Waiting for Broadwell MBP Thread

[2IS]

I understand your question to mean: Why do Apple change the iPhone design more often than the MacBook Pro design? That is a fair question.

One reason is that Apple produce more iPhones per day than MacBook Pro models per month. That allows Apple to amortize the redesign costs over a much larger number of units.

Another reason is that many iPhone buyers have their purchase subsidized by two year contracts. Every two years, many iPhones owners can get a new iPhone for a fraction of the real cost.

Also keep in mind that one of the factors driving design changes over the last decade or so has been ecological. Apple have removed toxic materials like bromides and have increased the use of recyclable components. That process has more or less been completed.

There have been three major redesigns of the iPhone. Two have been driven by new screen sizes. If Apple were to want to change the screen size of the MacBook Pro, then there would be a new design.

In addition to all that, phones are also someone of a fashion piece in addition to being a utility, so it needs to change to stay fresh and modern looking. That, and the fact that ultra mobile tech is advancing at a faster than mobile means that redesigns become more of a necessity for those items.

 

[mcarling]

And there is no question of changing the screen size from 15.6 Inch to anything else and so change in design is a little far fetched theory right ? Be it Broadwell or Skylake or whatever ?

A hypothetical change from a 15.4" to 15.6" screen would not require a major redesign. Only the cover would need to be redesigned, with a 2mm narrower bezel.

Several years ago, it was clear that the internal optical brick would be removed and so it was obvious that a major redesign would be coming. I don't think it was a big surprise that it was timed together with the Retina display, though simultaneity was not absolutely necessary, just convenient for Apple. It's difficult to see what in the current MacBook Pro needs to change which would require a redesign. There is nothing now analogous to the internal optical brick.

In addition to all that, phones are also [something] of a fashion piece in addition to being a utility, so it needs to change to stay fresh and modern looking.

Good point.

 

[augustya]

A hypothetical change from a 15.4" to 15.6" screen would not require a major redesign. Only the cover would need to be redesigned, with a 2mm narrower bezel.

lol ! Yeah ! I got the size wrong !!

 

[Cloudsurfer]

The design is fine the way it is, however I would totally dig the return of the Blackbook. Sans the fingerprints.

 

[xhacker]

I'm just curious, why the rMBP with only Iris Pro and the one with 750M have the same weight?

 

[catan]

Now is a great time to get a current rMBP, especially a used/refurbished 2013 one, since all Apple did was bump 0.2 GHz this year.

 

[Arethusa]

I don't get this. If the specs have basically been static for a year and a half, why is now a good time to get one?

The worst case scenario to me is that stays the same way for another 6 months—which, depressingly, doesn't seem that unlikely.

 

[thundersteele]

I don't get this. If the specs have basically been static for a year and a half, why is now a good time to get one?

Yeah I also don't understand this. It is certainly OK to buy if you need one, because no upgrades should happen in the next 6 months (for the 15'' at least). And you can get good discounts on new or refurbished machines. However in particular on the high-end models the graphics is quite dated now. It is essentially 2012 technology, and it is going to be 2015 in two weeks!


Has anyone thought about which AMD GPUs could be suitable for the 2015 high-end MBP (provided it gets a discrete GPU)? It is not clear whether Apple will switch the whole GPU lineup to AMD, but it is certainly a possibility.

 

[827538]

Can't you put more execution units in one chip with a die shrink?

But it was my belief that Intel don't change the architecture on a die shrink in order to focus on improving yields?

I'm not an expert on the semiconductor industry, merely an enthusiast in all things related to computing so I could well be wrong.

 

[mcarling]

I'm just curious, why the rMBP with only Iris Pro and the one with 750M have the same weight?

The 750M only adds a few grams, so not enough to change the spec.

But it was my belief that Intel don't change the architecture on a die shrink in order to focus on improving yields?

Adding execution units is not an architecture change. Any given architecture is available with a range of number of execution units. Also, improving yields is not the reason why Intel separated the introduction of new architectures from the die shrinks. I explained this in this thread already within the last few pages.

