Intel Begins Shipping First Kaby Lake Processors, but Most Macs Won't Get Them Until 2017

[geta]

And i thought Apple getting their newest chips from Intel before other companies...

 

[Appleaker]

Looking back at it, I'm starting to think that all that time ago when Apple execs got on stage and said something like the iPad was their "clearest vision of the future of computing...", they were actually hinting that they were moving on from the Mac.

I think it has finally worked on me, too. I recently purchased an iPad Pro (9.7) with the overpriced keyboard cover (after saying I would never buy another iPad) so that I can still have access to the Apple world when I switch to a custom-built PC box with Windows/Linux this winter (planned and saving). Prob gonna unload my rMBP and 24" ACD, will keep my 2011 Mac Mini for backup.

No, I don't think I'll bother.

@PizzaBoxStyle, is right. When the CEO himself is saying what his vision is for personal computing, it leaves no doubt in my mind that if the Mac has a future, it will be as a niche device at best.

My next device will be an iPad Pro - the only question for me now is size. I'll hold on to my 2011 Mac mini but will its role will be that of a server and a shared family computer.

So now that Apple say it in a Keynote, you throw away your Macs? I honestly find it amazing how their words have so much impact sometimes.
They're not going to give up on Macs, but it will be a so what niche market in the perspective of the entire market they sell to - Steve Jobs said that over 6 years ago.

 

[George Dawes]

Steve would never have put up with this..

Bye bye intel hello ARM

 

[cdmoore74]

Bring on the complaints and crying.

These same people will complain if Apple moves to the new release cycle Intel is going to. They'll cry that the new processors aren't a big enough leap to justify a new machine.

You can never win. Everyone always wants more than what's announced and for less.

No complaints here.

Best regards,
PC Master Race

 

[OldSchoolMacGuy]

I don't agree at all. People who spends over $1,000 on a desktop or laptop don't want old or slow technology. If they only have to do email and word processing it they will buy an ASUS at $250 and be super happy

If you ask a grandma: would you like to send email with a $1300 laptop or $250 ?
even the dumbest grandma will answer: I'll take the $250 laptop!

Just because I am not an expert in cars it doesn't mean I don't know the difference between toyota and mercedes. especially when someone hands me the bill

And yet the MBP still continues to sell well to the college crowd. In fact, Apple laptops outsell all the rest by a far margin for college students across the country. Do any of them need a +$1000 laptop? Not at all (sure, maybe less than 1% do).

Just as most with a 300HP car have no need for it over one with 120HP, they still sell wonderfully even if there isn't a real need for them.

 

[manu chao]

Not Skylake. It's the i7-5930K. Though I just checked, and it was released longer ago than I thought. Still newer than most Mac CPUs, which are one generation behind. Fry's had newer CPUs available at the time, but I was on a budget.

Of the laptops, only the 15" MBP is a generation behind your 5930K (aka Broadwell). The MBA and the 13" MBP have Broadwell, the MacBook One has Skylake. The iMac has both Skylake and Broadwell processors.

 

[Zarniwoop]

That isn't true. Apple has been loitering on old architecture for a while. On the Mac Pro side the Xeon v3 CPUs were out almost as soon as the Xeon v2 Mac Pros were in stores. They should have done an update on the Mac Pro to get the faster CPUs with more cores, as well as greater memory bandwidth.
The speculation is that Apple has been waiting for TB3 before they make another revision. And also that the Mac Pro has not really been selling since the new form factor debuted.

First: Haswell-EP (Xeon E5) was released nearly one year after first Mac Pro deliveries.

Haswell-EP was quite problematic for Mac Pro:
- Desktop variants of Haswell draw between 8% and 23% more power under load than Ivy Bridge. This was a design fault from Intel, and came as a surprise, because testing samples didn't have similar problem... but the production units had. The trashcan would have needed some tweaking in thermal regards and PSU
- TSX bug, that forced Intel to disable the whole feature from CPU
- Only 7% gain in speed vs Ivy Bridge, but because temps and perf/watt got worse, why update?
- Those 200 customers needing the two new extra cores for the best model would have had to share the redesigned motherboard and testing costs... I believe Apple thought I wont cut. And because there were no new GPU options available for GPGPU, the update to Haswell would really have been quite for nothing.

Now todat the situation is different; Broadwell-EP's and Polaris GPU's have just come out along deep discounts on Fury Nano.

macOS could be the only reason, why Apple would postpone new Macs to the autumn.

 

[dysamoria]

Why is everyone always so pissed at Apple for having “old” hardware, when it’s Intel that’s been causing the delays? Besides, my Late 2013 15” rMBP still works darn well for my power user workflow.

It would benefit Apple to start doing more custom chipsets. As of this new Intel release, there's still no DisplayPort 1.3. What's the current standard? 1.4? Released in March. Without that, external retina displays are nowhere. Unless Apple steps up the custom chip work.

