Intel Unveils Full Lineup of Skylake Processors for Notebooks and Desktops, Early 2016 Likely for Most Macs

[Edgar Spayce]

The retina Macbook Pro IS the rMBA. It's what you get when you add the retina screen and the requisite battery to keep the minimum 10 hour life.

And I have no idea what you mean by 'ridiculous and crappy performances'. Both models of Pro laptops are considerably more powerful than the vast majority of laptops on the market, and on the PC side of things, if you want something more powerful, you will generally end up with a 4-7lb laptop. The world has been doing 'pro' level work on laptops less powerful than these for decades, so who knows what you are on about...

I'm not even arguing with blind delusional people. The Retina Macbook which is barely as powerful as an iPad is a Macbook Air...? Yeah right

Also Macbook Pro were plenty powerful enough...6 years ago, until Apple stopped innovating and relied on Intel crappy less and less powered (relative to market performance evolutions) processors to drive its upgrades since Apple has added literally nothing new since the HD "retina" display.

 

[MacBH928]

I have been living on a 2008 core2duo model, hopefully I can last another few months for the skylakes... I want to hear it announced in September though.

I feel like Intel needs some serious competition in the computer market; they're getting slower and slower between releases.

I think in CPUs is reaching diminishing improvements, there is just enough place to improve on. Its not like back then when every 2 years computers speeds double. Also let us not forget that people concentrate on efficiency not raw power. People will no longer accept 4 hours battery life, they want 8 and 10 running HD content and more.

But I do agree we need more CPU companies. There has like on 2- Intel and AMD

 

[guychicago]

This is great move by intel. The 15w and 28w chips getting eDRAM will be a big boost for the 13" rMBP and the Air if it gets skywell. Graphics performance on the 13" will get the much needed boost.
The air will be retired in the future, it will be kept just like the old MBP as an entry level machine for PC converts.
I'm looking forward to purchasing the new 13" rMBP. If it gets the new colors even better...

 

[leo.andres.21]

Maybe you should take another look at the graph you posted yourself:

The value of 4873 you quote is the multi-core score for the A9. Single-core is 1921. Which is precisely 27.7 % of the i7-6700K's single-core score of 6946.

Some people weren't born to be looking at and comparing numbers.

 

[diddl14]

The value of 4873 you quote is the multi-core score for the A9. Single-core is 1921. Which is precisely 27.7 % of the i7-6700K's single-core score of 6946.

You're right. My mistake. 72.3% less is indeed a bigger cap to overcome..

 

[deconstruct60]

... However, given that the 12-inch MacBook just launched in April, it remains uncertain if Apple is willing to release updated models this soon or hold off until 2016.
...

While not 100% a sure thing that Apple will update the MacBook quickly, they also don't seem to be trying to maximize the number of MacBooks either. It is now 4 months after introduction and the supply of MacBooks is still limited. ( Online store says 5-7 days until ship). Almost as if Apple is keeping even more extreme than usual low inventory of the product. There is a decent chance they don't want any because they are about to nuke it. That way they don't have much inventor to "flush" at a discount when relatively (versus 10-12 month cycle) quickly jump to version 2.

The MacBook screams a need for Thunderbolt 3. It is the only Mac without Thunderbolt after Apple spent all that time and effort to make Thunderbolt uniform to the whole line up. If there is only one port it might as well be the most "super duper, swiss army does everything" port possible. Non 2:1 Scaled Retina will run smoother on a better GPU. Better battery could perhaps push into the current MBA 13" 10hr zone and certainly better than the substantially cheaper MBA 11" 9 hrs. When have to disconnect the USB cable to plug in power because the battery is drained, it is slightly more critical to maximize battery time. it lowers contention for the single port. If Apple doesn't release a substantially better Macbook class ultra light then someone else will on the Windows 10 side.

On the other end of the "updated recently" scale is the core of the iMac line up that is going on 2 years old. "Wait until 2016" for them is partially suicidal.

