[ObjectiveSub]

You immediately lost any credibility when you complained that the 2.4 GHz processor is the "same" as the one back in 2010. Clock rate has nothing to do with performance these days. Skylake is 25-35% faster across the board (and multiples faster for number crunching) than whatever Nehalem or Core2 was in the Macbooks in 2010.

[fisherjeff]

Actually, according to a few cobbled together Anandtech pieces, I think the IPC improvement may be closer to the 80-90% range.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7003/the-haswell-review-intel-...

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9483/intel-skylake-review-6700...

[tibbon]

I get though that it doesn't feel like Moore's Law type growth for system speed though, which is perhaps what people are hoping for. I have a hard time imagining that the 2016 model feels 16x as fast as the 2010 model.

I've got a 2010 MBP with an SSD, and it feels pretty much the same as my 2013 with an SDD, and expect this 2016 one to feel roughly about the same for most tasks (35% isn't a difference I'll notice for most tasks)

[andromeduck]

Moore's law died a decade ago.

[jansenv]

25% faster is still a joke. I want 100%!

[Caprinicus]

It's probably closer to 90% as another person notes, with far greater power efficiency. If that's not enough, feel free to complain to intel or alternatively, the laws of physics

If you expected shit to shrink linearly over time, our transistors would be occupying negative space right now. If you expected clocks to increase linearly, we'd need liquid nitrogen and shit would be full on behaving like waves. That is the reality until we leave silicon land.