Waiting for the 2019 MBP [Merged]

[Ma2k5]

Really guys, I think the majority of users here aren’t really interested in or benefit from 100% min max of CPU/dGPU.

Whether it’s 14nm, 12nm, 10nm or 7nm, will it really improve your workflow? - I mean it won’t drastically change how we use our MacBooks.

I’d be happy with just the faster integrated WiFi with less battery consumption as an upgrade even if 14nm. What would be more valuable to be for 2019 is:

1) Improving keyboard usability. They won’t go back to what they had but doesn’t mean they won’t improve it. The magnet based Maglev keys on the XPS 9575 is interesting so that could be an angle to look into.

2) Trackpad size is somewhat of an issue when typing where palm rejection can fail. I don’t know how you could fix this other than by making it smaller, unless there is some way to really improve the rejection. It doesn’t affect those who don’t use tap to click (which I exclusively use).

3) An improvement to the touch bar which makes it more programmer friendly. I don’t have a solution to this, but I’m sure they are thinking about it. Once that is achieved, I think we will see mass roll out of touch bar across product lines - but at the moment it is in an experimental phase.

4) More work on macOS, especially for compatibility and efficiency to using 3rd party apps which sometimes sucks as compared to Windows.

5) Make a machine without QC issues as much as the recently ones, be it T2 crashes, speaker issues, backup/restore bugs and more.

6) An improved web cam, Full HD+.

7) Improved cooling and higher battery capacities. I’d also love for a non-dGPU 15” again.

 

[koyoot]

Really guys, I think the majority of users here aren’t really interested in or benefit from 100% min max of CPU/dGPU.

Whether it’s 14nm, 12nm, 10nm or 7nm, will it really improve your workflow? - I mean it won’t drastically change how we use our MacBooks.

You understand that if 7 nm CPU can clock to 5 GHz, with higher IPC than Skylake architecture, in 45W can clock to 4 GHz on all cores and maintain it without throttling, it will mean that you can pack this CPU into lower thermal envelopes(15W), to still maintain high clock speeds(3 GHz), and get ultimately: higher performance AND longer battery life, at the same time?

How can this NOT affect your workflow? Are you attached to Intel so much that you cannot see any other possibility?

And most importantly. If AMD will give better CPU than Intel in upcoming months, and Apple will not switch, their competition which will use AMD CPUs will have better products than Apple, for less money(!).

 

[gaanee]

The question is whether Apple will switch to non-Intel 7nm CPUs to avail any of those improvements? PC OEMs offer AMD CPUs but as a second lower cost option most likely to up-sell their mainstream Intel based models.
Also, CPU clock speed doesn't necessarily increase with smaller node size and number of transistors. Max CPU clock speed for consumer segment has plateaued at around 3GHz because of other design parameters. But yes, 10 and 7nm improvements will be welcomed.

 

[Ma2k5]

You understand that if 7 nm CPU can clock to 5 GHz, with higher IPC than Skylake architecture, in 45W can clock to 4 GHz on all cores and maintain it without throttling, it will mean that you can pack this CPU into lower thermal envelopes(15W), to still maintain high clock speeds(3 GHz), and get ultimately: higher performance AND longer battery life, at the same time?

How can this NOT affect your workflow? Are you attached to Intel so much that you cannot see any other possibility?

And most importantly. If AMD will give better CPU than Intel in upcoming months, and Apple will not switch, their competition which will use AMD CPUs will have better products than Apple, for less money(!).

What has Intel got to do with this?

If you think there are chips around the corner that can provide same performance at 15w as 45w, you really lost your mind. That’s definitely not happening for 2019, if you believe otherwise I think you are about to be disappointed.

 

[koyoot]

If you think there are chips around the corner that can provide same performance at 15w as 45w, you really lost your mind. That’s definitely not happening for 2019, if you believe otherwise I think you are about to be disappointed.

Have you read ANYTHING about 7 nm process?

It appears not .

The question is whether Apple will switch to non-Intel 7nm CPUs to avail any of those improvements? PC OEMs offer AMD CPUs but as a second lower cost option most likely to up-sell their mainstream Intel based models.
Also, CPU clock speed doesn't necessarily increase with smaller node size and number of transistors. Max CPU clock speed for consumer segment has plateaued at around 3GHz because of other design parameters. But yes, 10 and 7nm improvements will be welcomed.

