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 New Broadwell Chips Appropriate for MacBook Air and 13-Inch MacBook Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So what? The fans in the modern MacBooks are basically inaudible. I don't understand why everyone is so obsessed with going fanless, like it's solving some great problem that currently plagues the MacBooks.
Broadwell offers plenty of improvements in GPU performance and power consumption - read up on it.
The MacBook Pro product line has strictly kept to a 8-10 month release cycle since the first ones in 2006. This pegs an update from March (at the soonest) to May (at the latest). Interestingly enough, regardless of when, in this range, the update occurs, the 13" Pro will have Broadwell chips and the 15" Pro will not. Given this, it seems like one of three things will happen:
1. The 13" Pro is updated with Broadwell and the 15" Pro is not (which would be unlike Apple).
2. Neither are updated with Broadwell until the refresh after this next refresh (this, sadly would be like Apple)
3. Neither are updated with Broadwell until the refresh after this next refresh. But when that refresh occurs, the 13" gets quad-core CPUs (by virtue of this being a die-shrink revision and not an architectural change). (Mind you, I say this knowing very little of whether or not the Broadwell quad-cores will work in the 13" laptop's chassis without heating issues. I figure that will happen inevitably, but am not sure if this is necessarily that time.)
1. The 13" Pro is updated with Broadwell and the 15" Pro is not (which would be unlike Apple).
2. Neither are updated with Broadwell until the refresh after this next refresh (this, sadly would be like Apple)
3. Neither are updated with Broadwell until the refresh after this next refresh. But when that refresh occurs, the 13" gets quad-core CPUs (by virtue of this being a die-shrink revision and not an architectural change). (Mind you, I say this knowing very little of whether or not the Broadwell quad-cores will work in the 13" laptop's chassis without heating issues. I figure that will happen inevitably, but am not sure if this is necessarily that time.)
It does matter if Apple uses it in a tablet since it's cooler in hand and passive cooling means more reliable since it'll never get clogged up with dust impacting cooling. No need to read links since I own both Haswell and Broadwell tablets so I'm fully aware of the differences.
Last I checked Apple wasn't a charity and is in the business of making money. I can pretty much guarantee you the quad core was dropped because sales weren't high enough to justify the cost of a new motherboard design (AKA they would have lost money on it).
----------
I would imagine this is more of an issue for the MBA's because removing the fan would allow for it to be thinner. Of course though you'll get the "it's thin enough, just increase the battery size" argument. Definitely not an issue for the MBPs.
Ditto. In fact, when the new Mini came out, I snapped up a refurbished 2012. It really should be all I need for the next decade.
Apple doesn't use Intel x86 processors in their tablets, so I do not see how this is relevant. And here, we are specifically talking about MacBooks.
With the rumors of retina MBAs coming soon, I'm wondering what the fate of the 13" rMBP will be. Right now, the 13" rMBP seems to be the better deal over the 13" MBA. But with a retina display, there won't be much different between the two. Extra Thunderbolt 2 port, HDMI port, but both will be using integrated video and the updated MBA will probably have an even better GPU over the current rMBP.
What I would really like to see is that the MBA becomes the obvious consumer choice and that Apple goes back to making the 13" MBP tailored to the Pro market. Let it be a little thicker and possibly toss in a quad core CPU or a discrete GPU option in. For those who want a thinner/lighter laptop or are a bit more cost conscious, the MBA would be the better choice.
Right now, it feels like the two lineups are a bit confused as to who they are for, especially when you look at how closely priced they are -- top config of the MBA is $100 less than the low end of the MBP, with half the RAM and a non-retina display.
----------
I'm not convinced they would've lost money on the mini itself -- it's certainly a possibility, but I would be willing to bet that they would've still made money on a quad mini, even with a different motherboard.
But more importantly, I think the quad core mini was costing them sales of either the iMac or Mac Pro. I have a quad core mini at home and it is definitely a high end machine. I used it for iOS development and for that it was more than enough machine to handle everything I tossed at it. If the quad mini didn't exist, I would've ended up buying another 27" iMac at the time (the new Mac Pro wasn't out yet).
We have no way of knowing, but the quad core mini may have been costing Apple quite a bit in sales. Especially once the new Mac Pro came out when people took a look at the Pro and a look at the mini and realized that they could get more than enough of a computer for around a $1000 and pocket the difference between it and the Pro.
What I would really like to see is that the MBA becomes the obvious consumer choice and that Apple goes back to making the 13" MBP tailored to the Pro market. Let it be a little thicker and possibly toss in a quad core CPU or a discrete GPU option in. For those who want a thinner/lighter laptop or are a bit more cost conscious, the MBA would be the better choice.
Right now, it feels like the two lineups are a bit confused as to who they are for, especially when you look at how closely priced they are -- top config of the MBA is $100 less than the low end of the MBP, with half the RAM and a non-retina display.
