First Machines Using Kaby Lake Processors Coming This Fall, but MacBook Pro Not Likely Among Them

[Michael Scrip]

Nope. The Intel processors that have Iris Pro (needed for the 15" rMBP) just recently became available.

Will the next 15" rely solely on Iris Pro? Or will it have a dedicated GPU from AMD or NVidia?

As good as Iris Pro may be... it's still an integrated GPU.

Unless you want to confuse everyone and have the 13" be Skylake and the 15" not.

The 13" is on Broadwell while the 15" is still on Haswell.

So it wouldn't be unusual if they did it again.

 

[symphara]

Nope. The Intel processors that have Iris Pro (needed for the 15" rMBP) just recently became available.

What are you talking about? The gen. 6 CPU was released in Q1'2016, the gen. 5 CPU was released in Q2'2015, the 15" rMBP is still on the gen. 4 CPU released in Q3'2014.

 

[Omega Mac]

What I have come to understand from various threads is that Apples ability to customise ARM chips, is a major advantage since they control both the silicon and the OS versus rest surely?

Might Apple have already innovated a desktop/laptop replacement chip at some point in parolee with the A chips for the iPhones, using what they learned and mapping into a future point on the roadmap xA Chips ready for laptops and desktops.

The dust has barely settled on the Intel ARM foundry deal, but it may be the first outward signal that Apple + Intel may be working much closer together in a manner that has not been obvious to the market now. What is good for Intel is surely going to be good for Apple and vice versa.

Will these Kaby lake intel chipsets be made work with a new xA Apple ARM chip in the future? I'm not expert enough to know but... why does it have to be exactly the same chip the goes into the iPhone and not a differentiation of the A family.

 

[Stella]

Nope. The Intel processors that have Iris Pro (needed for the 15" rMBP) just recently became available. Unless you want to confuse everyone and have the 13" be Skylake and the 15" not.

These became available in the April time frame?

It is now late August.

 

[tentales]

The operative word being 'some'.

Yes some referring to RAM, most are soldered on. Most SSD are upgradeable until Apple decided to make it proprietary.

The retina MBPs were introduced in 2012. And do you really believe that the MBPs were kept upgradeable until 2012 because Jobs thought that 'Pro' laptops should be upgradeable? Jobs would trade upgradeability for miniaturisation any time. I know that doesn't fit with your sense that things were better in the past but recognising when your sense is biased is an important skill.

Yes I do believe that. Goto 30:30

Jobs was bragging about being able to swap the battery and the hard drive. He made a difference between Pro user requirements and non-pro consumer level products like the iPhone. Try to learn to argue without condescension. It adds more credence to whatever point you're making.

There are standard 2.5" drives, less-standard 1.8" drives (the 2008 MBA used them) and non-standard SSD sticks (used in the MBA from 2010 onwards and the MBP from 2012 onwards). Already 1.8" drive availability was quite limited. The non-standard SSD sticks all were available one to two years after the corresponding Mac laptop was released. There is nothing better with the pre-2012 MBA, than with all other Macs that used non-standard SSD sticks.

Not sure what your point is here. Fact is, most users were happy until about 2012 with how they could apply upgrades. In fact, many would upgrade 1 or 2 years later after warranties expired and until 3rd parties had come up with alternatives.

So you agree that this has not really changed under Cook compared to the Jobs era?

Not really, dealing with repairs and the Genius Bar used to be a lot easier than lately. In fact, I had a MBP back in '08 that I attached a 3rd party Firewire drive to. Somehow that shorted the logic board. Apple (AASP) still replaced it for free and overnight, seeing I had to give a presentation the next day.

Listen, I'm not claiming "Apple is doomed" or everything was better during the Jobs era. However, people like you are ignoring the signs that Apple is changing as a company and you make excuses and just accept whatever they dish up or fail to dish up.