OEMs offer AMD CPUs as cheaper options not to sell Intel based options, but because the cost of buying the CPUs, and using them. Ryzen 5 2500U offers the same performance levels as 8250U but has a iGPU that is as fast as MX150. If you combine both chips, you end with much easier engineering effort to design, which saves cost, you get much lower thermal requirements needed to cool SINGLE 15W chip which combines performance of TWO chips that have combined thermal output of 40W, which also saves money, and that translates to lower prices for consumers.

And no guys. If anywhere 7 nm will be huge hit it will be for efficiency, and density of the chips.

To give you a perspective. Vega 10, 250W TDP monster, with 484 mm2 ported DIRECTLY to 7 nm HPC will have 160 mm2 die size. TDP? God only knows but it appears with the same core clocks it would be at around 75W, if not lower.

 

[Ma2k5]

Have you read ANYTHING about 7 nm process?

It appears not .

Again, if you think in 2019 you’ll have 15w CPU’s outperforming 45w CPU’s, I have news for you. I think you need to re-evaluate what you read about these CPU’s, two years ago you got burnt by the “Zen” hype, again quoting various articles and sources.

 

[koyoot]

Again, if you think in 2019 you’ll have 15w CPU’s outperforming 45w CPU’s, I have news for you. I think you need to re-evaluate what you read about these CPU’s, two years ago you got burnt by the “Zen” hype, again quoting various articles and sources.

Because you said so, without giving any proof that counter technical details of process differences between companies?

Who was hyped up by Ryzen? From the get-go everybody talked that AMD will offer Broadwell IPC with Zen architecture. The question was: at what clock speeds, and what power draw. Zen+ is already only 5% behind Skylake in IPC and 20% in clock speeds. 7 nm process nullifies the clock speed difference. How will the architecture design affect IPC do you think?

Ryzen CPUs offer 90-95% of gaming performance of Intel CPUs and 95-100% in professional workloads, depending on the optimization of the software for certain workloads. Raven Ridge 2500U with 2.0 GHz/3.6 GHz base/boost clocks offers 95% of CPU performance of Core i5 8250U which has 1.8/3.4 GHz. Both have 15W TDP.

Now if we go to 7 nm, you get higher clock speeds, and higher IPC on 7 nm CPU. Is it hard to imagine that AMD gets with BRAND NEW design, and BRAND NEW process, higher IPC, and Higher clock speeds that can compete with 45W TDP CPUs? The process itself allows for 30% power reduction from TSMC's 10 nm process, which allowed 50% reduction in power from 16 nm TSMC's process, which also was better than 14 nm LP from GloFo in terms of power and clock speeds, thats why 7 nm process is also 3 times more dense than 14 nm LP from GloFo, 14 nm from Intel, and 16 nm from TSMC.

We are talking about 3.0 GHz/4.0 GHz base/boost. And AMD's SenseMI and dynamic optimization of thermals and power allows AMD to control clock speeds more efficiently, than Intel, which we can already wee with Zen clocking higher and maintaining that clock longer than Intel can with 15W CPUs.

TSMC touted 5 GHz clock speeds on the protype chips. They may have overhyped this. But the sheer density will allow companies to burn some of the transistors for clock speeds. Its all about physical design here, which allows 15W TDP chips to be actually faster than 45W from 14/16 nm designs.

AMD few days ago released 12 nm Raven Ridge 2 APUs: Ryzen 2600H, and 2800H. Both are 45W. Both clock up to 4 GHz. How come, with 3 times higher density, 70% higher efficiency, and brand new design, 7 nm 15W CPUs cannot be faster than 45W ones, eh?

 

[Ploki]

Again, if you think in 2019 you’ll have 15w CPU’s outperforming 45w CPU’s, I have news for you. I think you need to re-evaluate what you read about these CPU’s, two years ago you got burnt by the “Zen” hype, again quoting various articles and sources.

youre probably right, physics are physics. I read why 7nm is taking so much time, because its nearing feasibility anyway and probably the last of the die shrinks.
some new tech will probably need to come by and its due.

edit:

if you remember, there were a couple of "breakthrough" cpu performance moments for Apple laptop line.
The 2006 shift to intel.
Then 2011 quadcore shift, and since the 2011, nothing happened until this year shift to hexacore.
Another leap in just a year will be tough.

 

[Ma2k5]

Because you said so, without giving any proof that counter technical details of process differences between companies?

Who was hyped up by Ryzen? From the get-go everybody talked that AMD will offer Broadwell IPC with Zen architecture. The question was: at what clock speeds, and what power draw. Zen+ is already only 5% behind Skylake in IPC and 20% in clock speeds. 7 nm process nullifies the clock speed difference. How will the architecture design affect IPC do you think?

