Benchmarks may reveal Haswell-powered gains in Apple's next 13" MacBook Pro

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Performance tests for an unreleased MacBook Pro model have appeared online, potentially offering a hint at Apple's next generation of professional notebooks powered by Intel's new Haswell processors.

Geekbench


A Geekbench score for a new MacBook Pro running OS X Mavericks identified as "AAPLJ44,1" was posted to the Primate Labs website this week. As noted by MacRumors, the hardware appears to be a 13-inch model with a Core i5-4258U processor clocked at 2.4 gigahertz.

Like the alleged Mac Pro benchmark that also appeared online this week, the new MacBook Pro appears to be running a specialized build of Mavericks, Apple's forthcoming Mac operating system update. The OS X build is identified as "13A2050."

The unidentified MacBook Pro earned a Geekbench 2 score of 7,140, outperforming Retina display MacBook Pro models released earlier this year with Ivy Bridge processors at faster clock speeds of 2.5 gigahertz and 2.6 gigahertz. But the new "AAPLJ44,1" hardware with a Core i5 CPU is still slower than existing models with high-end Core i7 Ivy Bridge processors.

The modest performance gains seen in the unreleased hardware suggest that, as with Apple's newly released MacBook Air lineup, the focus with this generation of hardware will be on battery life. In particular, the new 13-inch MacBook Air released last week is advertised to offer up to 12 hours of battery life, but real-world tests have found that the machine can even outperform that.

Much of the battery life gains seen in the new MacBook Air models are possible because of Intel's Haswell generation of processors. While the ultra-low voltage CPUs found in the new MacBook Airs saw performance improvements between 3 and 8 percent, power consumption was cut by 25 percent.

rMBP


Apple is expected to refresh its MacBook Pro lineup in the near future, as inventory of the 13-inch model has periodically become constrained in recent weeks. Well-connected analyst Ming-Chi Kuo of KGI Securities accurately said in April that Apple's new Haswell-powered MacBook Pros would not be ready in time for last week's Worldwide Developers conference, due to low yields of the notebooks' Retina displays.

Kuo also said earlier this month that the new 13-inch Retina MacBook Pro would feature a slightly thinner chassis than its predecessor, while gaining a higher-quality 1080p FaceTime HD camera.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 29
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    At first upon reading, I wondered why there wasn't a standard voltage processor until I realized that the i5-4258U has the Iris 5100.
  • Reply 2 of 29
    tipootipoo Posts: 1,007member
    Hmm, so that's still dual core, and Iris not-pro 5100 with no eDRAM. Better than I feared, worse than I hoped. I wanted quads across the Pro line, there are quads in the right TDP for it. And the eDRAM only adds a few watts TDP.

    The CPU won't be much better than IVB, I expected that. I hoped they would either go with more cores for it, or go with GT3e for very decent graphics in the 13". Ah well, there's still battery life gains I guess.
  • Reply 3 of 29
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    I didn't expect the Iris Pro for the 13" though it makes me wonder what the Mac mini will have. I'm hoping flash storage is standard at least.
  • Reply 4 of 29
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,875member
    My mid 2010 i7 15" MBP with an SSD and 8 GIGs of RAM clocks in at over 6000 running 10.9. Not too shabby for a relic!
  • Reply 5 of 29

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tipoo View Post



    Hmm, so that's still dual core, and Iris not-pro 5100 with no eDRAM. Better than I feared, worse than I hoped. I wanted quads across the Pro line, there are quads in the right TDP for it. And the eDRAM only adds a few watts TDP.



    The CPU won't be much better than IVB, I expected that. I hoped they would either go with more cores for it, or go with GT3e for very decent graphics in the 13". Ah well, there's still battery life gains I guess.


    all of you... There could be 8 or 9 configurations in the Apple HW shop at this point...  A bootleg benchmark of a non-verified SKU ready machine  running a just past alpha version of OS is not proof of market reality.

  • Reply 6 of 29
    tipootipoo Posts: 1,007member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff View Post


    all of you... There could be 8 or 9 configurations in the Apple HW shop at this point...  A bootleg benchmark of a non-verified SKU ready machine  running a just past alpha version of OS is not proof of market reality.



    Naturally. I'm just responding to the rumor as always. I'd be glad to be wrong. 

  • Reply 7 of 29


    Yeah the waiting is almost over. Do you think we'll see new rMBP before September or October?

  • Reply 8 of 29
    19831983 Posts: 1,142member


    I hope they increase the base SSD configuration to at least 256GB, the current 128GB is not enough, especially on a rMBP.

  • Reply 9 of 29
    spuditspudit Posts: 49member
    Thoughts on the delay of the MBP's. Thunderbolt 2....I'm wondering if this isn't another major reason for delay for these models. Sad, but I don't think we will see either model 13" or 15" until Oct/Nov at earliest. On the flip side, I wouldn't want to miss out on this feature if it's just a few more months away. Guessing this is a major reason we have not seen a new Thunderbolt display sooner.
  • Reply 10 of 29
    vulpinevulpine Posts: 61member


    I expect to see new Retina Macbooks Pro by early July. Lots of other Haswell-based laptops are appearing on the scene, and Apple can't get away with continuing to charge double their price for last generation's technology. Additionally, according to http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks the performance of the new Airs is within striking distance of the current Pros and battery life is much better, meaning that the lower-priced laptops might start to cannibalize sales of the more expensive ones.

