Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Waiting for Skylake MBP thread
- Thread starter adildacoolset
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Sounds like a good deal, if you really need it. It doesn't sound like such a crazy upgrade from your 2011 machine, though. You sure it's justified?
I would imagine so since most development seems to be towards optimising tasks so they can be done more efficiently rather than overpowering? Unless I guess you go into data science and more RAM intensive tasks.. I guess...?
Yeah my MBP runs fine but when I tried to change battery for 3rd time
, I kinda scratched the logic board and now the sound is not working and suddenly takes like 13 hours to fully charge. So I'm worried that it'll fail me soon and looking for alternatives
How big was the refresh? Redesign no.
Obviously I'm not optimistic after these last two conferences.
Most likely, but they could always release them with a special build of El Cap.
So, like lots of others I've been waiting patiently to finally update my 15" MBP with Core 2 Duo processor. Whilst trying to work out what the delay is I can't help thinking it's the CPU's.
According to Intel the i7-6770HQ, 6870HQ and 6970HQ (the i7's with the iris Pro 580 graphics) were launched in Q1 2016, but it's not clear what launched actually means. You can't seem to buy the chip on it's own and it seems none of the top tier laptop manufacturers are shipping these chips (I checked HP, Lenovo, Dell and Toshiba).
Also I couldn't find any of the previous generation Broadwell HQ chips in any of the major manufacturers.
Given these are Intel's flagship mobile chip isn't it a little strange that no-one is using it ?
I see Intel are shipping it in their Skull Canyon PC, but as no-one else is shipping it, is it because :
a) It's difficult to produce in the volume the major manufacturers need ?
b) It's too expensive ?
c) It doesn't perform as well in the real world as the major vendors demand ?
Perhaps Kaby Lake HQ processors will be fine (third time lucky!)......
According to Intel the i7-6770HQ, 6870HQ and 6970HQ (the i7's with the iris Pro 580 graphics) were launched in Q1 2016, but it's not clear what launched actually means. You can't seem to buy the chip on it's own and it seems none of the top tier laptop manufacturers are shipping these chips (I checked HP, Lenovo, Dell and Toshiba).
Also I couldn't find any of the previous generation Broadwell HQ chips in any of the major manufacturers.
Given these are Intel's flagship mobile chip isn't it a little strange that no-one is using it ?
I see Intel are shipping it in their Skull Canyon PC, but as no-one else is shipping it, is it because :
a) It's difficult to produce in the volume the major manufacturers need ?
b) It's too expensive ?
c) It doesn't perform as well in the real world as the major vendors demand ?
Perhaps Kaby Lake HQ processors will be fine (third time lucky!)......
They were delayed until May, not released in Q1. You'd know that if you were here on page 400-something, but this thread is too big to expect people to read through. Welcome to the party!
I was going by Intel's own site, either way they should be available in laptops by now. Also, what about the Broadwell version ? they were launched in Q2 2015, surely they should be available in laptops by now, or was there another reason why the major manufacturers didn't use them ?
This means that even if current MBP is using a 3 year old CPU, Apple is still using the best available CPU in the market?
Not really. One of the "mysteries" of the current MBP 15" is why Apple skipped Broadwell, considering that proper CPUs were released just a month after its update.
Anyway, I believe that Apple delay with MBP is not about CPUs, instead Polaris.
Proofs are also signs of Polaris code found in Sierra MacOS.
Speaking about this, do you think that Apple will still use double GPU with the 15" MBP?
I mean, usually they let se the iGPU for lighter stuff, and the dGPU for heavier.
Maybe this time they could get rid of iGPU and just use the dGPU for everything?
Nobody really has a good answer for why most manufacturers didn't go with the high-end Broadwells, but I have a personal theory: branding.
Look, the best Broadwell CPUs were released in June 2015 and Apple really had their pants on fire to release an MBP before that, so they skipped it. Blame Intel for increasingly missing their launch schedule. Whatever, let's imagine you're a laptop manufacturer. You've got great CPUs coming out now, but while they're high performance they're crazy expensive. And they're Intel Generation 5. Sure, the Generation 6 processors coming out in a few months are underpowered compared to the Gen 5s, but are people really going to notice? Of course not. People don't need powerful processors (not most people, anyway). But when someone hears "Intel Gen 6," they think it's better because 6 is bigger than 5!
Manufacturers didn't use the high performance Broadwells because they were expensive and because people are dumb enough to want a worse performing Gen 6 than a high performing Gen 5.
I'd say people on THIS forum of all places would know better, unlike most mainstream users, but the daily "maybe they'll use Kaby Lake" posts suggest otherwise.
Not tired of reading? Here, edumacate yourselfs: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015...ore-broadwell-cpus-and-the-iris-pro-6200-gpu/
Look, the best Broadwell CPUs were released in June 2015 and Apple really had their pants on fire to release an MBP before that, so they skipped it. Blame Intel for increasingly missing their launch schedule. Whatever, let's imagine you're a laptop manufacturer. You've got great CPUs coming out now, but while they're high performance they're crazy expensive. And they're Intel Generation 5. Sure, the Generation 6 processors coming out in a few months are underpowered compared to the Gen 5s, but are people really going to notice? Of course not. People don't need powerful processors (not most people, anyway). But when someone hears "Intel Gen 6," they think it's better because 6 is bigger than 5!
