I just can not understand why Apple just could not put in something like core i7 8805 Intel plus AMD APU and gives us good gpu performance in 13-14 inch form factor? I am really hoping for 14 inch redesign with scissor kb, 16Gb ram(32Gb option)/256Gb SSD by default and dGPU option!
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 2020 MBP
- Thread starter Dulcimer
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 2020 macbook pro
- Sort by reaction score
Honestly, I think Willow Cove launching in 2022 would be brutal for Intel even if it were right on track. We're not seeing amazing performance out of 10nm. Intel needs to figure out EUV and hit it out of the park with 7nm or they are going to bleed in the laptop sector.
Think about where AMD will be in 2022. A very conservative prediction would be rolling out Zen 4 on TSMC's 6nm process. There will probably be the same gap between the performance of TSMC's 6nm process and Intel's current 10nm process as there is between TSMC's OG 7nm and Intel's 14nm++ process right now. This is a bad scenario for Intel, and probably their best-case scenario, which leaves Intel exposed to the same amount of risk they're exposed to right now but for several more years.
Now just for fun, imagine AMD rolls out a Zen 4 + refined Navi APU on TSMC's 5nm process in 2H 2022. It comes with tons of variants with more or less cores and CUs and there may even be one with fat stacks of HBM2E for a very special customer. Is it possible for Intel to compete with this without getting to a better process?
This is exactly what I want. i7/14/256/16 in space grey (or black).
It does make me sad that Apple didn't jump on Kaby G, because it was a really cool product, and seemed perfect for the 13. But Kaby was old when it launched, and it's really old now.
What I've heard is Kaby G was less of a real market play and more Intel and AMD putting aside their differences to share ideas on how to make a good APU. So look forward to things to come. Both Intel and AMD are interested in making premium APUs with powerful graphics and high-speed memory on the die, and doing that without starting an electrical fire seems more feasible than ever.
I can't see 16GB becoming default for the 13 (or 14") any time soon as a lot of people just don't need it and it will only push the price up. I think 256GB SSD should be the minimum storage now, but Apple seem to be a law unto themselves with this stuff so who knows what they'll do.
So are any of the CPUs on the Intel roadmap worth Apple waiting for - i.e. will any of them give massive benefits over what's available today?
So are any of the CPUs on the Intel roadmap worth Apple waiting for - i.e. will any of them give massive benefits over what's available today?
I recently started a new job and no longer have a MBP because of that. I work from home now on my 5K iMac but I probably should get at least a 14" MBP. I was just hoping to wait another year because I think Apple will design their own CPU/GPU for it. But right now I'm hoping 14" MBP, redesigned keyboard, 6-core CPU, 32GB RAM, and 1TB SSD. Although it makes me feel weird to buy a computer without a discrete GPU as I've never done that before—never had anything smaller than the 15" model or desktops.
Should I try to get by until Apple brings out their new chips or what? I won't be traveling for work, but occasionally accompanying other higher ups who will be presenting to clients. I have an iPad Pro that I can take notes on, etc, but can't really efficiently do development and design work on it yet. I finally have a team to back me up when I go on vacation, but it still makes me insecure to go on vacation or even drive a couple hours to my hometown of Kansas City (HOW 'BOUT THOSE CHIEFS?) without a laptop, lol. I also would like to work outside on occasion or somewhere out where people are since I'm just in my basement studio all day and don't have any windows. Maybe I will mount a 4K webcam on my deck overlooking the forest behind my house and keep that open in a full screen space on my second display, lol.
Should I try to get by until Apple brings out their new chips or what? I won't be traveling for work, but occasionally accompanying other higher ups who will be presenting to clients. I have an iPad Pro that I can take notes on, etc, but can't really efficiently do development and design work on it yet. I finally have a team to back me up when I go on vacation, but it still makes me insecure to go on vacation or even drive a couple hours to my hometown of Kansas City (HOW 'BOUT THOSE CHIEFS?) without a laptop, lol. I also would like to work outside on occasion or somewhere out where people are since I'm just in my basement studio all day and don't have any windows. Maybe I will mount a 4K webcam on my deck overlooking the forest behind my house and keep that open in a full screen space on my second display, lol.
