Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Waiting for the 2020 MBP

Falhófnir said:
Switching to AMD would still likely be a big chunk of work (both for Apple optimising the OS, and for developers updating apps) if you wanted to maximise the benefits. I think too any people see AMD as an easy drop in replacement, but despite being x86 their chips are still going to be very different to Intel's. Unlike Windows which is designed to try and get on with all platforms as best it can, MacOS is a finely tuned OS which has only had to run on Intel chips for over a decade.
Click to expand...

I don't think this is true. Of course they need to work on driver support, but even the Hackintosh community gets macOS running on AMD systems quite easily. Catalina is x86_64 only and that instruction set was developed by AMD, Intel has a (cross)license to use it as well. Apple started migrating some Intel-only features (like QuickSync) to the T2 chip. The T2 chip might do a better job at these tasks but the main benefit from this all is they are less dependent on Intel. Also from the past we know they've compiled every software project for both Intel and PowerPC for many years. Apple has grown immensely since then. I'm sure they've labs running macOS and other projects on many, many different architectures and systems.

Intel really has a huge problem. They are years behind AMD at this moment, Apple is dropping them within 1-2 years and other manufacturers are moving to AMD (and even ARM is gaining marketshare in the server business).
 
  • Like
Reactions: ascender, Anonymous Freak and 09872738
Falhófnir said:
Switching to AMD would still likely be a big chunk of work (both for Apple optimising the OS, and for developers updating apps) if you wanted to maximise the benefits. I think too any people see AMD as an easy drop in replacement, but despite being x86 their chips are still going to be very different to Intel's. Unlike Windows which is designed to try and get on with all platforms as best it can, MacOS is a finely tuned OS which has only had to run on Intel chips for over a decade. Then of course if you put in the effort, you'd be at the mercy of AMD staying ahead of Intel in the future. While AMD absolutely deserve to do well with these 4000 series chips, I don't think they're a good fit for Apple that likes µm precise optimisation of hardware and software interoperation. Nor for that matter are Intel if they're not going to be consistently pushing out the best performing chips going forward.
Click to expand...

I kind of think Apple could get developers to write byte code so that their code it's compatible with Intel and any future ARM processors... Then they get the ability to use that same byte code to also compile for AMD. That should have been someone's goal...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Falhófnir
MakeAppleAwesomeAgain said:
I don't think this is true. Of course they need to work on driver support, but even the Hackintosh community gets macOS running on AMD systems quite easily. Catalina is x86_64 only and that instruction set was developed by AMD, Intel has a (cross)license to use it as well. Apple started migrating some Intel-only features (like QuickSync) to the T2 chip. The T2 chip might do a better job at these tasks but the main benefit from this all is they are less dependent on Intel. Also from the past we know they've compiled every software project for both Intel and PowerPC for many years. Apple has grown immensely since then. I'm sure they've labs running macOS and other projects on many, many different architectures and systems.

Intel really has a huge problem. They are years behind AMD at this moment, Apple is dropping them within 1-2 years and other manufacturers are moving to AMD (and even ARM is gaining marketshare in the server business).
Click to expand...
Maybe, though 'working' might be easy, but really tightly optimised is always going to require effort. AMD Zen has different strengths and weaknesses to Intel's Core architecture (single vs multi performance, differences in simultaneous multithreading operation, different clocking and throttling behaviour etc) so I would assume the OS would need to be tweaked to know how to get the most out of these chips? Absolutely would make sense if they were going AMD long term, but for an interim solution that seems a lot of unnecessary additional work. I suppose June should bring more clarity with regards to that.

MakeAppleAwesomeAgain said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1247934674472755200
Click to expand...
Interesting, this suggests both models are being taken forward (I can't see them abandoning the $1,799+ price point entirely?) I'm guessing the imminent Pro release will be an updated (magic keyboard/ 13" screen) model with a 15W Ice Lake CPU for $1,299/1,499 and it will only be the higher end 28W Pro updated to 14" later in the year with the other mini LED releases?
 