If Intel is shipping iMac (Core i5/i7 appropriate ) and Macbook (Core M) processors in quantity now to system vendors and there is enough limited TB v3 controller supply to cover these products, there is little to no upside for Apple waiting until 2016 to move.

 

[nutjob]

No it's not.

Wow! What a convincing argument.

 

[diddl14]

Some people weren't born to be looking at and comparing numbers.

Thank you for rubbing it in ..

 

[nutjob]

Are you saying they'll out perform an intel CPU and iGPU, running multiple apps like Lightroom, PS, and autocad?

The answer is in the rest of my post which you conveniently edited out.

 

[unplugme71]

They did, and they renamed it the MacBook. The purpose of the MBA when it came out was just what the MB does today. So, yes, they did give us a computer that does what the MBA was made for WITH a retina display.

Wrong. Apple named it the MacBook. The MBA is still a current model.

 

[T5BRICK]

Also Macbook Pro were plenty powerful enough...6 years ago, until Apple stopped innovating and relied on Intel crappy less and less powered (relative to market performance evolutions) processors to drive its upgrades since Apple has added literally nothing new since the HD "retina" display.

Which processors do you think Apple should be using in their laptops? ARM? As others have already been discussing, the current estimated A9 single core performance is less than 30% of the i7-6700K single core score.

Regardless, the rMBP is a perfectly capable computer, more capable than the MacBook Air you seem to be comparing it with in your original post.

 

[wiz329]

I feel like Intel needs some serious competition in the computer market; they're getting slower and slower between releases.

Yeah. They're probably sitting on their butts not spending billions of dollars on R&D shrinking processes.

 

[Dirtyharry50]

Maybe this was already mentioned earlier but I wonder why the iMac is even considered for a dual core CPU with integrated GPU. That seems like a step backward to me. Otherwise, I can appreciate the gains for certain mobile Macs.

Maybe I am just missing or misunderstanding the significance of this.

 

[symphara]

Which processors do you think Apple should be using in their laptops? ARM? As others have already been discussing, the current estimated A9 single core performance is less than 30% of the i7-6700K single core score.

Regardless, the rMBP is a perfectly capable computer, more capable than the MacBook Air you seem to be comparing it with in your original post.

It's more capable but it's also noticeably thicker and heavier. In a world with cheaper Dell XPS 13s, it's just not good enough.

And the new Retina Macbook is a 2011*-slow laptop with one port and a horrible keyboard (I tried it). Not good enough.

(*) My 2011 i7 MBA seems to hit the same CPU scores as the new rMB, according to the benchmarks. Amazing.

 

[bkkcanuck8]

Yeah. They're probably sitting on their butts not spending billions of dollars on R&D shrinking processes.

There is a reason why less and less companies are in the CPU chip fabrication game.... each die shrink costs billions and billions of dollars in R&D, and there is a good chance you won't necessarily come first and thus the R&D is fairly risky. I think there are really 3 companies in this area for personal computers left.... Intel (which fabs it's own), TSMC and Samsung (which now includes Globalfoundries). Use to be massive performance gains, now not that great.... and the die shrinking game is turning Intels Tic/Toc into Tic/Toc/Toc and next Tic/Toc/Toc/Toc. Silicon has pretty well been maxed out - now it even gets tougher....

 

[nutjob]

Yeah. They're probably sitting on their butts not spending billions of dollars on R&D shrinking processes.

Indeed, and yet we're getting marginal increases in performance. Whatever the benefits of die shrinks are they're not flowing through to the retail customer. I wonder if that's because Intel is effectively a monopoly?

 

[T5BRICK]

It's more capable but it's also noticeably thicker and heavier. In a world with cheaper Dell XPS 13s, it's just not good enough.

Then buy the Dell. I prefer OSX and the connectivity options of the rMBP, so I'll pay a bit of a premium for the Mac.

And the new Retina Macbook is a 2011*-slow laptop with one port and a horrible keyboard (I tried it). Not good enough.

(*) My 2011 i7 MBA seems to hit the same CPU scores as the new rMB, according to the benchmarks. Amazing.