So yeah, I do kinda blame Apple. I've been waiting for a long time and I'll STILL be waiting next year.

 

[thermodynamic]

Now we will hopefully get some movement in this heinously overdue lineup.

People said that about Skylake.

*zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz*
[doublepost=1469200161][/doublepost]

It would benefit Apple to start doing more custom chipsets. As of this new Intel release, there's still no DisplayPort 1.3. What's the current standard? 1.4? Released in March. Without that, external retina displays are nowhere. Unless Apple steps up the custom chip work.

So yeah, I do kinda blame Apple. I've been waiting for a long time and I'll STILL be waiting next year.

Custom = money. Everyone wants off-the-shelf blandness (but to be able to rip off the public as much as possible in turn, ironically). Which explains Apple's migrating to Intel for hardware and FreeBSD for core software to begin with, too...

 

[Hustler1337]

I had to replace the logic board on my 2011 17" MacBook Pro. It cost be £550. I took the hit because the current MacBooks aren't better in any significant way except having retina displays. For how it looks today, I'd pay that sum again if the computer breaks down again in 12 months.

I'm guessing it was the GPU issue that forced you to replace the logic board? I have the 2011 MacBook Pro and in terms of processing speed, it's a fantastic machine. Once you put an SSD in that machine, it's almost on par with the 2015 model (aside from the GPU of course).

 

[Wildkraut]

Some people might consider launching a spacecraft, putting it in orbit around Jupiter and monitoring it's progress to be a professional application.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/750176081987014657

Before you mention it, the desktops in the pictures appear to be Unix/Linux workstations, perhaps there could be some windows boxes in there somewhere. Didn't see any windows notebooks.

I'm also seeing a quite a lot of macbook pros in the telecommunications industry, mostly with contractors that own their own notebook. Not so many with engineers who get their notebook from the corporate purchasing department.

Well yeah Linux/Unix Workstations are also used a lot in the *real* Professional area, even more than Windows. But you won't find any Macs driving key stuff that keeps our world at a running state. Macs are primary used for secondary stuff. I find Macs shouldn't be called "Pro". Pro in my eyes is: To have the possibility to get top the notch hardware spec and performance, extendibility, customization, without virtual limitations. I use Macs myself, but I don't see them as *real* Pro devices, I see them as limited secondary consumer/business devices for iOS development. Apple is starting to cover everything with "Pro", sorry but I can't take them serious anymore.

 

[Hustler1337]

And yet, they're selling just fine.

People here need to realize that MacRumors members are the MINORITY. The average Apple user isn't on rumor sites or discussing the specs and releases of the newest Macs. The average user simply buys a computer to do basic stuff and as long as it does that they don't care about the rest.

That's why Apple has no issue selling what they do. 99% of their buyers don't care about the things people care about here. Having the latest process or one 2 generations old doesn't matter to them as long as they can get online, do some email and word processing and that's about it.

I think you're overstating the insignificance here. You're forgetting the professional users who use the MacBook Pro for graphics, video editing and other power uses which is what the MacBook Pro line is generally targeted at. Users who want to just get online, do some emailing and word processing are more likely to get the Macbook or Macbook Air models instead. For businesses and the professional user, it matters that the Macbook Pro, Mac Pro and other Mac lines are out of date and falling behind current technology. Apple risk losing market share to their competitors who are releasing hardware with latest chips and advancements in technology.

If it weren't for Mac OS, Apple would have seen a significant drop in their users in my opinion.

 

[manu chao]

Not entirely true. Dell, Lenovo and HP have all had skylake laptops out for over a year now.

The first Skylake chips launched on 1 September 2015. So much for 'over a year'. But I guess lying is ok if the audience wants to believe the lie. And people care more about the packaging than the content (aka any Skylake chip will do, even if it has a worse iGPU).

 

[pier]

Why is everyone always so pissed at Apple for having “old” hardware, when it’s Intel that’s been causing the delays? Besides, my Late 2013 15” rMBP still works darn well for my power user workflow.

It's not Intel that decides to keep 4th gen CPUs on the 15'' rMBP considering 6th gen chips have been out for a year.

 

[Gudi]

Is it really only bringing DisplayPort 1.2? Not 1.3 or 1.4 as seen in current GPUs from AMD and NVIDIA?

Disappointing, isn't it? I've already forgotten what version is needed to push enough pixels for a standalone 27" Retina display. The one that doesn't exist.

 

[vatter69]

It's not Intel that decides to keep 4th gen CPUs on the 15'' rMBP considering 6th gen chips have been out for a year.

Not sure but it has been said (rightfully) at least 20 times in this thread that the CPUs for the 2016 RMBP have not been released in volumes if at all. There are very very few machines in the wild running said CPUs.

Why do you people refuse to acknowledge this? Repeating the same nonsense doesnt make it any more true.

 

[Zarniwoop]

It's not Intel that decides to keep 4th gen CPUs on the 15'' rMBP considering 6th gen chips have been out for a year.