Falhófnir said:
Maybe, though 'working' might be easy, but really tightly optimised is always going to require effort. AMD Zen has different strengths and weaknesses to Intel's Core architecture (single vs multi performance, differences in simultaneous multithreading operation, different clocking and throttling behaviour etc) so I would assume the OS would need to be tweaked to know how to get the most out of these chips? Absolutely would make sense if they were going AMD long term, but for an interim solution that seems a lot of unnecessary additional work. I suppose June should bring more clarity with regards to that.


Interesting, this suggests both models are being taken forward (I can't see them abandoning the $1,799+ price point entirely?) I'm guessing the imminent Pro release will be an updated (magic keyboard/ 13" screen) model with a 15W Ice Lake CPU for $1,299/1,499 and it will only be the higher end 28W Pro updated to 14" later in the year with the other mini LED releases?
Click to expand...
MakeAppleAwesomeAgain said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1247934674472755200
Click to expand...
I suppose it does make sense to update both if there can be a decent enough performance gain for the 28W compared to the 15W. I’m hoping that the 14” comes soon but I can’t see mini led being ready until at least September although it apparently hasn’t been affected by coronavirus. It’s got me hoping that we might see a £1799 model with more ram and storage as standard soon
 
Last edited:
involuntarheely said:
yeah to be honest it seems to me like macOS development is not as high priority as iOS/ipadOS for Apple. I'm not sure about how much profits macbooks bring to Apple compared to iphones/ipads. so while I agree it would make sense for Apple to use their own ARM chips on new macbooks, it will also require significant investment on the software part. which, given how Catalina is being developed, is not a given.
would you trust a first-generation ARM macbook on a first-generation ARM macOS? Apple can't even fix the bugs in macOS now, I have little confidence they could make the transition very smooth. it would take a year at least.

on the other hand bringing more and more desktop features to ipadOS seems like a clear win. the need for a Macbook Air in the future might just disappear given that ipads will be more and more powerful and feature-rich.
even now, with the bad heating issues, most people recomment the macbook Air for those who mostly want to do web browsing, word processing, simple stuff. but you can already do most of this stuff on an ipad. now imagine ipadOS in 2 years: I'm betting it will be possible to do more and more. and fewer people will actually really need macOS.

if I had $100mil to spend on either development of ipadOS or porting macOS to ARM, I'd definitely spend them on developing ipadOS. intel processors suck? bring AMD to macbooks.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think it's also worth considering whether or not it's worth the investment for Apple at this point, especially now that Intel kind of has their act together and AMD is releasing compelling products. You can put together an Air with a A14X but it won't do things consumers expect it to do. And Intel actually has good products in that space now and in the near future.

Falhófnir said:
Switching to AMD would still likely be a big chunk of work (both for Apple optimising the OS, and for developers updating apps) if you wanted to maximise the benefits. I think too any people see AMD as an easy drop in replacement, but despite being x86 their chips are still going to be very different to Intel's. Unlike Windows which is designed to try and get on with all platforms as best it can, MacOS is a finely tuned OS which has only had to run on Intel chips for over a decade. Then of course if you put in the effort, you'd be at the mercy of AMD staying ahead of Intel in the future. While AMD absolutely deserve to do well with these 4000 series chips, I don't think they're a good fit for Apple that likes µm precise optimisation of hardware and software interoperation. Nor for that matter are Intel if they're not going to be consistently pushing out the best performing chips going forward.
Click to expand...
Much easier than ARM, but these concerns are fair. AMD also only makes sense in one machine (the MBP 15) right now, which means they would be optimizing the MBP 13 and Air around Ice/Tiger Lake and the 15 around Renoir/the alleged RDNA2 APU going forward.

I will say I think AMD being a poor fit for precise optimization is something that is changing. AMD has always been very willing to give Apple exactly the GPU they need. And while Intel used to be happy to give Apple a special 28W chip, it's taken them quite a while to get that chip to Apple this time. On the other hand, AMD's ability to deliver has really improved since they switched to TSMC -- a reliable manufacturer Apple is familiar with. And AMD's work with ASUS shows they are finally starting to work directly with ODM's in a way they haven't before.

If AMD could get a 5nm APU out next year, I think that would be hard for Apple to ignore. Otherwise, it may depend on whether Intel's 7nm node is a success.

MakeAppleAwesomeAgain said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1247934674472755200
Click to expand...
Well, here it is. MBP 13 with Ice Lake incoming. Be sure to grab the model with the 1068G7.