This chip, the 28W version of Ice Lake. Graphics boost would be substantial. Alternatively, this chip, which has 6 cores.
No one here is likely to have better information about whether Apple will bring out their own chips within the next year. My feeling is that it's not very likely as there are interesting options on the map from both Intel and AMD. But who knows!
See above for what you might be waiting on regarding the 13/14". You get either six cores or a good iGPU, but not both. The keyboard alone might be worth waiting for though.
Based on your needs, why not buy the recently released 16"?
I takes some getting used to but I've been doing network configuration etc on my ipad pro. When I travel for work, it's all I take (sometimes with a small magic keyboard). Because the ipad pro is so capable (once you found the right apps), my laptop has become a desktop replacement. Note that I don't do development at the moment. Still looking forward to what the new 13" will bring to the table, though. I don't believe it'll go up to 14" and I expect it will still max out at 4 cores and 16gb. If that's the case: hello, 16".
Looks like the new Renoir APU already got a design win with the Yoga Slim 14, and we have learned a lot from this device's announcement.
This is the first time I've seen a "Ryzen 9 4900U" part--it looks like it's the same 8 core / 8 CU design as the 4800U, but with higher boost clocks. This will make it more competitive with the upcoming 28W Ice Lake part, the i7-1068G7, which will sport less cores than AMD but stronger single core performance.
The mysteriously absent i7-1068G7 still hasn't appeared here. The intel version uses this chip, which AMD claims they have competitive IPC with. We'll find out the truth soon--this will be a remarkable opportunity for testers to compare the CPU performance of AMD and Intel's best mobile parts.
Another surprise: the Intel version also comes with separate nVidia graphics, called "G5" and "G3." These seem to be new products, and I'm willing to bet they can take the 8 Vega CUs in the 4900U. The existence of these parts may increase pressure for good GPU performance in the 13/14" space.
Right now I am thinking... either the i7-1068G7 exists, and Apple has locked up its whole supply, or they are testing their 13/14" with a 4900U right now. I don't think a i7-1065G7 + nVidia design is viable for Apple at this stage unless they've kept a lot under wraps.
This is the first time I've seen a "Ryzen 9 4900U" part--it looks like it's the same 8 core / 8 CU design as the 4800U, but with higher boost clocks. This will make it more competitive with the upcoming 28W Ice Lake part, the i7-1068G7, which will sport less cores than AMD but stronger single core performance.
The mysteriously absent i7-1068G7 still hasn't appeared here. The intel version uses this chip, which AMD claims they have competitive IPC with. We'll find out the truth soon--this will be a remarkable opportunity for testers to compare the CPU performance of AMD and Intel's best mobile parts.
Another surprise: the Intel version also comes with separate nVidia graphics, called "G5" and "G3." These seem to be new products, and I'm willing to bet they can take the 8 Vega CUs in the 4900U. The existence of these parts may increase pressure for good GPU performance in the 13/14" space.
Right now I am thinking... either the i7-1068G7 exists, and Apple has locked up its whole supply, or they are testing their 13/14" with a 4900U right now. I don't think a i7-1065G7 + nVidia design is viable for Apple at this stage unless they've kept a lot under wraps.
Last edited:
Speaking of Renoir: first review of Renoir based model is out:
Translated review: https://translate.google.com/transl...ockers.ua/notebook/acer-swift-3-sf314-42/all/
Check the battery life.
Translated review: https://translate.google.com/transl...ockers.ua/notebook/acer-swift-3-sf314-42/all/
Check the battery life.
I was actually just reading that. Battery life is great. I'm a little more worried about single core performance. I wish they gave us better benchmarks.
