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's Skylake Processor Lineup for Retina MacBook Revealed
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The day Apple ditch Intel is the day I walk away from Apple. Intel are vastly under-appreciated in the industry. No one comes close to their tech.
The MBA never really had discrete GPUs. They had Nvidia GPUs in 2009 and 2010 but that was with a chipset from Nvidia, such that the GPUs were integrated in that chipset.
How did I ever get by with my various 13" MBPs?
Last edited:
Yeah, that's why they're such a joke in the mobile industry and are basically giving away their CPUs to anyone who wants to try to make a tablet or phone with an Intel chip in it. Great tech!
The requirements for phone/tablet CPUs and laptop/desktop ones aren't identical.
Apple could make a lot of people happy by putting a Retina display in the Non retina Macbook Pro (And giving it Haswell and Broad-well) and by Putting a retina display in at least the 13 inch Macbook Air. Then they can leave those two laptops as their classic laptops, and do whatever port removable, thinning and other stuff with the Retina Pro and the Retina Macbook 
Then we'd have an up to date option for everyone.
Then we'd have an up to date option for everyone.
They're not, but every day they get a little bit closer. Soon laptops and phones will have the same requirements, since people always want smaller, lighter and more powerful. Laptops are already using ARM chips and that'll be the trend going forward.
The industry for decades has been driven by smaller, faster and cheaper. Intel fails badly on that combination and is weighed down by their x86 legacy architecture.
Apple could make a lot of people happy by putting a Retina display in the Non retina Macbook Pro (And giving it Haswell and Broad-well) and by Putting a retina display in at least the 13 inch Macbook Air. Then they can leave those two laptops as their classic laptops, and do whatever port removable, thinning and other stuff with the Retina Pro and the Retina Macbook
Then we'd have an up to date option for everyone.
So the Retina MacBook Pro then. That's been around for 3 years already...
No. The Macbook Pro Retina is missing a lot of the attractive features of the Non retina Pro. Ports, expandability, battery life indicator, IR sensor etc. The difference will be even more so if apple goes down the route of thinning down the Retina Macbook Pro.
You're living in the past. MacBooks aren't competing against Windows laptops, they're competing against mobile phones.
Why do you think the MacBook 12" even exists? It has a relatively slow processor and one port but is very portable. Kind of reminds me of... a mobile phone!
Apple will either start selling laptops that are extremely thin and light, or they'll essentially stop selling them. People are going to be looking at mobile phones and asking, "why can't my laptop be that portable?" Of course the answer is there's no reason at all.
A switch to ARM processors in inevitable because Intel can't compete with them. Notice how phones already have 8 cores yet Intel is stuck with 2 cores in their mobile processors. I imagine an Apple ARM laptop will have 16 or 32 cores, because numerous low power cores is the only way to reduce power consumption while maintaining performance, going forward, and Apple can manage such a software transition.
There are so many people like you that assume that Intel is really the problem here. They aren't. The real problem is that we are getting very close to the wall on how small we can build silicon chips. Most of the added performance seen in each generation of chip has been because we can keep shrinking them and adding more transistors to make things run faster and add more functionality. The wall is fast approaching and each step we make closer to it is getting harder and harder costing more time to get there. Apple is not immune to this with their chips just because they are ARM instead of x86 architecture. The fast moving pace of silicon tech is beginning to slow down due to these physical limits. You and everyone else is just going to have to get used to that.
Last edited:
And again.. The benefit to users is? NOTHING!
More costs, more freaking disaster. Except in the past it had benefits. Better performance etc. Now it really doesn't. Anyone who thinks that Apple could do better than Intel who are completely devoted to desktop class architecture is dreaming.
In the real world, light and thin is not the only thing people look at when buying a laptop.
As a consumer I could not giving a flying hoot if it saves Apple some money. When the majority of the worlds computers (not mobile phones) are running Arm processors, it will be different, but that is a long way off.
Why would you buy a laptop that's just a tablet with a keyboard? Most people can't get real work done on a tablet, it would be useless. Any laptop has to run regular software or it's useless to laptop (and desktop) users. It's not a matter "scaling it up" it's a completely different interface.
None of that stuff is needed which is why you don't see it on newer machines.
Yes it is needed. It is needed by many, obviously not by you though. Glad to see you've bought completely into what Apple tells you.
