Two of four Thunderbolt 3 ports in new 13" MacBook Pro with Touch Bar have reduced speeds

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 86
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,327member
    sandor said:
    Soli said:

    sandor said:
    my point is that if you are going to have distinct size options, knowing that people have personal preferences, why unnecessarily limit one in terms of specs? 
    I don't understand your question. What is unnecessary about their choices for specs? I don't even know how one can make that determination without having inside knowledge on what is most important to Apple in securing the highest possible unit sales for a new device.
    i can BTO a 2 TB SSD in the 15" but not the 13"
    ...but the drives can be swapped between the two models...

    unnecessarily limiting the purchaser's specs.
    1) Can they be swapped? Either the 2TB SSD uses double density NAND or they used twice as many as the 1TB SSD. If the former, then it would likely be nearly twice as long. We don't even know the SSD card lengths between the 13" and 15" models.

    2) You say it's "unnecessarily limiting" for the customer, but if there's a chance they could make $800 in revenue and whatever profit that yields, I'd think they'd do it. Because of that, I think it behooves us to think about a more rational reason why Apple isn't offering an extra TB of storage in the smaller of the two MBPs.
  • Reply 62 of 86
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 1,148member
    The comment section shows that the author of the article has not made the cause for the issue clear enough.

    Processors today use PCIe to connect everything from Storage controllers, high speed I/O like USB, Thunderbolt and other stuff including SD-Card readers and Graphic Cards (or discrete GPU in case of macbook). And on each processor model there is only a specific number of these lanes available. This means that since Apple has to rely on Intel on this issue, they can't simply change this behavior by putting in a second controller, it's simply not possible because there is no dual core i7 Chip with enough lanes. Thats why Apple has chosen to use the PCH-supplied PCIe-Lanes.

    PCH is an additional chip (which is integrated directly in the processor package on some models) which connects to the processor via a seperate high speed bus and it gives you many things included USB, keyboard support, audio and storage interface and additional (about half speed) PCIe-Lanes in one single chip. What I think is the case is that Apple is using these lanes because the processor itself does not supply enough PCIe-lanes.

    So obviously, there is nothing to be added from a non-technical viewpoint, because it's not about power consumption or other marketing decisions, it's simply because Intel does not make the chips Apple needs for four Thunderbolt 3 full speed capable ports.
    Why do they rely on Intel?

    Apple have almost always made they own platform chips. They sure have the talent in their custom chip teams to still build their own. It would seem they could push the platform harder if they could go back to building custom Mac platform hubs again.

    Sure would require DMI bus license from Intel and Intel probably would push for fabrication as a way of getting more of Apple's business generally.
  • Reply 63 of 86
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,798member
    sandor said:
    Soli said:

    sandor said:
    my point is that if you are going to have distinct size options, knowing that people have personal preferences, why unnecessarily limit one in terms of specs? 
    I don't understand your question. What is unnecessary about their choices for specs? I don't even know how one can make that determination without having inside knowledge on what is most important to Apple in securing the highest possible unit sales for a new device.
    i can BTO a 2 TB SSD in the 15" but not the 13"
    ...but the drives can be swapped between the two models...


    unnecessarily limiting the purchaser's specs.
    We don't know yet whether they can be swapped between the models (though it's likely), and it's quite possible that the 2TB model won't physically fit in the slimmer case of the 13" model.
  • Reply 64 of 86
    digitoldigitol Posts: 113member
    No doubt this new MacBook Pro, will look and feel stunning, but removing so much I/o and over 14 features past MacBook pros had, (mag safe, laser cut battery level, sd card,hdmi out,etc) plus upping the price just doesn't make sense. This is supposed to be the pro line, and it's quite underpowered. Your friends are quietly laughing at you behind your back for buying this laptop. 
  • Reply 65 of 86
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,798member
    I'll be too busy working with and enjoying it to care whether some moron is laughing at me. 

    How many users actually used more than four of those dedicated, single-purpose ports at the same time without a hub?


  • Reply 66 of 86
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,327member
    spheric said:
    I'll be too busy working with and enjoying it to care whether some moron is laughing at me. 

    How many users actually used more than four of those dedicated, single-purpose ports at the same time without a hub?
    If you're using an external display, then there's no reason not to have a hub, and if you're willing get a new MBP you may want to consider a 5K display with an integrated USB-C hub and a USB-C cable that can simultaneously supply power to charge your Mac and push display-out, and I/O data over a single USB-C cable.

