Waiting for 2021 MBP

[smoking monkey]

Is it possible the rumor of them not appearing until next year is about MiniLED models? Could we get 4 USB C port MBPs now and the new designs come later in the year and next year??? I can't imagine Apple will go over 2 years without a new MBP 16" computer now we are in the world of M series chips. Over 2 years! That would be crazy considering it's intel as well. Nah. We are getting new machines announced next week for sure.

 

[James Godfrey]

Is it possible the rumor of them not appearing until next year is about MiniLED models? Could we get 4 USB C port MBPs now and the new designs come later in the year and next year??? I can't imagine Apple will go over 2 years without a new MBP 16" computer now we are in the world of M series chips. Over 2 years! That would be crazy considering it's intel as well. Nah. We are getting new machines announced next week for sure.

Yeah Apple could have quite easily have planned a redesigned MBP launch later this year with miniLED, then due to miniLED production issues and the urgency to get new high end MBP’s out, they may have decided to just launch the current designed MBP’s with the M1X chip, with the intention of refreshing the design with miniLED alongside the redesigned MBA in 2022, potentially next years WWDC or possibly even later.

Let’s be honest if Apple did release the current design with M1X that will probably be enough to get people to pull the trigger, plus this benefits Apple in many ways:

-Cheaper and easier to produce and supply, shipping could potentially be fairly quick.
-Touch bar being removed on all models of the MBP at once rather than leaving it standing on the base model only for the next 12 months.
-Gives the high end MBP’s an easy 12-18 months worth of extended life before a full design refresh.

If Apple’s supplier wouldn’t have had that blackmail leak we probably would have any rumours at this point of more ports, removal of Touch Bar, 13” increasing to 14” etc… we probably would have had much clue other than a possible MBP launch this WWDC.

 

[Fomalhaut]

current 5500M 83W and that 3070 consume 93W, while this new M1x the gpu cores will consume around 40W being on par with 3070 and almost double the performance of the 5500M
This insane, and just Apple can deliver this because of the new architecture...hope others will jump the ship sooner than later and push the windows 10 apps on arm quickly because it will became ridiculous value/performance if they will not

I don't think the 5500M used in the MBP has a TDP of 83W. According to AMD's web site it has a TDP of 50W, which sounds much more reasonable: https://www.amd.com/en/graphics/radeon-apple-5000m-series

The CPU in the MBP16 has a TDP of 45W IIRC, and the whole thing has to be well under 100W (given the power supply and battery can supply around this figure, and we know that the MBP doesn't discharge the battery when plugged in, even under load).

I would expect some CPU and GPU throttling to occur to keep it below about 80W TDP combined (CPU + GPU).

 

[Serban55]

I don't think the 5500M used in the MBP has a TDP of 83W. According to AMD's web site it has a TDP of 50W, which sounds much more reasonable: https://www.amd.com/en/graphics/radeon-apple-5000m-series

The CPU in the MBP16 has a TDP of 45W IIRC, and the whole thing has to be well under 100W (given the power supply and battery can supply around this figure, and we know that the MBP doesn't discharge the battery when plugged in, even under load).

I would expect some CPU and GPU throttling to occur to keep it below about 80W TDP combined (CPU + GPU).

yes, i didnt was specific, my bad, i was talking about cpu+gpu with 5500M that consume in total around 80W etc Ty for info correction

"they may have decided to just launch the current designed MBP’s with the M1X chip"

I dont see Apple to adopt redesign for the 14" with 1080p facetime camera and so on, and let the 16" the same as it is now with 720p ,with touchbar etc just because of mini-led. The design is made months ago, if they have mini-led issues, they could make it that as an BTO that will drop the delivery date - weeks or months depending on their stock issues
They will show both 14" and 16" , glad that we got a info that the battery could stay around the same for the 16" but lets see

 

[Appletoni]

I want to buy the MacBook Pro 16 with 16 or better 32 CPU performance cores.

 

[Fomalhaut]

I want to buy the MacBook Pro 16 with 16 or better 32 CPU performance cores.

You and a few million other Mac aficionados

Personally, I'm hoping for a 14" model that is at least 50% more performant (multicore-CPU and GPU) than the current maxed-out Intel MBP16. I have an MBP16, but find it unnecessarily large when used in conjunction with an external monitor (which is 90% of my use) so I'm going to try the smaller machine next. To my mind, there wouldn't be much point in upgrading to a new Apple Silicon Mac unless the performance jump from the MBP16 is "impressive".

