Benchmarks hint at MacBook Pro with Intel's powerful six-core Core i7-8750H

AppleInsiderAppleInsider
Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited June 2018
Apple could use tomorrow's WWDC keynote to raise the performance bar for top-end MacBook Pros, new benchmarks suggest.




A "MacBookPro14,3" device has appeared in Geekbench listings using Intel's Core i7-8750H processor, a part of the Coffee Lake family. The chip has a base clock speed of 2.21 gigahertz, slower than current Pros, but can boost up to 4.1 gigahertz and more crucially sports six cores -- even a maximum-spec 2017-edition Pro is limited to four.

The laptop has a single-core score of 4,902, but a multi-core score of 22,316, putting it well beyond any other MacBook on Geekbench, the closest competition coming in at 16,999.

A MacBook Pro refresh is one of a number of anticipated announcements for WWDC. The last Pro update came in conjunction with WWDC 2017.

Notably, the "14,3" device is also listed as equipped with 32 gigabytes of DDR4 RAM, double the peak on 2017 Pros. It had been speculated that Apple would stick with a 16-gigabyte cap until later this year, if not 2019.

Apple's WWDC 2018 keynote is largely expected to concentrate on software, specifically previews of macOS 10.14, iOS 12, tvOS 12, and watchOS 5. Apple could also introduce new 12-inch MacBooks, and upgrades to Siri and ARKit.

Stay abreast of Apple's announcements by downloading the AppleInsider app for iOS, and follow us on YouTube, Twitter @appleinsider and Facebook for live, late-breaking coverage. You can also check out our official Instagram account for exclusive photos from the event.

Can't watch Apple's livestream of the keynote? AppleInsider has you covered with a live blog covering all the announcements.
readyplyrtrump
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 50
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Why does Apple use any site which makes public the speeds and other details of the tested device? Presumably they WANT people to see these numbers?
    doozydozen
  • Reply 2 of 50
    ncapncncapnc Posts: 1member
    Ding Ding Ding!
    Avieshek
  • Reply 3 of 50
    tailstootailstoo Posts: 44member
    Tease!
    doozydozenAvieshek
  • Reply 4 of 50
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,278member
    I guess they finally understand that Intel were just as slow as their current speed of refresh...  Their 10nm were way too ambitious, which is why they just keep optimizing the 14nm ever and ever.  Then again, 14nm have its limit, and every new processors are just getting hotter and hotter.  Their microarchitecture haven't change since Skylake either because the same reason (Skylake, Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake, (and refresh?), Cannonlake), making it the longest cycle in their history.
    edited June 2018 doozydozen[Deleted User]
  • Reply 5 of 50
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,861administrator
    DuhSesame said:
    I guess they finally understand that Intel were just as slow as their current speed of refresh...  Their 10nm were way too ambitious, which is why they just keep optimizing the 14nm ever and ever.  Then again, 14nm have its limit, and every new processors are just getting hotter and hotter.  Their microarchitecture haven't change since Skylake either because the same reason (Skylake, Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake, (and refresh?), Cannonlake), making it the longest cycle in their history.
    I'm not certain that these specs are legit. There is no i9 support in 10.13.5, let alone 10.13.4 as specified in the benchmark. I guess we'll see.
  • Reply 6 of 50
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,278member
    DuhSesame said:
    I guess they finally understand that Intel were just as slow as their current speed of refresh...  Their 10nm were way too ambitious, which is why they just keep optimizing the 14nm ever and ever.  Then again, 14nm have its limit, and every new processors are just getting hotter and hotter.  Their microarchitecture haven't change since Skylake either because the same reason (Skylake, Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake, (and refresh?), Cannonlake), making it the longest cycle in their history.
    I'm not certain that these specs are legit. There is no i9 support in 10.13.5, let alone 10.13.4 as specified in the benchmark. I guess we'll see.
    If not a hackintosh, then maybe a prototype device?  We saw similar thing earlier this year.
    edited June 2018
  • Reply 7 of 50
    boboliciousbobolicious Posts: 1,146member
    ...any hints of a 17" 4K display...? :)
    Avieshek
  • Reply 8 of 50
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    Mike Wuerthele said:
    DuhSesame said:
    I guess they finally understand that Intel were just as slow as their current speed of refresh...  Their 10nm were way too ambitious, which is why they just keep optimizing the 14nm ever and ever.  Then again, 14nm have its limit, and every new processors are just getting hotter and hotter.  Their microarchitecture haven't change since Skylake either because the same reason (Skylake, Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake, (and refresh?), Cannonlake), making it the longest cycle in their history.
    I'm not certain that these specs are legit. There is no i9 support in 10.13.5, let alone 10.13.4 as specified in the benchmark. I guess we'll see.
    Yep the build number does seem suspicious. If it was 10.13.4 you would expect it to be a custom build but 17E199 was the general release.
    doozydozen
  • Reply 9 of 50
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,727member
    Well if it is true my wife is about to inherit my 2017 MBP! :)
  • Reply 10 of 50
    dempsondempson Posts: 62member
    More points of suspicion: "MacBookPro14,3" is the model identifier of the existing mid 2017 15-inch model. I doubt a new model with DDR4 memory and a newer CPU architecture would have the same model identifier. If it is using DDR4 it must be desktop memory, since the Core i7-8750H doesn't support LPDDR4. That suggests a new motherboard and structural changes to cope with more heat produced by the memory. The motherboard identifier is identical to other MacBookPro14,3 listings on Geekbench (apart from a "1.0" suffix instead of "MacBookPro14,3").
    edited June 2018 asciiSoli[Deleted User]
  • Reply 11 of 50
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,035member
    dempson said:
    If it is using DDR4 it must be desktop memory, since the Core i7-8750H doesn't support LPDDR4.
    If that's the case then I can't see this being an Apple notebook.
    canukstormtenthousandthings
  • Reply 12 of 50
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,952member
    I wonder if someone can just spoof an entry to generate some buzz?
    flick
  • Reply 13 of 50
    danwat1234danwat1234 Posts: 7member
    dempson said:
     If it is using DDR4 it must be desktop memory, since the Core i7-8750H doesn't support LPDDR4. That suggests a new motherboard and structural changes to cope with more heat produced by the memory." 
    -No, u mean they would be using either regular voltage laptop RAM, or two soldered modules of 16GB of Low Powered DDR4. 
    It is not a heat issue, but space for the battery issue in the latter possibility and slightly more power draw.

