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

[nando87]

I don't think I've stopped chuckling to myself about this story since it was posted on here

So Apple have gone from a mid powered full featured MacBook Laptop to a thin design less featured and less powerful MacBook Air and then to a very minimum featured and very low power new MacBook.

Brilliant, and then they charge the same for it as the new MacBook Pro and current MacBook Air.

Man you have to be certifiable to buy this new MacBook over an Air. You would REALLY want to have the screen resolution.

Mind you, just as funny is the fact that the new Surface 3 tablet has more ports then the MacBook does!

The funny thing is that screen resolution and design is exactly what is special about this product. The macbook air's resolution is awful.

I see this product as a great product for certain kind of people. Haven't you seen that people with an ipad an a quite crappy keyboard cover on it? Now think you have a fck you money status. Would you prefer this wonderful machine or an ipad with an aftermarket keyboard?

IMO, its biggest failure is not having built in 4g/lte modem

This, like the apple watch edition but in smaller scale, is a quite niche product, but no one said everybody should be able to buy anything and also not everybody belongs to the middle class.

What I see ridiculous is the MBA's cheap and old looking screen

 

[iRun26.2]

Hence "forums" and why we debate.

But what was said was stated as fact. It was so funny to see such closed minded thinking.

 

[bkkcanuck]

Well I think it is funny that some people obsess over the CPU performance while at the same time typing in their response on a computer that is probably saying the CPU is 80% to 90% idle

If they could only get a computer with a faster CPU, then they would have a wonderfully fast computer where the CPU is 95% idle

 

[iRun26.2]

I don't think that Apple will update the Air with anything different than CPUs anymore.
I'd either get the new Macbook (if you don't care about the lack of ports) or get the overall awesome retina MacbookPro (if you don't care about the added weight and thickness).

I think the MBP will be updated and made thinner. I won't be as extreme as the rMB but I bet it will be what you want (late 2015).

----------

Yea, a MBA that doesn't even have a 1080 display, a new rMBP 13 with a sorry, integrated GPU and an expensive rMBP 15 running a two year old GPU. Not very good options.

I'd like to go to a forum where you write positive comments.

 

[RockSpider]

Well I think it is funny that some people obsess over the CPU performance while at the same time typing in their response on a computer that is probably saying the CPU is 80% to 90% idle

If they could only get a computer with a faster CPU, then they would have a wonderfully fast computer where the CPU is 95% idle

If that's all you want to do why not just buy an Android tablet for $80.

 

[iRun26.2]

Yeah, that's lame. I understand that sometimes Apple laptops and such don't always have the greatest specs but usually that doesn't matter with day to day performance. But, in this case, it's clear that the severely under-spec'd MacBook just doesn't have enough oomph to be taken that seriously.

It's like Ferrari coming out with a slick looking new model that has a 165hp V6 in it.

Is that an underpowered car, then?

----------

When comparing to current Models, some are clearly faster, some may not...there are models from i3/4GB to i7/8GB so there is a HUGE variety in performance...
If you are not in a hurry though, better wait for Summer when most likely the Surface Pro 4 will be launched alongside Win 10...

Still feels VERY odd to post about MS here, but considering the direction both apple and MS are currently taking, it may actualy be a viable alternative for some...

----------


The moment they put the Pricetag on it...

No!!! Things are miniaturized often cost much more! A large price tag in this case means Apple is getting paid for the advanced engineering that went into making it thin and light: new trackpad, new keyboard, new battery, first fan-less Mac.

It is also beautiful. I like that about Apple products.

 

[bkkcanuck]

If that's all you want to do why not just buy an Android tablet for $80.

If it had a fast SSD, lots of memory and a keyboard / mouse input and ran a full operating system and it provided all the CPU I would need.... Then yes, by all means. MOST people don't use the CPU anywhere close to it's full extent.... the question is does it have enough power when you need it. Most peoples CPU sits 90%+ idle for most of the time they are using their computer. The only time I have seen CPUs max out is when they have a process that has gone berserk and is eating everything it can get its hands on....

Performance is more about perception for most people. When I click the browser does it pop open or just slowly open up. When I type is there a delay. If it is snappy then you have enough CPU when you need it.