The frustration for most long-term Mac users is, that Apple appears to be resting on its laurels and purely focusing only on the biggest revenue products, clearly the iPhone. Doing so at the expense of the products that originally made the company great. We are on a site called "Macrumors", but maybe the admins should really change it to "Applerumors", since the Mac features less than 20% nowadays.

 

[Naaaaak]

I'm not ready to accept MBPs with ARMs. The transition nightmare with Application software would drive lots of users away and I'm not sure that all App developers would bother porting the macOS Apps across again. Anyone remember Rosetta ?

Apple is always undergoing a transition. 68000 -> PPC. Mac OS -> OS X. PPC -> Intel. Carbon -> Cocoa. 32 Bit -> 64 Bit. 30 Pin -> Lightning. USB + Thunderbolt -> USB C. ObjC -> Swift. It's the nature of the industry.

I don't see why an Intel -> ARM transition would be a nightmare or any harder than any of the aforementioned transitions. Most Apple devs are on Xcode and under Apple's tech stack. PPC -> Intel and 32 bit -> 64 bit was not much work at all for most app devs. Bitcode could eventually give them the ability to transparently recompile apps already in the App Store.

3rd party devs using their dev tools and tech stacks always have a choice to support Apple devices or not. If there is money to be made, support will happen.

As for Rosetta, it worked much better than I thought it would.

Could Apple do any better? I doubt it - Apple will also encounter the same issues as Intel - a slow down in development pace.

Perhaps, but Apple gets other advantages from doing their own chipset design for laptops and desktops:

1. Proprietary competitive advantages. For example, the iPhone/iPad has the M9 coprocessor for tracking movements and recognizing "Hey Siri". Think about custom coprocessors they could do for common laptop and desktop tasks.
2. Greater control over their release schedule.
3. A way to cut production costs and keep profit margins up. The more devices the sell, the more this scales.

 

[Tee11up]

I bought my first Macbook back in 2007, not long after Intel made their way into Apple's closet. I loved the Operating system and the tight integration. It really was a breath of fresh air. And then Steve passed on and things went dark....

Thank to a refresh calendar that can only be described as glacial, I am now actively shopping for Windows (6800K) system now as I need the video/multicore horsepower. The Mac Pro is an embarrassment. The Mac Mini has been neutered. iMacs are more about display and heat-throttling than performance and power. The MacBook Pro...isn't a pro anything and would be at home at any discount store clearance bin.

I keep coming to Mac websites hoping that someone working in the new Apple flying saucer has stopped marveling at the next iWatch strap color long enough to realize they are alienating their client base. Once I buy a Windows machine I will be in no mood to mess around with iTunes and will certainly replace my iPhone 6+ with an Android; probably Samsung.

Thanks for nothing, Cook.

 

[Wild-Bill]

Awesome.... It's not even out yet, but when it is, it'll be obsolete right out of the gate.

Way to go, Apple.

 

[Queen6]

I bought my first Macbook back in 2007, not long after Intel made their way into Apple's closet. I loved the Operating system and the tight integration. It really was a breath of fresh air. And then Steve passed on and things went dark....

Thank to a refresh calendar that can only be described as glacial, I am now actively shopping for Windows (6800K) system now as I need the video/multicore horsepower. The Mac Pro is an embarrassment. The Mac Mini has been neutered. iMacs are more about display and heat-throttling than performance and power. The MacBook Pro...isn't a pro anything and would be at home at any discount store clearance bin.

I keep coming to Mac websites hoping that someone working in the new Apple flying saucer has stopped marveling at the next iWatch strap color long enough to realize they are alienating their client base. Once I buy a Windows machine I will be in no mood to mess around with iTunes and will certainly replace my iPhone 6+ with an Android; probably Samsung.

Thanks for nothing, Cook.

Apple just serves up stylised consumer products these days, I find it impossible to take Apple remotely seriously as a provider of high end "professional" hardware, as their specifications and price points are a joke. Apple just want to sell to the average consumer at a grossly inflated price...

