Some people are satisfied and proud of owning this type of laptop, I'm not one of them. Of course there is some qualities this laptops possesses, but it's mainly the flaws that keep me from considering this laptop. When I purchase a travel laptop, I expect it to deliver on casual gaming, unlike this could ever do, as per my standards. Again to each his own, but the premium price asked for this laptop can only be appreciated by a dedicated fan.

Can you differentiate between the 2020 MacBook Pro 13" 2TB3 and the 2020 MacBook Pro13" 4TB3 like you did with 2019s??

I was told that the 2TB3 and the 4TB3 are completely different machines and that is true for 2019 as well as 2020.

I am mostly interested in the PWM because for 2019- the 4TB3 did not have PWM and the 2TB3 did. I am retruning my 2020 MacBook Air because it instantly gave me eye pain and a headache!

Thank you!!

Thanks a lot for the review. Would that be possible to check the level of PWM on the MacBook Pro 13 2020 with two thunderbolt ports?

Quote from: Deez Nuts on June 04, 2020, 05:17:00The MacBook Pro is a winning formula that has been refined year after year by Apple who has unlimited R&D money and can afford to pull out all the stops. 92% seems about right to me tbh.

If you can afford to spend a little more on this MacBook Pro, you will be getting a much more finished product compared to the Dell.

Where is that unlimited R&D money when it came to the cooling design of MBP 2019 and even MBA 2020? Nothing screams finished product like thermal throttling down to performance of pre-2016 gens.

The matter of fact is that MBP has average hardware and increasingly disproportionate to the price tag. For OS neutral consumers, it's hard to recommend latest gens MBP/MBA because you can have much better hardware for the same price if you go with Windows.

To all the idiots who claim that mac is better than anything that Windows has to offer. It is not. By no means it is a bad laptop, but given the price it just... meh. It is more a fashion accessory than working tool. Live with it. It's main selling points are design (which is nice) and Mac OS, which is a unix that has better support than other unix alternatives. That's it.

Quote from: Tov on June 05, 2020, 10:51:21
He compare the Swift which is price 1/3 of MBP while its cpu has twice the cores and more powerful. So his AMD superior claim is fair enough.

And the cpu power is the only factor which determines the price of a laptop, right?

Quote from: _MT_ on June 03, 2020, 12:47:34

Quote from: Rick on June 02, 2020, 12:15:23
The difference with the Acer Swift 3 is remarkable. The Ryzen 4700U is a nominally a 15W CPU (Anandtech found a sustained 18W consumption, if I am not mistaken).

Their TDP is configurable. The highest configuration is 25 W I believe. In this regard, it's pretty similar to what Intel is offering (this is also a 15 W chip that's configurable to 25 W; except Apple has a special version which is rather irrelevant anyway). Of course, they calculate TDP differently so 15 W of Intel is not the same as 15 W of AMD. I don't know if Acer allows you to choose. Yes, it's a little beast even in the 15 W configuration (if I had a choice, I would probably stick with 15 W). And the elephant in the room is motherboard/ BIOS.

As far as the difference, you have to keep in mind that you're comparing a 4 core with an 8 core processor. 8 cores would probably win even with the same architecture. As long as the benchmark scales well, more cores are going to win (up to a point). Because higher frequencies are less efficient (cutting power to a half doesn't reduce frequency to a half; it's going to be stable with lower voltage). If you have more cores with the same budget, you have less power per core therefore it's going to run slower and more efficient (again, up to a point).

He compare the Swift which is price 1/3 of MBP while its cpu has twice the cores and more powerful. So his AMD superior claim is fair enough.

Quote from: Deez Nuts on June 04, 2020, 05:17:00

Quote from: John Doe on June 03, 2020, 08:01:26
Notebookcheck was clearly paid by Apple for this review. Just look at the device, it looks way too outdated for a 2020 device and the prices are absurd.

92% is a joke. Also considering the Dell XPS 13 9300 was given a lower percentage for a clearly and obviously better device (also cheaper).

Are you kidding me lol. Dell XPS is barely in the same league let alone "obviously better". Every XPS I have laid hands on feels cheap. Creaky squeaky plastic that smudges as soon as you touch it. The MacBook Pro is a winning formula that has been refined year after year by Apple who has unlimited R&D money and can afford to pull out all the stops. 92% seems about right to me tbh. This isn't the best value but it is the best ultrabook you can buy full stop especially considering it can be a 13 inch gaming rig replacement with an eGPU. The CPU is only 9% slower than the 45W i7-9750H on userbenchmark.

The XPS is a toy that you would be satisfied with for about 6 months, whereas the MacBook Pro will easily serve you for 5+ years. If you can afford to spend a little more on this MacBook Pro, you will be getting a much more finished product compared to the Dell.

Totally agree with you. I've been using a 2017 13" MacBook Pro for the past 3 years. And I just had the opportunity to try the latest Razer Blade Stealth which is considered as one of the high-end Windows ultrabook. In terms of gaming performance it is by no means the no1 ultrabook, I cannot deny it.
But when it is unplugged from mains, it gets so slow and unresponsive. Its touchpad is also one of the best among the Windows machines, but still miles away from what a MacBook's one can provide. It has 4 speakers audio system, still means no compete to the MacBook, the latter is just so much better. Although the screen is 4k, it is so reflective that I can see myself in it even in-house.
The overall user experience is so much worse that I must say 92% is pretty accurate if Razer Blade is what a premium Windows laptop means.