Maybe people should start just saying WHAT are they running that is going to stress the CPU? Browsing, emailing, spreadsheets, word processing, playing a video, reading, downloading torrrents, VPN, Remote Desktop, coding are not examples that are going to tax the CPU.

 

[iRun26.2]

For me the hate isn't really aimed at this machine, it's just the general arrogance and direction is heading with all of their computers. Its a sign that they only care about form and NOT really function and this machine is just a precursor to updates down the line. They have the gall to release machines with no ports, 3 and 4 year old parts and then call it "innovation" because it's so "thin."

It is innovation, it's just not what you want in innovation.

Thinness and portability is innovation whether you like it or not.

----------

It's difficult to tell whether the anti retina MacBook posters are narrow-minded or simply haters.

I'd say narrow-minded. They seem so unenlightened.

 

[bkkcanuck]

Is that an underpowered car, then?

I still remember a guy in Mumbai driving his powerful Lamborghini, and had an SUV with four guys that would pop out and run beside the car to protect it when it slowed down in traffic (which was most of the time).... Then the odd times the traffic cleared enough they would pop back in the SUV and follow for the next time they were needed. The Lamborghini's power was never used, but you could ooh and aah about the specs and how fast it COULD go.

 

[shemp9999]

Great Moto companion

When doing a multi-day ride, I often bring a laptop to tweak routes in Garmin's Basecamp software.

Currently, I bring along my work-provided 13" air, but it's just way too big to pack when camping for a couple weeks.

I had used a core duo 11" air for the last few years, until I crushed the screen

It was very slow and the screen was horrible for the task, but we found some nice roads.

It looks like this machine will be at least twice as fast and have a much improved screen and faster storage.

I looked long and hard at the newest i7 11" air, but I just cannot stand the screen.

I plan on getting the 1.3/512 combo. Only wish is for more RAM than 8GB, but it will likely work for my needs.

 

[CE3]

If it had a fast SSD, lots of memory and a keyboard / mouse input and ran a full operating system and it provided all the CPU I would need.... Then yes, by all means. MOST people don't use the CPU anywhere close to it's full extent.... the question is does it have enough power when you need it. Most peoples CPU sits 90%+ idle for most of the time they are using their computer. The only time I have seen CPUs max out is when they have a process that has gone berserk and is eating everything it can get its hands on....

Most of the time I'm not maxing out my CPU, but I'm glad I have decent processors on my computers for when I do. I quite like having it sit 95% idle the rest of the time, thank you very much ; )

Anyway, I'm done being critical of the new Macbook for now. I'll be interested to hear how actual owners rate its performance, the new keyboard, if one port is enough, etc. With an SSD & 8GB of RAM, it should be fairly snappy for basic everyday use.

 

[junkw]

fanless is the main selling point for me.. I hate the fan of my 2009 MBP.

But it is 1781$ CAD with taxes so... I'm going to keep my MBP until I'm rich

 

[RockSpider]

If it had a fast SSD, lots of memory and a keyboard / mouse input and ran a full operating system and it provided all the CPU I would need.... Then yes, by all means. MOST people don't use the CPU anywhere close to it's full extent.... the question is does it have enough power when you need it. Most peoples CPU sits 90%+ idle for most of the time they are using their computer. The only time I have seen CPUs max out is when they have a process that has gone berserk and is eating everything it can get its hands on....

Performance is more about perception for most people. When I click the browser does it pop open or just slowly open up. When I type is there a delay. If it is snappy then you have enough CPU when you need it.

Maybe people should start just saying WHAT are they running that is going to stress the CPU? Browsing, emailing, spreadsheets, word processing, playing a video, reading, downloading torrrents, VPN, Remote Desktop, coding are not examples that are going to tax the CPU.

Remote Desktop shouldn't be there that needs a pretty reasonable CPU and VPN as well.
The thing they should be thinking is, how much do I need to spend to do the things I want, and to do all the above they only need to spend $500 or less. I know it's not going to be a fashion statement but it will be a computer.
I bought a Netbook around 6 or 7 years ago, not the fastest thing on the planet but it saved me thousands of dollars while travelling halfway around the world, and that netbook still works today, though for my last trip I bought an iPad Mini which I got rid of quickly after the trip as the screen was hardly readable.
I kept the Netbook because it's a lot more capable machine even now than the iPad Mini.

