New MacBook Air Announced With Magic Keyboard, Up to 2x Faster Performance, and Lower $999 Starting Price

[chucker23n1]

More interesting than the new iPad Pro but at 2.8# it's more of a Macbook Chubby. Apple needs to get it on a diet down closer to 2# considering the competition has a 2.4# with replaceable SSD, faster AMD Ryzen 4000 SoC, 32GB DRAM, better keyboard, more ports, etc.

Apple needs to get the iPod mini on a diet considering the competition has a phone with replaceable battery and 3G.
[automerge]1584698502[/automerge]

Does that mean that I can finally call Apple and ask them to replace my butterfly MacBook Air with this one? Would they give me this new MacBook Air for free?

If you have a reliability issue, they'll replace your keyboard.

If you don't like the keyboard, no, you don't get a different computer for free.
[automerge]1584698656[/automerge]

This seems like a really great update.
I'm considering selling my MBP 13" 2018 2,3 GHz 16 GB RAM and getting this updated Air.

One of the main reasons would be the new keyboard. I'm worried that mine will break at some point and I also love the MacBook Air doesn't have the touch bar and that the arrow keys are in an inverted T shape.

However, I can't find the maximum brightness of the new Air's display anywhere...do you guys know more about that?

The Air is less bright. I'm assuming you have the four-port model; then your display is 500 nits, and the Air only 400.

 

[seek3r]

The new AoE can run in up to 4k resolution. AoE Definitive Edition has been modernized and improved. It has much higher system requirements.

Holy crap, I hadn't realized!! Just looked on Steam, I know what I'm doing this weekend, thanks!!

 

[Mitch1984]

Has anyone got one yet, can't find it on Geekbench.

 

[imp3rator]

Has anyone got one yet, can't find it on Geekbench.

9to5mac:

For even basic users, however, I’d recommend adding $100 back onto the system price in order to upgrade to an i5. That’s the chip ours came with. The system scored 5244 and 14672 on Geekbench 4’s single and multi-core tests, respectively, presenting a marked upgrade over the last model we tested, back in 2018.

MB Pro 2019 2TB has - 4651 / 16712

 

[pbasmadj]

pbasmadj : outperfom only in GPU (about 80%), CPU should be same in common scenarios but sometimes can be worse (1,1 GHz to 3,2 GHz vs 1,6 to 3,6 Ghz in Air 2019)

Thanks dudes. Interesting. at the end of the day, probably just going with the upgraded i5/500GB model Would have been nice to have 256GB and i5 in the base for that price, but they are crafty in getting people to upgrade.

Just got a shipping confirmation. Base unit arriving tomorrow.

If you have experience with the 2019 i5-8210Y's , would love to hear your take aways on the new i3.

 

[chucker23n1]

9to5mac:

For even basic users, however, I’d recommend adding $100 back onto the system price in order to upgrade to an i5. That’s the chip ours came with. The system scored 5244 and 14672 on Geekbench 4’s single and multi-core tests, respectively, presenting a marked upgrade over the last model we tested, back in 2018.

MB Pro 2019 2TB has - 4651 / 16712

Sigh. Why on earth would they use Geekbench 4. Can't compare to the Mac benchmark charts that way.

Snell did it with 5. 33% improvement in single-core, 63% in multi-core.

 

[imp3rator]

MKBHD has larger numbers 🧐

https://forums.macrumors.com/attachments/screen-shot-2020-03-20-at-15-36-35-png.900091/

1192 / 3238

 

[chucker23n1]

MKBHD has larger numbers 🧐

https://forums.macrumors.com/attachments/screen-shot-2020-03-20-at-15-36-35-png.900091/

1192 / 3238

Hmm, 12% difference on single-core is quite a margin of error. And 22% difference on multi-core especially so.

Maybe Snell didn't properly kill background stuff before testing?

 

[Mitch1984]

9to5mac:

For even basic users, however, I’d recommend adding $100 back onto the system price in order to upgrade to an i5. That’s the chip ours came with. The system scored 5244 and 14672 on Geekbench 4’s single and multi-core tests, respectively, presenting a marked upgrade over the last model we tested, back in 2018.

MB Pro 2019 2TB has - 4651 / 16712

Awesome, think I'm gonna cop one then, rather than wait for the new Macbook Pro.

 

[Palliser]

Got the base model in and running. Really like the new keyboard, the i3 feels speedy enough for me. Fingerprint is great addition. I’m upgrading from an early 2016 MacBook 1.2 m5.

 

[russell_314]

Got the base model in and running. Really like the new keyboard, the i3 feels speedy enough for me. Fingerprint is great addition. I’m upgrading from an early 2016 MacBook 1.2 m5.

It's plenty powerful enough for basic use.

 

[kjvmartin]

Holy crap, I hadn't realized!! Just looked on Steam, I know what I'm doing this weekend, thanks!!

