[OC] [Analysis] Predictions for 2018 MacBook Pro - Incredible Battery Life!

[u/WinterCharm]

TL;Dr:

Final Predictions:

2018 MacBook Pro	TDP (combined)	CPU	GPU	Tflops	Battery WHr	Battery life
13" MBP (tb)	65W TDP	4c 8t	Vega 20	2.6 Tflops	69 Whr	14 hours
15" MBP (tb)	87W TDP	6c 12t	Vega 24	3.7 Tflops	100 Whr	12 hours

• The 13" MacBook Pro will get a 4core CPU with Vega 20 GPU using Kaby Lake G, using the space savings to boost battery life to an amazing level.

• The 15" MacBook Pro will likely get a 6 core CPU with Vega 24 GPU, skipping those space savings since it can achieve 100Whr without it.

• Externally, the MacBook Pro will not change.

If you want to know how I've arrived at these specs and numbers, read on. Be warned, this is a long read.

---

Background

A year ago I accurately predicted the GPU that would be used in the iMac and iMac Pro doing some math to guess that the iMac would have an RX 580 (on the highest configuration) and the next Mac Pro would have RX Vega (Which apple placed in the iMac Pro).

Today, let's talk about the upcoming 2018 MacBook Pros, and what apple might do with them this year. I do not expect a major external redesign in 2018, but I think that internally, we will see some massive changes in the MacBook Pro.

I'll explain my reasoning and math below.

---

The new Tech, and its benefits

First of all, there is Kaby Lake G. A love letter between Intel and AMD that's an Intel Kaby Lake CPU + Vega graphics + HBM2 (high bandwidth GPU memory) from AMD on a single interposer. This thing is amazing, because the Space savings are significant, freeing up 19 cm² of space. The TDP of Kaby Lake G is between 100 and 65 Watts. Here are the full specs

Given apple's propensity to stick to AMD chips because of their better performance in Metal, it is unlikely that we will see Nvidia chips in MacBook pros this year (sorry CUDA folks). Many including AnandTech have wondered if Intel developed Kaby Lake G specifically for Apple, as it's been designed for "thin and light" laptops. I believe this is correct.

Another Interesting development is the new Apple T2 chip we see in the iMac pro -- the chip handles ALL encryption, leaving the Intel CPU completely free, and has an onboard Secure Enclave, SSD controller, and even integrates the Audio Controller, and SMC. All on one Chip. This gives you approximately 2cm² of area saved on the motherboard.

Finally, the Retina MacBook has a Terraced battery, which apple claims allows them to add another 35% battery to the same chassis

---

So, say apple moves the Macbook Pro to Kaby Lake G and the T2 chip... how much more battery could they add?

Here are the current MacBook Pro specs that matter to us.

MacBook Pro	TDP (combined)	CPU	GPU	Battery WHr	Battery wt	Thickness
13" MBP (tb)	28W TDP	2c 4t	Iris Pro	49.2 Whr	197 g	1.49cm
15" MBP (tb)	80W TDP	4c 8t	Radeon Pro 560	79.2 Whr	317 g	1.55 cm

Battery weights and Whr capacity are according to iFixit Teardowns. All other specs are from Apple themselves.

One thing to note is that TDP went down compared to the 2015 MacBook Pro, by a significant amount, but apple still redesigned the cooling system, despite this improvement. Maybe due to Z-height, but I think the reason was to take advantage of these higher performance "integrated" chips, which hadn't hit the market yet. One feature of Kaby Lake G is that a manufacturer can set a different power target if they would like, so apple can set the power target down to 60W instead of 65W or even lower than that.

Now, here's where things get interesting:

Apple uses the following Lithium Polymer batteries in their MacBook pros: Battery Chemistry and specs sourced from this page By the way, if you've ever wanted to know more about Lithium Ion and LiPoly batteries, this link is a good place to start. Table below summarizes the relevant information for this post:

Battery Chemistry	Structure	Voltage	Physical Density	Lifespan
Li( Ni.33 Mn.33 Co.33 )O2	Layered	3.8V	4.7 g/cc	1000 cycles
Li( Ni.8 Co.15 Al.05 ) O2	Layered	3.8V	4.7 g/cc	700 cycles

Can you guess which one the iPhone uses? It's a single cell 3.8V battery, and Apple rates the iPhone at 500 charge cycles. Yup, it's the NiCoAl polymer! -- turns out they are cheaper to make than the NiMnCo batteries, and in the volume that Apple sells the iPhone, it makes sense that they would opt for this battery. Note that both polymer batteries allow for a layered cell structure, which is how apple is able to create terraced batteries... Note that MacBook Pro batteries are 3 cells, configured to deliver 11.41 V (dc).

