Thought about something for those disappointed in Skylake in 2016 Pro's

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by thadoggfather, Nov 7, 2016.

  1. thadoggfather macrumors 604

    thadoggfather

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    #1
    now that I think about it, 2010 MacBook Airs packed Core 2 Duo when most were anticipating i5

    same with 2010 Pros,

    2010 Airs didn't have a backlit keyboard either, which magically appeared in 2011 (i5 and backlit solidified it for me)

    so, things may change on port density on intro model/ or naming scheme for the base non touch bar model

    But also, architecture lag when the rest of the market has latest and greatest has happened, and under the beloved Steve reign, no less!

    this isn't to make it excusable since Kaby Lake is a bunch of OEM's by now AND for significantly cheaper, but...

    it's not unprecedented,

    what does bum me out a bit is from late 2013 has well 13" to base 2016 skylake ULV, compute has remained relatively the same. a solid 3 years later. for more!
     
  2. xWhiplash macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    #2
    Sigh. People, I am getting sick of this. Kaby Lake IS NOT AVAILABLE for the MacBook Pro! What is this damn obsession with processor generations?
     
  3. bcave098 macrumors 6502

    bcave098

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2015
    Location:
    Northern British Columbia
    #3
    Especially when there's essentially no performance difference.
     
  4. raqball macrumors 6502a

    raqball

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2016
    Location:
    California
    #4
    Sigh. I'm getting sick of reading people say they are sick of it...

    Get use to it. Apple made their bed and now they must lay in it...
     
  5. xWhiplash macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    #5
    And Kaby Lake will not fix the 16GB issue people are expecting it do. It's still a limitation on the lpddr style memory. This all comes down to Intel.
     
  6. thunng8 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #6
    Especially when there will be a graphics decrease in performance for the 13" and masssive CPU decrease for the 15" if Apple went with the available Kaby Lake processors
     
  7. xWhiplash macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    #7
    We already have nonstop whining about these are not Pro enough, yet people want ultra low powered Kaby Lake processors just because it is a "newer generation"? How well will that work out?
     
  8. thadoggfather thread starter macrumors 604

    thadoggfather

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    #8
    Now announcing the A11, with 2% performance increase over A10, and no battery gains because efficiency offset by shrinking battery- that would bode well in iOS world,

    ..That's why?
     
  9. xWhiplash, Nov 7, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2016

    xWhiplash macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    #9
    Right so we should just throw in ultra low powered Kaby Lake processors in these (apparently already too underpowered for ANY PROFESSIONAL work by people here) just because the generation number is one higher? Supposedly even the higher powered Skylakes are not capable of doing ANY professional work, yet people want LESSER processors?
     
  10. thadoggfather thread starter macrumors 604

    thadoggfather

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    #10
    Sure,

    it was my understanding they do have comparable class Skylake for 13" but not quad core 15"
     
  11. thunng8 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #11
    Nope .. no Iris graphics for kaby lake. Will be a large decrease in graphics performance for 13" Mbp in non touchbar and no 28w processor for touchbar model so potentially lower graphics and CPU performance
     
  12. bodonnell202 macrumors 6502a

    bodonnell202

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2016
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    #12
    There are 15 W (and 5.2 W) Kaby Lake processors with GT2 (i.e. lower end) graphics available. Apple uses 15 W processors with GT3e (i.e. higher end, with eDRAM) in the entry level 13" MBP and 28 W processors with GT3e graphics in the touch bar 13" MBP. Neither of these are available with a Kaby Lake version yet. Apple is using the best processors available in these classes.
     
  13. xWhiplash macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    #13
    But but but it's not Kaby Lake!!! These systems are already incapable of doing ANY professional work AT ALL, but we need low powered Kaby Lake for it to work better!
     
  14. MyopicPaideia macrumors 68000

    MyopicPaideia

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Location:
    Trollhättan, Sweden
    #14
    Well...I hope you've been properly chastened. I expect you'll do right thing and apologize for posting false information.

    This FUD accounts for well over half the complaints on here about the new MBP. Kaby Lake is crap anyway. It is a second tock, same architecture as Sky Lake, with no real breakthroughs at all, just go see the first post of the next generation expectations for the rMB thread. The core M3 and M i5 & i7's that are available now for the rMB still have no onboard TB3, no LPDDR4, barely measurable performance increase, etc. Seems the only real improvement is better HEVC decoding support...

    Processor-wise, Apple did the best with what they had available. This, at least should not be on the table for debate. Form factor, ports, graphics options, Touch Bar, etc I fully embrace debate and discussion on. The processors though, give it a rest!
     
  15. monkeydax macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2012
    #15
    Nice one there ;)
     
  16. leman macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #16

Share This Page