Right, I'm wondering if we can get it running well enough on a 2020 MB Air

 

[KPOM]

Anyone thinking of the base MacBook Air should spend the extra $100 for the quad-core i5.

 

[coolfactor]

Lower price. Better keyboard. Decent storage. A great update. iMac next please.

I've been waiting for this. This will be my next Air... replacing my 2013 that's still going strong, but not strong enough.

 

[sportfan619]

iPad Pro will be faster, better battery, and has replaceable keyboard along with touch screen and stylus capability.

one isn’t really better than the other though. It’s like saying my stapler is better than my hole punch.

Different tools for different jobs

Thanks for this post. I'm actually debating if i should go for the 2019 16 inch Macbook pro or get the ipad pro and the MBA now or perhaps a bit staggered with the new 13/14 PRO if something comes by June.

Currently have a 2015 MBP (128 gb is the killer) and a 2018 ipad air used for work (have a old ipad from 5-6 years ago as well). Does it make going all in on the 16 inch pro or trying to get a new ipad pro and a MBA?


i dont do crazy heavy lifting but use bloomberg terminal/excel and do stream sports a decent amount. also a dozens of tabs guy


any advice is appreciated!

 

[throAU]

i dont do crazy heavy lifting but use bloomberg terminal/excel and do stream sports a decent amount. also a dozens of tabs guy


any advice is appreciated!

How much do you plan to travel with the machine?

Unless you want the screen real estate, the 16" will be massive overkill and a huge extra expense that you really don't need - but if you're not going to use excel on an external display, then maybe the 16" would be better for that.

If you plan on doing heavy excel work on an external monitor, a 13" air will be plenty.

 

[Jury]

Got the base model in and running. Really like the new keyboard, the i3 feels speedy enough for me. Fingerprint is great addition. I’m upgrading from an early 2016 MacBook 1.2 m5.

The 2016-2019 Macbook is overpriced and absolutely ridiculous that it does not have a touchID to authenticate.

 

[ksec]

Does the quad core in the new air match the performance of a newer 13” MBP? Trying to decide if it would be worth upgrading my 2015 13” MBP

The Quad Core only manage to sustain a 1.74Ghz Clock on All 4 Core during a 95C Degree load..... which is pretty bad if you ask me. Its thermal is still crap. I have yet to see a valid / plausible explanation as to why they design it as it is.

 

[Mr. Heckles]

These are actually looking good. Very tempting. i7 1TB HD, 16 GB or RAM for under $1800 (using my daughters college discount).

 

[throAU]

The Quad Core only manage to sustain a 1.74Ghz Clock on All 4 Core during a 95C Degree load..... which is pretty bad if you ask me. Its thermal is still crap. I have yet to see a valid / plausible explanation as to why they design it as it is.

Because if you have a quad core instead of dual, you can spread the thermal load over more of the die.

Also, even at lower clocks, you can pin a high usage thread to one or two cores and still have 2 cores left over (instead of either 1 or no cores "free").

Clocks aren't everything and anyone who has used a high core count machine will know that more cores generally means a smoother more consistently responsive machine, irrespective of clock speed.

 

[ksec]

Because if you have a quad core instead of dual, you can spread the thermal load over more of the die.

Also, even at lower clocks, you can pin a high usage thread to one or two cores and still have 2 cores left over (instead of either 1 or no cores "free").

In reality you spread the performance across more core. Instead of a boost of PL2 / PL3 at 3.xGhz you get a sustained 2.xGhz if you are only using Dual Core. i.e It isn't a replacement to MacBook Pro as the previous question was asked.

Clocks aren't everything and anyone who has used a high core count machine will know that more cores generally means a smoother more consistently responsive machine, irrespective of clock speed.

Read Amdahl's law

Amdahl's law - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Jury]

Because if you have a quad core instead of dual, you can spread the thermal load over more of the die.

Also, even at lower clocks, you can pin a high usage thread to one or two cores and still have 2 cores left over (instead of either 1 or no cores "free").

Clocks aren't everything and anyone who has used a high core count machine will know that more cores generally means a smoother more consistently responsive machine, irrespective of clock speed.

Agreed. That's why the quad-core model should be able to run cooler but Apple failed to get it right.

 

[Seanm87]

Anyone thinking of the base MacBook Air should spend the extra $100 for the quad-core i5.

why? You don’t know people’s use cases. What if they just use it to write documents, watch Netflix, and don’t have a zillion apps open at a time.

 

[chucker23n1]

why? You don’t know people’s use cases. What if they just use it to write documents, watch Netflix, and don’t have a zillion apps open at a time.

Even then, those $100 increase longevity.

It’s not an absolute must, obviously. But it’s a good bang for the buck.

 

[Nütztjanix]

Even then, those $100 increase longevity.

It’s not an absolute must, obviously. But it’s a good bang for the buck.

I would second that.