Intel Begins Shipping First Kaby Lake Processors, but Most Macs Won't Get Them At All.
-there I fixed it....but i couldn't fix this font.-
-there I fixed it....but i couldn't fix this font.-
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Intel Begins Shipping First Kaby Lake Processors, but Most Macs Won't Get Them Until 2017
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Pass. Still no display port 1.3!! I want a 5K monitor in a single cable.
We're simply adopting the behavior of the new workplace. Continuous Quality Improvement, Performance Reviews, etc. What's good for the goose, etc., Onward and Upward. Or do you want to Do More with Less?
I see a number of people posting in regards to have dual chips (Apple + Intel) or future in-house chips designed to have Intel-compatibility, or emulation.
I'm pretty sure this is a very bad idea. History would seem to indicate that, while "all" it takes is a recompilation of code sometimes, developers (and their companies) take the easier path: lowest common denominator. If there's a high-end Apple CPU that also can run Intel-compiled code at "good enough" speeds (as well as a market that can ONLY run Intel code) then they'll choose the common denominator and have something that doesn't get any performance gain whatsoever (and may actually be slower in the case of emulation).
Some of Apple's advances have come from forcing companies to adapt or die: 64-bit, phasing out emulators like Rosetta, etc. More recently, the decision to force all apps submitted to the various App Stores to be able to support IPv6-only networking (not like anyone seriously has an IPv6 network that doesn't have some method of working with IPv4 but this may help push what we've been told "is right around the corner" for a decade to actually become a reality).
Look at Windows: you'd be hard pressed to find an entry-level computer with fewer than 4-GB of RAM these days. Yet, they still offer a 32-bit OS, many companies only deploy 32-bit versions of their applications (and in some cases, their drivers), and even Microsoft strongly recommends the 32-bit version of Office 2016 over the 64-bit version. Yes, most people don't need to address 64-bits for their apps and tasks but they still release 32-bit-only apps for those people running a 10-year-old computer (before 64-bit was supported) that they were able to get Windows 10/32 running.
Let's not forget the delayed Adobe updates, the ongoing complaints about the Quicken-family, and other common apps that were slow to update (or even dropped the Mac for a while) because their 5-year-old version still ran "good enough." Ultimately, supporting both code sets would probably not be much of a boost as you expect because nothing would support the newer, faster, better processor anyway.
I'm pretty sure this is a very bad idea. History would seem to indicate that, while "all" it takes is a recompilation of code sometimes, developers (and their companies) take the easier path: lowest common denominator. If there's a high-end Apple CPU that also can run Intel-compiled code at "good enough" speeds (as well as a market that can ONLY run Intel code) then they'll choose the common denominator and have something that doesn't get any performance gain whatsoever (and may actually be slower in the case of emulation).
Some of Apple's advances have come from forcing companies to adapt or die: 64-bit, phasing out emulators like Rosetta, etc. More recently, the decision to force all apps submitted to the various App Stores to be able to support IPv6-only networking (not like anyone seriously has an IPv6 network that doesn't have some method of working with IPv4 but this may help push what we've been told "is right around the corner" for a decade to actually become a reality).
Look at Windows: you'd be hard pressed to find an entry-level computer with fewer than 4-GB of RAM these days. Yet, they still offer a 32-bit OS, many companies only deploy 32-bit versions of their applications (and in some cases, their drivers), and even Microsoft strongly recommends the 32-bit version of Office 2016 over the 64-bit version. Yes, most people don't need to address 64-bits for their apps and tasks but they still release 32-bit-only apps for those people running a 10-year-old computer (before 64-bit was supported) that they were able to get Windows 10/32 running.
Let's not forget the delayed Adobe updates, the ongoing complaints about the Quicken-family, and other common apps that were slow to update (or even dropped the Mac for a while) because their 5-year-old version still ran "good enough." Ultimately, supporting both code sets would probably not be much of a boost as you expect because nothing would support the newer, faster, better processor anyway.
Intel didn't ship any Iris Pro 580 chips on Q1/2016. They didn't ship them even on Q2/2016. They have been delayed to unknown time...
Wow! Sarcastic arrogant person alert!!! Did you get out of the wrong side of bed or something?
You do know Nvidia has launched its new gen too right? And other laptops have been using Skylakes for a while now. And as for your suggestion of a delay in Skylake, please provide proof as I cannot find any information about that on Google.
Intel has not given any reason why they cannot deliver Iris Pro 580 based chips. There was a press release in May, that now they're coming... but no. Still, you cannot buy any Intel processors with Iris Pro 580... and that is an essential part of Skylake family. And the missing part of rMBP 15" and iMac 21.5".
My reaction was not just for you, but all you who are saying, that Apple is not updating their computers and who read Wikipedia like Bible. It states Q1/2016 because Intel has not given any official explanation or new dates. For me, it seems, they will jump silent directly to Kaby Lake. My only evidence is, that you cannot buy the mobile chip from any dealer as of now.
