Do you guys feel a bit disappointed with Apple choosing the Nvidia 750M...

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by cbautis2, Oct 24, 2013.

  1. cbautis2 macrumors 6502a

    Aug 17, 2013
    Do you guys feel a bit disappointed with Apple choosing the Nvidia 750M instead of a workstation class GPU like the Nvidia Quadro K2100M or K1100M?

    I think they should've put the Quadro cards since IMO most people who will work with a dGPU would prefer a GPU capable of super precise OpenGL rendering for CAD stuff or even Adobe Creative Suite rather than a gaming oriented/cheaper Nvidia GT 750M. I would say that for the price of the top of the line $2699 with 2.3 GHz i7-4950HQ specs, 16 GB RAM and Nvidia Quadro K1100M 512 GB PCI-E SSD, it's a good purchase. I feel that the price of $2599 machine for the i7-4950HQ with Nvidia 750M is too much especially when the GPU is just a mid-range GPU and worse performer than an iGPU for OpenCL and CAD / 3D modeling applications (not all CAD / 3D Modeling software of course).

    I would really invest my money as fast as I can if Apple released the rMBP with 2.0 GHz i7-4750HQ, 16 GB RAM, Nvidia K1100M, 512 GB PCI-E SSD for $2599. and the CPU 2.3 GHz upgrade for $100 more.

    Do you guys think that would be a perfect rMBP configuration for the price?
  2. trekky1700 macrumors newbie

    Oct 23, 2013
    It would've been nice, but Apple really seems to be focusing on portability and form factor in their Macbooks. I'm not surprised though, I have a laptop with a GPU of the same architecture as the K1100M and it sucks battery like crazy. With great power comes great battery drain.

    You could always do this:
  3. Quu macrumors 68030


    Apr 2, 2007
    I'm not bothered about it. Had they used something faster the laptop would run hotter and louder. I'm not buying these notebooks to play games only run everyday software and some professional software (Photoshop, Aperture etc) so for me the 750m is perfect the compromise.

    I know there are some Quadro cards within the same power and thermals as the 750m but I think they cost a lot more and the notebook is already very pricey.
  4. cbautis2 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Aug 17, 2013
    That's why I used the base Haswell CPU instead of the upgraded 2.3 GHz CPU and invest that money to the Nvidia K1100M instead. In terms of thermals and power consumption, I guarantee that K1100M should be around the same or even less than the 750M (both are Kepler GK107 architectures) since the core clock for 750M is around 967 MHz against 706 MHz for K1100M and 2500 MHz (from Lenovo Y510p) effective Memory clock vs 2800 MHz effective for K1100M (Source: Also, both GPUs have the same amount of shaders: 384. With these specs, raw performance and thermal levels should be the same. However, 750M will edge the K1100M a bit in gaming performance, but the K1100M will run laps around both Iris Pro and 750M in OpenGL, CAD rendering and 3D modeling. It's not like the Quadro cards can't game, but if given the same clocks for both core and memory of the same architecture, the GeForce will perform 0 - 10% faster depending on the game optimization.

    If you also think that the $2599 price for K1100M with 2.0 GHz i7, 16 GB RAM and 512 GB SSD is cheap by Apple standards, they can sell that at $2699 and I think it would still look better than a 2.3 GHz i7, 750M at $2599. Plus, putting a workstation class GPU there will make their laptop a genuine "Pro" laptop and it would justify the high price tag.
  5. Starfyre macrumors 68030


    Nov 7, 2010
    Its really all about the battery life. It can run LOL on High Settings... nothing wrong with that.
  6. cbautis2 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Aug 17, 2013
    You can still run the Iris Pro graphics all day alongside the Quadro (consuming less than 1 watt) with gfxcardstatus or automatic graphics switching. You see it right, the Nvidia Quadro K1100M supports Nvidia Optimus ( so it shouldn't be too hard for OSX developers to implement automatic graphics switching under OS X.
  7. erigas macrumors member

    Apr 6, 2011
    Atlanta GA
    OP I couldn't agree with you more!!!
    At least include it as an option along side the gt750 hogh-end option.
    Same heat footprint, same architecture as the gt750, only able to take advantage of the superior (for 3d creation, video, and CAD) drivers.
  8. dusk007 macrumors 68040


    Dec 5, 2009
    I would have hope for a 760M.

    Quadros you can forget. Most of what makes a Quadro a Quadro is the driver and there is a lot of work in it and it only exists for Windows. Putting a Quadro into a Mac with OSX really wouldn't do all that much unless the right driver came along. It would cost way too much to write such a driver for OSX. It would make more sense to invest more into their own driver on the OSX side for geforce cards and maybe pay a few licensing fees for the some of the quadro tech to use it selectively rather than pay for the full package that you wouldn't get anyway because there are just no drivers like there are for Windows.

    You will never see those in a Mac. They'd cost too much.
  9. ElderBrE macrumors regular


    Apr 14, 2004
    Quadros have been an option for Mac Pros in several occasions.

    As for the OP's question, I personally don't miss a Quadro at all, I don't think there's many people who would want one in a laptop, however for those few who need it, an option would've been nice.
  10. thedarkhorse macrumors 6502a

    Sep 13, 2007
    being disappointed they never went with a workstation class GPU would rely on an expectation that they would consider it. Since every single macbook pro ever released has only had gaming/mainstream GPUs I had no expectation a mobile workstation GPU would make it to the MBP.
  11. josesIPS macrumors newbie

    Aug 16, 2014
    that's why buy a non apple product to have a more powerful processor and graphics at a lot cheaper price.
    smart people does not buy apple products because when buying apple products, you are buying the name, not the gadget itself.
    you can buy a 150 dollar smartphone with the same specs and is more durable than a 1000 dollar i phone 5s. SAME AS FOR LAPTOPS and any other devices.
  12. eastercat macrumors 68040


    Mar 3, 2008
    Even if apple had decided to add the dgpu that you wanted, they would charge a lot more than you'd expect. See their RAM prices for example.
  13. leman macrumors G3

    Oct 14, 2008
    Definitively no. Quadros are a rip-off, and they don't provide any kind of benefit in properly written modern applications (unless you rely on double precision math). I am disappointed though that they didn't put a Maxwell into the latest refresh.
  14. Johnny Steps macrumors 6502

    Johnny Steps

    Jun 29, 2011
    Did you make an account just to post that lol?
  15. ckeck macrumors 6502a


    Jul 29, 2005
    Not disappointed that it's not a workstation "chip", but I am disappointed that it's 2014 and a $2-3k "Pro" laptop tops out with a 750M w/ 2GB vRAM. Embarrassing.
  16. fenjen macrumors 6502


    Nov 9, 2012
    Yeah, gimme that 780M :D
  17. ckeck macrumors 6502a


    Jul 29, 2005
    Yeah, really...power/heat might be a little much on that one for this form-factor though.

    Not sure why they couldn't bump up to the 860 or perhaps the 870M though. You can be sure this will be the next "upgrade" in know, once these are a generation old at least.
  18. maflynn Moderator


    Staff Member

    May 3, 2009
    In all honesty, the next MBP I get will be sans dGPU. The performance increases we're seeing with the iGPU are making the need for a dGPU less and less. Add in the fact that apple has a poor track record with dGPUs makes me want to avoid them for that reason alone.

Share This Page