Performance difference between the 3 available CPU

[Queen6]

"which implies that the Core M in present iteration will definitely reach temperatures that will induce significant throttling."

Another ignorant and unfounded statement by someone who wants to slam the new product.

The truth is this, we don't know how the new rMB will perform under it's max use.

The truth is the Apple engineers could have solved or reduced the heat issue by internal design thus eliminating the fan. My current 11" MBA rarely turns on the fan and my 2012 Mac Mini i7 Quad core also rarely turns on the fan (normally when using Handbrake).

Will it get hot? Of course the CPU will get hot (they all do) and knowing this the engineering team (or person) designing the hardware around it took this into consideration. They didn't drop the fan because it was a "cool" (pun intended) idea, they did it because they could.

It`s not ignorant or unfounded CPU`s are designed to throttle the question is by how much, and how efficient Apple`s cooling solution is. nor am I "slamming" the new MackBook, if you had actually read and understood the words you would have realised this..

BTW it`s a computer not a religion, so best calm down a touch

 

[MyopicPaideia]

Pretty sure the base 1.1 model is using the 5Y51, and the 1.2 and 1.3 models are both using the 5Y71. They quote 4.5W TDP, and I am pretty certain the 1.3 will be at 5W TDP.

Don't think Apple is touching the 5Y31 part at all...

EDIT: Nevermind, it does actually appear they are using the 5Y31 part for the 1.1, as it will only turbo up to 2.4...odd! And the 1.2 does appear to be the 5Y51 as well...only turbos up to 2.6.

Looks like you may very well be right! The 1.2 or 1.3 would be the way to go for less throttling I would imagine.

However, these core M chips are much better at getting to max instantly from idle than the Core i processors, they can stop and start faster than anything Intel has out there. This means they will be great at short burst stuff, like most everyday "light" computing, and be able to keep within their TDP much better than previous Intel processors. They are supposedly really that much more efficient. Transcode some video though, and Handbrake will get you throttling like no other fast.

 

[Theophil1971]

Pretty sure the base 1.1 model is using the 5Y51, and the 1.2 and 1.3 models are both using the 5Y71. They quote 4.5W TDP, and I am pretty certain the 1.3 will be at 5W TDP.

Don't think Apple is touching the 5Y31 part at all...

Ya, I read this somewhere else too.

 

[leman]

As I can agree with you about the chip design, as often center of a waffle would become high end CPU but it is not for sure how they designed the Core M lineup.

It wouldn't make any sense for them to do anything else. All the Core-M CPUs are based on an identical chip, I am absolutely sure of it.

About the throttled clock, what I wanted to say is that the CPU will never go lower of its based clock under normal usage. The manufacturer can decide to lower Core M base clock to 600Mhz but a "normal" 5Y51 will never go under 1.1Ghz under, again, normal circumstances.

Nope, it can go lower. Again, it depends on what you mean under 'normal circumstances'. Normal circumstances for a modern CPU on a modern OS is a deep power down mode.

Regarding the 5Y31 as the max Freq is 1.1 and the max TDP is 6W, I think we can safely assume that his TDP @ that freq will be 6W?

AFAIK the TDP has nothing to do with the frequency. Its simply the thermal load the cooling system should be able to dissipate during normal operation. A CPU can go below or beyond its TDP any time. The TDP of 6W simply means that the CPU starts trottle itself down if it should cross that threshold for a considerable time. Whether the CPU actually outputs 6W @1.1Gzh — one would need to measure this. In the end, I expect that one would find a lot of variation between individual CPUs. But I would be very surprised to find that the CPU outputs its TDP when constantly running at its base frequency.

 

[kingofwale]

It`s not ignorant or unfounded CPU`s are designed to throttle the question is by how much, and how efficient Apple`s cooling solution is. nor am I "slamming" the new MackBook, if you had actually read and understood the words you would have realised this..

BTW it`s a computer not a religion, so best calm down a touch

some people really need to come down, not even Ive is this fanatic...sometimes.

also, my 15 inch rMBP is now running on fans. I know that because I can hear it.

and all I'm doing is having 3 firefox tabs open, Utorrent in the background (no download, small upload), and netflix playing.

doesn't take much

 

[bibyfok]

It wouldn't make any sense for them to do anything else. All the Core-M CPUs are based on an identical chip, I am absolutely sure of it.



Nope, it can go lower. Again, it depends on what you mean under 'normal circumstances'. Normal circumstances for a modern CPU on a modern OS is a deep power down mode.