Please, Google Iris Pro P580 and look all the information and reviews available. Only Intel press release based vaporware.
Last edited:
Indeed, and Apple is waiting for the versions with the 'high-end' integrated graphics to ship.
update cycle decides that they are outdated. they are not updated as they usually are. meaning something big is coming or apple is shifting focus away from macs altogether.
I agree. I just decided to throw my hands up and get a 2015 13" MBP and love it. Would it be nice if it had sky/kaby? Sure. But broadwell is doing fantastically, and I still get all my ports.
It is true that shipping on the parts with the Iris Pro 580 was delayed beyond Q1. It is not true that they are "unavailable" or "delayed to unknown time." The i7-6770HQ, for example, has been available and shipping to customers since May.
If that is true, where are the products?
Update: ok, there are some Intel NUC computer out at the moment. So, we're talking about one month old product. That is good.
But anyway, one month is not a reason to be angry and accuse Apple being slow updater. Rumors say anyway, that there's coming a new design...
Last edited:
Amazon.
As for computers containing the mobile i5 and i7 parts with the Iris 550, you can walk into a Microsoft store and pick up a VAIO Z Flip containing either, as has been the case for some months.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
It's the Iris Pro 580 that has been late. But good, we have finally one computer in the world selling this part. Where's the competition, why Intel only? Low yields perhaps...
There are some mobile Xeons that came out 31st of May. But it really seems that there's still a production problem with P580.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Hey whoa there! Developing those watchbands isn't cheap. Nor was developing a single-port Macbook for those noodle-armed Portlandia hipsters. (It's okay, I'm a native...)
In October 2010 Apple released brand new MacBook Air and MacBook Pro models using the Core 2 Duo that was by then over a year old.
Perhaps. But don't tell me that a product isn't shipping to or available for purchase by consumers when that's obviously not the case.
Apple being Apple, I can imagine the Company not wanting to release whatever portion of the lineup, if any, configured for the Iris 550 without also being able to ship those units configured for the 580. But to the extent the former is being delayed on account of the latter, that's more to do with Apple than with Intel.
Because Intel spent a lot of money laying off thousands of workers in Oregon. That can't be cheap. ;op
That makes no sense whatsoever.
Did you mean
"You guys at maceumours [sic] assume that Apple is NOT going to release any new macs [sic] until next year..."
Where is that assumption? It certainly isn't in the Buying Guide! In fact, the guide showcases that upgrades and new versions are long overdue for virtually every computer!
One could more easily write,
"You guys (and gals!) at MacRumors have helped us by showing that Apple is LONG OVERDUE in releasing new Macs"!
Let's keep the facts straight!
------
Last edited:
True, that slightly orange-er pink band probably took thousands of R&D dollars...
People do joke about the one-port MacBook, rightly or wrongly, but at least it was Apple focussing on the Mac and trying to innovate in a fairly mature market.
Funnily enough, I walked into an edit suite this week. An editor was using FCPX on his 12" MacBook, cutting with 4K proxies and it performed perfectly. Not a Mac Pro in sight. They are surprising powerful, and this was for television, not some YouTube channel.
Just re-read the short article, too. It, too, certainly does NOT make the case that there won't be any upgrades.
It stated,
That's good news AND SUPPORTIVE OF UPDATES!
Again, emphasizing that releases are overdue.
...
FINALLY, there's this:
Notice the ending... the article does NOT conclude that there won't be updates, but rather that Kaby Lake will likely NOT be included in THIS YEAR'S RUMORED UPDATE!
So, we really can't claim that MacRumors -- via this single article or its Buying Guide -- is proclaiming NO updates this year!
It stated,
"Intel's last two chip releases have been plagued with long delays, and moving away from the tick-tock cycle will allow it to push out new chip updates on a regular basis."
That's good news AND SUPPORTIVE OF UPDATES!
"Apple's Macs, such as the Retina MacBook Pro and the iMac, have been impacted by Intel's chip delays over the last few years, resulting in long periods of time between updates and unusual update cycles."
Again, emphasizing that releases are overdue.
...
FINALLY, there's this:
"Kaby Lake chips appropriate for the Retina MacBook Pro, the machine everyone is most curious about, may not launch until the very end of 2016 or the beginning of 2017 and thus may not be released in time for inclusion in this year's rumored update."
Notice the ending... the article does NOT conclude that there won't be updates, but rather that Kaby Lake will likely NOT be included in THIS YEAR'S RUMORED UPDATE!
So, we really can't claim that MacRumors -- via this single article or its Buying Guide -- is proclaiming NO updates this year!
Funny you mentioned ports because the moment I heard the rumors about usb-c only and no sd card on the new MBP (true or not) i snatched up my 2015 15"!
Yes, I stumbled there. But it wont take away the point that there hasn't been an Intel product for rMBP 15". Until last month. And still the yields seems to be too low.
What comes to rMBP 13"... I think it will go, with MBA, to oblivion... and reborn as a one new product. Maybe that new one is waiting for the Kaby Lake?