The big unknown of the new MBP have yet to be revealed...

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by joscejrod, Nov 9, 2016.

  1. joscejrod macrumors 6502

    joscejrod

    Joined:
    May 16, 2015
    #1
    Yes. The new 15" MBP is a beast and benchmarks will show that. No doubts. It will score near 15000 points in 64-bit multi-core geekbench, will mark a new record in ssd speed, will add new dGPU that give them a great enhancement with metal graphics....

    Instead of that, for me, the big unknown is the performance of 13" MBP with touchbar and its battery life. Think about the following lines:
    + 28w intel core (15w in non-toucb bar model).
    + Iris 550 with higher clock (iris 540 in non touch-bar).
    + 2133 mhz lpddr3 ram (1866 mhz in non touch-bar).
    + oled touch bar + touch id.
    + Higher speed ssd than non-touch bar version.
    AND:
    - Significant LOWER battery capacity that non-touch bar

    I missed something....I think so. How Apple has been able to increase the performance (87% higher TDP) with more characteristics (like touch bar), and lower the battery too without sacrificing battery life??

    I have two suspicions:

    - The processor and gpu are underclocked (so performance is next to 15w MBP.
    - The battery life is significantly worse that not-touch mode.

    Now, reviewers already have MBP, so the unknow will be revealed bbw
     
  2. xb2003 macrumors 6502

    xb2003

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2016
    Location:
    MO
    #2
    I've been thinking the same thing. As little power as OLED displays draw, I have a feeling that isn't of much concern, but the CPU and graphics (which is on the CPU) definitely have me curious.

    I suspect that we will find that because of how well MacOS is optimized, battery life will still be solid under lighter loads. Apple also has always seemed good about giving fair battery ratings, so I'm optimistic.
     
  3. Softwarez macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2016
    #3
    It's not unknown. Answer is simple.

    The 10 hour battery life is based solely on the touchbar model. And the base configuration over performs in battery life. This has been somewhat proven by reviews. For example, Arstechnica measured the non-touchbar model lasting 13-14 hours.

    As for why Apple decided to do this; it's all marketing. It looks nicer when the entire model lineup says "10hours", it's much easier to remember. Also, they don't want the cheaper base model looking better than the more expensive premium option.
     
  4. brynsmith23 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2007
    Location:
    Australia/NZ
    #4
    I'm not sure if the new 2016 2.9ghz 460 AMD 512gb 15 inch model i ordered will be as fast as my mid 2010 2.66ghz duo core 15 inch 8gb limited Macbook Pro.

    It might just beat the 6372 geek bench score from my old Macbook Pro :D:D:D

    The reviews and geek benching should be out soon
     
  5. PaulWog Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    #5
    The question about battery life is nerve-racking though.

    Apple, historically, has been quite good about battery estimates. They have been known to underestimate often, to the consumer's benefit. The 2015 MBP easily reaches that 10 hour threshold, and at reasonable brightness. At 100% brightness I usually hit 50% battery life while using Wi-Fi and doing VERY light work after about 4 hours on the 2015 RMBP 13".

    The question is... did they underestimate, or overestimate, for the 2016 MBP? And what brightness settings did they base this year's battery life estimates on? Aaaaaand will the newer batteries degrade at the same rate, realistically? Aaaaaand will the newer batteries be cheaper to replace due to being smaller?
     
  6. SoyCapitanSoyCapitan macrumors 68040

    SoyCapitanSoyCapitan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2015
    #6
    Without decent APIs there's no point talking about optimal performance.

    macOS versions of OpenGL and OpenCL are a few years behind the competition. Metal is still not mature. GPU and SSD drivers have more CPU overhead than on Windows. You can Geekbench all day but the only time real world performance is good is FCP. In most other apps you get a performance boost by using Boot Camp.

    Go to the Mac Pro forum from time to time to understand how the situation looks from an API and drivers point of view.
     
  7. joscejrod thread starter macrumors 6502

    joscejrod

    Joined:
    May 16, 2015
    #7
    It's not that simple. Of course we'll have 10 hours aprox of battery life but, at what cost? The real doubt is, has Apple underclocked the CPUs of 13" MBP with TB in order to give us the same amount of battery of last year model?(lower battery time would have been a huge disappointment)... how much better is the performance of TB model against non-TB model? We'll see...
     
  8. PaulWog Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    #8
    It just seems odd that they went *THAT* thin, and removed *THAT MUCH* battery.

    It makes me think they will be selling unibody-style battery attachments. If the laptop were any thicker, an attachment would look bulky. But they have gone *SO THIN* that an attachment underneath the Macbook Pro would look normal. Another way to bolster sales with extras.
     
  9. SBruv macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    #9
    Of course they haven't underclocked the CPUs. Do you really think they'd sell you a 3.1GHz CPU that didn't actually run at 3.1GHz?
     
  10. PaulWog Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    #10
    I think what he's referring to is throttling.

    As in, the CPU will run at 3.1GHz, but at a certain temperature threshold, the CPU will throttle to a slower speed.

    The worry is that throttling will occur in a short timespan of high CPU/GPU usage, and thus result in slower clocks speeds with reasonable usage.
     
  11. Ma2k5 macrumors 6502a

    Ma2k5

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2012
    #11
    No he wasn't referring to throttling. Throttling is a thermal issue, not a battery issue.

    Anyway, as others have said, the non-touch bar is more than 10 hours battery life, this one will be between 8-10, under load a lot less (comparatively to non-touch).
     
  12. Samuelsan2001 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    #12
    The battery estimates are for the touch bar version, reviews show the non touch bar reaching 14 hours plus, no need to worry about it apples battery estimates are spot on and have been for years.
     
  13. 0x100 macrumors regular

    0x100

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2014
    Location:
    Japan
    #13
    If you don't have a battery plugged in to your macbook pro the CPU will throttle.
     
  14. apolloa macrumors G3

    apolloa

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Location:
    Time, because it rules EVERYTHING!
    #14
    I wouldn't worry about Metal as not many devs will support, bit I guess it depends on what you will be using it for as I was thinking of games.
    As for its performance, I suspect either the fans will be loud or it's going to throttle, don't expect too much of a boost over last years model bar maybe the graphics.
    We will see, I just think it's too thin to offer any real performance in benchmarks.
     
  15. circuitt macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    #15
    I get just about 1400 multi core and 4200 single core geekbwnch score on my 2015 mbp not worth an extra 1500 dollars.
     
  16. Wowereit macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2016
    Location:
    Germany
    #16
    You probably won't use the 2016 MBP indoors at 100% brightness ever.
    Seriously, maybe I'm over sensitive but it hurts. 25 to 40% brightness are absolutely fine for indoor usage and combined with light usage like web browsing you will get around 12 hours of battery life.

    Pushing it hard with VMs, compiling and debugging code and listening to YouTube in the background at the same time will obviously kill it in 4 hours.
     
  17. The Mercurian macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2012
    #17
    Thats a pretty strong assumption. Show me the data. It won't be long now I guess
     
  18. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #18
    I wouldn't say its nerve-racking and we'll find out soon enough. I suspect Apple's estimates of battery life are spot on and we'll only be seeing 10 hours of usage.
     
  19. zhenya macrumors 603

    zhenya

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    #19
    Battery estimates are always based on 50% brightness and relatively light usage. With light usage the power consumption differences between the two cpus and two gpu's are minor.
     

Share This Page