Thunderbolt 3 Ports on Right Side of 13-Inch MacBook Pro Have Reduced PCI Express Bandwidth

[TMRJIJ]

Heh, the whining is almost comical at this point. Of course I'll be called a McPologist!

This is nothing new anyway, the previous smaller MacBooks (Airs, etc) had reduced Thunderbolt functionality over the larger pros. The cylinder Mac Pro doesn't have Thunderbolt 2 on all 6 ports, it divides 3 TB buses among them. So, the 13" MacBook Pros probably only have 1 thunderbolt 3 bus instead of 2 on the 15", or some other lesser vs. greater combination (not sure how the TB 3 hardware support works). You should've been complaining about this for years as it's been that way since Thunderbolt was introduced on the smaller devices vs. the larger.

Really don't see why Moderators don't suspend some of these members or even explain to people that this isn't really an Apple issue.
These members clearly don't understand anything about PCI-Express lanes yet troll/whine just for the sake of it.

 

[manu chao]

It's sad to see the decline of Apple accelerate even as their leadership seems blind and/or apathetic about what is happening.

You sound as if you had preferred that the 13" MBP only had two TB 3 ports instead of four (but with two of them somewhat slower, 20 Gbit/s aka TB 2 speeds possibly being the precise value). Perfection for you means rather less ports and less power if you cannot have perfect symmetry.

May I ask you how often you already have saturated the 20 Gbit/s bandwith of TB 2?

 

[smoledman]

Apple only cares enough about Mac to keep it going for iOS devs. That's literally all they care about, feeding the iOS machine.

 

[citysnaps]

Heh, the whining is almost comical at this point. Of course I'll be called a McPologist!

This is nothing new anyway, the previous smaller MacBooks (Airs, etc) had reduced Thunderbolt functionality over the larger pros. The cylinder Mac Pro doesn't have Thunderbolt 2 on all 6 ports, it divides 3 TB buses among them. So, the 13" MacBook Pros probably only have 1 thunderbolt 3 bus instead of 2 on the 15", or some other lesser vs. greater combination (not sure how the TB 3 hardware support works). You should've been complaining about this for years as it's been that way since Thunderbolt was introduced on the smaller devices vs. the larger.

Hah, it is comical. And so adorable. People live to whine on MR. Teeny tiny rants that give the powerless, power. And a chance to poke The Man, aka "Timmy," because people here are on a first name basis with him.

It's as if every moaner here was ready to open their wallet and buy that MacBook Pro 13", because they have massive SSD RAID arrays and peripherals that could suck up four full TB 3 streams simultaneously. On a laptop. And with this news their plans, dreams, and livelihood are now CRUSHED. Totally. In the blink of an eye. Wahhh...

Jeez, I'd be shocked if anyone moaning here could make full use of a single TB 3 port's bandwidth.

 

[imageWIS]

Apple only cares enough about Mac to keep it going for iOS devs. That's literally all they care about, feeding the iOS machine.

Until they can kill macOS and only have iOS. Because they are 'courageous' enough with their 'innovations' for the sake of 'experience' or some other marketing BS.

 

[JTToft]

MacBook Pro (13-inch, Late 2016, Four Thunderbolt 3 Ports) supports Thunderbolt 3 at full performance using the two left-hand ports. The two right-hand ports deliver Thunderbolt 3 functionality, but have reduced PCI Express bandwidth.

MacBook Pro (13-inch, Late 2016, Two Thunderbolt 3 Ports) delivers full Thunderbolt 3 performance on both ports.

- Those are some convoluted model names...

 

[manu chao]

Where did I say anything about price?

At the end of the day, the adapter isn't a good option for the MBP, and no adapter (from Apple) currently exists for the MBP (at any price) that properly supports that systems IO in this configuration.

You complained that not all TB-3 or USB-C devices sold by Apple support the full 100-W that TB-3 enables. I suggested that that might have required more expensive components. Thus, you implicitly agreed to higher prices (you demanded features that increase cost).

