Th design really is horrible; yes it’s powerful and I don’t mind it’s thicker but it doesn’t look sleek or futurist, wish it had a more boxy design, this look like a 10 year old laptop you get out and say why how ugly was the old style
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.
MacBook Pro Reviews: Fast Performance, Added Ports, and ProMotion Displays Check All the Boxes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
From my perspective, they listened to their users and brought back the stuff people care about.
I don't know about you but I'm fine with them taking their time to give accurate battery tests.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Then 2 would make it even more recognizable? And one on every side would practically SHOUT!
If it's only a design choice- IMO- it's a poor choice. I'm pretty sure the huge Apple logo on the back of the screen much more clearly says this is an Apple product than a notch on the front. Else, we have the mix bag of products from Apple that are and are not recognizable as some have the notch and some don't. Look at the beautiful Mac Pro monitor. If I'm going to spend $5K on a monitor and a "design choice" notch is needed to make it recognizable, where's the notch on that one?
No then they would of brought back usb a like most people use, also pros don’t use sd they use compact flash or better
I am not sure who this guy is but he got a subscription from me. This is a very honest and solid review overall. My apologies if this was already posted at some point.
The relevant bit is the "70W" and "100W" under those two PC GPUs. The "magical" thing about the M1 Max is not that it's the "fastest. GPU. evah." - it's about how much performance it can deliver while only consuming 30W of power (which affects heat, battery life, how bulky the cooling system has to be...)
Also, the performance will depend how well optimised any particular app or benchmark is for the M1/Metal architecture.
More like totally unsurprising - it's pretty much the same core design, so the difference in performance is very similar. You'll need to aggregate a lot more tests to decide if that slightly lower benchmark is significant or if they're effectively the same - but even the sort of different shown here is going to be imperceptible in practice.
The M1 already has 8 (4 performance + 4 efficiency) cores and has already cashed in any benefit from having spare cores to run UI and housekeeping while your single-threaded App gets a clear run. Adding more cores was never going to have any effect on single-core workloads, the advantage is entirely dependent on how well any particular workflow makes use of multi-threading.
Again - there should be no surprises here unless you expected Apple to criticise its own product in their glitzy launch video. It's just as true with Intel - single core performance hits rapidly diminishing returns fairly low down the price range, and the more powerful options mainly tack on more cores and hope that your software is optimised to make good use of them. E.g. the entry-level 8 core Xeon Mac Pro has a single core GeekBench 5 of 1033 which only rises to 1135 on the 28 core top-end model (which also has larger cache) while the far cheaper i7 (forget the i9) iMac Pro beats both of them at 1217 (source: EveryMac.com).
Point is, you don't need the M1 Pro or Max unless you're running the sort of heavily multi-threaded or GPU based workflow which, until now, has needed a desktop or a "luggable" mobile workstation. Or, the other advantages of the M1 Max/Pro like more RAM or external display support.
Maybe we'll get a 14" or 16" M2 (not pro/max) laptop in the future which would be great for a lot of people who just want a bigger screen (I kinda doubt it, especially 16", Apple would much prefer you pay "Pro" money, please).
What these benchmarks do show (as did Apple's launch video, they just didn't hang a lampshade on it) is that the M1 Pro/Max aren't going to be a night-and-day upgrade from the very highest-spec i9/5700XT iMacs and won't touch the higher Mac Pro configurations on multicore/heavy GPU tasks. Hence the rumours that Apple are working on - amongst other things - systems with 2 or 4 M1 Max processors.
The notch would never be a dealbreaker for me, but man… it looks way better on the iPhone than the Mac lol. it should be more curvy or something that makes it more natural/elegant.
Yes. Why wouldn't Apple give the slowest model to early reviewers to test? What are they hiding? Perhaps it is slower than the other models? Is 8 less than 10? Enquiring minds want to know!!!!!! ?
Dave is great, and his conclusion is something that most will probably ignore. I considered these MacBooks but realized my laptop usage doesn't justify it. I went with the M1 MacBook Air instead and saved $1-2k+.
She didn't blindly praise the 720p webcam so no more review unit privilege for her.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
iPad Mini has to put the WHOLE computer and battery in the screen... and the backside 4K camera too.
1080p FaceTime is 1080p FaceTime. However, Apple managed to get what may be the very same module into iPad Mini seems like Apple could get it into a MBpro. Else, insert the 1080p FaceTime module into the MBpro exactly as they did it... just higher. Obviously Apple CAN put a 1080p camera that close to the edge- they just did it (again) in iPad Mini.
Last edited:
Indeed. I hate the notch but Apple really listened to everything else, so i got to give Apple my money.
If people only care about thinnes, there is the M1 iPad Pro and the M1 MBA.
I usually love Dave but his conclusion was a little too gatekeeper-y for me. These laptops are wonderful for people who just want an awesome laptop. The 14" only holds a $300 premium over the 2-port M1 MBP when spec'd to 16GB/512GB (perfectly reasonable consumer-level specs) and offers a LOT more. No sense in silo'ing these off to Only The Most Professional Pros.
It's not about the overall volume but specifically about thickness. Cameras need enough space for the lenses, sensors and optical path. In a thicker device you can shift components around so that they don't interfere, but if the lid is thin, there just is not enough depth to fit all that in.