Haswell RMBP wont get a 750m... and heres why

[yabot]

With the release of the Haswell iMac's and the high end 21.5inch including the 750m i dont think we will see it in the Haswell retina macbook pro refresh, and heres why...

1. Why would they put the same graphics card in both a desktop AND a macbook? Surely there needs to be some differentiation of specs...

2. If they did, the iMac and retina macbook pro would be very similar spec'd machines, obviously apart from the display and size etc.

3. the cost difference would be huge, probably about £400 if the rmbp's dont drop in price.

4. if it did i doubt it would get 2Gb 750m... then it'd be more powerful that the desktop variant... which traditionally isnt meant to happen....

its just my thought, im not sure why'd they'd make two machines so similar, one a desktop, one a laptop

Peace'n im out!

 

[Millionaire2K]

With the release of the Haswell iMac's and the high end 21.5inch including the 750m i dont think we will see it in the Haswell retina macbook pro refresh, and heres why...

1. Why would they put the same graphics card in both a desktop AND a macbook? Surely there needs to be some differentiation of specs...

2. If they did, the iMac and retina macbook pro would be very similar spec'd machines, obviously apart from the display and size etc.

3. the cost difference would be huge, probably about £400 if the rmbp's dont drop in price.

4. if it did i doubt it would get 2Gb 750m... then it'd be more powerful that the desktop variant... which traditionally isnt meant to happen....

its just my thought, im not sure why'd they'd make two machines so similar, one a desktop, one a laptop

Peace'n im out!

1. Yeah because the CPU and bigger screen is not different...

2. yeah because you can take your iMac to the local coffee shop.

3. Not true. A dgpu cost very little.

4. No company makes a sub par laptop to ensure the desktop is king. They do their best to make BOTH amazing.

Here is WHY THEY WILL add a dgpu OPTION!!

BECAUSE IT WILL PISS A LARGE % OF PEOPLE OFF TO LEAVE IT OUT!!

 

[yabot]

1. Yeah because the CPU and bigger screen is not different...

2. yeah because you can take your iMac to the local coffee shop.

3. Not true. A dgpu cost very little.

4. No company makes a sub par laptop to ensure the desktop is king. They do their best to make BOTH amazing.

In answer to 4. Apple could have easily put a better graphics card in the 1st gen Retina macbook pro's... but they didnt... why? cost?

and i also think that the people who you are referring to sit in coffee shops, are generally graphics design students with macbook airs sat in the starbucks window across from campus on a rainy day. They don't do that here in england as much the states.

and yeah it will sure as hell piss me off and i bet im not the only one!!!

 

[Millionaire2K]

In answer to 4. Apple could have easily put a better graphics card in the 1st gen Retina macbook pro's... but they didnt... why? cost?

and i also think that the people who you are referring to sit in coffee shops, are generally graphics design students with macbook airs sat in the starbucks window across from campus on a rainy day. They don't do that here in england as much the states.

But they didn't so they could do better in this one. Apple has always held back features and better hardware to make them great new features in the future.

And my comment about coffee shop was referring to the fact that the rmbp is their portable desktop. They want to make it as best as they can. ITS NOT THEIR "CHEAP" MACHINE!! The air and cmbp are the cheap options.

 

[Petulka]

With the release of the Haswell iMac's and the high end 21.5inch including the 750m i dont think we will see it in the Haswell retina macbook pro refresh, and heres why...

1. Why would they put the same graphics card in both a desktop AND a macbook? Surely there needs to be some differentiation of specs...

2. If they did, the iMac and retina macbook pro would be very similar spec'd machines, obviously apart from the display and size etc.

3. the cost difference would be huge, probably about £400 if the rmbp's dont drop in price.

4. if it did i doubt it would get 2Gb 750m... then it'd be more powerful that the desktop variant... which traditionally isnt meant to happen....

its just my thought, im not sure why'd they'd make two machines so similar, one a desktop, one a laptop

Peace'n im out!

Very stupid opinion.

 

[yabot]

Very stupid opinion.

well have they ever made the specs so similar in one of their desk or laptops that you only need to choose between screen quality, size and portability? for a £400 extra charge if you decide you want all of those...
oh and dont forget the smaller disk space.

 

[53kyle]

They put a 640m GPU and 650m in iMacs last year, why not 750m in both iMac and rMBP this year?

 

[yabot]

They put a 640m GPU and 650m in iMacs last year, why not 750m in both iMac and rMBP this year?

because wouldnt the inclusion of 750m reduce battery life, which is the whole point of haswell?

 

[53kyle]

because wouldnt the inclusion of 750m reduce battery life, which is the whole point of haswell?

Only as much as the 650m does to the rMBP now, and anytime you would actually use the dGPU is when you should have it plugged in anyway, such as video editing or gaming.

 

[yabot]

Only as much as the 650m does to the rMBP now, and anytime you would actually use the dGPU is when you should have it plugged in anyway, such as video editing or gaming.

yeah i get your point, but these days some websites use so many damn animations etc that the dgpu might just think your firing up a game or something and kick in, and tbh you dont normally know when its on unless the fans kick in

 

[Vanillian]

This post is so stupid I felt inclined to log in to respond, and I haven't posted on here in nearly two years.

im not sure why'd they'd make two machines so similar, one a desktop, one a laptop

They are not similar machines in the least. You said it yourself one is a desktop and one is a laptop, is that not a big enough distinction between the two?