----------
I'm not convinced they would've lost money on the mini itself -- it's certainly a possibility, but I would be willing to bet that they would've still made money on a quad mini, even with a different motherboard.
But more importantly, I think the quad core mini was costing them sales of either the iMac or Mac Pro. I have a quad core mini at home and it is definitely a high end machine. I used it for iOS development and for that it was more than enough machine to handle everything I tossed at it. If the quad mini didn't exist, I would've ended up buying another 27" iMac at the time (the new Mac Pro wasn't out yet).
We have no way of knowing, but the quad core mini may have been costing Apple quite a bit in sales. Especially once the new Mac Pro came out when people took a look at the Pro and a look at the mini and realized that they could get more than enough of a computer for around a $1000 and pocket the difference between it and the Pro.
Silent only under low cpu usage. My 2011 MBP runs really hot (90c) when under full load and it's quite loud.
I was going to pick up a rMBP '14 but I'll wait for Skylake.
I'm sick and tired of Intel lying about their performance specs and it's borderline false advertising. Looks great on paper, but in actual use on real everyday software, it's barely an improvement over their last model or two.
I'm sick and tired of Intel lying about their performance specs and it's borderline false advertising. Looks great on paper, but in actual use on real everyday software, it's barely an improvement over their last model or two.
2011 is ancient. I have had a Haswell MacBook for a year, and it's near silent at all times.
Outside the box..
Have you no imagination?
If a thunderbolt-cable/port could carry/accept 100 watts, a MBA could have two ports: During charging, you have a TB-cable and a power-brick that you attach your cable to. When charging, the other TB-port could be used for peripherals. When not charging, YAY - Dual ports for peripherals...
This would also mean you could have TB-peripherals and/or charging on both sides of the MBA.
Have you no imagination?
If a thunderbolt-cable/port could carry/accept 100 watts, a MBA could have two ports: During charging, you have a TB-cable and a power-brick that you attach your cable to. When charging, the other TB-port could be used for peripherals. When not charging, YAY - Dual ports for peripherals...
This would also mean you could have TB-peripherals and/or charging on both sides of the MBA.
And I can guarantee you that apple dropped it because they perceived it as taking away sales from the MBP, iMac, and Mac Pro. Difficult to gauge thie actual #'s. But as long as they continue to sell dual core minis and quad core MBP, iMacs and Mac pros, Apple doesn't really have to figure get that exact #
Will we get a completely new Mac mini design with these new CPUs or will Apple wait for Skylake? Since they just "updated" the Mac mini (debatable) will they wait another two or three years and then stop making it because they didn't sell enough units?
It's like they're trying to kill it on purpose.
I feel your pain but you need to express this to Tim Cook at Apple. I wouldn't expect that he would respond but at least he would realize that the product isn't meeting customer expectations. Given that the Mini is dying for a SkyLake update in the later half of 2015.
Given the enhanced GPU performance though I'd jump on a Broadwell based Mini.
Skylake is actually right around the corner, compared to how Broadwell turned out to be after Haswell was released. Intel says (that's a loaded statement
) Skylake will not be delayed and if that's true the time between generations will be half the usual one-year time. I'd think of getting a 12" rMBA this year if it was Skylake but I'm not beta testing the 12" rMBA with technology that is in a sense a year late. Not Apple's fault but...Maybe not. But IMHO it's more likely than not that there will be Skylake Macs significantly before mid-2016. Like I said: If you can wait. Any time is good for a Mac if you need one.
I really hope Apple will release the 13" ahead of the 15", but the most likely scenario is that they will wait until the quad core parts become available for the 15" and update both of them at the same time. This will be in or shortly after summer.
They could shock us. Considering Apple is gutless in this regard we probably won't see an update until the 15" MBP has suitable chips.
I don't know about that. The latest rumors is that Intel will not release high performance Broadwell based chips suitable for the MBP's. Instead they will move SkyLake based chips into those lines. So we might not see a MBP update until mid summer when SkyLake starts to ship.
Meh.. That would require Apple to design a new/custom AC adapter that takes a TB cable. And you'd have to carry a thick & bulky 6-foot TB cable with you everywhere for charging.. Say goodbye to slick AC adapter with a thin wraparound MagSafe cable.
No thanks!
Powered Thunderbolt ports will be useful for one-cable dock charging, but they won't replace MagSafe.
They will only perform better where the GPU will be leveraged. By Intels own admission you may get 4% better CPU performance and since Intel is always optimistic in this regard you will likely not even notice the difference for CPU bound apps. Apps that leverage the GPUs though will be nicely enhanced. Given the right chip, GPU performance hovers around 200 GFlops double precision, that is impressive in such a low power laptop chip.
On the other hand cooler operation should allow them to run longer without throttling. That may be a big bonus here that has yet to be demonstrated.
I was reading an article on how the 14 nm process used for Broadwell is the world's first mass produced system so it was bound to have problems and everyone sensible expected staggered releases. And I think next year sounds about right for Skylake, so I personally wouldn't bother waiting.