AFAIK the TDP has nothing to do with the frequency. Its simply the thermal load the cooling system should be able to dissipate during normal operation. A CPU can go below or beyond its TDP any time. The TDP of 6W simply means that the CPU starts trottle itself down if it should cross that threshold for a considerable time. Whether the CPU actually outputs 6W @1.1Gzh — one would need to measure this. In the end, I expect that one would find a lot of variation between individual CPUs. But I would be very surprised to find that the CPU outputs its TDP when constantly running at its base frequency.

Thank you for those explanations, lot of things that I learned...

 

[bjet767]

Queen

"if you had actually read and understood the words you would have realised this.."


I fully understand the words and know quite well how a CPU operates, but you missed my point so I'll make it clearer.

You and many others all speculate over and over again, mostly on the negative side, about all the issues and problems this new product will face. The only problem is not one of you have seen the actual device in person or read a review of it in real time use. No it's a computer and not a religion, but your analysis sound mores like the doctrinal division and details that goes on at so many religious based blogs.

If you read my post this is what my comment is all about; "will definitely"

So how can you make such a statement? Do you have some special insight and knowledge about the rMB design? probably not.

What do I think about the new rMB? I think it will be a hit and most likely out perform all yours and others dire predictions. Why do I believe that? Because the Apple engineers have proved it in the past.

So maybe I'm not the one who needs to breath a bit and calm down.

BTW, here's how I use my computer; I open it up and turn it on and really don't care about what percentage it is running at as long as it is doing the job I ask of it.

 

[Queen6]

I fully understand the words and know quite well how a CPU operates, but you missed my point so I'll make it clearer.

You and many others all speculate over and over again, mostly on the negative side, about all the issues and problems this new product will face. The only problem is not one of you have seen the actual device in person or read a review of it in real time use. No it's a computer and not a religion, but your analysis sound mores like the doctrinal division and details that goes on at so many religious based blogs.

If you read my post this is what my comment is all about; "will definitely"

So how can you make such a statement? Do you have some special insight and knowledge about the rMB design? probably not.

What do I think about the new rMB? I think it will be a hit and most likely out perform all yours and others dire predictions. Why do I believe that? Because the Apple engineers have proved it in the past.

So maybe I'm not the one who needs to breath a bit and calm down.

BTW, here's how I use my computer; I open it up and turn it on and really don't care about what percentage it is running at as long as it is doing the job I ask of it.

It`s a forum and people are fully entitled to express their opinions and associated speculation. Apple`s portables have always run notoriously hot, resulting in throttling of CPU and GPU, up to and including premature failure. This is evident to anyone who has used Apple`s Notebook`s for more than a week or two. The advent of the MBPr cooling and associated issue`s are significantly reduced. As such questions and speculation on the new MacBook performance and thermal profile are more than valid.

If all you want to read is how awesome Apple is, I suggest you try Apple`s official forum`s, where negative post`s have a habit of being removed, should be a perfect fit, here things are more balanced. Bottom line is Apple is not perfect and they have made mistakes in the past, as they are equally capable of making them in the future. Presently Apple has six models of the MacBook Pro alone under extended warrantee due to premature GPU failure, something that slipped past the Apple engineers.

If you had read more of my post`s it would be clear that I am looking to purchase the new MacBook, subject to it meeting my needs, which has no reflection on the Notebook. I have owned and used Mac`s for well over two decades and will likely continue, equally I am not a member of the "iSheep" crew..

Q-6

 

[magbarn]

"which implies that the Core M in present iteration will definitely reach temperatures that will induce significant throttling."

Another ignorant and unfounded statement by someone who wants to slam the new product.

The truth is this, we don't know how the new rMB will perform under it's max use.

The truth is the Apple engineers could have solved or reduced the heat issue by internal design thus eliminating the fan. My current 11" MBA rarely turns on the fan and my 2012 Mac Mini i7 Quad core also rarely turns on the fan (normally when using Handbrake).

Will it get hot? Of course the CPU will get hot (they all do) and knowing this the engineering team (or person) designing the hardware around it took this into consideration. They didn't drop the fan because it was a "cool" (pun intended) idea, they did it because they could.

You do realize that the MBA and the Mac Mini's fans are constantly running and never turn off in normal operation right? In other words they are constantly pushing heat out of the case when running. If you cut the fan off on both the MBA/Mac Mini, overtime they will overheat even when running non-intensive tasks as the heat will begin to build up as they were both designed with the fans to be running constantly.
The cpu in the rMB isn't necessarily going to run hot. The cpu is severely restricted to a very low power budget so it will keep itself cool by constantly throttling.

