Report: Super-Lightweight 12-inch MacBook Powered By Apple Silicon to Launch This Year

[miketcool]

Will everyone still love it when it comes with only one port like an iPad?

 

[Ritsuka]

Some tests we did on the Apple Transition kit with Apple Silicone.

Encoding the free animation movie bbb_sunflower_1080p_30fps to a MP4 format with HEVC and AAC with a video bitrate of 6000k and audio bitrate of 256k
Encoding with FFmpeg 4.3.1 compiled versions for ARM and Intel (with x265 library)

Both system running Mac Big Sur Beta 5

Software encoding for video and audio:
Intel Core i9 2.3Ghz 8core 5:09
Intel Core i3 2.8Ghz. 23:18
Apple Silicone A12Z 36:43

Hardware encoding with Apple Videotoolbox (*) for video and audio:
Intel Core i9 2:58
Apple Silicone A12Z 10:51
Intel Core i3 N/A (does not have HEVC hardware accelerated encoding)

Although the Apple transition kit is not using the most powerful ARM atm it does clearly indicate they are much slower in doing hard crunching numbers. With the A14 it may be a bit closer to Intel Core i3
The hardware accelerated encoding was much slower too (which was a surprise).
Basically a Core i5, i7 and i9 will be much faster for the foreseeable future.

A side note: the Apple kit got incredible warm and it may have did some throttling along the test.

(*) Although it’s faster to encode, the file size is much bigger compared when using the software x265 encoder for achieving the same quality. This is a known problem/side effect when using VideoToolbox hardware accelerated APIs. If you need smal file size with high quality, you’re only choice is software encoding.

x265 has got no simd acceleration on arm. There is a patch in the work that will speed it up 2x. You should try x264 that is already well accelerated on arm too.

Here's a HandBrake version you can compile on arm with x265 improvements too: https://github.com/HandBrake/HandBrake/tree/applesilicon

x264 on the Dev Kit was a bit faster than the i7 quad-core 2.8 GHz.

 

[ian87w]

I think the poster is aware of that. The rMB's single port was probably its most frequently criticized limitation.

With the iPad Pro having just one USB-C port, Apple is probably banking on most people not needing more than one port nowadays (ie. doing everything on the cloud/wirelessly). For those needing more than one port, there will be the Macbook Pros.

 

[zlt1228]

I Mean, the current MacBook lineup is a little weird. On the one hand, we have the 13 inch MacBook Air and the lower-end 13 inch MacBook Pro that has similar weight, but the Air is artificially crippled thermally, while the Pro receive proper cooling but rocking a significantly worse processor. And the MacBook Pro with up-to-date processor is way too expensive. The whole lineup seems a little over priced, except for the Air. I think it would be ideal if apple give the Air a P3 display and a heat pipe, and cancel the lower end pro, and lower the price of the 10th-gen Pro and the 16-inch by 200$ or so.

 

[NewUsername]

12" is too small. I've used an 11.6" MacBook Air for years, then switched to a 13.3" model. In comparison that screen is HUGE. I wouldn't want to go back to 12".

On the other hand, a 12" MacBook Air, 14" MacBook Pro and 16" MacBook Pro would make a lot of sense to me.

 

[ascender]

I love the 12” Macbook in spite of its failings. If they add a second port and a magic keyboard, our family will be in the market for at least one if not two of these.

Even if it just had a single port, so long as its not costing more than an Air, a lot of people won’t care. One port was always a real drag for me, but I know lots of people who would only ever need to plug something-in which wasn’t the power cable, once in a blue moon. If the battery life of this laptop is genuinely much better than their current 7-10 hours, then maybe that’s how they’ll justify only having a single usb-c port?

Thing is, stories like this don’t help the limbo we seem to be in for buying new products. My wife is going back to uni shortly, doesn’t want an iPad Pro, so a standard Macbook Air would be the ideal purchase. But as a nerd, I can’t bring myself to spent £1000 on a laptop when there’s going to be something which apears to be every better suited to the job released in the next few months. The rumours about a new 12” ultra-portable have been pretty consistent for a while now so there’s a pretty good chance it will be the first Apple Silicon laptop.

 

[Darth Tulhu]

I have a feeling this'll be nothing more than an Air with Apple Silicon.

Apple will save the real redesign for when the transition is closer to the end.

