Intel to Supply Apple with Special High-End Haswell Processors for MacBook Pro

[Sym0]

Worth selling my current rmbp 2.6ghz model and upgrading?

Nope, performance difference will be minimal, but battery life will be better. If you don't need all day battery life then upgrading will be a disappointment.

The reason Apple need a 'special' CPU is because iris 5200 is close to 650m in performance but CPU performance has to drop below current 2.7 and 2.8 models. So Apple want both top end CPU with top end GPU integrated. Such a thing doesn't exist so intel is making something close to this just for Apple.

So current top spec rMPB may actually be a better buy at discounted rates for many people.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 2

 

[Sym0]

If synthetic benchmarks show the Irispro to be close but in real world they are vastly different, could it be the Nvidia advantage or refined drivers that are constantly updated and improved?

The intel drivers don't have the huge windows Nvidia database of information to lean on...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 2

 

[VoR]

It's common for chips to be created with "extra" cores / units / cache - and for defective units to be disabled.

And it's 100x more common nowadays that chips have disabled (physicallly in the case of intel) parts to meet price point requirements

 

[ihuman:D]

And it's 100x more common nowadays that chips have disabled (physicallly in the case of intel) parts to meet price point requirements

Or if there's more demand for the dual-core version of a chip than the quad-core. (Dual and quad-core are just examples)

 

[McGiord]

Are there any external thunderbolt GPU available for the MacBooks??
That support Gaming and no complaints about them?

 

[throAU]

...and there it is. The death of the Pro in MacBook Pro. So Apple can continue their irrational obsession with stripping functionality to make thinner and thinner.

R.I.P.

I'd be interested to see how many "Pro" users require a dGPU that is higher end than Iris. Because musicians certainly don't. Neither do accountants, network administrators, programmers or graphics artists. I'm one of those professional network administrators.

Out of all of those Pro users, I am willing to bet that 90% of them would prefer double the battery life under heavy work load (which is what you'll get with haswell running flat out vs. a discrete CPU/GPU combo running flat out) to an extra 20 fps in games.

Maybe they're just dropping the gamers.

My experience: dGPU in built is useless on battery. Battery usage is the reason i bought a portable machine.

Give me a cheaper thunderbolt dock with a GPU in it (that I can UPGRADE, no less) and rip the GPU out of the machine. It's a waste of heat, battery life and space.

----------

So, Dell's top of the line laptops will have 11 hours battery life and discrete GPUs whilst MBPs will have 12 hours battery life and IGP. Which one is better? I'd say anything beyond 9 hours matters to very few people outside rural Africa.

12hrs vs 9 hrs becomes more like 2 hours vs 4 hours when you are pushing the machines hard.

 

[john123]

He's right "games" and "professional" or opposites. A "professional is one who uses the computer to make money. "games" is one who has time to kill. Those are cross purposes.

It may turn out both uses of the computer need a good GPU. Most pro apps are going to be using the GPU for non-graphics, things like transcoding or otherwise modifying media.

That may be your definition of professional, but is isn't the only one. Others define professional as the opposite of an amateur. Specifically, two Oxford definitions are the following:
• an expert player, as of golf or tennis, serving as a teacher, consultant, performer, or contestant; pro
• a person who is expert at his or her work

By both of those definitions, an advanced gamer can qualify.

But this whole thing is really a stupid semantic argument. The fact that the machines carry the word "Pro" printed on them doesn't mean that their only intended purpose is for people making a living. Proof? See the section devoted to "Gaming" right there in black-and-white on Apple's own web site. Clearly, the "Pro" moniker is more about marketing than serving as a limiting definition.
http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/performance-retina/

----------

I'd be interested to see how many "Pro" users require a dGPU that is higher end than Iris. Because musicians certainly don't. Neither do accountants, network administrators, programmers or graphics artists. I'm one of those professional network administrators.

Out of all of those Pro users, I am willing to bet that 90% of them would prefer double the battery life under heavy work load (which is what you'll get with haswell running flat out vs. a discrete CPU/GPU combo running flat out) to an extra 20 fps in games.

