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.
New iPad Pro Has Comparable Performance to 2018 15" MacBook Pro in Benchmarks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is also one of those things that people on the Apple-loving bandwagon will ignore (including me, and I preordered TWO 12.9" iPad Pros for my household). As many others have commented, as long as the iPad Pro is limited to iOS, it doesn't matter if it's a thousand times faster than the latest MacBook Pro. It's purely academic.
Seems more of an indication that the MBP is underpowered than anything else. Apple could add a larger laptop with a larger battery, more RAM, and a beefier processor that would blow this thing out of the water — and still be smaller and lighter than the 2011 models.
Yes, but...
My macbook pro 2018 heats up like insane, needs two fans and it still can barely handle allegedly *marginally better performance*
i think implications are different than what you are implying here. I think the implications are "how the hell is apple able to stick so much performance in such a small chassis if mbp2018 is practically falling apart"
No really, what's the point? If apple apparently can make a device that's twice smaller that's almost as fast judging by geekbench...
By that logic, even if they make macbook pro twice as bulky it wont have twice the performance, since the twice as bulky as ipad pro doesn't nearly have twice the performance of an ipad pro.
[doublepost=1541087614][/doublepost]
no but frankly, barely does the 2018 mbp...
"And it has no business being priced like a laptop."
It does if Apple's long-term goal (emphasis on long-term) is for the iPad Pro to cannibalize / replace its entire laptop line.
Here's the problem:
The comparison is meaningless, the iPad Pro runs iOS and the Macbook Pro runs MacOS. They are completely different and run a completely different set of apps.
This ultimately means you can't even run a real benchmark comparison of the two, as the apps to run the benchmarks will also be different.
Which I still disagree with. It's not pragmatic with this form factor no matter how you look at it.
the MBP NEEDS to dissipate more watts because the cpu burns more. The benchmark runs long enough to cause throttling, and the iPad still wins.
And you are all missing the point. Never mind whether an iPad can run desktop workloads as fast as a desktop. The point is that if you put the A12X into a bigger case, with a real heat sink and active cooling, it would absolutely OWN any x86 chip used in any mac today.
How does the new iPad Pro's graphics capabilities compare to Intel's integrated graphics? This is more important to me than raw CPU performance as to whether or not it's realistic to have Apple's own processors in a Mac.
The question is... why didnt they?
[doublepost=1541087958][/doublepost]
judging by game performance (of identical games), iOS devices always fared pretty well.
Be careful of the wording, they said that AutoCAD mobile will be available, which has been available on iPad, iPhone and Android devices for some time. According to everything I have heard from Autodesk, the iPad Pro will NOT be getting the full desktop version of AutoCAD. According to Adobe it will be getting the full desktop version of Photoshop and possibly some other products.
They probably already have put the Apple ARM chips in laptops, as prototypes.
However, what takes time is the OS and software support.
The question on my mind: if Apple stops using Intel Core i5 and i7 processors in its Macintosh computer lines, does this mean users will no longer be able to run Microsoft Windows on Macs via BootCamp, Parallels, etc.? Some of us do use our Macs as dual-boot machines.
Great, so they compare the $2800 MacbookPro to $1200 iPad which was compared in the keynote to a $350 gaming console. That really says a lot about the state of the Mac with Apple.
There is no such thing and CISC and RISC in any modern computer architecture. All micro ops are implemented as what you would call “RISC” and instruction code translation is moving toward “CISC” for icache efficiency. With respect to these benchmarks, they are really useless because they are not testing any advanced instructions (AVX, Virtualization etc) where Intel will perform at an order of magnitude greater within the same power envelope. Apples ARM is bar none the best designed in the field, but by no means does it compare to actual perf of an intel processor for a majority of real workloads.
Yeah it's pooping on my 2016 MBP, can we get FCPX on the iPad Pro or possibly the A13 in the next MBP?
If they did, people on this site's heads would explode.
Honestly, its never going to happen because it would require too much reprogramming. But I think Apple's long term goal is to kill off the Macbooks and other traditional computers as we know to transition to iOS completely and be a competitor to ChromeOS devices. Of course many ChromeOS devices can also run most Linux apps now, plus Android and Chrome Extensions, so there will be an issue there.
They could run Dual-architecture as they did with x86/powerpc for quite a while (Tiger, Leopard were both dual-architecture and Snow Leopard had powerpc emulation for running old apps) . Arguably ARM/x86 is even less problematic since many apps already are partially ported - most apple apps and a lot of 3rd party apps are.
I was disappointed to see the new MacBook Air only had a dual-core i5, to an even bigger disappointment when they talked about the specifications of the A12X. Maybe the rumours of a low-cost MacBook will come soon, after all the MacBook Air now replaces the MacBook as far as power/size/price is concerned so maybe the MacBook will be the one to switch to ARM first. As long as there's a Rosetta2 to run my current apps on it, I don't care. BBedit running at 100% or 50%, I'm still the slowest part of the setup.
Well Apple seems to have no die size limitation as they have more CPU/GPU cores than most computers so I don't think this is an impossible task for them - I would be money that Apple has ARM Macs running in their labs. Once they determine they can match or exceed Intel they will pull the trigger at least on their entry level models.