Manufacturers didn't use the high performance Broadwells because they were expensive and because people are dumb enough to want a worse performing Gen 6 than a high performing Gen 5.
I'd say people on THIS forum of all places would know better, unlike most mainstream users, but the daily "maybe they'll use Kaby Lake" posts suggest otherwise.
Not tired of reading? Here, edumacate yourselfs: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015...ore-broadwell-cpus-and-the-iris-pro-6200-gpu/
Please try www.cpuboss.com
And compare the Intel i7 4980HQ with Intel i7 6700HQ, the cpu in the current MBP 2015 is outperforming every single HQ(Notebook) CPU. I would not wait for the new MBP because of higher perfomance of the CPU. I am waiting for DDR4 and effiency -> better battery life -> lower heat. However, a redesign would be also a nice thing Finally, I also hope for a OLED display with IPS quality to have a nice black and to safe some battery percentage Not to derail the discussion, but here is a crazy thought.
What if, after all this time, after all this hand-wringing, pissing, and moaning, the new MBP . . . sucks? What if the redesign is complete crap and the consensus is, "Gee, the specs are nice, but the new design blows"? Or if it's too expensive for your preferred configuration? Bottom line: what if it *wasn't* worth thew wait?
By the end of the year, I need to buy a new MBP (for work-related purposes), and so it's either going to be the upcoming release or a 2015 version. I'm crossing my fingers, like you all, that the 2016 edition will be awesome.
What if, after all this time, after all this hand-wringing, pissing, and moaning, the new MBP . . . sucks? What if the redesign is complete crap and the consensus is, "Gee, the specs are nice, but the new design blows"? Or if it's too expensive for your preferred configuration? Bottom line: what if it *wasn't* worth thew wait?
By the end of the year, I need to buy a new MBP (for work-related purposes), and so it's either going to be the upcoming release or a 2015 version. I'm crossing my fingers, like you all, that the 2016 edition will be awesome.
Well, that's always a chance. It's never been much of an issue for MBPs, except for specific things like graphic card series being faulty and screens losing their... thingies... but many other mac models have had the first model of a new style being REALLY ******.
In fact, I consider the new Macbook to be really ******, even after rev 2 coming this year.
Notice that the Skylake Iris Pro chips were "announced" in January but didn't start shipping until last month, so who knows when Apple would have actually received those Broadwell chips for the 15".
Going by the leaked pictures, it already blows in my opinion. I don't want that stupid touchbar at all, and having all USB-C is going to be a PITA for at least 3-5 years. Either way I'll probably end up with a 2015; I'm just waiting to replenish my cash stash at this point. Plenty of excellent deals going around. If it gets close to September I might wait again and see what Apple has in store for the new rMBP.
I have the late 2008 MB--first aluminum version--and it has been amazing. However, I do see your point regarding issues with new generations of products. I'm willing to take that chance.
One thing about Apple is that their new stuff works as advertised out of the box. Never Surface Book or Pro 4 type issues. The problem with first gen/major redesign Apple products is almost always future proof-ness/minor issues. iPad 1/Air 1/iPhone 6's RAM, the iPad 3's CPU/GPU, or the Retina display issues of 2012 rMBPs being good examples.
It's going to "suck" or not be as great as it could have been. There will always be people that love everything Apple but for me, it's taken too long to come out so the expectations are too great now. That's the problem with taking too long to come to market, it doesn't matter what you produce, you took too long and it's not good enough.
The thing is back in the day the Retina screen was ahead of it's time. I don't recall seeing any other laptop with a screen that high-res.
Nowadays, we have 4K screens in many laptops. Not saying they are good screens, or well calibrated, but they exist. I hope Apple goes with a same res screen, but on a smaller chassic, and using the new tecnologies that came in the iMac (P3 screen?) and iPad pro (true tone). I believe they wont have as many problems as they did back in 2012 on the original Retina launch.
The GPU problems is another story though... Let's hope AMD does it right
Nowadays, we have 4K screens in many laptops. Not saying they are good screens, or well calibrated, but they exist. I hope Apple goes with a same res screen, but on a smaller chassic, and using the new tecnologies that came in the iMac (P3 screen?) and iPad pro (true tone). I believe they wont have as many problems as they did back in 2012 on the original Retina launch.
The GPU problems is another story though... Let's hope AMD does it right
I don't disagree with your reasoning, because it's clear that Apple is including polaris-compatible drivers in Sierra.
But if we follow the logic to the end, it means that the MBPs are not delayed at all, since we all knew that macOS Sierra is coming out in September, and presumably so did Apple. So basically, it was the plan all along: wait for Polaris, make macOS compatible with it, then ship redesigned MBPs.
The only morons expecting anything else are the ones (like me) who spammed a poor macrumours thread for 740 god forsaken pages while waiting for the redesign. haha!
- Status