Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Discrete graphics

I echo the sentiments of the other posters, in that the iGPU is enough to handle the stated needs. Back a few years ago, the discussion was moot, given the lack luster performance of intel's integrated GPUs but they've made some good progress in improving the iGPU and as it stands now, its good enough for many tasks.
 
Trust me, the Iris Pro is near a discrete graphic card, i think between 640M and 650M with 1 Gb vRAM
 
thekev said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yeah I am on the original rMBP. In my case it helps a ton I think. I mean I know it maxes out my video memory on my card almost immediately hooking up an external 24" and a usb monitor. That may not be the case anymore with iris pro.
 
yjchua95 said:
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.
Click to expand...


I've used both the base and the top end 15" and I can't explain why but even when forcing the iris pro I always saw about an hour extra battery life on the base model without the dGPU. Maybe its the slightly beefier processor or that extra ram ....don't think that those make a big difference though in terms of power consumption.
 
Last edited:
alphaod said:
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.
Click to expand...

The "average" user won't be buying the ~$2600 rMBP model with the dGPU.
 
dalupus said:
Yeah I am on the original rMBP. In my case it helps a ton I think. I mean I know it maxes out my video memory on my card almost immediately hooking up an external 24" and a usb monitor. That may not be the case anymore with iris pro.
Click to expand...

You say it makes a difference, yet I would assume yours automatically switches to discrete under that. You may not have seen it do such a thing on the HD 4000. Video memory is just one aspect. It's important for some things, but you should be able to run that on the HD 4000. For the OP's trivial tasks on the built in screen, there's no reason to worry about it. If the HD 4000 and iris pro graphics could not handle such trivial tasks, Apple would be out of line equipping a significant portion of their notebook line without discrete graphics. At this point integrated only must make up the vast majority of their notebook sales given that a $2500 minimum sale drives away quite a few buyers. Their average selling price has supported my assertions on these things in the past.

You can always check the difference if you like with gfxcardstatus, but I don't think you'll find much of one for basic tasks. People have become way too focused on gpu performance when the attempt to leverage them overall has predominantly involved areas where the hardware composition has an inherent advantage. Most of these features used to run acceptably when cpu bound, yet provide a feeling of greater responsiveness even on a mediocre gpu. You have to look at the areas of use where powerful graphics have always been an advantage to see real differentiation.
 
simon48 said:
The "average" user won't be buying the ~$2600 rMBP model with the dGPU.
Click to expand...

Well depends on how you define average user.

I know a lot people who buy the top end model simply because they can afford it.

And then they ask me to help them wipe OS X and install Windows on it. :(
 
2.3 w/GPU or 2.0 with Iris Pro

This is a very interesting thread, and considering that I've been through this.

Originally I had the 15" rMBP 2.3GHz, 512SSD, 2GB Nvidia , the battery life was horrible , after a week and a call to Applecare with all there test's and programs run on my computer, sending them the data, they replied with a take it back and swap it.

Switched to the base model 2.0 and after a week of usage and the same amount of power cycles, my battery would last me for 6 to 7 hours.

The part that Apple does not tell you but I found out from Applecare / Engineering is that when they say 8 hour's , that's with brightness set too 50% and your not, I repeat NOT surfing graphics intensive sites.

To date I have the 15" rMBP maxed again because the 2.0 would not hold anymore then a 4 hour charge, I asked about switching and thats why I have the maxed , sitting in my closet still packaged and shrink wrapped. A few of my fellow programmers told me last night and today you wasted the extra money, and I also do NOT game. I was thinking long term of the bigger SSD and more memory.

Any and all comments appreciated. Just as an FYI, I do lite programming, VMware, Xcode, Java. and the obvious email, web, no graphics or video editing,
 
alphaod said:
Well depends on how you define average user.

I know a lot people who buy the top end model simply because they can afford it.

And then they ask me to help them wipe OS X and install Windows on it. :(
Click to expand...

I'm defining average as the majority of buyers. I don't consider people who buy because they can to be the majority.
 
michaelsviews said:
This is a very interesting thread, and considering that I've been through this.

Originally I had the 15" rMBP 2.3GHz, 512SSD, 2GB Nvidia , the battery life was horrible , after a week and a call to Applecare with all there test's and programs run on my computer, sending them the data, they replied with a take it back and swap it.

Switched to the base model 2.0 and after a week of usage and the same amount of power cycles, my battery would last me for 6 to 7 hours.

The part that Apple does not tell you but I found out from Applecare / Engineering is that when they say 8 hour's , that's with brightness set too 50% and your not, I repeat NOT surfing graphics intensive sites.