    The previous 15" MBP only came with 3x USB-A ports. Now you have 4. You also have 4 ports that support Thunderbolt. This is by far, the most versatile and future-forward Mac they've ever released and I can't wait for mine to arrive.
    trydwatto_cobra
  • Reply 67 of 86
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,798member
    I agree. 
  • Reply 68 of 86
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,781member
    Soli said:
    sandor said:
    Soli said:

    sandor said:
    my point is that if you are going to have distinct size options, knowing that people have personal preferences, why unnecessarily limit one in terms of specs? 
    I don't understand your question. What is unnecessary about their choices for specs? I don't even know how one can make that determination without having inside knowledge on what is most important to Apple in securing the highest possible unit sales for a new device.
    i can BTO a 2 TB SSD in the 15" but not the 13"
    ...but the drives can be swapped between the two models...

    unnecessarily limiting the purchaser's specs.
    1) Can they be swapped? Either the 2TB SSD uses double density NAND or they used twice as many as the 1TB SSD. If the former, then it would likely be nearly twice as long. We don't even know the SSD card lengths between the 13" and 15" models.

    2) You say it's "unnecessarily limiting" for the customer, but if there's a chance they could make $800 in revenue and whatever profit that yields, I'd think they'd do it. Because of that, I think it behooves us to think about a more rational reason why Apple isn't offering an extra TB of storage in the smaller of the two MBPs.
    It's also possible that they don't want to risk a shortage of 2TB SSDs for the larger machines. 
    edited October 2016 Soli
  • Reply 69 of 86
    safi said:
    Unacceptable on a goddamn 1700 laptop. Have a pro right now. Will use it for a few years but Apple needs to UP ITS GAME! Oh and btw fix the steaming pile of crap that is SIRI. 
    Please go and troll elsewhere... You scum have started infesting this site, and I'm getting sick of it!
    Actually I find the infestation of blind Apple jihadists who can't take any criticism of anything Apple does far more annoying that this sort of comment (which has a point, though could use a specific example of the steaming pile)....

    If Apple's core base were more critical and vocal about Apple's failings maybe Cupertino wouldn't let as many bozo mistakes out the door (then again maybe not)
  • Reply 70 of 86
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,781member

    mattinoz said:
    The comment section shows that the author of the article has not made the cause for the issue clear enough.

    Processors today use PCIe to connect everything from Storage controllers, high speed I/O like USB, Thunderbolt and other stuff including SD-Card readers and Graphic Cards (or discrete GPU in case of macbook). And on each processor model there is only a specific number of these lanes available. This means that since Apple has to rely on Intel on this issue, they can't simply change this behavior by putting in a second controller, it's simply not possible because there is no dual core i7 Chip with enough lanes. Thats why Apple has chosen to use the PCH-supplied PCIe-Lanes.

    PCH is an additional chip (which is integrated directly in the processor package on some models) which connects to the processor via a seperate high speed bus and it gives you many things included USB, keyboard support, audio and storage interface and additional (about half speed) PCIe-Lanes in one single chip. What I think is the case is that Apple is using these lanes because the processor itself does not supply enough PCIe-lanes.

    So obviously, there is nothing to be added from a non-technical viewpoint, because it's not about power consumption or other marketing decisions, it's simply because Intel does not make the chips Apple needs for four Thunderbolt 3 full speed capable ports.
    Why do they rely on Intel?

    Apple have almost always made they own platform chips. They sure have the talent in their custom chip teams to still build their own. It would seem they could push the platform harder if they could go back to building custom Mac platform hubs again.

    Sure would require DMI bus license from Intel and Intel probably would push for fabrication as a way of getting more of Apple's business generally.
    I'm sure that is the plan, but it'll take time because there are a lot of kinks work out first. 
    How to ensure the least amount of pain for developers and end users. 
    What happens to Thunderbolt?
    What about Windows compatibility?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 71 of 86
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,798member
    luvappl said:
    safi said:
    Unacceptable on a goddamn 1700 laptop. Have a pro right now. Will use it for a few years but Apple needs to UP ITS GAME! Oh and btw fix the steaming pile of crap that is SIRI. 
    Please go and troll elsewhere... You scum have started infesting this site, and I'm getting sick of it!
    Actually I find the infestation of blind Apple jihadists who can't take any criticism of anything Apple does far more annoying that this sort of comment (which has a point, though could use a specific example of the steaming pile)....

