Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

manu chao

macrumors 604
Jul 30, 2003
7,219
3,031
It's a shame that Apple killed the 12" MacBook.
2015 MacBook: Core M, M-5Y51, TDP 4.5 W (Broadwell)
2016 MacBook: Core m5, 6Y54, TDP 4.5 W (Skylake)
2017 MacBook: Core m5, 7Y54, TDP 4.5 W (Kaby Lake)
2018 MacBook Air: Core i5, 8210Y, TDP 7 W (Amber Lake)

2019: Core i5, 1030G5, TDP 9 W (Ice Lake)

The 12" MacBook chassis was designed for 4.5 W TDP. The retina MacBook Air for (at least) 7 W TDP. Those Ice Lake Y-series chips really might not fit into the no-fan 12" MB body thermally.
[doublepost=1564740266][/doublepost]
It's a shame that Apple killed the non-TouchBar 13" MacBook Pro.
They didn't kill it, they've just added a TouchBar (and TouchID). It still uses the same class of processors as the non-TB 13" MBP, still has the same two TB ports and still has the same internal layout (which is different from the 4-TB port 13" MBP).
[doublepost=1564740455][/doublepost]
What makes you think an A series processor, once you add the caches, memory controllers, PCIe and other stuff will have a lower TDP.

Comparing an A series processor with an Intel i7 is an oranges to bananas comparison.
Once there is a real laptop version of an A series processor, only then can you make a comparison.

The high speed analog I/O and serdes required for PCIe and thunderbolt consume lots of power.
Given that Apple had offered a MacBook without TB for four years, why couldn't they release an ARM-based laptop that, like the iPad Pro only comes with USB-C ports? And once we discard TB, what other "caches, memory controllers, PCIe and other stuff" would a MacBook need that are not in an iPad Pro today?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MrUNIMOG

MrUNIMOG

macrumors 6502a
Sep 23, 2014
654
424
Hamburg, Germany
With those Y-Series parts, that might mean a future MacBook Air with Quad Core and Iris Plus graphics?
[doublepost=1564746053][/doublepost]
You'll upgrade when Apple drops OS support for it next year, giving some BS reason for dropping support like they have all previous versions. You can always run Windows/Linux on it if you want to continue running the latest OS...
Why so cynical? They're never dropping a device just for the sake of it. You might just not always know the reason.

I can imagine the early 2013 MBP being dropped next year along with 2012 models. But certainly not the late 2013.

Also entirely possible the next macOS release after Catalina will just continue supporting all the same Macs.
Remember Mountain Lion / Mavericks / Yosemite / El Capitan?
 

chucker23n1

macrumors G3
Dec 7, 2014
8,564
11,307
With those Y-Series parts, that might mean a future MacBook Air with Quad Core and Iris Plus graphics?

Assuming that the Air can handle 9W TDP (hopefully?) and that these parts ship in volume, yes.

It's possible Apple waits until Tiger Lake-Y, which might ship Q2/2020. Maybe Tiger Lake-Y offers a 7W part.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrUNIMOG

Populus

macrumors 601
Aug 24, 2012
4,659
6,848
Spain, Europe
They didn't kill it, they've just added a TouchBar (and TouchID). It still uses the same class of processors as the non-TB 13" MBP, still has the same two TB ports and still has the same internal layout (which is different from the 4-TB port 13" MBP).

Well, then we have a non-Touch Bar MacBook Pro... with a Touch Bar ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrUNIMOG

dgdosen

macrumors 68030
Dec 13, 2003
2,742
1,381
Seattle
Assuming that the Air can handle 9W TDP (hopefully?) and that these parts ship in volume, yes.

It's possible Apple waits until Tiger Lake-Y, which might ship Q2/2020. Maybe Tiger Lake-Y offers a 7W part.

I doubt Apple skips - Other vendors will be able to hold their '10th generation' laptops over Apple's 8th/9th gen laptops and sell for much less. That won't make customers happy.

