MacBook Pro 13" Quad-Core the ultimate laptop?

Mathias Denichi

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 21, 2013
438
596
Now that the Surface Book 2 13.5" 15w i7-8650U has quad cores in such a thin envelope, I can't imagine how much more this will improve the MacBook Pro 13".

The HP Spector x360 is already showing 13,663 in a multi core score in a 13" form factor, I would assume the 25w TBMBP 13" will perform even better.

I'm currently in the market for a TBMBP, and was thinking of pulling the trigger on a 15", but these new benchmarks has me possibly thinking of waiting for the Quad-Core 13" next year.

Any thoughts? Will you be waiting to upgrade if you haven't purchased a 13-15" 2016-17 MacBook Pro?
 

Wreckus

macrumors 6502a
Jan 22, 2015
996
553
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Now that the Surface Book 2 13.5" 15w i7-8650U has quad cores in such a thin envelope, I can't imagine how much more this will improve the MacBook Pro 13".

The HP Spector x360 is already showing 13,663 in a multi core score in a 13" form factor, I would assume the 25w TBMBP 13" will perform even better.

I'm currently in the market for a TBMBP, and was thinking of pulling the trigger on a 15", but these new benchmarks has me possibly thinking of waiting for the Quad-Core 13" next year.

Any thoughts? Will you be waiting to upgrade if you haven't purchased a 13-15" 2016-17 MacBook Pro?
Unless you are using apps or games that will actually use the four cores, current 2 core MBP will do fine.
 

Poki

macrumors 65816
Mar 21, 2012
1,294
892
I'm certainly waiting for that one. After having my 2009 15" MBP for more than eight years, it's time to upgrade. In order to be able to do actual work on the go, I need more power than the current 13" provides, while I don't want to go 15" again (transporting the 13" is just so much nicer). So yes, whatever it takes, my next notebook will be a quad core 13" one, and I hope I can buy it sooner rather than later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BiscottiGelato

Mathias Denichi

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 21, 2013
438
596
Unless you are using apps or games that will actually use the four cores, current 2 core MBP will do fine.
Yes they would. But if this thing launches in February with a quad core, for the same price, wouldn't you want to hold out for it? Thats only four months away.
 

New_Mac_Smell

macrumors 68000
Oct 17, 2016
1,914
1,491
Shanghai
Yes they would. But if this thing launches in February with a quad core, for the same price, wouldn't you want to hold out for it? Thats only four months away.
What if nothing launches in February (It's an odd time for a MBP launch) and you're waiting till next fall, that's 12 months away... What if it launches in the exact same configuration just slightly better CPU/SSD? Might as well have grabbed one now. What if you actually need a computer to work on? Lot's of what ifs. If you need something then buy it, if you can wait then wait. But unless there is a confirmed release in the next 4 weeks you're generally better to just buy now and upgrade if you absolutely need to. Whatever you brought now will be more than capable of the tasks you give it, whatever you buy in 2 years will be the same, it's just about having the 'newest' of something rather than needing it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HenryDJP

throAU

macrumors 603
Feb 13, 2012
5,285
2,276
Perth, Western Australia
Unless you are using apps or games that will actually use the four cores, current 2 core MBP will do fine.
However, a quad core 13” with thunderbolt 3 does open up the possibility of using one as a legitimate all purpose machine, including for games via an officially supported eGPU setup.

Modern games really push more than 2 cores, a dual core is a significant bottleneck in the above setup.

A quad core will be a lot nicer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jagooch

Adamantoise

macrumors 6502a
Aug 1, 2011
891
112
Unless you are using apps or games that will actually use the four cores, current 2 core MBP will do fine.
Unless you're using more than 128GB disk space, 128GB disk space will do fine.
Unless you're using more than 4GB of RAM, 4GB of RAM will do fine.
Unless you're away from an outlet more than 6 hours, 6 hour battery life will do fine.

Notice how all those above statements are essentially meaningless? So too is your point. I guess we should only rave about progress when it's available on an Apple device lol.
 

Samuelsan2001

macrumors 604
Oct 24, 2013
7,682
2,103
However, a quad core 13” with thunderbolt 3 does open up the possibility of using one as a legitimate all purpose machine, including for games via an officially supported eGPU setup.

Modern games really push more than 2 cores, a dual core is a significant bottleneck in the above setup.

A quad core will be a lot nicer.
Except the currently available quad cores are 15w and while great for burst speed will throttle terribly in extended cpu use like gaming and video editing etc, they also have a pretty standard igpu making graphics performance well below the level in the current mbp 13 inchers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pejx72

Mathias Denichi

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 21, 2013
438
596
What if nothing launches in February (It's an odd time for a MBP launch) and you're waiting till next fall, that's 12 months away... What if it launches in the exact same configuration just slightly better CPU/SSD? Might as well have grabbed one now. What if you actually need a computer to work on? Lot's of what ifs. If you need something then buy it, if you can wait then wait. But unless there is a confirmed release in the next 4 weeks you're generally better to just buy now and upgrade if you absolutely need to. Whatever you brought now will be more than capable of the tasks you give it, whatever you buy in 2 years will be the same, it's just about having the 'newest' of something rather than needing it.
It’s not solid, but Apple’s previous launch patterns typically showed a Late 20xx release, follow by the next year mid 20xx release, followed by a Early/Late release cycle again. There won’t be a design change, and just a mobo and cpu swap, I see no reason why it won’t be out in Feb/January to keep competitive.

