Discrete graphics

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Rchawks, Feb 21, 2014.

  1. Rchawks macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2014
    #1
    How much of an advantage does this provide. Would the gain of speed in boot up time for web surfing, viewing photos, or video clips, really justify the extra six hundred dollars for the machine.
     
  2. monokitty macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2011
    #2
    It's primarily for gaming, to be honest, and video editing. Everything you listed does not benefit from a dedicated graphics card. That said, for $600 more, you're getting a faster processor, double the RAM and double the storage, too - if that's important to you.
     
  3. iHackPro macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2014
    Location:
    DFW, TX
    #3
    The most noticeable difference would be in gaming and heavy video processing, 3D rendering, etc. If you're doing any of those things, I recommend getting a dedicated GPU for your system.
     
  4. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #4
    When the CPU, RAM and SSD options are matched on both Iris-only and Iris+750M, they're priced identically.
     
  5. blooperz macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2013
    #5
    Those don't utilize the dedicated GPU in any way... I don't even think the dedicated GPU kicks in for watching video (unless your playing it on an external monitor in which case it will)....editing videos on the other hand is a different story.
     
  6. Rchawks thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2014
    #6
    I would like to edit some video but not very much. Mostly for personal exercise stuff.
    Editing of video would still be very capable, just much slower, correct? I use a IPod a lot, so working with music and playlists is important. Also would transfer speed be noticeable using external hard drives with the
    With the DGC?
     
  7. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #7
    For these things you won't notice a difference in performance. The model without the discrete graphics will have better battery life though.
     
  8. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #8
    I disagree.

    The dGPU model also can have the same battery life as the iGPU-only model, as long as you use gfxcardstatus to force it into iGPU-only mode.
     
  9. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #9
    Yeah, but there is no way to use the integrated graphics in Windows and no way to use it if you have any external display connected.
     
  10. VanillaCracker macrumors 68030

    VanillaCracker

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Location:
    Washington D.C.
    #10
    You definitely don't need the dGPU. Just stick with the base model

    ----------

    Let's stop making assumptions that are not the case for the average user. Most people buying Macs are using the native OS, and not windows.
     
  11. simon48 macrumors 65816

    simon48

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    #11
    I don't think battery life in Windows via Boot Camp is really something people should worry about.
     
  12. dalupus macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    #12
    I would only add that if you use external monitors the desecrate card will help.
     
  13. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #13
    Not anywhere near as much as you might think. That was more an issue back when intel was on GMA graphics. What amuses me is that every reason the OP listed has nothing to do with discrete graphics.
     
  14. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #14
    The average user won't be looking up gfxCardStatus, but instead will be wondering why their battery life isn't what Apple claims. The average user will be more than happy with Iris Pro graphics.
     
  15. Serban Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #15
    i have the base model, and for those tasks i have 8H and 33min for surfing the web and photos, and for videos i think 5-6h depends on the resolution.

    So yeah for these tasks, the 600$ is a waste. For that reason i chose the base model too. I would have liked to have an BTO option like +150$ for 750M alone but sadly its missing
     
  16. mr.bee macrumors 6502a

    mr.bee

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Location:
    Brussels, belgium
    #16
    so are you happy with the iris pro only model? Do you notice anything? Do you use Photoshop, etc?
    I'm still contemplating.
    It would be great to get rid of the hassle of dGPU in a macbook, but I'm afraid the current Iris pro will not live up to normal standards in 2 years.
     
  17. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #17
    I actually have the Iris+750M model, and believe me, the Iris performs better than the 750M in Photoshop CC because Photoshop is now more OpenCL-oriented.

    The Iris is only better than the 750M in OpenCL tasks though. When it comes to gaming and CUDA-assisted software, the 750M still beats the Iris.
     
  18. leman macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #18
    And 750m will? ;)

    If you are not a gamer, here is not much reason in getting the dGPU. For computation, Iris Pro is superior in most cases. And you don't need the fast 3D graphics capabilities.
     
  19. mr.bee macrumors 6502a

    mr.bee

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Location:
    Brussels, belgium
    #19
    thanks for the info! the only game I played on my current iMac is warcraft, and that game became boring.

    I'm looking forward to an apple tv/gaming console and don't play games on my computer.

    I'll probably order my new computer on Thursday :)

    It will be base model with extra RAM, (heavy multitasker), and maybe upgraded to 2.3 ghz.
     
  20. thekev, Feb 25, 2014
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2014

    thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #20
    Your concerns are misguided. You should look at whether any additional performance will justify the additional cost amortized over the life of the device. It will not. It's a complete waste of money outside of gaming. If you're slogging around 3d models, neither one is absolutely ideal. If you really want that, why not a 2012 model? Save $800~. End up with a lower clocked version of the 750m. Retire it proportionately earlier relative to the money that has been saved. The absolute only advantage is greater vram, and most people will never notice that. Adobe currently recommends 1GB for heavy users, which you can still find on the 2012 model.


    The first part isn't entirely true, and the second part is completely misguided (you may want to read Adobe's official specs). It only relies on the gpu for certain things. They've been slowly rewriting parts that can be made threadsafe, which I suspect is partly due to the millions of lines of code that make up that one application. If you're one of the rare users who actually wants to push it all the way and has to deal with switching with other applications that may use vram, then it depends more on video memory. Oddly I would still come to the same conclusion. The iris pro is fine, because it's not worth the extra money for the other in that situation.
     
  21. Serban Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #21
    yes Photoshop is seamless, no problem there. Only problems i get (but not a really problem) is in games like other people said.
    But for the OpenCL it really screams
     
  22. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #22
    Mate, I said that the Iris is better than the 750M in Photoshop CC, not the other way round.
     
  23. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #23
    Yeah I know. It's poor writing style on my part. In my own tests in PS and Illustrator I haven't seen a significant difference with graphics switching, although I wasn't testing my own machines, which are older. I did test up to around 10k x 6k @ 16 bpc in PS. Filters and things run a bit faster. I have never been able to find significant difference in general responsiveness with graphics as long as it has adequate memory. Did your results differ in general use? I never liked the benchmarks, because no one is just going to run a long stream of automated operations in PS. That kind of thing is much better implemented in Lightroom, yet Lightroom doesn't use OpenCL at all (yet). Also when I say misguided, it's more that the topic of picking apart which notebook gpu for Creative Suite is a bit misguided in general, because it's unlikely that the difference will in any way justify the increased cost.
     
  24. snaky69, Feb 25, 2014
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2014

    snaky69 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    #24
    A discrete graphics card does nothing whatsoever for any of those tasks. From your posts in this thread, I doubt you actually know what a discrete graphics card does, as nearly everything you mention makes no use of a graphics card, let alone a discrete one.
     
  25. Zeov macrumors 6502a

    Zeov

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Location:
    Odense
    #25
    you don't need discrete graphics.
     

Share This Page