 

[bjet767]

Before we get too far in this let me give you some qualifications,

I have been coding since the days of punch cards.
I have built more than one computer from the MB (mother board) up, including choosing various CPUs, cooling fans and heat sinks.
I have owned three Apple "notebook/laptops" over the years, (2010 MBP, 2010 11" MBA, 2014 11" MBA).
I have built two "Hackintoshs"
I currently use two Mini's (2010 and a 2012)

And yes all the computer's fan "idle" a about 1200 rpm.

So you do realize when we hear the fan in the MBA and the Mini it means the CPU is near max and and has gotten hot.

But, these are all higher power CPUs and the rMBA will run at around 1/3 of the power requirements with very little degradation in speed.

You do realize all this stuff?

You also realize Queen has "throttled down" the comment I mentioned a bit.

I intend to buy the new rMB because of it's form factor and I trust Apple products over Samsung and others. It's that simple. No fan boy, just practical end user simplicity.

BTW with all the Apple products I have owned and used somehow the aforementioned problems have never arisen. Maybe I was lucky?

Somewhere you all missed my point, wait till you see, feel and use the finale product and then maybe I'll join you in the critique.

 

[ctyrider]

"which implies that the Core M in present iteration will definitely reach temperatures that will induce significant throttling."

Another ignorant and unfounded statement by someone who wants to slam the new product.

The truth is this, we don't know how the new rMB will perform under it's max use.

The truth is the Apple engineers could have solved or reduced the heat issue by internal design thus eliminating the fan. My current 11" MBA rarely turns on the fan and my 2012 Mac Mini i7 Quad core also rarely turns on the fan (normally when using Handbrake).

Will it get hot? Of course the CPU will get hot (they all do) and knowing this the engineering team (or person) designing the hardware around it took this into consideration. They didn't drop the fan because it was a "cool" (pun intended) idea, they did it because they could.

There are certain basic laws of physics and heat dissipation constrains in play here. Upcoming Apple MacBook is not completely unlike other similar form factor CoreM machines that have hit the market and have been tested and benchmarked.

And no, Apple engineers are not magicians and they couldn't have "solved" the heat issue. What they have done is made certain design choices and certain compromises. We will see what the end results are, but it's reasonable to anticipate them to be in the same ballpark as other ultraportables using the same CoreM chips.

I think the statement that "Core M will reach temperatures that will introduce throttling" is a very reasonable (probably factual) one. Throttling is an inherent part of Core M design, and there is noting in that statement that "slams the product".

I personally find your faith in Apple and its ability to pull magic rabits out of their hat quite amusing.

 

[iRun26.2]

Before we get too far in this let me give you some qualifications,

I have been coding since the days of punch cards.
I have built more than one computer from the MB (mother board) up, including choosing various CPUs, cooling fans and heat sinks.
I have owned three Apple "notebook/laptops" over the years, (2010 MBP, 2010 11" MBA, 2014 11" MBA).
I have built two "Hackintoshs"
I currently use two Mini's (2010 and a 2012)

And yes all the computer's fan "idle" a about 1200 rpm.

So you do realize when we hear the fan in the MBA and the Mini it means the CPU is near max and and has gotten hot.

But, these are all higher power CPUs and the rMBA will run at around 1/3 of the power requirements with very little degradation in speed.

You do realize all this stuff?

You also realize Queen has "throttled down" the comment I mentioned a bit.

I intend to buy the new rMB because of it's form factor and I trust Apple products over Samsung and others. It's that simple. No fan boy, just practical end user simplicity.

BTW with all the Apple products I have owned and used somehow the aforementioned problems have never arisen. Maybe I was lucky?

Somewhere you all missed my point, wait till you see, feel and use the finale product and then maybe I'll join you in the critique.

bjet767: Thank you for discussing your background.

I agree with your point of trusting Apple over Samsung (and the others). With such a low power part running a fan-less laptop, it does make me worry a little bit about poor performance. But, then again, as you said, I will trust Apple. I do not need to see a professional reviewer's opinion in order to decide whether I will buy it. Just like you, I'm getting one for the form factor and I bet I will be quite happy with the way it performs. I'm really looking forward to testing it out myself with my software applications.

 

[ctyrider]

I agree with your point of trusting Apple over Samsung (and the others). With such a low power part running a fan-less laptop, it does make me worry a little bit about poor performance. But, then again, as you said, I will trust Apple.

