Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Prepare to flame: A more realistic 2012 MBP predictions

Prodo123

Prodo123

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Nov 18, 2010
2,326
10
13" MacBook Pro
1.7 or 1.9Ghz Ivy Bridge i7 Quad Core (35W as AnandTech reports)
Intel HD Graphics (Not 3000, should be big improvement with 3D transistors)
4GB RAM (Upgradeable to 16GB)
500GB 7200RPM or 750GB 7200RPM HDD (optional 128GB and 256GB SSD)
1440x900 Glossy/Matte display
ODD (Yes, an ODD)
FaceTime HD 1080p Camera
Bluetooth 4.0
Backlit keyboard
10-hour battery life
Same design as last year
$1200 for low-end and $1500 for high-end

15" MacBook Pro
2.3, 2.6 or 2.8Ghz Ivy Bridge i7 Quad Core (45W)
AMD Radeon HD 76xxM or 78xxM GPUs
4GB RAM (Upgradeable to 16GB)
750GB 7200RPM or 1TB 5400RPM HDD (Optional 128GB, 256GB, 512GB and 1TB SSD)
1680x1050 or 1920x1200 Glossy/Matte
ODD (Optional secondary storage option)
FaceTime HD 1080p Camera
Bluetooth 4.0
11-hour battery life
Backlit Keyboard
Same design as last year
$1800 for low-end, $2000 for mid and $2300 for high-end

17" MacBook Pro
2.6Ghz or 2.8Ghz Ivy Bridge Quad Core
AMD Radeon HD 76xxM or 78xxM GPUs
4GB RAM (Upgradeable to 16GB)
750GB 7200RPM or 1TB 5400RPM HDD (Optional 128GB, 256GB, 512GB and 1TB SSD)
1920x1200 Glossy/Matte
ODD (Optional secondary storage option)
FaceTime HD 1080p Camera
Bluetooth 4.0
11-hour battery life
Backlit Keyboard
Same design, except with 0.93" thickness
$2500 for low-end and $2800 for high-end

Predictions will be edited with suggestions from you guys. :)
Also, the battery life boost is not from an improved battery but from a more power-efficient processor.
 
Last edited:
Prodo123 said:
13" MacBook Pro
1.66 or 1.83Ghz Ivy Bridge i7 Quad Core (35W as AnandTech reports)
Intel HD Graphics (Not 3000, should be big improvement with 3D transistors)
4GB RAM (Upgradeable to 16GB)
500GB 7200RPM or 750GB 7200RPM HDD (optional 128GB and 256GB SSD)
1440x900 Glossy/Matte display
ODD (Yes, an ODD)
FaceTime HD 1080p Camera
Bluetooth 4.0
Backlit keyboard
10-hour battery life
Same design as last year
$1200 for low-end and $1500 for high-end

15" MacBook Pro
2.33, 2.66 or 2.83Ghz Ivy Bridge i7 Quad Core (45W)
AMD Radeon HD 76xxM or 78xxM GPUs
6GB RAM (Upgradeable to 16GB)
750GB 7200RPM or 1TB 5400RPM HDD (Optional 128GB, 256GB, 512GB and 1TB SSD)
1680x1050 or 1920x1200 Glossy/Matte
ODD (Optional secondary storage option)
FaceTime HD 1080p Camera
Bluetooth 4.0
11-hour battery life
Backlit Keyboard
Same design as last year
$1800 for low-end, $2000 for mid and $2300 for high-end

17" MacBook Pro
2.66Ghz or 2.83Ghz Ivy Bridge Quad Core
AMD Radeon HD 76xxM or 78xxM GPUs
6GB RAM (Upgradeable to 16GB)
750GB 7200RPM or 1TB 5400RPM HDD (Optional 128GB, 256GB, 512GB and 1TB SSD)
1920x1200 or 2560x1600 Glossy/Matte
ODD (Optional secondary storage option)
FaceTime HD 1080p Camera
Bluetooth 4.0
11-hour battery life
Backlit Keyboard
Same design, except with 0.93" thickness
$2500 for low-end and $2800 for high-end
Click to expand...

Actually sounds like what they should do! Apple can and should keep the Optical drive. Dell just made a laptop z15 or something, that looks like the MBP but way thinner, but it still has the Disk drive, they even put its motto as the "Thinnest Laptop with a built in DVD Drive" or something.
 