It might not happen this year, I know...but if a new 14" MacBook Pro really does have 8 performance cores and double the current number of GPU cores, then it should be a huge step up from the current M1 machines.

 

[James Godfrey]

NOT LONG TO GO NOW!!!!

Just was thinking looking at history if the Apple store goes down ahead of WWDC it’s pretty certain hardware is coming at the event!

2017 - Apple Store went down, they announced Macs, iPad and HomePod etc…

2018 - Never went down, no hardware announced.

2019 - Never went down, Mac Pro and Pro Display XDR announced BUT didn’t ship until late that year.

2020 - Never went down, no hardware announced.

So if the store does not go down ahead of WWDC, it’s safe to say either we won’t get hardware or we will get hardware announced but releasing later in the year.

 

[cullenl87]

What current equivalent do we expect the 32 core model to meet?

 

[terminator-jq]

What current equivalent do we expect the 32 core model to meet?

Current estimates look something like this (note that in all cases, the Apple chip gives similar performance while using less power).

M1 8 core GPU = Nvidia 1050ti (desktop)

M1X 16 core GPU = AMD 5500m (mid tier 2019 16” MacBook Pro)

M1X 32 core GPU = Nvidia 3070 (laptop version. So I’m desktop terms it would be somewhere between the Nvidia 2080 and 3060ti).

With these estimates in mind, I am leaning a lot more towards the 32core GPU being standard on the 16” while the 16 core comes on the 14”. Not only for power consumption (since the 14” will have a smaller battery) but also because Apple likes to brag about performance increases in CPU and… GPU power for the M chips compared to the previous Intel models. If Apple puts the 16 core version in the 16” it will only show slight performance improvements over the base model 2019 16” and will be relatively equal to the mid tier version. In other words, not anything to brag about on bar graphs. On the flip side, the 16 core GPU would be a big improvement for the 14” compared to the previous models while the 32 core would be a great improvement for the 16”.

Now where things get sticky is reports (and leaked chip ids) showing 2 versions of the M1X for each model pointing to some sort of optional upgrade. Some rumors are saying this is simply the option of 16 or 32 GPU cores for each model which would be awesome for the 14” but for the reasons above, it doesn’t make much sense for the 16”.

Perhaps we see some extra abilities added. Maybe it’s 32 core GPU exclusive for the 16” and 16 cores exclusive for the 14” but Apple offers another way to upgrade. Maybe something similar to the Apple Afterburner card that can offer increases in performance for certain task. Or maybe ray tracing abilities. So you might have a lineup like this:

$1799 14” M1X 16 core
$1999 14” M1X 16 core w/ ray tracing

$2399 16” M1X 32 core
$2799 16” M1X 32 core w/ ray tracing and afterburner

We shall see in just a couple days! Hopefully the base model 16” comes ready to rock. I know I’m getting 32 cores either way but it would be nice if it’s standard.

 

[mdgm]

It could make sense for a 16 core GPU to be available for a more budget friendly (well relatively speaking) 16" option. Not everyone that gets 16" laptops needs a good GPU. I'm still using a 15" from mid-2014. If I needed a fast modern GPU then I would have upgraded by now (though part of the reason I haven't upgraded yet is that the storage is no longer replaceable. One has to save up more if one has to buy all the storage one will ever need internally in the machine when buying it rather than delaying a storage upgrade to years after purchase - I only upgraded from 512GB to 2TB in my current MBP last year).

 

[Rashy]

The M370X in my MBP2015 makes 1 TFLOPS and my entry iMac 5K 2017 about 3.6TFLOPS. If the 16-core variant already breaks the 5TFLOPS barrier (roughly matching a RX580 or GTX1060/70 desktop) while draining much less power (=heat, noise) I would be pretty happy already and could go for the combination of 14" MBP + LG Ultrafine 4K, no more need for two separate systems.

Now my only pain remaining is the lack of compatibility compared to the Intel-era chips. Both x86 and Bootcamp were pretty handy to make most things run besides the small 10% market share, including games and 3D/CGI/CAD. Blender still isn't optimized for Metal or the M1. I hope the situation will improve over the next 1-2 years and strong chips = popular Macbooks can help with that.

