Waiting for Skylake MBP thread

[koyoot]

I did not brought argument with HD530 to show increases of performance thanks to EDRAM, but with architecture.

Architecture alone is much more powerful without even EDRAM. Increase from HD540 to HD580 will be linear, because of simple reasons: 50% more cores, at higher clock, all fed by EDRAM. It is simple as that. 50% increase is MINIMUM what we can expect.

 

[R3k]

Some people might say they don't notice the dGPU's advantage in day to day basic tasks like web surfing and the like, but boot up the occasional World of Warcraft or DOTA2 and it'll definitely be obvious!

The dGPU isn't used at all for those day to day tasks. Which is why an upgraded Skylake iGPU with more juice will benefit most users so much more.

The dGPU is instead used to drive a 2nd monitor, Games, etc.

You probably know this, but thought id put it down for anyone who isnt aware.

 

[snc]

I did not brought argument with HD530 to show increases of performance thanks to EDRAM, but with architecture.

Architecture alone is much more powerful without even EDRAM. Increase from HD540 to HD580 will be linear, because of simple reasons: 50% more cores, at higher clock, all fed by EDRAM. It is simple as that. 50% increase is MINIMUM what we can expect.

hehe I can show you multiple history examples that increasing number of executions units don't always come with linear improve in fps

 

[killawat]

The transition from Haswell CPUs with GT3e to Xeon CPUs with GT4e has been proposed by Intel already. The Xeon is really just a Skylake-H with a GT4e and a few other instructions enabled.

Why would Apple use the Xeon chips? They've always offered low mid and high CPU choices, and the tray price of the fastest Xeon is insane.

 

[koyoot]

hehe I can show you multiple history examples that increasing number of executions units don't always come with linear improve in fps

Of course. Even Fury X scales only 87% more performance compared to R9 380X, while doubling the core count and almost tripling the bandwidth.

 

[andrewtm]

So I've been following along for awhile and now I'm a bit confused. For the 15" rMBP, will the Polaris be an upgradeable option with the Iris Pro coming standard? Or will Polaris be standard when the time comes?

 

[j1104638]

Why would Apple use the Xeon chips? They've always offered low mid and high CPU choices, and the tray price of the fastest Xeon is insane.

1. Because they can.
2. This will allow new marketing vectors to be used.
3. Indeed, they're more expensive. There are clients that will pay whatever Apple asks. Why not let them?
[doublepost=1454098099][/doublepost]

So I've been following along for awhile and now I'm a bit confused. For the 15" rMBP, will the Polaris be an upgradeable option with the Iris Pro coming standard? Or will Polaris be standard when the time comes?

If there will be no major changes (i. e. if extrapolating previous data is ok) then most probably base 15" model will have Iris Pro and the dGPU model will have Polaris or Pascal.
But too many factors make extrapolating error-prone - release dates of Polaris/Pascal and rMBPs themselves, Apple's vision of whole rMBP line (they might cannibalize Air line, lower rMBP line and create new really Pro line with Xeons for example), Apple's vision why do they provide dGPU in rMBP line at all (maybe their vision is that iGPU performance was not enough and now it is).

 

[snc]

Of course. Even Fury X scales only 87% more performance compared to R9 380X, while doubling the core count and almost tripling the bandwidth.

So can you explain why do you think 580 will be minimum 1.5x faster than 540?

 

[koyoot]

Because this architecture scales linearly . It not bottlenecked by anything .
Adding 50% more cores will add 50% performance. It is simple as it can be .

 

[snc]

Because this architecture scales linearly . It not bottlenecked by anything .
Adding 50% more cores will add 50% performance. It is simple as it can be .

Yeah, will see that Still, 1.5x 940m is not impressive for a 2000$ laptop.

 

[AYNOM]

After much thought, I don't think the 15" rMBPs will see an update until June.

In March, I expect the rMB to receive a silent update to Skylake and maybe also the 13" rMBP, though I find this less plausible. I also expect a large amount of whining about the injustice of Apple's decision.