I like them, but I'm not sure if this is more realistic ;)


why not this scenario:

Air upgrade to ivy bridge + introduction of 15'' air in early 2012 (march-may)
MBP refresh with non-air layout later in 2012 (june/july).

Reasons:
Air is 3 month older
Air benefits more from ivy bridge, can finally get really powerful CPUs
Can wait for SSD prices to drop for MBP and offer the base model with 256 SSD
Finally a MBP with 10 hours battery life
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

This. This is without doubt the best thing Apple can do to their Pro line. Seriously, if they'd make it thinner, they'd make it worse. If you like very thin laptops, well then that's what the Air is for, not the Pro. Wouldn't you think Apple favors a dedicated GPU over the ODD on the 13" MBP though (just like what they have done with the Mac Mini)?
 
Quinoky said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

This. This is without doubt the best thing Apple can do to their Pro line. Seriously, if they'd make it thinner, they'd make it worse. If you like very thin laptops, well then that's what the Air is for, not the Pro. Wouldn't you think Apple favors a dedicated GPU over the ODD on the 13" MBP though (just like what they have done with the Mac Mini)?
Click to expand...

Simple Answer Yes.
 
The 3d transistors themselves don't boost GPU performance ;)

I think your predictions are far more realistic than anything suggested so far. If we could see that, it would be a pretty decent refresh.

You mentioned secondary storage as an option. People have suggested a Thinkpad style removable bay but I don't think Apple will implement something that unsightly. However, Apple could just omit the cutout on the current MBP body. They that on the Mac mini body and it would be more feasible to offer such an option when they are pushing higher volumes like with the MBP.
 
Everything sounds reasonable except the 2560x1440 on the 17" MBP. I don't think that's in the running for the 2012 designs. Maybe in the next generation of MBP's, but the display market doesn't seem to be progressing very fast. Other than that, I think this is pretty accurate.
 
laxman101 said:
Everything sounds reasonable except the 2560x1440 on the 17" MBP. I don't think that's in the running for the 2012 designs. Maybe in the next generation of MBP's, but the display market doesn't seem to be progressing very fast. Other than that, I think this is pretty accurate.
Click to expand...

I Agree, Plus to play games on that without the power of the iMac, you need at least 2gb of VRAM, the iMac 27 inch barely gets by on 1gb maxed out in most games.
 
Heh. 1600p on the 17", I think you've got 'realistic' mixed up with another word.

And 6GB of RAM, don't think Apple has ever shipped anything with a set of RAM sticks that weren't all the same size. Check the Mac Pro configs, they have 8 RAM slots, and each of the choices are all the same.

And no, you can't get RAM in 3GB DIMMs.

Doubt the battery will be going up either. My 2011 MBP 15" barely gets 4 hours as it is on Lion.
 
sammich said:
Heh. 1600p on the 17", I think you've got 'realistic' mixed up with another word.

And 6GB of RAM, don't think Apple has ever shipped anything with a set of RAM sticks that weren't all the same size. Check the Mac Pro configs, they have 8 RAM slots, and each of the choices are all the same.

And no, you can't get RAM in 3GB DIMMs.

Doubt the battery will be going up either. My 2011 MBP 15" barely gets 4 hours as it is on Lion.
Click to expand...

Well Ivy Bridge Will use less Power So increased battery life seems possible, but not by a whole 2 hours or more, MAYBE an hour.
 
I'll put my 2 cents on some of the points.

CPUs

Ivy Bridge uses the same Sandy Bridge architecture, which has 100MHz BCLK. That means all frequencies are X.Y0GHz (Z*100MHz). Nitpicking, I know that.

I'm also not entirely sure whether all 13" MBPs will go quad core. So far, the trend has been that i7s are quad core (although this will change sooner than later), which may mean that the high-end will be quad whereas the base model will remain dual. We need more specs, such as the prices, to make more accurate predictions.

Storage

Apple has always used 5400rpm HDs in their laptops, even though they have the possibility to use 7200rpm. I doubt this will change, 7200rpm will remain as BTO. It does take more battery life, which has always been important for Apple.