Side note, but does anyone else find the processors Apple is including with some of these machines in the base models distressing? Like the Air starts with a nonfunctional two core Ice Lake processor with UHD graphics, and now we're using 15W parts in the MBP13?
 
Last edited:
awesomedeluxe said:
I think it's also worth considering whether or not it's worth the investment for Apple at this point, especially now that Intel kind of has their act together and AMD is releasing compelling products.
Click to expand...
That Asus with Ryzen 4000 is amazing at $1500 price point. Beats the MBP 16 in all terms except the LCD. Base MBP 13 will be likely at $1500 with 16gb ram upgrade, and it holds no comparison against Ryzen.
 
No, WWDC. That Jon Prosser guy seems to be predicting something every other day, don't think I can take him seriously.
 
piecookie said:
Let's talk dates again. Do you think it's bound for WWDC? Or is it possible that Apple may release it any day now?
Click to expand...
I think it’ll be a May release. Unless by some miracle Mini Led is ready then it could get a WWDC Announcement but I doubt (but hope) that’ll happen
 
According to Jon Prosser there will be a MBP release in May and additionally something MBP related happening at WWDC. Kuo also hinted at a MBP refresh by Q2.
Is it possible that Apple silently refreshes the low end MBP (2xThunderbolt) in May with 13“ and introduces the new high end MBP (4xThunderbolt) with 14“ and Mini-LED at WWDC next to the MBP 16“ Mini-LED refresh?
 
  • Like
Reactions: foliage
stlow said:
According to Jon Prosser there will be a MBP release in May and additionally something MBP related happening at WWDC. Kuo also hinted at a MBP refresh by Q2.
Is it possible that Apple silently refreshes the low end MBP (2xThunderbolt) in May with 13“ and introduces the new high end MBP (4xThunderbolt) with 14“ and Mini-LED at WWDC next to the MBP 16“ Mini-LED refresh?
Click to expand...

I don’t see the 13” MBP lineup being split into 2 different screen sizes. The 13” MBP variant will be too similar to the Air and it will be just confusing
 
  • Like
Reactions: SvenLorenz1975
I still don't understand why the two-tiered Macbook Pro 13" offering exists. Computer with 2 TB3 ports is not a 'Pro' laptop so maybe they should just call that one a Macbook instead of Macbook Pro

Or even better, get rid of it completely and offer the 4 TB3, 28W model at $1499 starting price
 
  • Like
Reactions: sub150
ctjack said:
That Asus with Ryzen 4000 is amazing at $1500 price point. Beats the MBP 16 in all terms except the LCD. Base MBP 13 will be likely at $1500 with 16gb ram upgrade, and it holds no comparison against Ryzen.
Click to expand...
I agree the Ryzen is impressive but let's not get out of control here. On top of the screen the MBP still has better speakers and microphones, better SSD, better trackpad, better fingerprint sensor, more thunderbolt ports, larger battery, and far better customer support on the back end. And of course MacOS. There's a lot more to these things than CPU/GPU performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: souko and HappyIntro
"If" the 14' is released in May or June w/o the mini LED

what is the "likelihood" the screen will be later added in a Fall update refresh for the above 14'?
 
Useless Touchbar said:
I still don't understand why the two-tiered Macbook Pro 13" offering exists. Computer with 2 TB3 ports is not a 'Pro' laptop so maybe they should just call that one a Macbook instead of Macbook Pro
Click to expand...

I got a couple of them for a few co-workers and they basically behave exactly the same as the more expensive ones for all tasks, including demanding ones. The processors go up to the same GHz in boost anyway. So when you get one of those 2-TB plug-in docks, you're all set for way less money. And yes, that's professional use.

mikethebigo said:
I agree the Ryzen is impressive but let's not get out of control here. On top of the screen the MBP still has better speakers and microphones, better SSD, better trackpad, better fingerprint sensor, more thunderbolt ports, larger battery, and far better customer support on the back end. And of course MacOS. There's a lot more to these things than CPU/GPU performance.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. The mac is more than just CPU/GPU. But now swap in the Ryzen 4000 into the rest of the great components and it gets even better :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ModusOperandi
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back