Since MBP's charger is 90W, I find it puzzling why this is even being discussed. The bottom line is that external batteries are very much viable for a MBP and completely within the limits imposed by flight regulations. So yes, external batteries are a simple and affordable answer to the lack of user-replaceable battery on the MBP, not to mention that they are also more flexible, can be charged separately from the laptop and do not require you to power down the machine to be replaced.
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
Since MBP's charger is 90W, I find it puzzling why this is even being discussed. The bottom line is that external batteries are very much viable for a MBP and completely within the limits imposed by flight regulations. So yes, external batteries are a simple and affordable answer to the lack of user-replaceable battery on the MBP, not to mention that they are also more flexible, can be charged separately from the laptop and do not require you to power down the machine to be replaced.
What are the chances we will see a bigger screen? Used to be the MB “PRO” was for”Professionals”. I used it constantly in my web design. I keep replacing parts on my 17” and I don’t want a 13” or 15” laptop for designing.
I feel like my days are numbered anymore...
I’m limited on space so a laptop is a must...Why did they discontinue the larger screen in the first place? I’ll have to google it.
I feel like my days are numbered anymore...
I’m limited on space so a laptop is a must...Why did they discontinue the larger screen in the first place? I’ll have to google it.
Where did you find the information on the GPU? The mention I've seen so far suggest that its using Iris Plus 650, so the same GPU the 2017 version is using. Nevertheless, the CPU in itself would definitely be an upgrade
[doublepost=1518994374][/doublepost]
The resolution is higher, so its not like you can fit anything more on the screen. The only difference between the 15" and 17" MBP was that the later offered Full HD. They discontinued it as soon as they had a 15" panel that surpassed that resolution.
Sounds like you need a IMAC 17" is to big of a screen.
What are the chances we will see a bigger screen? Used to be the MB “PRO” was for”Professionals”. I used it constantly in my web design. I keep replacing parts on my 17” and I don’t want a 13” or 15” laptop for designing.
I feel like my days are numbered anymore...
I’m limited on space so a laptop is a must...Why did they discontinue the larger screen in the first place? I’ll have to google it.
Where did you find the information on the GPU? The mention I've seen so far suggest that its using Iris Plus 650, so the same GPU the 2017 version is using. Nevertheless, the CPU in itself would definitely be an upgrade
The article was wrong initially and stated it's a 10 nm Cannon Lake part, which would come with a new gen 10 iGPU. Since it seems to be Coffee Lake, it probably will be a tweaked Iris Plus 650. Still better than the UHD 620 they use in the 15W Kaby Lake Refresh parts.
I think that's pretty harsh. Have you actually worked with a notebook using GT3e graphics? It's certainly more than capable for everything but running current demanding games. It's not like any iGPU would be able to play all these games anyway. AMDs iGPUs are better, but nor nearly by as much as AMD claims, since they're always only comparing themselves to an UHD 620.
https://www.notebookcheck.com/Intel-Iris-Plus-Graphics-650.189856.0.html
This literally would be worst case. GH does have a TDP of 100W, which would reduce battery life quite a lot compared to the current 80W combined CPU + GPU TDP. Also this would mean using an outdated quad-core CPU when six-core ones should be available any moment now, and gaining nothing since with the 55W left over you could just use a dedicated GPU with similar performance, especially now where the new GPU architectures from NVidia and AMD are almost ready for prime time.
I do not care about games....
Macbook....iGPU
thicker MBP 13.....kaby lake G series 65W
thicker MBP 15.....6 cores + vega dGPU
Problem solved
P.S. I gave up on nVidia GPU, i know apple is stubborn and would never do it...
If you don't care about games, why would you effectively halve the battery life just for more GPU performance? Going from 28W to 65W TDP (CPU + GPU) is quite a jump ... And which problem? I don't see any problem here, Intel's current GT3e iGPUs are, like I already said, more than capable enough for most use cases I could think of.
So okay, because you don't need a notebook with good battery life means nobody needs a notebook with good battery life? That logic ...
And again, what advantage would an even faster GPU have for you? Which applications do you use which actually benefit from that?
No it does not. I'm looking into all the available and rumored parts and try to predict what the best compromise is, based on Apple's previous actions and the target audience they've chosen for their MacBook Pro line. If it does fit my own needs or wishes is not a consideration – if I say something about my own needs, I will clearly state it as that.
On that line, using Kaby Lake G in a 13" Ultrabook does make no sense at all, it's a nightmare to fit in there, to cool and to power.