  • Reply 11 of 29
    tipootipoo Posts: 1,007member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Vulpine View Post


    and Apple can't get away with continuing to charge double their price for last generation's technology.



     


     


    This is the same Apple we are talking about, right? image



    Of COURSE they could get away with that. That's not to say that they will.


     

  • Reply 12 of 29
    chabigchabig Posts: 622member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by 1983 View Post


    I hope they increase the base SSD configuration to at least 256GB, the current 128GB is not enough, especially on a rMBP.



    If you need (or want) 256GB, it's available. Why do you want Apple to raise the minimum price on everyone else?

  • Reply 13 of 29
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,667member
    chabig wrote: »
    If you need (or want) 256GB, it's available. Why do you want Apple to raise the minimum price on everyone else?

    Because it wouldn't raise the price one bit. Did you not see what happened with the Airs? The Airs got vastly improved SSD performance and a price cut. The price of flash storage has dropped remarkably while performance has gone up. Beyond that 128 GB is not viable for most users so effectively Apple forces you to make an upgrade that is more expensive than it should be.
  • Reply 14 of 29
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by chabig View Post


    If you need (or want) 256GB, it's available. Why do you want Apple to raise the minimum price on everyone else?





    NAND has been somewhat flat lately, but it decreased considerably prior to that. Your misconception is that parts directly drive pricing. Anytime there is a change in overall costs across however many components, they decide how to distribute that. It's possible for lower costs to simply drive higher margins.

  • Reply 15 of 29
    vulpinevulpine Posts: 61member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tipoo View Post


    This is the same Apple we are talking about, right? image



    Of COURSE they could get away with that. That's not to say that they will.


     



     


    Touché. I forgot about the Mac Pro.


     


    I don't think the MacBook Pro will fall the way of the Mac Pro, though, and languish for long periods of time.

  • Reply 16 of 29
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,667member
    Similar to the Mac Pro leaks this can't be stressed enough. Beta hardware and software tells us little. For instance is this a base model or something better.

    Given that I'm fearful Apple will be stressing battery life in the pros instead of performance.
    all of you... There could be 8 or 9 configurations in the Apple HW shop at this point...  A bootleg benchmark of a non-verified SKU ready machine  running a just past alpha version of OS is not proof of market reality.
  • Reply 17 of 29
    spuditspudit Posts: 49member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Vulpine View Post


     


    Touché. I forgot about the Mac Pro.


     


    I don't think the MacBook Pro will fall the way of the Mac Pro, though, and languish for long periods of time.



     


    I don't think Apple wants to release the MBP if it's not ready.   It's pretty obvious they want it running Mavericks, and this has a ways to go.    In my opinion, they rushed Mountain Lion last year.    The way things are shaping up, all the big stuff will be late Summer/Fall-   5S w/ IOS7, and MBP's w/ Mavericks, heck...even the Mac Pro-     Although several Haswell Laptops have been announced or just released, it's still pretty sparse at the moment.   What's another 3 months?   This puts us nearly into October--   They have time to get the software and hardware done right, and can possibly take advantage of some newer silicon that just isn't ready yet (Thunderbolt 2).


     


    I'd be first in line if they came out in July, but I'd be bummed if they snuck in an update with this before year-end.

  • Reply 18 of 29
    bigpicsbigpics Posts: 1,353member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by chabig View Post


    If you need (or want) 256GB, it's available. Why do you want Apple to raise the minimum price on everyone else?



     


    Because (as others have pointed out), storage (and RAM) are always dropping in price


     


    Apple has perennially offered small amounts of storage - and worse, less RAM than is optimal to make OS X sing - on their base models - which is what most people buy.  So most users get a compromised user experience compared to what they could have (and expect from demos, etc.). 



    Making most users think their Macs aren't as good as they're designed to be (with enough of the above) - and therefore less likely to recommend them to others.  



    Which actually hurts Apple in the long run.  



    PS: I'm personally more bothered about the RAM since most new users seem to be taking to iCloud - or DropBox, SugarSync, et al.

  • Reply 19 of 29
    I hope it is wrong, because it will be the slowest of all... A dual-core is not acceptable for a macbook-pro, and 8GB is so long gone...
  • Reply 20 of 29
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    I hope it is wrong, because it will be the slowest of all... A dual-core is not acceptable for a macbook-pro, and 8GB is so long gone...

    I would love for the 13" to have a quad-core, perhaps the same processor that went into the 14" Razer Blade (i7-4702HQ). Having said that, if Apple puts utilizes the i5 with the Iris 5100, it will be a welcome improvement over the Intel HD 4000.
Sign In or Register to comment.