I am getting rMB as well, but it has nothing to do with trusting Apple over Samsung and others. As I said in my previous post - there are no magic tricks here for Apple to pull out of their hat in terms of passively cooling rMB enclosure. There are very limited design choices to passively dissipate heat within a sub-1cm thick case.

If you expect rMB to perform dramatically better over competitive fanless CoreM systems.. simply because rMB has an Apple logo on it - you're in for a disappointment.

 

[iRun26.2]

I am getting rMB as well, but it has nothing to do with trusting Apple over Samsung and others. As I said in my previous post - there are no magic tricks here for Apple to pull out of their hat in terms of passively cooling rMB enclosure. There are very limited design choices to passively dissipate heat within a sub-1cm thick case.

If you expect rMB to perform dramatically better over competitive fanless CoreM systems.. simply because rMB has an Apple logo on it - you're in for a disappointment.

I will be happy if Apple provides the results we see from the other Core M systems.

I trust it will run OS X quite well. I trust they there won't be significant overheating issues.

 

[bjet767]

I didn't say it would run dramatically over the competitors. In another thread I pointed out Windows computers in general run quite fast and I believe others pointed out they do so on lesser hardware. But,, pure speed and perceived "snappiness" is not why I moved from Windows/Microsoft to Apple products many years ago. The reason why I switched is Apple stuff simply works and it works for much longer and reliably than comparably priced Windows hardware (not to mention the inter-device integration of Apple products).

My expectations for the new rMB is it will run OSX very well and the heat will not be an issue any more than it is today with my current Apple products. If I'm wrong I will post it here and be very disappointed (for the first time since since I joined the dark side).

----------

BTW:

I do want to thank all of you for the comments and the ability exchange comments without becoming overly offended. Yes this isn't a religion and in the end we will all eventually buy another product when the next "new" thing comes out.

Thank you!

Personally I don't get the 12.9" iPad, but I'm sure there will be a need. I did notice Apple may have added a USBC port in addition to the normal audio/mic and charge port. Hmmmm, how did this happen? Maybe no keyboard to take up space?

 

[Mcdevidr]

There are reviews of some of the core M notebooks. Many are better than the yoga pro. No use debating when the reviews show what is there.

As for the iPad. Hmmm. I want the bigger ipad but I see more utility in this macbook for me.

 

[Queen6]

I will be happy if Apple provides the results we see from the other Core M systems.

This is pretty much what I expect. What I am most interested in is the performance when the display is scaled at 1440 x 900 as this adds a greater load to the GPU, as undoubtedly the GPU is the "weakest link" in the system.

Temperature should not be an issue, all the Core M Notebook`s I have looked at have never given me concern for how hot the machine feels to the touch, and Apple are on the money with the TDP.

Q-6

 

[bobval]

"..The Geekbench process tested the performance of the entry-level 12-inch Retina MacBook, which packs an Intel Core M-5Y31 processor clocked at 1.1GHz with Turbo Boost to 2.4GHz."

http://9to5mac.com/category/mac/

Yet 5Y31..and 6 watts.

 

[bibyfok]

"..The Geekbench process tested the performance of the entry-level 12-inch Retina MacBook, which packs an Intel Core M-5Y31 processor clocked at 1.1GHz with Turbo Boost to 2.4GHz."

http://9to5mac.com/category/mac/

Yet 5Y31..and 6 watts.

So I was right !

 

[bobval]

So I was right !

Yes ..but I'm not happy about it ..)

A month later, all forums will scream about overheating,throttling and etc..Apple surprised more and more ..last time , over clocking CPU in the first macbook without the fan - a good idea !

 

[jwdawso]

Yes ..but I'm not happy about it ..)

A month later, all forums will scream about overheating,throttling and etc..Apple surprised more and more ..last time , over clocking CPU in the first macbook without the fan - a good idea !

It seems like you (and others) are assuming that the MacBook can only dissipate 5 watts efficiently. How do you know it won't dissipate 10 watts efficiently, and that it doesn't break a sweat on 6 or 5 watts? Discussing the processors is fun (thus why I am reading these posts). Forum members here are "notorious" for worrying about issues before anyone outside of Apple have even touched the product.

People who are concerned about the MacBook's performance should probably wait to buy one after thorough reviews. Those of us who know ourselves and are content to buy one sight unseen are waiting anxiously for April 10!