In regards to PWM, I had to return the 16" Macbook Pro because it caused a lot of eye strain. I don't know if it was because of the PWM, but I suspect it was.

Another issue: I could turn the brightness all the way up, stopping the PWM, but it was then way too bright to stare at all day, which also caused eye strain. When I turned the brightness down, the PWM was initialized. However, the contrast also suffered quite a lot. I would *very much* like Notebookcheck's review to compare screens at a medium level brightness of 250 nits, especially in terms of contrast. I suspect most people use their screens at that brightness level, and this would give us a real-world comparison, based on actual usage. As far as I can tell, no other review site does this, and it is another way Notebookcheck could really stand out. Please consider doing this!

#11
For example Razer blade stealth is in subnotebook category, so why Asus G14 should be clasiffied as gaming laptop only? Its not much heavier and bigger than MBP13.

Additionally  notebookcheck redaction is certainly aware that Ryzens 4600-4800 are entering market now. In review they stated that Ryzen 4700u is 20% faster than CPU from MBP.  Still,MBP got  super high score in performance. So I guess Ideapad S540-13 or Thinkpad X13(confirmed 13inches with 8c/16t ryzens) will get around 200%?

Quote from: John Doe on June 03, 2020, 08:01:26
Notebookcheck was clearly paid by Apple for this review. Just look at the device, it looks way too outdated for a 2020 device and the prices are absurd.

92% is a joke. Also considering the Dell XPS 13 9300 was given a lower percentage for a clearly and obviously better device (also cheaper).

Are you kidding me lol. Dell XPS is barely in the same league let alone "obviously better". Every XPS I have laid hands on feels cheap. Creaky squeaky plastic that smudges as soon as you touch it. The MacBook Pro is a winning formula that has been refined year after year by Apple who has unlimited R&D money and can afford to pull out all the stops. 92% seems about right to me tbh. This isn't the best value but it is the best ultrabook you can buy full stop especially considering it can be a 13 inch gaming rig replacement with an eGPU. The CPU is only 9% slower than the 45W i7-9750H on userbenchmark.

The XPS is a toy that you would be satisfied with for about 6 months, whereas the MacBook Pro will easily serve you for 5+ years. If you can afford to spend a little more on this MacBook Pro, you will be getting a much more finished product compared to the Dell.

Quote from: Mate on June 03, 2020, 14:50:12
Unfortunately your score formula is completely outdated and ridiculous.
1. Performance - 2 years ago MBP 13 2018 scored 98% in application performance and 97% in games(lol!). In new model performance dropped to 96% and 75% in games, still ridiculous given that 24 months is a lot and we have now 14inch laptops that massacres maxed out MBP16.

You're forgetting that different categories use different scoring. That 14" beast might be considered to be in a different category with different standards and priorities.

Any idea why the Surface Laptop 3 13" performed so poorly here? Bad thermals?

Doesn't really make up for it with battery life either, which is also 30% lower than this Macbook.

Unfortunately your score formula is completely outdated and ridiculous.
1. Performance - 2 years ago MBP 13 2018 scored 98% in application performance and 97% in games(lol!). In new model performance dropped to 96% and 75% in games, still ridiculous given that 24 months is a lot and we have now 14inch laptops that massacres maxed out MBP16.

2.Keyboard - for some strange reasons it seems like you always rate high macbooks keyboards. For me new 'magic' one is still s*** - short key travel, no func keys,  can be too hot for comfortable usage...  Even thinkpads that set standards in laptop keyboards for years cant get that high score

3.Connectivity. Macbook pro 13 2017 58%, macbook pro 13 2020 87%. What? Same amount of ports , same bandwidth, similar dongle life...

You should really  rethink how you make laptop scores

Quote from: Rick on June 02, 2020, 12:15:23
The difference with the Acer Swift 3 is remarkable. The Ryzen 4700U is a nominally a 15W CPU (Anandtech found a sustained 18W consumption, if I am not mistaken).

Their TDP is configurable. The highest configuration is 25 W I believe. In this regard, it's pretty similar to what Intel is offering (this is also a 15 W chip that's configurable to 25 W; except Apple has a special version which is rather irrelevant anyway). Of course, they calculate TDP differently so 15 W of Intel is not the same as 15 W of AMD. I don't know if Acer allows you to choose. Yes, it's a little beast even in the 15 W configuration (if I had a choice, I would probably stick with 15 W). And the elephant in the room is motherboard/ BIOS.

As far as the difference, you have to keep in mind that you're comparing a 4 core with an 8 core processor. 8 cores would probably win even with the same architecture. As long as the benchmark scales well, more cores are going to win (up to a point). Because higher frequencies are less efficient (cutting power to a half doesn't reduce frequency to a half; it's going to be stable with lower voltage). If you have more cores with the same budget, you have less power per core therefore it's going to run slower and more efficient (again, up to a point).