Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

Intel Launches First Eighth-Generation Core Processors, Paving Way For Quad-Core 13-Inch MacBook Pro

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
51,004
12,544


Intel today introduced its eighth-generation Core processor lineup [PDF] coming to notebooks later this year.


The first four eighth-generation processors launching today are U-series chips suitable for the 13-inch MacBook Pro, MacBook Air, and Mac mini. They're all 15W chips with four cores and eight threads, paving the way for a quad-core 13-inch MacBook Pro should Apple choose to release one.

The new Core i5 and Core i7 chips have integrated Intel UHD Graphics 620, and support both DDR4-2400 and LPDDR3-2133 RAM.

Given the lack of LPDDR4 support, which allows for up to 32GB RAM, a new 13-inch MacBook Pro with an eighth-generation Core processor would likely remain capped at 16GB of RAM. Apple marketing Phil Schiller explained why last year.


Notebooks using the eighth-generation chips can get up to 10 hours of battery life, consistent with the current 13-inch MacBook Pro.

Intel said eighth-generation processors appropriate for desktops like the iMac will be available in the fall, while processors appropriate for the 12-inch MacBook and 15-inch MacBook Pro are vaguely listed as coming soon.

The eighth-generation Core i5 and Core i7 chips are up to 40 percent faster than the equivalent seventh-generation Kaby Lake processors, according to Intel, based on the benchmark tool SYSmark 2014 SE on Windows 10. That tops Intel's original claim that the chips would be up to 30 percent faster.

The test compared Intel's quad-core Core i7-8550U processor, with a base frequency of 1.8GHz and Turbo Boost up to 4GHz, against its dual-core Core i7-7500U processor with a base frequency of 2.7GHz and Turbo Boost up to 3.5GHz.

Intel also boasted that its eighth-generation Core processors are up to twice as fast as its equivalent five-year-old Ivy Bridge chips. It said users can output a 106-second 4K video in as little as three minutes with a new PC, for example, versus up to 45 minutes on an equivalent five-year-old PC.

Notably, the eighth-generation processors announced today are not part of the upcoming Coffee Lake family. Instead, they're part of what's being called Kaby Lake Refresh, an iteration of the seventh-generation Kaby Lake processors used in the latest MacBook, MacBook Pro, and iMac models.

Intel is expected to eventually announce chips based on Coffee Lake's 14nm++ and Cannonlake's 10nm manufacturing processes that join the eighth-generation Core lineup. In other words, a new generation of Core processors no longer immediately correlates to brand new chip architecture.

Intel said the first notebooks with eighth-generation Core processors will be available in September, but it's unclear when Apple will refresh its Mac lineup -- probably not soon. For perspective, Intel launched its Kaby Lake processors in January, and the first Macs equipped with the chips were released in June.

Article Link: Intel Launches First Eighth-Generation Core Processors, Paving Way For Quad-Core 13-Inch MacBook Pro
 
Last edited:

Appleaker

macrumors 68020
Jun 13, 2016
2,197
4,191
A year after originally rumored, they’ve been announced. It’ll be interesting to see the 28W configurations and the 45W (6-core) configurations. Hopefully we will see MacBooks with it in March but WWDC could be more likely, along with 6-core iMacs.
 
Comment

mikecorp

Suspended
Mar 20, 2008
502
341
I still have 4 years to go before I will consider any upgrade. So Octo and 4GB GPU in 13" macbook pro.
 
Comment

Avieshek

Suspended
Dec 7, 2013
701
1,128
India
We are about to have DDR5, PCIe 5.0 while the mobile devices already use LPDDR4x and Intel call this an update that still stuck with LPDDR3?
And their comparison is something from 5yrs ago? With what courage do they charge this much of money for this kind of Stagnant evolution. Atleast, support the standards.

I don't wanna even blame Intel anymore. I wanna ask, is Apple just gonna sit idle? All that proprietory OS, motherboard, MacAppStore for nothing?
 
Last edited:
Comment

CWallace

macrumors G3
Aug 17, 2007
8,246
4,697
Seattle, WA
So arguably these should have been Coffee Lake per the original road maps, but instead are an improved Kaby Lake process. They still deliver the performance boost, however, so in the end I guess it doesn't really matter.
 
Comment

Appleaker

macrumors 68020
Jun 13, 2016
2,197
4,191
Intel is Nokia.

I thought, this one was supposed to be Coffee Lake. Than what name is this?
These are revised Kaby Lake chips (Kaby Lake R). Here’s the breakdown for mobile:

Y (5W, 2 cores) = Cannonlake
U (15W/28W, 4 cores) = Kaby Lake R
H (45W, 6 cores) = Coffee Lake

However, they are all 8th generation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ener Ji and ikir
Comment

Appleaker

macrumors 68020
Jun 13, 2016
2,197
4,191
The 2012 Mac Mini's had the full 45W Quad Cores found in the 15" MBPs; these low power quad cores are unnecessary to make a quad core Mac Mini. Apple doesn't want a quad core mac mini, simple as that.
Actually they are necessary since 45W mobile chips are moving to 6-core. They may have not wanted a quad-core, but if they were to refresh it, it would be quad core as it currently uses the 13” MBP chips which are moving to quad-core. And there’s no threat of competing against iMacs as they will similarly move to 6 core. Although a quad-core Mac mini with TB3 could be considered as competing with iMacs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Luap
Comment

A7ibaba

macrumors 6502
Apr 19, 2012
257
232
Sweden
And dat graphic UHD 620 is 60% better than HD640 because its just the usual HD and Ultra High Definition iz the new king. lol. These quads works at 1.6 Ghz and with that 40% better nonsense from intel in sysmark (which is useful in real life like broken dildo) they could easily say its better 100%,because 4 cores are better than 2 therefore extra 2 cores are increased efficiency by 100%. And in real life these 4 core will probably throttle at 2 Ghz and 80 °C TDP.
 
Comment

TechZeke

macrumors 68020
Jul 29, 2012
2,377
2,030
San Antonio, TX
Actually they are necessary since 45W mobile chips are moving to 6-core. They may have not wanted a quad-core, but if they were to refresh it, it would be quad core as it currently uses the 13” MBP chips which are moving to quad-core. And there’s no threat of competing against iMacs as they will similarly move to 6 core. Although a quad-core Mac mini with TB3 could be considered as competing with iMacs.

Then the Mac mini should be using the new 45W 6-cores. The point is, the Mac Mini is capable and proven to be capable of having the higher watt processors. There's no reason why these shouldn't be an option when the 2012s had it. The 2014 refresh was a step backwards, plain and simple. It'd be one thing if the Mac mini was smaller now, but it's the same damn size as the 2012 model.
 
Comment

Smeaton1724

macrumors 6502a
Sep 14, 2011
830
801
Leeds, UK
13 MacBook Pro with quad core and 32GB RAM plus the ability to connect to an eGPU. Solid portable performance with the quad, RAM and Intel graphics, then for the really heavy stuff being able to get to a desk and use an eGPU and be connected to a 4K monitor or VR headset.

Funny thing is the current hardware is priced like the future (probably 2019) is here already......
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.