New 13-Inch MacBook Pro Sans Touch Bar is Marginally Faster But More Efficient Than Last Year's Base Model

[johngwheeler]

Depends on the processor and cores.
I am guessing you have an i7
The 13inch i5 will be slower, but the higher end i7 will most probably give better results

You're comparing the multi-core results of a quad core machine against a dual core; the quad core is going to be faster for many years to come for workloads that can use all of the cores, of course ( e.g. Video encoding).

The single core scores are probably more relevant for average application use, and for these the newer processor will be conserably faster than your 2012 MBP 15.

 

[rog]

Have you looked at the benchmarks? This machine is far, far faster than the Air you reference.

Yes I have, and no it is not, at least according to Geekbench. SSD is much faster, but it's so small I can't even back up my 256GB iPhone to it without shelling out as much as I would for a used car.

 

[Mr. Dee]

Cool. I had the same laptop, now with my gf, and I think it will give many, many years of great service still.

I run two Windows VMs, multiple tabs open in both Safari and Firefox, iTunes running the background, along with Slack, always typing up something in Word and its still speedy. Sure, I would love to have a 15 inch MBP with all the trimmings, but I think that's money best saved towards the 2019 model. Surprisingly, the 13 inch screen has not turned out to be a drawback as I initially thought it would be.

 

[Feenician]

I run two Windows VMs, multiple tabs open in both Safari and Firefox, iTunes running the background, along with Slack, always typing up something in Word and its still speedy. Sure, I would love to have a 15 inch MBP with all the trimmings, but I think that's money best saved towards the 2019 model. Surprisingly, the 13 inch screen has not turned out to be a drawback as I initially thought it would be.

It's a very, very capable machine and nothing released now will make it any less so. I ran VM's in too all the time. It's just that our latest product is a more demanding beast (in production we usually ask for 96gb+ RAM and nothing less than 8 cores, 16 preferred)

 

[honam1021]

Assuming you are using your laptop only 12 out of any 24 hour period, you are talking about two days of heavy use without access to a plug to recharge. I just don't get the value for that kind of battery life. Where would you be using your laptop for that period of time and not have a power supply? Even the longest non-stop international flight doesn't touch 24 hours. I mean, is this for camping? Is that your workflow issue where you need huge battery life?

The vast majority of users will use the MacBook Pro at work, plugged in, and then, maybe, carry it home every day and then plug it in at home. So for those people weight is way more important than battery life. The battery never gets stretched for more than a few hours.

Thin or thick, though, I don't care about. The only reason thin is helpful is because it makes the laptop weigh less.

Even if most people won't need that kind of battery life when surfing, the extra juice would surely make doing CPU intensive work or even light gaming on the go actually feasible.

 

[TallManNY]

Even if most people won't need that kind of battery life when surfing, the extra juice would surely make doing CPU intensive work or even light gaming on the go actually feasible.

Are you saying CPU intensive work and gaming is not feasible now on Macs with 10 hour battery life? I mean are people really cranking away on a regular basis on 4k editing in locations where they don't have access to a power supply? Where are you guys going (and remaining for hours on end) that doesn't have electric outlets? I'm genuinely curious. And how much does the most intensive work flow or gaming eat into the battery life? Because 6 or 7 hours of battery life still seems like plenty to me.

For me, Apple has solved the battery life issue on all of its devices at this point. Further gains are not worth much unless one can get to a full week (or at least five days) of charge. iPhone 7 is possibly the only one you can argue about (the SE and 7Plus have all the juice you could want). But the battery case is very nice and it solves that issue well in my opinion.

 

[Unami]

nice, 7% faster, 17 % thinner, 66% fewer connections and 30% more expensive

(nevermind compared to my 2009 mid-tier 13" mbp, a comparable model would be about double the price - so they adjusted for inflation - in russia)

 

[Toby2]

Article Link: New 13-Inch MacBook Pro Sans Touch Bar is Marginally Faster But More Efficient Than Last Year's Base Model[/QUOTE]
[doublepost=1483051374][/doublepost]I'll gladly wait for the Kaby Lake processors for next years model, then USB C peripherals will be better and cheaper.
Don't really want the Gimmicky Touch Bar. If Apple put a Touch Bar on a Magic Track Pad they'd have a winner! Mr. Cook is more of an accountant than a innovator.

 

[12ozWillie]

Reading all these comments knowing now what this MacBook is known for is humorous! It was hated back in 2016, and its hated now because of the failure prone keyboard! Poor 2016-2019 MacBook Pro 13"/15" can't catch a break!

 

[MarvinHC]

Reading all these comments knowing now what this MacBook is known for is humorous! It was hated back in 2016, and its hated now because of the failure prone keyboard! Poor 2016-2019 MacBook Pro 13"/15" can't catch a break!

It was always hated for the keyboard, failing or not. Thank god the butterfly keyboards are gone now! They are the one reason why I kept my old MacBook Air 11" with the "good" keyboard until now