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

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

True, although ....

Honestly, the idea that the specs of a Macbook Pro are "overkill" is only relative to the high price of the system.

By that, I mean I don't think these machines are really giving you all that much in the way of performance that you shouldn't be able to expect it as a standard "baseline" of what would be in a new portable sold in 2015.

It frustrates me that Apple so often cripples video performance in its machines -- reserving anything with "good" 3D performance as "high end/top dollar". Meanwhile, over on the Windows PC clone side of the market -- that type of 3D video capability would be a $100-250ish upgrade to a mini or mid tower. Likely, you'd find similar capabilities in a Windows portable at well under the $1000 price point too.

Not saying there aren't good reasons to pay more for a Mac, because I certainly think there are. I haven't bothered owning a Windows laptop in years, except for hand-me downs given to me free. But the idea that you need to settle for really low CPU and GPU performance, and often limited storage space, unless you buy a costly "Pro" class machine is pretty much an artificial, Apple-created situation; not the reality of the whole marketplace.


ToomeyND said:
I think this is the thing that many find frustrating with Apple products, though. You have certain requirements that you have, but those are not available to you in any packages you desire, or even any packages that Apple has paid attention to recently.

Sure, the new macbook can't have the internals of a macbook pro. But why can't you build a thicker one of these that has the internals of the macbook pro? With all the ports and all the speed, while integrating all of the same advances that they are touting for this thing?

I spent a good part of a year trying to figure out which laptop I wanted almost a year ago.

Do I want super portable? 11 air. Do I want a nice screen? 13 pro. The internals of the pro are overkill for me, and it's much more expensive. So let's go 11 air, even though I would pay the extra to put a retina screen in it.

Why can't they have one design, with multiple thicknesses, for the varying options? If this (performance-wise) piece of crap can support a retina screen, why can't the MBA? I like the balance of relative power and a nice screen that could be achieved with a retina 11" or 13" air. But no, if I want the nice screen, I need to go heavier, or lighter. The air, for some reason, is right in the middle of two capable machines but is hamstrung by this, despite better performance than the new macbook.

Apple takes away the ability to customize the machines to the point that you are forced to give up things you would happily pay for in order to simplify the check-out experience. I'd rather have a better computer.
Click to expand...
 
Oh wow my iPad is faster......
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    277.5 KB · Views: 98
LordVic said:
i believe that this is where most of the shock in the rMB is coming from

The MacBook air line, aside from the display is an absolutely fantastic product. It's great performing, good space, good specs, great expandibility in it's segment with USB3, Thunderbolt and SD on the larger of the two.

the actual dimensions between the rMB and the 11MBA is i believe < 5cubic cm of space and less than .25kg difference. There is very negligble, to zero true space savings.

Most people expected this to get a better display. It would have easily made the MacBook air the crowning king of the ultraportables in virtually every metric.

instead, the MBA gets a CPU refresh (that everyone else in the Ultraportables will have) and is left unchanged, and a new, slower, less options, less expansion and more limited computer is released with that better display for a far far higher base price.

its confusing and doesn't (at least from our consumer perspective) make a lot of sense.

yes, its a good machine for the casual computer user, but no more or less so than the MBA with an upgraded screen would have provided.
Click to expand...

I think you're right on target. I have said this before and will probably say it again: I would *happily* be using an 11" MBA right now if it had a 1080p IPS display. You couldn't pry it out of my hands. For reasons that probably only Apple really knows, they're taking product development in another direction. I'll give it a shot. If it works, great. If not, they get market feedback in the form of a return. It's that simple... ;)
 
Karma*Police said:
I think that goes to show how far Apple's chips have come while Intel has lagged. It'll be interesting to see how the A9 compares to Skylake.
Click to expand...

swouldnt say "lagged". Intel has the hard job of having to make their CPU's, which have always been known as powerhouses, scale downwards in power usage, while ARM based CPU's have had the benefit of starting off slower and working their way up.

if you scaled most of ARM cpu's up to the performance of Intels main parts (i series), you will likely see at equal performance, the ARM cpu's probably arent as efficient as intel.

eventually, they will balance out and be closer to par, they're just both starting at different starting points.

both have been incredibly impressive and Apple / ARM should be incredibly proud of what they have managed
 
This thing is gimped beyond belief.

I have to use windows and need a decent screen. So I have a 2013 Surface Pro 2 which is also 2lbs, but 50% faster, and cost half the price. And I also have a 15" 2012 rMBP that's overkill.

If this thing had surface pro 2 performance, I'd love for it to replace both my machines.