Many pc makers are using the Kaby Lake-R in their smaller form factors. While the 4-6 core jump on the 15” MacBook Pro will be nice, I don’t think it’s as dire or significant as the 2-4 core jump in the 13” form factor showing a 4k-5k score improvement on geekbench 4.
 

The Mercurian

macrumors 68000
Mar 17, 2012
1,836
2,058
There are already geekbench scores for a quadcore 13" MBP:
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Refreshed-MacBook-Pro-series-with-ULV-Kaby-Lake-R-could-be-coming-soon.251604.0.html

I've posted this before but its been ignored. Normally such things generate a front page splash.

My 2 cents. Apple cannot wait until February on this. They are going to get hammered in Christmas market if they are behind the curve. 2 whole extra cores of CPU and 40% power boost is not the same as haswell/skylake/kabylake disappointing upgrades. Buying a 13" dual-core at this point would be absolute madness
 

PortableLover

macrumors 6502a
Apr 14, 2012
734
642
england
I hope apple fit a dgpu in it somewho. I know MS did it on their 13.5 surface book 2 by putting the cpu in thr screen and gpu in the bottom. I wonder if apple could do some magic..?
 

Mathias Denichi

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 21, 2013
438
596
There are already geekbench scores for a quadcore 13" MBP:
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Refreshed-MacBook-Pro-series-with-ULV-Kaby-Lake-R-could-be-coming-soon.251604.0.html

I've posted this before but its been ignored. Normally such things generate a front page splash.

My 2 cents. Apple cannot wait until February on this. They are going to get hammered in Christmas market if they are behind the curve. 2 whole extra cores of CPU and 40% power boost is not the same as haswell/skylake/kabylake disappointing upgrades. Buying a 13" dual-core at this point would be absolute madness
Very nice, you may be right. However, Apple is one to plod along, and I feel they may release it in February; if they do release an update this year, it’ll probably be along with the iMac Pro press release.
 

Poki

macrumors 65816
Mar 21, 2012
1,294
892
Very nice, you may be right. However, Apple is one to plod along, and I feel they may release it in February; if they do release an update this year, it’ll probably be along with the iMac Pro press release.
To be honest, a December release would be perfect for me! At that month, I've got money to burn, and obviously not having to wait until next March or even June is better. Also, that's six months from the last update, so that wouldn't be unheard of.

Maybe, just maybe, Intel could supply their 28W chips with Iris iGPUs and their 45W chips in time for that release window too.

Probably that's all just wishful thinking, but I actually don't think a December release of a new MBP line-up is impossible.
 

throAU

macrumors 603
Feb 13, 2012
5,285
2,276
Perth, Western Australia
Except the currently available quad cores are 15w and while great for burst speed will throttle terribly in extended cpu use like gaming and video editing etc, they also have a pretty standard igpu making graphics performance well below the level in the current mbp 13 inchers.
Did you not see thunderbolt 3 + eGPU.

ALL integrated GPUs are garbage and unsuitable for gaming.
 

lambertjohn

macrumors 65816
Jun 17, 2012
1,025
1,006
Now that the Surface Book 2 13.5" 15w i7-8650U has quad cores in such a thin envelope, I can't imagine how much more this will improve the MacBook Pro 13".

The HP Spector x360 is already showing 13,663 in a multi core score in a 13" form factor, I would assume the 25w TBMBP 13" will perform even better.

I'm currently in the market for a TBMBP, and was thinking of pulling the trigger on a 15", but these new benchmarks has me possibly thinking of waiting for the Quad-Core 13" next year.

Any thoughts? Will you be waiting to upgrade if you haven't purchased a 13-15" 2016-17 MacBook Pro?
Not everyone wants a computer from the 24th century. My 2015 MBP does me just fine. Fast, quiet and dependable. When a job comes my way, I kick it out, collect a paycheck and move on to the next job. And when my 2015 MBP is not available for whatever reason, I fall back on my 2010 MBP. Same thing: job, paycheck, another job. Could care less about achieving warp 10 with my computer. But there will always be that crowd that wants bigger, better and flashier. Good luck with your quad-core whatever. It will be great for about thirty seconds, then something faster will come along. Spend your money on a good book instead; better for the brain!
 

Mathias Denichi

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 21, 2013
438
596
Not everyone wants a computer from the 24th century. My 2015 MBP does me just fine. Fast, quiet and dependable. When a job comes my way, I kick it out, collect a paycheck and move on to the next job. And when my 2015 MBP is not available for whatever reason, I fall back on my 2010 MBP. Same thing: job, paycheck, another job. Could care less about achieving warp 10 with my computer. But there will always be that crowd that wants bigger, better and flashier. Good luck with your quad-core whatever. It will be great for about thirty seconds, then something faster will come along. Spend your money on a good book instead; better for the brain!
That def deserves a cool story brah.
 

