Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Waiting for Skylake MBP thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dydegu said:
Oooh, I think the last time I checked the rMBPs had "caution, mid-cycle."

We still have 83 days until this becomes the longest rMBP wait in history. It's unlikely that it will be, so less than 83 days doesn't sound that bad. That's sound logic, right? Right...?
Click to expand...
Actually, the guide is half wrong. The 13" rMBP came out in March, followed by the 15" 71 days later. That means it's already been 269 days since the release of the (initial) 2015 rMBP.

By next month, this will have been the longest period in between releases.
 
leedy said:
Actually, the guide is half wrong. The 13" rMBP came out in March, followed by the 15" 71 days later. That means it's already been 269 days since the release of the (initial) 2015 rMBP.

By next month, this will have been the longest period in between releases.
Click to expand...
The guide separates 13 and 15, if you add together it's definitely long enough.
 
Here's what the Motley Fool article from Nov 18 2015 says:
http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...-corp-really-prefer-microsoft-corp-to-ap.aspx
All of the 15-inch PCs that are being upgraded to Skylake now are using quad-core Skylake processors with Intel's integrated GT2 graphics -- the lowest graphics configuration Intel offers. For its 15-inch MacBook Pro, Apple tends to use quad-core processors with Intel's highest-end graphics configuration.

The chips with the highest-end graphics configuration -- and in the case of Skylake, this will be GT4 configuration -- are much larger and thus are much more difficult to manufacture.

Intel PC chief Kirk Skaugen said Skylake processors with Iris Pro graphics (the GT4 configuration) will go into production this year, so I expect Intel to try to build up a bunch of these chips for Apple to support the launch of an updated 15-inch MacBook Pro at some point in the first half of 2016.

The availability of Skylake-H parts with Iris Pro 580 is an external dependency on the release of the 15" model, since all prior 15" releases since Arrandale in 2010 have used an H chip with the highest end graphics available from Intel too.

It seems Intel will announce SKUs for Skylake-H with GT4e this month. That should signal the MBP is around the corner. The Skylake-U with GT3e for the 13" MBP is not out either; the i7-6650U in Surface Book is a 15W part, while 13" MBPs use more powerful 28W chips.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doitdada
HighRes15 said:
The Skylake-U with GT3e for the 13" MBP is not out either; the i7-6650U in Surface Book is a 15W part, while 13" MBPs use more powerful 28W chips.
Click to expand...

Well, 2 Skylake 28W chips with GT3e have actually been launched already: the i5-6287U and i5-6267U.

The i7 version (i7-6567U), on the other hand, has been announced but not yet launched.

If history holds true, Apple will offer the i5-6267U in the base model, the i5-6287U in the step up model, and then offer the i7-6567U as a build to order option.

Sources:
http://ark.intel.com/products/family/88393/6th-Generation-Intel-Core-i5-Processors#@Mobile
http://ark.intel.com/products/family/88392/6th-Generation-Intel-Core-i7-Processors#@Mobile
 
  • Like
Reactions: AirdanMR
Thanks for that bit of information. I don't think there's a prior record of Apple launching an MBP product before it is capable of fulfilling the standard and high end BTO configurations, all of which are announced at once. I agree with you on the likely choices of SKUs for the base, intermediate and top line BTO 13" models.

So far I've seen nothing about GT4e chips being released, unfortunately. Perhaps they'll do what they did last year and release 13" models first, and 15" ones subsequently, since the latter is dependent on GT4e chips that haven't even been announced as SKUs yet, or have they ? All I've seen so far are Skylake-HQ SKUs with HD 530 graphics.
 
cmChimera said:
Intel. Pls.
Click to expand...
IntelMercy.jpg
 
HighRes15 said:
Thanks for that bit of information. I don't think there's a prior record of Apple launching an MBP product before it is capable of fulfilling the standard and high end BTO configurations, all of which are announced at once. I agree with you on the likely choices of SKUs for the base, intermediate and top line BTO 13" models.

