[Very Possibly Solved] Why the Macbook Pro 2016 is slower than 2015?

[ntnskrds]

I'm curious if more Late 2016 15" owners could run the rough Xcode test here https://github.com/ashfurrow/xcode-hardware-performance/ because as far as the results show the 2016 is significantly slower at Xcode compilations (about 40%) which is really bad considering as a developer I compile projects a good 1000x a day.

Here is another report on Xcode performance for various Mac models: https://blog.curtisherbert.com/13-vs-15-macbook-a-developers-perspective-in-2016/

From my experience so far my 15''/2.7/512/455 MBP is definitely faster than my 15''/2.3 rMBP of 2012. Not spectacualirly faster, mind you. Something in the order of 15% (but be warned, I have yet to find the time to make proper, controlled tests and comparisons).

 

[ZapNZs]

While the 4870HQ and 4980HQ have higher turbo speeds and do better on pure short CPU benchmarks than the current 6820HQ and 6920HQ, I've also noticed that the 2016 is better able to dissipate heat. Even with the RAM and dGPU aside, wouldn't this have substantial real-world performance implications in favor of the 2016, especially in regards to sustained tasks?

 

[762999]

This laptop will last you at least 3 years, when it comes to performance.

I totally agree!

I'm using my late 2013 rMBP for XCode, Lightroom, Finalcutpro and Logic. It still works so well that I'm amazed in each time I use it. I have a seperate PC for gaming with a 4k screen but I still prefer using my macbook most of the time!

 

[TrueBlou]

This isn't aimed to complain about it, it's aimed to explain it.

They are faster because they are compensating from other parts of the machine. Also I'm actually very happy with my purchase (all upgraded 2016 Macbook Pro 15").

With this said, I think it's important to see what went on as you can start to see Apple's constraints and what they'll want to do in the next Macbook pro. (More efficient and faster CPU/Ram combination which will allow more ram which if you're about to drop 3-4k on a laptop that should last you a while (more than a year), this kind of information is relevant don't you think?)
[doublepost=1479727036][/doublepost]

Faster GPU, Faster SSD? I'm sure they have done some nice improvements on the chipset too and made things faster there.

This is just pointing out the 2 parts that held this back from being blown away performance.

Frankly I couldn't care less if it was faster because they coated the motherboard in purple fairy dust.

Faster > slower and that's all I care about in the end. How they get there doesn't matter.
[doublepost=1485632541][/doublepost]

Thanks for a more "normal" language and also a good answer Would saving documents in Photoshop really use that much GPU or CPU? It takes like 5x longer than the old one and I kinda expected that a new integrated GPU and all the other updates to be at least at the level of a 5 year old computer. :l

CPU power definitely makes a difference when saving(or doing anything) in Photoshop. I notice a big difference between a few systems of varying power levels that I've used. Saving, especially large, works in Photoshop benefits from a faster CPU to crunch the numbers behind the scenes.

These days there's very little in modern macOS apps that doesn't benefit from more powerful processors. And needless to say, the more cores you have the better. macOS is designed to take advantage of multi-core processors and depending on the type of app the GPU processing and memory.

With the work I do, iOS development and 3D modelling work for my 3D printing business, the more cores, memory and powerful GPU I can get the better. Which is why I'll be maxing out a 15" MacBook Pro.

 

[sakabaro]

Frankly I couldn't care less if it was faster because they coated the motherboard in purple fairy dust.

Faster > slower and that's all I care about in the end. How they get there doesn't matter.
[doublepost=1485632541][/doublepost]


CPU power definitely makes a difference when saving(or doing anything) in Photoshop. I notice a big difference between a few systems of varying power levels that I've used. Saving, especially large, works in Photoshop benefits from a faster CPU to crunch the numbers behind the scenes.

These days there's very little in modern macOS apps that doesn't benefit from more powerful processors. And needless to say, the more cores you have the better. macOS is designed to take advantage of multi-core processors and depending on the type of app the GPU processing and memory.

With the work I do, iOS development and 3D modelling work for my 3D printing business, the more cores, memory and powerful GPU I can get the better. Which is why I'll be maxing out a 15" MacBook Pro.

maxing out 2015 or 2016?

I've ordered a maxed out 2016, but I am strongly considering a 5k iMac. Weridly I don't like big screen for dev work, slower machine plus it's a distraction to keep moving your head.