GPUs

I wouldn't bet my money on AMD 78xxM GPUs. Generally, Apple has stuck with mediocre GPUs, so 77xxM series seems the most likely. Same applies to 76xxM, 74xxM or 75xxM is more likely. Of course, we need to know the specs of these GPUs to really speculate.

Displays

2560x1600 isn't gonna happen. OS X simply lacks the support for it. Everything would be too small to read. Until Apple provides resolution independence, hi-DPI displays are useless in Macs. Besides, no laptop has 1600p either AFAIK.

Matte in 13" is kind of a myth. Apple has never had a 13" laptop with matte display. I don't see them changing this. Why? Because they make good money from people who want the matte and go for 15" because of that.

Battery life

Sandy Bridge was supposed to be more power efficient than Core 2 Duo. Was it really? It's a common thought that battery life will go up when a new line of CPUs comes. They are claimed to be more power efficient and so on but usually the gains are very little.

Apple will most likely advertise the same battery lives. Real world performance may vary but I doubt there will be huge differences.
 
Same design as last year? Really. That is not realistic at all.

The new MacBook pros will get a redesign not unlike the MacBook Airs. Thinner and lighter. Shave a pound off of each 13,15,17.

I would not be surprised if HD's let alone ODDs were to go. Most certainly ODD's.

2012 is the year of the SSD. HD's are out the door as are ODD.

The Macbook air is Apple's best selling laptop. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out where the Pro's form factor is going.

http://www.isuppli.com/Memory-and-S...aketh-Away-From-NAND-Flash-Memory-Market.aspx

http://www.tuaw.com/2011/07/26/rumor-apples-next-15-laptop-refresh-will-be-air-like/
 
Last edited:
I'm not gonna flame. Flaming is sad.
I'm just going to hose all your ridiculousness down.
Stop dreaming and get on with life.
 
I have been looking for a while into the MBP 13" (I want to buy the 2012 version: it'll be my first Mac), and I have some things to say on your report:

Prodo123 said:
13" MacBook Pro
1.66 or 1.83Ghz Ivy Bridge i7 Quad Core (35W as AnandTech reports)
Intel HD Graphics (Not 3000, should be big improvement with 3D transistors)
4GB RAM (Upgradeable to 16GB)
500GB 7200RPM or 750GB 7200RPM HDD (optional 128GB and 256GB SSD)
1440x900 Glossy/Matte display
ODD (Yes, an ODD)
FaceTime HD 1080p Camera
Bluetooth 4.0
Backlit keyboard
10-hour battery life
Same design as last year
$1200 for low-end and $1500 for high-end
Click to expand...

CPU: Quad Cores on the base 13" are a possibility, as MacRumors reported. Regardless, I also find it credible to believe that Quad Cores will only be available on the higher-end MBP 13". Your prediction is not, however, baseless: it's a very valid one.

RAM: Doubt they'll offer the possibility of a 16GB upgrade. It's possible, but I can't see them doing that just yet. After all, it is a 13" laptop. Not that we can't go aftermarket anyway.

Storage: They'll probably offer the 500GB 5400rpm as base. 7200rpm is battery-consuming. Also, they already offer 512GB SSD as an option.

Screen: I agree with the resolution bump; the MBA 13" has it already. What I find harder to believe is the matte screen option. Apple gets a lot of money from those who go 15" specifically for that.

Optical Drive: No idea about this one. I can see them taking it out, but also can see them not doing so. I hope they do: I'd welcome a dedicated GPU or better battery life, but I don't know if Apple will take the risk that soon.

Design: A redesign has been rumored for some time, but I do see the possibility of it staying the same. I can also see them just making the laptop look thinner, but without incorporating a wedge-shape form like the MBA (kind of like the Lenovo 300S).

Ports: You forgot to mention USB 3.0. Ivy Bridge comes with native USB 3.0, so unless Apple's incredibly lazy at producing drivers and/or wants to force Thunderbolt down our throat, we should see USB 3.0 soon.
 
Hellhammer said:
Battery life

Sandy Bridge was supposed to be more power efficient than Core 2 Duo. Was it really? It's a common thought that battery life will go up when a new line of CPUs comes. They are claimed to be more power efficient and so on but usually the gains are very little.