Then in June I expect a full realignment in Apple's laptop line:
--MBAs discontinued
--13" rMBPs discontinued
--15" rMBPs discontinued
--rMB line with 12" and 14" models (iGPUs only)
--rMBP line with 14" and 16" models. New form factor. TB3, USB3. (OLED screens? I'm not even sure if that is possible.) Introduced as a workstation for professionals. ("We did not forget those who got us here" mantra.) Xeon processors. GT4e on 14". dGPU for 16". The wait until June will become clear when Apple introduces Polaris (or Pascal) dGPUs at 14nm (or 16nm). The transition from Haswell CPUs with GT3e to Xeon CPUs with GT4e has been proposed by Intel already. The Xeon is really just a Skylake-H with a GT4e and a few other instructions enabled.

Apple may simply converge the two lines but I think they will continue to segment their machines between consumer and prosumer/professional lines.

My only concern is whether the glitch in the Skylake CPUs which causes them to crash under heavy workloads will affect these new machines.

We appreciate your fan fiction.

 

[koyoot]

Yeah, will see that Still, 1.5x 940m is not impressive for a 2000$ laptop.

Well, GTX950M is 45% faster than GT940M. I just checked the benchmarks on notebookcheck. It is 40-50% faster depending on game and resolution.

P.S. Hd580 will not be 50% faster than GT940M. It will be 50% faster than HD550 which is 15% faster than GT940M.

 

[snc]

Well, GTX950M is 45% faster than GT940M. I just checked the benchmarks on notebookcheck. It is 40-50% faster depending on game and resolution.

P.S. Hd580 will not be 50% faster than GT940M. It will be 50% faster than HD550 which is 15% faster than GT940M.

I see only one game benchmark of iris pro 540 on the net (Bioshock, simillar level to 940m) and can't find any tested game on 550m so you have some good source. If 580 will be faster 1.5 than 550 and is faster 1.15 than 940m so it will be faster about 1.73 of 940m and about 1.2x 950m. Bright future, can't wait for real benchmarks in full hd and medium details or even high

ps. now I checked that 950m is still on prehistoric ddr3 and 960m is the same card but with ddr5 ant this is the old 860m slightly overclocked hehe thats little depressing

 

[destroyboredom]

After much thought, I don't think the 15" rMBPs will see an update until June.

In March, I expect the rMB to receive a silent update to Skylake and maybe also the 13" rMBP, though I find this less plausible. I also expect a large amount of whining about the injustice of Apple's decision.

Then in June I expect a full realignment in Apple's laptop line:
--MBAs discontinued
--13" rMBPs discontinued
--15" rMBPs discontinued
--rMB line with 12" and 14" models (iGPUs only)
--rMBP line with 14" and 16" models. New form factor. TB3, USB3. (OLED screens? I'm not even sure if that is possible.) Introduced as a workstation for professionals. ("We did not forget those who got us here" mantra.) Xeon processors. GT4e on 14". dGPU for 16". The wait until June will become clear when Apple introduces Polaris (or Pascal) dGPUs at 14nm (or 16nm). The transition from Haswell CPUs with GT3e to Xeon CPUs with GT4e has been proposed by Intel already. The Xeon is really just a Skylake-H with a GT4e and a few other instructions enabled.

Apple may simply converge the two lines but I think they will continue to segment their machines between consumer and prosumer/professional lines.

My only concern is whether the glitch in the Skylake CPUs which causes them to crash under heavy workloads will affect these new machines.

I feel pretty confident we will get an updated rMB and an updated rMBP line in March with the new Pros taking design cues from the air. I don't think Apple will delay the release and wait for Polaris/Pascal dGPU. I would say there is a better chance that update would likely come in the fall with a spec bumped machine alongside OS 10.12

I agree the Air line eventually goes away. The timing will depend on how soon the rMB can get to that coveted $999 price point.

 

[Blue Sun]

After much thought, I don't think the 15" rMBPs will see an update until June.

In March, I expect the rMB to receive a silent update to Skylake and maybe also the 13" rMBP, though I find this less plausible. I also expect a large amount of whining about the injustice of Apple's decision.