 

[TrueBlou]

maxing out 2015 or 2016?

I've ordered a maxed out 2016, but I am strongly considering a 5k iMac. Weridly I don't like big screen for dev work, slower machine plus it's a distraction to keep moving your head.

Definitely the 2016, it's improved enough for me to decide it's the one I want and after simulating the Touch Bar on my iPad Pro, hooked up to my iMac for a few days, I know I'm going to like that more than I thought already. It's got potential, I know a lot of people don't see it but I'm already thinking of ways it'll be handy for my first macOS app, if I ever get round to doing the bloody thing and it may streamline certain tasks I perform, especially if I make custom apps for it, we'll see.

I've been using iMacs for years as my main systems and I love them, but it's been a few years since I've had a MacBook. But as I'm spending significantly longer sitting in the office working these days, I don't see the family so much. Hence the MacBook, I can gouch on the sofa and still be working and I'll be able to pop the lid shut and be sociable when needs be.

I'm also looking forward to sitting in the garden with a wee dram and working away during the 4 and a half hours of summer we get here

Whether I actually bother keeping the iMac (I love the 27" screen. I'm used to it so my head doesn't move really, just my eyes. I think if you're needing to move your head, you're sitting too close to it ) depends entirely on how much the MacBook can cope with my workflow.
Benchmarks suggest that the maxed out MacBook is just slightly more powerful than my iMac, if that bears true I'll likely give it to a new home and just buy myself a nice 5K monitor.

 

[sakabaro]

Definitely the 2016, it's improved enough for me to decide it's the one I want and after simulating the Touch Bar on my iPad Pro, hooked up to my iMac for a few days, I know I'm going to like that more than I thought already. It's got potential, I know a lot of people don't see it but I'm already thinking of ways it'll be handy for my first macOS app, if I ever get round to doing the bloody thing and it may streamline certain tasks I perform, especially if I make custom apps for it, we'll see.

I've been using iMacs for years as my main systems and I love them, but it's been a few years since I've had a MacBook. But as I'm spending significantly longer sitting in the office working these days, I don't see the family so much. Hence the MacBook, I can gouch on the sofa and still be working and I'll be able to pop the lid shut and be sociable when needs be.

I'm also looking forward to sitting in the garden with a wee dram and working away during the 4 and a half hours of summer we get here

Whether I actually bother keeping the iMac (I love the 27" screen. I'm used to it so my head doesn't move really, just my eyes. I think if you're needing to move your head, you're sitting too close to it ) depends entirely on how much the MacBook can cope with my workflow.
Benchmarks suggest that the maxed out MacBook is just slightly more powerful than my iMac, if that bears true I'll likely give it to a new home and just buy myself a nice 5K monitor.

Interesting. Yeah, hopefully TB is not the big mistake people are saying it is. I kind of like the discovery aspect of it. Like what shortcuts are the most useful for each app. Even if at the end of the day, true keyboard shortcuts might be better.

I am considering 15" 2016 maxed out vs. iMac 5k 2015 maxed out. The 2016 should be slightly slower than the iMac by about 20%. Not negligible, but not a deal breaker either.

So, you have switched completely to the 2016 despite having a 5k?

 

[TrueBlou]

Interesting. Yeah, hopefully TB is not the big mistake people are saying it is. I kind of like the discovery aspect of it. Like what shortcuts are the most useful for each app. Even if at the end of the day, true keyboard shortcuts might be better.

I am considering 15" 2016 maxed out vs. iMac 5k 2015 maxed out. The 2016 should be slightly slower than the iMac by about 20%. Not negligible, but not a deal breaker either.

So, you have switched completely to the 2016 despite having a 5k?

I've not got it yet, putting the order in on Tuesday and as it'll be getting upgraded it looks like it'll arrive two weeks from Monday, if the shipping times hold up.

I've a very strong feeling that I'll end up just switching over to the MacBook, I like the flexibility. Being a workaholic, despite how much frowning at me the wife will do, I'd sooner be lounging by the pool working than reading a book when I'm on holiday, it just seems a more productive use of my time It should be powerful enough and with a 5k monitor to go with it for at my desk I just don't see me missing, or using, the iMac.

 

[Miltz]

I have a i7 2700K 16GB 1TB windows 7 desktop. My fully loaded 2016 MacBook Pro beats it in photoshop and all other software I tested so far. I'm impressed. In some tests I did it was up to twice as fast. I expected to performance to me very close overall. I only wish safari supported 4K videos on YouTube, what a shame.

