Leaker: Upcoming MacBook Pro to See Price Hike Over Current Model, Equal Performance Across 14 and 16-Inch Sizes

[cashboxz02]

One thing to note that the current 13.3" M1 MacBook Pro is $1699 with 16GB of RAM and 512GB of storage.

While it is nice to believe that for $100 more Apple would give us a 14" MiniLED display and an "M1X" with twice as many CPU and GPU cores plus another USB/TB port and MagSafe and HDMI, is that a realistic proposition? And if they did, who would ever buy the 13.3" M1 MBP?

Personally, I say "no" and "nobody" and that is why a presumed $1899 or $1999 price makes sense to me. And is one I am willing to pay.

Apple has never ever raised the price due to a new generation of CPU's. Intel CPU's also increase cores with newer generations. A-series chips also get more cores with newer generations. If they did that, the price would be 10's of thousands of dollars per device.

tl;dr: If they didn't raise it when the bulk of the research and development was done (for the M1), they're not going to do it for M1 to M1X...at least because of the processor upgrade.

Apple also did not raise the price of the retina MacBook Pro after the first generation. It became a standard, and Apple kept the same price as the 2012 baseline MBP. They went to $1300 in 2013, which is $100 more than $1200 2012 baseline MBP. The following year, they dropped the price.

As cheap as solid state storage has become, it only makes sense that the baseline would have 512GB/16GB and cost $1400 or less...regardless of how much more powerful this year's CPU is. That is still overpriced btw, considering how solid state storage costs as much as mechanical storage from 2012. If they make it $1500, not enough people would buy a MacBook Pro.

 

[CWallace]

Maybe Apple are charging more because TSMC is charging Apple more (see recent price increases starting in 2022). And maybe other components it uses are also costing Apple more so they are "front-loading" that in now.

Maybe Apple are charging more because Apple feel "M1X" is at least as good as the Intel i7-1068NG7 and Apple charges $200 for that CPU in a 13.3" MacBook Pro.

Maybe Apple are charging more because it has a bigger display with a new backlight than the 13.3" MackBook Pro (the iPad Pro 12.9" went up $100 because of it's MiniLED display).

Maybe Apple are charging more to create a sufficient price differential to the 13.3" MacBook Pro with 16GB/512GB to keep it relevant because if the price delta was only $100, I expect the vast majority of customers would instead go for the 14" model.

And yes, maybe Apple is charging more because they can and we'll pay it.

Maybe it is a mix of some of the above.

Maybe it is all of the above.

For me, I expect I will find enough value in the 14" MacBook Pro at (up to) $1999 to buy it. Others mileage may vary.

 

[macsplusmacs]

Would the "grade" of the SSD be a level or two up in the MacBook pro? I'm sure they would be using among the fastest mass-market devices there are. Another possible differentiator.

 

[Falhófnir]

One thing to note that the current 13.3" M1 MacBook Pro is $1699 with 16GB of RAM and 512GB of storage.

While it is nice to believe that for $100 more Apple would give us a 14" MiniLED display and an "M1X" with twice as many CPU and GPU cores plus another USB/TB port and MagSafe and HDMI, is that a realistic proposition? And if they did, who would ever buy the 13.3" M1 MBP?

Personally, I say "no" and "nobody" and that is why a presumed $1899 or $1999 price makes sense to me. And is one I am willing to pay.

This is true to an extent, though in my experience Apple want you to always be looking at the next step up. That seems to be a big part of how their product lines/ prices are set… if they can entice you to part with $1,799 to $1,999 rather than $1,699 that’s more revenue and potentially more profit. Assuming the 14” doesn’t cost them much or any more than the 13” it replaces, I’m sure they’d quite happily cannibalise the upper BTOs of the M1 if it makes them more money.

The two deciding factors are can they get a higher margin selling the 14” at $1,799 or $1,899 than they can selling the M1 13” at $1,699 with similar specs; and at what point is the next step too big/ off-putting to someone looking for a new computer (i.e. how much of a premium will customers happily pay for the 14” over the 13”). If the sums add up so $1,899 nets them decent extra profit/ unit and market research says customers will happily fork over an extra $200 without a second thought, then that’s where they will set. If the same is true of $1,999 then that’s what it’ll be. You can bet they will have a dedicated team and a lot of market research going into getting that balance just right…

 

[katandmouse]

Well if this is true, then they better have a base storage of 512GB and 16GB of RAM.

My old macbook died 3 months ago. I'm holding out for the new macbook so I bought a mini to hold me over. I got the bare minimum because I was told it would be enough. I was used to 64 GB of RAM and over a terrabyte in storage, but I went for it anyway. Surprisingly the 8GB ram is not so bad. I only run out of space when I have about 75 Chrome tabs open and that's with Photoshop and other apps running too. So something about this chip makes it so you don't need as much RAM. They should make 16GB the bare minimum, but 8MB is fine for simple home users. Hard drive space is a different story. Thank god I use icloud. I run out of space 2 or 3 times a week and have to clear out my core files probably because of all the crashes that happen when I try to shut down and my RAM is working on overdrive. So if 256 completely fills up twice a week with almost all my files going to icloud for storage, 512 GB isn't near enough.

 

[bkenney]

What happened M2 ?? Are we still on track for nano pixels or whatever they're called today?

 

[macsplusmacs]

m2 is next year. maybe a m2x would be in next falls macbook pro. maybe

 

[CWallace]

What happened M2 ?? Are we still on track for nano pixels or whatever they're called today?

M2 will likely launch by mid-2022 on the MacBook Air and 13.3" MacBook Pro.

MicroLED is still likely years away for displays larger than the Apple Watch.

