Any chance of a 4870?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Yixian, Nov 4, 2009.

  1. Yixian macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Europe
    #1
    I've been waiting for... well, as long as Apple have been making Intel Macs for a MacBook Pro with a decent GPU. Apple's insistence on for some reason refusing to allow the MBP to be any thicker than 1" has meant that it's always lacked anything more than low-mid range card and even the current models perform poorly with last generation games.

    The same is true of the 4670 in the iMac - last years tech with last years performance, and last years mid-range performance at that. If you're interested in gaming it's out of date before it's even shipped.

    Is there any chance of a 4870 option in a new 15" MBP? BTO maybe? Perhaps if it lacks an optical drive there will be room?

    If a 4670 or below is all we'll get yet again I'll be waiting another 6 months for a machine that might be able to achieve the same performance I was expecting 1 year ago.

    And before anyone tells me to go get a PC, GPUs are now relevant to all of us and as a high end notebook the MBPs should put performance above thinness, especially when 1.3" for example is plenty thin enough for everyone anyway.
     
  2. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #2
    your guess is as good as anyone's. Since apple doesn't really mention what the new machines will look like. All of this talk is pure speculation.
     
  3. copykris Suspended

    copykris

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Location:
    home
    #3
    some of us still buy cd's and like our optical drives

    i think what you're looking for is www.alienware.com

    have fun
     
  4. Yixian thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Europe
    #4
    Do the new iMacs place a cap on what we can expect of the new MBPs? Would Apple be reluctant to outperform the iMacs with their MBPs in terms of GPU?
     
  5. darngooddesign macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #5
    1.3"... dear gods no.

    This isn't 1998 and I don't want to hump any laptop thicker than an inch.
     
  6. Yixian thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Europe
    #6
    You don't have to be a gamer to expect that this is the way the industry is moving.
     
  7. Yixian thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Europe
    #7
    0.3 inches means that much to you? o_O
     
  8. darngooddesign macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #8
    When added to .5" no, when added to 1" yes.

    But why stop there, does 1" matter to you? Why not shoot for some 2" monstrosity.
     
  9. copykris Suspended

    copykris

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Location:
    home
    #9
    thankfully, you have jack to say about the direction the industry is moving in

    now go surf the alienwarez
     
  10. Yixian thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Europe
    #10
    There's rather a large difference between a 30% increase in thickness, and 100%, not just to dimensions but also to weight. Even at 1.3" the MBP would be thinner than most, and indeed that is how thick it used to be before the Intel switch - nobody complained then.

    Unluckily for the both of us chances are in a few years neither of us will have what we want - no optical drive and still pathetic GPUs.

    And I think you mean "jack to do".
     
  11. darngooddesign macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #11
    No one complained about 10lb laptops, until they no longer weighed that much.

    To sum up, as someone who carries laptops on my body while walking and also while commuting by motorcycle, I care more about reducing the weight and thickness as much as possible while still getting features I consider acceptable. If you game and only travel by car you might not.
     
  12. Yixian thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Europe
    #12
    Yeah they did xD

    And you'd have a point if we were talking 2" here, but we're only talking about a few mm for an exponential increase in performance. Just strikes me as the sort of direction a company's highest end notebook should be going. At present the balance is tipped pretty much in favour of form over function. There's almost no practical benefit to portability gained by reducing the thickness of a computer from 1.3" to 1" but the benefits to anyone that benefits from graphics intense computing/OpenCL is big... BIG.

    But on topic, is the 4870 practical at MBP dimensions?
     
  13. darngooddesign macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #13
    I consider over a quarter of an inch to be a significant amount when it comes to the thickness of a laptop.
     
  14. Yixian thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Europe
    #14
    Hmm, the Nvidia GTS 250M draws just 28w, and scores 8310 to the ATI HD4670s 6995 in 3d mark 06...

    How in the world did the iMacs get lumped with the 4670 when there's this as an alternative?!
     
  15. harperjones99 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    #15
    My laptop sits on my desk usually but I would still like it to be lighter and thinner for the times I do have to move it or set it on my lap.

    As long as they don't sacrifice durability and functionality (and I know optical drives limit thickness for now but they won't exist forever as a norm) I can't see how they could possibly make a laptop TOO light. It's not like they are every going to float off the table or your shoulder.

