Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Iris Pro only = better?

A

AppleGoat

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Oct 14, 2010
655
8
I'm trying to conceive of reasons to go with the discrete GPU-less 15" rMBP. The reason is obvious: I wish to save money. I'd upgrade the RAM to 16gigs, since I'm a graphic designer by trade. That's about it.

Ok, so my basis for believing the Iris Pro only 15" is better revolves around durability and heat. I feel one of the common causes of a death for a computer is a bad video card and more heat is never a good thing for a notebook. Am I right for assuming the average lifespan of the base 15" is probably longer than the higher-end model with the 750m?

Don't get me wrong, if money were not an issue, I would have gotten the higher-end model a long time ago; but, naturally, money is an issue and am I right to believe this is one (lone) advantage of saving money and going with the base model?
 
AppleGoat said:
Ok, so my basis for believing the Iris Pro only 15" is better revolves around durability and heat. I feel one of the common causes of a death for a computer is a bad video card and more heat is never a good thing for a notebook. Am I right for assuming the average lifespan of the base 15" is probably longer than the higher-end model with the 750m?
Click to expand...

This is pure speculation. I've heard reports of people saying that the Iris Pro runs hotter, since both CPU & GPU are on the same chip. But the CPU is usually very able to take that heat, and other parts of the machine remain cooler, so this is not really a problem.
The discrete GPUs have a bit of a bad history. But so far I haven't heard of any problems with either the 650M or the 750M.

In the end, I think the Iris Pro only machine should be more than sufficient for your graphics design purposes. This is what you should base your decision on.

PS: The high-end model is usually in the refurbished store for $2200... just saying ;)
 
thundersteele said:
This is pure speculation. I've heard reports of people saying that the Iris Pro runs hotter, since both CPU & GPU are on the same chip. But the CPU is usually very able to take that heat, and other parts of the machine remain cooler, so this is not really a problem.
The discrete GPUs have a bit of a bad history. But so far I haven't heard of any problems with either the 650M or the 750M.

In the end, I think the Iris Pro only machine should be more than sufficient for your graphics design purposes. This is what you should base your decision on.

PS: The high-end model is usually in the refurbished store for $2200... just saying ;)
Click to expand...

Thanks for the response -- yeah, I've been eyeing the $1949 refurb (2.3ghz & 16GB sans dGPU). I wonder if I should pony up for the dGPU but the aforementioned model is pushing my budget as is.

True, no mass repots of GPU failure have emerged with the Nvidia chips in the Retina MBPs but only recently did we start to hear about the 2011 AMD GPUs failing.
 
The Iris Pro is most efficient/cool when idle compared to the 750M. However, when running at full, Iris Pro is hotter than the 750M, as the 1 entire chip is running hot instead of half the CPU chip and a separate GPU chip.
 
Freyqq said:
The Iris Pro is most efficient/cool when idle compared to the 750M. However, when running at full, Iris Pro is hotter than the 750M, as the 1 entire chip is running hot instead of half the CPU chip and a separate GPU chip.
Click to expand...

Oh really. Interesting. Could you give me the source?
 
AppleGoat said:
I'm trying to conceive of reasons to go with the discrete GPU-less 15" rMBP. The reason is obvious: I wish to save money. I'd upgrade the RAM to 16gigs, since I'm a graphic designer by trade. That's about it.

Ok, so my basis for believing the Iris Pro only 15" is better revolves around durability and heat. I feel one of the common causes of a death for a computer is a bad video card and more heat is never a good thing for a notebook. Am I right for assuming the average lifespan of the base 15" is probably longer than the higher-end model with the 750m?

Don't get me wrong, if money were not an issue, I would have gotten the higher-end model a long time ago; but, naturally, money is an issue and am I right to believe this is one (lone) advantage of saving money and going with the base model?
Click to expand...

If you buy either Iris-only or Iris+750M with at least 2.3/16/512, both are priced identically.

So the 750M is a freebie.