So far I've seen nothing about GT4e chips being released, unfortunately. Perhaps they'll do what they did last year and release 13" models first, and 15" ones subsequently, since the latter is dependent on GT4e chips that haven't even been announced as SKUs yet, or have they ? All I've seen so far are Skylake-HQ SKUs with HD 530 graphics.
Click to expand...

January-February event to announce the rMBP 13 inch (hopefully 14) plus others devices: rMB skylake, Mac Mini, Mac Pro, iphone 6c.

June for rMBP 15, iMac, ipads, iPhone 7 and iOS 10 / OSX "fuji"

...

What do you think?
 
AirdanMR said:
January-February event to announce the rMBP 13 inch (hopefully 14) plus others devices: rMB skylake, Mac Mini, Mac Pro, iphone 6c.

June for rMBP 15, iMac, ipads, iPhone 7 and iOS 10 / OSX "fuji"

...

What do you think?
Click to expand...

If they are going to have a Mac oriented event I think they will also include some details about the 15" rMBP. Probably a sort of release window like the iPad Pro saying: Available in 'X month'
 
AirdanMR said:
January-February event to announce the rMBP 13 inch (hopefully 14) plus others devices: rMB skylake, Mac Mini, Mac Pro, iphone 6c.

June for rMBP 15, iMac, ipads, iPhone 7 and iOS 10 / OSX "fuji"

...

What do you think?
Click to expand...
Please be there before June.
And "Fuji"? Why not "Grand Canyon"
lol
 
Last edited:
Long time reader, first time poster in this thread.

I have been thinking about whether or not they will include a dGPU in the highest configuration or not. Personally, I really hope they do, but this time I really suspect that they might not.

My thinking is that with the rumoured performance of GT4e being 50% faster than Broadwell's GT3e [source], the new MBP's could have graphical performance only slightly less than a current 950M.

Broadwell GT3e Sky Diver score ≈ 6440 [source]
50% improvement would be = 9660
GTX 950M ≈ 11000 [source - a reasonable average]

So GT4e could only be around 10% slower than a mid-end discrete GPU.

It would also seem, compared to the M370X (Score of 7824), about 20% faster.

It's all very approximate of course, and hinges on the rumours of 50% performance increase, but if they did only release the GT4e without a dGPU, I would probably still consider buying one. The test for me has always been 'would the iGPU be slower than the dGPU that Apple would likely put in the rMBP'. Since for whatever reason Apple seem averse to Nvidia at the moment, and the fact that both AMD/Nvidia's next generation is unlikely to be suddenly released in Q1 next year (Pascal round the corner, but I don't think it's that imminent), it does make me suspicious as to what dGPU they could actually put in the machine? If the dGPU is almost the same speed, what would the point actually be? What dGPU options are actually on the table that have a TDP that could fit into the chassis of the rMBP, whilst out-performing GT4e?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: domsodidavid and Pahanda
hfletcher said:
Long time reader, first time poster in this thread.

I have been thinking about whether or not they will include a dGPU in the highest configuration or not. Personally, I really hope they do, but this time I really suspect that they might not.

My thinking is that with the rumoured performance of GT4e being 50% faster than Broadwell's GT3e [source], the new MBP's could have graphical performance only slightly less than a current 950M.

Broadwell GT3e Sky Diver score ≈ 6440 [source]
50% improvement would be = 9660
GTX 950M ≈ 11000 [source - a reasonable average]

So GT4e could only be around 10% slower than a mid-end discrete GPU.

It would also seem, compared to the M370X (Score of 7824), about 20% faster.

It's all very approximate of course, and hinges on the rumours of 50% performance increase, but if they did only release the GT4e without a dGPU, I would probably still consider buying one. The test for me has always been 'would the iGPU be slower than the dGPU that Apple would likely put in the rMBP'. Since for whatever reason Apple seem averse to Nvidia at the moment, and the fact that both AMD/Nvidia's next generation is unlikely to be suddenly released in Q1 next year (Pascal round the corner, but I don't think it's that imminent), it does make me suspicious as to what dGPU they could actually put in the machine? If the dGPU is almost the same speed, what would the point actually be? What dGPU options are actually on the table that have a TDP that could fit into the chassis of the rMBP, whilst out-performing GT4e?
Click to expand...
very good point and links, so yes if its 50% improvement we will not see any dGPU in the next one
Nvidia and Amd are so low at improvements lately, and intel since Hd 4000 is improving very quickly
 
hfletcher said:
Long time reader, first time poster in this thread.

