At the moment, quad core would be a lot more useful than going to 32GB from 16GB for me. Although I have a feeling my current machine is here to stay until the next form factor refresh.
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 Launches First Eighth-Generation Core Processors, Paving Way For Quad-Core 13-Inch MacBook Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Boring..... because AMD have knocked Intel outa the park.. and for a lot less money too!
The new Dell Inspiron Ryzen system is very good value, or you can build a nice system yourself of course! One of the best Ryzen systems I've seen is a hackintosh in an old G5 Mac Pro case.
Unfortunately Apple has enhanced Final Cut for Intel only...
I know the new Mac Pro will be a work of art, but a grand buys one powerful Ryzen system! Hmm that's around the same cost as a low end MacBook..
The new Dell Inspiron Ryzen system is very good value, or you can build a nice system yourself of course! One of the best Ryzen systems I've seen is a hackintosh in an old G5 Mac Pro case.
Unfortunately Apple has enhanced Final Cut for Intel only...
I know the new Mac Pro will be a work of art, but a grand buys one powerful Ryzen system! Hmm that's around the same cost as a low end MacBook..
I laughed out loud when I read this line. I know zero MBP users who get 10 hours of battery life. It doesn't even get 10 hours while sitting idle. Sadly, Apple is back to their shady battery life claims.
For me, I couldn't care less about these new chips in the MacBook Pro. What I want is for Apple to fix the design decisions which are hostile to Pro workflows:
1. True 10 hour battery life during a pro workflow
2. More travel on the Keyboard. And make it quieter.
3. A touch-bar free version with full specs. (My guess is the touch bar will go down as a miss in the Apple history books.) A lot of pros I know want to max out their MBP but loathe the Touchbar.
4. Add the SD slot back. Again, breaking professional workflows for aesthetic reasons.
Apple needs to get back in touch with their pro customers, get over Jonny Ive's thinness and simplistic fetishes, and ship a slightly thicker, better MBP that empowers the professional workflow.
Won't happen anytime soon. That gives people a reason to not get the more expensive 15" MBP which has quad-cores so Apple's gonna keep the 13" dual-core for a year or two more (of course with LPDDR3 RAM instead of DDR4 because Apple) just so they can get more people who want 4 cores over to the way more expensive 15".
The next 15 MBP should hexcore. Fall next year, unless Intel moves the time frame in.
It's not more expensive though. Fastest CPU 13 is 100$ cheaper than 15. One is dual core the other is quad, same HD same memory and 15 has a dGPU as well. It's not that 15 is more expensive, it's just that 13 should be much more cheaper.
"The KabyLake refresh"
Well that's not confusing for consumers at all...
Well that's not confusing for consumers at all...
Of course! I just bought my MBP a week ago so it makes sense a new one is right around the corner... Oh well. Can't say I'm longing for more performance considering my work flow.
Stay assured, they don't last nowhere near 10 hours even with low power memory.
Or even offer the quad CPU and dGPU in the 13" model at a premium.
The worst part is, like the iPhone 7 Plus, you have to deal with (and pay extra for) the obnoxiously oversized product to get the better hardware.
I mean
Knowing Apple, they're more likely to put the M-series Intel Processors found in the 12" Macbook, drop the fan, slap in a 5400rpm HDD and charge $600.
Knowing Apple, they're more likely to put the M-series Intel Processors found in the 12" Macbook, drop the fan, slap in a 5400rpm HDD and charge $600.
ars technica measured 13 hours of Wi-Fi browsing battery life for the 2016 13-inch MacBook Pro.
And certainly more than that "while sitting idle".
My first thought. It would also mean that if they make a smaller Mac Mini, which they might, because they are Apple, there is now a chip that won't be completely terrible.
I doubt that the chips Intel released today will end up in any Apple products as while they do have more cores, they have inferior graphics to what is currently in the 13" MBP. These use UHD 620 Graphics, which are apparently a re-brand of HD 620 Graphics with HDCP 2.2 support, and are inferior to the Iris Plus graphics in the current 13" MBP. Apple will probably wait for Coffee Lake which should have versions with GT3e (Iris) graphics.
Intel marketing's ability to make even the simplest things absolutely inscrutable never ceases to amaze me. Would it have killed them to have one "lake" for the eighth generation? And to at least pre-announce whether Iris Plus 15W parts are coming at all?
This doesn't seem like the next 13" MBP process to me. The clock speed is low and they don't have the Iris GPUs. Possible for a Mac mini or to get extra life out of a 15" but I don't see this for the 13" MBPs. That said, those procs could still be in development as the higher end GPUs take longer to pack into the same space.
I believe cannonlake is only for Y series? So likely 9th gen Icelake for the H series chips (the ones for which a 32gb system makes sense) unless the imminent refresh to coffee lake does end up supporting it.
Hear me out: when the next Mac Pro is finally here, they'll rename the mini to: Mac. With the iPhone and iPhone Pro, there entire line will have Pro and regular variants.
The are saving the mini for this