 

[Questtt3]

In my opinion, now is an excellent time to buy a rMBP.

Hey there mcarling, I very much appreciate you continuing to add your voice to this discussion as it adds a great deal--thanks.

You've been asked and mentioned in several posts that you think it is an "excellent time to buy a rMBP." Certainly the current iteration of Haswell is quite good, but if I am reading your other posts correctly, it also seems like Broadwell will have considerably improved integrated graphics and power consumption.

So, do you see the enhanced aspects of Broadwell (integrated GPU, power use, performance(?) . . . is there much actual performance improvement?) to be compelling enough to wait for if you did not have an earlier MBP yet and could possibly wait just a bit longer?

Or, if you would not wait and would get the Haswell now, why?


Lastly, a little off topic for this thread, but I have also been struggling a bit on the 13" vs 15" MBP (discrete GPU) decision. Ideally I would love to see a 13" quad core to be able to more easily carry it with me everyday (commuting, meeting with clients, work on the go at airports, planes, commutes, less space on desk with files and resource material spread everywhere, etc.) and still comfortably use for photos and especially video editing/rendering and ideally for flight simulator--(although flight sim. not critical) and use 60Hz monitors (can 13" use 60Hz monitors?--I have heard conflicting info on this). A maxed out 13" (3.0 GHz i7, 16GB RAM and 512 SSD) is within aprox. $250 of 15" discreet GPU.

Which size MBP would you recommend?
Thoughts on the benefits and limitations of the 13" vs 15" for these purposes?
Anything I should be considering in this decision not addressed? Would these purposes make Broadwell more desirable than Haswell?

Thanks very much!

 

[augustya]

Power= Sheer Performance=15 Inch
Portability & Some Power= Reasonable Performance but great portability and overall as a Great Value package=13 Inch

So if Broadwell is announced at CES-Jan-2015 how much time do you guys think would Apple require, A quarter ? So are we looking at what ? April-May-June 2015 time frame when Apple comes out with its first batch of Early 2015 Broadwell equipped rMBP 15 inch ?

 

[mcarling]

Hey there mcarling, I very much appreciate you continuing to add your voice to this discussion as it adds a great deal--thanks.

You're welcome.

You've been asked and mentioned in several posts that you think it is an "excellent time to buy a rMBP." Certainly the current iteration of Haswell is quite good, but if I am reading your other posts correctly, it also seems like Broadwell will have considerably improved integrated graphics and power consumption.

So, do you see the enhanced aspects of Broadwell (integrated GPU, power use, performance(?) . . . is there much actual performance improvement?) to be compelling enough to wait for if you did not have an earlier MBP yet and could possibly wait just a bit longer?

Or, if you would not wait and would get the Haswell now, why?


Lastly, a little off topic for this thread, but I have also been struggling a bit on the 13" vs 15" MBP (discrete GPU) decision. Ideally I would love to see a 13" quad core to be able to more easily carry it with me everyday (commuting, meeting with clients, work on the go at airports, planes, commutes, less space on desk with files and resource material spread everywhere, etc.) and still comfortably use for photos and especially video editing/rendering and ideally for flight simulator--(although flight sim. not critical) and use 60Hz monitors (can 13" use 60Hz monitors?--I have heard conflicting info on this). A maxed out 13" (3.0 GHz i7, 16GB RAM and 512 SSD) is within aprox. $250 of 15" discreet GPU.

Which size MBP would you recommend?
Thoughts on the benefits and limitations of the 13" vs 15" for these purposes?
Anything I should be considering in this decision not addressed? Would these purposes make Broadwell more desirable than Haswell?

Several months ago, a friend with a 2.3GHz Ivy Bridge 15" MacBook Pro and I blind tested each other to see if we could tell a performance difference between his 2.3GHz and my 2.7GHz 15" MacBook Pro. Both machines are Ivy Bridge, his with 8GB and mine with 16GB of DRAM, both with 6MB L3 cache. We logged both machines in the Guest accounts. One of us would leave the room while the other would pseudo-randomly set out the machines. The other would come back in and try to figure out which was faster without peeking at system information or running benchmarks. We tried things like using Safari, streaming 1080p iTunes movies, etc. Neither of us could reliably and repeatedly guess correctly, though both of us correctly guessed that my machine was faster most of the time.