I hope not, but that's what this feels like.

 

[lambertjohn]

I’m going to be the first one lining up at the door. This makes a lot of sense.

No. I'll be ahead of you because I'm getting in line now!

 

[ersan191]

I always thought it was odd that everyone was predicting the first Apple silicon macs would be the Pro's. Seems like it would make a lot more sense to bring it to the Air or revive the macbook form factor. Their chips are great but especially with Rosetta they are definitely going to be slower than high-end intel SKU's. They seem more poised to compete with the lower level chips in the beginning.

 

[ersan191]

Glad I just went ahead and bought the 16” MBP the other day. Seems like there probably won’t be a chip variant ready for it for over a year at a minimum when the A15 comes out. I’ve needed a MBP since the spring and finally caved. Glad I did. It seems fine so far and it will be a couple more years until third party Mac software is fully optimized for ARM and the bugs are worked out. Wish I had realized this sooner.

Did the exact same thing, knowing the ARM chips would never support Boot Camp was what made me decide finally. Glad I did. It's something I hardly ever use but I like having the option if something comes up.

 

[Crazy Badger]

They'll need to do something with the butterfly keyboard, which has to be one of Apple's biggest own-goals of recent times

 

[Chayuth]

"Less than 1 kilogram" will actually be "close to 1 kg" (otherwise they would say "half a kilogram"), which is too much for a 12-inch nowadays (the Intel rMB already had that weight). That's too much for such a little screen. Look at the LG gram: A 17-inch weighting 1kg (you can argue the LG gram is not rigid enough, but it has the screen size you want --big--- and the weight you need).

The weight of aluminium frame alone makes it nearly 1kg already. I want neither plastic MacBook nor bendable one like the first batch of new iPad Pro.

 

[waquzy]

This makes me nervous about the keyboard situation. Hoping and praying they don't go back to butterfly...

Butterfly keyboard is dead, no need to worry

 

[chucker23n1]

I am still not buying the hype that a lone a14(xxx) can outperform the current offerings.

Even an A13 would probably outperform the current Core Y-series CPUs. Even the fastest Air is 17% slower than the A13 at single-core and 12% slower at multi-core tasks. That's despite the iPhone having far less thermal headroom.

MacBook Air (Early 2020) Benchmarks - Geekbench

browser.geekbench.com

iPhone 11 Pro Benchmarks - Geekbench

browser.geekbench.com

Apple: “Lets release a thinner, lighter more portable MacBook!“

Target Market: “We’re still working from home. What use is this thing?”

Most countries are no longer in hardcore lockdown mode. Still limited exposure, but far less working from home than in late spring.

Contrary to the mainstream opinion here, I would argue that this might not be true. The 12-inch MacBook, being supposedly the entry-level Mac, was not in a clear space in the lineup in 2016. On the one hand, there was the MacBook Pro, starting at the same price, while being much more powerful. Apple wanted the MacBook to be a ultra thin and light parallel to the Pro, but it did not go so well. This is caused, on the one hand, by the thermal constrains of the chassis, and one the other hand, the high manufacturing cost of the ultra dense motherboard and the terrace battery. Apple quickly reverted that with the reintroduction on the MacBook Air. I doubt whether Apple will make the same mistake again.

I think the main issues plaguing the 12-inch MacBook were its keyboard, and Intel failing to evolve Core M / the Y-series CPUs.

Uhhhm why not? The old 12in MacBook was always sold alongside the air.

Yeah, and as a result, the line-up was confusing as heck. Did you want the Air (oh, but it isn't even Retina and hasn't been updated in years)? Did you want the 12-inch? Oh, but it's very slow, only has one USB port, and has a problematic keyboard. Or maybe the 13-inch with Escape key? Oh, but that one is pricier.

I doubt that was the original plan. They surely wanted the 12-inch MacBook to replace the Air. When that wasn't working out, they introduced the "Escape". When that didn't work out either, they upgraded it to be more like the other 13-inch Pros, and introduced a new Air and killed off the 12.

Some tests we did on the Apple Transition kit with Apple Silicone.