Ryzen CPUs offer 90-95% of gaming performance of Intel CPUs and 95-100% in professional workloads, depending on the optimization of the software for certain workloads. Raven Ridge 2500U with 2.0 GHz/3.6 GHz base/boost clocks offers 95% of CPU performance of Core i5 8250U which has 1.8/3.4 GHz. Both have 15W TDP.

Now if we go to 7 nm, you get higher clock speeds, and higher IPC on 7 nm CPU. Is it hard to imagine that AMD gets with BRAND NEW design, and BRAND NEW process, higher IPC, and Higher clock speeds that can compete with 45W TDP CPUs? The process itself allows for 30% power reduction from TSMC's 10 nm process, which allowed 50% reduction in power from 16 nm TSMC's process, which also was better than 14 nm LP from GloFo in terms of power and clock speeds, thats why 7 nm process is also 3 times more dense than 14 nm LP from GloFo, 14 nm from Intel, and 16 nm from TSMC.

We are talking about 3.0 GHz/4.0 GHz base/boost. And AMD's SenseMI and dynamic optimization of thermals and power allows AMD to control clock speeds more efficiently, than Intel, which we can already wee with Zen clocking higher and maintaining that clock longer than Intel can with 15W CPUs.

TSMC touted 5 GHz clock speeds on the protype chips. They may have overhyped this. But the sheer density will allow companies to burn some of the transistors for clock speeds. Its all about physical design here, which allows 15W TDP chips to be actually faster than 45W from 14/16 nm designs.

AMD few days ago released 12 nm Raven Ridge 2 APUs: Ryzen 2600H, and 2800H. Both are 45W. Both clock up to 4 GHz. How come, with 3 times higher density, 70% higher efficiency, and brand new design, 7 nm 15W CPUs cannot be faster than 45W ones, eh?

Honestly I just read “blah”, you’re just regurgitating stuff you read on articles and extrapolating from it, same as you did with your Zen thread (remember how you said Nvidia mobile gpu’s are in trouble? They only went ahead and are providing the gpu’s for the super successful Nintendo Switch, where was AMD?) - I just told you that isn’t evidence...

Come on you are smarter than this, you think out of the shadows a company which hasn’t been able to take over Intel, will next year provide a 15w CPU that beats Intels 45w CPU’s? That would mean they will have 45w CPU’s that would what, behave like 95w behemoths too? This is science fiction - in fact I’ll buy you a MacBook Pro from my own pocket if it becomes true.

 

[Acronyc]

Overall I think the 2018 Macs are good and personally I like them. If I were in the market right now I would pick one up, but they do seem to have become more expensive, especially the higher specced models. I bought my now sold 2012 rMBP with 2.3GHz CPU, 16GB of RAM, 256GB SSD, and dGPU for JPY 202,400 including tax (just was about US$2,000 at the time, I think), which is less than a similarly specced model today.

I'm on a 4 or 5 year cycle, so for me I will pick up my next MBP in 2020/21. Looking forward to it, but also look forward to continue using my 2016 MBP until then.

 

[Ma2k5]

Overall I think the 2018 Macs are good and personally I like them. If I were in the market right now I would pick one up, but they do seem to have become more expensive, especially the higher specced models. I bought my now sold 2012 rMBP with 2.3GHz CPU, 16GB of RAM, 256GB SSD, and dGPU for JPY 202,400 including tax (just was about US$2,000 at the time, I think), which is less than a similarly specced model today.

I'm on a 4 or 5 year cycle, so for me I will pick up my next MBP in 2020/21. Looking forward to it, but also look forward to continue using my 2016 MBP until then.

Price is difficult to swallow. I currently compared a i7-8750H/1TB/32GB Ram/4K Screen XPS 9570 vs MacBook Pro 2018 with the same spec. After all discounts (and including AppleCare for MacBook and 3 years warranty/accidental(as a bonus) for Dell) in the UK I have £1,961 for the XPS 9570 and £3,340 for the MacBook Pro, a difference of £1,379 in the UK plus accidental cover.

Saying that, this pricing is very good in UK at the moment, it's lower than the comparable Lenovo/Asus/HP as well which would probably hover around ~£2400? Only thing stopping me pulling the trigger is thinking if I could sacrifice some of the performance and buy a Whiskey Lake laptop in a month or two, for the greater portability and WiF and get an e-GPU... As I code rather than design, most of the time I don't need the horsepower, but it would help with emulations, builds and VM's.

