13" MBP Retina (new one) - Iris 5100 Graphics?

[Sunday Ironfoot]

Trying to figure out which Intel graphics chip the new 13" MacBook Pro Retina uses. Apple just says it's an Intel Iris GPU. I think that means it's a 5100 (the Iris Pro in the 15" is a 5200). If it is a 5100 then it's only a tiny slither slower than than the 5200, which would be awesome for the 13" laptop.

Can anyone confirm this?

 

[RichardC300]

Trying to figure out which Intel graphics chip the new 13" MacBook Pro Retina uses. Apple just says it's an Intel Iris GPU. I think that means it's a 5100 (the Iris Pro in the 15" is a 5200). If it is a 5100 then it's only a tiny slither slower than than the 5200, which would be awesome for the 13" laptop.

Can anyone confirm this?

You are correct in thinking that the Iris is the 5100. But I'd say it's more than just a "tiny slither" slower than the 5200.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

Yup. Unfortunately, the lost of the 128MB L4 Cache ("VRAM") is a pretty big deal. Not a bad machine at all, and not a bad GPU. Just not something you'd want to use for gaming or intense production apps.

Hopefully the L4 cache will become more common with Broadwell, and if not then, then things will be helped a bit with DDR4.

 

[koulmj]

Yup. Unfortunately, the lost of the 128MB L4 Cache ("VRAM") is a pretty big deal. Not a bad machine at all, and not a bad GPU. Just not something you'd want to use for gaming or intense production apps.

Hopefully the L4 cache will become more common with Broadwell, and if not then, then things will be helped a bit with DDR4.

I just ordered a 13 in 256gb, and will post speee tests as soon as it grts here, buy uf u google macbook air speed tests there are some cool youtube videos of the 5000 playing games, impressive considering its intergrated graphics.

 

[justin216]

The 5000, Iris 5100, and Iris Pro 5200 are really great advancements from Intel. Hopefully they will help remove some of the negative stigma of iGPUs.

 

[Portal83]

The HD 5200 is quite a bit better than the 5100 but the 5100 still more than meets most consumers' needs.

I don't understand why people say the HD 5000 and 5100 aren't good enough for gaming or intense production apps. If you want 60fps playing the latest most graphics intensive games on high or doing complex 1080p edits with lots of effects then yeah, the 5100 isn't going to meet your needs and the 5200 likely won't either. That being said, the 5100 is enough to give you great FPS on high with games like WoW, D3, SC2, etc. I think it'll be just fine...unless you're like über 1337

 

[Watabou]

Trying to figure out which Intel graphics chip the new 13" MacBook Pro Retina uses. Apple just says it's an Intel Iris GPU. I think that means it's a 5100 (the Iris Pro in the 15" is a 5200). If it is a 5100 then it's only a tiny slither slower than than the 5200, which would be awesome for the 13" laptop.

Can anyone confirm this?

Yeah, the Iris is the 5100. Iris Pro refers to the 5200.

5200 is quite a bit better than the 5100, mainly because it has an embedded DRAM which makes it really fast.

But, the 5100 is much faster than the previous generation's Intel 4000. It's an awesome integrated GPU.

 

[emptysands]

You are correct in thinking that the Iris is the 5100. But I'd say it's more than just a "tiny slither" slower than the 5200.

Actually the 5200 is much faster than the 5100:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Graphics-5100.91977.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Pro-Graphics-5200.90965.0.html

Maybe 50%+.

 

[OverpricedJunk]

That being said, the 5100 is enough to give you great FPS on high with games like WoW, D3, SC2, etc. I think it'll be just fine...unless you're like über 1337

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Graphics-5100.91977.0.html
36 fps on diablo 3


I would hardly call that "great fps."


Don't expect to use the 5100 for any recent games with moderate graphics. You will only be disappointed.

 

[DarwinOSX]

Yup. Unfortunately, the lost of the 128MB L4 Cache ("VRAM") is a pretty big deal. Not a bad machine at all, and not a bad GPU. Just not something you'd want to use for gaming or intense production apps.

Hopefully the L4 cache will become more common with Broadwell, and if not then, then things will be helped a bit with DDR4.

It will be fine for gaming.

----------

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Graphics-5100.91977.0.html
36 fps on diablo 3


I would hardly call that "great fps."


Don't expect to use the 5100 for any recent games with moderate graphics. You will only be disappointed.

I would hardly call that a good source of information for performance on a MBP.

 

[OverpricedJunk]

It will be fine for gaming.

----------



I would hardly call that a good source of information for performance on a MBP.

And why is that?

It's the most reliable benchmarks we have on systems with similar configurations (Intel Iris 5100).

So does that mean you--someone who has never seen, used, or tested the computer in question--are a better source of information?

 

[RichardC300]

Actually the 5200 is much faster than the 5100:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Graphics-5100.91977.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Pro-Graphics-5200.90965.0.html

Maybe 50%+.

Uh... That's what I said. The TS said the 5100 only a tad slower than the 5200, but the 5100 is actually a lot slower than the 5200.