Smeaton1724

macrumors 6502a
Sep 14, 2011
805
781
Leeds, UK
The problem is pricing, not the ability to throw in a quad core in to a 13'' form factor anymore. Every time Cook's Apple releases a product pricing gets higher and I don't expect it to stop when the 13'' Quad comes along. Whether that's too rich for people for the product on offer then sales will tell.

Personally I think we've come to the point where Desktop build/iMac 27'' + iPad Pro 10.5/12.9/9.7 is the best scenario offering flexibility, power and spreading cost. The Macbook Pro's are too rich for what they offer.
 

Mathias Denichi

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 21, 2013
438
596
The problem is pricing, not the ability to throw in a quad core in to a 13'' form factor anymore. Every time Cook's Apple releases a product pricing gets higher and I don't expect it to stop when the 13'' Quad comes along. Whether that's too rich for people for the product on offer then sales will tell.

Personally I think we've come to the point where Desktop build/iMac 27'' + iPad Pro 10.5/12.9/9.7 is the best scenario offering flexibility, power and spreading cost. The Macbook Pro's are too rich for what they offer.
I can agree on price. I feel that the 13” is priced absurdly high; however, the 15” base is priced well for what it is, and can do in the mobile space.

I’ve tried the iPad Pro with even an X1 citrix mouse and jump; while I’ve been able to create quite a few products and videos on it, it’s still way faster the second I switch to a MacBook with a pointer and solid keyboard.

There’s still no app that is any good on the iPad Pro to view source code or edit live css. Affinity, Pixelmator, Canvas, used them all, Photoshop still is king when it comes to photo editing and batching, which I can’t do on the iPad near as fast.
 

fireedo

macrumors regular
Jun 9, 2011
116
37
Indonesia
well, we will actually see all macbook pro 13 product lines should using quad cores since AMD and intel latest CPU using quad cores as their base model.
Cpu cores races these days
also there will be ddr4 and faster iGPU, AMD and Nvidia have great products right now, so it will back to apple decision, what should they use in the incoming model (2018)
if they choose not to use latest tech well shame on them
 

SicTransitGloriaMundi

macrumors newbie
Nov 4, 2016
7
7
There are already geekbench scores for a quadcore 13" MBP:
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Refreshed-MacBook-Pro-series-with-ULV-Kaby-Lake-R-could-be-coming-soon.251604.0.html

I've posted this before but its been ignored. Normally such things generate a front page splash.

My 2 cents. Apple cannot wait until February on this. They are going to get hammered in Christmas market if they are behind the curve. 2 whole extra cores of CPU and 40% power boost is not the same as haswell/skylake/kabylake disappointing upgrades. Buying a 13" dual-core at this point would be absolute madness
as i'm currently entertaining the idea of purchasing a mbpro this report caught my attention too. sadly it seems they're not going for the 8550u, which is built into the razer blade stealth for example and its performance is really good.
[doublepost=1508603137][/doublepost]
To be honest, a December release would be perfect for me!
imho a december-release is not ideal. while some kids run around with pockets full of money after christmas, a company's most profitable time is in the months before dec24th/25th.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Mercurian

sevvere

Suspended
Oct 20, 2017
107
255
If you are waiting for the next 13 inch MacBook Pro with quad core .... better be saving up for it. It will be the “premium” upgrade ... you know ... the one that’s last on the clickable boxes of upgrades when you order your MacBook Pro online and it has a (+800) next to it.

You will have the 15w options in i5 and i7 ... then the dual core 28w option i5 ... then the 28w i7 option ... then the quad core option that they will inflate the hell out of that price.

Quad core will NOT replace the “standard” dual core 28 watt MacBook Pro. It will be the “ceramic” option (iWatch) for the 13 inch MacBook Pro line. Apple will make that the ultimate insanely expensive premium high roller option ... and the price increase will reflect it and even though most people will want it ... most people will not be able to either afford it or rationally excuse the insane price it will be.

(Hope i’m wrong ... but look deep inside .... you know I’m not!)
 

SicTransitGloriaMundi

macrumors newbie
Nov 4, 2016
7
7
If you are waiting for the next 13 inch MacBook Pro with quad core .... better be saving up for it. It will be the “premium” upgrade ... you know ... the one that’s last on the clickable boxes of upgrades when you order your MacBook Pro online and it has a (+800) next to it.
that thought has crossed my mind too. let's keep our fingers crossed that this is not going to happen. :x
 
  • Like
Reactions: stigman and Queen6

mrex

macrumors 68040
Jul 16, 2014
3,284
1,350
europe
casual gaming, fair enough.

but try and run anything in 1080p with even moderate details and you’ll get less than 60 fps by a long shot. most likely less than 30
No need to play games and it has already its limits. Just connect it to an external display and let it to start a screensaver... my 13” mbp (2016/i7) sounds like a jet turbine.