 

[R.P.G]

can we expect a 15Inch Macbook pro with out dedicated GPU like the 13inch we have now?

 

[KarmaRocket]

can we expect a 15Inch Macbook pro with out dedicated GPU like the 13inch we have now?

I hope not, at least they shouldn't call it a MacBook Pro then. What would make more sense is if they redesigned the MacBook Pro and just renamed the current ones MacBook. Take out the discrete GPU and have a light but powerful 13" and 15" MacBook for people who need some muscle but don't need the graphics. They can make ultra-portable MacBook Airs in 12" and/or 14" for those who need something light and portable.

The redesigned MacBook Pros would be slightly thicker and all include top shelf discrete graphics with multiple ports.

Probably won't happen since Apple makes a ton of money on dongles and wants power users to buy eGPU's if they need the graphics muscle.

 

[Leo90]

I am sticking to my MB Air 2014 the most I can. I would love to buy a new MBP and I have the money for it, I just don’t want to give Tim the impression I agree with those prices. It is absolutely insane to pay 3000 Euros for a 15 inch MBP. I am definitely voting with my wallet.

 

[Queen6]

I hope not, at least they shouldn't call it a MacBook Pro then. What would make more sense is if they redesigned the MacBook Pro and just renamed the current ones MacBook. Take out the discrete GPU and have a light but powerful 13" and 15" MacBook for people who need some muscle but don't need the graphics. They can make ultra-portable MacBook Airs in 12" and/or 14" for those who need something light and portable.

The redesigned MacBook Pros would be slightly thicker and all include top shelf discrete graphics with multiple ports.

Probably won't happen since Apple makes a ton of money on dongles and wants power users to buy eGPU's if they need the graphics muscle.

Apple's course is well and truly set, Pro is just a marketing term to impress the uninformed and push margins, with Apple deliberately designing it's hardware to require multiple additional purchases to attain basic connectivity.

If Apple can find a way to drop the dGPU it will in a heartbeat as it's always been about simplification. As for those that need "muscle" the options are simple move to an iMac Pro or switch to Windows as Apple is very unlikely to produce a flexible & performant notebook that many professional's would like to see.

Q-6
[doublepost=1537943240][/doublepost]

I am sticking to my MB Air 2014 the most I can. I would love to buy a new MBP and I have the money for it, I just don’t want to give Tim the impression I agree with those prices. It is absolutely insane to pay 3000 Euros for a 15 inch MBP. I am definitely voting with my wallet.

In the scope of being a professional tool the pricing is not an issue, however the MBP is now far too limited for many professional's. Personally I've never seen many drop the Mac since the 2016 MBP was launched and now with the 2018 you loose a lot of the benefit of the 8th Gen CPU's due to the inadequate cooling.

Apple barely plays lip service to it's users with high computational demands, mostly all show with limited go. Pricing for the average consumer being ludicrous thx to Apple's extensive margins, as they clearly want to project their product as a luxury item, similar to other fashion brands...

Q-6

 

[koyoot]

can we expect a 15Inch Macbook pro with out dedicated GPU like the 13inch we have now?

There is no 6 core CPU replacement with Intel Iris GPU. So the answer is: no.

For those who are interested. Vega 12 GPU is actually 20 CU design - 1280 GCN cores, with HBM2. Whole package, with memory is smaller than Polaris GPU, plus GDDR5, which despite the bigger GPU footprint is interesting for Apple.

 

[Falhófnir]

There is no 6 core CPU replacement with Intel Iris GPU. So the answer is: no.

For those who are interested. Vega 12 GPU is actually 20 CU design - 1280 GCN cores, with HBM2. Whole package, with memory is smaller than Polaris GPU, plus GDDR5, which despite the bigger GPU footprint is interesting for Apple.

They could potentially use the G series chips (which actually has more GPU power than the 555x!) or drop to a 28W quad U series (8559U?) if they really wanted to offer it, but they seem to have no interest in doing so. I’m still clinging to a shred of hope they might eventually come out with a 14.4 or 15” MacBook at a more reasonable price for those who have no need of a dGPU and would instead like to invest the money saved into a larger SSD size...

 

[Vonjover]

Apple's course is well and truly set, Pro is just a marketing term to impress the uninformed and push margins, with Apple deliberately designing it's hardware to require multiple additional purchases to attain basic connectivity.

If Apple can find a way to drop the dGPU it will in a heartbeat as it's always been about simplification. As for those that need "muscle" the options are simple move to an iMac Pro or switch to Windows as Apple is very unlikely to produce a flexible & performant notebook that many professional's would like to see.

