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

13" MBA i5 - TB great, graphics bad?

Rob587

Rob587

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jul 4, 2004
801
1
Orlando, FL
So explain this to me.....

Does the thunderbolt port on the new 13" MBA i5 allow for good external display performance? Isnt the GPU going to hold it back, reguardless of how good the connection is?
 
It also depends on what you want to display in which resolution on an external display.
3D applications like Maya (and other GPU intensive applications) might not really like being put through an Intel HD 3000 onto an external 2560 x 1600 pixel display, but having Word or Safari display a window on that same external display is not really a problem.
Anyway, since TB is not really the problem, but the GPU, what has your thread title to do with your post again?
 
simsaladimbamba said:
It also depends on what you want to display in which resolution on an external display.
3D applications like Maya (and other GPU intensive applications) might not really like being put through an Intel HD 3000 onto an external 2560 x 1600 pixel display, but having Word or Safari display a window on that same external display is not really a problem.
Anyway, since TB is not really the problem, but the GPU, what has your thread title to do with your post again?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I had trouble titling the thread... didn’t know how to summarize it concisely. But it does ultimately make sense; even though, thunderbolt is very fast, it still isn’t good enough to power a display at an above average level in terms of performance. I guess it could be "good enough" if you just use safari and word, but then again, what’s the point of having that excellent connection if it will only perform well with simple use?

I guess it will be very snappy for everyday use, but I think that most people looking to fully utilize the i5 or i7 are going to need better graphic performance. Like no one buys an i5 to have word and itunes run a milli second faster.

I guess I just feel like it was kind of a waste on Apples part. Why have such a powerful processor with such low end graphics?
 
Last edited:
simsaladimbamba said:
Because Intel does not offer better IGPs currently. And a dedicated GPU is still out of the question.
Click to expand...

Tru.... Maybe one day :)

Do you think the processors would make up for lack of GPU speed when it comes to photo editing and photo load times? OR would that rely mainly on the graphics?
 
simsaladimbamba said:
Yes, but again, this depends on the applications you use for photo editing and what kind of photos you edit.
Click to expand...

Well, lets just say like general photography and photo editing. Not really photoshop, but more along the lines of photo saturation, color, hue, adjustments, developing etc.?

(clearly I know little about photography at this point) lol :D
 
Last edited:
Rob587 said:
Well, lets just say like general photography and photo editing. Not really photoshop, but more along the lines of photo saturation, color, hue, adjustments, developing etc.?
Click to expand...

A 5 year old MacBook could handle this without a problem, let alone a brand new Air. I'm sure you'll be pleasantly surprised should you choose to buy one.
 
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