The way things look - I think a 10th gen 4-core (1030G7) MacBook Air sans TouchBar might be an ideal mobile computer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Populus

chucker23n1

macrumors G3
Dec 7, 2014
8,564
11,307
I doubt Apple skips - Other vendors will be able to hold their '10th generation' laptops over Apple's 8th/9th gen laptops and sell for much less. That won't make customers happy.

The way things look - I think a 10th gen 4-core (1030G7) MacBook Air sans TouchBar might be an ideal mobile computer.

It depends on how soon Intel can deliver Tiger Lake, and how much volume they can actually offer on Ice Lake.

It wouldn't at all be unprecedented for Apple to skip; most MacBooks never went to Broadwell.
 

wallysb01

macrumors 68000
Jun 30, 2011
1,589
809
Except it won't. This is something they've been having trouble with for over six years. The IPC gain was "nerfed" according to first party reviewers such as Anandtech. Expect another core bump on 14nm in 2020. If it were as easy as you claim it is, 10nm would have been on the market in 2016. To make investors happy, they don't need to deliver 10nm desktop parts at all. As long as they deliver something that is 10nm, they're fine. Chances are Intel began work on 7nm years ago after they realized they were too far down the rabbit hole with 10nm to give up. In reality, you're looking at a third of IPC gain due to frequency regression. Intel simply cannot bump up the frequency to 9th gen 14nm+~ parts without serious problems. The performance of these mobile parts don't translate 1:1 to desktop parts.

And FWIW, 18% is an Intel claim. Actual IPC uplift has yet to be verified by third party reviewers. The uplift is based on a small series of tests using SPEC2017. Intel has been known to exaggerate their figures in the past as has AMD. In any case, these mobile processors will be throttled due to their lower heat output and allowing OEMs to use even thinner heat sinks and less piping to cool down the CPU. Leading to a thinner and lighter chassis.

Intel announced their 10nm intentions in early 2011 with a delivery year of 2015. 4 years later they're barely getting enough yield on 10nm without serious regressions and putting them out to OEMs. I wouldn't expect desktop parts anytime soon, especially for HEDT.

At this point in the game, you would have to be clueless to presume Intel could deliver desktop parts at 10nm while holding frequency with an 18% IPC uplift, while lowering TDP and temperatures.

I'd expect less than 5% real world use difference in overall performance. The onboard video on these processors is 2x faster than what's currently available which should make encoding even snappier than it currently is.

You realize we have some benchmarks that show modest gains despite the 14% clock rate reduction, right? This is a sub-5% improvement in performance, no doubt. But package improvements and likely better power efficiency will also come with it. No need to get overtly negative here. It’s looking like AMD’s first stab at 7nm is also a bit light on performance gains. Turns out this is hard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrUNIMOG

deconstruct60

macrumors G5
Mar 10, 2009
12,298
3,893
2015 MacBook: Core M, M-5Y51, TDP 4.5 W (Broadwell)
2016 MacBook: Core m5, 6Y54, TDP 4.5 W (Skylake)
2017 MacBook: Core m5, 7Y54, TDP 4.5 W (Kaby Lake)
2018 MacBook Air: Core i5, 8210Y, TDP 7 W (Amber Lake)

2019: Core i5, 1030G5, TDP 9 W (Ice Lake)

These are not all implementing the exact same package functionality. The 2019 model has effectively two Thunderbolt Controllers in it. It also has the bulk of WiFi 6 base implementation in it also. The core counts are different too.

For example a discrete Thunderbolt "titan ridge" controller has TDP of 2.4
https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...1/intel-jhl7440-thunderbolt-3-controller.html

In package cuts out some of the overhead, but if look at it from an overall system TDP perspective (and if the MacBook actually had Thunderbolt ), then would have 6.9 , 6.9 , 9.4 versus 9 . And haven't added in the Wi-Fi base controller yet.

Intel is bundling more stuff into the 'CPU' package.