 

[PeterJP]

Now my only pain remaining is the lack of compatibility compared to the Intel-era chips. Both x86 and Bootcamp were pretty handy to make most things run besides the small 10% market share, including games and 3D/CGI/CAD. Blender still isn't optimized for Metal or the M1. I hope the situation will improve over the next 1-2 years and strong chips = popular Macbooks can help with that.

Yeah, fair point. I have a Windows VM in Parallels that I fire up from time to time and I' sure I'll miss it. I still sometimes encounter situations where a tool only supports Windows. I have Windows machines machines at work and at home, though, so I'll have to log in to one of those to get stuff done. It's infrequent so very little hassle.

Another point is that Hackintoshes will stay stuck on this sauna heater version of Intel with no advances. That removes another option that I frequently entertained but in practice used even less than the Windows VM. So all in all, a regrettable loss of options but without much real-life impact for me.

 

[MLVC]

Yeah, fair point. I have a Windows VM in Parallels that I fire up from time to time and I' sure I'll miss it. I still sometimes encounter situations where a tool only supports Windows. I have Windows machines machines at work and at home, though, so I'll have to log in to one of those to get stuff done. It's infrequent so very little hassle.

Another point is that Hackintoshes will stay stuck on this sauna heater version of Intel with no advances. That removes another option that I frequently entertained but in practice used even less than the Windows VM. So all in all, a regrettable loss of options but without much real-life impact for me.

I have to use windows for work software, used Parallels before (will still try their Apple silicon compatible version of course as nothing beats the integration of Parallels) but have set up a VM on my Synology NAS that works rather well for what I need it for. So happy I don’t depend on the Parallels setup.

Now just announce the new MBPs tomorrow Apple, the rumors are driving me a bit crazy lol.

 

[Fomalhaut]

Current estimates look something like this (note that in all cases, the Apple chip gives similar performance while using less power).

M1 8 core GPU = Nvidia 1050ti (desktop)

M1X 16 core GPU = AMD 5500m (mid tier 2019 16” MacBook Pro)

M1X 32 core GPU = Nvidia 3070 (laptop version. So I’m desktop terms it would be somewhere between the Nvidia 2080 and 3060ti).

With these estimates in mind, I am leaning a lot more towards the 32core GPU being standard on the 16” while the 16 core comes on the 14”. Not only for power consumption (since the 14” will have a smaller battery) but also because Apple likes to brag about performance increases in CPU and… GPU power for the M chips compared to the previous Intel models. If Apple puts the 16 core version in the 16” it will only show slight performance improvements over the base model 2019 16” and will be relatively equal to the mid tier version. In other words, not anything to brag about on bar graphs. On the flip side, the 16 core GPU would be a big improvement for the 14” compared to the previous models while the 32 core would be a great improvement for the 16”.

Now where things get sticky is reports (and leaked chip ids) showing 2 versions of the M1X for each model pointing to some sort of optional upgrade. Some rumors are saying this is simply the option of 16 or 32 GPU cores for each model which would be awesome for the 14” but for the reasons above, it doesn’t make much sense for the 16”.

Perhaps we see some extra abilities added. Maybe it’s 32 core GPU exclusive for the 16” and 16 cores exclusive for the 14” but Apple offers another way to upgrade. Maybe something similar to the Apple Afterburner card that can offer increases in performance for certain task. Or maybe ray tracing abilities. So you might have a lineup like this:

$1799 14” M1X 16 core
$1999 14” M1X 16 core w/ ray tracing

$2399 16” M1X 32 core
$2799 16” M1X 32 core w/ ray tracing and afterburner

We shall see in just a couple days! Hopefully the base model 16” comes ready to rock. I know I’m getting 32 cores either way but it would be nice if it’s standard.

I'm hoping that a 16-core GPU would be a lot better than an AMD Radeon Pro 5500M. The 8-core M1 is already quite close to that in Metal benchmarks (c. 22,000 vs c. 28000). I would hope that the any SoC with 16 GPU cores would be on a par (or better) than the AMD 5600M in the MBP16 (Metal score of c. 40,000). If not, it would be disappointing.

I already have an MBP16 with an 8GB 5500M, so I won't be upgrading unless the new MBPs are similar to 5600M performance levels; no point otherwise!

