MacBook Pro 2020 13" USER Reviews

[Pugly]

I believe it's not as complicated.
The Air and the Pro series are different in a number of ways, beyond the RAM and CPU configurations, as has been mentioned numerous times.. display, speakers, thermals, etc. etc. and both have their advantages.

Bottom line is if you already know you need a certain amount of RAM or a certain level of processing / graphics performance then you are smart enough to compare the two different types of laptop Apple offers specced the way you want / need, see how much they cost and then just decide on one.
It's actually much easier compared to choosing a Windows laptop, isn't it? It's just Air or Pro, one or the other.

The older Air had better performance relative to the Pros than the current Airs do. The original intention was for the low-spec MBP to be the replacement Air (they said this at the announcement back in 2016), the MacBook to be the basic computer for everybody. But that didn't take because people were too attached to the old Airs... so Apple shifted and put the MacBook CPU into the new MacBook Air. While the standard Ultrabook cpu continues to be in the low end Pro.

To me the old Airs were good performers for the time. The current Air doesn't seem as good to me compared to what else is out there, it's just adequate. That might align better with what the 'perception' of an Air is and what a Pro is. But I see no reason why Apple needs to stick with the low wattage CPU in a laptop that's as large as the current Air is. Well I see the reason... but it does nothing for me as a consumer...

 

[edubfromktown]

I’ve had both. The Ice Lake i5 MBP performs better overall, and having ports on both sides is convenient.

Agreed... I have both sitting in front of me now

The touch bar is not so bad either... so glad there is a real escape key and power button.

Only negative is the chunkier power adapter.

 

[Borophyll0520]

Agreed... I have both sitting in front of me now

The touch bar is not so bad either... so glad there is a real escape key and power button.

Only negative is the chunkier power adapter.

View attachment 918858

Agreed... I have both sitting in front of me now

The touch bar is not so bad either... so glad there is a real escape key and power button.

Only negative is the chunkier power adapter.

View attachment 918858

What is the difference in CPU temps while doing your regular work on both? Im curios because I have an i5/16 air that has the CPU running at near 100 c working in Lightroom and Im concerned with longevity if its gonna be running that hot while working. Im considering switching to the Pro

 

[KPOM]

Agreed... I have both sitting in front of me now

The touch bar is not so bad either... so glad there is a real escape key and power button.

Only negative is the chunkier power adapter.

View attachment 918858

This 61W charger is about the same size as Apple’s 30W charger. I’m a fan of Gallium Nitride (GaN) chargers, and use this with my MacBook Pro.

USB C Charger, RAVPower 61W PD Charger[GaN Tech] Fast Charging Foldable Adapter, USB C Wall Charger Compatible with iPhone 12 Pro Max MacBook Pro, iPad Pro 2020 Nintendo Switch, iPhone SE 11 Pro Max

USB C Charger, RAVPower 61W PD Charger[GaN Tech] Fast Charging Foldable Adapter, USB C Wall Charger Compatible with iPhone 12 Pro Max MacBook Pro, iPad Pro 2020 Nintendo Switch, iPhone SE 11 Pro Max

www.amazon.com

 

[citivolus]

3.8GHz is the maximum single-core boost. When all 4 cores are running, I believe the max is 3.2GHz, but in real world tests they tend to stabilize around 3.0 GHz. In any case, yes, Ice Lake is mostly about improving the GPU. The CPU improvements are not very significant, as they have a higher IPC, but lower clock speeds.

I did a test on both 8th Gen and 10th Gen using Intel Power Gadget. Running the "All Thread Frequency" test showed the 8th Gen pinning all four cores at 3.7Ghz while the 10th Gen maxed all four cores at 3.3Ghz. Interesting result...

 

[edubfromktown]

This 61W charger is about the same size as Apple’s 30W charger. I’m a fan of Gallium Nitride (GaN) chargers, and use this with my MacBook Pro.

USB C Charger, RAVPower 61W PD Charger[GaN Tech] Fast Charging Foldable Adapter, USB C Wall Charger Compatible with iPhone 12 Pro Max MacBook Pro, iPad Pro 2020 Nintendo Switch, iPhone SE 11 Pro Max

USB C Charger, RAVPower 61W PD Charger[GaN Tech] Fast Charging Foldable Adapter, USB C Wall Charger Compatible with iPhone 12 Pro Max MacBook Pro, iPad Pro 2020 Nintendo Switch, iPhone SE 11 Pro Max

www.amazon.com

Yes- me too. I have one of the RavPower 45W chargers... that I used with my 12". They are awesome.

