Geekbench Shows 2018 MacBook Pro Has Biggest Yearly Performance Gain Since 2011

[TimmeyCook]

It's a good refresh at a good time, but there are still some valid complaints to make, like the screen res and price tag.

It's funny because PC fans have been telling me that "1080p is also good" all this time.
[doublepost=1531688901][/doublepost]

Indeed.

A gaming laptop from 2017 with a mobile GTX 1070 and 5.9 TFLOPS smokes the most expensive 2018 MBP with a 560X and 2.6 TFLOPS. Heck, even the most powerful iMac with a 580 has 5.5 TFLOPS (and the BlackMagic eGPU).

Why don't you also post a picture of a laptop with those graphics cards?

I bet the MBP will easily fit inside that monstrous thing, and the battery lasts twice as much.

 

[FrozenDarkness]

btw when people say "nobody cares about thin and light," they're lying.

I for one am constantly amazed at how thin and light my macbook is compared to my laptops even 5 years ago.

 

[AJ5790]

They haven't updated them for ages, so yes, they better have a big performance improvement. This is like putting a Thread.Sleep() inside your code, then remove it, and say the performance gains are huge. Sure they are

A Year is now “ages”. wow! Those goalposts just keep moving all over the place

 

[redheeler]

Your comparison with the 2014 retina model is apples and oranges though. The baseline model that year only had integrated graphics, which is far inferior to most other baseline MBPs which have usually had dedicated graphics. I already conceded on the inexplicably lower priced (on an absolute scale even) mid-cycle unibodies, but the latest MBPs are still very much in line with the pre-unibody and rMBP prices, as long as you stick with apples to apples hardware.

Standardizing dedicated GPUs was more of a necessity given the weaker integrated GPUs found in the Skylake / Kaby Lake / Coffee Lake 45 W chips (Intel probably assumed the higher-end 45 W chips would be used alongside a dedicated GPU).

The reason I attribute the price increase (or at least Apple's excuse for it) to the Touch Bar is the 13" lineup, with the $300 more expensive Touch Bar models that still use integrated graphics.

 

[FrozenDarkness]

Standardizing dedicated GPUs was more of a necessity given the weaker integrated GPUs found in the Skylake / Kaby Lake / Coffee Lake 45 W chips (Intel probably assumed the higher-end 45 W chips would be used alongside a dedicated GPU).

The reason I attribute the price increase (or at least Apple's excuse for it) to the Touch Bar is the 13" lineup, with the $300 more expensive Touch Bar models that still use integrated graphics.

your first sentence is pretty misguided. The reason they included dedicated was purely because they wanted 15" to support dual 5K displays. The state of integrated graphics is much better than it was 4 years ago.

 

[ESA]

All people complaining about the graphic card. Tell me a card with more Tflops that only requires 35W?

 

[redheeler]

your first sentence is pretty misguided. The reason they included dedicated was purely because they wanted 15" to support dual 5K displays. The state of integrated graphics is much better than it was 4 years ago.

You misunderstood my point. I don't think Apple would want the base model 15" with Touch Bar to have a weaker GPU than the base model 13" with Touch Bar of the same generation, which would've been the case had they not put in a dedicated GPU starting with the 2016 models.

 

[chucker23n1]

your first sentence is pretty misguided. The reason they included dedicated was purely because they wanted 15" to support dual 5K displays. The state of integrated graphics is much better than it was 4 years ago.

No it isn't. They killed off the Iris Pro, and the H-series Coffee Lake CPUs don't even come with an Iris Plus. Thus, the last-generation rMBP came with 40 execution units, 320 shading units, 128 MB eDRAM, a 1300 MHz boost clock, adding up to 832 GFLOPS, while the current one has 24 execution units, 192 shading units, no eDRAM whatsoever, a 460.8 MHz boost clock and, y'know, just 460.8 GFLOPS.

The low- and mid-end integrated graphics have improved, but the high end ones are done for.

 

[Zdigital2015]

That's all well and good, now take the machine and plug an HDMI cable into it.

Sure, no problem. I will order it today and post the pics of my 2016 plugged into my works projector just as soon as Amazon delivers it - which is no different that what I had to do to get the 21.5" iMac we use with the projector hooked up, except it was miniDisplayPort to HDMI, but I digress.

https://www.amazon.com/Cable-Matter...pID=41CYhqej-yL&preST=_SY300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

 

[Garrett998]

It's funny because PC fans have been telling me that "1080p is also good" all this time.
[doublepost=1531688901][/doublepost]

Why don't you also post a picture of a laptop with those graphics cards?

I bet the MBP will easily fit inside that monstrous thing, and the battery lasts twice as much.

The Dell XPS, SurfaceBook 2, and Razer Blade all have similar build sizes but absolutely demolish the MBP in terms of graphics power. They have a valid point.

 

[bodonnell202]

I still think Apple would do well to update to the new 8th gen 15W CPUs with Intel UHD (or God forbid NVidia MX150) GPU.

Going to a UHD 620 (which is all that is available on the 8th gen 15W chips at this time) would be a downgrade from from the Iris Plus 640 that's in there now, so it's unlikely that Apple would do that. Throwing in an nVidia MX150 would be nice but that definitely won't happen (for two reasons, Apple won't go nVidia and that would mean the the non touch bar model would have better graphics than the touch bar models. Chances are that the non touch bar model will not be updated this year to maintain separation from the more expensive models...

 

[vipergts2207]

Standardizing dedicated GPUs was more of a necessity given the weaker integrated GPUs found in the Skylake / Kaby Lake / Coffee Lake 45 W chips (Intel probably assumed the higher-end 45 W chips would be used alongside a dedicated GPU).

The reason I attribute the price increase (or at least Apple's excuse for it) to the Touch Bar is the 13" lineup, with the $300 more expensive Touch Bar models that still use integrated graphics.

Dedicated GPU’s in the 15” MBP have almost always been the case, not a new phenomenon that came around with Skylake. The use of non-dedicated GPUs on baseline 15” models was relatively short-lived idea from the late-‘13 model to the mid-‘15 model. My guess is a low take-rate, considering these are supposed to be pro-level machines. The why doesn’t really matter much anyway. The fact is if you’re going to compare prices, then it needs to be an apples to apples hardware comparison. Anything less is just being disingenuous.

And I’m sure the touch bar adds to some of that $300 cost, but not all of it. The 13” TB models all have better processors and iGPUs as well, even before last week’s update. Now the difference is even greater with the new chips and still the same $300 difference.

 

[WristyManchego]

Simple tasks like work processing startups are not the goal. No one would really notice any difference. Most would be focused on video editing/encoding and gaming

Whoosh.

 

[UltimaKilo]

This is a worthy upgrade and there hasn’t been a better time to buy a MBP in years.

As much as I’d like to switch back to Mac, I’ll stick with the HP I purchased this year and hold out for 10nm optimized Intel processors and a better GPU, LPDDR4 RAM with a true 4K screen

 

[OS X Dude]

That’s what most people seem to forget. Specs are great on paper for MacBooks and I really love the machine, but if you have the system under load for long periods of time it’s going to slow down. At this point it is nowhere near being a replacement for my desktop system. One day.

This is why I went for a desktop this time. Also much better suited to my workflow too as I can leave all my gear permanently rigged-up and I have a variety of I/O without needing adapters. I’m hoping a future version of the MacBook Pro has variant of the iMac Pro cooling system.

 

[PJivan]

Can you find a 2017 gaming laptop on ebay that sold for peanuts? Seems $1000-$1500.

50% depreciation in one year for me is peanut, another 2 years and become unsalable, in fact I can find gaming led plastic with 970m for 550 euros.

P.S. is this the start of a pointless discussion were you try to prove that a gaming laptop keep better value over the year compared to a Macbook pro?

 

[tokajilover]

Why do you need 4tb of SSD to have that score?7 years later you still don't know what a drive does.

i have a 2tb raid-0 ssd in my oldie. (about 1.2tb in use) so if you wish it would be 6k - does it make it better? i think no

and btw. i could upgrade easy to 8tb ssd inside. - but with this 2018 "maschine" you will stay at the same storage for ever!

what do you think, you would need (or like) in, let say 6 years?

not upgradable = no deal (for me)

 

[Glideslope]

So, Intel has one of the biggest year over year performance gains since 2011 in their 8th gen processor lineup, and the MacBook Pro which uses Intel's new 8th gen processors has the same performance gains?

Wow didn't see that one coming.

“Slay the Truth Teller.”

 

[PJivan]

The Dell XPS, SurfaceBook 2, and Razer Blade all have similar build sizes but absolutely demolish the MBP in terms of graphics power. They have a valid point.

LoL dell don't 1050 is their max config, i think you are confusing them with alienware, surface and Razer have 1060 max-Q...it is more powerful but not much...10% maybe not a game changer that is for sure.