 

[Fomalhaut]

It could make sense for a 16 core GPU to be available for a more budget friendly (well relatively speaking) 16" option. Not everyone that gets 16" laptops needs a good GPU. I'm still using a 15" from mid-2014. If I needed a fast modern GPU then I would have upgraded by now (though part of the reason I haven't upgraded yet is that the storage is no longer replaceable. One has to save up more if one has to buy all the storage one will ever need internally in the machine when buying it rather than delaying a storage upgrade to years after purchase - I only upgraded from 512GB to 2TB in my current MBP last year).

I would expect the 14" MBP to have 16-core GPU only, and the 16" MBP to have a base configuration with 16-core GPU with an option to upgrade to a larger one (hopefully 32-core, but could be only 24)

 

[frosty18]

Really hoping the new 16 inch starts at $1,999 this time around, with the savings from Apple silicon and the disappearance of the Touch Bar it would be great to bring the starting price down a bit and make the 16 core gpu standard. I really wanted a new iMac to complement my M1 Pro but these new MacBooks sound very enticing, hopefully the trade in values on the M1 machines will be good.

 

[James Godfrey]

Really hoping the new 16 inch starts at $1,999 this time around, with the savings from Apple silicon and the disappearance of the Touch Bar it would be great to bring the starting price down a bit and make the 16 core gpu standard. I really wanted a new iMac to complement my M1 Pro but these new MacBooks sound very enticing, hopefully the trade in values on the M1 machines will be good.

Yeah I am 100% hoping for a price drop doubt it will happen though… Apple are greedy at the end of the day… but you really never know what’s going to happen.

 

[terminator-jq]

Now my only pain remaining is the lack of compatibility compared to the Intel-era chips. Both x86 and Bootcamp were pretty handy to make most things run besides the small 10% market share, including games and 3D/CGI/CAD. Blender still isn't optimized for Metal or the M1. I hope the situation will improve over the next 1-2 years and strong chips = popular Macbooks can help with that.

Not sure about games but it shouldn’t be too much longer for 3D. I know Blender 2.93 officially added M1 support (and I’m sure the M1X will run it with even better performance without any code changes). I’ve heard rumblings that Modo will also be adding Arm support and I’m sure C4D won’t be too far behind seeing how it made an appearance during the M1 reveal event. Maya is the only one I haven’t heard anything about although I’m sure it’s coming.

I will definitely be using my machine for heavy 3D task. My 2019 16” can practically heat my house. I’m really hoping these M1X models have better thermals and fan noise. Definitely eager to see how they perform in 3D too. Maybe I’ll make a short video showing some comparisons since 3D pushes a computer for everything it’s got.

 

[gadgetfreaky]

Now my only pain remaining is the lack of compatibility compared to the Intel-era chips. Both x86 and Bootcamp were pretty handy to make most things run besides the small 10% market share, including games and 3D/CGI/CAD. Blender still isn't optimized for Metal or the M1. I hope the situation will improve over the next 1-2 years and strong chips = popular Macbooks can help with that.

This is my main issue too going to M1x from an Intel Chip and tempts me to just go with the 11th generation Intel chip which I think they may still offer.

Windows still has a few strategy games and RPGs I like to play and bootcamp is essential for this. It feels like it will be at least 2-3 years before this is addressed thru one fashion or another.

 

[stuffx]

It appears that a special event will be held tomorrow after the WWDC keynote, which may be focusing on Spatial Audio, not MacBook Pro. And it seems like Prosser is having a doubt at very last minutes.

 

[jk73]

For non-Twitter people, what are the poll results? Thanks.

 

[stuffx]

For non-Twitter people, what are the poll results? Thanks.

 

[jk73]

Thanks. Hope so.

 

[MrGunny94]

It could make sense for a 16 core GPU to be available for a more budget friendly (well relatively speaking) 16" option. Not everyone that gets 16" laptops needs a good GPU. I'm still using a 15" from mid-2014. If I needed a fast modern GPU then I would have upgraded by now (though part of the reason I haven't upgraded yet is that the storage is no longer replaceable. One has to save up more if one has to buy all the storage one will ever need internally in the machine when buying it rather than delaying a storage upgrade to years after purchase - I only upgraded from 512GB to 2TB in my current MBP last year).

16 Core GPU for Base Model would make sense for both 14" and 16". I would really love to see a 14" packing a punch as with 32 Core but I doubt it will happen due to thermal envelope....

I am curious to see if they deliver 16GB of Unified Memory front on those 14".....

 

[UltimateSyn]

I want to see a ton of optimism in here this morning. Today is the day.