So, I would not buy a 15" MacBook Pro over a 13" for the performance. I chose the 15" MacBook for the screen real estate and I think for most but not all users that is probably the only good reason to choose the 15" over the 13". The fact that you are asking at all about portability suggests to me that you would probably be better served by the 13" MacBook Pro.

I have not tested it but it is my understanding that the 13" Retina MacBook Pro, even Ivy Bridge, supports 60Hz with an external display. The question is at what resolution. I don't know whether or not a 13" Haswell MacBook Pro will support 3840x2160 at 60Hz but I doubt it. The 15" Haswell MacBook Pro does support 3840x2160 at 60Hz on an external display. The limit for the 13" Haswell might be 2560x1600. I guess the 13" Broadwell MacBook Pro will probably support 3840x2160 at 60Hz on an external display. If that is a critical requirement, you might need to either wait for Broadwell or get a 15" model now.

I think six to eight months of additional immediate use is an excellent reason to buy now rather than wait for Broadwell -- for most users.

So are we looking at what ? April-May-June 2015 time frame when Apple comes out with its first batch of Early 2015 Broadwell equipped rMBP 15 inch ?

I would put money on the 15" Broadwell MBP not being released before June.

 

[augustya]

I would put money on the 15" Broadwell MBP not being released before June.

Sounds like a very big time period six months ?? after Broadwell is announced at CES In Jan-2015 !! Why would Apple need six Months to come out with Broadwell rMBP after they have been announced in Jan-2015 !! What would Apple be sitting on for ? For All six months ?? Doesn't wuire make Business sense !!

And when do you think Skylake rMBP would come out then ?

 

[mcarling]

Sounds like a very big time period six months ?? after Broadwell is announced at CES In Jan-2015 !!

Please reread the last several pages of this thread. Broadwell has already been announced, so think about exactly what you expect to be announced at CES. Broadwell, like every generation of Intel processors, is released in stages, starting with the lowest TDP parts. The 4.5W parts have already been shipping for months. The CES announcement will be that the 15W (and maybe also 28W) parts are shipping. Those 15W parts are relevant to the MacBook Air, not the MacBook Pro.

Why would Apple need six Months to come out with Broadwell rMBP after they have been announced in Jan-2015 !! What would Apple be sitting on for ? For All six months ?? Doesn't wuire make Business sense !!

Apple need to wait until the 28W, 37W, and 48W Broadwell parts are shipping in large volumes. That should be summer 2015.

And when do you think Skylake rMBP would come out then ?

2016. The fact that we can expect to see 4.5W Skylake parts in Q4 2015 is irrelevant to the MacBook Pro.

 

[augustya]

Apple need to wait until the 28W, 37W, and 48W Broadwell parts are shipping in large volumes. That should be summer 2015.

So what you are saying is just like in 2014 when Apple released the current Haswell Machines in Phases like Early 2014, Mid 2014 and Late 2014 (I don't know if in the first place late 2014 is there ) but still, so in the same way Apple will release the Broadwell MBP in Phases incorporating 28W as a Early 2015 Broadwell, 37W and 48W Broadwell Machines as Mid and Late -2015 Broadwell Machines Respectively ?

 

[mcarling]

So what you are saying is just like in 2014 when Apple released the current Haswell Machines in Phases like Early 2014, Mid 2014 and Late 2014 (I don't know if in the first place late 2014 is there ) but still, so in the same way Apple will release the Broadwell MBP in Phases incorporating 28W as a Early 2015 Broadwell, 37W and 48W Broadwell Machines as Mid and Late -2015 Broadwell Machines Respectively ?

No, I'm saying Intel will release those CPUs in phases, as they always do. Tick releases are a bit more spread out than Tock releases because of the need to re-equip the fabs.

Apple usually release the 13" and 15" MacBook Pro models at the same time.

 

[Crobeccada]

No, I'm saying Intel will release those CPUs in phases, as they always do. Tick releases are a bit more spread out than Tock releases because of the need to re-equip the fabs.



Apple usually release the 13" and 15" MacBook Pro models at the same time.

So mcarling you are saying that Apple this year doesn't respect the phase early 2014 late 2014 like she has did from 2010 to now ..?

 

[Questtt3]

Thank you, as always your responses are very helpful! Couple of questions . . .

Several months ago, a friend with a 2.3GHz Ivy Bridge 15" MacBook Pro and I blind tested each other to see if we could tell a performance difference between his 2.3GHz and my 2.7GHz 15" MacBook Pro. Both machines are Ivy Bridge, his with 8GB and mine with 16GB of DRAM, both with 6MB L3 cache. We logged both machines in the Guest accounts. One of us would leave the room while the other would pseudo-randomly set out the machines. The other would come back in and try to figure out which was faster without peeking at system information or running benchmarks. We tried things like using Safari, streaming 1080p iTunes movies, etc. Neither of us could reliably and repeatedly guess correctly, though both of us correctly guessed that my machine was faster most of the time.

So you are saying you had identical machines except for processor speeds (2.3 vs 2.7GHz) and RAM (8GB vs 16GB) . . . and when running basic tasks there wasn't much of a performance difference (although just a slight edge to yours) . . . therefore, it doesn't make sense to get a maxed out 13" in terms of expense because the gains would be minimal? If so, what if one were running more intense programming like video editing/rendering . . . wouldn't the higher end spec'ed 13" 3.0GHz i7 and 16GB RAM I was considering help?

So, I would not buy a 15" MacBook Pro over a 13" for the performance. I chose the 15" MacBook for the screen real estate and I think for most but not all users that is probably the only good reason to choose the 15" over the 13". The fact that you are asking at all about portability suggests to me that you would probably be better served by the 13" MacBook Pro.

This is comforting to hear bkz in truth the 13" form factor I think would be more convenient for the reasons I mentioned before (more easily carry it with me everyday (commuting, meeting with clients, work on the go at airports, planes, commutes, less space on desk with files and resource material spread everywhere, etc.). Ideally I would then have a larger monitor to plug into when home for greater screen real estate when tasked with large projects. However, curious . . . when you say you wouldn't choose a 15" over a 13" for the performance, wouldn't the quad core with discrete graphics (15") factor into your decision at any level if you were going to be doing video editing/rendering or considering flight simulator use (although again, the flight simulator is not as imperative at the moment as the video editing/rendering and other concerns are).

On the other hand, I know the 15" MBP is fairly light, but given its larger footprint, it seems less "elegant" size-wise to carry or pull out on the run (commuting, waiting for plane, at client meeting) . . . true?

Thank you!

 

[mcarling]

So mcarling you are saying that Apple this year doesn't respect the phase early 2014 late 2014 like she has did from 2010 to now ..?

I don't understand your question.

Thank you, as always your responses are very helpful!

Thank you for the kind words.

So you are saying you had identical machines except for processor speeds (2.3 vs 2.7GHz) and RAM (8GB vs 16GB) . . . and when running basic tasks there wasn't much of a performance difference (although just a slight edge to yours) . . .

As subjectively perceived by the two of us, yes.

. . . therefore, it doesn't make sense to get a maxed out 13" in terms of expense because the gains would be minimal? If so, what if one were running more intense programming like video editing/rendering . . . wouldn't the higher end spec'ed 13" 3.0GHz i7 and 16GB RAM I was considering help?

I don't do video editing or rendering, so I don't know.

when you say you wouldn't choose a 15" over a 13" for the performance, wouldn't the quad core with discrete graphics (15") factor into your decision at any level if you were going to be doing video editing/rendering or considering flight simulator use (although again, the flight simulator is not as imperative at the moment as the video editing/rendering and other concerns are).