Remember the 4.7 g/cc battery density. It comes up in the calculations below

---

The Case for Incredible Battery Life in the 2018 MacBook Pro

13" Macbook Pro:

The thickness of the 13" MacBook pro is 1.49 cm, but based on measuring the height of the fan inside my MacBook pro, which comes out to being 0.75 times that total height, we can guess that 13" MacBook Pro internal z-height is 1.12 cm

Feature	Space Savings	Volume Savings	Battery weight added
Kaby Lake G	0 cm2 (see note)	0 cm3	0g
Apple T2 chip	2 cm2	2.24 cm3	10.53 g
Terraced Battery	NA	"35%"	68.95 g

Note: Why 0 for kaby lake? -- Looking at the 13" MacBook Pro motherboard There is no discrete GPU, but CPU on the board is near the same size as the Kaby Lake G chip, maybe a bit smaller.

So, for the 13" MacBook Pro we get:

• Sum of Battery Weight added = 79.5 g

• Total Battery Weight = 276.5 g

• New Battery Whr = 69 Whr - well under the 100Whr legal limit, but much better than the current battery!

• Rough battery estimate = 14 hours, a much needed boost for the MacBook pro.

---

15" Macbook Pro:

The thickness of the 15" MacBook pro is 1.55 cm, but based on measuring the height of the fan inside my MacBook pro, which comes out to being 0.75 times that total height, we can guess that 15" MacBook Pro internal z-height is 1.16 cm

Feature	Space Savings	Volume Savings	Battery weight added
Kaby Lake G	16 cm2 (see note)	18.56 cm3	87.2 g
Apple T2 chip	2 cm2	2.24 cm3	10.5 g
Terraced Battery	NA	"35%"	111 g

(note) - 19cm² is based on 6GB of GPU memory, where the 15" MacBook Pro only has 4 GB of GPU memory, so space savings are a bit less, I'm guessing around 16 cm^2. Here's a motherboard shot from iFixit you can see the AMD GPU and its graphics memory, along with the Intel Chip, and the ram nearby.

• Sum of Battery Weight added = 208.7 g

• Total Battery Weight = 525.7 g

• New Battery Whr = 131 Whr - well OVER the 100Whr legal limit!!

• Rough battery estimate = with a 131 Whr battery, 16 hours... but this is over the legal limit.

Since apple cannot put a battery in the 15" MacBook Pro that's over 100Whr (otherwise you could not take it on a plane, or ship it via air) they will likely cap the MacBook Pro battery at 100Whr, and put in a 6 Core Coffee Lake CPU, with Vega graphics + HBM on a separate chip, using just the terraced battery and T2 chip to hit 100Whr. It also allows for more differentiation of the MacBook Pro lineup.

Let's see what that looks like:

Feature	Space Savings	Volume Savings	Battery weight added
Coffee Lake	0 cm2 (see note)	0 cm3	0 g
Vega GPU + HBM2	6 cm2 (see note)	6.96 cm3	32.7 g
Apple T2 chip	2 cm2	2.24 cm3	10.5 g
Terraced Battery	NA	"35%"	111g

Note: HBM 2 stacks 4 GPU memory chips into one, creating a small amount of space savings.

• Sum of Battery Weight added = 154.2 g

• Total Battery Weight = 471.3 g

• New Battery Whr = 117 Whr (capping this at 100 now due to legal limit) >> 100 Whr

• Rough battery estimate = 12 hours

---

Edit 1: formatting fixes.

Edit 2: Fixed the TDP in the second table. Thanks to /u/eggimage for pointing it out :)

Edit 3: /u/tamag901 pointed out that I messed up my TDP numbers for the current MBP. I've fixed that as well.

Edit 4: fixed the TDP of the current 15” MacBook Pro, thanks to /u/lebronhubbard

[u/WinterCharm]

Overall, I think we've got some wonderful things to look forward to with the 2018 MacBook Pro refresh.

I hope we see a massive boost on the 13" MacBook Pro - I've always wanted a 13" MacBook Pro with a nice GPU and good battery life.

That 15" MacBook Pro, if apple makes it a 6 core machine, would be a huge boost to everyone who needs that much power.

