What makes these Broadwell MBPr's better than the Haswell?

[Hieveryone]

I have a Haswell one (late 2013). Although I got it bumped up to 2.6 so it's the same as the mid 2014 (2.6/8/256).

These new ones don't seem that much better. I mean yes faster read speeds but I mean all I do is open apps like Chrome, notes, iMessage, calendar, keynote, etc and check mail. I watch YouTube a lot.

And yes 1 hr better life on the 13" I believe, but it's not like battery is up to 12 hours or something crazy big.

Yes the graphics are better, but I mean what could I do more with the better graphics that I can't do now?

I use an Xbox One for games (love it).

I guess I'm just somewhat confused as to what the hype is about Broadwell.

What am I missing by not having Broadwell and using Haswell?

Also, what is Skylake and why is that going to be so great relative to Haswell?

 

[Jayayess1190]

You mentioned everything better about Broadwell. Faster speeds, better graphics, being 14nm which is supposed to give better battery life and run cooler. Compared to Haswell it is not a huge upgrade, but for those coming from older architectures it is a nice bump.

Skylake brings even more. It is supposed to be even larger bumps in graphics performance and cpu speeds. Plus features like wireless charging and DDR4 ram support. It will bring us a step closer to completely fanless laptops that still have performance. It is being hyped to be the biggest upgrade to laptops since Sandy Bridge in 2011. Hopefully it will deliver.

 

[magicMac]

You mentioned everything better about Broadwell. Faster speeds, better graphics, being 14nm which is supposed to give better battery life and run cooler. Compared to Haswell it is not a huge upgrade, but for those coming from older architectures it is a nice bump.

Skylake brings even more. It is supposed to be even larger bumps in graphics performance and cpu speeds. Plus features like wireless charging and DDR4 ram support. It will bring us a step closer to completely fanless laptops that still have performance. It is being hyped to be the biggest upgrade to laptops since Sandy Bridge in 2011. Hopefully it will deliver.

Damn, you make me feel like I should have waited out a bit longer before upgrade !

 

[Hieveryone]

I'm just confused about what I'm missing out on. I don't want the Air because no retina and not enough ports.

I need 2 USB (actually 3 is ideal), HDMI, AND an SD card slot. So basically I need a Pro, not Air or MacBook.

But again all I do is YouTube, chrome browsing, calendar, notes, numbers, keynote, mail, etc.

For my use, I'm thinking I'll be good for a long time?

I understand the 2012 MBPr has such a weak graphics card it was stressed for tasks as simple as Genie effect on the retina screen.

But luckily I got Haswell, so I mean, for my use, I just don't see me upgrading anytime soon am I right?

 

[Jayayess1190]

I'm just confused about what I'm missing out on. I don't want the Air because no retina and not enough ports.

I need 2 USB (actually 3 is ideal), HDMI, AND an SD card slot. So basically I need a Pro, not Air or MacBook.

But again all I do is YouTube, chrome browsing, calendar, notes, numbers, keynote, mail, etc.

For my use, I'm thinking I'll be good for a long time?

I understand the 2012 MBPr has such a weak graphics card it was stressed for tasks as simple as Genie effect on the retina screen.

But luckily I got Haswell, so I mean, for my use, I just don't see me upgrading anytime soon am I right?

Yes for you Haswell will be fine for years to come.

 

[macguy360]

Here's the thing to think about.

With past iterations of downscaling in build process, the increments were always like 30% or less.

In the 1990's you had 90nm process, then post 2000 you had 65nm, followed by 45nm, followed by 32nm, 28nm, then 22nm and finally 14nm.

Decreases as a percentage
90 to 65nm = 28%
65 to 45nm = 31%
45 to 32nm = 29%
32nm to 28nm = 12.5%
28nm to 22nm = 21.5%
22nm to 14nm = 36.4%

That is a huge change in the nm size. Here is the thing that Apple didn't emphasize because when they talk battery life, it is always about maximum battery life potential and not about battery life under strenuous tasks.

The huge change in process build from 22nm to 14nm means that the Broadwell processors will not be using nearly as much energy at maximum load compared to Haswell processors.

