I know, but the amount of upgrades this year, it’s hard to see 120hz happeningIt’s coming from a display expert though.
I know, but the amount of upgrades this year, it’s hard to see 120hz happeningIt’s coming from a display expert though.
If you've ever used a 120/144hz monitor, you'd know that scrolling and everything is smoother compared to a 60hz screen. It is a big difference and hard to go back to 60.For scrolling Safari Windows .... common.... I love Apple but 120 Hz on a machine that's more for production and business use than ever.... I see no reason to get over excited.
Apple had a lot of time to perfect the new Mac though. I guess we will all find out. Hopefully we are not set for a disappointment.I know, but the amount of upgrades this year, it’s hard to see 120hz happening
I’m still hoping they can get at least 15 hours battery life out of these. Battery life is so important for these pro machines…Hmmmmmmm… What’s the trade-off?
Mini LED, 120 Hz, M1X, HDMI, SD card slot, MagSafe, no Touch Bar, Magic Keyboard, 1080P WebCam, new design, up to 32 and possibly 64 GB of RAM, up to 8 TB of storage…
Something has to give. Battery life?
Lightness?
Price? Is this the year we get a $3000 starting price, which was actually rumored back in 2019?
Or they will leave the Intel option and discontinue the M1 MacBook Pro 13 inch.Betting the 14" will begin at $1799-1999 (thinking higher) and they'll keep a model of the previous-gen M1 13" around, at about $1500.
I have a 140 Hz monitor for gaming and hooked up to the Mac When I switch form the PC gaming to Mac - working.If you've ever used a 120/144hz monitor, you'd know that scrolling and everything is smoother compared to a 60hz screen. It is a big difference and hard to go back to 60.
I doubt they would reduce the number of efficiency cores to only two. You want the MBP's to run cool doing most things (long battery life), not concentrating on high performance cores. They are trying to make higher RAM configurations available which is also important.It is expected to feature 10 cores, with eight high-performance cores for system intensive tasks and two efficiency cores for basic operations. 16 and 32-core graphics options will be available, and the machines could support up to 64GB RAM.
The four high-efficiency cores deliver outstanding performance at a tenth of the power. By themselves, these four cores deliver similar performance as the current-generation, dual-core MacBook Air at much lower power. They are the most efficient way to run lightweight, everyday tasks like checking email or browsing the web, and preserve battery life like never before. And all eight cores can work together to provide incredible compute power for the most demanding tasks and deliver the world’s best CPU performance per watt.
I agree, I don't know why they would cut the number of efficiency cores. From a software development standpoint, it becomes easier to develop your OS and apps when all your devices have a base number of efficiency cores. If a tiny $700 iPhone and MacBook Air has 4 efficiency cores, why not your $2k+ MacBook Pro?I doubt they would reduce the number of efficiency cores to only two. You want the MBP's to run cool doing most things (long battery life), not concentrating on high performance cores. They are trying to make higher RAM configurations available which is also important.
M1 provides
😱😲😱😲😱😲😱😲@LFC2020 get ready to place your order in with me. Apple is not playing games anymore!!!
Don’t tell me you are going to think about it. You are placing your order with me. No if’s and buts!
It’s game over! Prepare your wallet. Sell your Mac to your cousin. 😮