And using the Macoh utility to test throttling, the CPU throttles when forced into Iris-only. When forced into the 750M, the CPU doesn't throttle at all.
 
Ok thanks -- the model I'm eyeing has a 256GB SSD. The 750m comes with the bigger drive.
 
cNPZU9c.png


What do you guys make of this from the TLD Today review?
 
I think the discrete gpu is a good option if you'll need CUDA support which is a nVidia-only technology. For programmers, CUDA is usually more friendly and nVidia provides a lot of useful tools for code debugging. Otherwise, I'd be ok with the integrated graphics.
 
Better battery life, runs cooler, and performs just as well?

What's not to love?

Personally I wished I had the Iris Pro only model, but mine was a warranty replacement, so they didn't give me a choice.

I have gfxCardStatus to set it to integrated only, but when I have an external monitor connected it forces the discrete graphics sadly.
 
I'd say the state of the iGPU technology for Intel is such that for most folks its more then enough horse power. My next MBP will not have a dGPU
 
AppleGoat said:
I'm trying to conceive of reasons to go with the discrete GPU-less 15" rMBP.
Click to expand...

Personally, I've always felt a MBPr with only the Iris Pro is like a Ferrari with bicycle tires. Having seen the Iris Pro stutter and pause while struggling through apps like Photoshop, Premiere, Unreal Engine 4 and Lightwave, it just seems underpowered to me. There is no CUDA support and it just feels sluggish under more demanding applications.

I guess for surfing the web and word processing it would be great. To each their own...but if you are going to spend the money for a MBPr wouldn't you want the performance to go with it??

-P
 
maflynn said:
I'd say the state of the iGPU technology for Intel is such that for most folks its more then enough horse power. My next MBP will not have a dGPU
Click to expand...

I may actually do the same. It would be somewhat restrictive in terms of OpenGL performance, but Apple has gone through many gpu problems in recent years. Even with the heat of iris pro, I suspect we're less likely to see logic board problems.
 
thekev said:
Apple has gone through many gpu problems in recent years.
Click to expand...
This is the #1 reason why I'd opt for the iGPU. Apple's track record for dGPUs seems to be getting worse.
 
Last edited:
AppleGoat said:
I'm trying to conceive of reasons to go with the discrete GPU-less 15" rMBP. The reason is obvious: I wish to save money. I'd upgrade the RAM to 16gigs, since I'm a graphic designer by trade. That's about it.

Ok, so my basis for believing the Iris Pro only 15" is better revolves around durability and heat. I feel one of the common causes of a death for a computer is a bad video card and more heat is never a good thing for a notebook. Am I right for assuming the average lifespan of the base 15" is probably longer than the higher-end model with the 750m?

Don't get me wrong, if money were not an issue, I would have gotten the higher-end model a long time ago; but, naturally, money is an issue and am I right to believe this is one (lone) advantage of saving money and going with the base model?
Click to expand...

I think integrated GPU is better. As my personal experience, it runs much cooler under light or slight heavy duty. My 2011 MBP with discrete GPU runs very hot when Skype or watch HD video but my 2013 rMBP with the Iris Pro only does not. Plus, Apple seems to have a couple of discrete GPU problem in recent years. My 2011 MBP died from the discrete GPU. If you don't use very graphic demanding apps or games, the integrated GPU should be powerful enough. And I think it is overall a more reliable choice.
 
brdeveloper said:
I think the discrete gpu is a good option if you'll need CUDA support which is a nVidia-only technology. For programmers, CUDA is usually more friendly and nVidia provides a lot of useful tools for code debugging. Otherwise, I'd be ok with the integrated graphics.
Click to expand...

CUDA is being phased out in favor of OpenCL for a lot of applications. The 750M performs worse than the Iris Pro in OCL because NVIDIA wants professionals to pony up for its Quadro line of GPUs.
 
The thing is, if you plan on doing an external GPU later which is turning out to be quite an easy task to accomplish, the Iris Pro only model is actually better for it. The reason being that according to nando4:

nando4 said:
The 750M can be used and gives mostly identical performance to the Iris Pro model when using an external LCD attached to a eGPU using a native TB interface.