 

[rawweb]

I've not got it yet, putting the order in on Tuesday and as it'll be getting upgraded it looks like it'll arrive two weeks from Monday, if the shipping times hold up.

I've a very strong feeling that I'll end up just switching over to the MacBook, I like the flexibility. Being a workaholic, despite how much frowning at me the wife will do, I'd sooner be lounging by the pool working than reading a book when I'm on holiday, it just seems a more productive use of my time It should be powerful enough and with a 5k monitor to go with it for at my desk I just don't see me missing, or using, the iMac.

If it helps, your scenario is basically the same story as mine except I'm a video professional. In 2015 I decided to grab a maxed out iMac to potentially replace my cMP. I loved the iMac, it was great, but I sit at a desk all day at work. Hard to find time at home with two young kids to get down to my home studio. Sold the iMac and plunged into a maxed late 2016 15". It's been three weeks, so far...no complaints. For now I'm using my ancient Thunderbolt Display for times I need to be at my desk mixing sound on the studio monitors or something. I absolutely love this notebook. I've owned every apple notebook generation either personally or for work since 2001. For my needs, I've always saw them as companions to my desktop. For the first time, this really did replace my desktop. The 4gb of VRAM was a big deal for me, especially on a laptop. I hope you experience similar results.

Also, it only took apple about 8 days to process and deliver the laptop for me. I was very impressed with the speed after reading about such long delays.

 

[TrueBlou]

If it helps, your scenario is basically the same story as mine except I'm a video professional. In 2015 I decided to grab a maxed out iMac to potentially replace my cMP. I loved the iMac, it was great, but I sit at a desk all day at work. Hard to find time at home with two young kids to get down to my home studio. Sold the iMac and plunged into a maxed late 2016 15". It's been three weeks, so far...no complaints. For now I'm using my ancient Thunderbolt Display for times I need to be at my desk mixing sound on the studio monitors or something. I absolutely love this notebook. I've owned every apple notebook generation either personally or for work since 2001. For my needs, I've always saw them as companions to my desktop. For the first time, this really did replace my desktop. The 4gb of VRAM was a big deal for me, especially on a laptop. I hope you experience similar results.

Also, it only took apple about 8 days to process and deliver the laptop for me. I was very impressed with the speed after reading about such long delays.

Thanks for the rundown, sounds good. I do agree that the graphics card upgrade is a must, even more than upgrading the cpu, which is a relatively minor upgrade over the stock 2.7 i7 in the high end MacBook.

Can't wait to get my hands on it now, I always enjoy the run up to new shiny toys

 

[rawweb]

Thanks for the rundown, sounds good. I do agree that the graphics card upgrade is a must, even more than upgrading the cpu, which is a relatively minor upgrade over the stock 2.7 i7 in the high end MacBook.

Can't wait to get my hands on it now, I always enjoy the run up to new shiny toys

It is exciting. I hope everything works out well for you!

This is stupid but...I really missed that "new apple smell", this time around. You know, that classic, scotch tape like smell. Made the unboxing experience less than anticipated. A very industrial, stale, scent as I unpackaged everything. LOL

 

[Zwopple]

Here is another report on Xcode performance for various Mac models: https://blog.curtisherbert.com/13-vs-15-macbook-a-developers-perspective-in-2016/

From my experience so far my 15''/2.7/512/455 MBP is definitely faster than my 15''/2.3 rMBP of 2012. Not spectacualirly faster, mind you. Something in the order of 15% (but be warned, I have yet to find the time to make proper, controlled tests and comparisons).

Yea I've seen that post but it's such an Apples to Oranges. As far as I can tell the 2015 15" MBP's outperform the 2016 15" MBP's with Xcode. Any comparisons really need to be quad core i7 processors.

I think the main reason is that the 2015's turbo higher and code compilation is the perfect candidate to benefit from maximum turbo's since it tends to be infrequent and short lived.

Again it really depends on your needs but the 2016 models seem worse for a developer than the 2015's in regards to performance, when it comes to anything that makes heavy use of the GPU though (Photo/Video) the newer MBP's take the cake and then some.

