If we could have either an additional 128GB or a dedicated GPU (640M perhaps) which would you choose?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
All this Dedicated card talk
- Thread starter Hoolig4n
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Too bad this site doesn't have a "rate down" feature.
The small army of us that wish the 13" rMBP had a dedicated graphics chip are not crazy. With that many pixels, it's going to choke on just about anything beyond flat 2D. Some of us have large budgets and really want our on-the-go work computer to be capable of some level of gaming. The last time I was at a conference I was stuck playing GW2 on my MacBook Air.
I have well over $2,000 literally sitting in a pile waiting for a 13" MBA or MBP with a half-decent discreet graphics chip. I'm certainly not alone. We are NOT wrong, just because you don't care.
well thats the problem it would of cost 2k if the added the extra graphics and that its hard to market to consumers
The Geforce 5200 was a s*** card though, even when the Geforce 5 series was brand new. It was only better than integrated graphics because back in the day integrated graphics meant the CPU did all the work a GPU normally would, with RAM partitioned off for use with video and a framebuffer on the motherboard to help the CPU interface with a display. Terribly slow and inefficient. Only people who didn't know better used integrated graphics. Intel started packaging a GPU on the same die as their CPUs only recently, starting with the Arrandale line of processors in 2010 IIRC.My research indicates that Apple's first ultraportable laptop, the 12" PowerBook G4, had a dedicated graphics card, the Nvidia GoForce 5200
This. My last Dell cost me less than $1000 for a business model, dedicated GPU, and next day onsite repair service. For a $1600 machine, it should also come with a dedicated GPU, next day onsite repair service, and still I would call it too expensive.
you can get an acer for $500 thats everyones choice if that what they want to use, apple does not need do anything different they make a pretty good profit doing things the way they see it
I disagree. I owned the 12" PowerBook and at the time, the GPU was far more useful that your suggesting.
Bottom line, If Apple wanted to put one inside of the 13", Its more than possible.
But fairly underpowered even in comparison to Nvidia's Geforce 5500, or ATI's lineup at the time. On the other hand it's a running tradition for Apple to put underpowered graphics cards in their $1.5k+ laptops now that I think about it.
Stopped by the apple store to check it out today, really wanted to hate it so it won't tempt me as I love that form factor, but looks it will be my next laptop. Compared it with a 15 cMBP (same price point) maybe it was the ssd and ram but everything felt zippier and if I need to run something heavy, well that's what my iMac is for...
Not gonna do ANY gaming on the 13 inch pro I ordered so couldn't care LESS about dedicated graphics, but seems like a lot of people do.. so fair enough. I can see their point, but doesn't influence my decision to get it one iota...
Sometimes, we just wish that Apple would sacrifice their massive profit margins just slightly so that consumers could have a better device.
Better in this case is very subjective. Having dedicated graphics would chew more battery and may require additional cooling, which would mean a larger shell (even if they would offer it just as an option). The space in this machine is so limited that they couldn't even fit more then 8gb of ram in it.
I personally don't think that's worth it and would take size and battery life over gpu any time.