The single thread Geekbench 5 score (which I assume accidentally swapped the single and multicore labels) compares ok with the high-end Ice Lake part of the same TDP. This is the best single thread head-to-head I can find, and again, I don't want to put too much weight on it, tests vary, machines vary, etc. But the takeaway is still that single core performance of the 4500U is 17% lower than the two-benchmark median for the i7-1065G7 in our very first preview of Renoir vs Ice Lake. And the i7-1068G7, if it's real, will widen that gap more than the 4900U will narrow it.
If AMD CPU would be allowed to break the power specs, as IceLake CPUs do: 49-64W under load, the scores would be better for AMD CPUs.
Here is a proof for power draw of Ice Lake CPUs:
Remember that Renoir APUs are 15W and under load they should draw around 20-30W.
That's interesting information, thanks. I'm not quite sure what you mean about "breaking" power specs... we know Intel has a "Power Level 2" well above the TDP, and sustaining high draw at boost frequencies is an advantage of the architecture. I understand how that pumps benchmark numbers, since it's possible Intel's CPUs are sustaining PL2 for a long time while Geekbench 5 is running, even though it would not be able to sustain that load for very long in real-world use.
I'm looking forward to more and better benchmarks--hopefully, an Ice Lake / Renoir head to head of sustained load in the Yoga Slim 14 this April.
Well, mostly because I spent $4K on a top model 2019 iMac 5K that is great and I'd prefer something a bit lighter and less expensive for my mobile needs. That and I just spent an ungodly amount on KC Chiefs Super bowl merch. I've just never had integrated graphics before and worry about longevity. I think if it came down to it, I'd prefer six cores to a discrete GPU. Main reason I was asking is that I've been paying a lot less attention to the Mac-related rumors over almost a year since I got my iMac because I wasn't planning on buying so soon. I also feel like Apple has the chops to make a killer CPU and a killer GPU that could go into a smaller frame like a 13/14" machine without having to worry much about thermals.
Hey, I get you. It's really hard to predict how long you might end up waiting though. If you need it now, make sure to try the 13's keyboard first and make sure you like it before you buy. The Iris graphics aren't great, but day-to-day performance will be fine.
If you're willing to wait, this is a really exciting time for technology in the small notebook space. Cool developments are coming, and when they arrive, cool developments will be on the horizon. I don't personally think these developments are Apple CPU/GPUs in notebooks (they make come with x86 parts at some point), if only because AMD and Intel have great roadmaps in that space right now.
Well, AMD seems to. Intel is mostly vaporware. Would be fine if they switched to AMD CPUs, and while they're at it, Nvidia GPUs.
10nm has been a disaster for Intel. But the Sunny Cove cores are the biggest redesign in years and Intel is quickly following up with another redesign with Willow Cove cores on Tiger Lake this same year. Tiger Lake will also feature a new GPU architecture, Xe.
These are big changes. It's probably true Intel will have to backport these changes to 14nm to get them working at 35W+, but that doesn't detract from the innovation in architecture.
I don’t intend to rain on anyone’s parade here, but Apple isn’t going to switch from Intel to AMD for CPUs in any of its products. It doesn’t make sense to lose the Intel brand for the premium specs... and:
Apple will definitely make the same power per watt performance slide as Steve Jobs used to transition to ARM CPUs and its own custom graphics to go with it. Apple can absolutely crush it. And for those who state oh well ARM cannot sustain performance, it actually does better than Intel!!! Ever see those slowdowns and bottlenecks, they’re due to heat.
Apple custom chips we are all looking at it wrong. It doesn’t have to be a single 5nm CPU. It could literally be four or six 5nm CPUs working in tandem with each other handling different processes and tasks just as the current T2 chips do.
The end result will finally allow Apple to realize advanced graphics just like an iPad Pro does 120 in Fortnight. Before any other system could. Apple could truly disrupt the industry and hell, even sell its custom A-series chips to other companies as Samsung does. Not saying they would but the types of real world performance per watt will just blow away anything even remotely possible from Intel.