    If Apple's core base were more critical and vocal about Apple's failings maybe Cupertino wouldn't let as many bozo mistakes out the door (then again maybe not)
    Apple: failing through bozo mistakes since 1977.
    Soliwatto_cobra
  • Reply 72 of 86
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,798member
    luvappl said:
    safi said:
    Unacceptable on a goddamn 1700 laptop. Have a pro right now. Will use it for a few years but Apple needs to UP ITS GAME! Oh and btw fix the steaming pile of crap that is SIRI. 
    Please go and troll elsewhere... You scum have started infesting this site, and I'm getting sick of it!
    Actually I find the infestation of blind Apple jihadists who can't take any criticism of anything Apple does far more annoying that this sort of comment (which has a point, though could use a specific example of the steaming pile)....

    If Apple's core base were more critical and vocal about Apple's failings maybe Cupertino wouldn't let as many bozo mistakes out the door (then again maybe not)
    Apple: failing through bozo mistakes since 1977.
    Soli
  • Reply 73 of 86
    sflocal said:
    safi said:
    Unacceptable on a goddamn 1700 laptop. Have a pro right now. Will use it for a few years but Apple needs to UP ITS GAME! Oh and btw fix the steaming pile of crap that is SIRI. 
    Grow up, or troll elsewhere. You have absolutely zero clue about the what's going on here.

    I'll bet you don't even own any TB devices anyway.  I do.  You do realize that TB devices can be daisy-changed so even if one is able to saturate one TB port, it's just insane to think that anyone requires even more than two TB ports all daisy-chained together running on one laptop.  If one is running that kind of setup, then a desktop machine is more preferable.

    Come back when you get a clue.

    He does have a clue... you might be scared that you're life savings in AAPL stock may tank in the long term and you'll be living in a tent on Mission street eating dog food, but blindness to Apple's failings will just ensure that happens.

    This guy isn't a troll... you're just an AAPL Jihadist.
  • Reply 74 of 86
    sandorsandor Posts: 551member
    Soli said:
    sandor said:
    Soli said:

    sandor said:
    my point is that if you are going to have distinct size options, knowing that people have personal preferences, why unnecessarily limit one in terms of specs? 
    I don't understand your question. What is unnecessary about their choices for specs? I don't even know how one can make that determination without having inside knowledge on what is most important to Apple in securing the highest possible unit sales for a new device.
    i can BTO a 2 TB SSD in the 15" but not the 13"
    ...but the drives can be swapped between the two models...

    unnecessarily limiting the purchaser's specs.
    1) Can they be swapped? Either the 2TB SSD uses double density NAND or they used twice as many as the 1TB SSD. If the former, then it would likely be nearly twice as long. We don't even know the SSD card lengths between the 13" and 15" models.

    2) You say it's "unnecessarily limiting" for the customer, but if there's a chance they could make $800 in revenue and whatever profit that yields, I'd think they'd do it. Because of that, I think it behooves us to think about a more rational reason why Apple isn't offering an extra TB of storage in the smaller of the two MBPs.
    you are missing the point
    some professionals want the smaller format with the largest storage space. its about options.

    this is why we have stuck with the pre-retina display 13", where we can throw in Samsung 2.5"  2TB & 4TB SSD with no problem!
    we haven't stuck with a stock Apple drive for our higher-ups for the past 3 years.

    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1259799-REG/samsung_mz_75e4t0b_am_4tb_850_evo_2_5.html

    they have been excellent drives, as have the OWC SSD.
    edited October 2016
  • Reply 75 of 86
    sandor said:
    and you cannot get the (finally available) 2 TB SSD upgrade on the 13"

    the purpose of a portable is to be portable. some professionals don't want to travel with a 15"
    Apple needs a 13" *real* pro that can be a smaller, spec-maxed computer.

    I just upgraded from a 2013 11" 8GB/512GB MacBook Air to a 2009 unibody white MacBook 13" that was being thrown out. I rolled my own Fusion array fitting a 2TB drive in the HDD bay and a 500GB SSD in an adaptor in the optical drive bay. I now have a portable with 2.5TB Fusion running Mac OS Sierra quite nicely. 


    sandor
  • Reply 76 of 86
    mike1mike1 Posts: 1,939member
    The comment section shows that the author of the article has not made the cause for the issue clear enough.

    Processors today use PCIe to connect everything from Storage controllers, high speed I/O like USB, Thunderbolt and other stuff including SD-Card readers and Graphic Cards (or discrete GPU in case of macbook). And on each processor model there is only a specific number of these lanes available. This means that since Apple has to rely on Intel on this issue, they can't simply change this behavior by putting in a second controller, it's simply not possible because there is no dual core i7 Chip with enough lanes. Thats why Apple has chosen to use the PCH-supplied PCIe-Lanes.