Then in June I expect a full realignment in Apple's laptop line:
--MBAs discontinued
--13" rMBPs discontinued
--15" rMBPs discontinued
--rMB line with 12" and 14" models (iGPUs only)
--rMBP line with 14" and 16" models. New form factor. TB3, USB3. (OLED screens? I'm not even sure if that is possible.) Introduced as a workstation for professionals. ("We did not forget those who got us here" mantra.) Xeon processors. GT4e on 14". dGPU for 16". The wait until June will become clear when Apple introduces Polaris (or Pascal) dGPUs at 14nm (or 16nm). The transition from Haswell CPUs with GT3e to Xeon CPUs with GT4e has been proposed by Intel already. The Xeon is really just a Skylake-H with a GT4e and a few other instructions enabled.

Apple may simply converge the two lines but I think they will continue to segment their machines between consumer and prosumer/professional lines.

My only concern is whether the glitch in the Skylake CPUs which causes them to crash under heavy workloads will affect these new machines.

If a change in display technology and/or sizes were on the cards, why haven't we heard anything regarding manufacturers ramping up production of said displays? I can appreciate how people want to "tidy up" Apple's notebook lineup and make it more consistent, but there is no evidence to state that this is the case. Just wishful thinking.

 

[nicovh]

These last few pages convinced me that the iGPU is alot more attractive then its ever been.
A dGPU would not really be needed for a lot of people, like me, if said performance claims are true.

It would be really cool to have an eGPU but I just can't really see Apple selling that. But who knows, its Apple

 

[mjs402]

These last few pages convinced me that the iGPU is alot more attractive then its ever been.
A dGPU would not really be needed for a lot of people, like me, if said performance claims are true.

It would be really cool to have an eGPU but I just can't really see Apple selling that. But who knows, its Apple

Not only would a dGPU be redundant for a lot of people but if they include Thunderbolt 3 (and I would guess they would seeing as they put USB-C on the 12-inch MacBook) then an external GPU is plausible as well. I would assume that for the majority of individuals, a high-performance integrated graphics processor would be great when mobile but when they return to their office/home, using the Thunderbolt 3 port, they plug in an external GPU to diminish and exceed any performance gap a dGPU may have provided.

And while it may cost people more money to buy the eGPU, it would be cheaper then having two computers and would make Apple extra money if they made their own enclosure/solution.

Just saying.

 

[joecool99]

What if they put a quad-core option with Iris Pro in the 13", and a quad-core with dGPU in the 15". Then the 13" will be a monster. Thin as a leaf, performance like a tiger, raaaw!

doubt tigers are any good at computing binary code...
you can always buy yourself...

 

[snagnyou]

Apple will skip Skylake!

 

[volcomvenom]

Apple will skip Skylake!

How dare you say that!

 

[WRONG]

Apple will skip Skylake!

Of course.

I really hope that the news from DigiTimes are inaccurate, because having to wait for september for the 15" MBP is completely crazy.
Apple should at least present the 13" in March and 15" in June, but no way introducing it in June and shipping months later.

Apple, that's not what means "Think Different"...

 

[NiVanc]

It would be totally awesome if Apple integrated the dGPU in their new Thunderbolt Display. That way we could have an external 5k display panel without the need for displayport 1.3 which The skylake cpu lacks.

However I don't see this happening

 

[snc]

These last few pages convinced me that the iGPU is alot more attractive then its ever been.
A dGPU would not really be needed for a lot of people, like me, if said performance claims are true.

It would be really cool to have an eGPU but I just can't really see Apple selling that. But who knows, its Apple

After little researched I'm convinced that in 2000$ laptop there should be at least 960m or similar card but nobody buy macbook to play a game so still don't now why they choose overpriced cpu with iris pro eDram

 

[WRONG]

After little researched I'm convinced that in 2000$ laptop there should be at least 960m or similar card but nobody buy macbook to play a game so still don't now why they choose overpriced cpu with iris pro eDram

Probably you didn't research well, though.
There can't be a GPU more powerful than a GTX950M because of its power consumption and consequently thermal dissipation.

There are only few suitable options:
- a good enough iGPU which outperform the current MBP dGPU
- customized GPU chips with low TDP
- waiting for Pascal/Polaris with low TDP and great performance
- Apple stop making its notebooks slimmer ...and getting instead thicker.

So, pick up your favourite reason.

 

[t0mat0]

What's the general consensus- who here thinks Polaris will come the Rev after this refresh ie 2017?
Do some think it'll come this year for the 13/15" MBP?