Apple`s focus is clearly IOS and it`s toys, now that sales phone & tablet sales are dropping they look back to the Mac, only to find an uninspiring, lacklustre, outdated lineup. Apple needs to Knock off trying to compel it`s customers to live in the "walled garden" and produce hardware and an OS that delivers and excels, then Apple will have no concerns with the former.

Apple was so very successful in the past, as Apple produced compelling hardware & software. These days we just get to see Apple exec`s congratulating themselves on releasing mediocre hardware on a under developed OS, as some have already stated Apple is fast becoming a joke.

Apple needs to get the "right" individual in the "chair" Tim Cook simply comes across as dull, uninteresting, uninspiring and clearly lacks any form of innovation. His focus is everywhere but where it needs to be Apple`s products, by the time his "pipeline" delivers Apple will be exactly where they are today, way behind the completion relying on it`s heritage to sell products...

Q-6

 

[Ethosik]

These became available in the April time frame?

It is now late August.

May is what I saw. It doesn't matter. They were probably working on this update for a while. Why update the rMBP in May and release an entire new design in shortly later?

My point is, people here need to stop acting like Apple is years behind when suitable processors JUST came out in May. Suitable processors were available for the 13" processors, but people here are already frustrated with Apple for having some older processors in some systems, and some newer processors in other systems. People would be furious that 13" laptops got Skylake but 15" did not.

And not only does it take time to get those processors and test (they probably got them early), it also takes time to generate enough stock to announce a new system. We have no idea what is going on. Maybe it got delayed due to a manufacturing problem, who knows. But stop acting like suitable processors have been out for years. A few months of R&D and production is not unusual. Especially since it isn't just a standard laptop design. They had to spend a lot of time on that touch function bar.
[doublepost=1471611065][/doublepost]

Ok, this. For all you fanboys who will scream 'I told you how awesome Apple is' when they release the new MBP in a couple months, just keep in mind that you'll be waiting another two years with the same gear, as it gets more and more outdated, and Apple keeps the same premium price.

At this point, one nice update won't obscure the evidence that all macs will recieve the Mac Pro treatment going forward: A kickass update, then completly ignored for years with no price adjustments.

And you know this for a fact how exactly? Did EVERY rMBP update take two years? NO. This is a long upgrade because suitable Skylake processors JUST became available in May. Also, this isn't a typical "put in the new processor and go". They are designing the new touch function bar. That takes time. Not a day's worth of R&D.
[doublepost=1471611503][/doublepost]

What this is saying is that Apple chooses to use different versions of chips than other companies.

This is Apple's choice.

Intel is not deliberately delaying Apple. Intel always releases their higher power and higher performance chips first. And then as they start releasing the lower power and lower performance versions marketed towards devices which have lower performance needs and low energy needs.

It is Apple's choice to use lower performance processors. So yes, Apple will be behind the other companies which build their machines on whatever the latest processor is.

Other companies manage to build high performance machines which use higher power processors and do just fine.

Apple's problem is that they are so focused on being thin, that they force themselves to wait for processors that are meant for devices resembling tablets.

Um, you got that completely backwards. Intel JUST released the processors that the 15" laptop needs in May. Those laptops need the Iris Pro iGPU to drive the high resolution and external monitors. Previous processors only had Iris or Intel HD. So no, they did not release the highest performing processor right away. The opposite actually. People keep linking the Dell XPS because it has Skylake. But guess what? That has Intel HD graphics which is absolutely horrible.

Also, I would like to point out that I have a 2010 Mac Pro (tower). 3.33Ghz 6-core. I built my own computer in 2015 running Windows. 3.30Ghz 6-core latest processor at the time. Why didn't I see any MAJOR improvements? Geez, people here act like Skylake is the processor to end all processors. Why people here are acting like it is a 300% performance improvement is something I will never understand. My 2015 computer took $2,000 (got the GTX 980 too) to build. It is a major disappointment due to no real performance improvements over my 2010 Mac Pro. I had the GTX 980 in my Mac Pro for a while since I was slowly purchasing parts, and the performance (even when gaming through Bootcamp) was identical with my 2015 system.
[doublepost=1471613117][/doublepost]

Will the next 15" rely solely on Iris Pro? Or will it have a dedicated GPU from AMD or NVidia?