There is some progress here. There is some trade-off because it is a denser "hot spot" than before but the really evaluation on TDP would be couch at the systems level since component bundling is being moved around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrUNIMOG

manu chao

macrumors 604
Jul 30, 2003
7,219
3,031
These are not all implementing the exact same package functionality. The 2019 model has effectively two Thunderbolt Controllers in it. It also has the bulk of WiFi 6 base implementation in it also. The core counts are different too.

For example a discrete Thunderbolt "titan ridge" controller has TDP of 2.4
https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...1/intel-jhl7440-thunderbolt-3-controller.html

In package cuts out some of the overhead, but if look at it from an overall system TDP perspective (and if the MacBook actually had Thunderbolt ), then would have 6.9 , 6.9 , 9.4 versus 9 . And haven't added in the Wi-Fi base controller yet.

Intel is bundling more stuff into the 'CPU' package.

There is some progress here. There is some trade-off because it is a denser "hot spot" than before but the really evaluation on TDP would be couch at the systems level since component bundling is being moved around.
However, the 12" MacBook didn't actually have TB, so the system TDP the chassis was designed for isn't 6.9 W but 4.5 W + WiFi controller. And I'm pretty sure that sum comes out well below 9 W.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrUNIMOG

deconstruct60

macrumors G5
Mar 10, 2009
12,298
3,893
However, the 12" MacBook didn't actually have TB, so the system TDP the chassis was designed for isn't 6.9 W but 4.5 W + WiFi controller. And I'm pretty sure that sum comes out well below 9 W.

And the Gen11 graphics in these new models stomp all over the graphics in those old Y's in the MacBook too.

TDP is a metric to measure of actually using what is in the package. If completely by-passed the Thunderbolt controller then the actually used power used in the system would be lower than the TDP number. Same thing for the GPU portion of it. If you activate it and use it heavily then the relative power will go up. If leaving it completely disconnected it often won't consume any power (or generate thermal issues).

The standard TDP numbers for the features present used at the standard power level (and standard flex power draw ).
The i5-1030G4 has two more cores and a bigger GPU (and can handle 5K displays). [ The '30' in the product name indicates these are more so the 'cheaper, low performance' parts, not the more rare higher performance ones. )

The power they use when not using substantive subsystems really isn't documented that well at all. That's primarily the point I was making.


A bigger factor is that it doesn't make sense to Apple to buy a system with Thunderbolt capability and leave it off. (and similar issue if Apple doesn't like Intel's WiFi 6 solution ).


The bigger issue with the MacBook case was that it was the birth of the butterfly keyboard at least as much as any huge thermal mismatch issue that these new Gen 10 "Y" processors bring. Apple was more interested in closely stalking the iPad Pro future direction with the initial MacBook case (e.g., one port wonder) than doing something with x86 laptop space. The MacBook case it was seemed to want something lower than 4W (that even 4.5W ) was 'too high' and had to make some dubious moves to stuff more battery in, toss ports out , and shave keyboard height. That makes some sense if want a Mac case for the iPad Pro SoC.

It kind of loopy though that some 9W package that implements most of the core of a PC is "too much of problem" design a decent laptop case around.
 

RegularGuy09

macrumors regular
Feb 20, 2015
177
94
But from what I understand MacBook Air can definitely use the 9W chip.

Hopefully they release new MBAs with icelake this october.
 

Maven1975

macrumors 6502a
Aug 24, 2008
985
222
And the iPad Pro will still keep up with it... Intels iGPUs stink and are an embarrassment.

Problem will always be that PC/Desktop software development will never be tightly optimized. So unless Intel makes a MAJOR leap in iGPU’s, it will never look as smooth as iOS software.

Honestly, It’s almost game over for their ultra books. iPAD OS is going to REALLY show many people that they have no need for a laptop for many tasks.
 
Last edited:

Zdigital2015

macrumors 601
Jul 14, 2015
4,018
5,364
East Coast, United States
And the iPad Pro will still keep up with it... Intels iGPUs stink and are an embarrassment.

