The processor in the geekbench score would not make it into a 13" chassis. The TDP is 45W, whereas the CPUs in the 13" MBP are 35W. The CPU also costs around $568, therefore it will only be in the high-end BTO 15" and 17" models.
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 Macbook Pro 13 specs?
- Thread starter dsciel
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The processor in the geekbench score would not make it into a 13" chassis. The TDP is 45W, whereas the CPUs in the 13" MBP are 35W. The CPU also costs around $568, therefore it will only be in the high-end BTO 15" and 17" models.
Whoa there. We don't know what speed the air will be, but i doubt it will be a 2.5 ghz ivy bridge. for size and weight... Uh, of course. You're comparing a full featured notebook to an ultralight. So this is really just about screen resolution. Ok, I get that, but let's not overreact. It's still a good screen and a great laptop overall. And the "pro" moniker doesn't mean anything. It's not like the 13" is more expensive than the air.
Hate to be this guy, but this is EXACTLY what happened last year. Before the launch everyone thought there would be a redesign and they would get every new feature under the sun - seriously, everyone was convinced of this. Then they came out and it was new processors, thunderbolt and not much else.
Hope it isn't true, but man does it feel familiar.
Hope it isn't true, but man does it feel familiar.
No it's not. It's 1280x800. Lame resolution for a 2012 £999 laptop. I don't even care for Retina that much, but that is the one thing Apple need to improve.
Calling fake on this being a 13" Pro. I think this is the new Macbook and we will no longer see a Macbook 'Pro'. Rather a increased resolution Air.
Why? Because the geekbench Pro score was a 15" laptop, with the name "Macbook Pro 9,1" If there was a 13" Pro, then that geekbench should have been "9,2"
Yup, that is very true unfortunately. The rumours last year was that all of the products coming out would have everything, but the kitchen sink. Let's see how things pan out.
You have to be impressed...nothing really has been leaked at all about the Mac line...pretty good security there compared to the iPhone parts and iPad parts.
We'll know more in less then a week.
I would suggest that next time you double check before making yourself look foolish. You'll find out that the 2011 13" MBP does indeed have a 1280x800 resolution.
----------
I can't help but think that all of the rumours we've seen so far have just been guesses and wish lists. At least by being pessimistic one can always be pleasantly surprised rather than disappointed.
If there is no HiDPI, then it is because of Sharp IGZO. Apple may have not been able to wait long enough for Sharp to get the IGZO working right. If this is the case then the HiDPI screens we may see in the MacBook Pro's will be the same technology as the screens that Samsung is making for Apple's iPad3. This means higher power requirements for the screen, which means bigger battery. If Apple cant fit a bigger battery in the 13" then they went the conservative route and kept a low res screen to save on weight and power requirements.
The 13" really doesn't fit into the MBPro line IMO...
This could be the last bump/refresh of that line when the 13" MBAir replaces it.
The 15" and 17" make more sense as the 'Pro' machines.
Also... MBA has a res of 1440 by 900 native. For the 13 inch.
MBP has a res of 1280 by 800. I could see that even if there was a moderate update to the 13in "pro", we'd see at least the increased screen res to 1440 by 900.
To me, that just makes sense.
MBP has a res of 1280 by 800. I could see that even if there was a moderate update to the 13in "pro", we'd see at least the increased screen res to 1440 by 900.
To me, that just makes sense.
I don´t think there even will be a 13" Macbook Pro. Just like we had it in late 2008.
11" + 13 " Macbook (without Air as its not necessary)
15" + 17" Macbook Pro
11" + 13 " Macbook (without Air as its not necessary)
15" + 17" Macbook Pro
Everyone's talking about how it was faked in Photoshop, but in reality, it would just be easier to type it up in word, print it out on an Avery label, slap it on a white box, then take a picture. It would be impossible to tell if was fake using traditional fake detecting techniques at that point. I'm not commenting on whether it's real or not, but just saying.
Yep... since there's no MacBook anymore, this would be a nice entry-point... although strange how this has only recently been "Pro"ed
So if the 11" + 13" are becoming Macbooks, and there will be no 13" Macbook Pro, what is this computer then?
Unfortunately, this sounds very Apple-like, and quite a repeat of last year's expectations with the whole iPhone 4S/5 thing.
Sigh, if it is real: 
Though, weren't the 15 inch MacBook Pros originally supposed to be the retina display ones? Maybe there's still hope for those? :\
Though, weren't the 15 inch MacBook Pros originally supposed to be the retina display ones? Maybe there's still hope for those? :\
This points to what I've been thinking for awhile now... The current MBPs are selling better than ever. If you put on your "Apple hat" vs. one of an enthusiastic end-user, you'll see it makes sense to change as little as possible. Couple that with the fact that we are only 1 week away from WWDC and seeing NONE of the typical leaks surrounding accessories that are compatible, and I think you'll find that the chassis stays the same - IF they even announce new models.
...Don't shoot the messenger!
...Don't shoot the messenger!
You're too hung up on the word "pro." it's just a word to distinguish the lines when there was a MacBook line. There are plenty of folks who want a computer smaller than 15" that still has an optical drive. That said, I think the optical drive is on the way out even in the bigger sizes, if not this time than next time.
Seems fake, could just mock up in photoshop print out and then take a picture with a bad camera
