Are dGPUs really necessary in a 15"MBP?

[groove-agent]

One of the biggest complaints of the current MBPs is the price. I think Apple should mirror the offerings of the 13" and offer a 15" no-frills unit with no touch bar and no discrete GPU that can be upgraded (CPU, RAM, SSD). Leave the touch bar and the dGPU option for the higher end model(s). If people want to game, they can use an external GPU. Leaving out the dGPU will lower the thermals and lower the price. An entry level 15" could weigh in below $2000 which is much more attractive, particularly to a first time buyer.

With eGPUs, it makes dGPUs not completely necessary IMO. If I'm gaming on my laptop I'll be at home at my desk anyway plugged in w/ external drives, monitor etc. Why not remove the dGPU, reduce price and thermals and get an eGPU which could perform better than the dGPU anyway.

 

[kotlos]

I agree, they should have offered options without dGPUs. Many people just like the screen size but rarely need the dGPU, and many others that use the machine for doing heavy tasks most often are on their desks in which case using an eGPU is easy.

 

[mikethebigo]

Maybe they'll update the nTB 13" and also the 15" without dGPU later this year. I agree that Iris graphics are more than enough for many.

 

[AppleHaterLover]

If they made a 15" without the Touch Bar, nobody would buy the Touch Bar version.

 

[Altis]

If they made a 15" without the Touch Bar, nobody would buy the Touch Bar version.

Pretty much. If the TB were optional on all trims, I suspect very few people would opt for it.

I've forever said that there should be a base 15" model with no dGPU and even with the ultrabook CPUs -- effectively just up the screen size.

 

[AppleHaterLover]

The thing I see is that the "function keys" are not "function keys" as Phil Schiller said it, they are the "brightness, play/pause, Exposé" keys. And I do not want those moving around, I want them available at all times.

So I voted with my wallet and got an nTB (which I would buy again all day long), which Apple will left to rot and then kill off.

 

[groove-agent]

If they made a 15" without the Touch Bar, nobody would buy the Touch Bar version.

Quite possibly. If they want to standardize the touch bar, they should really make it more useful. I always thought it could also work well as a notification area, similar to a stock ticker that can scroll information that you choose such as: weather, current news, the time. Make it an output device as well as an input device.

Ideally I would like if they brought back the function keys, and put the touch bar between the function keys and closer to the screen as if it's an extension of the screen.

 

[PortableLover]

Maybe a i5 quad option with no dgpu option would be great as a cheaper but still extremely capable machine for users who do not need 6 cores.

 

[maflynn]

I think Apple should mirror the offerings of the 13" and offer a 15" no-frills unit with no touch bar and no discrete GPU that can be upgraded (CPU, RAM, SSD).

If Apple offered that, would they see an appreciable increase in sales from those who would not have purchased the MBP in the first place? The reason why I ask, is if they offered that option, I think people buying that would have already purchased a MBP anyways, i.e., the lower end machine will cannibalize sales of the higher end model. That in of itself doesn't server Apple at all.

I think the move to more demanding apps that need a more powerful GPU is more of the trend an iGPU machine is a step backward (I know you're not condoning the elimination of the dGPU model). We have people complaining already that the MBP is not a pro machine, that rhetoric will just increase with a low end machine

I'm not knocking the suggestions, but I think for apple marketing the MBP as a premium brand, cutting many of those features flies in the face that approach.

 

[Nozuka]

If they made a 15" without the Touch Bar, nobody would buy the Touch Bar version.

I don't think that's true. I think they could make it optional and still alot of people would buy it. Myself included.

 

[Sterkenburg]

I also agree that an entry-level 15" with essentially the same specs as the base 13" (quad-core CPU and integrated graphics) would be a great option for the many people who don't need much power but would greatly benefit from the larger screen. Unfortunately, this use case would encompass so many users that the sales of the higher-end models would end up taking a massive hit, which is in a nutshell why Apple won't do it.

Ditto for the TouchBar. Would people still buy it as an optional? Yes, certainly, but I'm pretty convinced the majority wouldn't if that saved them money.

 

[curmudgeonette]

I think people buying that would have already purchased a MBP anyways, i.e., the lower end machine will cannibalize sales of the higher end model. That in of itself doesn't server Apple at all.

It is better to cannibalize your own sales than to have a competitor do it, i.e. it is better for Apple to cannibalize their sales than to have HP, Dell, or Lenovo swoop in a similar model.

However, ... (from a discussion a few years ago when the Iris Pro iGPU was dropped) ... Apple's cost of the Radeon dGPU and associated RAM is on par with Intel's price bump for Iris Pro graphics. Today's Iris Plus has a smaller premium - but the price difference doesn't make it worthwhile creating two different models.

 

[Aea]

I can't imagine the dGPUs in these things adding that much to the cost. Maybe $100 for the chip and probably another $100-150 in integration costs.

The benefits of having that dGPU in the moments you need it is pretty invaluable though.

 

[Falhófnir]

Absolutely what I want to see, but they seem to be pivoting the Pro 15" towards being a machine that will really only be bought by businesses on company dollar and video editors. How they've gotten it into their head only video editors need 15" of screen space I really don't know. Among manufacturers they are unique in making the 15" model to suit a niche.

 

[iamMacPerson]

I don't think that's true. I think they could make it optional and still alot of people would buy it. Myself included.