----------

fanless is the main selling point for me.. I hate the fan of my 2009 MBP.

But it is 1781$ CAD with taxes so... I'm going to keep my MBP until I'm rich

It must be terrible to only be able to see Apple machines, there are other manufacturers out there at much better prices you know.

 

[junkw]

It must be terrible to only be able to see Apple machines, there are other manufacturers out there at much better prices you know.

My 2009 feels better than lots of those

 

[bkkcanuck]

Remote Desktop shouldn't be there that needs a pretty reasonable CPU and VPN as well.

I have been running Remote Desktop and VPN on a lot less powerful computers than the Macbook. I even had the "pleasure" to run it an iPad (power was not an issue, touch simulation of a mouse was a big issue) recently - which is a much less powerful processor.

The thing they should be thinking is, how much do I need to spend to do the things I want, and to do all the above they only need to spend $500 or less. I know it's not going to be a fashion statement but it will be a computer.

When I need my laptop -- it is typically for work.... for which I actually earn money.... I am not looking for the cheapest, or the most powerful. I am looking for one that is the least annoying to carry and for which I can do my work on. Size and weight matter a lot. I really want one I can throw on my shoulder and it is small and light enough so that it is as little annoying as possible and that I am not constantly thinking of where can ditch the laptop. The iPads weight and thickness were great, I could carry one all day on my shoulder without really paying that much attention to it.... the only problem is that it is not meant for real work where you are doing anything serious.... it is a media consumption device mostly. The new Macbooks have enough power in them to do what I need (coding, word processing, lectures, and remoting into work or customers). I spent 3 years on the road at one time (great for saving money since I got rid of rented apartment in Chicago - and stayed in places that other people paid for) -- but the problem is that because one carries a laptop on the same shoulder all the time (it is automatic) ... it caused issues with pushing down one shoulder lower than the other (i.e. out of alignment).... so now I really don't want anything noticeable.

It must be terrible to only be able to see Apple machines, there are other manufacturers out there at much better prices you know.

Sucks to have high retail taxes and a dollar that is basically a petrol or resource based dollar when the market has collapsed.

 

[MoreAwesomeDanU]

As expected, its basically a iPad pro more than a laptop computer.

Is pretty pricey though.

 

[Mal67]

The funny thing is that screen resolution and design is exactly what is special about this product. The macbook air's resolution is awful.

I see this product as a great product for certain kind of people. Haven't you seen that people with an ipad an a quite crappy keyboard cover on it? Now think you have a fck you money status. Would you prefer this wonderful machine or an ipad with an aftermarket keyboard?

I'd like to see a macbook that could run osx and ipad ios apps. Add a decent screen and bam!

 

[bkkcanuck]

As expected, its basically a iPad pro more than a laptop computer.

Is pretty pricey though.

Tablets (iPads) are consumption devices, laptops are for work/data entry etc.

This is definately a laptop.

 

[Mal67]

Anyway why worry too much about it. We can probably guess that by the next revision they'll change things (the Facetime camera for example) and in the process drop the price.

 

[bkkcanuck]

Anyway why worry too much about it. We can probably guess that by the next revision they'll change things (the Facetime camera for example) and in the process drop the price.

Room for improvement in facetime camera, but the price.... won't drop that much for the same configuration. They will likely come with lighter configuration (4GB memory, 128GB SSD). A Macbook Air (base) configured with 8GB of memory and a 256GB SSD is $100 difference ($1199) which you have to figure is the difference in the screen price (retina vs normal).

There will likely be some improvements later this year once Skylake CPUs are released..... but the difference will not be huge.... just a range of selection for the Macbook once supplies are no longer constrained.

 

[MyopicPaideia]

Of course and I even mentioned that.

From a customer's perspective, it costs more today to buy a 15" MBP than it did 7 years ago. (even if the hardware offered is greatly improved over what was available)

To point to the technology as the sole driver in pricing is not looking at the entire picture. There is the marketing/financial component as well.

Apple has to sell the new Macbook at this pricepoint because the MBA pricing was dropping. The price of the new Macbook "resets" the pricing. MBP prices were declining right before the release of the retina 15" MBP and have never dropped to the pre-retina pricing.

In the end, "value" of an item is based on a person's willingness (or not) to pay the asking price.