 

[VArase]

Wth Apple?? I’m done with this rip off company.. price hike for what? Using their own chips and removing the Touch Bar and still jacking up the price😡😡

Everyone's getting this one wrong ... the 14" is not replacing the high end 13" Intel model.

Apple is cancelling the high end 13" Intel model, and they're creating a new model M1x 14" MacBook Pro which is a smaller version of the M1x 16" MacBook Pro, with all the processing power of the 16" but with a smaller form factor, display, and battery than the 16".

Next year, I'm pretty sure they'll stop selling the 13" Intel model, and will only sell a MacBook Air (or simply rename the lower end machine to MacBook) with an M2 processor based on the A15, and the MacBook Pro name will belong exclusively to the higher end prosumer 14" and 16" models.

The Intel 13" MacBook Pros were really never prosumer models - they were simply MacBook models with additional processor options. Calling them MacBook Pros was really a marketing thing.

 

[meboy]

Once again.... no.

I'm gonna restate the comment I made to you earlier... since you don't seem to get it.

Remember back then there were two configurations of the 13" Macbook Pro... starting at $1,499 and $1,799

The entry-level 13" Macbook Pro had function keys and two Thunderbolt ports.

The TouchBar model was the higher-end model at the time. It had four Thunderbolts ports... and a faster processor... and faster RAM... and a faster iGPU.

So it wasn't just the TouchBar that made it an extra $300... even though revisionist historians like to say it did...

Who's making stuff up??

Exactly the same model was replaced with the "newer" version of that model but with touchbar and it was $300 more.

 

[meboy]

And if the mini LED costs 300$ more than the old screen????


It doesn't but unless one has the apple parts and price list for the M1X MacBook Pro....

yada yada...

Then it would make sense if the price was less than the current model.

Cheaper chip.
No touchbar.

Try simple math harder..

 

[Handsome Bacon]

My 15" late 2018 MBP is pretty much the biggest POS laptop I've ever had. Pure garbage, especially the keyboard. I retired a 2012 for it and have regretted it ever since. Was excited for an M1 MBP but their built in government spyware makes it a hard "no". I need to trade this fall, too.

 

[macsplusmacs]

The leaker Dylan just retweeted this:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1431281704300425216

I believe this is a confirmation of his thoughts on the m1x macbook chips and them being the same in the 14" and 16" machines?


Read the comments to the tweet as well.

 

[macsplusmacs]

with up to a maxed out 4 times the current count of core GPUs as well as double the performance cores.

and up to double the ram.

I predict a LOT of happy campers this fall.

 

[mario0]

Can't wait for the new MacBook Pro 14 and 16. I'm sure that will be the best bang for the buck (16GB/512GB).

 

[dikey]

If there's no intel version anymore, where to go for current eGPU user.

 

[macsplusmacs]

If there's no intel version anymore, where to go for current eGPU user.

Sadly, That is a question I do not think we will know till closer to WWDC '22 with the mac pro and mac pro jr. announcements.

 

[CWallace]

If there's no intel version anymore, where to go for current eGPU user.

Depending on what macOS applications and tasks you are depending on the eGPU for, they may become irrelevant considering how powerful Apple Silicon is now with the M1 and how much more powerful it will be when "M1X" drops on these new MacBook Pros.

 

[macsplusmacs]

As I watched that video, i just thought to myself, ok now run it with the M1x.

with the 32 GPU core option, which would be 4X fast, almost in a linear fashion it seems.

Then lets talk discreet GPU after that.


Oh by the way. That card he talks about in the video takes 300w of power.

The mac mini. 5.6w.

 

[macsplusmacs]

But,But, But, they dropped the TouchBar!!!

World’s Largest Chip Maker to Raise Prices, Threatening Costlier Electronics

The world’s largest contract chip maker is raising prices by as much as 20%, a move that could result in consumers paying more for electronics.

www.wsj.com

 

[gordian]

At this point, I'd pay any amount of money to get rid of this wretched touch bar. Brilliant strategy—saddle us with this piece of total garbage for 2+ years and then charge us more to get rid of it. Steve Jobs would definitely approve!

 

[macsplusmacs]

Does the headphone jack service to this version?

Yes or No?

I vote yes.

 

[Stridr69]

The main difference between the pro and the air is battery size. I don't see the $300 price difference proportional to actual cost of hardware difference (of $30-40). That extra GPU core is a negligible difference in real world use. What they're doing is making a crappy version of a good product and selling that as the base price. Classic post-Jobs Apple move.

Jobs wouldn't make the iPhone 4 with non-retina version and start that as the base price, while making the retina iPhone 4 $200 more. His philosophy was, "Apple does not ship junk".

Also tell me 2 years from now how the 8GB RAM/256GB SSD laptop is holding up.

Actually my 6 year old 8GB ram/128GB ssd is still doing fine, Thank You very much. Oh, BTY it's a Lenovo Yoga 3(typed as you read this).....

 

[morganBH]

This isn’t really a price hike though… the $1,299 model is the entry level machine. These will be replacing the 2 higher end 13’s and the 16. I’m not sure where the “price hike” is coming from. From what this says, they should be priced fairly similar, if not exactly the same as the previous iterations of the high end machines.

 

[VArase]

Of course Apple will raise prices, it is what they have done regularly since Tim took over. With that being said, I can remember a time when the lowest end Apple portable was very expensive, I spent $1499 on a base model iBook G3 clamshell and I can remeber when the PowerBook was easily $3,000+

Oh, I dunno.

Seems like Apple pretty much keep prices stable for quite some time, and even lowered them.

I seem to remember spending a lot more on a lot less capable MacBook Pros.