 

[imageWIS]

The previous 13" MBP had two TB 2 ports (aka 20 GB/s and that 20 GB/s might have been shared between the two ports). The new one has two TB3 ports with 40 GB/s (again, maybe shared) and two with maybe 20 GB/s. That is a massive increase, from potentially 20 GB/s total to 60 GB/s total. But I guess having only 60 GB/s (instead of 80 GB/s) total is really a serious issue that is a deal-breaker for a lot of uses.

I guess, you would have preferred that the new MBPs would have come with two charging cables (and ports). One with Magsafe and one with USB-C.

My buddy carries his fully loaded 13" MBPr with him and he constantly has to upload or download via cable massive files... he is a videographer who now shoots in 4K. He also uses the computer to edit on the road. The faster he can transfer files, especially when on location, the better.

 

[ghost187]

Lower performance chips (CPU & GPU) will stay longer in saturated mode to perform a given computing task. For example, encoding a movie might use the same amount of battery power on 15-W CPU as on a 25-W CPU. But idle or low load use should consume less battery. Still overall, the touch-bar-less MBP should have at least a 10% longer battery life given the larger battery.

I'm guessing much more, remember the iPad "2.5" had about 13 hour battery life. If this has a 12-13 hour battery life than this is the Retina MBA I've been looking for (even if it's more expensive).

 

[Floris]

I'm very happy with my Late 2015 5K iMac. I dropped 32GB of RAM on it and have the Radeon R9 M395X... has all of the connections I need and should last me for quite a while. I mention that it's connected to 7 external drives and occasional drives my 4K 55" TV with no issues whatsoever.

Who knows when or what the next iMac will be like but I would say that if you're in the market, might as well take the plunge and get one.

i am starting to wonder if i stick to my original plan (see my sig) and just .. accept the compromise.
Secretly I am hoping the new imac will be a bit of a mix between both worlds.

 

[ProjectManager101]

I've just seen a leak of the next Macbook Pro.
It's just 2mm thick, has no screen, no ports & no keyboard.

You're going to love it.

Because apple says so.

 

[jjlannoo]

LOL people whining about bandwidth they will never use. Apple should have just put two ports on it. People are too slow to understand why all 4 can't be full speed.

 

[manu chao]

My buddy carries his fully loaded 13" MBPr with him and he constantly has to upload or download via cable massive files... he is a videographer who now shoots in 4K. He also uses the computer to edit on the road. The faster he can transfer files, especially when on location, the better.

I don't doubt that, but it takes two to tango, ie, storage devices that actually exceed the 20 Gbit/s limit of his current MBP, much less devices that exceed the potential 60 Gbit/s limit on new 13" MBPs.

The 40 Gbit/s bandwith is today only really useful for (a) 5K monitors and (b) daisy-chaining of multiple devices (in particular if some of them are 4K or higher monitors). Look, the 'world's fastest external drive' just announced by LaCie peaks at 22.4 GB/s.
[You need quite a couple of them to exceed 20 Gbit/s let alone 60 Gbit/s.]
Correction, I mixed up bits and bytes. One of them just goes above what TB2 could provide or what the righthand TB3 on the new 13" MBP offers.

 

[kcamfork]

Really? No one here? In this thread where they are talking about this specific issue, crying in rage whether they understand the details or not?

There are certainly pluses and minuses--for me included. But so many of things people are saying have surpassed parody level. Which is a shame, because Apple could use the feedback--but it just sounds insane half the time.

I understand the details quite clearly. This machine is limited at best. I'll be voting with my wallet as I assume a lot of other people will too.