  • Reply 14 of 50
    AustinmAustinm Posts: 1unconfirmed, member
    Now the question is, what did they choose for GPU? I bet it's gonna be high cpu power, low GPU power (like the previous MacBook Pros)
    danwat1234
  • Reply 15 of 50
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,861administrator
    cgWerks said:
    I wonder if someone can just spoof an entry to generate some buzz?
    It's fairly trivial to do so.
    cgWerks
  • Reply 16 of 50
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,861administrator

    dempson said:
     If it is using DDR4 it must be desktop memory, since the Core i7-8750H doesn't support LPDDR4. That suggests a new motherboard and structural changes to cope with more heat produced by the memory." 
    -No, u mean they would be using either regular voltage laptop RAM, or two soldered modules of 16GB of Low Powered DDR4. 
    It is not a heat issue, but space for the battery issue in the latter possibility and slightly more power draw.

    LPDD4 is not supported by the current crop of i9 i7 processors. It would have to be regular DDR4, with all that entails.
    edited June 2018
  • Reply 17 of 50
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,297member
    Not sure how in the know Ben Bajarin is but he seems fairly confident no hardware will be announced tomorrow.
  • Reply 18 of 50
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 2,700member
    rogifan_new said:
    Not sure how in the know Ben Bajarin is but he seems fairly confident no hardware will be announced tomorrow.
    Same goes for Mark Gurman.  And he's in the know more than most.
  • Reply 19 of 50
    KITAKITA Posts: 392member
    DuhSesame said:
    I guess they finally understand that Intel were just as slow as their current speed of refresh...  Their 10nm were way too ambitious, which is why they just keep optimizing the 14nm ever and ever.  Then again, 14nm have its limit, and every new processors are just getting hotter and hotter.  Their microarchitecture haven't change since Skylake either because the same reason (Skylake, Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake, (and refresh?), Cannonlake), making it the longest cycle in their history.
    I'm not certain that these specs are legit. There is no i9 support in 10.13.5, let alone 10.13.4 as specified in the benchmark. I guess we'll see.
    It says i7-8750H, not i9-8950HK.
    flick
  • Reply 20 of 50
    KITAKITA Posts: 392member
    Let's rewind to September 2017: 

    https://liliputing.com/2017/09/macbook-pro-core-i5-8250u-shows-geekbench.html




    https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/4062620
Sign In or Register to comment.