 

[newellj]

It seems like you (and others) are assuming that the MacBook can only dissipate 5 watts efficiently. How do you know it won't dissipate 10 watts efficiently, and that it doesn't break a sweat on 6 or 5 watts? Discussing the processors is fun (thus why I am reading these posts). Forum members here are "notorious" for worrying about issues before anyone outside of Apple have even touched the product.

People who are concerned about the MacBook's performance should probably wait to buy one after thorough reviews. Those of us who know ourselves and are content to buy one sight unseen are waiting anxiously for April 10!

What you are missing is the fact that people who are complaining about the rMB know a great deal more about engineering and design than the engineers and designers at Apple. Why is it so hard for people to grasp the fact that the average anonymous internet poster has infinitely more expertise than people who do this for a living at one of the most successful and valuable companies on the planet??? / sarcasm & humor

 

[MyopicPaideia]

What you are missing is the fact that people who are complaining about the rMB know a great deal more about engineering and design than the engineers and designers at Apple. Why is it so hard for people to grasp the fact that the average anonymous internet poster has infinitely more expertise than people who do this for a living at one of the most successful and valuable companies on the planet??? / sarcasm & humor

Exactly. People think they suddenly discover something Apple's product design and hardware engineers must have obviously missed during the entire design and testing process. That they must have decided to use the high end of the clocking options (not over-clock, 1.1MHz is within the standard range of the 5Y31, as shown in the OP's chart) not because of the results of their testing, but just because they decided to crank it up for the heck of it, without even thinking about anything else...

The interesting thing is, they didn't do the same thing with the 5Y51 and 5Y71, using 1.2MHz instead of 1.3MHz and 1.3MHz instead of 1.4MHz respectively, thus giving the higher end configurations actually more thermal headroom than the base model.

I am assuming there is a logical and good explanation for this. Maybe they feel the users who pay for the higher configurarions may tend to have a more demanding use case? I am planning on the 1.3MHz 512GB configuration myself, and am wondering about this decision - could they have gone 1.4MHz and had the same TDP as the base 5Y31 at 1.1MHz, or do the 51 and 71 tend to reach their TDP faster and thus Apple couldn't be quite as aggresive within the confines of their hardware design's thermal dissipation characteristics?

It will be interesting to find out what the benchmarks and deeper analysis of the processor's behavior say. Sites like anandtech usually have intelligent things to say in these sorts of areas.

 

[MyopicPaideia]

This is pretty much what I expect. What I am most interested in is the performance when the display is scaled at 1440 x 900 as this adds a greater load to the GPU, as undoubtedly the GPU is the "weakest link" in the system.

Temperature should not be an issue, all the Core M Notebook`s I have looked at have never given me concern for how hot the machine feels to the touch, and Apple are on the money with the TDP.

Q-6

Wondering about this myself, as I know I defintely won't be satisfied with a 720p effective workspace, because the nature of my work is such that never do the majority of my work in any one place, I am out at different clients with no permanent workspace about 75% of the time and only at the home office about 25% of the time. So a larger, non-portable external monitor isn't really a meaningful option. At the same time and for the same reasons, the thinnest, smallest and lightest form factor I can get is a top priority.

I mean 720p is smaller than I have now on my 11" Air, and a major draw here for me is going from 16x9 to 16x10 for more vertical space (financial accountancy is my main service, so a lot of spreadsheets, presentations and management reports), as the screen's physical size is essentially the MBA's 11.6" 16x9 screen stretched vertically to a 12" 16x10, and retina. I will either run it scaled at 1440x900 or the full 2560x1440. If the GPU isn't up to the 1440x900 scaling buttery smooth then I'll have to run it at 2560x1440.

Just wonder then if that might not be too small...it would make the UI elements, including text almost 50% smaller, right?

 

[Queen6]

Just wonder then if that might not be too small...it would make the UI elements, including text almost 50% smaller, right?

Very similar I am a quality engineer in the energy industry so travel, heavyweight reporting, spreadsheets, presentations, specific application software etc. all come with the turf. I know I can't live with the 11" Air; 16x9 & TN panel rule it out for me.

Right now I run two MBPr`s as my primary systems a 15" and 13" I run the 13" 100% scaled and am very pleased with the results. Running the 13" at the displays native resolution does make everything incredibly small, so fairly certain the 12" MacBook will be the same. I have QuickRes so that will allow me to play with the resolution. Same as the 13" I plan to run the MacBook at 1440x900. I am not expecting super fast frame rates across the UI, as long a the Notebook is responsive.

Q-6