October 18th Apple Event - Unleashed - Apple Silicon, MacBook Pro upgrades, HomePod mini, AirPods 3rd Generation

[BondiBlue]

2 minutes ago, Roswell said:

Yeah but the 2015 model before the 16 started at $2699 if memory serves. They’ve always been around the same price point for years and years. 

The 2015 15" MacBook Pro started at $1999. 

[sounds]

The first 6 months, these babies will be hard to get. Only actual professionals will be willing to plunk down the money and wait for it to arrive a week or 6 weeks later.

 

After that, everyone will get one. Status symbol!

 

PC laptops will cost $5,000 by early 2024.

[BondiBlue]

Just now, sounds said:

The first 6 months, these babies will be hard to get. Only actual professionals will be willing to plunk down the money and wait for it to arrive a week or 6 weeks later.

 

After that, everyone will get one. Status symbol!

Not everyone who buys a Mac buys it as a status symbol lmao. I'll be buying the 16" model in a couple months, but I don't care what other people think about it. 

[Action_Johnson]

Ordered a 16” Max with 64GB of RAM. 
 

this thing better be fucking amazing, because if it’s not, that’s going to make my work-life suck 

[hishnash]

3 minutes ago, sounds said:

After that, everyone will get one. Status symbol!

 

No if people buy a mac as a status symbol (if that is really a thing) they buy a MBA. Apple will be refreshing these within the next year.

[Kisai]

4 minutes ago, hishnash said:

It is worth noting however like AMD have on die cache the M1 GPU has multiple layers of much much faster on die cache:

* To start with it has `tile memory, or thread group memory` this is not cache as develops explicitly allocate data in this memory
* Then the chip as System level cache as well (not sure how big this was 16MB on the M1 but we don't have numbers for the M1 Pro/Max yet).

For things like 3d rendering the tile memory does enabled the GPU to use a lot less bandwidth (in particular for those high res 6k+ displays) due to the depth buffer blending happing on die so rather than writing out the fragment output for every object to memory then reading it in to figure out what is in front TBDR pipelines do this on the fly using the local tile memory (this has its drawbacks and does making writing a display pipeline more complex but saves a LOT of memory bandwidth if you have many many draw call objects on screen). 

 

We will have to wait and see if they're available or get scalped for yet more cryptcoin mining, because as of right now, Apple's the only option to get anything more powerful than a GTX 1650.

 

Now try and find any GPU in stock. Laptops start looking affordable. No matter who makes them.

 

 

USD.

 

 

 

[HenrySalayne]

They finally did it. They managed to build a beefy cooling solution for a Macbook.

The performance of these new machines seems to be amazing. But pricing? The entry config (14") costs more then a moderately speced top-of-the-line 17" in 2011 (the last 17"). Oof. And they still stick to the Magsafe without any kink protection. They already build a slim and angled Magsafe in the past. I don't understand why they returned to this sub-optimal design.

[hishnash]

3 minutes ago, Kisai said:

We will have to wait and see if they're available or get scalped for yet more cryptcoin mining, because as of right now, Apple's the only option to get anything more powerful than a GTX 1650.

You can configure the other options to have the M1 Max without the 1TB ssd the only thing you are forced to upgrade to is the 32GB of memory. 

 

[BondiBlue]

4 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

But pricing? The entry config (14") costs more then a moderately speced top-of-the-line 17" in 2011 (the last 17"). Oof. And they still stick to the Magsafe without any kink protection. They already build a slim and angled Magsafe in the past. I don't understand why they returned to this sub-optimal design.

No it doesn't. The 17" MBP started at $2499, just like the new 16" MBP. Also, the new 14" MacBook Pro is not the entry model MBP. That's the 13" M1 MBP. The 14" is between the 13" and 16". 

[porina]

From a technology standpoint I'm finding this fascinating, not as a demonstration not of Arm or Apple magic, but quite simply what cutting edge tech can do. I only briefly skimmed this thread so I may be covering old ground, and in the time it took me to write this I'm seeing a ton of new post notifications!

 

On the ram bandwidths, to help provide some context, 200GB/s is roughly comparable to 8 channel DDR4 at 3200. Since DDR5 (desktop) is roughly double that, DDR5 generation HEDT platforms might match or exceed that. IMO desktop CPUs have been ram bandwidth starved for a long time, even excluding GPU effects, and I hope this will persuade x86 to go beyond 128-bit widths (dual channel DDR4 equivalent) in mainstream. AMD have actually been particularly lagging in this area and I'm really curious how they might handle this in DDR5 era. Big caches suggest to me they're not going to address it seriously and choose instead to work around it.

 

GPU claims are badly put, but it seems they compared in the two cases to 3050 Ti and 3080 mobile versions. If they're not doing marketing number shenanigans the bigger version could be ball park comparable to a desktop 3070 in performance. If they are using number tricks, it could be a LOT slower. The die of the big chip is also ball park comparable to the 3070, but obviously using a much more advanced process means they can do a load more stuff too. Implicitly the chip should cost a lot more than a 3070 chip.

 

CPU wise it looks like they compared to Tiger Lake, so the best Intel has to offer until the impending Alder Lake is formally launched soon. Tiger Lake however isn't even the most efficient x86, Zen 3 still takes the lead there by a not insignificant margin.

 

So on both CPU and GPU, Apple have compared to the market leaders Intel and nvidia, neither of which are arguably demonstrating leading power efficiency which is AMD. Apple has more than a full process node generation advantage contributing to that. If we assume Zen 4 as first x86 to go 5nm that would give a better indication of where x86 really fits in. Alder Lake is only going to be comparable to TSMC 7nm, but it remains to be seen how architecture plays against Zen 3. 

[Roswell]

12 minutes ago, BondiBlue said:

The 2015 15" MacBook Pro started at $1999. 

You can't use that model as a comparison, it was a budget option without a dedicated GPU. They removed it from the line years ago. 

 

I just looked it up, the mid 2015 model with a dedicated GPU started at $2499: https://everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/specs/macbook-pro-core-i7-2.5-15-dual-graphics-mid-2015-retina-display-specs.html

 

2013 model with dedicated GPU started at $2599: https://everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/specs/macbook-pro-core-i7-2.3-15-dual-graphics-late-2013-retina-display-specs.html

 

You would need to go back nearly 9 years to 2012 to find a model with a dedicated GPU that started at $1999.

 

[BondiBlue]

Just now, Roswell said:

You can't use that model as a comparison, it was a budget option without a dedicated GPU. They removed it from the line years ago. 

 

I just looked it up, the mid 2015 model with a dedicated GPU started at $2499: https://everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/specs/macbook-pro-core-i7-2.5-15-dual-graphics-mid-2015-retina-display-specs.html

 

2013 model with dedicated GPU started at $2599: https://everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/specs/macbook-pro-core-i7-2.3-15-dual-graphics-late-2013-retina-display-specs.html

 

You would need to go back nearly 9 years to 2012 to find a model with a dedicated GPU that started at $1999.

dGPU or not, it was still the cheapest 15" MacBook Pro in 2015, and it was still $500 cheaper than the cheapest 16" M1 MacBook Pro today. 

[gjsman]

1 minute ago, BondiBlue said:

dGPU or not, it was still the cheapest 15" MacBook Pro in 2015, and it was still $500 cheaper than the cheapest 16" M1 MacBook Pro today. 

As if there hasn't been inflation too... and chip shortages...

[HenrySalayne]

5 minutes ago, BondiBlue said:

No it doesn't. The 17" MBP started at $2499

Not on the European market. I paid around 2150€ for a moderately speced one back in 2011 (directly from Apple). Now the 14" starts at 2249€.

[BondiBlue]

2 minutes ago, gjsman said:

As if there hasn't been inflation too... and chip shortages...

I was simply responding to the claim that the 2015 15" MacBook Pro started at $2699. In fact, it started at only $1999. Yes, that 2015 MBP has no dGPU, but it's still a comparison between the two cheapest models for the 2015 15" and the 2021 16". 

 

2 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

Not on the European market. I paid around 2150€ for a moderately speced one back in 2011 (directly from Apple). Now the 14" starts at 2249€.

In Germany the original price for the base model 2011 17" MBP was €2499, so you got a good deal. 

[Roswell]

Just now, BondiBlue said:

dGPU or not, it was still the cheapest 15" MacBook Pro in 2015, and it was still $500 cheaper than the cheapest 16" M1 MacBook Pro today. 

This statement makes no logical sense. The new 16" M1 model is replacing the 16" inch Radeon model which replaced the 15" Radeon model which replaced a 15" Nvidia model, etc etc. The iGPU models have no place in that succession.

[BondiBlue]

1 minute ago, Roswell said:

The iGPU models have no place in that succession.

So are you saying the iGPU 15" MacBook Pro is not a 15" MacBook Pro? Because that doesn't make any sense. 

 

Yes, I know it isn't a direct comparison between the iGPU 2015 MBP and the dGPU 16" MacBook Pro (along with the Apple Silicon 16"), but it's still a valid comparison. If you wanted a 15" MBP in 2015 then the cheapest option was $1999. If you want a 16" 2021 MBP then the cheapest option is $2499. 

[BobVonBob]

13 minutes ago, hishnash said:

Doing this on a windows (that does not have a top menu bar) would be a big issue yes.  (lets hope OEMs do not do what we all know they are about to do and copy apple). 

But when running macOS the system puts a menu bar at the top of the screen. So the notch will not cover your apps it just covers the centre of the menu bar.  

Fullscreen? Applications that use the whole menu bar (I'd argue probably crappy UI design to begin with, but it is a valid use case)? The top middle of the display is less important on macOS than Windows, but it's not unimportant.

 

I've stood by it since the notch era started, and I continue to stand by it now: anything that cuts into the display is significantly worse than just having a bigger bezel. If you're fine with it I don't begrudge you that, but I've heard every argument and seen hundreds of devices with some sort of notch or hole punch in the last 5 years, and I've still never seen a situation where the thinner bezels were worth it.

[IAmAndre]

26 minutes ago, Kisai said:

We will have to wait and see if they're available or get scalped for yet more cryptcoin mining, because as of right now, Apple's the only option to get anything more powerful than a GTX 1650.

 

Now try and find any GPU in stock. Laptops start looking affordable. No matter who makes them.

 

 

USD.

 

 

 

You seem to have forgotten about the Razer Blade 14, which now seems very attractive at this price point because you're getting an RTX 3060 and a Ryzen 9 for $1800, and more power if you're willing to spend more. I'm very curious to see a comparison between the two.

[HenrySalayne]

2 minutes ago, BondiBlue said:

In Germany the original price for the base model 2011 17" MBP was €2499, so you got a good deal. 

You are right about the MSRP. Amazing. Seems like I really got a (edu) deal.

I would have bet it was 2199€ or 2099€ back then.

[Dracarris]

55 minutes ago, Vishera said:

The pricing is ridiculous,

I guess that people will buy them anyway because it's a status symbol.

So people will happily get milked out of their money.

Anyone that at this point still thinks Apple machines are "status symbols" understood absolutely nothing and is stuck at the era of reading GHz numbers on the carboard box.

[IAmAndre]

21 minutes ago, porina said:

CPU wise it looks like they compared to Tiger Lake, so the best Intel has to offer until the impending Alder Lake is formally launched soon. Tiger Lake however isn't even the most efficient x86, Zen 3 still takes the lead there by a not insignificant margin.

Actually they also compared it with the current M1 so it gives a better idea of its overall power. That's around 50% more power if I recall correctly for the M1 Pro

[TheSaucerofDoom]

Wow, these new MacBook Pros sound like really good machines that won't have any comparable laptop alternatives for many months to come, especially in the fit and finish, raw performance, built-in audio and display quality sections!

 

I'm just gonna go cry somewhere else for now because the prices of these things in Portugal are, well, what you get for selling an arm and a leg......

[Roswell]

12 minutes ago, BondiBlue said:

So are you saying the iGPU 15" MacBook Pro is not a 15" MacBook Pro? Because that doesn't make any sense. 

 

Yes, I know it isn't a direct comparison between the iGPU 2015 MBP and the dGPU 16" MacBook Pro (along with the Apple Silicon 16"), but it's still a valid comparison. If you wanted a 15" MBP in 2015 then the cheapest option was $1999. If you want a 16" 2021 MBP then the cheapest option is $2499. 

You’re getting really into the weeds with this. If you wanted a full size MBP with a capable GPU you were paying $2500. Why are you so hung up on a product category that they haven’t offered for 6 years? It’s not a valid comparison.

[BondiBlue]

Just now, Roswell said:

You’re getting really into the weeds with this. If you wanted a full size MBP with a capable GPU you were paying $2500. Why are you so hung up on a product category that they haven’t offered for 6 years? It’s not a valid comparison.

I think you're confused on what I was comparing. I'm not comparing the specs at all. I'm comparing the price for the screen. If you wanted the 15" MBP in 2015, you could get one for as low as $1999. Here in 2021 that price is $2499. Yes, I know the 16" MBP has more hardware than the base model 2015 15" MBP. That's not the point. My point is that if you want the larger screen regardless of the hardware inside, you're paying more for it now than in 2015. Not sure why that's hard to understand. I'm completely aware of the fact that the components inside aren't comparable. Some people just want the larger display, and these days it costs them more to get that.