Encoding the free animation movie bbb_sunflower_1080p_30fps to a MP4 format with HEVC and AAC with a video bitrate of 6000k and audio bitrate of 256k
Encoding with FFmpeg 4.3.1 compiled versions for ARM and Intel (with x265 library)

Both system running Mac Big Sur Beta 5

Software encoding for video and audio:
Intel Core i9 2.3Ghz 8core 5:09
Intel Core i3 2.8Ghz. 23:18
Apple Silicone A12Z 36:43

Hardware encoding with Apple Videotoolbox (*) for video and audio:
Intel Core i9 2:58
Apple Silicone A12Z 10:51
Intel Core i3 N/A (does not have HEVC hardware accelerated encoding)

Although the Apple transition kit is not using the most powerful ARM atm it does clearly indicate they are much slower in doing hard crunching numbers. With the A14 it may be a bit closer to Intel Core i3
The hardware accelerated encoding was much slower too (which was a surprise).

There's a lot of information missing here. What generation are these Intel CPUs? What series? The A12Z has a TDP of around 7W, but you're clearly comparing against at least an H-series (45W), what with 8 cores and all.

Basically a Core i5, i7 and i9 will be much faster for the foreseeable future.

At similar wattage? I don't buy it.

 

[malko]

I had the 12" macbook from 2015 and I loved loved loved the form-factor, and how light it was. The current Air is such a lump next to it. ... but it was underpowered

I don't know why everyone is still talking about the performance of the 5,5 years old 2015 model as soon as the 12" MB is up for discussion. I'm writing this on a 2017 Macbook 12" with i7 and 16 GB ram and it's just very marginally slower than the two years younger Macbook air (2019) that I've tried it against. Both user experience and benchmark tests like Geekbench suggest single digit difference in %.

Many seem to be of the opinion that the 12" Macbook didn't really have a place in the lineup, but personally I think that applies more to the Macbook Air line, which is clumsier and noisier (fan) while not being faster than the 12".

 

[aleni]

The 12” macbook is the most enjoyable laptop to use. Even with its slow cpu back then, I just used it every where on the house, at the sofa’s arm, at my small coffee table, on my lap when I was sunbathing in the morning in my balcony etc etc etc.

 

[malko]

I doubt that the 12" replacement coming in the end of the year will be 12". I think we can be quite assured that Apple has trimmed down the bezels, making space for a slightly bigger screen.

 

[nshads]

Well, the 17" weight is 2.98 pounds actually, but still lighter than every above 15" laptops out there.

The 17" weighs 6.6 pounds.

 

[deevey]

What I like to know is how much better are apple's "silicon" chips in video rendering compared to intel machines using AMD GPUs? Apple divorced themselves with Nvidia so cuda is out of the question so now we are stuck with open cl and metal. I am still not buying the hype that a lone a14(xxx) can outperform the current offerings.

Well the current iPad Pro is around 75% as fast to export as a 13" MacBook Pro, I'd imagine an Apple Silicon Mac to far outperform that being 2 generations ahead.

Scroll to 17.35 for comparison

 

[Thrutheroofnunderground]

this makes the most sense out of all the first apple silicon rumors.

the last 12-inch was severely under powered. apple will show it'll be nearly as powerful as MBP, but not quite enough ports for pros to switch over. then it'll show what apple silicon can do with better thermal design in the MBP.

"Ports. Only for Pros". If that's what separates a "pro"/consumer machine then that is just sad. I have never understood taking all the ports out, because then people just have to go buy a dock. What's the point?

 

[Thrutheroofnunderground]

The butterfly keyboard lives on...

This is actually the thing that caught my attention as well...

 

[kerr]

ugh, I want a 14" Macbook Air not a tiny 12" Macbook.

I thought the Macbook line was finished (as it should be).

 

[dantracht]

Now this I would choose over any new iPad coming up. Had a 2016 12” and loved it.

 

[acidblood]

This rumor is false, because of simple physics.

For quoted “maximum battery runtime” scenarios, the main battery drain is the screen.

So even if the CPU (essentially the only thing being changed) drained 0 W, getting 20 hours out of the same laptop (same weight, therefore same battery) that previously got 10 hours just won’t happen. Don’t get your hopes up.

 

[dogslobber]

I hope they don't keep both the 12-inch and the Air. Or just call it the 12-inch Air.

This. What problem are Apple trying to solve with a 12" and 13" laptop? What is the differentiation? This all feels like a page taken from Spindler's playbook. Haven't Apple learned nothing from Steve over the years? People on here are constantly pointing out Apple's product problems but it falls on death ears.