I think what you will see is a new line of MacBooks, not Pro as those just got updated. Something that will replace the Air completely
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 the 2018 MBP
- Thread starter benface
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Glossy are generally more colour accurate, that can't be denied - hence why Apple moved away from matte displays
By brightness, it is by the level of screen brightness. So starting from minimum brightness setting, 2 ticks of brightness vs 4/5 on the MacBook, the XPS was more clearer. I am aware that the MacBook has more peak brightness - the result surprised me at the time.
I'm talking about the build in gnu the 580x its exactly same as 2017 one but with slight higher clock speed, thats so poor I expected a huge gnu update
Quoting my post from February 2018
Ordered
15" 6-Core, 32GB Ram, 1TB SSD, AppleCare. Time to update that signature
By my recollection, this is actually not true, if the older iMacs are any indication. The quad-core models retained their resale values significantly better than the dual-core models available the day before.Similar to any other Apple hardware when new one comes out. Not everyone needs more cores, btw. And no need to be all
But this shouldn't come as a big surprise.
Quoting my post from February 2018
Ordered
15" 6-Core, 32GB Ram, 1TB SSD, AppleCare. Time to update that signature
Core i9?
I think you can forget the latter. More likely the non-TB model will disappear completely would be my guess.
Whether the TB will disappear in the next redesign is a more interesting question to speculate on, but it's impossible to guess. If it starts to appear on other models we'll know that they are doubling down on it. Otherwise the only reason to keep it would be because Apple never admit to making mistakes, but that might be enough.
I would say most of us did not expect a huge GPU update. As mentioned earlier in the thread, we knew months ago that AMD had rebranded Polaris to 500X series for release in 2018. Mainstream Vega may appear but it would mean a significant later release.
The question now is whether or not the new iMacs will get Polaris, or if they will get Vega. I had been predicting Polaris, but that was based on a June/July release time frame, which didn't happen. If the new iMacs are delayed until October, then perhaps there's a chance they'll get Vega, although Polaris is still a possibility.
OK, so I need your opinions on what's the better choice of the following configurations:
1) 2.2ghz, upgraded 32gb RAM, upgraded 512gb SSD - $2,789
2) 2.6ghz, upgraded 32gb RAM, 512gb SSD - $2,959
3) 2.6ghz, 16gb RAM, 512gb SSD - $2,599
My wife is a photographer and will use this MBP for mostly editing in Lightroom, blogging, web, email. Nothing too intense, but definitely some photoshop with the majority of work in Lightroom. I'm not sure if the 32gb RAM or the 2.6ghz processor would be overkill or not. We're currently working with an iMac and a 2011 MBP, so it's time to upgrade.
Also, the 2.6 v 2.2 models have a different graphics card, which is a consideration as well.
Appreciate anyone's opinion.
1) 2.2ghz, upgraded 32gb RAM, upgraded 512gb SSD - $2,789
2) 2.6ghz, upgraded 32gb RAM, 512gb SSD - $2,959
3) 2.6ghz, 16gb RAM, 512gb SSD - $2,599
My wife is a photographer and will use this MBP for mostly editing in Lightroom, blogging, web, email. Nothing too intense, but definitely some photoshop with the majority of work in Lightroom. I'm not sure if the 32gb RAM or the 2.6ghz processor would be overkill or not. We're currently working with an iMac and a 2011 MBP, so it's time to upgrade.
Also, the 2.6 v 2.2 models have a different graphics card, which is a consideration as well.
Appreciate anyone's opinion.
Why don't you start a new thread? No one will notice this question (snowed under) on page 290 of this thread. Everybody is to excited about the new MBP's.
Core i9?
Yep. My current MacBook Pro (late-2013) is a Core i7 2.6Ghz w/ maxed out RAM. Every time a MacBook is refreshed, I compare the CPUs and mine was actually just as fast as the 2016 MacBook Pro (3 years later) and the 2017 was about 40% faster. This new one is twice as fast at Multicore, 50% faster at single core and has faster RAM, SSD and the GPU is about twice as fast.
So finally time to purchase. The base MacBook pro 15" isn't all that better than my 2013 maxed out.
The one thing I'll miss..NVIDIA GPU. Going to AMD means I'm losing CUDA cores for Davinci Resolve.
Honestly it may well be overkill/more than she needs right now, but then who know's what software looks like in 3-5 years time, where the 32GB RAM could end up shining?
I'd go with option 2 personally.
Are you getting a new iMac too?
I'm no expect but if the MacBook Pro was a photographer's main machine, I'd suggest 32 GB. If the main machine was an iMac though, you would want to get 40 GB on the iMac, whereas 32 GB on the MacBook Pro might not be as necessary, depending on how long she kept the machine.
But FWIW, I am usually not a heavy user of my MacBook, but I got 16 GB anyway. For me 8 GB is about what I need, but I tend to keep my laptops a LONG time like you seem to, so I went with 16 GB. If you plan on keeping that MBP a long time, then 32 GB might be advisable for a photographer.
Also, can't she claim the MBP as a business expense?
From playing around on the Apple website:
6,699 USD in the US (taxes excluded)
8,059 EUR (9400 USD) in EU (taxes included)
~790,000 JPY (7000 USD) here in Japan (taxes included)
Huge differences, yes, EU prices are once again absolutely bonkers.
It must be said that half of the maxed-out price is the 4TB drive alone, so those figures are not really indicative. I don't see how that option could make any logical sense for anyone, honestly.
Does she store her photos locally? If she's shooting RAW and using Lightroom, get a 1TB SSD. 16GB of RAM is sufficient for Lightroom.
I have a late-2013 MBP w/ 16GB of RAM and it handles Lightroom RAW Images from my Canon 5D and Final Cut Pro 4K video editing just fine. Things are faster on my iMac w/ 32GB of RAM but the big win of the iMac is the much better GPU.
The Built-In dGPU in the 15" is built for power efficiency more than anything else and while it isn't bad, per se, it is never going to approach the higher tier NVIDIA cards.
If you need/want 1070/1080 performance, you need to be looking at a Vega 64, not an RX580, plus the cost of the eGPU enclosure.
The cost of a nicely equipped 13" i7/16GB/512GB plus the eGPU(Razer Core X) and an 8GB Vega64 is going to be around $3399.00 USD total ($2499.00-MBP, $299.00-Razer Core X and $599.00-SapphireTech Nitro+ Vega 64 LE).
On the flip side, for $3499, you can max out the CPU and RAM on a 15" or for $3599, max out the RAM, keep the base CPU and move to 1TB of storage. The benefit being that you have a 6-core 15" model with 32GB of RAM, which is no slouch and you can add an eGPU and a 7nm Vega "Navi" in mid-2019.
Personally, I want all the firepower I can get and I would opt for the 15" w/ 32GB of DRAM and the 1TB Flash Storage. I would also get the Core i9 upgrade, but that's me.
Buy what you can afford, with an emphasis on maxing out and future proofing as much as possible. These things are so locked down, the idea of upgrading is non-existent. MacBook Pro's have a long life, I have a 18 year old PowerBook G4 right now, bought it for $100. So, buy it with the intention of keeping it for a while and also resale value. Just make sure Apple Care is part of the purchase. I'm sure between running Photoshop CC, Lightroom, Chrome; you can never have enough RAM.