I don't do video editing, rendering, or flight simulation, so I don't know. I suggest running the apps you use on various machines at an Apple Store.

I know the 15" MBP is fairly light, but given its larger footprint, it seems less "elegant" size-wise to carry or pull out on the run (commuting, waiting for plane, at client meeting) . . . true?

Yes, that has been my experience owning two 13" MacBook Air, one 13" MacBook Pro, and two 15" MacBook Pro models. I'm now (again) on a 15" MacBook Pro because I love the screen real estate. For me, the perfect Mac would be a 15" MacBook Air. The only reason I have a 2.7GHz (16GB/512GB) rather than 2.3GHz model is because I got it for $2000 in virtually new condition. As I have mentioned before (apologies to those who have been following the thread), I will replace my Ivy Bridge MacBook Pro with a Broadwell MacBook Pro if and only if the latter will support an external 5K monitor (Displayport 1.3 over Thunderbolt 3) which would require that Apple use a discrete Thunderbolt 3 controller rather than wait for the integrated Thunderbolt 3 controller that will come with Skylake's chipset.

 

[Crobeccada]

I don't understand your question.

I was saying that Apple from the 2010 has had a "road map" for me upgrades... Example early 2011 then late 2011 then mid 2012 than early 2013 etc.. In 2014 the upgrade was on mid and if apple keeps following the "upgrade road map", in 2015 there'll be an early upgrade and then a late.. You don't think that apple still follow the "upgrade road map"?

 

[maratus]

Here's my ultimate 15" rMBP wishlist:

1. 3360 x 2100 screen. It's a HiDPI version of the previous hi-res 1680x1050 option. Probably won't happen because Apple thinks that "scaled" modes are okay (I disagree)

2. Sightly bigger heatsinks. Please Apple give us some cooling headroom!

3. Thunderbolt 3 without forcing a new connector. 40gbps heaven for eGPU! Should also support DP1.3 with two 4K screens or one 5K screen possible over single cable.

4. Maybe a 105W power supply to guarantee throttle-free operation even under full load?

5. Give me a third USB3.0 port

 

[SympathyRS]

I was saying that Apple from the 2010 has had a "road map" for me upgrades... Example early 2011 then late 2011 then mid 2012 than early 2013 etc.. In 2014 the upgrade was on mid and if apple keeps following the "upgrade road map", in 2015 there'll be an early upgrade and then a late.. You don't think that apple still follow the "upgrade road map"?

That is actually a great point, looking at the release dates of previous release for the retina mbp, there seems to be some kind of pattern. Though, it still lies on "if" Intel actually releases the suitable Broadwell CPUs at CES 2015, if they don't, there isn't much for apple to "upgrade" except for the GPU that is.

 

[mcarling]

I was saying that Apple from the 2010 has had a "road map" for me upgrades... Example early 2011 then late 2011 then mid 2012 than early 2013 etc.. In 2014 the upgrade was on mid and if apple keeps following the "upgrade road map", in 2015 there'll be an early upgrade and then a late.. You don't think that apple still follow the "upgrade road map"?

I don't think Apple ever had such a "road map". Apple released updated Macs when Intel provided updated CPUs. Obviously, Intel keep Apple informed about their planned CPU releases. Trying to fit a pattern to the data after the fact is not a useful exercise.

 

[tacorrito]

Hey all, I've been using a 2.7GHz 16GB Mid 2012 15" rMBP for the last few years, and the computer's starting to show signs of a slow death. Sometimes, the screen goes black, and it takes about five minutes to get it out of its blackout phase. The rainbow beach ball seems to be more prevalent as well.

I was always aiming to get a new laptop at the end of the year, just in time for starting an architecture course at uni. I was hoping that the Broadwell chips, if released then, would give a great performance boost to programs such as AutoCAD and Photoshop.

Considering the potential upgrades that Broadwell will bring, do you think I should stick with the 2012 laptop until the next refresh, or get the current iteration?