    For me it's more about the usable dimensions like screen size. Thickness and weight make usability less comfortable. A 15" uMBP screen is to me noticeably more comfortable to view than a MBA...however I have never said I wish it was thicker and heavier. Make it as light and thin as the MBA and it only makes it more comfortable in my eyes. Just like a phone...nobody wants a phone the size of a bag phone and they sure wished for smaller ones back then.

    You can go too small in the screen dimensions for comfy viewing but you can't go too light or too thin as far as I am concerned. Give me the flexible roll up computer from Mission to Mars even...
     
  16. Yixian thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Europe
    #16
    ...
     
  17. harperjones99 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    #17
    Is that a placeholder or did you mean something by it?

    In case it is the latter I am simply saying in my case I would not want bigger regardless of performance at this point in time....I also think I am pretty representative of the avg user (yes I know there are people who want more) The tech will naturally get smaller with time and things like screen size will be the limiting ergonomic factors. If the tech allows it having a Laptop that weighs 1lb and is as thin as the air is more comfy to me than having one that is 5-6lbs and the thickness of the MBP. It is a natural progression and I don't think Apple is "refusing" to do something..what you are asking for is not their market. They know that the future is not going to be in thicker and heavier for what their customer base wants in notebooks.

    I totally get that you wish it was better suited to your needs...there isn't a product out there I have ever thought was perfect and didn't wish 'something' was different about it.
     
  18. tri3limited macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Location:
    London
    #18
    I just wrote about weight in another thread and therefore in my anger and disappointment at yet another one of these threads.

    Why would you need more power? What for?

    Googling "define laptop" brings up this response;
    "a portable computer small enough to use in your lap"

    Sure the MBP will burn you if you follow that advice but seriously why would you need it more powerful than it is?

    I can offline HD, conform to online, add a fairly-through grade, a bit of motion titling and playout through the PCIe in full HD and maximum rendering for something that complicated with a half-hour piece might be 2 hours. Pretty darn good for a laptop!

    If I need something faster to meet a deadline up steps my Mac Pro.

    I just don't get this need for unnecessary power.
     
  19. Yixian thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Europe
    #19
    So anyway, will the 4870 work with the MBPs form factor + TDP?
     
  20. darngooddesign macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #20
    I'm going to go out on a limb and say the OP is looking at this from a gamer's POV and he really wants an OSX Alienware laptop. A better GPU is not unnecessary as many of us don't have towers, but its more a question of priorities. And for me, a better GPU is not a high enough priority that I'll accept a 1.3" or 1.5" laptop.
     
  21. Yixian thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Europe
    #21
    I can't find the TDP figures for the 4870 but I imagine they might be a little high. Even so though, why are we expecting the 4670? In fact, why the hell does the iMac have a 4670? o_O

    http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTS-250M.17669.0.html

    Isn't this the perfect card? It wouldn't require a thicker MBP, it uses only a fraction more power than the 9600M GT and yet the performance is what you could start to call "high end" for sure!
     
  22. harperjones99 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    #22
    Remember it's all about profits. If Apple thought there were real profits in developing and manufacturing a gaming machine they would do it. I would be willing to bet they spend a lot of time and money determining these things. Look at the glossy/matte thing. They went to glossy...it was obvious quick that enough people wanted matte so rather than put matte back as a free option they made it a 50usd "upgrade". That kind of thing proves they are not doing it for us but rather for their pocket book. If enough people pester them for a gaming machine I am sure they could get one done simply because they could earn.
     
  23. Yixian thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Europe
    #23
    Please stop derailing my thread, this is not a discussion about gaming laptops.

    So does anyone know why Apple didn't go with the GTS 250M? Is it purely cost?
     
  24. harperjones99 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    #24
    The thicker, better gpu laptops you are describing are available as gaming laptops thats why I used the term. I can call it MacBookProExtreme if you want...no skin off my nose.
     
  25. Yixian thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Europe
    #25
    Ok so you're saying the 4870 won't fit inside the MBP without an increase in form factor? Is that because of the TDP?

    How about the GTS 950M?
     

Share This Page