NVIDIA Issues Leading Apple to Pursue Integrated Intel Graphics for Mid-Range Notebooks?

[limo79]

According to AnandTech review of "Ivy Bridge" platform new Intel HD 4000 presents significantly better than Intel HD 3000.

I do not believe that Apple will resign from dGPU in MacBooks due to marketing advertised mostly to young people.

From professional/business point of view it is more safe to have just integrated GPU - no GPU switching problems and no overheating problems reported by consumers.

Of course there is a solution that can satisfy all consumers - external module graphics connected to Thunderbolt port like in Sony VAIO Z (configuration option). This way Apple can also cut the prices of new MacBook Pro for consumers that do not need dGPU. If someone like hard core gaming on a MacBook Pro he can always to buy external module with dGPU.

 

[KnightWRX]

Well, yes, but you can't slap an IGP from competition on the same board with an Intel CPU, because the only competitor is AMD/ATI (and ATI has been doing graphics for far longer then Intel). Intel IGP is slower, but its still fast enough for most tasks you would expect to perform on a 13" laptop, inclusive gaming.

Yeah, thank god Intel managed to litigate away all their competitors in the IGP sector, now they basically have a clear road towards sucking without being hindered!

According to AnandTech review of "Ivy Bridge" platform new Intel HD 4000 presents significantly better than Intel HD 3000.

Wow a frickin' surprise uh ? Newer generation IGP is "better" than older generation IGP. Too bad they are barely catching up to whatever ATI and nVidia were shipping last year.

God forbid Intel actually puts out a competitive solution.

 

[limo79]

Do not be sarcastic. This is not only my opinion but also reviewers claim - Intel with a new HD 3000 graphics made huge technology jump comparing to GMA architecture (in Intel's scale). But I still understand that Intel HD graphics can be not enough for some users and expectations are much higher. But what did you expect - the latest NVIDIA Kepler's performance? Intel HD 3000 is almost on the same level like famous NV320M which was really good (now it is obsoleted, so there is no direct competitor).

Intel is not a GPU specialized semiconductor company like AMD (ATI) or NVIDIA. They do not hide this fact. Intel's ambition was always to make the best CPU in the world. Intel HD graphics is a just base solution sufficient for most office tasks, video decoding and light gaming. So do no expect too much. NVIDIA does not have a CPU in product portfolio. AMD definitely loose a battle in CPU race and they focused on APU where GPU performance (ATi know-how) compensate weak CPU performance (AMD know-how).

 

[Lennyvalentin]

I still remember faulty NVIDIA GPUs few years ago. No thx.

That was years ago, you're being irrational. The manufacturing flaw that led to those faulty chips has long been fixed, and there's no reason to not want to buy Nvidia graphics - or there might be, but cracking solder bump connections is not one anymore.

I am against dGPU in thin laptops like ultrabooks or MBA due overheating problems in aluminium case which conducts heat very quickly.

You want a case that conducts heat quickly. The alternative would be a case that conducts heat slowly - ie an insulator that packs in the heat inside the computer, causing it to build up and up. That would be bad.

That Apple laptops run hot has a lot more to do with them being thin, thus little space inside for adequate cooling, and also no visible air vents; keeping both intakes and exhaust hidden away in the screen hinge area is not ideal from a cooling perspective.

This has everything to do with form-over-function/poor thermal engineering, and nothing with the case being made out of aluminium alloy.

Current components based on Sandy Bridge platform with integrated Intel GPU still generate serious cooling/noise problems and it is still a big challenge for engineers.

Nah. Low-power dual core sandy bridge chips dissipate 35W max at full tilt, that's not a significant heatload. If Apple had put in some decent sized vents and preferably increased thickness of the chassis to allow a bigger, slower-spinning fan the computer would run much cooler and quieter.

Even as it is the CPU still runs within specs, easily. Heat isn't a problem with the current macbook design.