But like every other person waiting for a retina macbook air, I'm just hugely disappointed with these benchmarks.
 
newellj said:
Best value? The MBA line is an embarrassment, albeit one that still sells incredibly well. I say that as the former owner of one 13" MBA and two 11" MBAs. While we're moaning about obsolete tech, what kind of brass does a company have to have to sell notebooks with a TN panel, and not just any TN panel but a cr@ppy TN panel, for these prices in 2015? It if didn't have the Apple logo on the cover, it wouldn't sell at half the Apple price.
Click to expand...

Yep, unlike the new Macbook it has a real CPU, better GPU, multiple ports and a real camera and its $300 less. The only thing it lacks is a retina display, but at $999, it gets a pass.
 
iPad Air 2 and a 2011 MacBook Air both have 2 GB of RAM, while the retina MacBook has 8 GB.
 
DevNull0 said:
No, they stopped when the cMBP went out of production. This new piece of junk is just another indication that Apple is not the company they were 4 years ago.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Just the fact they are still charging $2500 for a rMBP with a two year old 700 series GPU is laughable. Apple couldn't care less about power users anymore, they are all about web browsers and social media bloggers.
 
dexterbell said:
Yep, unlike the new Macbook it has a real CPU, better GPU, multiple ports and a real camera and its $300 less. The only thing it lacks is a retina display, but at $999, it gets a pass.
Click to expand...

If all Apple did was put Jony Ive up for 5 seconds where he just said "We took the MBA and swapped out the *&^%ing $#i7 display," and bumped the price up $200, everyone and their dog would buy this thing.
 
newellj said:
I think you're right on target. I have said this before and will probably say it again: I would *happily* be using an 11" MBA right now if it had a 1080p IPS display. You couldn't pry it out of my hands. For reasons that probably only Apple really knows, they're taking product development in another direction. I'll give it a shot. If it works, great. If not, they get market feedback in the form of a return. It's that simple... ;)
Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat. my 2011 11" MBA IS on it's way out. I loved that laptop a lot.

My prospects if I want another Mac
Same performance levels as my 2011 computer, with an upgraded display
Upgraded performance with the same display which has not been kept up to par with the rest of the market.

Apple just can't seem to hit ANY of my needs/wants these days. I was in the market for a mini, they butchered it.

and now with no clear upgrade in the laptop department.

I'm sure the rMB will be more than adequate performance for many. But from my current position it makes absolutely no sense at all
 
sdf said:
This is not the MacBook for me. However, it looks perfect for my dad — if I could train him to charge it overnight and use it wirelessly.
Click to expand...
It shouldn't be a Macbook for anyone unless you want a slow notebook and just want to donate some money to Apple.
 
kingofwale said:
Con:
-horrid performance
Click to expand...
If I had asked you whether you thought the 2011 11" MBA had a horrid performance one month ago, I am pretty sure you would have said no. Because I cannot remember that people have ever called their performance horrid, even four years after their release. And we should add that this a comparison of the entry-level rMB vs the high-end 2012 11" MBA.
 
I think the MacBook is pointless. Apple should have just put a 1080p screen in the new airs and offer them in the new colors. They are much better machines in everway except the screens. The Macbooks should start at $599 and top end $999.
 
LordVic said:
Same performance levels as my 2011 computer, with an upgraded display
Upgraded performance with the same display which has not been kept up to par with the rest of the market.
Click to expand...
The graphics are significantly faster as, I am certain, is the storage.
 
LordVic said:
swouldnt say "lagged". Intel has the hard job of having to make their CPU's, which have always been known as powerhouses, scale downwards in power usage, while ARM based CPU's have had the benefit of starting off slower and working their way up.
Click to expand...

interesting.. as a layman, it surprises me that the ARM wouldn't start out more efficient and that the reverse is true for scaling down..? is it because they're aiming for such ridiculously small scale in the first place?
 
scupking said:
I think the MacBook is pointless. Apple should have just put a 1080p screen in the new airs and offer them in the new colors. They are much better machines in everway except the screens. The Macbooks should start at $599 and top end $999.
Click to expand...

When intel charges $150+ per chip? Why would apple want to be in a low margin sector?
 
manu chao said:
The graphics are significantly faster as, I am certain, is the storage.
Click to expand...

in which?

while it is likely that the file storage on the rMB and 2015 MBA will outperform the 2011 filesystem, it is really an irrelevant metric since

A. both the new computers storage should be fairly equal
B. they are generally not the bottleneck in performance of either of these computers (and wasn't really a bottleneck in the 2011)


Graphics performance metrics of the new Core M haven't yet been released. Will wait to judge on that merrit, However, I'm not entirely sure anyone buys either MBA or rMB with intent for real performing gaming.

based on expectations, the 2015 MBA should absolutely crush the rMB in available GPU performance.

However outside of gaming, this is also Moot since almost all modern integrated intel GPU's, even the non high end versiosn will provide more than adequate performance for the intended uses of either laptop
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back