To date I have the 15" rMBP maxed again because the 2.0 would not hold anymore then a 4 hour charge, I asked about switching and thats why I have the maxed , sitting in my closet still packaged and shrink wrapped. A few of my fellow programmers told me last night and today you wasted the extra money, and I also do NOT game. I was thinking long term of the bigger SSD and more memory.

Any and all comments appreciated. Just as an FYI, I do lite programming, VMware, Xcode, Java. and the obvious email, web, no graphics or video editing,
Click to expand...

Actually it's well known that Apple's battery life tests are done on standard (not Flash or video) sites and with the screen brightness down (also it's at 75% not 50%). They also say this at all their keynotes and on their website.

From Apple's Retina MacBook Pro Tech Specs page in the footnotes:

"The wireless web test measures battery life by wirelessly browsing 25 popular websites with display brightness set to 12 clicks from bottom or 75%."
 
Iris Pro is definitely in a different class than what we are used to thinking of as iGPUs. Performance wise it is basically a 650M. As the current model is the 750M Iris Pro performance is only one iteration behind, which for an iGPU is great.

The reality is while NVidia need not worry about being pushed out just yet, Iris Pro is a game changer because we finally have iGPU performance in the same general plane as dGPUs.
 
simon48 said:
Actually it's well known that Apple's battery life tests are done on standard (not Flash or video) sites and with the screen brightness down (also it's at 75% not 50%). They also say this at all their keynotes and on their website.

From Apple's Retina MacBook Pro Tech Specs page in the footnotes:

"The wireless web test measures battery life by wirelessly browsing 25 popular websites with display brightness set to 12 clicks from bottom or 75%."
Click to expand...

What I posted is what I was told by AC. And who the heck surfs 25 websites with there brightness set so low? I get what there saying but WTH ?
 
michaelsviews said:
The part that Apple does not tell you but I found out from Applecare / Engineering is that when they say 8 hour's , that's with brightness set too 50% and your not, I repeat NOT surfing graphics intensive sites.
Click to expand...
They do tell you, it's in the fine print on the spec sheet, but nobody bothers reading it.
 
thekev said:
You can always check the difference if you like with gfxcardstatus, but I don't think you'll find much of one for basic tasks. People have become way too focused on gpu performance when the attempt to leverage them overall has predominantly involved areas where the hardware composition has an inherent advantage. Most of these features used to run acceptably when cpu bound, yet provide a feeling of greater responsiveness even on a mediocre gpu. You have to look at the areas of use where powerful graphics have always been an advantage to see real differentiation.
Click to expand...

gfxcardstatus won't even let you do integrated only with an external display plugged in.

I didn't think there was a any question that a discrete gpu helps when powering multiple displays. I know my mac air struggles a bit when running multiple displays.
 
dalupus said:
gfxcardstatus won't even let you do integrated only with an external display plugged in.

I didn't think there was a any question that a discrete gpu helps when powering multiple displays. I know my mac air struggles a bit when running multiple displays.
Click to expand...

I was unaware that gfxcardstatus imposed that limitation or simply ran into an API limitation there. As long as the card has adequate memory, it shouldn't be an issue with modern graphics, especially not for the trivial tasks referred to by the OP. Even with your Air, it could be a memory limitation. These things do share memory, and I know even at 8GB, I used to see sub 100MB free in activity monitor at times with a drop in responsiveness. If you look at his uses, he's not doing anything that would result in large amounts of extra data being accessed by the gpu.
 
thekev said:
I was unaware that gfxcardstatus imposed that limitation or simply ran into an API limitation there. As long as the card has adequate memory, it shouldn't be an issue with modern graphics, especially not for the trivial tasks referred to by the OP. Even with your Air, it could be a memory limitation. These things do share memory, and I know even at 8GB, I used to see sub 100MB free in activity monitor at times with a drop in responsiveness. If you look at his uses, he's not doing anything that would result in large amounts of extra data being accessed by the gpu.
Click to expand...

I've always thought that if you have a dGPU the display outputs are only accessible the the dGPU.
 
yjchua95 said:
You're correct. If there's a dGPU, the output to external display is physically linked to the dGPU. It's the way it's wired inside the logic board.
Click to expand...

Good the know for sure. It's not like it matters that you can use the iGPU either as you're going to be at a desk if you're running an external display.
 
yjchua95 said:
You're correct. If there's a dGPU, the output to external display is physically linked to the dGPU. It's the way it's wired inside the logic board.
Click to expand...

I didn't know its physical but when I use an external monitor it always go on the dGPU and even with gfxcardstatus, I cannot change it. Makes sense though now that you mentioned it :)
 
maflynn said:
I didn't know its physical but when I use an external monitor it always go on the dGPU and even with gfxcardstatus, I cannot change it. Makes sense though now that you mentioned it :)
Click to expand...

That is because the integrated graphics are in no way, shape or form connected to the thunderbolt port, only the discrete graphics card is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back