 

[Sanpete]

Yea I've seen that post but it's such an Apples to Oranges. As far as I can tell the 2015 15" MBP's outperform the 2016 15" MBP's with Xcode. Any comparisons really need to be quad core i7 processors.

I think these from the end of that link are all quad core:

• My 2016 rMBP 15” i7 2.7ghz 16gig RAM: avg 62s
• Roland's 2013 rMBP 15" i7 2.7ghz 16gig RAM: 64s
• Alfredo's 2012 rMBP 15" i7 2.3ghz 8gig RAM: avg 75s

The comparison at the link I gave is also quad core. The results taken all together seem inconsistent. That isn't to say the 2015 isn't faster, I'd guess it is, a little. But it's hard to say without a careful head-to-head comparison.

 

[sakabaro]

Yea I've seen that post but it's such an Apples to Oranges. As far as I can tell the 2015 15" MBP's outperform the 2016 15" MBP's with Xcode. Any comparisons really need to be quad core i7 processors.

I think the main reason is that the 2015's turbo higher and code compilation is the perfect candidate to benefit from maximum turbo's since it tends to be infrequent and short lived.

Again it really depends on your needs but the 2016 models seem worse for a developer than the 2015's in regards to performance, when it comes to anything that makes heavy use of the GPU though (Photo/Video) the newer MBP's take the cake and then some.

Seems the 2016 to be faster in this Xcode benchmark:

• Arek's 2015 iMac 5k i7 4.0ghz 16gig RAM: avg 46s
• David's 2013 Mac Pro Xeon E5 6-core 3.5ghz 64gig RAM: avg 47s
• Troy's 2016 rMBP 15" i7 2.9ghz 16gig RAM: avg 53s
• Joe's 2012 iMac 27" i7 3.4ghz (fusion drive) 24gig RAM: avg 61s
• My 2016 rMBP 15” i7 2.7ghz 16gig RAM: avg 62s
• Roland's 2013 rMBP 15" i7 2.7ghz 16gig RAM: 64s
• Alfredo's 2012 rMBP 15" i7 2.3ghz 8gig RAM: avg 75s
• Soroush's 2016 rMBP 13” i5 2.9ghz 16gig RAM: avg 88s
• Kuba's 2012 iMac i5 2.9ghz 16gig RAM: avg 97s
• Nicholas's 2009 iMac 27" i5 2.66ghz 16gig RAM: avg 97s
• Mateusz's 2011 MBP 15" i7 2.2ghz 8gig RAM: avg 101s
• My 2014 rMBP 13” i5 2.6ghz 16gig RAM: avg 103s
• Kuba's 2015 MacBook Air i7 2.2ghz 8gig RAM: avg 118s
• Joe's 2015 MacBook 12" Core M 1.3ghz 8gigs RAM : avg 160s

Can you run your own benchmark by curiosity?

 

[Zwopple]

I think these from the end of that link are all quad core:

• My 2016 rMBP 15” i7 2.7ghz 16gig RAM: avg 62s
• Roland's 2013 rMBP 15" i7 2.7ghz 16gig RAM: 64s
• Alfredo's 2012 rMBP 15" i7 2.3ghz 8gig RAM: avg 75s

The comparison at the link I gave is also quad core. The results taken all together seem inconsistent. That isn't to say the 2015 isn't faster, I'd guess it is, a little. But it's hard to say without a careful head-to-head comparison.

The 2014 and 2015 15" MBP's perform better. The 2013 and 2012 do not. Again I really think it just comes down to the 200mhz turbo boost difference which for short bursts of code compilation makes the difference.
[doublepost=1485686995][/doublepost]

Seems the 2016 to be faster in this Xcode benchmark:

• Arek's 2015 iMac 5k i7 4.0ghz 16gig RAM: avg 46s
• David's 2013 Mac Pro Xeon E5 6-core 3.5ghz 64gig RAM: avg 47s
• Troy's 2016 rMBP 15" i7 2.9ghz 16gig RAM: avg 53s
• Joe's 2012 iMac 27" i7 3.4ghz (fusion drive) 24gig RAM: avg 61s
• My 2016 rMBP 15” i7 2.7ghz 16gig RAM: avg 62s
• Roland's 2013 rMBP 15" i7 2.7ghz 16gig RAM: 64s
• Alfredo's 2012 rMBP 15" i7 2.3ghz 8gig RAM: avg 75s
• Soroush's 2016 rMBP 13” i5 2.9ghz 16gig RAM: avg 88s
• Kuba's 2012 iMac i5 2.9ghz 16gig RAM: avg 97s
• Nicholas's 2009 iMac 27" i5 2.66ghz 16gig RAM: avg 97s
• Mateusz's 2011 MBP 15" i7 2.2ghz 8gig RAM: avg 101s
• My 2014 rMBP 13” i5 2.6ghz 16gig RAM: avg 103s
• Kuba's 2015 MacBook Air i7 2.2ghz 8gig RAM: avg 118s
• Joe's 2015 MacBook 12" Core M 1.3ghz 8gigs RAM : avg 160s

