until you plug the POS in. It's just marketing.

I need a new laptop and plan on getting this macbook--but all i'll be running on it is ordinary office productivity software. I'll have bootcamp with Windows for when i want to directly connect to my office servers while in the office. I'm not running any advanced software that requires intense processing power. This is the ordinary, every day use for a laptop. Now, i expect my laptop to be quick--so i'll want to see how fast this is, in person, before i make my decision. We will see how fast this performs--but i'm guessing the CPU won't hold the computer back from what i'll need out of it.

 

[hans1972]

My iPad air 2 with 2GB of RAM, LTE and 128 GB of SSD is cheaper, better, faster and the only thing it doesn't do is run OS X...

Is not the operating system and the application it can run, kind of huge? An iPad would be horrible at doing a lot of what people can use a Macbook for.

Also the SSD in the iPad has pretty bad performance compared to whats in this Macbook.

 

[MH01]

It was once again a case of Apple being ahead of Intel. Penryn was a vast improvement on Merom. In this case, Skylake should be a vast improvement on Broadwell. Nonetheless, Apple's choices then and now were to wait for Intel to get its act together or release the product. I liked that first MacBook Air, all the issues notwithstanding. I did upgrade to the second generation, though.

How can Apple be ahead of Intel, where Intel is the dependency? Intel is not forcing apple to launch this new MB, Apple can wait....

How big was the difference between the first and second gen? I got the second one.

 

[KPOM]

Pretty disappointing for a $1300.00 machine. Its about as fast as the iPad Air 2 I'm currently typing on.. What is apple doing? I'm at a lost for words,...

It's an Intel Core M processor. They couldn't make a fanless design with the Broadwell-Y processors. Core M should get better with Skylake, but in the meantime, unless Apple wants to start designing its own x64 processors they are stuck with what Intel can give them. They don't sell enough Macs to justify the expense of designing an x64 processor. And if they switched to ARM the same people complaining about performance would be complaining that the MacBook is either incompatible with all their existing software or relies on emulation, which would hurt performance even more.

 

[newellj]

yes.

It might struggle on some of the largest of jobs due to the cpu, but you should be fine for it.

I run Lightroom on my 2011 MBA with only 2gb of ram. its' not ideal. and does bog down after a while, but it runs, and I have used it for a quick touchup or two.

problem i have is the MBA screen is so dog awefull that i can't trust it's display to be anywhere near what I actually expect to see

Yes. Among other near-fatal problems, move your head just a bit and the gamma goes way out of whack.

It was once again a case of Apple being ahead of Intel. Penryn was a vast improvement on Merom. In this case, Skylake should be a vast improvement on Broadwell. Nonetheless, Apple's choices then and now were to wait for Intel to get its act together or release the product. I liked that first MacBook Air, all the issues notwithstanding. I did upgrade to the second generation, though.

The hater drivel here is actually laughable, but it is almost certainly true that the next generation will introduce (or, nod to the critics, re-introduce) some features we are all accustomed to at a lower price point. People who buy the rMB this year need to be aware that this is probable...otherwise we'll have endless threads next year (or even later this year) about "why did Apple make my new rMB obsolete!"

 

[subsonix]

How can Apple be ahead of Intel, where Intel is the dependency? Intel is not forcing apple to launch this new MB, Apple can wait....

They can have a product ready, just waiting for Intel to get a new chip out the door.

 

[newellj]

Open up your System performance thing and observe.... you will see your CPU sits mostly idle most of the time (most users). Most people only use the CPU in spurts, and if you did not you would find your laptops without battery power in no time at all . For all intensive purposes it means the CPU will speed up when you need it, and the rest of the time run in a more energy efficient mode.

CPUs are bound / limited by the fact that everything that it has to connect to .... is orders of magnitude slower (memory, devices, and hard disks/ssds). So often when people buy a computer and they splurge and buy a top of the line processor that gives them 30% more speed.... in reality it is a mere fraction of that in improvement.

The single greatest improvement in performance for computers during the last few years was due to SSDs.... which gave a much more snappy feeling when using the computer.

So, realizing that it's hard to evaluate a system that no one has had a chance to use yet, what's your guess on the clock upgrades - worthwhile, or wasted money?

 

[hans1972]

100% of the people using this statement repeatedly as an excuse for an underpowered, overpriced, overly thin machine that strips basic functionality for skewed aesthetics need to get over it. This costs the same as the pro and the pro doesn't even have a discrete GPU until you pay $2,500. What point are you trying to make exactly? Do you think someone that just plays in iPhoto and checks their e-mail wants to shell out over $1,300? Whatever you're smoking, you need to share.

This will be popular with people valuing weight and small size above all else, whether they be regular consumers or professionals. I think that women will be very attracted to it.

A lot of Apple´s customers are not price sensitive and it would not really matter if this machine costs $1000 or $1400 if it does what they really want.

There are very few workloads that people want to do on an ultraportable that is CPU-intensitive. I have yet to see people coming up with workloads that would be common on such a machine that would cause problems.