Remind me why the non Retina Macbook is one of their best selling laptops, despite being over priced and outdated?
Thus going back to my point. A lineup that catered to a wide range of people would be great.
You didn't read or respond to the details in my post at all, because they destroy your argument.
People don't want more performance, they want the same performance in a smaller form factor. People want to carry around their laptop everywhere all the time, just like mobile phones. The only way to do that without reducing functionality is thinness, and lots of it.
I don't know why you think it would be more expensive. ARM chips are an order of magnitude cheaper than Intel chips.
Disaster is Apple being left behind by other companies who see where laptops are headed.
As I said, you're living in the past, and you just can't free your mind from it.
So people are buying and enjoying their 12" MBs, but it's all an Apple conspiracy and people are being forced against their will to buy an "inferior product" and to prove your point you post a mocking video.
Wow, you're so convincing!
And you're living in some sort of future that hopefully won't exist.
Diaster is Apple making a pointless switch. Intel will be able to provide chips for smaller and smaller form factors, while maintaining compadiblitly with the rest of the worlds computing.
You make a lot of assumptions. People do want performance in general terms. They want their machines to last and perform well over a period of time. However requirements will ever increase.
A transition from Intel to arm will be expensive. Just like the transition from PPC to Intel was.
Intel is moving towards offering chips that are power efficient and thin, and they know what they are doing. Apple does not have the knowledge of desktop class processors. Its just not there.
Really what you're talking about is tablets and phones becoming more powerful and reaching the capabilities of laptops, which will happen. Laptops will remain though at least till the next big thing happens. They will probably be a niche item, but still there, and not ruined by a race to make them less and less useful.
That or everything gets moved to the cloud and phone and tablets become cloud pushing devices, and again laptops are retained for the niche minority, where processing power would matter.
No, Intel can't compete with ARM. Their legacy x86 arch won't allow it. You probably don't get the technical aspect of it, thus your view. To maintain compatibility and performance x86 processors are very complicated. Because of this they use more power. It doesn't matter what Intel do they can't get around this basic fact.
ARM is absolutely beating the pants off of Intel in the low power stakes. When are they going to start competing? Do you think they're holding off for some reason? Intel gives away processors to tablet and phone builders because they can't compete in tablets and phones, so it doesn't look good, even if your vague tablet and "next big thing" progostinations come to pass (they won't).
Also, do you think Apple is broke? What exactly is "expensive" for Apple?
That's a fairly bold claim.
Core count really doesn't say much. Also, oddly enough, this rMBP has four cores, not two.
As for 16 or 32 cores, programmers are already struggling to make their code sufficiently parallelized to max out four cores, let alone more than that. It doesn't really scale like that right now, and it won't for a while.
Intel isn't equipping their consumer CPUs with few cores because they can't deliver more; it's because 1) it lets them keep it to the high server end, and 2) there's really not a whole lot of use for more cores. Two cores was a great leap because you always have plenty of background processes anyway. Three or four cores can still be a bit of an advantage. Beyond that? Not so much. This is different on servers, where applications are more likely to be split into worker processes.
Uh… mobility? Y'know, the very thing mobile devices are bought for? The benefit is less weight, less thickness, less power draw, less heat. More battery life, more mobility, more flexibility.
The only thing? No. A major thing? Sure.
I assume you mean the non-retina MBP? Care to show any data at all for it being "one of their best[sic] selling laptops"? I mean, what with there being no publicly available data on that at all.
Oh great the personal attacks have started
Don't speak down to me. ARM can't compete with Intel for power, and it is as simple as that. I know very well why Intel processors use more power. However they have continually been reducing power usage. It however doesn't make sense to dump Intel for ARM based chips purely based on a power perspective. It makes more sense for Tablets to become more powerful, leaving Macs for people who want desktop class machines.
Expensive is Expensive - Intel's R&D costs are absolutely massive.
And the rMB for example comes close to Matching the iPad Air 2 in almost all of those.
Amazon sales charts (US where the Macbook Pro Non Retina is outselling the Retina, behind only the Air 13, and the UK where the Non retina is 3rd best selling laptop, ahead of every other Macbook, except the 13 inch retina at number 1) , and numerous supply chain etc stuff over the last couple of years.
I know numerous people in sales who also say that the Non retina pro sells well. If it didn't sell well Apple wouldn't sell it at all.