To be fair, you're absolutely right. The price of the latest technology available from Apple at any given time has risen at a much higher rate than both inflation and average household income during the period you guys are dicussing.

That's the real argument, I assume, sracer? The price of Apple's latest tech has gone up in real terms, not just relative?

Then of course you have the perceived value proposition. I venture a guess that the reputation of Apple's products across the board is, relatively speaking, much higher than it was in 2008. I don't know because I am what would be considered a newly converted user, jumping head first in 2011, replacing all my family's Win/Linux devices with 2 iPad 2's, a Mac mini, an ATV, and an 11" MBA.

I am guessing that Apple's perceived brand value has allowed them to slowly raise the prices of subsequent generations and revisions of their equivalent product line.

Back to the MB, it sits right in line with what I consider to be a logical price grid, given its relative position in the line-up. Equally equipped RAM and SSD assumed, it is more expensive than only the 11" MBA, costs the same as the 13" MBA, and is cheaper than both the 13" cMBP and rMBP.

 

[MyopicPaideia]

Remote Desktop shouldn't be there that needs a pretty reasonable CPU and VPN as well.

Actually Remote Desktop requires almost zero resources on the accessing terminal. Why is it hard to have VPN on a Macbook, or ANY device for that matter? All iPads have easily configurable VPN capabilities and can even have predetermined VPN configurations loaded up to them using appropriate apps.

That's the point of RD, to allow thin clients access to more powerful or remote workstations/servers.

If an iPad had BT mouse support it would be the ideal ultraportable thin client for accessing Windows Remote Desktops. As is, it is still pretty darn good as long as you stay in the metro UI...which admittedly isn't that realistic.

Anyway, the point is, RD is NOT a resource intensive use at all on the local client. Your connection speed is the determining factor. Admittedly while underway on a trip, that is not going to be reliable, but once you get to where you are going, RD has come a long way and for many many applications is much preferable to running a local VM.

 

[the-msa]

Says the guy buying a windows computer

i do.

 

[mattopotamus]

But what was said was stated as fact. It was so funny to see such closed minded thinking.

If you think that, sure. It's 99% opinions here.

----------

Actually Remote Desktop requires almost zero resources on the accessing terminal. Why is it hard to have VPN on a Macbook, or ANY device for that matter? All iPads have easily configurable VPN capabilities and can even have predetermined VPN configurations loaded up to them using appropriate apps.

That's the point of RD, to allow thin clients access to more powerful or remote workstations/servers.

If an iPad had BT mouse support it would be the ideal ultraportable thin client for accessing Windows Remote Desktops. As is, it is still pretty darn good as long as you stay in the metro UI...which admittedly isn't that realistic.

Anyway, the point is, RD is NOT a resource intensive use at all on the local client. Your connection speed is the determining factor. Admittedly while underway on a trip, that is not going to be reliable, but once you get to where you are going, RD has come a long way and for many many applications is much preferable to running a local VM.

Agreed. I can run RD on my iPhone.

 

[Nee412]

I don't think I've stopped chuckling to myself about this story since it was posted on here

So Apple have gone from a mid powered full featured MacBook Laptop to a thin design less featured and less powerful MacBook Air and then to a very minimum featured and very low power new MacBook.

Brilliant, and then they charge the same for it as the new MacBook Pro and current MacBook Air.

Man you have to be certifiable to buy this new MacBook over an Air. You would REALLY want to have the screen resolution.

Mind you, just as funny is the fact that the new Surface 3 tablet has more ports then the MacBook does!

Curiousity. This Macbook is over twice as powerful as my current Mac and it's fanless. It has a Retina Display and it's ultraportable. I'm going to buy one because it meets the standards I want from my next Mac.

Does that make me Certifiable?

Firstly if you've spent the last day or two chuckling to yourself you should probably see a doctor, that's not healthy. Secondly just because you don't like something Apple releases don't assume everyone else won't. It's a ultra portable laptop that weighs less than 2 pounds with a Retina Display. Oh and it's fanless with the processing power of a top of the range dual core i7 from 4 years ago. An i7. Fanless. That's an achievement.

If you can't see these Geekbench scores as an achievement for a fanless machine with full OSX in 2015, you clearly know very little about how technology actually works.