I have been thinking about whether or not they will include a dGPU in the highest configuration or not. Personally, I really hope they do, but this time I really suspect that they might not.

My thinking is that with the rumoured performance of GT4e being 50% faster than Broadwell's GT3e [source], the new MBP's could have graphical performance only slightly less than a current 950M.

Broadwell GT3e Sky Diver score ≈ 6440 [source]
50% improvement would be = 9660
GTX 950M ≈ 11000 [source - a reasonable average]

So GT4e could only be around 10% slower than a mid-end discrete GPU.

It would also seem, compared to the M370X (Score of 7824), about 20% faster.

It's all very approximate of course, and hinges on the rumours of 50% performance increase, but if they did only release the GT4e without a dGPU, I would probably still consider buying one. The test for me has always been 'would the iGPU be slower than the dGPU that Apple would likely put in the rMBP'. Since for whatever reason Apple seem averse to Nvidia at the moment, and the fact that both AMD/Nvidia's next generation is unlikely to be suddenly released in Q1 next year (Pascal round the corner, but I don't think it's that imminent), it does make me suspicious as to what dGPU they could actually put in the machine? If the dGPU is almost the same speed, what would the point actually be? What dGPU options are actually on the table that have a TDP that could fit into the chassis of the rMBP, whilst out-performing GT4e?
Click to expand...

Macs were never dGPU-friendly, since Macs were not gaming-friendly, so the Graphics performance as long as good enough, that will stop it there. A costly and hot dGPU were never the first choice.

My points it's unless they want to moving to gaming, we probably wouldn't see dGPUs.
 
the 27" imacs still capable of gaming since 680mx till now.
and the dGPU is growing very strong in the top tier of Nvidia like 980M or 990M !

but yes in macbooks no need for dgpu if the iGPU is so close to mid range dgpu
 
  • Like
Reactions: AirdanMR
SesameWasher said:
Macs were never dGPU-friendly, since Macs were not gaming-friendly, so the Graphics performance as long as good enough, that will stop it there. A costly and hot dGPU were never the first choice.

My points it's unless they want to moving to gaming, we probably wouldn't see dGPUs.
Click to expand...

I think a dGPU might still be available in the new update for professionals running 3d moddeling programs and other high demanding graphic software. Although dGPU's might not be as powerful as the cpu's graphics processor, it could still take over the workload from the cpu so it could have more processing power.

Maybe my comment is too much of a tinfoil hat statement, but oh well
 
Last edited:
nicovh said:
I think a dGPU might still be available in the new update for professionals running 3d moddeling programs and other high demanding graphic software. Although dGPU's might not be as powerful as the cpu's graphics processor, it could still take over the workload from the cpu so it could have more processing power.

Maybe my comment is too much of a tinfoil hat statement, but oh well
Click to expand...
I don't think that's the reason people want a dGPU to add thickness and cooling pressures on their laptops...
Maybe they will include a dGPU if it have a huge advantage over the Iris Pro yet won't cause heating and thickness goes up.
Speaking about graphics intensive, I think Iris Pro were good enough to handling most of the things we need, maybe except gaming (I think dGPU it's all about gaming btw), but OS X were not really gaming-friendly...
 
SesameWasher said:
I don't think that's the reason people want a dGPU to add thickness and cooling pressures on their laptops...
Maybe they will include a dGPU if it have a huge advantage over the Iris Pro yet won't cause heating and thickness goes up.
Speaking about graphics intensive, I think Iris Pro were good enough to handling most of the things we need, maybe except gaming (I think dGPU it's all about gaming btw), but OS X were not really gaming-friendly...
Click to expand...

If Skylake really is as good as rumored then I think you're right. A less hot and thinner&lighter version of a rMBP would be sweet. The rMBP to me is already really thin but it could lose some weight.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back