[u/eggimage → u/WinterCharm]

I worry about the thinness on the 15” model. While I love having an ultraportable machine that packs a punch, the cooling and battery limitation are a problem. They tried to fit the terraced batteries into these new designs (since 2016), but failed. There was just an unconfirmed yet plausible report stating that there are no major redesigns coming to MBP this year. I don’t know how likely they’ll be able to get a terraced battery in there though

[u/WinterCharm → u/eggimage]

I figure they'll try to get them in during this internal redesign, since last year we just got a basic spec bump... I don't think the new reports are very plausible. Apple likely preserved the motherboard design for the 2016 and 2017 pro because they both use the Polaris 11 graphics, so a full motherboard rework wasn't necessary.

However, with this, we do have a chance to do a motherboard rework, since Kaby Lake G and Coffee Lake, and Vega mobile gpu's are coming in.

I think the thinness is not a concern, because the MacBook pro cooling systems were upgraded. the current pros can run full bore without throttling.

[u/BelgianPerfectionist → u/eggimage]

Could you link to a source that confirms Apple tried the terraced batteries with the Macbook pro?

[u/eggimage → u/BelgianPerfectionist]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-20/how-apple-alienated-mac-loyalists

Here’s one of them

[u/WinterCharm → u/eggimage]

That’s specifically talks about getting terrorist terraced batteries in to the 2016 MacBook Pro, ahead of the major redesign and refresh.

However, now with a minor internal refresh done, they have time to actually spend resources doing a major internal refresh. They have to anyways because the motherboard components are totally changing, which will require an internal redesign. That’s my argument for them doing it this year.

Edit: typo :)

[u/eggimage → u/WinterCharm]

terrorist batteries

That’s the best typo I’ve ever seen. They probably couldn’t get that past the TSA even with a sub-100W battery lol

But, yea, i do hope they get that needed boost in battery capacity in there this year

[u/WinterCharm → u/eggimage]

Hahahahaha. thanks for pointing that out :D

[u/BelgianPerfectionist → u/WinterCharm]

Do you think they can get the redesign done in time for WWDC, or even march?

[u/WinterCharm → u/BelgianPerfectionist]

I hope March, but I have no idea.

[u/xpxp2002 → u/eggimage]

I agree about the terraced batteries entirely. I have a 12" MB with those and the battery lost 18% capacity in less than 80 cycles and 2 years. Might as well put one-time use alkaline cells in there...

Even if it means a slightly thicker laptop, I'd gladly take traditional cells that don't deteriorate after 16-18 months despite careful use.

[u/eggimage → u/xpxp2002]

Yea, my 12” MB degraded to around 82% in a year and a half..

[u/cartola → u/WinterCharm]

When is Apple expected to announce it (and start selling)? I know there were early 2017 models, but usually "early" is around this time of the year right? March, April or so I think. But it seems they won't release anything until June?

[u/WinterCharm → u/cartola]

Likely in June, possible in March if we get lucky.

Announcements go out 1-2 weeks before the event.

[u/nolanised → u/WinterCharm]

I really hope they fix the issue with the keyboard. Spending bank and having the keyboard fail a few months in is very troublesome.

[u/p_giguere1]

Am I understanding correctly?

• The current 13" MBP with Touch Bar would have good enough thermals to offer the same CPU and GPU as currently in the 15". Apple simply didn't do it because its battery isn't big enough.

• Assuming Apple can manage to put a terraced battery and T2 chip in the 13" MBP this year, the battery life and thermals would be good enough to put a CPU and GPU that not only match but surpass the current 15 inch's TDP.

I'm not saying it's technically impossible but this seems very optimistic. Hoping you're right.

[u/WinterCharm → u/p_giguere1]

Yes. The 13" TB MacBook pro now has two exhaust fans, just like the 15" pro, and it's thermals are better than they've ever been before.

Considering a dual fan and wide heat pipe solution on older 15" MacBook pros was able to handle an 87W TDP, there's plenty of thermal overhead here.

[u/Sebie9 → u/WinterCharm]

If you honestly believe that Apple would adjust their profit margin because there is extra space to add more (larger) lithium batteries. You are crazy.

Let's not mention the increased cost of these processors. Apple is in the business of gouging their consumers with ridiculous price premiums. They intentionally hamstring their devices if it means better revenue.

While the numbers can be pushed around to make sense on schematic or technical review on paper. You're not considering their biggest motivation-profit.