As good as Iris Pro may be... it's still an integrated GPU.



The 13" is on Broadwell while the 15" is still on Haswell.

So it wouldn't be unusual if they did it again.

Well that is the way it is now. The base 15" rMBP is only Iris Pro. The top of the line 15" has dedicated graphics.

 

[symphara]

Intel JUST released the processors that the 15" laptop needs in May.

Not according to Intel. I posted the release dates from ark in a previous reply. Most importantly, there was a 5th gen CPU suitable for the 15" rMBP (Iris Pro and all), released last year, and Apple completely skipped it and left it with a 4th gen CPU.

You keep bringing up Iris Pro, but is it not at all clear why Iris Pro was necessary (even though both 5th and 6th gen HQ CPUs with Iris Pro are available). The newer Iris HD is far from horrible - it's about as good as the 4th gen Pro - and the 15" rMBP has the option to use a dGPU anyway.

 

[KPOM]

Awesome.... It's not even out yet, but when it is, it'll be obsolete right out of the gate.

Way to go, Apple.

No it won't be. The Kaby Lake 28W chips won't be out until 2017. And if Skylake was any indication, Apple is right to be cautious (the early Skylake PCs, such as the Surface Book) had lots of driver issues that led to crashes.
[doublepost=1471618083][/doublepost]

Listen, I'm not claiming "Apple is doomed" or everything was better during the Jobs era. However, people like you are ignoring the signs that Apple is changing as a company and you make excuses and just accept whatever they dish up or fail to dish up.

The frustration for most long-term Mac users is, that Apple appears to be resting on its laurels and purely focusing only on the biggest revenue products, clearly the iPhone. Doing so at the expense of the products that originally made the company great. We are on a site called "Macrumors", but maybe the admins should really change it to "Applerumors", since the Mac features less than 20% nowadays.

Let's see what happens next month. My guess is that with only a modest iPhone update for this year (at least visually), Apple will devote a fair amount of time to a new MacBook Pro. We have seen part leaks, and the rumored OLED touchstrip looks interesting.

 

[Ethosik]

Not according to Intel. I posted the release dates from ark in a previous reply. Most importantly, there was a 5th gen CPU suitable for the 15" rMBP (Iris Pro and all), released last year, and Apple completely skipped it and left it with a 4th gen CPU.

You keep bringing up Iris Pro, but is it not at all clear why Iris Pro was necessary (even though both 5th and 6th gen HQ CPUs with Iris Pro are available). The newer Iris HD is far from horrible - it's about as good as the 4th gen Pro - and the 15" rMBP has the option to use a dGPU anyway.

Uhhh we are talking about skylake. http://ark.intel.com/products/family/88392/6th-Generation-Intel-Core-i7-Processors#@All

I see no Iris Pro processors that are before 2016.

No it doesn't. You need to get the top of the line 15" in order to get that option.

 

[symphara]

I see no Iris Pro processors that are before 2016.

As I said before: the gen. 5 CPU (i7-5950HQ) with Iris Pro was released in Q2'2015. This is the direct update for the gen 4 CPU currently being used by the 15" rMBP. Same price and everything.

 

[Ethosik]

As I said before: the gen. 5 CPU (i7-5950HQ) with Iris Pro was released in Q2'2015. This is the direct update for the gen 4 CPU currently being used by the 15" rMBP. Same price and everything.

Nope.

Processor in rMBP: http://ark.intel.com/products/83504/Intel-Core-i7-4870HQ-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_70-GHz
Processor you linked: http://ark.intel.com/products/87720/Intel-Core-i7-5950HQ-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz

Almost a $200 difference.

 

[symphara]

Nope.

Processor in rMBP: http://ark.intel.com/products/83504/Intel-Core-i7-4870HQ-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_70-GHz
Processor you linked: http://ark.intel.com/products/87720/Intel-Core-i7-5950HQ-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz

Almost a $200 difference.