I concur. I think though a lot of people will see the Touch Bar as useless, but in the apps that have been updated to take advantage of it, it's AMAZING for quite a few tasks. I use Pixelmator and the ability to use the Touch Bar to precisely adjust the rotation and size of an object was enough to make me change my mind on the Touch Bar. Plus scrubbing playback of videos in QuickTime and FCPX is really nice to have too.

 

[Aea]

I think the TB is one of those things that is very... divisive.

I would happily pay to have a ‘TB Delete,’ mostly because I really miss having that physical esc key and couldn’t care for it otherwise.

 

[Randall2018]

I think it would be enough for a lot of people, but I doubt Apple will do it because there wouldn’t be that many new customers, and the few that are new probably won’t make up for the loss of money by selling a cheaper model even before you include the extra cost to design and test it.

 

[BigMcGuire]

I think the TB is one of those things that is very... divisive.

I would happily pay to have a ‘TB Delete,’ mostly because I really miss having that physical esc key and couldn’t care for it otherwise.

I know those of us who did buy it, didn't buy it for the TB... we bought it for the faster CPU, extra case fan, 4 ports, etc... But I have to agree with you, I prefer the physical buttons even though I don't mind the TB and have gotten used to it.

I find my MBP 13 to be plenty good for my use of Starcraft and other not so insane games. I find the eGPU attractive but I can't really justify it in my current situation.

 

[iamMacPerson]

I think the TB is one of those things that is very... divisive.

I would happily pay to have a ‘TB Delete,’ mostly because I really miss having that physical esc key and couldn’t care for it otherwise.

Yeah I do miss the physical esc key. That's all I miss thought tbh. It is a very divisive issue lol.

 

[maflynn]

It is better to cannibalize your own sales than to have a competitor do it, i.e. it is better for Apple to cannibalize their sales than to have HP, Dell, or Lenovo swoop in a similar model.

My point is they're not losing sales because of the lack of a low end model, and they'll only hurt sales of the more expensive model. Its a lose - lose situation. They're not gaining new customers, they're not losing customer and some of the existing customers will purchase a cheaper model. The overhead for carrying another model, that's cheaper that hurts existing sales doesn't make business sense.

 

[iamMacPerson]

My point is they're not losing sales because of the lack of a low end model, and they'll only hurt sales of the more expensive model. Its a lose - lose situation. They're not gaining new customers, they're not losing customer and some of the existing customers will purchase a cheaper model. The overhead for carrying another model, that's cheaper that hurts existing sales doesn't make business sense.

Well I think if they significantly cripple a nTB MBP 15" - like use a Quad Core U chip from the 13" tbMBP, remove the dGPU, use LPDDR3 instead of DDR4 - and price it at $1999-$2099, pros would scoff at it as a lesser machine like they normally do, and buy a 6-core anyway. However, it would still allow non-pro users access to a 15" model at a lower cost. I think of someone like my grandmother for whom the 13" screen is just too small but the 15" price and spec wise would be overkill. Plus with reports of how powerful that Quad Core U chip is in the 13", imagine how much better it would run with a larger thermal envelope.

 

[groove-agent]

Well they removed the USB ports, SD card reader and HDMI port, so why not remove the dGPU as well?

They could also sell eGPUs as an add-on.

I think the move to more demanding apps that need a more powerful GPU is more of the trend an iGPU machine is a step backward (I know you're not condoning the elimination of the dGPU model). We have people complaining already that the MBP is not a pro machine, that rhetoric will just increase with a low end machine

 

[lambinho]

Why would they do this for the Macbook Pro?

 

[CodeJoy]

Apple's current business model is strongly centred around removing options that users actually do want, and instead channeling them towards more expensive options that they don't really want. And also offering massively overpriced upgrade options that look good on paper to non-technical users, but aren't actually much of any upgrades.

I could easily see a nTB 15" quad-core with no dGPU and LPDDR3 only for $1899 be a very attractive option to users. But some who end up getting it would otherwise go cursing to the Apple store and dig a little deeper in their wallet and part with $2399 for the current model. Apple prefers cursing customers that part with more money.

If they'd had models that actually fit my use case better, I'm pretty sure I would have bought a recent MBP already. By using this strategy they are so far losing me as a customer, but I'm sure that I'm very much in the minority.

 

[throAU]

IMHO discrete GPUs in portables are one of those things that is more of a waste of time/liability than anything else for most people.

If you need to do heavy work on a 15", you're normally on AC power at a desk, because pushing them hard the battery life is like 1 hour if that.

Given you're on AC power, you may as well just use an eGPU box with a proper desktop class GPU in it for better performance.

Yes, some people may be edge cases who need a discrete GPU when on the road away from a desk for whatever reason. But most people aren't doing that.
[doublepost=1532584420][/doublepost]

Why would they do this for the Macbook Pro?

For pretty much any task that needs more screen real estate and potentially better battery life than a 13" machine that does not require heavy use of 3d acceleration.

i.e., 90% of what people typically use a business laptop for.
[doublepost=1532584512][/doublepost]

My point is they're not losing sales because of the lack of a low end model, and they'll only hurt sales of the more expensive model. Its a lose - lose situation. They're not gaining new customers, they're not losing customer and some of the existing customers will purchase a cheaper model. The overhead for carrying another model, that's cheaper that hurts existing sales doesn't make business sense.

Given the thermal issues on the low end 13" model, they're losing sales, period.