I didn't mention the rMB in my post. Honestly, I think it is a turd and I won't argue with you on that point.

 

[maflynn]

The answer is in the rest of my post which you conveniently edited out.

Perhaps I missed it, I see you posted a remark regarding single threaded performance but not running multiple demanding apps at the same time.

Intel has trained everyone to think better single threaded performance means better overall performance, because that's what they do best. Unfortunately that strategy inherently uses more power. They may have a point now with legacy software but that's changing.

I think overall for multithreaded, multitasking uses, intel is a better product. Either way, if apple chose its own CPUs, I'd leave the platform. One major need is to run windows (either in virtualization or bootcamp).

 

[bkkcanuck8]

Indeed, and yet we're getting marginal increases in performance. Whatever the benefits of die shrinks are they're not flowing through to the retail customer. I wonder if that's because Intel is effectively a monopoly?

Intel is not a monopoly when it comes to chip fabrication... there are 3 in that area Samsung/Globalfoundries, TSMC, and Intel which does it's own..... Each die shrink costs billions in R&D with no guarantees.... you are reaching the max for the technology (silicon) so this is really the end of it until they perfect different materials..... maybe at most one more shrink to 10nm then that is it....

 

[redheeler]

On the other end of the "updated recently" scale is the core of the iMac line up that is going on 2 years old. "Wait until 2016" for them is partially suicidal.

My assumption for a while has been the 21.5" will go Retina with a Broadwell update, and the 27" Retina will wait for Skylake. This still looks very likely, as the 21.5" is in bad need of a Retina 4K update.

 

[nutjob]

Which processors do you think Apple should be using in their laptops? ARM? As others have already been discussing, the current estimated A9 single core performance is less than 30% of the i7-6700K single core score.

Regardless, the rMBP is a perfectly capable computer, more capable than the MacBook Air you seem to be comparing it with in your original post.

LOL! That's a fair comparison! A probably 2W mobile part compared to a 95W desktop part. Why don't you ask yourself this question: why is a part that uses 50x the power only 3x as fast?

You should also list all the laptops built with i7-6700K!

 

[retep42]

I have been living on a 2008 core2duo model, hopefully I can last another few months for the skylakes... I want to hear it announced in September though.

I feel your pain. Barely hanging on to my 2009 MPB myself... It is so beaten up (deformed) that I don't dare taking it in for a battery replacement. Also, I can't wait for Force Touch. The mechanical click on my trackpad has been flaky for quite some time now. But I am determined to wait for Skylake!!

 

[retep42]

I feel like Intel needs some serious competition in the computer market; they're getting slower and slower between releases.

Well, I think its just materials scientists fighting basic physics at this point. Any new technology is too expensive to go alone, that's why the lack of competition...

 

[nutjob]

Intel is not a monopoly when it comes to chip fabrication... there are 3 in that area Samsung/Globalfoundries, TSMC, and Intel which does it's own..... Each die shrink costs billions in R&D with no guarantees.... you are reaching the max for the technology (silicon) so this is really the end of it until they perfect different materials..... maybe at most one more shrink to 10nm then that is it....

You're right, and that's why ARM is doing so well against Intel even though they're a always node behind, because there's competition in that space.

But Intel are an effective monopoly in the x86 space and their strategy has been to outspend on fabs to prop up their legacy architecture. And now that's falling apart. Their utter failure in the mobile space is laying bare their predicament.

 

[T5BRICK]

LOL! That's a fair comparison! A probably 2W mobile part compared to a 95W desktop part. Why don't you ask yourself this question: why is a part that uses 50x the power only 3x as fast?

You should also list all the laptops built with i7-6700K!

The fact of the matter is that currently ARM isn't fast enough to power anything other than a low end laptop. You've seen posts complaining that the rMB isn't much faster than an iPad. Well, where is the ARM chip that will power a high end laptop?

I'm only referencing information posted earlier in the thread. If you want more proof, it is out there.