This continues the line of reasoning in my previous comments. The term "Pro" is really intended to denote "power."

 

[throAU]

They could just keep around one version with a 650M and call it the Macbook Nerdrage Gamer.

Ahahah gold.

 

[Quu]

A lot of people seem to be saying without a dedicated GPU this won't be a MacBook Pro.

But you know this isn't the first time Apple has done this. They did at one time offer a 15" MacBook Pro which only had a 9400m which was integrated graphics. For a bit more money you could get the 9400m + 9600GT as the Dedicated card.

And even if they choose not to use a dedicated graphics chip in the new MacBook Pro this rumour indicates Apple will instead get a souped-up integrated chip capable of rivalling the dedicated chip they would have used anyway.

I think everyone should just relax until we actually see some benchmarks.

 

[polymersayb]

Another reason not to drop the cMBP: you can look at then side by side with the retina models in the store. They make the retina ones all the more impressive.

 

[69650]

that the updated MacBook Pros will launch in mid-September

If they don't release them in August, then hopefully they'll announce them at the iPod/iPhone event in Sept at the very latest. Seriously I can't wait any longer.

I was thinking that the delay might be due to a refreshed design along the lines of the new Mac Pro but I don't think that's likely this year.

 

[throAU]

Damn, I'm not sure about the remove of the dedicated GPU when I saw this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8b7beYeDko

That's all about quad core in the 15" vs dual core in the MBA.

 

[69650]

Another reason not to drop the cMBP: you can look at then side by side with the retina models in the store. They make the retina ones all the more impressive.

If previous iterations are anything to go buy I'd say the most likely scenario is that they'll drop the 15" cMBP and just keep the 13" cMBP. That's pretty much what they've done in the past. Personally I don't see why they need 3 13" models and no 17" model which is what a lot of pro users would prefer, myself included.

I still think a combo of 11" & 13" MBA + 15" & 17" MBP-R would be the best solution.

 

[stolpioni]

When is it being released? I just ordered a new 13 incher. Should I send it back?

 

[asthamapheo]

now let's hope the new macbook pro isn't tagged $1500.

 

[Macboy Pro]

And what exactly is wrong with an external HDD? Not many people need 750GB in their laptop, that might be something U need but it's not common for many. Even people that use their Macbook for their livelihood don't need that much storage on the go daily.

I work in this field and the Demand is Pretty high. Folks do not want to carry their data externally. Moving back to the old proprietary APPLE will decline their sales. Too much competition and their are product that compete with retina for MUCH less!

 

[throAU]

"Unique part" and "bespoke" doesn't sound like a GT3e part with higher clocks. Most people would interpret this as a custom SKU. Remember: GPUs are embarrassingly parallel, and scale quite well with additional compute units.

My dream:

• Intel un-cripple the i7 Haswell and allow it to run multi-socket, like it's XEONs do, and like their older Pentium Pros, etc did. Given that intel originally crippled the pentium III (i think from memory) from running multi slot with a simple trace on the cpu module (that could easily be re-enabled) it probably isn't a massive thing for them to allow i7s to run multi-socket either. like basically zero R&D.
• Apple remove the dGPU and use the space and thermal headroom to add a second i7 with Iris.

All you "no dGPU = no pro machine!!!" guys: put that in your pipe and smoke it.

"Bespoke part" gives me hope for this. I think its the logical way forward. Simplifies drivers, gives the new machine 8 cores in the 15" model (16 threads!), and running on battery they could just turn a socket off and use the same drivers, etc for the remaining GPU and still get great power consumption.



edit:
either that, or as mentioned above they may have added a heap of execution units to the GPU. But i suspect that is more work - and wouldn't give apple 16 threads in a laptop. which would totally destroy any other mobile machine in things like video processing, etc.



As to future model lineups, I see this happening within 2 years:

• MBA name dropped
• MBA 13" dropped
• cMBP 13" and 15" dropped
• new lineup: MBA 11", rMBP 13" rMBP 15"
• all called "Macbook Pro" or simply "Macbook" (or "New Macbook" ... groan)

 

[AidenShaw]

And it's 100x more common nowadays that chips have disabled (physicallly in the case of intel) parts to meet price point requirements

That's just a more negative (or paranoid) way of looking at what I just said.