At the same time, the Broadwell processors will not be producing nearly as much heat as Haswell processors. That means that the batteries and internals of the laptop will not be exposed to as much heat day in and day out. The batteries will last longer because they aren't being exposed to higher temps. The other components should last longer as well.

 

[Z3man]

What size nm will Skylake be.

 

[Alakagom]

What size nm will Skylake be.

14nm. ( after Skylake and its tock Cannonlake will be 10nm)

That's why Skylake will be update most about performance and graphics wise, not battery. Basically following, one decent update per release. Intel really doesn't need to do much more with no competitor near them.

 

[snaky69]

I'm just confused about what I'm missing out on. I don't want the Air because no retina and not enough ports.

I need 2 USB (actually 3 is ideal), HDMI, AND an SD card slot. So basically I need a Pro, not Air or MacBook.

But again all I do is YouTube, chrome browsing, calendar, notes, numbers, keynote, mail, etc.

For my use, I'm thinking I'll be good for a long time?

I understand the 2012 MBPr has such a weak graphics card it was stressed for tasks as simple as Genie effect on the retina screen.

But luckily I got Haswell, so I mean, for my use, I just don't see me upgrading anytime soon am I right?

I usually upgrade when the computer no longer meets my needs, not when something new comes out.

 

[thadoggfather]

I usually upgrade when the computer no longer meets my needs, not when something new comes out.

That's an excellent philosophy to have

thumbs up!

 

[Hieveryone]

That's an excellent philosophy to have

thumbs up!

I completely agree. Upgrade when it no longer meets your needs. I think that should be the standard by which everyone should go by from now on.

 

[leman]

There is certainly not much reason to upgrade to Broadwell if you already have a Haswell rMBP.

As to what to makes Broadwell models better — they are faster in typical real-life uses, they are more efficient at media tasks and they have a faster GPU; besides that the new trackpad is really cool and the longer battery life is a nice bonus.

 

[DanGoh]

I usually upgrade when the computer no longer meets my needs, not when something new comes out.

Yup. Yup. Yup. No need to worry about having the lastest thing. As long as my machine does things in a timely manner it's all good!

 

[snaky69]

I completely agree. Upgrade when it no longer meets your needs. I think that should be the standard by which everyone should go by from now on.

Then why start this thread, if I may ask?

 

[macguy360]

Then why start this thread, if I may ask?

Lol you make a good point.

 

[TechGod]

I completely agree. Upgrade when it no longer meets your needs. I think that should be the standard by which everyone should go by from now on.

Yet you were considering buying the 2015 model?

 

[Hieveryone]

Yet you were considering buying the 2015 model?

Yes. Because I never thought about it as quoted. I always assumed you've got to upgrade just because Apple made a newer better product.

I never thought "but is this one I have good enough for what I use? How will the new one enhance my life"

Apple is very good at taking my money constantly year after year

 

[TechGod]

Yes. Because I never thought about it as quoted. I always assumed you've got to upgrade just because Apple made a newer better product.

I never thought "but is this one I have good enough for what I use? How will the new one enhance my life"

Apple is very good at taking my money constantly year after year

How old are you?

 

[Hieveryone]

How old are you?

It's about a year old. I have the late 2013.

 

[TechGod]

It's about a year old. I have the late 2013.

No, I meant your age.

 

[greenbreadmmm]

Here's the thing to think about.

With past iterations of downscaling in build process, the increments were always like 30% or less.

In the 1990's you had 90nm process, then post 2000 you had 65nm, followed by 45nm, followed by 32nm, 28nm, then 22nm and finally 14nm.

Decreases as a percentage
90 to 65nm = 28%
65 to 45nm = 31%
45 to 32nm = 29%
32nm to 28nm = 12.5%
28nm to 22nm = 21.5%
22nm to 14nm = 36.4%

That is a huge change in the nm size. Here is the thing that Apple didn't emphasize because when they talk battery life, it is always about maximum battery life potential and not about battery life under strenuous tasks.

The huge change in process build from 22nm to 14nm means that the Broadwell processors will not be using nearly as much energy at maximum load compared to Haswell processors.