Nope.

You compare apples with oranges. I listed the top CPU in every generation (so they're comparable), and the top gen 4 CPU is the I7-4980HQ, which is the one currently used in the 15" rMBP. It's the same price, $623. Same as the top 5th gen CPU with Iris Pro, same as the top 6th gen CPU with Iris Pro.

It looks to me like Apple had suitable CPUs all along, they just chose not to update the 15" rMBP, for whatever reason.

 

[Ethosik]

Nope.

You compare apples with oranges. I listed the top CPU in every generation (so they're comparable), and the top gen 4 CPU is the I7-4980HQ, which is the one currently used in the 15" rMBP. It's the same price, $623. Same as the top 5th gen CPU with Iris Pro, same as the top 6th gen CPU with Iris Pro.

It looks to me like Apple had suitable CPUs all along, they just chose not to update the 15" rMBP, for whatever reason.

Get your facts straight.

As I said before: the gen. 5 CPU (i7-5950HQ) with Iris Pro was released in Q2'2015. This is the direct update for the gen 4 CPU currently being used by the 15" rMBP. Same price and everything.

I listed the current processor in the 15" rMBP, and listed one that you mentioned. They are not priced the same. Unless you wanted the 15" rMBP to be $200 more expensive than it already is.

 

[symphara]

I listed the current processor in the 15" rMBP, and listed one that you mentioned. They are not priced the same. Unless you wanted the 15" rMBP to be $200 more expensive than it already is.

Wrong again. I have no idea what you find so complicated and confusing about this.

Currently, the top 15" rMBP uses the $623 part I listed. This is the I7-4980HQ. It's the 4th gen i7, released in 2014.

In 2015, Intel released an upgraded part, the 5th gen, for the same money. This is the i7-5950HQ. Iris Pro and everything. In 2016, Intel released again an upgraded part, the 6th gen, for the same $623. This is the i7-6970HQ. Again, all of them cost $623. This is the top option.

If you look on everymac.com, you see the full list:

MacBook Pro "Core i7" 2.2 15" Mid-2015 (IG)2.2 GHz Core i7 (I7-4770HQ)

MacBook Pro "Core i7" 2.5 15" Mid-2015 (IG)2.5 GHz Core i7 (I7-4870HQ)

MacBook Pro "Core i7" 2.8 15" Mid-2015 (IG)2.8 GHz Core i7 (I7-4980HQ)

MacBook Pro "Core i7" 2.5 15" Mid-2015 (DG)2.5 GHz Core i7 (I7-4870HQ)

MacBook Pro "Core i7" 2.8 15" Mid-2015 (DG)2.8 GHz Core i7 (I7-4980HQ)

See the 4980HQ last? That's the best option. Intel produced an upgrade in both 2015 and 2016, for the same price.

But if you take the current entry level, the 4770HQ, sold for $434, you'll see that Intel had upgrades for that too. It's the i7-5750HQ, 5th gen CPU, released in 2015, has Iris Pro, same $434 price. Followed by the i7-6770HQ, same price, launched in Q1'2016.

Clearly, Intel did provide the chips. In particular, they provided what seems to be a full complement of 5th gen CPUs suitable for the 15" rMBP, in 2015. Then all the Skylake CPUs are listed as released in Q1'2016, not "just released".

This story that Apple didn't update the 15" rMBP because they had no CPUs from Intel seems a complete fabrication.

 

[Ethosik]

Wrong again. I have no idea what you find so complicated and confusing about this.

Currently, the top 15" rMBP uses the $623 part I listed. This is the I7-4980HQ. It's the 4th gen i7, released in 2014.

In 2015, Intel released an upgraded part, the 5th gen, for the same money. This is the i7-5950HQ. Iris Pro and everything. In 2016, Intel released again an upgraded part, the 6th gen, for the same $623. This is the i7-6970HQ. Again, all of them cost $623. This is the top option.

