Is my MBP 2016 outdated?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Aditya_S, Jun 9, 2017.

  1. Aditya_S macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2016
    #1
    So I had bought a refurbished 2016 MacBook Pro 13" before WWDC however the Kaby Lake refresh seems to have much more performance improvements than expected. I couldn't afford the full price of the 2016 so I went with refurbished but I can't do that with Kaby Lake. Should I just live with my 2016 model or is it going to be soon outdated?
     
  2. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #2
    What does the 2017 MBP do that that the 2016 doesn't?
     
  3. ZapNZs macrumors 68020

    ZapNZs

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2017
    #3
    Unless you are doing something that can seriously benefit from minor CPU improvements, In my humble opinion you should enjoy the system you have and not worry too much about it. By the time refurb Kaby Lake models come out, it could be only a few months before the Coffee Lake MBPs, and then you'll just get stuck in a cycle of worry.
     
  4. PBG4 Dude macrumors 68020

    PBG4 Dude

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    #4
    Hardware HEVC / HEIF en/decoding. Everything else is iterative.
     
  5. vipergts2207 macrumors 68000

    vipergts2207

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    #5
    Even the 2016 modes will do 8-bit in hardware.
     
  6. pallymore macrumors member

    pallymore

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #6
    Yes, it is outdated.
    The questions is "do you have to have the latest mbp".
    2016 MBP is outdated, but not obsolete (yet).

    Most car manufactures come out with model updates/improvements yearly - that doesn't necessarily mean people need to exchange their 2016 models for 2017 ones.
     
  7. TheRealAlex macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    #7
    - 10-bit HEVC decoding
    - 4K HDR10 streaming
    - 50% faster SSD performance
    Watch in real time Skylake vs. Kabylake try to play the same 4K 10-bit color file.
    (Warning this video will make people sell their Skylake based system)
    . Start at 3:00
     
  8. vipergts2207 macrumors 68000

    vipergts2207

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    #8
    Depends which models we're talking about. The 2016 MBP's can do 8-bit HEVC in hardware and 10-bit in software. No MacBook can display 4K HDR. The screen is only an 8-bit panel and not 4K resolution. They also cannot output HDR as the best video out protocols they support is HDMI 2.0 and DP 1.3, neither of which support HDR. Faster SSD was in reference to the MacBook only, not the MBP. Finally, it's true the 2017 13" in the video will run 4K video better than the 2016 model because of the updates to the iGPU. The 15" models with dedicated GPU have no such problem.
     
  9. whodean macrumors member

    whodean

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2011
    #9
    You should say the 2016 15" MBP with the optional upgraded GPU and more VRAM have no such problem, the non-upgraded ones do.
     
  10. vipergts2207 macrumors 68000

    vipergts2207

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    #10
    The people who didn't opt for the 460 either don't need the extra performance of the 460 for 4K video anyway or should've been smarter with their purchase last year.
     
  11. kuhnje macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 29, 2017
    #11
    Of course it's not outdated. I still have a late 2013 and there isn't anything that a 2017 can do for me that my 2013 can't.
     
  12. New_Mac_Smell macrumors 68000

    New_Mac_Smell

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2016
    Location:
    Shanghai
    #12
    Why do I keep hearing about this 50% faster SSD? During the keynote they said they were improving the SSD of the rMB, but nothing about the MBP. Has there been any tests of the 2017 model somehow hitting 4500mb/s read/write?

    The main difference is Kabylake against Skylake. Kabylake is an iterative update meant to bring greater efficiency, real world difference is minimal. On paper I believe they're about 5-10% faster. If you will genuinely notice 100Mhz difference on a 3GHz core then all credit to you. Otherwise just be happy with the computer you brought and use it for whatever reason you brought it for.
     
  13. Aditya_S thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2016
    #13
    So I remember Apple talking about HEVC at WWDC and I might be confusing it with something else but I think they said it offered better compression to save file space. But what does hardware 8 bit and 10 bit encoding/decoding mean?
     
  14. satinsilverem2 macrumors 6502a

    satinsilverem2

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    #14
    Technically yes its outdated but I don't think its that big of an update to upgrade from a 2016 models.
     
  15. vipergts2207 macrumors 68000

    vipergts2207

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    #15
    A 10-bit encoded video is able to show more colors and thus smoother gradients with less banding (likely no banding).

    There’s a bit of a snag here though because MBP’s only use 8-bit (likely with dithering) displays and cannot output HDR from their ports, rendering the visual advantage largely moot. H.265 compression benefits would still apply though.
     
  16. evec macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2016
    #16
    Yes, it outdated, this faster that a pack of potato chip will be expired.
    However, Are this outdated affect your daily usage ?
    Do you need a faster machine to save your time ? (may be just 0.1s)
    Are you view the 4K video on such small display, 1080p don't meet your enjoyment ?

    Most of the time the people don't know what they need and already thing they need that because they want this.
    If you need a new car this fine have a latest model, but why you need change the car every years or half years ?
    Are you need to change you home main door because depot have need model and claim this strong 10% that old model ?
     
  17. Aditya_S thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2016
    #17
    The only reason I'm asking is because I plan on keeping this for a really long time and I wanted to know if Skylake would last me that long or would Katy lake be much better.
     
  18. New_Mac_Smell macrumors 68000

    New_Mac_Smell

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2016
    Location:
    Shanghai
    #18
    Skylake will last you just as long as Kabylake. As would Cannonlake or Coffeelake or whichever lake they decide on in the future. These are always iterative updates, there is no such thing as the speed/capability/technology doubling at each iteration, they simply improve them. This is an efficiency update more than anything, which is largely marketing speak for cheaper to make.

    Each processor will last about 4-6 years before being noticeably 'outdated', so if you brought one 6 months ago expect it to last about 6 months less than if you brought one today.
     
  19. vipergts2207 macrumors 68000

    vipergts2207

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    #19
    I should also add that any lack of 4K performance that may be seen in the 450 and 455 2016 models will be apparent in the 2017 15" base model as well since it only has a 555.
     
  20. whodean macrumors member

    whodean

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2011
    #20
    That is correct. the $2799 model is the sweet spot, with 25% graphics improvement.
     
  21. PBG4 Dude macrumors 68020

    PBG4 Dude

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    #21
    I wonder what the improvement of the 560 4GB over the Radeon 9600m 256MB in my last laptop is?
     
  22. Karnicopia macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2015
    #22
    Seems like a nice update but I'm not regretting my purchase, it's just as great of a product as when I bought it.
     
  23. vipergts2207, Jun 10, 2017
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2017

    vipergts2207 macrumors 68000

    vipergts2207

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    #23
    Having gone from the 8600GT to the 6750M to the 460 myself, fairly substantial. Though the 25% performance increase would only be if you were to go up the GPU line from the 455 to the 560. You only see those kind of performance jumps in years where the GPU update isn’t just a rebadge.

    To put some numbers to it I looked at some geekbench compute results. I could only find results for a model as far back as the 2010 model with a 330M and it got a score of 5500. The new MBP’s with a 560 get around a 56400 and since yours is even older than the 330M I was able to compare it to, it would indeed be quite substantial.
     

Share This Page