Waiting for the 2017 MBP (Kaby Lake / Cannonlake / Coffee Lake??)

[Swift33]

What the 2016 MacBook Pro specs should have been:

http://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/productdetails/xps-15-9560-laptop

Dell's New XPS 15 has a 7th Gen Kaby Lake Quad Core, 32GB RAM, and GTX 1050...

 

[havenyoung]

What the 2016 MacBook Pro specs should have been:

http://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/productdetails/xps-15-9560-laptop

Dell's New XPS 15 has a 7th Gen Kaby Lake Quad Core, 32GB RAM, and GTX 1050...

But definitely not that 58Whr battery...

 

[eulslix]

What the 2016 MacBook Pro specs should have been:

http://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/productdetails/xps-15-9560-laptop

Dell's New XPS 15 has a 7th Gen Kaby Lake Quad Core, 32GB RAM, and GTX 1050...

A 75 Watt GPU only roughly 10% more powerful than a 460 Pro? No thanks. Ram Upgrade would've been great though.

Source: http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-1050-Notebook.178614.0.html . The TDP, sadly, is only reported within the german article.

 

[rasputin1969]

It seems to me that the Macbook Pro should have been released with a) The bigger terraced battery and b) Native screen resolution bumps, eg 1680x1050(x2) on the 15.

I believe the failure to go with the bigger battery led to the screen res staying the same. I hope there's a refresh around WWDC time that gives us these and a non-discrete graphics option on the 15. Kaby lake would be a plus.

 

[trueredsoxfan58]

Im guessing we might get a kaby lake bump in june(ish) and in the spring of 2018 a Minor refresh of CoffeeLake + Terraced battery

 

[Ries]

A 75 Watt GPU only roughly 10% more powerful than a 460 Pro? No thanks. Ram Upgrade would've been great though.

Source: http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-1050-Notebook.178614.0.html . The TDP, sadly, is only reported within the german article.

From your own source:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-1050-Ti-Notebook.168400.0.html

The performance should on on a level of the GTX 970M and therefore in the current high-end range of laptop graphics cards.

Power Consumption 50 Watt

http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1050-ti-laptops-benchmarked-specs/

Laptop 1050 Ti Estimated ~60w. 10% faster than the 970M.

 

[eulslix]

From your own source:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-1050-Ti-Notebook.168400.0.html

The performance should on on a level of the GTX 970M and therefore in the current high-end range of laptop graphics cards.

Power Consumption 50 Watt

http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1050-ti-laptops-benchmarked-specs/

Laptop 1050 Ti Estimated ~60w. 10% faster than the 970M.

*facepalm*

The XPS 9650 does NOT contain a 1050 Ti, it contains a 1050. These are two completely different cards and always have been. The Ti series is known for their great value, but it won't be built in in this laptop, for whatever reasons (thermal issues, throttling, cost factor ... whatever, no idea). Please, stop spreading this misinformation.

Also, the 1050 has a TDP of 75W, compared to the 35W of a Pro 460. There's not much known other than that. Don't expect the efficiency of the Ti card, as already said, these are usually exceptionally great deals.

 

[haydn!]

There was some suggestion this week Apple was planning a better battery design/capacity for the latest MBP but it was delayed. If that becomes ready, Apple will add that in for sure as soon as possible to combat the negative press around battery life. So I'm relatively confident we'll see an update next summer.

 

[Ries]

*facepalm*

The XPS 9650 does NOT contain a 1050 Ti, it contains a 1050. These are two completely different cards and always have been. The Ti series is known for their great value, but it won't be built in in this laptop, for whatever reasons (thermal issues, throttling, cost factor ... whatever, no idea). Please, stop spreading this misinformation.

Also, the 1050 has a TDP of 75W, compared to the 35W of a Pro 460. There's not much known other than that. Don't expect the efficiency of the Ti card, as already said, these are usually exceptionally great deals.

Won't be in a laptop? Current rumors says it will.

http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/nvidia-gtx-1050-ti-laptop-specs-performance

http://hexus.net/tech/news/laptop/99829-laptops-nvidia-gtx-1050-1050-ti-graphics-launch-ces-2017/

The desktop edition has TDP of 75W, no one knows if it will be the same for the laptop variants. Everyone is just guessing it will be the same based on the 9x0 models having 75w TDP. TDP is not linear with clock, +100Mhz can easily mean +10W. So they may clock it lower.