 

[Dhock_Holiday]

I have noticed the 2020 10th Gen. runs just as fast if not a bit quicker than the base 16 inch MBP. I've tested when launching applications and syncing large files its much pretty much neck in neck with its bigger brother. I'm sure in GPU intensive applications it will pull ahead though.

I've been putting the 13 inch 10th Gen. through the paces and to my surprise its super quiet, the only time I hear the fans ramp up is when benchmarking but that's to be expected. Overall I'm pretty impressed with this little laptop, the screen and the large bezels are a bummer however. Its pretty shocking going form the gorgeous display of the 16 inch back down the 13 inch. Especially with laptops like the XPS 13, Spectre x360 on the market I feel like Apple really should have pushed this to 14 inches.

 

[SirJohn871]

Agreed... I have both sitting in front of me now

The touch bar is not so bad either... so glad there is a real escape key and power button.

Only negative is the chunkier power adapter.

View attachment 918858

Do you notice any difference in SSD speed with normal use? The MBP apparently has a much faster SSD which not many people are talking about.

I have a MBA i7/16gb/256 on the way. I really want the snappiest experience and don’t care about sustained loads. If it takes the MBA 4 seconds to launch MS365 apps vs. 2 seconds with the MBP, that’s huge to me. Same with restart times.

It’s a shame that YouTube reviews don’t look at application launch times. Synthetic metrics are not that helpful for day-to-day experience.

 

[edubfromktown]

What is the difference in CPU temps while doing your regular work on both? Im curios because I have an i5/16 air that has the CPU running at near 100 c working in Lightroom and Im concerned with longevity if its gonna be running that hot while working. Im considering switching to the Pro

(The MBA i7 is offline at the moment but has never really run hot).

On the MBP as follows:

Doing basic stuff and connected to a Zoom meeting, CPU 43.71 C / GPU 47.00 C

I ran LR 6 perpetual and flipped past ~20 Raw images... CPU 61.14 C / GPU 55.00
[automerge]1590523674[/automerge]

Do you notice any difference in SSD speed with normal use? The MBP apparently has a much faster SSD which not many people are talking about.

I have a MBA i7/16gb/256 on the way. I really want the snappiest experience and don’t care about sustained loads. If it takes the MBA 4 seconds to launch MS365 apps vs. 2 seconds with the MBP, that’s huge to me. Same with restart times.

It’s a shame that YouTube reviews don’t look at application launch times. Synthetic metrics are not that helpful for day-to-day experience.

I had read about the faster SSD in the MBP and was intrigued.

Haven't noticed a difference in speed as of yet... just got the MBP.

The MBA is a nice machine and for much of what we use these things for other than throwing heavy sustained workloads at it there's plenty under the hood to deal with it in my opinion.

 

[mbaire]

Do you notice any difference in SSD speed with normal use? The MBP apparently has a much faster SSD which not many people are talking about.

I have a MBA i7/16gb/256 on the way. I really want the snappiest experience and don’t care about sustained loads. If it takes the MBA 4 seconds to launch MS365 apps vs. 2 seconds with the MBP, that’s huge to me. Same with restart times.

It’s a shame that YouTube reviews don’t look at application launch times. Synthetic metrics are not that helpful for day-to-day experience.

Totally agree.

a comparison of disk speed:

Edit: if you are interested you can see more tests here

Disk speed test: min 7:05


my intention this year was to buy the MBA but seeing the results (poor performance) I will buy in July the MBP13 base with 16GB of RAM (the only thing that bothers me is the 2133MHz vs the 3733MHz of the 10th gen CPU)

 

[Mattyman]

Totally agree.

a comparison of disk speed:

Edit: if you are interested you can see more tests here

Disk speed test: min 7:05


my intention this year was to buy the MBA but seeing the results (poor performance) I will buy in July the MBP13 base with 16GB of RAM (the only thing that bothers me is the 2133MHz vs the 3733MHz of the 10th gen CPU)

Those disc results look good. Seeing earlier benchmarks for the base pro i think were lower...

 

[mbaire]

Those disc results look good. Seeing earlier benchmarks for the base pro i think were lower...

yes, it is a very good result, I had seen this ...

Source:

 

[mbaire]

Edit: duplicate message

Sorry

 

[Mattyman]

Exactly. Only the 512gb version scores better. Perhaps it is that one.

 

[mbaire]

Exactly. Only the 512gb version scores better. Perhaps it is that one.

in the video he says that it is the base version with 256GB

Perhaps the improvement for the base model apart from the keyboard is a faster hard drive?