Maybe APU from AMD could be a great choice from TDP perspective.

Intel chips are far superior to AMD from a TDP perspective due to their vastly more advanced silicon fabrication process, and generally more well-designed processors. AMD is declining, and has been for years and years now. Sad in a way, but true.

maybe, but in this example there is barely an improvement over the 3000

By cherry-picking your data you can "prove" almost any BS postulation... It isn't neccessarily going to be the truth, though. Ivy Bridge graphics is a serious upgrade over sandy bridge, which already is passable for gaming in many titles, at dialed-down settings of course.

 

[jterp7]

By cherry-picking your data you can "prove" almost any BS postulation... It isn't neccessarily going to be the truth, though. Ivy Bridge graphics is a serious upgrade over sandy bridge, which already is passable for gaming in many titles, at dialed-down settings of course.

Dude you're just proving my point, the fact it isn't consistent at all shows that at best this is an incremental upgrade and no where near ready to replace something like the even the 6750m. The words "passable" and "dialed-down" don't belong anywhere close to the word "gaming".

 

[aggri1]

my main hackintosh machine is Atom 330 cpu with Nvidia ION (9400m) GPU

Everything silky smooth and youtube 1080p full-hd plays smoothly with low CPU usage thanks to Nvidia..

Animations are smooth too. Why wouldn't they be? Animations on OSX are smooth on PowerPC machines and their GPU's are really slow.

And why in the hell someone wants to open 30 safari windows at once? somekind of test? that is no test. That is retarded youtube show-stuff

Hi there!

I disagree with your assertion that "Animations on OSX are smooth on PowerPC machines" because you imply _all_ PowerPC machines. Having used PPC Macs up until early last year, I can assure you that it's NOT always smooth animation. I tried disabling as much as I could, particularly the daft "Genie effect", but compared to my i5 iMac, the PPC Macs that I used _were_ very slow.

I could not play certain types of modern, highly-compressed video at all (though that's a slightly different issue).

The Mac I used for many years was a Yikes G4 400. That's 400MHz. Used that up until about 2006. Because it had PCI graphics, not AGP, Quartz Extreme (QE) was not supported and in Mac OS X it really was very very slow. Mac OS 9 of course ran great, and the machine itself was fantastic, as demonstrated by its relative longevity. It still works now, I just don't use it much.

The single-1.25GHz G4 MDD I had after the Yikes did support QE and this made a huge difference. Putting in a second (PCI-based) graphics card was pretty much a waste of time, because the screen attached to that card was SO PAINFUL to use. Seriously, just moving the iTunes window around on that screen was irritating. But nonetheless, even on the AGP graphics system, things weren't always smooth, particularly things like Dashboard (which I really like, but... ugh!). I also noticed that up until 10.4 things were getting faster, generally (not hard considering how crap-slow Mac OS X was at 10.0 & 10.1). Then when I put Leopard (10.5) on the MDD, it was slower than Tiger (10.4). That was a shame, but quicklook is handy...

Perhaps you've had experience with better PPC Macs than I had.

 

[throAU]

meh, my mid-range desktop from 2008 with its gtx260 and q9550 still destroys it, silky smooth at 1080p on ultra with everything on..yes I realize that I'm comparing a desktop to mobile, but we're talking about 4years which is an eternity in the computer world. It wouldn't be a problem if it weren't for the fact that these integrated solutions will soon be replacing the discrete cards. If that's the future then the integrated solutions are insufficient as it stands.

So, how big is the fan and power supply on your desktop?

 

[hhwghjkt6]

This news makes me more convinced that purchasing the high level 15 inch late 2011 with antiglare is a better and better idea..

 

[CoolHand777]

Apple beware of NVIDIA!

I'd prefer to see AMD graphics replace it rather than Intel graphics. But I hate NVIDIA.

I haven't had one NVIDIA GPU that hasn't gone bad. True story. My MacPro1,1, MacBookPro4,1, and MacBookPro6,2 all had bad GPUs which caused kernel panics and needed replacing.