At the same time, the Broadwell processors will not be producing nearly as much heat as Haswell processors. That means that the batteries and internals of the laptop will not be exposed to as much heat day in and day out. The batteries will last longer because they aren't being exposed to higher temps. The other components should last longer as well.

Does that mean they can run at turbo/full tdp longer because they don't warm up as quick?

 

[dusk007]

Well Macguy360 math is wrong because ever since 45nm they just call those technology nodes something what they think their combined transistor tech should sound like. They just keep the naming in the same schema but it has less and less to do with reality.

Still the general idea is right. While you notice less difference when there is little to no load, because the chips just make up only a smaller portion of the power cake, under medium or high load the newer processes like 14nm are significantly better.
At the low load that Apple does its battery life tests with, there is probably a smaller difference than in real battery life that you get with flash websites, vlc videos and background apps.

Essentially the new 14nm chips will net you better battery life first. Performance boost is secondary and rather small in the 28W chips that the Pro uses (the 17W Air chips get a bigger relative performance boost) It is mostly just battery life, which isn't bad with Haswell either, it is just quite a bit better still.

 

[macguy360]

Well Macguy360 math is wrong because ever since 45nm they just call those technology nodes something what they think their combined transistor tech should sound like. They just keep the naming in the same schema but it has less and less to do with reality.

Still the general idea is right. While you notice less difference when there is little to no load, because the chips just make up only a smaller portion of the power cake, under medium or high load the newer processes like 14nm are significantly better.
At the low load that Apple does its battery life tests with, there is probably a smaller difference than in real battery life that you get with flash websites, vlc videos and background apps.

Essentially the new 14nm chips will net you better battery life first. Performance boost is secondary and rather small in the 28W chips that the Pro uses (the 17W Air chips get a bigger relative performance boost) It is mostly just battery life, which isn't bad with Haswell either, it is just quite a bit better still.

So apparently Dailytech's math is wrong also. Their article seems pretty accurate. They also indicate the same % as me.

http://www.dailytech.com/Intels+BroadwellBase+Core+iSeries+SoCs+Finally+Hits+the+Market/article37051.htm

The thing that makes the new 2015 rmbp worth it is the tech that is in the Broadwell processors is way better than the tech in the Haswell. Also with the slowing down of producing newer fabs we likely won't see anything in the 11nm for a while. The only thing that may be worth waiting for would be Skylake.

 

[2IS]

I'm just confused about what I'm missing out on. I don't want the Air because no retina and not enough ports.

I need 2 USB (actually 3 is ideal), HDMI, AND an SD card slot. So basically I need a Pro, not Air or MacBook.

But again all I do is YouTube, chrome browsing, calendar, notes, numbers, keynote, mail, etc.

For my use, I'm thinking I'll be good for a long time?

I understand the 2012 MBPr has such a weak graphics card it was stressed for tasks as simple as Genie effect on the retina screen.

But luckily I got Haswell, so I mean, for my use, I just don't see me upgrading anytime soon am I right?

It's not that confusing. You're missing out on all the things you mentioned in your OP. You need to keep in mind that not everyone is looking at these new machines has a late 2013 Haswell rMBP. For people like you with fairly current machines, the differences aren't much to get excited about, but for others is huge.

 

[Mr.C]

It's not that confusing. You're missing out on all the things you mentioned in your OP. You need to keep in mind that not everyone is looking at these new machines has a late 2013 Haswell rMBP. For people like you with fairly current machines, the differences aren't much to get excited about, but for others is huge.

Very true. I have a first generation MacBook Air and a 2011 Mac Mini. I don't use the MacBook Air anymore as my parents use it for Internet, email and Skype. I want to give my Mac Mini to my Dad and replace essentially both computers with a new Retina MacBook Pro.

I could wait for Skylake based models but I'm not sure if it's really worth it in my case. I think I'm just going to go with one of the new 13" Retina MacBook Pros. Currently my Mac Mini is connected to my 32" Sony Bravia TV which is neither ideal nor practical. Plus I want something which is portable. I also want something with an SSD rather then a standard HD.