 

[redheeler]

Dedicated GPU’s in the 15” MBP have almost always been the case, not a new phenomenon that came around with Skylake. The use of non-dedicated GPUs on baseline 15” models was relatively short-lived idea from the late-‘13 model to the mid-‘15 model. My guess is a low take-rate, considering these are supposed to be pro-level machines. The why doesn’t really matter much anyway. The fact is if you’re going to compare prices, then it needs to be an apples to apples hardware comparison. Anything less is just being disingenuous.

While the use of dedicated GPUs in 15" rMBPs is nothing new, my point is that Apple really had no choice but to put one in the base model, as not doing so would've resulted in the 15" base model having a weaker GPU than the 13" base model.

Obviously a lot of components in today's MBPs are better than the ones in the 2011 or 2015 MBP, not just the GPU; but that doesn't mean they should be sold at a higher price. Evolutionary technology is about offering more capability at the same or lower price.

And I’m sure the touch bar adds to some of that $300 cost, but not all of it. The 13” TB models all have better processors and iGPUs as well, even before last week’s update. Now the difference is even greater with the new chips and still the same $300 difference.

Excluding the non-Touch Bar models from the refresh was either a deliberate attempt by Apple to upsell the more-expensive Touch Bar models, or a refresh + reorganization of Apple's lower-end laptop lineup is planned for the fall (time will tell if so).

 

[PJivan]

i have a 2tb raid-0 ssd in my oldie. (about 1.2tb in use) so if you wish it would be 6k - does it make it better? i think no

and btw. i could upgrade easy to 8tb ssd inside. - but with this 2018 "maschine" you will stay at the same storage for ever!

what do you think, you would need (or like) in, let say 6 years?

not upgradable = no deal (for me)

So again, how come 7k and ridiculous SSD requirement has something to do with intel CPU gain over the past years? What you need it's none of my business and I could not care less, I'm just point out your flawed logic.

 

[lkrupp]

Hmm but what will all those “professionals” complain about now that their word processors start up quicker? I’m sure the majority of professionals were really struggling without the 32gb ram and six cores .

Well, that’s the great divide between what the basement neckbeards who post here say is necessary and what real professionals actually need. Is a few milliseconds faster performance really worth the extra cost. If it takes 15 minutes longer to render a graphic with less DRAM or CPU Ghz does that really become a deal breaker for a professional? I think not.

 

[imageWIS]

Let’s face it. The MacBook Pro lineup got a great update with very little to complain about...though, people still will (and have).

You mean the same update along with every other computer company that's using Intel's new chips? Is that really how far you're willing to bend over to defend Apple? Cuz the actual hardware they are responsible for is stupidly lacking, including: screen resolution, crap new keyboard design, lacking MagSafe (which is totally, f*cking doable with USB-C), only 2 ports on the 13" MBP, etc, etc, etc...

 

[Goaliegeek]

Are you just joking? A modern i7 is a huge difference from Core 2 Duo. There are significant changes in the architecture and the amount of cache is significantly higher. Hardware 10-bit HEVC. We're talking about 9MB vs 3. 12MB L3 on the i9! The system bus is significantly faster. The PCIe x3 NVMe is singificantly faster. The I/O is insanely fast. When you look at the entire system as a whole these 2018s are monsters compared to the pre-retina MBPs even with maxed out memory and a data SSD. PCIe 3 is just in a different league. It's also much much faster than the PCIe 2 in the 3rd gen 2012-2015 retina MBPs.

Anyone that wants a great MBP will get what they're paying for with these machines. The 13" models are better than ever. They should be useful for many years to come.

Given how competitive AMD has been in the last 2 years, I wouldn't be suspenseful if these yearly gains start becoming the norm rather than the exception. I'm sure we will see octa core CPUs in the 15" sooner than later. It all depends how well AMD does with mobile. On the desktop Intel has no choice but to keep offering more cores until AMD hits a roadblock.

Yes, I was. Hence the:

So glad I waited for one of the largest speed bumps. It would be great if this one lasts me another 10 years

 

[aknabi]

Hmm but what will all those “professionals” complain about now that their word processors start up quicker? I’m sure the majority of professionals were really struggling without the 32gb ram and six cores .

How about this one... just back from London where neither my Anker or Apple USB-C dongles would work with the HDMI monitor... screwing around for a over 30min with reboots, etc to no avail... ended up showing stuff on an HP Envy (oh and the Dell XPSs and Lenovos in the room had no issue).

It was embarrassing and if Timmy is going to have us live in dongle hell with no recourse, then get those dongles implemented solidly (and if you say "well you can't for all those different models" then don't send us to dongle hell then)... but I guess "it just works" is as dead as disco