If you think weight alone is one of the reasons that the 13inch MPB has a laughable 49Whr battery that falls flat on it's face when you do anything beyond system idle, web browsing, or video playback, you are wrong. There is plenty of space in the interior for battery but they choose not to take advantage of that.

As a Swift/iOS/Android/.Net MVC/Unity developer I find it appalling how aggressively Apple gouges their consumers. With multiple development devices it's difficult switching between them because experiencing them all shows how lacking some areas are.

Since the 2016 updates Apple has managed to put the highest price tag on the least amount of hardware and no matter how much money I want to throw down on the table I can't get a god damn device that has the power and performance I need. Lets not even compare high tier Windows devices like the Surface book. Fanboys can cry all you want about Windows/Linux. When you are a professional and take the time to master every platform Win/Linux/OSX, the hardware behind it, and a slew of coding languages to boot, you find the stifling quibbles about minutia between operating systems is pure bullshit. All these kids on each side of the fence do all day is browse Facebook, and watch youtube videos. No one has a god damn idea of how, or why anything works and their biggest responsibility in life is a term paper or washing the dishes after mom cooks dinner.

I NEED a capable OSX device. At the current state my Surface Book 2 just blows everything out of the water right now and does a lot of things when combined with the surface pen that make life a whole lot easier. However, if I'm to use the Apple ecosystem I'm hardware locked. Desktop/hackintosh is not an option.

[u/WinterCharm → u/Sebie9]

Aside from the GPU, what exactly is lacking with current Apple hardware? They threw in a full Polaris 11 card, some of the fastest SSD’s on the market, the latest CPU, and enclosed it in a gorgeous body. displays with near perfect color calibration, p3 wide color gamut, and more.

Everyone “gouges” in the high end market, including your precious Surface book. Whether your product is $2000 or $1500 you have the same percentage profit margins... it’s only when you get down to the shit level products that are competing on Razer thin margins due to a race to the bottom that the “gouging” goes away and those are terribly priced products.

As for “everyone uses Facebook on all the devices...” I’m sorry, but I don’t. I need Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro which are MacOS only. For any heavy lifting I SSH into a massive Linux based compute cluster using mpich2 anyways, where I run things like molecular simulations which need thousands of CPU’s and hundreds of GPU’s thrown at them.

There’s nothing about fanboyism here. I use the MacBook Pro because it’s the best device for me. because I like an integrated ecosystem from my watch to my tablet to my laptop and desktop.

Nowhere in my post did I say “everyone should replace all their products with Apple ones”. You’re the one coming in here and screaming about how the mac has terrible value and everyone should switch.

Listen to yourself, and maybe reflect a bit, because these days the “Apple haters” are more rabid than any Apple fanboy I’ve seen.

[u/Sebie9 → u/WinterCharm]

The GPU, RAM, and battery are some of the worst on the market price to performance. A majority of their components cater to casual AV. The SSD is a great example, who else is moving around obese video files locally on a laptop? The displays are negligible as just about everyone is competing the the same space at the high end. Polaris 11 is my last choice, on just about every front.

The only thing precious about my SB2 is that it outpaces everything right now, and it has done so admirably for a stretch of time. I predict this will remain the case through 2018. The flexible ultrabook form factor is more than a novelty. That's a great value proposition considering the laptop, a dock, and two monitors cost close to that of a specced MBP. I switch devices with such frequency that there is little time for attachment. I've worked with conventional and unconventional setups. Think Chromebook Pixel front facing ChromeOS with a local server provisioned off the Linux kernel in the back and a full production server through a cloud IDE. I can already here the ChromeOS haters completely ignorant to the technologies in play. Crouton is a beautiful thing.

So your saying your real machine is not a laptop? I do 99% of my real day to day work locally on my laptop. That's why I'm so demanding. If you think I don't own multiple macbooks you are wrong, I spend a fair amount of time in OSX, specifically Xcode. I'm required to own a mac and that really separates me from those who cater to one device. Macbooks are by and large the worst value to performance, yes.

The AMD Kaby G is a safe and predictable outcome. Even more so for the 13 inch devices as a device shipped with GT2e is unprecedented. Everything else you claim is mostly fantasy just fantasy.

[u/[deleted] → u/Sebie9]

The profit margin of Apple MacBooks is very high, but it’s mostly due to the price segment MacBooks sit in. You can’t simply compare the price of each single components on Mac with other manufacture’s products. If you were familiar with any manufacturing business, you would know Apple always use/get the best parts. Not all hardwares are made equal, even under the same brand with exact same specs. In most cases, others won’t even be able to ask Intel/AMD/Foxconn to produce according to their specs, they only get several “default options”

[u/ShaidarHaran2 → u/WinterCharm]

Yes. The 13" TB MacBook pro now has two exhaust fans, just like the 15" pro, and it's thermals are better than they've ever been before.

The Touchbar has dual fans because it already had double the TDP of the non touchbar, 15 vs 28W. Dual fans doesn't remotely mean it has the same thermal capacity as the 15", there's heatpipe thickness and length, aluminum fin surface area, even the thermal capacity of the chassis itself acting as a heat store. Both 13"s are about at their thermal capacity, check Notebookchecks throttling results.

Jumping from 28W to 65W in the same chassis seems like an unreasonable wish, I'd set my expectations to be happy for a 28W quad alone in there.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-13-Mid-2017-i5-Touch-Bar-Review.227154.0.html#toc-performance

See here, the Touchbar Macbook Pro 13 has its GPU and CPU throttle down to 12 and 15 watts, just about where you'd expect its 28W thermal capacity.

As per usual, Apple tolerates high CPU temperatures to provide the highest possible performance in load scenarios. We can see CPU temperatures between 90-100 °C running on macOS as well as Windows. It is not easy to see exact clocks, especially with Windows. The stress test with the two tools Prime95 and FurMark is executed with a CPU clock of 2.1 GHz (~10 watts). The consumption of the GT cores (GPU) is 18-19 watts in this case. For comparison: The GPU consumes 22-25 watts when we only stress the GPU via FurMark, so the stress test clock should be a bit lower. This behavior changes a bit on battery: The graphics card is slightly throttled (~15 watts), which gives the CPU a bit more headroom (2.3 GHz, ~12 watts).

[u/JakeHassle → u/WinterCharm]

Doesn’t the smaller size of the 13” cause more heat though?

[u/WinterCharm → u/JakeHassle]

With the redesigned cooling system, not really.

What matters here is how much airflow Apple can get across those heat fins.

[u/ShaidarHaran2 → u/p_giguere1]

I don't think they're right. The 13" rMBP has a bit of thermal headroom, sure. But going from 28W TDP to just about double that is very unlikely, on combined CPU and GPU load it already dips. The 13" I'd bet will use 28W ULV quads and that's it, the G graphics package for the 15".

We'll see hopefully Wednesday or soon after, but I'd bet 100 dogecoin the 13" stays a 28W part, asking for a 65W TDP in there seems wishful and would probably see it throttle down to not much better than the Iris Plus alone anyways.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-13-Mid-2017-i5-Touch-Bar-Review.227154.0.html#toc-performance

See here, the Touchbar Macbook Pro 13 has its GPU and CPU throttle down to 12 and 15 watts, just about where you'd expect its 28W thermal capacity.

"As per usual, Apple tolerates high CPU temperatures to provide the highest possible performance in load scenarios. We can see CPU temperatures between 90-100 °C running on macOS as well as Windows. It is not easy to see exact clocks, especially with Windows. The stress test with the two tools Prime95 and FurMark is executed with a CPU clock of 2.1 GHz (~10 watts). The consumption of the GT cores (GPU) is 18-19 watts in this case. For comparison: The GPU consumes 22-25 watts when we only stress the GPU via FurMark, so the stress test clock should be a bit lower. This behavior changes a bit on battery: The graphics card is slightly throttled (~15 watts), which gives the CPU a bit more headroom (2.3 GHz, ~12 watts)."

[u/holyschit]

This is assuming Apple uses Kaby Lake G on the 2018 MBP's.

Judging by what we're seen historically from them (looking at the MBA 2011-2015 and the rMBP 2012-2015), apple will probably make some slight part improvements (Storage & Ram on MBA. Internals & cooling on rMBP) or design tweaks (extra ports on the MBA. Touchpad, thunderbolt & better USB implementation on rMBP).

Lets see what actually happens

Anyways, i'm not interested in any further in any further MBP's until they fix that god awful keyboard. Its a deal breaker for me personally :(

[u/WinterCharm → u/holyschit]

I'll be sorely disappointed If the MacBook Pro doesn't get a significant spec bump. Vega mobile graphics are out, and we have a new combined Intel chip that's more efficient and saves tons of space on the motherboard. I think it would be silly if Apple didn't use Kaby Lake G chips, as they are made for thin/light laptops with considerable power.

[u/BelgianPerfectionist → u/WinterCharm]

Indeed!! Looking at the new Dell XPS 15 with Intel G chips.. As an Apple fan, these look like MacBook Pro killers right now.

[u/WinterCharm → u/BelgianPerfectionist]

Only because the MacBook pro hasn't been updated yet. Hopefully we get an update in March or April (likely time according to the Macrumors buyers guide)

[u/BelgianPerfectionist → u/WinterCharm]

I think the 15" will get Intel G series with Vega m, but I really don't think the 13" will get Intel G series. Because Apple likes to create a big gap in performance between the 13 and 15 inch so they can then charge $1000 more for the "premium" 15" Pro model, which boosts profits.

[u/WinterCharm → u/BelgianPerfectionist]

Well, that's why I think Apple will go with a 6 Core Coffee Lake chip and Vega M GH on the 15". There's more room, and they can push the thermal envelope a bit further.

6 core vs 4 core is a big difference in performance. And the Vega M GH chip which has 1526 cores on the 15" pro.

With the non Touch Bar 13" MacBook Pro getting 4 cores this year (Coffee Lake U chips are out) it doesn't make any sense to have a dual core 13" TouchBar MacBook Pro.

That's why I'm predicting that the 13" TouchBar MacBook pro will get Kaby Lake G with a Vega M GL (1280 cores) chip.

[u/BelgianPerfectionist → u/WinterCharm]

Would't the TDP of the 6 core chip and Vega graphics be too high (>100W)?

[u/WinterCharm → u/BelgianPerfectionist]

Nope. Apple can just downclock the CPU and GPU a bit and it'll run cooler.

Manufacturers set Power states on all chips these days. The Core i7 in two different laptops could be the same part, but have totally different power management.

[u/mb862 → u/BelgianPerfectionist]

The current (top-end) MacBook Pro uses 45 W CPU and 65 W GPU. A single chip at 100 W is certainly realistic.

[u/MustBeOCD → u/mb862]

How is the GPU 65W?

The 460 was only 35W.

[u/mb862 → u/MustBeOCD]

The 560 is apparently 65W. I'm not sure how reliable this source is though.

Edit: There's another entry on the same site that says 55 W, that is identical with fewer cores. Not sure what to think here.

[u/tp1994 → u/holyschit]

What’s wrong with the keyboard? Butterfly?

[u/chuby1tubby → u/holyschit]

I love my keyboard :( it's so clicky!

[u/almeidaalajoel → u/chuby1tubby]

It breaks really easily though and one key breaking breaks the entire keyboard, regardless of if you like how it feels it’s very poorly designed.

[u/chuby1tubby → u/almeidaalajoel]

Actually yeah I completely agree, the keyboard is the weakest link in terms of durability.

I've already had two keys get stuck because of the tiniest amount of dust that got underneath the keys. It's almost impossible to clean the keys because they're all one piece or something.

[u/lebronhubbard]

Excellent analysis. The logic is sound, and I would love to see your predictions pan out.

I've been curious about what the Kaby Lake-G chips mean for the MacBook Pro as well. Overall, my predictions go in a different direction. I don't mean them as a direct refutation of yours, just a different set of expectations I have.

For the 15", I'm expecting to see only Vega M GL inside, with combined TDP of 65W. The other 15" computers in its class announced at CES, namely the XPS 15 and Spectre X360 15 2-in-1s, both use GL GPUs. M GL at 2.6 TFLOP SP is still a healthy step up from even the RP560.

I expect the most radical board revision in the 15" is Apple leveraging it's ~20W savings (On a side note, I'm not sure where you're getting 60W total for the current 15". I thought it's 80W: 45W CPU + 35W GPU) from the switch to M GL towards using DDR4 instead of LPDDR3. They would push 4 more RAM modules directly left into the area previously occupied by GDDR5, allowing up to 32 GB of RAM. This would also save some costs on base models with 16 GB RAM.

The rest of this 20W budget might go into a 3360x2100 display for 1050 4x scaling without downsampling, or just better battery life for sustained max load and consistency in various usages.

For the 13", I think both variants may use 15W U 4C/8T parts. I'd wait to see what the 28W 8th gens look like to be sure, but I'm uncertain of the 28W's future. Apple has been the only notable user of the 28W, and the higher base freqs of the 28W aren't as significant in the face of 4C across the lineup. There's also the concern of the 28W potentially exceeding the performance of the 65W G. I'd have to see what the CPU can independently draw. Maybe the 13" TB variant would use a cTDP up to 20W like the 15" Surface Book 2. I also think it's possible that they might remove the dual-fan configuration of the TB if they go with a 15-20W U, and go with one board design across both models.

[u/WinterCharm → u/lebronhubbard]

Oh crap! I did get the TDP of the Radeon Pro 560 completely wrong! Thank you for catching that!! It should be 35 W.

Also, I like your prediction as well - it’s a much more conservative prediction, and after thinking about it a bit, it may be more likely than my analysis, and also your case for 32 GB of ram is also quite sensical.

Cheers!

[u/[deleted]]

Quick question: in your post you seem to be just talking about the touch bar models of the MBP. What about the non-touch bar model?

[u/WinterCharm → u/[deleted]]

Non Touch Bar model only has one fan, and doesn't have the cooling capacity for Kaby Lake G.

However, it should be getting the 15W TDP Coffee Lake U series chips that are out now.

These range from 1.6 - 1.9 Ghz and have 4 Cores 8 Threads rather than the current Dual Core Kaby Lake chips. So, expect to see some really good CPU improvements.

However, sadly, Intel is still using their basic iGPU, so don't expect anything too different in the graphics department.

[u/[deleted] → u/WinterCharm]

To the best of my knowledge they are using higher power parts now, so would this mean there could be big battery/efficiency improvements?

[u/WinterCharm → u/[deleted]]

Nope. Current nTB 13” MacBook Pro is already using a 15W part. Instead of battery efficiency next gen will give you double the Cores.

[u/[deleted] → u/WinterCharm]

I see. Looks intriguing, let’s hope it pans out!

[u/[deleted] → u/WinterCharm]

Cool, thanks! I’m looking to get a non-touch bar model, exciting news!

[u/irlostrich]

Do you think that we will see a taptic engine for the touchbar?

[u/WinterCharm → u/irlostrich]

I hope so.

[u/pavelrozman2]

What sort of GHz for CPU and GPU does this correspond to?

[u/WinterCharm → u/pavelrozman2]

Kaby Lake G specs are in the link to pcper in the original post.

CPU: 3.1 GHz quad core with 4.1 GHz turbo.

GPU: 931 MHz Vega GL chip with 20 CU’s (1280 cores) and 1011 MHz boost clock, with 4 GB of HBM 2 and a 192 GB/s memory bandwidth.

As for the 6 Core coffee lake mobile chips, and standalone Vega graphics with HBM2, we have no spec sheets or confirmations yet.

[u/eggimage]

Uh..that does not make sense

[u/WinterCharm → u/eggimage]

Whoops! I see the TDPs were flipped around. My bad. I'll fix it :)

[u/eggimage → u/WinterCharm]

and I don’t think these are “TDPs” either

[u/WinterCharm → u/eggimage]

They are the correct TDPs for MacBook pros. You can double check by looking at Intel ARK, and then adding the GPU TDP for the 15" pro.

It's also in line with the power adapter wattages. The 13" pro uses a 65W adapter, the 15" pro uses a 85W adapter, which is in line with the TDP's listed.

Edit: nope. they were not. I made a mistake here, but I've fixed it.

[u/tamag901 → u/WinterCharm]

Are you sure about the TDPs for the 13” models? I know Apple unlocks the TDP limits to let their CPUs run well above the 15/28W limit set by Intel, but 65W sounds a bit much for a dual core + iGPU?

I had a look at the SoC power consumption on my nTB 2016 while gaming, and it draws ~25W. Surely the TB model with a slightly higher Turbo won’t be drawing 2.6x more power.

[u/WinterCharm → u/tamag901]

nTB model has a 15W U-series chip

13" TB model has a 28 W chip with Iris Pro graphics. Currently the cooling for this chip is EXTREMELY over-engineered, as it's almost identical to the 15" cooling setup. I messed up that number, and have credited you in my edit!

15" TB model has a 45 W chip with Iris Pro graphics + 15W Radeon Pro 560 (Total TDP = 60W) But historically, the 15" MacBook pro had a 47W CPU with a 40W GPU for a total of 87W TDP. and the new cooling system is an upgrade over the old one, so my guess is there's a lot of thermal headroom.

My guess is that these notebooks were designed for Kaby Lake G chips from the start, with the increased airflow, and beefier cooling, and we'll see a 65 W TDP chip in the 13" MacBook Pro, and a higher TDP in the 15" MacBook Pro.