The are the same thing, just with different number of cores/texture-units and clocks.

Please, stop spreading this misinformation.

 

[eulslix]

Won't be in a laptop? Current rumors says it will.

http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/nvidia-gtx-1050-ti-laptop-specs-performance

http://hexus.net/tech/news/laptop/99829-laptops-nvidia-gtx-1050-1050-ti-graphics-launch-ces-2017/

The desktop edition has TDP of 75W, no one knows if it will be the same for the laptop variants. Everyone is just guessing it will be the same based on the 9x0 models having 75w TDP. TDP is not linear with clock, +100Mhz can easily mean +10W. So they may clock it lower.

The are the same thing, just with different number of cores/texture-units and clocks.

Please, stop spreading this misinformation.

Jeezaz...

Their official website stated it being a 1050, before it was taken down ... there's no reason to think otherwise. They're a company ... they try to convince their potential consumers ... if there's a Ti in it, be sure that they'll slap it into your face on each occasion. They even explicitly stated, that it features non-standard 4GB VRAM.

Even none of your sources (which btw don't belong to the trustworthy ones) mentions the Dell XPS in a single word. Also, I didn't state it wasn't in "a" laptop, but you were probably already getting all emotional and started typing before processing what I've actually written. There're even laptops on the way featuring a 1080 in a small form factor. Do they compete in the same league as a XPS or a MBP? Depends, but for the use cases of most of us ... no.

But go on, your fanboy agenda is quite amusing.

 

[JohnnyGo]

Im guessing we might get a kaby lake bump in june(ish) and in the spring of 2018 a Minor refresh of CoffeeLake + Terraced battery

IMO the KL bump won't happen. Spring 2018: CL + terraced battery as you predicted

 

[Ries]

Jeezaz...

Their official website stated it being a 1050, before it was taken down ... there's no reason to think otherwise. They're a company ... they try to convince their consumers ... if there's a Ti in it, be sure that they'll slap it into your face on each occasion. They even explicitly stated, that it features non-standard 4GB VRAM.

Even none of your sources (which btw don't belong to the trustworthy ones) mentions the Dell XPS in a single word. Also, I didn't state it wasn't in "a" laptop, but you were probably already getting all emotional and started typing before processing what I've actually written. There're even laptops on the way featuring a 1080 in a small form factor. Do they compete in the same league as a XPS or a MBP? Depends, but for the use cases of most of us ... no.

But go on, your fanboy agenda is quite amusing.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 with up to 4GB of RAM

Read more: http://www.tweaktown.com/news/55559/dells-new-xps-gaming-laptop-rocks-kaby-lake-gtx-1050/index.html

For the desktop model, 2GB is the 1050, 4GB is 1050 Ti. Because it is absolutely impossibile for them to have a 1050 2GB option and a 1050 Ti 4GB upgrade option right?

 

[eulslix]

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 with up to 4GB of RAM

Read more: http://www.tweaktown.com/news/55559/dells-new-xps-gaming-laptop-rocks-kaby-lake-gtx-1050/index.html

For the desktop model, 2GB is the 1050, 4GB is 1050 Ti. Because it is absolutely impossibile for them to have a 1050 2GB option and a 1050 Ti 4GB upgrade option right?

Everything is possible. But so far, non of your arguments is backed up by any of your sources, just pure speculation based on the 4GB VRAM. It's nothing unusual to offer different VRAM configurations for a GPU series, especially for NVidia cards.
To be honest, I don't care, maybe I'm wrong and the XPS will be a great deal, than we've got at least some serious competition going on.
But you've started of labelling things as facts that don't reflect the current state of knowledge, which makes it difficult to discuss things on an objective level. And that kinda pisses me off tbh, because I'm trying to make up my mind whether to buy the current MBP or wait until mid 17.

 

[jerryk]

But definitely not that 58Whr battery...

Battery sizes for the XPS are a function of how the system is configured. The 58 is in the system that contain a rotational drive AND M.2 SSD. The M.2 SSD only system is either 95 or 98 Whr (I don't remember which one). The whole Dell's DNA being a BTO makes it easy to get exactly what you want, but creates some complex configurations

 

[Appleaker]

I don't think a 4 core is in the plans for the 28W chips. Everything I see for the 28W series shows the 2+2 or 2+3e (that's CPU + GPU in a sense, 2+2 is 2 core CPU plus regular graphics, 2+3e is core CPU plus Iris Pro).