MBP does not have to be an ultrabook....MB is an ultrabook
Wrong, both are Ultrabooks. The MacBook Pro fits the description perfectly:
"Intel has specified and trademarked Ultrabook[1] for a line of high-end subnotebook computersfeaturing reduced bulk without compromising battery life. Ultrabooks use low-powerIntel Core processors, solid-state drives, and a unibodychassis to help meet these criteria.[2] Due to their limited size, Ultrabooks typically omit common laptop features such as optical disc drives[3] and Ethernet ports."
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrabook
I was editing my post, but you quoted me at the speed of light before i could.... The concept I am espressing, as in my all my previous posts, is what i wish apple would do...
Your definition of ultrabook is precise for the MB. But Apple now is transforming every laptop they make, even the uselessly thin 15", in ultrabooks and IMHO is a dumb move...
In the workstation/dektop space they transformed their MacPro in a joke, they hit a wall and did a u-turn...
Your definition of ultrabook is precise for the MB. But Apple now is transforming every laptop they make, even the uselessly thin 15", in ultrabooks and IMHO is a dumb move...
In the workstation/dektop space they transformed their MacPro in a joke, they hit a wall and did a u-turn...
It offers around 900 gflops of compute and its gaming performance is comparable to a 940MX. By no means a behemoth but certainly better than most other 13” laptops of its class, including XPS and friends.
See, and that's exactly the point I'm trying to make – Apple wants to find the best compromise for the vast majority of their customers. I'm not claiming that I know what that compromise is, or even who their customers are, but seeing how many of these notebooks they're able to sell, I'm thinking that Apple themselves know something about their target demographic.
And again, I think an additional product category for actual workstation notebooks would be nice. But that's not what the MacBook Pro is about, and that is not going to be what it is about in the foreseeable future.
The thing is, most users are totally fine with the performance the MacBook Pro provides, including me. While a faster GPU would be nice for the occasional gaming session, none of my graphic design workflows would benefit from a slightly faster GPU in there. No GPU they could ever fit in there would be powerful enough for productive 3D render times anyway. And for Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, Capture One and so on the Iris is more than fine. I can only think of a few workloads which would dramatically benefit from a faster GPU. Please feel free to tell me I'm wrong and present a mainstream workload which is bottlenecked by the Iris Plus.
The same argument goes for the 16 GB RAM limit and so on. The MacBook Pro is a relatively high performance mainstream notebook, not a workstation one. When we're talking about more than doubling the TDP, we're talking about a different product category.
Quoting The Mercurian, this is a straw man argument, or at least some other kind of logical fallacy
In relative terms, the MBP never had any faster GPUs then what they have now. So complaining about thinnes here is completely irrelevant since it didn't mean any performance downgrades. Same class GPU in a thinner chassis is certainly better than same class GPU in an unchanged chassis.
Since we are talking about logic, yours is a perfect example of one who think that the fact that apple never did means they never will, and in the desktop space they already proved you wrong...
And it was a downgrade in potential performances, if they used a better GPU.
It was not a downgrade – they used 35W class GPUs before, and they use 35W class GPUs now.
And yes, in the desktop space, they introduced a new product category – the iMac Pro. Since this thread is about the next MacBook Pro, I think it's pretty pointless to complain about what the MBP always has been. Make your own thread about the possible introduction of a workstation class Apple notebook if you want to talk about that.
What are the chances we will see a bigger screen? Used to be the MB “PRO” was for”Professionals”. I used it constantly in my web design. I keep replacing parts on my 17” and I don’t want a 13” or 15” laptop for designing.
I feel like my days are numbered anymore...
I’m limited on space so a laptop is a must...Why did they discontinue the larger screen in the first place? I’ll have to google it.
Zero chance. Don't take this the wrong way but you folks who cling on to your slowly disintegrating 17"s in hopes they will release a new one need a reality check. The 17" is gone. The 15" now has a higher resolution than the 17" have. Ye don't need a 17" screen. All you need to is try a retina 15" for a few days and you will wonder why you didn't change years ago.
It was a downgrade in potential/ipotetic performance....if they had used a better GPU, since the 35W is not a limit some alien superpower forced them to adopt but only a dumb design choice, the 15" could have achieved much better performances in GPGPU computing and, adopting nVidia GPU, even with CUDA optimized software...
And you are another one who think that the fact that apple never did means they never will...
But we have to agree that we have a different concept of what a pro laptop should and should not be so it...
EDIT: and BTW is not for you to decide if i can or can not post in this or another thread....I am as entitled as you to my own opinion...
Last edited: