Apple releases new MacBook Pros with up to 6-Core Processors and 32GB of Memory

AndreeOnline said:
My guess is that noise levels is the main differentiation. The BMD design is custom with a huge heatsink to be more or less silent. More generic solutions simply offer a box around a retail card. Yes, they're cheaper, but not as refined. Buyer's choice—which is good.



My Mac Pro from 2009 scores 24500 in multithreaded. I guess the listed Macs are the stock configs, whereas most old towers still in use for demanding tasks likely all have the 3.46GHz CPUs that cost nothing.

I don't say this to take anything away from the new MBP though: it seems like a really cool allrounder straddling the portability vs power gap quite well. And let's not talk single threaded scenarios at all, please. :cry: :embarasse
Click to expand...

That 2009 Mac Pro also is missing a lot of the hardware instructions that speed up tasks vs just the brute force strength. Its part of the reason why some h264 based tasks are faster on the regular iMac vs the iMac Pro which uses Xeon CPUs that are typically a generation or two behind in hardware instructions. Some tasks may be as fast but some will greatly suffer on an older machine.

My 2015 MBP is that way vs my iMac from 2012. On paper and in raw 3D rendering the iMac blows away the 2015 MBP but when running FCPX the 2015 MBP with is much lower clock speed completely destroys the 2012 iMac.
 
AndreeOnline said:
My guess is that noise levels is the main differentiation. The BMD design is custom with a huge heatsink to be more or less silent. More generic solutions simply offer a box around a retail card. Yes, they're cheaper, but not as refined. Buyer's choice—which is good.



My Mac Pro from 2009 scores 24500 in multithreaded. I guess the listed Macs are the stock configs, whereas most old towers still in use for demanding tasks likely all have the 3.46GHz CPUs that cost nothing.

I don't say this to take anything away from the new MBP though: it seems like a really cool allrounder straddling the portability vs power gap quite well. And let's not talk single threaded scenarios at all, please. :cry: :embarasse
Click to expand...


The Gigabyte Auros is a custom solution. They even built their own small form factor GPU to fit in the case vs just slapping in a PCI Express card. Neither of us have noise comparisons between the products so we can't really say for sure if its a thing or not. I also don't mind putting the eGPU under my desk since I don't want my desk cluttered up anyway.

Choice is always good of course but I think we need to wait and see if noise is actually any different between these products before we make any kind of assumption just because BMD created it.
 
Thomas Smet said:
Not a mystery at all. Sales of the 17” were very poor. I love the size as well but it just didn’t make financial sense for Apple to keep it around. I wish they would give it another go but that ship may have sailed.
Click to expand...

The problem is when I take out my 15 inch MBP and the producer takes out his 15 inch MBP and gives me a look. Now there is not differentiation. In the juvenile world of my thing is bigger than yours (pun intended), I lose. :) With the 17 inch MBP, people appreciate the real estate. All 40+ guys like it.

Will the Blackmagic eGPU will in FCPX editing with the current MBP?
 
indiawilds said:
The problem is when I take out my 15 inch MBP and the producer takes out his 15 inch MBP and gives me a look. Now there is not differentiation. In the juvenile world of my thing is bigger than yours (pun intended), I lose. :) With the 17 inch MBP, people appreciate the real estate. All 40+ guys like it.

Will the Blackmagic eGPU will in FCPX editing with the current MBP?
Click to expand...

Totally agree and as one of those 40+ dudes I still have a 2011 17” MBP. Kind of clunky today but it’s hard to give it up. I really wish they would bring back the 17”. Niche or not it was a great laptop.

My work provides a 15” MBP and while I have learned to use it I do miss the larger size.
 
AndreeOnline said:
My guess is that noise levels is the main differentiation. The BMD design is custom with a huge heatsink to be more or less silent. More generic solutions simply offer a box around a retail card. Yes, they're cheaper, but not as refined. Buyer's choice—which is good.



My Mac Pro from 2009 scores 24500 in multithreaded. I guess the listed Macs are the stock configs, whereas most old towers still in use for demanding tasks likely all have the 3.46GHz CPUs that cost nothing.

I don't say this to take anything away from the new MBP though: it seems like a really cool allrounder straddling the portability vs power gap quite well. And let's not talk single threaded scenarios at all, please. :cry: :embarasse
Click to expand...


Hi Andrée,

I have also considered buying a 2009 Mac Pro with updated firmware and hardware but haven't pick one up yet. Those Mac Pros seem like they are still a great performer for DaVinci Resolve but from what I heard the tower wasn't as good with Apple's Pro Apps. A number of people with updated Mac Pro and recent iMacs told me the Mac Pro was better at exporting but the iMacs had much less stuttering and hanging editing when with FCPX. They said this difference was noticeable even when the Mac Pro had an SSD and a superior GPU to that included in the iMac.

Are you a FCPX user and if so do you have any observations on editing with an iMac vs your upgraded Mac Pro? I'm still considering getting one primarily for Resolve and noise reduction. As you mentioned they are cheap these days and it's easier to stack GPU's in the tower so it's still an option.

Thanks!
 
indiawilds said:
The problem is when I take out my 15 inch MBP and the producer takes out his 15 inch MBP and gives me a look. Now there is not differentiation. In the juvenile world of my thing is bigger than yours (pun intended), I lose. :) With the 17 inch MBP, people appreciate the real estate. All 40+ guys like it.

Will the Blackmagic eGPU will in FCPX editing with the current MBP?
Click to expand...
Apple abandoned the pro in the era of killing the mac pro and making the 17” mbp disappear.

If i were buying a new mbp today, i would definitely opt for the 17”.
 
James0b57 said:
Apple abandoned the pro in the era of killing the mac pro and making the 17” mbp disappear.

If i were buying a new mbp today, i would definitely opt for the 17”.
Click to expand...

Guess myself and an entire industry of designers, musicians and content producers are no longer pros then. Crap I wish somebody would have told me I'm no longer a pro...

You have a serious problem if you think Apple abandoned a specific market after creating systems that push the latest CPU, storage, network connections, and peripheral connections beyond anybody else in the market. Thunderbolt was really intended just for pros and they were the first to adopt it. The Mac Pro trashcan and iMac Pro are engineering marvels aimed entirely at the pro market. FCPX and Motion are continuously updated to serve the professional markets and the prospect of eGPU opens a new era in portable computer options.

Lots of pros prefer to focus on their craft vs farting around with computer hardware all the time. Stop using that lame beat to death recycled talking point that Apple abandoned the pro market. I'm more productive now with my Mac and FCPX than I have ever been in my 20+ year career. Productivity = professional and thats where Apple focuses their attention on the pro market. They removed all the BS so pros could focus on what they really want to do.
 
filmguy123 said:
I just think it's funny that somehow the 17" MBP is too niche, but a 12.9" iPad Pro isn't.

Go figure.
Click to expand...


And they may get rid of it for that reason. The 17" was out for years and they gave it a serious go. The larger iPad is fairly new and they are testing the waters to see if it gains traction.

Its also about size/weight to function ratio. 17" laptops are large, bulky, difficult to use on airplanes and weigh more. The 12.9" iPad while larger is still very light compared to a laptop and equal in size to 13" laptops that are easier to use on airplanes and to carry around with less effort. I think it makes complete sense why the market may prefer a large iPad over a large laptop. In the eyes of the shrinking market 15" is the new large as we gravitate towards the ideal size for human use for comfort.

As weird as it sounds I even consider sometimes to get a 13" MBP vs a 15" for the exact same reason why they got rid of the 17". I sometimes want a lighter and smaller laptop and really wish the 13" could have the same guts as the 15". Especially since I use it in clamshell mode on a desk a lot of the time with two monitors, keyboard and mouse. Heck I would get a Mac mini if it had the 15" MBP guts.
 
I personally feel that there is a much greater need for a 17" MacBook Pro now that 4K has become a standard delivery resolution. A 15" display isn't ideal for most of us properly view 4K footage and the current MacBook Pro displays are "only" 2880x1800. On a 17inch model Apple could up the native resolution to UHD or even DCI 4K while still offering a "Retina" mode for everyday use. I would buy one!

The original 17 inch MacBook Pro included an ExpressCard slot which I put to great use with a high speed CompactFlash reader. In a perfect world I would love to see a CFAST or even a CFexpress/XQD slot in a new model to allow offloading of footage while in the field. The extra real estate could also allow for additional connection/ports including a couple of USB 3.1 Type A ports. While I'm dreaming it would also be great to have an integrated 10Gb Ethernet port.

They probably wouldn't sell in large numbers but it could be a great prestige product for Apple. Imagine all of the sexy photos of the new MacBook Pro's being used on film sets. Maybe they'll release something like this in 2019/2020.

Please Apple!
 
Gary T said:
I personally feel that there is a much greater need for a 17" MacBook Pro now that 4K has become a standard delivery resolution. A 15" display isn't ideal for most of us properly view 4K footage and the current MacBook Pro displays are "only" 2880x1800. On a 17inch model Apple could up the native resolution to UHD or even DCI 4K while still offering a "Retina" mode for everyday use. I would buy one!

The original 17 inch MacBook Pro included an ExpressCard slot which I put to great use with a high speed CompactFlash reader. In a perfect world I would love to see a CFAST or even a CFexpress/XQD slot in a new model to allow offloading of footage while in the field. The extra real estate could also allow for additional connection/ports including a couple of USB 3.1 Type A ports. While I'm dreaming it would also be great to have an integrated 10Gb Ethernet port.

They probably wouldn't sell in large numbers but it could be a great prestige product for Apple. Imagine all of the sexy photos of the new MacBook Pro's being used on film sets. Maybe they'll release something like this in 2019/2020.

Please Apple!
Click to expand...

And they will call it Macbook Pro Pro
 
Gary T said:
I personally feel that there is a much greater need for a 17" MacBook Pro now that 4K has become a standard delivery resolution. A 15" display isn't ideal for most of us properly view 4K footage and the current MacBook Pro displays are "only" 2880x1800. On a 17inch model Apple could up the native resolution to UHD or even DCI 4K while still offering a "Retina" mode for everyday use. I would buy one!

The original 17 inch MacBook Pro included an ExpressCard slot which I put to great use with a high speed CompactFlash reader. In a perfect world I would love to see a CFAST or even a CFexpress/XQD slot in a new model to allow offloading of footage while in the field. The extra real estate could also allow for additional connection/ports including a couple of USB 3.1 Type A ports. While I'm dreaming it would also be great to have an integrated 10Gb Ethernet port.

They probably wouldn't sell in large numbers but it could be a great prestige product for Apple. Imagine all of the sexy photos of the new MacBook Pro's being used on film sets. Maybe they'll release something like this in 2019/2020.

Please Apple!
Click to expand...

While I agree with you I honestly don't feel like not viewing 4k at 4k resolution is really hurting what I do. At my desk I can easily use a large 4k monitor for critical pixel perfect work. Even if there was a 4k 17" MBP I'm not sure I would use it for critical work anyway. I also doubt you would really notice much of a difference visually. I'm just not convinced we are really losing out on much besides bragging rights.
 
Thomas Smet said:
While I agree with you I honestly don't feel like not viewing 4k at 4k resolution is really hurting what I do. At my desk I can easily use a large 4k monitor for critical pixel perfect work. Even if there was a 4k 17" MBP I'm not sure I would use it for critical work anyway. I also doubt you would really notice much of a difference visually. I'm just not convinced we are really losing out on much besides bragging rights.
Click to expand...

To be clear, I expect to be thrilled with the MacBook Pro I'm planning to buy next week. However while I agree that it won't make a huge difference, the increase in screen size would definitely help me a bit when viewing footage. Every little bit helps. I've worked an a number of 15" PC laptops with UHD resolutions and it was impossible to see details on such a small screen. Of course when I'm not in the field I would use my 65" OLED or some other monitor.

The market for my fantasy machine is small but what is life without dreams.
 
My first Apple computer was a 17" MBP and I would love for them to bring out a new 17". My original was a beast, although I didn't realize it until I got my 15" RMBP, since I was coming from an even bigger and heavier Dell. But with the advancements of SSD's and dropping the disc drive, a new 17" would be much lighter and thinner.
 
Apple is done with the 17" laptop and eventually may even discontinue the 15" eventually. The trend is 13 and 12.1". Not good for us but since when has Apple done what it's users want?
 
They should make the laptop in a 13-15” size with an expandable screen once the clamshell is open. The panel technology may not be that far fetched with foldable panels on horizon.
 
Gary T said:
To be clear, I expect to be thrilled with the MacBook Pro I'm planning to buy next week. However while I agree that it won't make a huge difference, the increase in screen size would definitely help me a bit when viewing footage. Every little bit helps. I've worked an a number of 15" PC laptops with UHD resolutions and it was impossible to see details on such a small screen. Of course when I'm not in the field I would use my 65" OLED or some other monitor.

The market for my fantasy machine is small but what is life without dreams.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong I would probably buy a 17" if it existed as well. I loved my 2011 17" and I'm pretty sure Apple could make one thinner and lighter than that beast was. My eyes are not as good as they used to be so any extra space is welcome. I am a fan of the smaller lighter form factor however so I'm really torn. Its kind of a situation where I would prefer both which I know is just not possible. Like Filmguy123 said a small form factor with an expandable screen would be awesome. For work I sometimes use my iPad Pro as a second monitor via a special app which is ok but not great.

A 13" with the guts of the 15" and a screen that expands when opened to UHD 17" would be so cool. Not sure how to make that display not weird and pathetic or need regular repairs.
 
Benjobe said:
It looks like you'll need to lower your AC to below freezing in order to unlock the full potential of the i9 chip due to thermal throttling. Otherwise, in normal room temperatures, this new model performs slower than a 2017 MBP with an i7 chip. At least when using Premiere Pro. Perhaps Apple is pushing more editors towards FCPX this way?

https://www.macrumors.com/2018/07/17/core-i9-chip-macbook-pro-throttling/
Click to expand...

The irony is that a more optimized application would make MORE use of the CPU, and therefore run it hotter... or try to.

:Drogar-Evil(DBG):
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top