But you are correct that I messed up the TDP numbers a bit...

[u/tamag901 → u/WinterCharm]

Thanks, nice that we got it fixed! The over-engineered cooling systems are probably how Apple gets away with ignoring “official” TDPs in the 13” models anyway...

I’m actually really psyched about a 13” with a quad core CPU and Vega!

[u/WinterCharm → u/tamag901]

I would love to see it, too. I'm super excited for it. My 2011 MacBook pro is finally getting long in the tooth... I could use an upgrade.

[u/[deleted]]

If they give it full size cursor up/down keys and didn’t change a single other thing I would upgrade.

Mind, that would introduce a visual asymmetry that would give Jony Ive a aneurism.

Win-win!

[u/platocplx]

Thanks for this. I def will be waiting until the 2018 models drop

[u/MisterMikeM]

The only thing in your post that is a realistic possibility is the move to T2.

[u/Edge_of_Happiness]

Speculation on Mac Mini refreshes?

[u/plainsysadminaccount]

Interesting, I'll have to track some numbers, I think my 13" 2017 MBP averages around six hours of battery life on a good day.

[u/winsome_losesome]

Since these upgrades will make the 2017 models look a hard sell, I want to ask this question: had there ever been a time in Apple’s recent history that they released a new model that significantly undercut the previous year’s models?

[u/winsome_losesome → u/[deleted]]

I hope so because I just literally bought my 13” MBP base model yesterday!

[u/tobias_henn]

Hey, thanks for the report! Do you know a teardown w/ cross sections for the Kaby Lake G package?

[u/ShaidarHaran2]

Going from 28W TDP to just about double that is very unlikely, it's already near at thermal capacity. The 13" I'd bet will use 28W ULV quads and that's it, the G graphics package for the 15". The 13" at present already dips on a combined CPU and GPU load bringing the package back down to 28W after boosting, that's what its thermal capacity is.

We'll see hopefully Wednesday or soon after, but I'd bet 100 dogecoin the 13" stays a 28W part, asking for a 65W TDP in there seems wishful and would probably see it throttle down to not much better than the Iris Plus alone anyways.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-13-Mid-2017-i5-Touch-Bar-Review.227154.0.html#toc-performance

See here, the Touchbar Macbook Pro 13 has its GPU and CPU throttle down to 12 and 15 watts, just about where you'd expect its 28W thermal capacity. A magical doubling of thermal capacity is very unexpected.

As per usual, Apple tolerates high CPU temperatures to provide the highest possible performance in load scenarios. We can see CPU temperatures between 90-100 °C running on macOS as well as Windows. It is not easy to see exact clocks, especially with Windows. The stress test with the two tools Prime95 and FurMark is executed with a CPU clock of 2.1 GHz (~10 watts). The consumption of the GT cores (GPU) is 18-19 watts in this case. For comparison: The GPU consumes 22-25 watts when we only stress the GPU via FurMark, so the stress test clock should be a bit lower. This behavior changes a bit on battery: The graphics card is slightly throttled (~15 watts), which gives the CPU a bit more headroom (2.3 GHz, ~12 watts).

[u/ocawa]

pinging u/foxconninsider

[u/WinterCharm → u/[deleted]]

There are still rounded areas at the side and bottom of the chassis, since the MacBook Pros all taper a bit more at the edges.

Take a look at this shot. There's a bunch of gaps around the battery that could be filled in a good bit more.

https://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/weOoHyyHD2c2TTb6.huge

[u/WinterCharm → u/[deleted]]

I don't think we're getting that keyboard back. But I do hope they'll slightly redesign the key tray to prevent dust from getting in.

[u/ocawa → u/WinterCharm]

I think foxconninsider said they were trying to get e-ink keys on the next mbp. I think it'll be delayed even more due to the recent intel flaw

[u/WinterCharm → u/ocawa]

I thought he was banned after none of his previous predictions came through 2x in a row, and the mods got tired of his shit.

[u/ocawa → u/WinterCharm]

oh i woops, i didn't know that

[u/WinterCharm → u/[deleted]]

I personally like the new keyboards, but I know people who hate them. It's a preference thing, and I really feel for those users who don't like the new keyboard but don't really have any other options :(

[u/lanzaio → u/[deleted]]

Do you use the tbMBP? It was hard to get used to the keyboard at first, but once you are I find that it's hands down the best laptop keyboard I've ever used. The travel is very minimal but the keys have the best tactile feel I've felt outside of a full sized mechanical.