Apple will most likely advertise the same battery lives. Real world performance may vary but I doubt there will be huge differences.
Click to expand...

I see where you're coming from but it's a bit difficult to say exactly how power consumption is measured. SB definitely uses less power to complete the same task as a C2D CPU. Ivy Bridge, being a die shrink of what is for the most part - the same CPU design, should have reduced power consumption.
 
grahamnp said:
I see where you're coming from but it's a bit difficult to say exactly how power consumption is measured. SB definitely uses less power to complete the same task as a C2D CPU. Ivy Bridge, being a die shrink of what is for the most part - the same CPU design, should have reduced power consumption.
Click to expand...

Intel doesn't just shrink the die and leave everything as they were. Otherwise there would be no performance gains. More cores and higher frequencies come at a cost, hence the battery life savings are vastly exaggerated.
 
thundersteele said:
I like them, but I'm not sure if this is more realistic ;)


why not this scenario:

Air upgrade to ivy bridge + introduction of 15'' air in early 2012 (march-may)
MBP refresh with non-air layout later in 2012 (june/july).

Reasons:
Air is 3 month older
Air benefits more from ivy bridge, can finally get really powerful CPUs
Can wait for SSD prices to drop for MBP and offer the base model with 256 SSD
Finally a MBP with 10 hours battery life
Click to expand...
Because:
1. A 15" Air looks and sounds plain ridiculous. It doesn't benefit much from Ivy Bridge; rather, it'll benefit from the Haswell architecture that comes after Ivy Bridge (see solar powered CPU).
2. Offering SSDs as a base option is plain stupid. Professionals need space, not speed.
3. MacBook Pros are first in line for Intel's latest. So when Ivy Bridge releases in April, MacBook Pros will get it first, NOT MacBook Airs.
grahamnp said:
The 3d transistors themselves don't boost GPU performance ;)

I think your predictions are far more realistic than anything suggested so far. If we could see that, it would be a pretty decent refresh.

You mentioned secondary storage as an option. People have suggested a Thinkpad style removable bay but I don't think Apple will implement something that unsightly. However, Apple could just omit the cutout on the current MBP body. They that on the Mac mini body and it would be more feasible to offer such an option when they are pushing higher volumes like with the MBP.
Click to expand...

Thanks :)
3D transistors would mean you can fit more transistors on the die which means more space for graphics :p
Also, I wasn't thinking of ThinkPad-style removable bay, either. What I was thinking of was more in lines of the internal hard drive bay. Replacing the drive would require removing the bottom panel, and the bay would have enough space for you to put in an optical drive instead of a hard drive.


Hellhammer said:
Intel doesn't just shrink the die and leave everything as they were. Otherwise there would be no performance gains. More cores and higher frequencies come at a cost, hence the battery life savings are vastly exaggerated.
Click to expand...
I'm using Apple's style of estimating battery life. Best case scenario with the lowest clock processor. So the battery life would be determined from the 2.3Ghz, which isn't a higher frequency (or more cores, in fact). Of course, IRL battery would be about 2 hours less.




Initial predictions have been updated with your suggestions!
 
Juan TS said:
Wrong, professionals want speed. Time is priceless.
And buying an External Hard Drive isn't that expensive and fits very well the storing necessities. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Please tell me how a SSD would speed up professionals.
Because most of the real speed is from the CPU and GPU, and many people fall for the illusion of speed from SSDs.
 
Prodo123 said:
3D transistors would mean you can fit more transistors on the die which means more space for graphics :p
Click to expand...

Not tri-gate transistors, but the move from 32nm to 22nm. We already know that IB will have 16 EUs, which is only 33% more than SB. A lot is left on the hands of architecture and frequencies - the EU count alone won't provide huge increases (Intel pretty much needs to double the performance to be competitive against AMD's APUs in terms of GPU power).
 
Hellhammer said:
Not tri-gate transistors, but the move from 32nm to 22nm. We already know that IB will have 16 EUs, which is only 33% more than SB. A lot is left on the hands of architecture and frequencies - the EU count alone won't provide huge increases (Intel pretty much needs to double the performance to be competitive against AMD's APUs in terms of GPU power).
Click to expand...
asdf thank you for correcting my stupid comment.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4763/...nce-up-to-60-faster-than-snb-better-quicksync
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back