Anyway 1300-1500MB/s is a good result for me

 

[mbaire]

I did a test on both 8th Gen and 10th Gen using Intel Power Gadget. Running the "All Thread Frequency" test showed the 8th Gen pinning all four cores at 3.7Ghz while the 10th Gen maxed all four cores at 3.3Ghz. Interesting result...

Have you tested the disk speed of the MBP 8th gen?

 

[Mattyman]

in the video he says that it is the base version with 256GB

Perhaps the improvement for the base model apart from the keyboard is a faster hard drive?

Anyway 1300-1500MB/s is a good result for me

It’s just odd cos every other base I’ve seen reviewed have the lower speeds

 

[unoporfavor]

yes, it is a very good result, I had seen this ...

Source:

This may have been already highlighted, but I thought because of how the memory chips and controller is laid out, the larger the capacity, the greater the performance? (even if marginal)
i.e. The 512GB should be faster than the 256GB all other things being equal? I 100% could be wrong though!
I assume there would be some parameters around upper and lower limits on that though too. ✌

 

[Metrosey]

Yeah, I actually suspect Apple reusing 8th gen processors in the 2020 MacBook was a warning shot at Intel that they need to up their game or they're out the door.

Given the performance of ARM chips keeps increasing exponentially, doubling every few years, and Intel struggle to make a 20% jump in the same time frame it's hard to see a future for x86 in laptops.

How exactly is that a warning shot? You know the single core increase under Geekbench is 30 percent right? Furthermore, performance laptops have always been hot and loud. Considering it’s a good chip, the complaints aren’t really valid. Sure Apple can most likely make a faster ARM CPU, but we are talking completely different architecture and a chip bespokely made for one system, dealing with one OS.

 

[emraha06]

Same terrible slow pixel response time and same terrible smearing texts?

 

[w00tini]

people — there are dozens of benchmarking threads. let’s get back to USER reviews as the thread is intended.

🙏

 

[Metrosey]

people — there are dozens of benchmarking threads. let’s get back to USER reviews as the thread is intended.

🙏

Here here, enough of these synthetic benchmarks. Happens every release, how about people use their system for their specific need and then review it.

 

[unoporfavor]

How exactly is that a warning shot? You know the single core increase under Geekbench is 30 percent right? Furthermore, performance laptops have always been hot and loud. Considering it’s a good chip, the complaints aren’t really valid. Sure Apple can most likely make a faster ARM CPU, but we are talking completely different architecture and a chip bespokely made for one system, dealing with one OS.

Some benchmarks (eg. cinemark) show only around 20% single-core and 10% multi-core. Given most heavy work like exporting photos and videos are multi-core it's not a huge increase for $500 more cost. Or another way of putting it - almost 40% more expensive machine 😬
But take your point - I don't see it as a 'warning shot'. There's a lot going on in the world that has impacted production and technology - not sure why people think Intel would be immune to it.
Cheers ✌

 

[Metrosey]

Some benchmarks (eg. cinemark) show only around 20% single-core and 10% multi-core. Given most heavy work like exporting photos and videos are multi-core it's not a huge increase for $500 more cost. Or another way of putting it - almost 40% more expensive machine 😬
But take your point - I don't see it as a 'warning shot'. There's a lot going on in the world that has impacted production and technology - not sure why people think Intel would be immune to it.
Cheers ✌

I understand your point, but it’s a bigger increase than in the past and a rather good one. I don’t know where we are getting the $500 from, on the UK store, the difference between the 8th and 10th gen is £200, and that’s with faster LPDDR4x RAM and more Thunderbolt ports. Moreover, you’ve got behind the hood features such as integrated Thunderbolt which is a massive deal for those eGPUs and other devices.

 

[unoporfavor]

I understand your point, but it’s a bigger increase than in the past and a rather good one. I don’t know where we are getting the $500 from, on the UK store, the difference between the 8th and 10th gen is £200, and that’s with faster LPDDR4x RAM and more Thunderbolt ports. Moreover, you’ve got behind the hood features such as integrated Thunderbolt which is a massive deal for those eGPUs and other devices.

Sorry you're right - the price difference isn't $500 but rather £500 (£1,299.00 vs. £1,799).
That's what the benchmarks have been comparing.
I would imagine the results could be even closer if the memory was increased on the base model.
GPU performance of the 10th gen there can be no argument. My workflow doesn't utilise it a lot however. Having a 5/6k monitor might be nice though!