I was recently looking at buying a Mac mini to use as an always on iTunes server, media player, gamin machine, etc hooked up to my 50" TV. But I was so disappointed in what was available and at the price point. This seems to be a common theme with apple products lately: disappointing hardware and disappointing price. So for less than $500 (base price for the lowest tier Mac mini, mind you), I built my own high quality mini PC with a sky lake processor, 16gb ram, expandability (!!!), and an SSD. Installed windows 10 and it works like a dream. I couldn't be more pleased.

It's funny. In 2009 I was slowly replacing all my non apple products with apple products. Now in 2016, I've shifted in reverse and going back to my own builds and Microsoft. I built a gaming PC in 2012 for about $900 that had the top of the line everything. It still purrs today, unlike most apple hardware from 2012. Yeah... I think I'm done.

 

[Cineplex]

Now that puts the pro in MacBook Pro!

 

[Val-kyrie]

In light of the need for separate TB controllers with Skylake, I wondered when a bombshell like this was going to drop.

Apple has published a detailed support document highlighting the capabilities of the Thunderbolt 3 USB-C ports on the new MacBook Pro, unveiling some previously unknown details and outlining the different adapters that are needed to connect various accessories.

Hmmm, published, not announced during the keynote. Gee, I wonder why this wasn't mentioned during the presentation?

According to the document, while all of the ports on the 15-inch MacBook Pro and the 13-inch MacBook Pro without a Touch Bar offer full Thunderbolt 3 performance, only two of the four ports on the 13-inch MacBook Pro with a Touch Bar support Thunderbolt 3 at full performance.

The two ports on the right side of the machine have Thunderbolt 3 functionality but with reduced PCI Express bandwidth. For that reason, Apple recommends plugging higher-performance devices into the left-hand ports on that machine.As for USB, all of the USB-C ports on all MacBook Pro models offer USB 3.1 Gen 2 (10Gb/s) transfer speeds when connected to a USB accessory.

This should be stated up front for all consumers. In essence, the 13" MBP only has 2xTB3 and 2xUSB-C 3.1 ports. Given the drop in bandwidth, the USB-C port is nothing more than eye candy (much like the left set of speaker holes on the iPhone 7). It would have been more useful if it had been a USB-A 3.1 port. Apple should be flogged publicly for this misrepresentation of its capabilities.

Other interesting tidbits in the document include the fact that six devices can be daisy-chained to each Thunderbolt 3 port on the MacBook Pro, and only one power supply can be used to charge the machine.

Oh yes, Phil, we really needed FOUR TB3 ports and no other ports, because every peripheral MUST be attached to a separate port.

You can attach multiple power supplies, but it's only going to draw power from the one that provides the most power.

Power supplies that exceed 100W have the potential to damage the Macbook Pro, and accessories like the USB-C VGA Multiport Adapter or the USB-C Digital AV Multiport Adapter can only provide up to 60W of power, which will offer slow or delayed charging in the 15-inch MacBook Pro. Apple recommends charging the 15-inch model with the power supply it ships with.

So much for power pass-through on Apple's own dongles. What is the point of power pass-through if an adapter doesn't pass enough power through to keep the MBP from draining its battery? Another illusion and an example of Apple's failure to design even its own hardware to work properly across its own line of products.

Apple also outlines powering attached devices with Thunderbolt 3 ports. The 15-inch MacBook Pro and the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Touch Bar can power two devices that use up to 15 watts and two additional devices that use up to 7.5 watts. The 13-inch MacBook Pro with no Touch Bar and two Thunderbolt 3 ports can power one device that uses up to 15 watts and one device that uses up to 7.5 watts.

Again, the lowest-end 13" MBP should not outperform the higher spec'd models. This is yet another indication of how first-gen these new models really are.

If you're planning to purchase a new MacBook Pro and are confused about which adapters you're going to need so it will work with your existing equipment and accessories, Apple's support document is a good reference to check out.

