Benchmarks may reveal Haswell-powered gains in Apple's next 13" MacBook Pro
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Comments
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tipoo
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff
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.
Yeah the waiting is almost over. Do you think we'll see new rMBP before September or October?
I hope they increase the base SSD configuration to at least 256GB, the current 128GB is not enough, especially on a rMBP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vulpine
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?
Of COURSE they could get away with that. That's not to say that they will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1983
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?
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chabig
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.
Given that I'm fearful Apple will be stressing battery life in the pros instead of performance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vulpine
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chabig
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.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter
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.
The quads would not only include the 5100, but allow an option for the Iris Pro 5200 with that eDRAM cache which makes the same GPU dramatically faster. There are quads in the right TDP, as I said. It is a possibility, I think it's just a matter of who would shoulder the costs. I'd like it there as a BTO option, at least, since Haswell won't have much better CPU performance than IVB core for core clock for clock, the only way to raise performance is adding more cores or higher clocks.