UHD Graphics are passable, but nothing to write home about at all. However, the Iris iGPUs are certainly much better and always preferred. I am quite interested to see how the new Gen 11 iGPUs perform once (and if) Apple adopts Ice Lake CPUs in the MacBook Air and 13" MacBook Pros.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrUNIMOG

Falhófnir

macrumors 603
Aug 19, 2017
6,139
6,990
With those Y-Series parts, that might mean a future MacBook Air with Quad Core and Iris Plus graphics?
Iris at least is a Pro feature, something to set apart the 13" where there haven't been dGPUs to date (though this might change, a lot of Windows competitors now offer dedicated graphics in their 13" class offerings). Now that even HD graphics is more competent it will be interesting to see if Apple does make a 14" Pro with dedicated graphics, and where that then leaves the $1,299 13" and the Air (will there be enough differentiation, or will they merge the lines into a more powerful Air with quad core and Iris?).
 

cmaier

Suspended
Jul 25, 2007
25,405
33,471
California
The computer does its primary work in a part of the machine we cannot see, a control center that converts data input to information output. This control center, called the central processing unit (CPU), is a highly complex, extensive set of electronic circuitry that executes stored program instructions. All computers, large and small, must have a central processing unit. As Figure 1 shows, the central processing unit consists of two parts: The control unit and the arithmetic/logic unit. Each part has a specific function.
Before we discuss the control unit and the arithmetic/logic unit in detail, we need to consider data storage and its relationship to the central processing unit. Computers use two types of storage: Primary storage and secondary storage. The CPU interacts closely with primary storage, or main memory, referring to it for both instructions and data. For this reason this part of the reading will discuss memory in the context of the central processing unit. Technically, however, memory is not part of the CPU.

Recall that a computer's memory holds data only temporarily, at the time the computer is executing a program. Secondary storage holds permanent or semi-permanent data on some external magnetic or optical medium. The diskettes and CD-ROM disks that you have seen with personal computers are secondary storage devices, as are hard disks. Since the physical attributes of secondary storage devices determine the way data is organized on them, we will discuss secondary storage and data organization together in another part of our on-line readings.

  • The Control Unit
    The control unit of the CPU contains circuitry that uses electrical signals to direct the entire computer system to carry out, or execute, stored program instructions. Like an orchestra leader, the control unit does not execute program instructions; rather, it directs other parts of the system to do so. The control unit must communicate with both the arithmetic/logic unit and memory.
  • The Arithmetic/Logic Unit
    The arithmetic/logic unit (ALU) contains the electronic circuitry that executes all arithmetic and logical operations.

    The arithmetic/logic unit can perform four kinds of arithmetic operations, or mathematical calculations: addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. As its name implies, the arithmetic/logic unit also performs logical operations. A logical operation is usually a comparison. The unit can compare numbers, letters, or special characters. The computer can then take action based on the result of the comparison. This is a very important capability. It is by comparing that a computer is able to tell, for instance, whether there are unfilled seats on airplanes, whether charge- card customers have exceeded their credit limits, and whether one candidate for Congress has more votes than another.

Lol. “The control unit.”
 

ctyrider

macrumors 65816
Jul 15, 2012
1,025
591

I am sure Apple has dabbled with the idea of ARM-based Macs, but all latest signs point to them deciding against it. Apple's vision for cross-platform apps development is Swift UI and Catalyst, and their strategic OS for convertible mobile computong is iPadOS. Porting MacOS to ARM makes absolutely no sense, given what we know today.

ARM-based MacOS is the new "Apple branded TV" - just a bunch of analyst talk and forum fantasizes, which will never become a reality.
 

0388631

Cancelled
Sep 10, 2009
9,669
10,820
You realize we have some benchmarks that show modest gains despite the 14% clock rate reduction, right? This is a sub-5% improvement in performance, no doubt. But package improvements and likely better power efficiency will also come with it. No need to get overtly negative here. It’s looking like AMD’s first stab at 7nm is also a bit light on performance gains. Turns out this is hard.


