I think Apple holds off for the Iris Pro because they rely on iGPU performance more than most manufacturers, especially in regards to the 13" MBP since it doesn't offer a dGPU. The 6700HQ w/o Iris Pro still is going to have good battery life when using the iGPU (probably better because the iGPU is less powerful/demanding).Better battery life (while you're running on the iGPU). I'm wagering that's why Apple's been holding off. They love bragging about their all day battery life. Though in reality, their batteries are absolute garbage. My iPhone 6S doesn't hold a charge, randomly dies any where between 20-30% after one year. And my 2012 rMBP doesn't last more then an hour on a fully charged battery. They brag about lasting 1k cycles, but won't cover it under warranty if your battery life is below 80% within 1k cycles (I'm at 72% health after 800 cycles).
I see it like this, the MacBook Pro has a unique spot in the laptop market because it's designed to be a) very powerful b) thin, especially for that performance and c) have incredible battery life in a slim package. There isn't really a PC maker outside of Dell and Razer who is able to come close on delivering all 3 like Apple does. The Dell and Razer laptops easily compete with the MBP on power and size, but the battery life takes a hit, largely due to their choice/reliance of dGPU. For Apple I feel the dGPU is more of an afterthought to their design goals so they need to pick a CPU that can deliver near-dGPU performance in order to deliver maximum overall system performance. I don't think the fact that no other PC maker offers the 6770HQ yet really means anything in terms of letting Apple off the hook for this delay. It's simply the chip they prefer (and need) for their design goals, which happen to be different than most laptop offerings from other PC makers.
Last edited: