Watch: 2017 MacBook Pro with Kaby Lake CPU vs. Apple's 2016 Skylake model

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware
Released in late 2016, the redesigned MacBook Pro without Touch Bar came with Intel's previous-generation Skylake processors. This month, they were refreshed with next-gen Kaby Lake processors, and AppleInsider put the two models head to head to compare their performance.






For more reviews, news, tips, features and more, subscribe to AppleInsider on YouTube.



«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 40
    palegolaspalegolas Posts: 1,270member
    Great stuff! Max, my favourite camera reviewer, also my favourite Mac reviewer. Thorough, to the point, precise. 👌🏼
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 40
    irelandireland Posts: 17,386member
    There’s no way the base model MacBook Pro should be 128 GB in mid-2017. And especially so at those prices. Ffs, the 13” Touch Bar model here is over €2K.

    Tbh there’s too many Apple products across all lineups—it’s a grand mess. I’d cull lots of items and focus heavily on streamlining the product lineups and options to drive prices down a bit. I certainly wouldn’t have iMac Pro taking up a ‘new’ tab on the store Mac toolbar, when it’s shipping in 6 months time!!

    MacBook shouldn’t be 12” either. It should be 13” and it should start at 128 GB and $999, or less!! And it should have at least a TB3 port. Coinciding with this move MBA should be killed (if MB can match its battery life). And MBP should start at 256 GB for the $1,299 model.

    Furthermore, iPad Pro base prices are too high and the price gap from regular iPad to iPad Pro is too large. The pricing of the leather sleeve is also shameful. And iPad Pro smart keyboards are overpriced for what they are (should be $129 for 10.5” model). Every customer should leave the store with a keyboard and a pencil. The keyboard isn’t worth $159. And no, it’s not worth what people are willing to pay for it. It’s worth what it’s worth and it is certainly not worth $159 for the 10.5” model.

    If they have to keep the prices of the 256 GB and 512 GB models of iPad Pro the same then so be it, but for God’s sake lower the 64 GB models by $100. That means iPad is $329, $429 & then $549 for a smaller GB Pro model which is fair. That means a 64 GB iPad Pro with a Pencil and Smart Keyboard would be $777 before tax which sounds spot on price to me.

    ”Leave the world better than you found it”, applies not only to the environment, but to your customers and a moral sense of dignity, values, value and respect. Yes Apple is a business, but we try to hold them in a higher regard. I only wished they would live up to what we expect of them. Sadly, if it isn’t apparently by now... they likely never will. A great corporation, but a corporation nevertheless. They make it very difficult for me to recommend their products. An iPad Pro would be perfectly suited for my retired uncle, but I just can’t bring myself to recommend them at the price they are.
    edited June 2017 indiekidukcalipte appleargonaut
  • Reply 3 of 40
    indiekidukindiekiduk Posts: 250member
    128GB SSD is an embarrassment and will hurt Apple with so many customers having an inevitable bad experience
    netroxcaliNameo_argonaut
  • Reply 4 of 40
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 1,521member
    Many like to see base $1299 Macbook Pro offered with 8GB/256GB but looks like Intel processor price and Samsung SSD ties Apple's hand to offer more for less. Someday when Apple uses it's 7nm A12 processor with in-house designed GPU for Macbook Pro, we will have better price point. Hope that day come sooner..
  • Reply 5 of 40
    Good info about the performance hit on the smaller SSD's. Thanks guys!!
  • Reply 6 of 40
    rufworkrufwork Posts: 126member
    128GB SSD is an embarrassment and will hurt Apple with so many customers having an inevitable bad experience
    Idk. How fast is an ssd in a thunderbolt enclosure? If you can limit yourself to 128  on the road, which sounds possible to me, you could have a powerhouse compared to last year's model for a thousand less. 

    Nice comparison to last year's best benchmarks in the review, btw. The 2016 models really seem rushed out. Apple probably would have done better to wait for Kaby Lake before upgrading at all. 
    StrangeDaysbaconstang
  • Reply 7 of 40
    netroxnetrox Posts: 639member
    I honestly don't get what Apple was thinking when they decided to sell MacBook with 128GB. It is a terrible value even though it's two hundred dollars cheaper. 

    But it's important to keep in mind that the price for 258GB model is the same as last year but with a faster processor. No one should buy the 128GB but Apple should NOT even offer that. It will only make customers feel unhappy when their storage is quickly maxed out with photos, videos, and documents. Of course, they can use Thunderbolt/USB external drives but the truth is that a lot of customers prefer to keep as much as possible on local drives. 

    But again, remember when Apple did that same thing with iPhones offering a measly 16 GB storage or 64 GB storage or higher. It apparently worked in their favor - most bought the 64GB by a huge margin.

     


  • Reply 8 of 40
    netroxnetrox Posts: 639member
    Also, I have MacBook Pro 13" without Touchbar and I bought it for $1999. It has 512GB and 16GB. 

    Now, with the same configuration except for faster processor, it's actually a hundred dollars cheaper - $1899. 




    likethesky
  • Reply 9 of 40
    hexclockhexclock Posts: 410member
    Perhaps APFS will mitigate somewhat the smaller SSD in the base model. 
  • Reply 10 of 40
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member
    rufwork said:
    128GB SSD is an embarrassment and will hurt Apple with so many customers having an inevitable bad experience
    Idk. How fast is an ssd in a thunderbolt enclosure? If you can limit yourself to 128  on the road, which sounds possible to me, you could have a powerhouse compared to last year's model for a thousand less. 

    Nice comparison to last year's best benchmarks in the review, btw. The 2016 models really seem rushed out. Apple probably would have done better to wait for Kaby Lake before upgrading at all. 
    You can't safely fill 128GB, even if that is the size of your drive. The OS requires some of it. You need at least a couple 10s of GB free to allow for things to be moved around, temporary writes, etc. You still need to back things up, and swapping things on and off a drive makes that considerably more complicated. 

    I suspect they'll finally ditch the 128GB nonsense in the near future though.
  • Reply 11 of 40
    tonglajitonglaji Posts: 12member
    My thought is apple intentionally ships the 128 knowing everyone would upgrade on their own. This lowers the entry price point without hurting their profit margin. For the users, throwing away a 128 is less painful than a 256. So it's a win-win. We just need someone to confirm this model has the upgradeable ssd like the 2016 model. 
    edited June 2017 baconstang
  • Reply 12 of 40
    tyler82tyler82 Posts: 705member
    I agree with statements above that the Mac and idevices lineup is too cluttered. Reminds me of the Performa/ Power Mac/ Quadra/ LC days. When Steve saved apple he gave us a Power Mac G3, then a PowerBook, then iMac, and then iBook, and that's the way it was for many years. The Macbook/ Macbook Air/ Macbook Pro models are making the product lineup very convoluted.
  • Reply 13 of 40
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 5,371member
    ireland said:
    There’s no way the base model MacBook Pro should be 128 GB in mid-2017. And especially so at those prices. Ffs, the 13” Touch Bar model here is over €2K.

    Tbh there’s too many Apple products across all lineups—it’s a grand mess. I’d cull lots of items and focus heavily on streamlining the product lineups and options to drive prices down a bit. I certainly wouldn’t have iMac Pro taking up a ‘new’ tab on the store Mac toolbar, when it’s shipping in 6 months time!!

    MacBook shouldn’t be 12” either. It should be 13” and it should start at 128 GB and $999, or less!! And it should have at least a TB3 port. Coinciding with this move MBA should be killed (if MB can match its battery life). And MBP should start at 256 GB for the $1,299 model.

    Furthermore, iPad Pro base prices are too high and the price gap from regular iPad to iPad Pro is too large. The pricing of the leather sleeve is also shameful. And iPad Pro smart keyboards are overpriced for what they are (should be $129 for 10.5” model). Every customer should leave the store with a keyboard and a pencil. The keyboard isn’t worth $159. And no, it’s not worth what people are willing to pay for it. It’s worth what it’s worth and it is certainly not worth $159 for the 10.5” model.

    If they have to keep the prices of the 256 GB and 512 GB models of iPad Pro the same then so be it, but for God’s sake lower the 64 GB models by $100. That means iPad is $329, $429 & then $549 for a smaller GB Pro model which is fair. That means a 64 GB iPad Pro with a Pencil and Smart Keyboard would be $777 before tax which sounds spot on price to me.

    ”Leave the world better than you found it”, applies not only to the environment, but to your customers and a moral sense of dignity, values, value and respect. Yes Apple is a business, but we try to hold them in a higher regard. I only wished they would live up to what we expect of them. Sadly, if it isn’t apparently by now... they likely never will. A great corporation, but a corporation nevertheless. They make it very difficult for me to recommend their products. An iPad Pro would be perfectly suited for my retired uncle, but I just can’t bring myself to recommend them at the price they are.
    Sounds like you should start a computer company and do things the way you think they should be.

    Apple is living up to my expectations. 

    Why would your "retired" uncle need an iPad Pro? Does he have use case so not served by the $350 ipad? 

    edited June 2017 baconstangmagman1979Solipscooter63fastasleep
  • Reply 14 of 40
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 5,371member
    In essence Apple has created a new, lower-price entry level model, while leaving the next tier up at the sa,e price but with better hardware, and still you people whine about it. wtf. Don't want the new, cheaper entry level model? Fine don't get one. But the nerd rage about things you don't even plan to buy is so neurotic and weird. 
    anomebaconstangtokyojimupscooter63fastasleep
  • Reply 15 of 40
    anomeanome Posts: 1,093member
    In essence Apple has created a new, lower-price entry level model, while leaving the next tier up at the sa,e price but with better hardware, and still you people whine about it. wtf. Don't want the new, cheaper entry level model? Fine don't get one. But the nerd rage about things you don't even plan to buy is so neurotic and weird. 
    But it's the lifeblood of Apple news sites...

    If there's no market for a 128 GB MacBook Pro, then no-one will buy it. Eventually, when the price of SSDs comes men's down enough, the price of the 256 GB model will come down, and might become the entry point. Of course,  by then everyone will be saying that 256GB isn't enough for Professional machines, and they should be only selling them with 512 or 1TB.
    baconstangStrangeDays
  • Reply 16 of 40
    baconstangbaconstang Posts: 495member
    If you're heavily invested in the cloud for everyday stuff, and keep your massive files on external drives, 128 will serve you fine.  Otherwise step up to a larger SSD.  Jeesh, it's not rocket science.
    pscooter63StrangeDaysfastasleep
  • Reply 17 of 40
    analogjackanalogjack Posts: 1,043member
    I give Apple a lot of leeway but making a big deal about reducing the price as they did at the wwdc, but not saying that they halved their 256GB storage to do that is just a dirty bit of cynicism by anybody's standard of fair play, and just makes Apple look greedy and deceptive.
  • Reply 18 of 40
    analogjackanalogjack Posts: 1,043member
    If you're heavily invested in the cloud for everyday stuff, and keep your massive files on external drives, 128 will serve you fine.  Otherwise step up to a larger SSD.  Jeesh, it's not rocket science.
    Look at it this way, Apple introduce their base model at wwdc, initially with a $1499 price tag which is what would have been expected. But then Tim crosses out the $1499 and proudly shows and says like some fantastic news that it's been reduced to $1299, however I do not recall him saying that they also reduced the 256GB storage by half. But wait you can simply upgrade it to 256GB for er...$200, fancy that. It's not a question of what solutions are available if 128 isn't enough, it's a question of deception, taking users for imbeciles. 
  • Reply 19 of 40
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,184member
    ireland said:
    MacBook shouldn’t be 12” either. It should be 13” and it should start at 128 GB and $999, or less!! And it should have at least a TB3 port
    Can you explain to us how all this happens with at least the same profit per unit and unit sales with the same estimated growth?
  • Reply 20 of 40
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,038member
    In essence Apple has created a new, lower-price entry level model, while leaving the next tier up at the sa,e price but with better hardware, and still you people whine about it. wtf. Don't want the new, cheaper entry level model? Fine don't get one. But the nerd rage about things you don't even plan to buy is so neurotic and weird. 
    And of course, if Apple had lowered the price on the new model then the same whiners would be screaming that the company was screwing early adopters, even though the aforementioned whingers never had any intention of buying one now, later, and most probably, ever. 

    And let's not forget that the people complaining the lineup is too complicated will be complaining in the next thread that Apple doesn't offer them enough choice in the $100 to $200 sweet spot where the rest of the market is heading. 
    pscooter63StrangeDaysautomaticftp1baconstang
Sign In or Register to comment.