Article Link: Thunderbolt 3 Ports on Right Side of 13-Inch MacBook Pro Have Reduced PCI Express Bandwidth

This is the most damning article yet about these new "pros," but worse the details in this support document could really cause problems and frustration for consumers and few will be aware of these pitfalls. The fact that this information is essentially hidden in a support document to all but the most technically informed has lowered my view of this company drastically. Color me skeptical of all things Apple until they earn back my trust.

 

[manu chao]

LOL people whining about bandwidth they will never use. Apple should have just put two ports on it. People are too slow to understand why all 4 can't be full speed.

Yes, people would have preferred two 'full-speed' TB3 ports over two 'full-speed' & two maybe 'half-speed' TB3 ports. Because anything less than perfection is seen a slight Apple is enforcing on them (and symmetry is part of perfection).

 

[Pootmatoot]

Really don't see why Moderators don't suspend some of these members or even explain to people that this isn't really an Apple issue.
These members clearly don't understand anything about PCI-Express lanes yet troll/whine just for the sake of it.

Of course it's an "Apple issue". It's not about PCI-Express lanes... it's that Apple chose to put in four ports that it's not technically possible to support.

That's the sort of shoddiness that you don't expect from Apple (well, Apple as-was). A small amount of the poison on this forum wouldn't be here if it was two USB-A ports instead of 2 of these semi-ports. A sensible half-and-half for a world that's still 99% USB-A, and that USB-C transition will take years.

 

[manu chao]

I'm guessing much more, remember the iPad "2.5" had about 13 hour battery life. If this has a 12-13 hour battery life than this is the Retina MBA I've been looking for (even if it's more expensive).

I'm guessing also more than the 11% in battery capacity would suggest but I don't have much of a clue of how much more. In your iPad 2.5 example you are comparing two CPUs produced using different process geometries, that is a much bigger difference than a lower-clock CPU.

 

[ATC]

MR should have a warning to heart burn sufferers to avoid reading the site's front page news until further advised.

 

[kcamfork]

This has to do with the number of PCI Express lanes provided by the Intel chips. Thunderbolt 3 needs 4 PCI Express lanes for full throughput. The dual-core chips in the 13" MacBook Pro only have 12 lanes, so that can only support two full speed ports (2x4 lanes) and two ports at half speed (2x2 lanes). The quad-core in 15" MacBook Pro supports up to 16 lanes, which gives 4 full speed thunderbolt ports.

Wanna know what would have been better?

1) 2 TB3 ports on the left that nobody would use and collect dust
2) 2 USB 3 ports, SD card slot, Mag Safe, HDMI out, 3.5mm AND lightning (you know. So I could use those new headphones they forced down my throat courageously?) on the right that would actually get use.

Instead we get this pile of cow excrement. No thanks, Apple.

 

[ghost187]

I'm guessing also more than the 11% in battery capacity would suggest but I don't have much of a clue of how much more. In your iPad 2.5 example you are comparing two CPUs produced using different process geometries, that is a much bigger difference than a lower-clock CPU.

Yes but there is also the fact that you don't have to drive the touch bar or the t1 chip. I'm anxiously waiting for a review of this particular models battery life, than I'm pulling the trigger if it's 12 hours or more.

 

[shareef777]

That's as easy to understand as the good old days of SCSI.

If it confuses you, then maybe a MBP isn't for you.

 

[gagarin]

You who comment in the tune of Jobs Apple always did ports that was magically working the same way clearly haven't experienced USB ports of early Intel Macbooks which were providing different amperage. Closer to Magsafe was more powerful (or maybe it was that one that was far from Magsafe?>

 

[AdonisSMU]

When was the last time Apple supported legacy connections any longer than they absolutely had to? The new Thunderbolt ports are exactly what everyone has been asking for for 20 years. And we expect Apple, who has dumped SCSI, Serial, Floppy disks, CD drives, 3.5mm audio, etc. all way before their time, to hold back here? Really?

Truthfully, I dont see this as a big deal at all. The Apple users always complain when Apple makes bold changes and then they still buy the product anyway. I don't see why they wouldn't now.