I say mostly because the TDP of the Haswell CPUs is determined by the iGPU and CPU. When the iGPU isn't active it theoretically means the CPU can run a higher/longer turbo boost though in reality if you are using the external LCD mode with the iGPU-model, the iGPU will pretty much be dormant and not contribute to TDP.

Now the iGPU requirement becomes far more important if using a x1 link (Thunderbolt-to-expresscard) type eGPU. Their appeal being far lower cost than the usual Thunderbolt enclosures. On TechInferno uses will typically mate a PE4L-EC060A (Expresscard-to-pcie adapter) with a Sonnet Echo Expresscard Pro (Thunderbolt-to-expresscard adapter) to do such an implementation.

With x1 eGPU implementations, NVidia drivers enable a pci-e compression only if a x1 link is detected and an iGPU present. So there you'd absolutely not want the 750M model.

The 750M model can use the internal LCD *if* drag a windows app from the external to the internal one. The Iris Pro model can provide transparent eGPU-rendered images on the internal LCD (windows or full screen apps) courtesy of NVidia Optimus.

So yeah, the Iris Pro model is definitely preferrable for eGPU purposes or if wanting maximum battery life under Windows. If having an eGPU then the 750M is pretty much redundant.

Iris Pro 15" Macbook Pro + Thunderbolt eGPU = winning combo. Shame about the cost.
Click to expand...

Personally, I have a 13" Retina so luckily I don't have to worry too much either way. :)
 
saturnotaku said:
CUDA is being phased out in favor of OpenCL for a lot of applications. The 750M performs worse than the Iris Pro in OCL because NVIDIA wants professionals to pony up for its Quadro line of GPUs.
Click to expand...

From what I've seen "phased out" only extends as far as to certain applications having support for both and from listings that I've seen CUDA does seem to have more support. Also, CUDA is much more commonly used in the academic word, thou I suppose Nivida's GPGPU solutions, software support and academic centric features (like being able to embed CUDA code into Fortran) probably have a lot to do with it.
 
That's like saying a Dual Core is better than a Quad Core CPU because it has better battery life.
 
Thanks everyone for the insightful responses.

Do you guys think I should jump on the iGPU + 16GB 15" next time it appears on the refurb site? Or it is much more worth it to pony up $268 for the larger SSD and 750m -- neither of which I believe I need. I'm not a storage fiend, have no inclination to ever game on my computer and, as of right now, I don't do any 3D work whatsoever. The first model is pushing my budget as is, but $268 is not much to pay for those improvements.

I just wish the model I'm considering didn't have the meaningless CPU upgrade, I don't want to pay for that. All I need is the base model with 16GB but it never appears on the refurb list. My suspicion is that some people who bought the base model have gotten 16GB for free. I don't really feel like playing the refurb lottery though.
 
AppleGoat said:
Thanks everyone for the insightful responses.

Do you guys think I should jump on the iGPU + 16GB 15" next time it appears on the refurb site? Or it is much more worth it to pony up $268 for the larger SSD and 750m -- neither of which I believe I need. I'm not a storage fiend, have no inclination to ever game on my computer and, as of right now, I don't do any 3D work whatsoever. The first model is pushing my budget as is, but $268 is not much to pay for those improvements.

I just wish the model I'm considering didn't have the meaningless CPU upgrade, I don't want to pay for that. All I need is the base model with 16GB but it never appears on the refurb list. My suspicion is that some people who bought the base model have gotten 16GB for free. I don't really feel like playing the refurb lottery though.
Click to expand...

I agree, unless you jumping from the base to the top-end CPU and you REALLY NEED to maximize CPU performance, the CPU upgrades are pointless. More RAM and SSD space will have are far bigger impact on user experience.

Thinking about saving up to get a Retina eventually, but sadly to buy new I would have pay for the $2600 model just to get matching specs to my current cMBP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back