That sub 5% gain is based on a SPEC2017 benchmark. SPEC2017 is the king of synthetic benches. Furthermore, negativity is required because Intel always pulls a fast one when it comes to these things. Additionally, I have no idea what you're talking about when you mention AMD's 7nm. Do you mean their desktop processors that wallop the 9900K and its variants in real life usecase benches for multithreaded tasks and just come a few percent short in single threaded tasks? It took AMD just three years to get at Intel's heels whereas it took 9 years for Intel to get here. Or are you referring to mobile processors? Because AMD has no 7nm mobile processors out right now. The 3000~ mobile line does not reflect the desktop line, and is always a generation behind. The Ryzen 4000~ mobile line will be using 7nm. Mobile Ryzen 3000 uses the Zen+ architecture on 12nm. Desktop Ryzen 3000 uses 7nm. Desktop Ryzen 4000 will be using 7nm+ (EUV).
 
Last edited:

cmaier

Suspended
Jul 25, 2007
25,405
33,471
California
I am sure Apple has dabbled with the idea of ARM-based Macs, but all latest signs point to them deciding against it. Apple's vision for cross-platform apps development is Swift UI and Catalyst, and their strategic OS for convertible mobile computong is iPadOS. Porting MacOS to ARM makes absolutely no sense, given what we know today.

ARM-based MacOS is the new "Apple branded TV" - just a bunch of analyst talk and forum fantasizes, which will never become a reality.

Yes, it really will. And MacOS has already been ported to ARM. Given their strategic vision of swift ui and catalyst, ARM makes more sense than ever, not less sense.
 

0388631

Cancelled
Sep 10, 2009
9,669
10,820
Based on an Axios report that's based on a Bloomberg report that basis its opinion, not fact, that Apple plans on doing so based on making it easier for iOS to communicate with macOS via the app merger plan. Rumors floating around Apple leveraging their A~ series processors on Macs have been around since 2010.
[doublepost=1564799709][/doublepost]
And MacOS has already been ported to ARM.
Source?
[doublepost=1564799841][/doublepost]
Given their strategic vision of swift ui and catalyst, ARM makes more sense than ever, not less sense.
I remember similar vision about AIR. SwiftUI is a very dumbed down variant of Objective-C which is simplified language influenced by two other older languages. In the same manner Electron is a brilliant platform because it works on everything. Speed being its major fault.
 
Last edited:

cmaier

Suspended
Jul 25, 2007
25,405
33,471
California
Based on an Axios report that's based on a Bloomberg report that basis its opinion, not fact, that Apple plans on doing so based on making it easier for iOS to communicate with macOS via the app merger plan. Rumors floating around Apple leveraging their A~ series processors on Macs have been around since 2010.
[doublepost=1564799709][/doublepost]
Source?
[doublepost=1564799841][/doublepost]
I remember similar vision about AIR. SwiftUI is a very dumbed down variant of Objective-C which is simplified language influenced by two other older languages. In the same manner Electron is a brilliant platform because it works on everything. Speed being its major fault.

SwiftUI is a dumbed down variant of Objective-C? What?! It’s nothing at all like objective-c. It’s not even a language - it’s fully Swift. It’s a method of building responsive and animated interfaces using Swift. It has absolutely nothing to do with objective-c. What are you even talking about? It’s a replacement for the Interface Builder view/model paradigm, not a replacement for any programming language. Your comment is like saying an orange is a dumbed-down version of a spider monkey. It makes that little sense.

And objective-c is “simplified language?” What? Compared to what? It’s one of the most complicated mainstream programming languages. It’s essentially equivalent in complexity to c++, perhaps minus some dangerous cruft that can get c++ programmers in a lot of trouble.

Do you even know how to code in swift or objective-c? If not, that’s nothing to be ashamed of, but you shouldn’t make stuff up and say it as if you do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrUNIMOG
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.