If Intel has a SKU for an 8 core chip and a SKU for a 12 core chip - what do they do with a chip with 11 perfect cores?

Obviously, disable 3 and sell it as an 8 core chip.

And everyone does that - it's not an Intel thing. Your upper mid-range GeForce or Radeon has the same basic chip as the high end - but defective cores and cache are disabled, or maybe it won't run at the higher end clock rate.

Of course, it's true that later in the life of most chips the yield improves, and a company might take a chip with 12 working cores and disable 4 to sell it as an 8 core chip - but what's wrong with that? You're paying for an 8 core chip, and you're getting an 8 core chip. Certainly anyone who's an Apple customer is used to paying more for less.

 

[Ice Dragon]

A lot of people seem to be saying without a dedicated GPU this won't be a MacBook Pro.

But you know this isn't the first time Apple has done this. They did at one time offer a 15" MacBook Pro which only had a 9400m which was integrated graphics. For a bit more money you could get the 9400m + 9600GT as the Dedicated card.

And even if they choose not to use a dedicated graphics chip in the new MacBook Pro this rumour indicates Apple will instead get a souped-up integrated chip capable of rivalling the dedicated chip they would have used anyway.

I think everyone should just relax until we actually see some benchmarks.

The fear I think is that the dGPU will go away permanently which most people including myself do not want. Even though I will not be buying a rMBP, I just don't think it would be the right move. Selling an Iris Pro only rMBP alongside ones with dGPUs would be a good move though.

 

[LiveDiamond]

Hi,
Just a thought. Maybe the reason Apple wants the beefed up integrated Graphics to the MBP line is to include thunderbolt 2 and be able to drive external retina displays similar to what is happening with the Mac Pro line.
The Thunderbolt Display needs a retina/ USB3/ thunderbolt 2(to drive the retina) refresh and is to be expected with the new Mac Pros.
Additionally, I would think most Final Cut Pro users would be laptop based. Adding this capability would tie in with what was shown at WWDC with the new Mac Pros, and also explain why Apple has held off releasing new MBP's.

 

[richardw]

If Apple drops Dedicated Graphics (with its own dedicated RAM) they should also drop the word 'Pro' from the name and call it Macbook Casual Consumer

You don't know what you're talking about.

I use my 2009 MBP for iOS and web development, Photoshop for UI bits etc etc. as far as I can tell I think I'm probably right in the centre of their 'Pro' audience. I just need quick 2D performance really over lots of pixels. I'm looking forward to a decent integrated card + awesome battery life.

Gamers are not the target audience for the MBP, fortunately!

 

[Rocketman]

Give me a cheaper thunderbolt dock with a GPU in it (that I can UPGRADE, no less) and rip the GPU out of the machine. It's a waste of heat, battery life and space.

Fair enough. This is actually a product Apple should make. Maybe with your brand choice of dedicated GPU under BTO. This could be what Apple is talking to Nvidia about, as well as iMac stuff.

I would like to see Apple itself bring out TB accessories that really "do the trick".

Rocketman

 

[benjones]

Iris Pro is going to seriously struggle with anything 3D related in native Retina resolution.

Pixel doubled 1440x900 here we come.

 

[Mal67]

• MBA name dropped
• MBA 13" dropped
• cMBP 13" and 15" dropped
• new lineup: MBA 11", rMBP 13" rMBP 15"
• all called "Macbook Pro" or simply "Macbook" (or "New Macbook" ... groan)

I would hope that the 11" would not be the entry level machine at least not without a change in screen real estate possibly by reducing the edging. Also I cant see the price points being competitive with retina machines.

 

[GenesisST]

Why? I really don't understand the people who are against the retina display. After using one for awhile, every other display looks like total crap. Is it the display or just the fact that the rMBP is not upgradeable?

This is why I'm waiting a bit... If iPad 3 and HDTV showed me anything, is that you can't go back... I'm still happy with my 2010 hires 15" MBP, so I don't even want to see a rMBP... Yet...