And finally, a 13”/14” MacBook Pro can have the graphics prowess of the 15” models. Not saying it’s going to be easy to do the software transition, but when Apple makes the leap, and if they give developers time and state we are doing this 100% within the next twelve months, everyone will get on board just as they did in 2005/6.
The whole ecosystem will improve. Software will work rather seamless. It’s the true dream of the Apple ecosystem. And it is coming. I just hope they don’t start with a 12” MacBook and not go all in. That would be doomsday just like it has with the Surface X and its ARM chip while the rest of Microsoft is running Intel/AMD/Nvidia (graphics).
Three words for Apple and we will all benefit greatly after a two-year transfer period.
“Just Do It!”
Apple will definitely make the same power per watt performance slide as Steve Jobs used to transition to ARM CPUs and its own custom graphics to go with it. Apple can absolutely crush it. And for those who state oh well ARM cannot sustain performance, it actually does better than Intel!!! Ever see those slowdowns and bottlenecks, they’re due to heat.
Apple custom chips we are all looking at it wrong. It doesn’t have to be a single 5nm CPU. It could literally be four or six 5nm CPUs working in tandem with each other handling different processes and tasks just as the current T2 chips do.
The end result will finally allow Apple to realize advanced graphics just like an iPad Pro does 120 in Fortnight. Before any other system could. Apple could truly disrupt the industry and hell, even sell its custom A-series chips to other companies as Samsung does. Not saying they would but the types of real world performance per watt will just blow away anything even remotely possible from Intel.
And finally, a 13”/14” MacBook Pro can have the graphics prowess of the 15” models. Not saying it’s going to be easy to do the software transition, but when Apple makes the leap, and if they give developers time and state we are doing this 100% within the next twelve months, everyone will get on board just as they did in 2005/6.
The whole ecosystem will improve. Software will work rather seamless. It’s the true dream of the Apple ecosystem. And it is coming. I just hope they don’t start with a 12” MacBook and not go all in. That would be doomsday just like it has with the Surface X and its ARM chip while the rest of Microsoft is running Intel/AMD/Nvidia (graphics).
Three words for Apple and we will all benefit greatly after a two-year transfer period.
“Just Do It!”
You clearly NEVER used ARM CPUs for anything requiring heavy lifting. After 10 minutes of using ARM you would gladly go back to anything x86.
Apple is brilliant at selling **** to people. Remember this, always.
One more thing. Never mobile GPUs - like in smartphones - will have comparable performance to those from laptops, or desktops. ARM based Mac will not have the same, or higher performance than 16 inch MBP.
You may believe that way, but the technology is not that simple as you make it to be.
I hope apple uses a comet lake 6 core i7-10710U in its high end 13 pro or low end 16 pro. I currentley have the processor in my msi prestige 15 and it kicks *ss. Performance almost as fast as the i7-9750H available on demand but crazy good battery life when the chip is running at 12.5 watts.
I also want apple to use this chip so I can hackintosh my prestige 15. no patches right now because apple doesn't use the processor.
I also want apple to use this chip so I can hackintosh my prestige 15. no patches right now because apple doesn't use the processor.
Last edited:
Please take an online course on Computer Organization and Architecture, it'll take you away from the Koolaid.
Well, I wouldn't go quite that far. Apple turned the 15 into a 16 by shrinking the bezels and keeping the length-width dimensions mostly the same, so it's not wild to think they may do the same with the 13.
But I agree the assumption there will be a 14" has too much gravity here. Apple had to increase the chassis of the 15" to accommodate future CPU/GPU tech. That's not true for the 13: an Apple A14X, Ryzen 9 4900U, or Intel Core i7-1068G7 would all fit nicely inside a slimmer 13 while still boosting performance.
Don’t forget the keyboard..
Some assume that maybe a thickness increase of the keyboard components necessicated a bit of relocation and/configuration change for things that might have more easily fit right below the butterfly keyboards.
..and thus a slight chassis LxW dimension increase