If you look on everymac.com, you see the full list:

MacBook Pro "Core i7" 2.2 15" Mid-2015 (IG)2.2 GHz Core i7 (I7-4770HQ)

MacBook Pro "Core i7" 2.5 15" Mid-2015 (IG)2.5 GHz Core i7 (I7-4870HQ)

MacBook Pro "Core i7" 2.8 15" Mid-2015 (IG)2.8 GHz Core i7 (I7-4980HQ)

MacBook Pro "Core i7" 2.5 15" Mid-2015 (DG)2.5 GHz Core i7 (I7-4870HQ)

MacBook Pro "Core i7" 2.8 15" Mid-2015 (DG)2.8 GHz Core i7 (I7-4980HQ)

See the 4980HQ last? That's the best option. Intel produced an upgrade in both 2015 and 2016, for the same price.

But if you take the current entry level, the 4770HQ, sold for $434, you'll see that Intel had upgrades for that too. It's the i7-5750HQ, 5th gen CPU, released in 2015, has Iris Pro, same $434 price. Followed by the i7-6770HQ, same price, launched in Q1'2016.

Clearly, Intel did provide the chips. In particular, they provided what seems to be a full complement of 5th gen CPUs suitable for the 15" rMBP, in 2015. Then all the Skylake CPUs are listed as released in Q1'2016, not "just released".

This story that Apple didn't update the 15" rMBP because they had no CPUs from Intel seems a complete fabrication.

Where do you see the 15" laptop has the 4980HQ? Everywhere I have read on review sites and tech specs shows it as 4870HQ.

 

[MacBH928]

Currently, computers without HEVC hardware can still play HEVC compressed video, however, it does so by using software encoding and therefore relies heavily on CPU power to be able to doe the encode. HEVC h265 transcoding can be very CPU intensive.

thanks for clearing this up! I thought this kind of tech is old news now given that 4k has been around for sometimes. Its on YouTube, Netflix, BD players, and TVs. Usually PCs are there first

 

[symphara]

Where do you see the 15" laptop has the 4980HQ? Everywhere I have read on review sites and tech specs shows it as 4870HQ.

The source was listed there in my post. You only had to click on it. Look at http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/index-macbookpro.html, scroll down, you have all the models and complete specifications.

The 4870HQ is the 2.5GHz version (the more expensive of the two default options). Once you select it in the Apple Store, however, you can upgrade it to the 2.8GHz CPU, which is the 4980HQ.

If you go to this page: http://ark.intel.com/search/products?q=iris+pro&page=3 you'll see that Intel had a full complement of 5th gen CPUs suitable for the 15" rMBP, which Apple skipped altogether. Now it looks like they'll switch to the 6th gen (Skylake) late autumn, when the chips were available in Q1'2016.

 

[LordVic]

thanks for clearing this up! I thought this kind of tech is old news now given that 4k has been around for sometimes. Its on YouTube, Netflix, BD players, and TVs. Usually PCs are there first

most of those are still currently using H264 for mainstream streaming. Almost all hardware today has a built in h264 encoder (it's why modern computers can run youtube, or watch videos with little CPU overhead)

HVEC, H265, will bring even better compression. Looking really forward to it. CUrrently a full length movie in 264 will be about 1.5-2gb. with H265, 750mb.

 

[cocoua]

Who needs a computer when you can choose one of three different iPad Pros!

people who needs to make the apps iPads use ;D

 

[MacBH928]

HVEC, H265, will bring even better compression. Looking really forward to it. CUrrently a full length movie in 264 will be about 1.5-2gb. with H265, 750mb.

So Skylake does not have the h265 hardware built in but Kabylake does?

 

[LordVic]

So Skylake does not have the h265 hardware built in but Kabylake does?

Intel's "QuickSync Video" is what they call their H264 hardware encoder and was available starting with Sandy Bridge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quick_Sync_Video

However, it does look like if you're using an Intel IGPU, they added H265 support to them as early as haswell.