Q-6
[doublepost=1537943240][/doublepost]

In the scope of being a professional tool the pricing is not an issue, however the MBP is now far too limited for many professional's. Personally I've never seen many drop the Mac since the 2016 MBP was launched and now with the 2018 you loose a lot of the benefit of the 8th Gen CPU's due to the inadequate cooling.

Apple barely plays lip service to it's users with high computational demands, mostly all show with limited go. Pricing for the average consumer being ludicrous thx to Apple's margins, as they clearly want to push their product as a luxury item, similar to other fashion brands...

Q-6

Just asking, do you mean you’ve seen people drop it as a pro tool? Or never seen people drop it?

They have been pricing their laptops out of reach in areas outside the US. Where i live, the cost of return now is just not worth investing in. I decided to buy the 2015 mbp instead.

 

[Queen6]

Just asking, do you mean you’ve seen people drop it as a pro tool? Or never seen people drop it?

They have been pricing their laptops out of reach in areas outside the US. Where i live, the cost of return now is just not worth investing in. I decided to buy the 2015 mbp instead.

Drop the Mac for professional use. For these individuals the pricing is not the issue more the lack of performance, reduced usability and reliability issues.

Q-6

 

[Vonjover]

Drop the Mac for professional use. For these individuals the pricing is not the issue more the lack of performance, reduced usability and reliability issues.

Q-6

I'm in the same boat actually and have been considering shifting once my 2015 mbp feels its age.

 

[Queen6]

I'm in the same boat actually and have been considering shifting once my 2015 mbp feels its age.

MBP was my weapon choice since it's inception, however Apple`s direction, lack of development of the Mac and the desktop OS has resulted in a product that panders to a specific audience, with no path for those that require performance and usability. I would very much like to be using a Mac that makes sense, equally there's simply no realistic option, without incurring significant downgrade.

It's also insulting the way Apple now literally Nickel & Dimes it's customers at every possible opportunity, it's certainly not an honour to purchase their product, especially when it does not live up to the expectation...

Been there myself and not a lot of fun, ultimately if you need performance and flexibility the Mac is currently the wrong platform...

Q-6

 

[Queen6]

DP

 

[cfdlab]

A former apple engineer alleges many things went wrong after Jobs died.

https://www.siliconvalley.com/2018/...fter-steve-jobs-death-former-engineer-claims/

With Apple management focused on “eliminating quality assurance and engineering positions,” employees became tied up dealing with litigation, “often for embarrassing and simple causes which never had previously happened at Apple,” Eastman alleged.

If true, 2019 may not bring good news for us unhappy users.

 

[RumorConsumer]

A former apple engineer alleges many things went wrong after Jobs died.

https://www.siliconvalley.com/2018/...fter-steve-jobs-death-former-engineer-claims/

With Apple management focused on “eliminating quality assurance and engineering positions,” employees became tied up dealing with litigation, “often for embarrassing and simple causes which never had previously happened at Apple,” Eastman alleged.

If true, 2019 may not bring good news for us unhappy users.

So here's the thing. I have some things I want fixed and that part of me would totally go with this analysis. And we've seen TONS of bugs get fixed with basically zero hour efficiency and we have recent quotes from Apple execs saying they would be fixing some software up and they know it went kinda off the rails. And there has ALWAYS been stuff we cry about forever and it doesn't get fixed. Siri was broken when Steve was around.

Some of the true bummers

Disk Utility has gone down hill in reliability (weird errors, seems to slip on its own shoelaces)
Messages is kind of a POS
Calendar wont always refresh with new appointments

Everybody has their little list.

 

[Ma2k5]

A former apple engineer alleges many things went wrong after Jobs died.

https://www.siliconvalley.com/2018/...fter-steve-jobs-death-former-engineer-claims/

With Apple management focused on “eliminating quality assurance and engineering positions,” employees became tied up dealing with litigation, “often for embarrassing and simple causes which never had previously happened at Apple,” Eastman alleged.

If true, 2019 may not bring good news for us unhappy users.

Being a fired employee, you have to take everything he said with a grain of salt. I wouldn’t however be surprised if QA has been reduced in Apple, going over my experience of iOS/macOS over the years. It’s not a rare occurrence in the industry as a whole as fast feature releases make money, while good QA doesn’t except in the long term (brand loyalty/reliability of software). You could say Apple have short term priorities, which kind of makes sense as the CEO has shareholders to please.