As far as performance goes, I think the best thing about Kaby Lake is likely to be the 4K video support, which is supposed to bring power usage while running a 4K video stream down a TON. Otherwise its sounding like a typical incremental increase in overall performance.

No, they're right in the sense that the roadmap showed a low power quad-core, but it was 18W and part of the H series without Iris graphics. I hope Apple puts this in but they would probably have to include a basic dGPU which could be possible due to the power savings (going from 28W to 18W)

 

[Appleaker]

Why are over 300 people voting for the first option? With the last MacBook Pro redesign they increased the prices by $400, and they did the same this time . But that period in between is when the prices went down. You should be certain of that more than ever due to the backlash.
[doublepost=1482442391][/doublepost]

A 75 Watt GPU only roughly 10% more powerful than a 460 Pro? No thanks. Ram Upgrade would've been great though.

Source: http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-1050-Notebook.178614.0.html . The TDP, sadly, is only reported within the german article.

Where did you get a 10% performance increase from???? That's not true, it is A LOT MORE than that. The wattage is the reason why Apple didn't consider it, along with their existing relationship with AMD.
[doublepost=1482442568][/doublepost]

What the 2016 MacBook Pro specs should have been:

http://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/productdetails/xps-15-9560-laptop

Dell's New XPS 15 has a 7th Gen Kaby Lake Quad Core, 32GB RAM, and GTX 1050...

Maybe but Apple wouldn't consider the 1050 or 32GB of RAM due to power consumption and the Kaby Lake chips are still not out, which is the reason why the new XPS 15 hasn't been released or even announced yet.
[doublepost=1482442897][/doublepost]

There was some suggestion this week Apple was planning a better battery design/capacity for the latest MBP but it was delayed. If that becomes ready, Apple will add that in for sure as soon as possible to combat the negative press around battery life. So I'm relatively confident we'll see an update next summer.

The technology will be ready for next Summer but it wouldn't be a full 12 month update cycle which might bring further negative press and opinions, especially from MBP 2016 owners.

 

[haydn!]

The technology will be ready for next Summer but it wouldn't be a full 12 month update cycle which might bring further negative press and opinions, especially from MBP 2016 owners.

Historically Apple have updated the MacBook after anything from 6-18 months. So a July/August update wouldn't be entirely out of the norm.

 

[eulslix]

Where did you get a 10% performance increase from???? That's not true, it is A LOT MORE than that. The wattage is the reason why Apple didn't consider it, along with their existing relationship with AMD.

From my linked source, didn't you read it? "The mobile version should be slightly slower than a Maxwell based GTX 965M (see for benchmarks and gaming tests)."

The GTX 965M is about 13% more efficient than a Radeon Pro 460 on average, if you look at the benchmark data on notebookcheck.com (there are not many samples, but it's backed up by other benchmarks on the internet). In general, Notebookcheck is pretty reliable with their prognosis.
They were initially a bit off with the 460 however, they put it on the same level as a GTX 960M which didn't turn out to be exactly true, as the 460 is somewhere in between the 960M and 965M, more towards the latter one.
Still, I wouldn't expect much deviation from their predictions.

 

[lusid1]

Historically Apple have updated the MacBook after anything from 6-18 months. So a July/August update wouldn't be entirely out of the norm.

They need to rev it as soon as possible. Aesthetics aside, the 2016 is an embarrassment. The mediocre performance, the grossly undersized battery, the ultra-premium pricing... this is not the year to buy a rMBP. I'm delaying my refresh in hopes of a course correction, but I'm looking at other options in case they don't or my system doesn't make it through the void.

 

[hajime]

I read about the new Dell XPS 15 with quad core Kaby Lake. Sounds good. Hope laptops with quad core KL will be available soon.

 

[10-Dee-Q]

Hi, i need some expert opinion here.
Currently im using mid 2009 15" mbp.
It's now very laggy and slow.
So i really want to upgrade it.
Few months back i bought 12" Macbook retina , but sold it after few days, the screen is just too small for me.
Speed wise its ok for me, i opted for the 1.2 ghz options.
And i really like the butterfly keyboard on the 12" mb.
So should i get this 2016 tbmbp now ? Or wait another year with my laggy 2009?
I use my notebook mostly for downloading torrent, safari browsing, keeping my itunes music library organized, and photo library as well.
I also use it to edit photos from my 24 mpixels sony A7II in adobe.