    PCH is an additional chip (which is integrated directly in the processor package on some models) which connects to the processor via a seperate high speed bus and it gives you many things included USB, keyboard support, audio and storage interface and additional (about half speed) PCIe-Lanes in one single chip. What I think is the case is that Apple is using these lanes because the processor itself does not supply enough PCIe-lanes.

    So obviously, there is nothing to be added from a non-technical viewpoint, because it's not about power consumption or other marketing decisions, it's simply because Intel does not make the chips Apple needs for four Thunderbolt 3 full speed capable ports.
    I have absolutely no technical knowledge on the subject, but the article says the low-power Intel processors provide full bandwidth on all 4 ports on the 13" Pro without Touch Bar. If there is a technical reason for reduced bandwidth on the two right ports of the 13" Pro (as opposed to it being an economy measure), it seems more like the Touch Bar is responsible. Perhaps it absorbs (uses) some of the PCIe-Lanes you describe.
    The non-Touch Bar model only has 2 ports.
  • Reply 77 of 86
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,327member
    Rayz2016 said:
    Soli said:
    1) Can they be swapped? Either the 2TB SSD uses double density NAND or they used twice as many as the 1TB SSD. If the former, then it would likely be nearly twice as long. We don't even know the SSD card lengths between the 13" and 15" models.

    2) You say it's "unnecessarily limiting" for the customer, but if there's a chance they could make $800 in revenue and whatever profit that yields, I'd think they'd do it. Because of that, I think it behooves us to think about a more rational reason why Apple isn't offering an extra TB of storage in the smaller of the two MBPs.
    It's also possible that they don't want to risk a shortage of 2TB SSDs for the larger machines. 
    That's certainly a viable possibility. Whatever the reason, it's likely not because Apple is playing some spiteful game where they want to push away the real professionals that were expecting 32GiB RAM and 2TB SSD on a 13" MBP.
  • Reply 78 of 86
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,327member

    sandor said:
    Soli said:
    1) Can they be swapped? Either the 2TB SSD uses double density NAND or they used twice as many as the 1TB SSD. If the former, then it would likely be nearly twice as long. We don't even know the SSD card lengths between the 13" and 15" models.

    2) You say it's "unnecessarily limiting" for the customer, but if there's a chance they could make $800 in revenue and whatever profit that yields, I'd think they'd do it. Because of that, I think it behooves us to think about a more rational reason why Apple isn't offering an extra TB of storage in the smaller of the two MBPs.
    you are missing the point
    some professionals want the smaller format with the largest storage space. its about options.

    this is why we have stuck with the pre-retina display 13", where we can throw in Samsung 2.5"  2TB & 4TB SSD with no problem!
    we haven't stuck with a stock Apple drive for our higher-ups for the past 3 years.

    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1259799-REG/samsung_mz_75e4t0b_am_4tb_850_evo_2_5.html

    they have been excellent drives, as have the OWC SSD.
    For whatever reason, Apple doesn't offer that option. It's reasonable to wish that they did offer it, and you can even hypothesize as to why they don't, but it doesn't make sense to get upset that they don't or make assertions as to why they are purposely screwing over the customer. (I don't know what you've said to that point, I'm simply replying as to the general reasons I'm seeing about how Apple is screwing them over.)
  • Reply 79 of 86
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,290member
    melgross said:
    Some of you guys are really funny.

    pretty much nobody needs 4 full speed Thunderbolt ports. If you really think about it, the reason would become clear. I don't know of any complaints from the professional world about the 3 slower Thunderbolt ports on the Mac Pro.
    That remains to be seen. I'd prefer to have it than not have it on a machine at this starting price. Having it would be easy if this 'pro' machine had a 'pro' processor. But it doesn't. They should be quad core. 
  • Reply 80 of 86
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,798member
    avon b7 said:
    melgross said:
    Some of you guys are really funny.

    pretty much nobody needs 4 full speed Thunderbolt ports. If you really think about it, the reason would become clear. I don't know of any complaints from the professional world about the 3 slower Thunderbolt ports on the Mac Pro.
    That remains to be seen. I'd prefer to have it than not have it on a machine at this starting price. Having it would be easy if this 'pro' machine had a 'pro' processor. But it doesn't. They should be quad core. 
    If a quad-core processor existed that would fit within the thermal envelope of a 13" machine, Apple would use it — I'd LOVE a quad 13" macBook Pro. I've wanted one for eight years. Unfortunately, Apple is bound by the laws of physics, and so my next machine is a 15" MacBook Pro. 
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.