Well then, tell me oh sensei, what 6th Gen chips were available one year ago? What kind of computer you'd build with them? Would you really want a laptop with those processors?

For some it seems to be too much to understand, that Skylake is a processor family and it can take one year to release all of its members. We just got the last Broadwell (5th gen) members out last month. Skylake EP (Xeon E5) could come out next year... if ever.

 

[venom600]

Yeah the performance is pretty much the same, in the sense that you won't see any noticeable benefit, even under specific circumstances. Already made mention of that here:
And that's really the only one I can think of. Everybody else is acting like Intel have doubled CPU performance but Apple aren't putting in the chips.

You aren't joking. I smugly went over to Lenovo to find out what the fastest processors they use in their P50 and P70 notebooks are; 2.8-GHz Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 CPU. According to CPUboss.com, it's not any faster than the i7 4980HQ.... in fact it's slower in many instances. They rated the Xeon (arguably the fastest current gen chip out) lower than the two year old i7 in the Macbook Pro.

They list four chips with better overall performance than the 4980. One is the i7 3920XM released in 2012, the other three are all Haswell parts (ironically the 2.5Ghz part that is the standard high end is ranked higher than the 4980).

So what's the benefit of sticking a newer, but slower processor in the computer? A little better battery life?

 

[manu chao]

For some it seems to be too much to understand, that Skylake is a processor family and it can take one year to release all of its members.

That.

 

[rfrmac]

Why is everyone always so pissed at Apple for having “old” hardware, when it’s Intel that’s been causing the delays? Besides, my Late 2013 15” rMBP still works darn well for my power user workflow.

Sorry, I don't see it that way. On the Windows side of the house they are using multiple processors instead of just one to increase there graphic output. Have you seen there graphic output? I have and it makes me cry. Graphics is very important to me. The Apple OS is very important to me. What Apple has done with their hardware both desktop and mobile when it comes to graphics has been a complete disappointment in the last three years. They know how to do more, someone there just won't let them. And I'm left with 2013 technology.

 

[keysofanxiety]

You aren't joking. I smugly went over to Lenovo to find out what the fastest processors they use in their P50 and P70 notebooks are; 2.8-GHz Intel Xeon E3-1505M v5 CPU. According to CPUboss.com, it's not any faster than the i7 4980HQ.... in fact it's slower in many instances. They rated the Xeon (arguably the fastest current gen chip out) lower than the two year old i7 in the Macbook Pro.

They list four chips with better overall performance than the 4980. One is the i7 3920XM released in 2012, the other three are all Haswell parts (ironically the 2.5Ghz part that is the standard high end is ranked higher than the 4980).

So what's the benefit of sticking a newer, but slower processor in the computer? A little better battery life?

Thank you Venom, I know this might sound a bit suckery but I actually appreciate you taking the time to validate that! Most posters here just brush it off. Newer does not mean better performance.

And if Apple put these 'new generation' chips in, then everybody would be freaking out that the Geekbench scores would be lower than the previous gen. So what are they supposed to do?

Mac Pro, of course -- unforgivable that they haven't yet implemented the FCLGA2011-3 socket yet. The 20-core hyperthreaded Xeon E5-2679 is an absolutely gorgeous processor. Makes my insides tingle just thinking about it.

I'd have loved for Apple to update their dGPUs more as well, or even drop the price of their current hardware if they can't offer a decent upgrade. GPUs have made more leaps-and-bounds than CPUs recently.

 

[MacBH928]

That awkward moment when you are waiting for Broadwell, except for that Skylake is about to be released, then Apple decides not to upgrade so long that Kaby Lake is released before the Skylake laptops ships.

I am starting to dislike this Tim guy.


People are giving excuses for Apple that intel is late in releasing CPUs, then how come all other manufacturers upgraded already?

 

[manu chao]

My current machine was bought in 2011. Upgraded it to 16GB RAM and looking at throwing in a 512GB SSD.
It still does everything I need to do.

Best of all, it has FW800 and Thunderbolt so I use it at work to check other macs that have been put into Target Mode (I run Diskwarrior, TechtoolPro,DriveGenius, etc) as well as allowing me to clone machines with CCC.

My machine is from 2012 and it has all that yours has plus USB 3.

What I probably miss most compared to newer machines is the retina screen. PCIe SSD speed might be next and GPU third. Sure, thinner and lighter is also nice.

 

[jonnysods]

Yep, and they will offer the crappiest version of it.

I feel so jaded these days as a passionate Mac user waiting for a notebook update. Couldn't imagine needing a Mac pro update.

 

[keysofanxiety]

People are giving excuses for Apple that intel is late in releasing CPUs, then how come all other manufacturers upgraded already?

You only read what you want to read. The new chips other manufacturers are shipping do not have better CPU performance than the ones currently in the 15" rMBP. I've been arguing this for pages and people are just brushing it off.

You'd be the same person complaining if Apple upgraded the chips to the new gen, and the Geekbench results were lower.