If i buy the 2016 tb mbp,
Which option should i get ?
I was thinking for the base model
2.6 ghz, radeon pro 450, and customize the ssd to 1 TB
Will i miss anything significant by opting for the lowest cou and gpu?

The reason that i want to upgrade the ssd to 1 tb is so that i can keep my itunes music library and my photos library offline. Cause the internet in my country is still sucks.

Or is there any better option? Like keeping the itunes and photo library on an external storage ?

Thank you.

 

[Appleaker]

From my linked source, didn't you read it? "The mobile version should be slightly slower than a Maxwell based GTX 965M (see for benchmarks and gaming tests)."

The GTX 965M is about 13% more efficient than a Radeon Pro 460 on average, if you look at the benchmark data on notebookcheck.com (there are not many samples, but it's backed up by other benchmarks on the internet). In general, Notebookcheck is pretty reliable with their prognosis.
They were initially a bit off with the 460 however, they put it on the same level as a GTX 960M which didn't turn out to be exactly true, as the 460 is somewhere in between the 960M and 965M, more towards the latter one.
Still, I wouldn't expect much deviation from their predictions.

Sorry, i thought you were talking about the GTX 1050.

 

[eulslix]

Sorry, i thought you were talking about the GTX 1050.

You don't have to be, you understood me correctly. The article I linked states "The mobile version should be slightly slower than a Maxwell based GTX 965M (see for benchmarks and gaming tests)." They're talking about the mobile version of the GTX 1050. They're stating, that the performance of the GTX 1050M is slightly slower than the GTX 965M, which in turn is roughly 13% faster than the AMD Radeon Pro 460.

That's where my roughly 10% faster than the 460 estimate came from. Now I see, why my statement is so misleading I wasn't aware, that there were actually that many steps involved to deduce that rough estimate. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[wowee]

I've owned 3 15 inch macbook pros: my first was in 2007, then 2010 and then 2013. I absolutely love my late 2013 15inch but as three years had gone by, i was hoping for something that would be a great update. Needless to say, the 2016 Macbook Pro is a complete joke. My friend just got the fully maxed out version and we were able to compare next to my version from 3 years ago. In Lightroom - zero speed difference, (if anything, mine actually seemed slightly faster). In general usage - zero speed difference. Photoshop - zero speed difference. PRICE TAG - HUGE ****ING DIFFERENCE. Battery life - a joke. Even geek bench shows our computers as almost the same. WTF is wrong with apple? They have completely lost track and dropped the ball. I am a professional photographer and am now questioning if I can continue to use apple products. I am now looking to the next iMac when it comes out as a MacBook replacement - but based on the MacBook refresh, i'm sure it will also be a piece of overpriced ****. Tim Cook has created a mess.

 

[xmonkey]

I've owned 3 15 inch macbook pros: my first was in 2007, then 2010 and then 2013. I absolutely love my late 2013 15inch but as three years had gone by, i was hoping for something that would be a great update. Needless to say, the 2016 Macbook Pro is a complete joke. My friend just got the fully maxed out version and we were able to compare next to my version from 3 years ago. In Lightroom - zero speed difference, (if anything, mine actually seemed slightly faster). In general usage - zero speed difference. Photoshop - zero speed difference. PRICE TAG - HUGE ****ING DIFFERENCE. Battery life - a joke. Even geek bench shows our computers as almost the same. WTF is wrong with apple? They have completely lost track and dropped the ball. I am a professional photographer and am now questioning if I can continue to use apple products. I am now looking to the next iMac when it comes out as a MacBook replacement - but based on the MacBook refresh, i'm sure it will also be a piece of overpriced ****. Tim Cook has created a mess.

I didn't know Apple made the CPUs in their laptops.

In case your comparison didn't make this obvious, we've reached a plateau in CPU performance. This has nothing to do with Apple. Outside of a few specific uses, the CPUs Intel were putting out 3-4 years ago are nearly as powerful as the ones they release today for a vast majority of the tasks people use them for. Photo editing just isn't as demanding a task as it used to be and CPUs eclipsed the needed power for that task quite awhile ago. You can go ahead and wait for Kaby Lake, or whatever-Lake, but there isn't going to be some huge jump in performance with those either.