Can you run your own benchmark by curiosity?

Missing in this list is a 2014 or 2015 15" quad core i7. I ran this test here https://github.com/ashfurrow/xcode-hardware-performance on my 2014 2.2ghz i7 15" MBP and came to the same results as listed (the 2014 and 2015 models outperform the 2016 models).

The two tests are similar, one is primarily an Objective-C app and the other a Swift app. I work in Swift all day so it's more beneficial for me to specifically test that compiler toolchain.

Again I think the 2016 MBP's are a fantastic machine and definitely a worth upgrade from anyone with a 2013 or older model but for a developer using Xcode they actually seem to come up short on compilation times compared to the 2014/2015 models if you're using a 15" variant.

 

[Ma2k5]

Blame Intel.

 

[Zwopple]

Blame Intel.

Yea CPU's have been getting less and less meaningful over the years as the practicalities of physics play out. It's a shame the Skylake CPU in the 2016" MBP's doesn't turbo to 4.0ghz like the high-end CPU in the 2015"'s did.

 

[Freyqq]

15" is also missing crystalwell (128 MB L4 cache). That boosts memory speeds a lot as well, which is a far bigger loss than slower memory timings.

 

[MH01]

I have a i7 2700K 16GB 1TB windows 7 desktop. My fully loaded 2016 MacBook Pro beats it in photoshop and all other software I tested so far. I'm impressed. In some tests I did it was up to twice as fast. I expected to performance to me very close overall. I only wish safari supported 4K videos on YouTube, what a shame.

Replace your 1TB HDD with a PCI ssd or raid 0 ssd and it will beat your 2016 MacBook Pro .

To be honest with very little investment and GPU compared to the price of the MacBook , the 2700k would beat it easily. my 2012 desktop destroyed my 2015 and 2016 top spec MacBook pros. Though one cannot compare desktop to laptop.

 

[doitdada]

The new machines may feel faster because of the faster SSD's. If you would give both the same SSD's the 2016 could be actually slower based on this "research".

Agreed.
The evolution of SSDs are way more progressive than the development of CPUs.

 

[Miltz]

Replace your 1TB HDD with a PCI ssd or raid 0 ssd and it will beat your 2016 MacBook Pro .

To be honest with very little investment and GPU compared to the price of the MacBook , the 2700k would beat it easily. my 2012 desktop destroyed my 2015 and 2016 top spec MacBook pros. Though one cannot compare desktop to laptop.

I can't fault my desktop, it's amazing how it runs even though it's old. I'm just done with windows 7 and I don't want to use windows 10. I don't think the i7 2700k CPU would beat out the i7-6920HQ even if the both had the same SSD. Between 2011 sandy bridge - 2015 sky lake intel made enough improvements that the newer CPU has the advantage.

 

[capelesshero]

Disclaimer:

Apple did give you a choice. It's called the MacBook Pro or the Dell XPS 15.

 

[MH01]

I can't fault my desktop, it's amazing how it runs even though it's old. I'm just done with windows 7 and I don't want to use windows 10. I don't think the i7 2700k CPU would beat out the i7-6920HQ even if the both had the same SSD. Between 2011 sandy bridge - 2015 sky lake intel made enough improvements that the newer CPU has the advantage.

I'd assume you would OC the desktop. Though based on what you have at the moment, the MacBook Pro is a much nicer machine at the end it comes down to the OS you enjoy

 

[Miltz]

I'd assume you would OC the desktop. Though based on what you have at the moment, the MacBook Pro is a much nicer machine at the end it comes down to the OS you enjoy

I haven't needed to overclock a computer since the early 2000's when I took a Pentium 4 2.4GHz to 3.5GHz. Ahhh the good old days. My room sounded like a jet engine was going to take off.