NVIDIA sucks! I had my MBP motherboard replaced twice because of the defective NVIDIA GPU, so I am wary.

You all may remember the defective NVIDIA GPU issue from a few years back in the MBP, which is why apple stopped using them in the first place.

 

[jterp7]

This news makes me more convinced that purchasing the high level 15 inch late 2011 with antiglare is a better and better idea..

you still may be able to find them at microcenter if you want a new one (and not for retail).

 

[xinu]

Bad news.

GOOD news. More battery life. Games are for children. And children cannot afford Macbooks anyway so this is brilliant news.

----------

Hi there!

I disagree with your assertion that "Animations on OSX are smooth on PowerPC machines" because you imply _all_ PowerPC machines. Having used PPC Macs up until early last year, I can assure you that it's NOT always smooth animation. I tried disabling as much as I could, particularly the daft "Genie effect", but compared to my i5 iMac, the PPC Macs that I used _were_ very slow.

I could not play certain types of modern, highly-compressed video at all (though that's a slightly different issue).

The Mac I used for many years was a Yikes G4 400. That's 400MHz. Used that up until about 2006. Because it had PCI graphics, not AGP, Quartz Extreme (QE) was not supported and in Mac OS X it really was very very slow. Mac OS 9 of course ran great, and the machine itself was fantastic, as demonstrated by its relative longevity. It still works now, I just don't use it much.

The single-1.25GHz G4 MDD I had after the Yikes did support QE and this made a huge difference. Putting in a second (PCI-based) graphics card was pretty much a waste of time, because the screen attached to that card was SO PAINFUL to use. Seriously, just moving the iTunes window around on that screen was irritating. But nonetheless, even on the AGP graphics system, things weren't always smooth, particularly things like Dashboard (which I really like, but... ugh!). I also noticed that up until 10.4 things were getting faster, generally (not hard considering how crap-slow Mac OS X was at 10.0 & 10.1). Then when I put Leopard (10.5) on the MDD, it was slower than Tiger (10.4). That was a shame, but quicklook is handy...

Perhaps you've had experience with better PPC Macs than I had.

PowerBook G4 1.67ghz and it is abouit 50x slower than i5 MBP

Animations are smooth. Even under heavy load. ATI 128mb GPU and HighRes screen. Animations are smooht with dual monitor also. No problems...

----------

It's pretty much the same as the current intel stuff, but slower than the next intel one in Ivy Bridge.

People seem not to get it.

Todays integrated GPU's are faster than 2-3 year old discreet GPU's

But well.. Live and learn. As always.

 

[KnightWRX]

Intel is not a GPU specialized semiconductor company like AMD (ATI) or NVIDIA. They do not hide this fact. Intel's ambition was always to make the best CPU in the world.

Maybe you should tell Intel's marketing department :

I don't call "barely catching up to the competition's last generation while needing the backing of 2 whole generations of CPU to achieve such a feat" significant advances.

 

[lukarak]

People seem not to get it.

Todays integrated GPU's are faster than 2-3 year old discreet GPU's

But well.. Live and learn. As always.

Intel's 2011 Sandybridge GPU was somewhere around the year old NVIDIA 320M in the previous MBs. They caught up.

 

[KnightWRX]

Intel's 2011 Sandybridge GPU was somewhere around the year old NVIDIA 320M in the previous MBs. They caught up.

Caught up ? To catch up, they'd have to equal nVidia's and ATI's current offering. Otherwise, if they're now equal to 1 or 2 generation old GPUs, they haven't caught up, they're still late.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

As much as Apple charges for its notebooks, they should ALL have discrete GPUs. And if anyone thinks Intel Integrated isn't such a bad idea, just look how Lion dumped support for them willy-nilly because that is the double-standard treatment Apple is known for since they just expect you to keep buying replacement computers every other year.