 

[simon48]

because wouldnt the inclusion of 750m reduce battery life, which is the whole point of haswell?

Then, like they've been doing for years they would have both an iGPU and a dGPU. It's the best of both worlds.

 

[MatthewAMEL]

There has never been an iMac/MBP that didn't share a GPU.

 

[yabot]

well even though what i said i bloody hope they put one in, maybe even a gtx 680mx... KIDDING GUYS.

 

[Ledgem]

In answer to 4. Apple could have easily put a better graphics card in the 1st gen Retina macbook pro's... but they didnt... why? cost?

You have to remember that Apple doesn't play the specifications game like other computer manufacturers. With Apple, for better or for worse, it's about the computing experience. More powerful GPUs will always exist, but Apple won't use them because they might draw too much power (long battery life is a boasting point for Apple) and they might generate too much heat (fairly quiet systems are another boasting point for Apple). If you wanted something for gaming, or if you wanted to brag about the model number and how powerful it was, then you're with the wrong manufacturer.

 

[GSPice]

When I saw the title of this thread I was worried.. Then I read the first post and lol'd.

See you guys back in the main thread

 

[Miguel Cunha]

Very stupid opinion.

Unnecessary comment.

 

[nickandre21]

You have to remember that Apple doesn't play the specifications game like other computer manufacturers. With Apple, for better or for worse, it's about the computing experience. More powerful GPUs will always exist, but Apple won't use them because they might draw too much power (long battery life is a boasting point for Apple) and they might generate too much heat (fairly quiet systems are another boasting point for Apple). If you wanted something for gaming, or if you wanted to brag about the model number and how powerful it was, then you're with the wrong manufacturer.

their fans do get noisy when the macbooks are gunned with intensive work, but they have improved alot on the retina.

 

[2IS]

3. Not true. A dgpu cost very little.

I think it probably costs more than you may think. It's not simply the cost of the GPU alone, but hundreds of additional traces on the motherboard. Additional power requirements, which means additional components on the motherboard which require even more traces. These have the tradeoff of also taking up valuable space. Then there's additional cooling requirements and additional complexity in BIOS configurations to ensure proper operation between the IGP and dGPU. With more components, you also have more things that can go wrong, which is another cost as far as Apple is concerned.

 

[cirus]

I think it probably costs more than you may think. It's not simply the cost of the GPU alone, but hundreds of additional traces on the motherboard. Additional power requirements, which means additional components on the motherboard which require even more traces. These have the tradeoff of also taking up valuable space. Then there's additional cooling requirements and additional complexity in BIOS configurations to ensure proper operation between the IGP and dGPU. With more components, you also have more things that can go wrong, which is another cost as far as Apple is concerned.

If I can buy a whole GK107 chip (desktop 650) from newegg for $90 (with pcb and traces, vram, and including manufacturer and reseller margins) then it doesn't cost apple any more than $70. HP charges $70 to add a 740m to their notebooks. It will take up more space and take additional cooling. Drivers and BIOS will require more work but the actual components will not be that expensive. Most other manufacturers don't really have a hard time with it. A company like apple certainty won't.

In answer to 4. Apple could have easily put a better graphics card in the 1st gen Retina macbook pro's... but they didnt... why? cost?

and i also think that the people who you are referring to sit in coffee shops, are generally graphics design students with macbook airs sat in the starbucks window across from campus on a rainy day. They don't do that here in england as much the states.

and yeah it will sure as hell piss me off and i bet im not the only one!!!

Cooling and power. If you run max load on a 15" rmbp it will throttle as it cannot supply enough power. 85w is not enough for OC 650m, quad i7 and retina screen.

 

[leman]

1. Why would they put the same graphics card in both a desktop AND a macbook? Surely there needs to be some differentiation of specs...

Because they did if with last iMac, the iMac before that, the iMac before the one that came before that... do I have to continue?

2. If they did, the iMac and retina macbook pro would be very similar spec'd machines, obviously apart from the display and size etc.

Yes. So what?

3. the cost difference would be huge, probably about £400 if the rmbp's dont drop in price.

Yes. So what? Besides, its not like iGPU based Haswell will be much cheaper - these CPUs do cost a lot.

4. if it did i doubt it would get 2Gb 750m... then it'd be more powerful that the desktop variant... which traditionally isnt meant to happen....

No, it won't be more powerful, it would just have more VRAM.

 

[joecool99]

With the release of the Haswell iMac's and the high end 21.5inch including the 750m i dont think we will see it in the Haswell retina macbook pro refresh, and heres why...

1. Why would they put the same graphics card in both a desktop AND a macbook? Surely there needs to be some differentiation of specs...

2. If they did, the iMac and retina macbook pro would be very similar spec'd machines, obviously apart from the display and size etc.

3. the cost difference would be huge, probably about £400 if the rmbp's dont drop in price.

4. if it did i doubt it would get 2Gb 750m... then it'd be more powerful that the desktop variant... which traditionally isnt meant to happen....

its just my thought, im not sure why'd they'd make two machines so similar, one a desktop, one a laptop

Peace'n im out!

Most stupid argument on this whole site.
You deserve a Darwin Award.

 

[2IS]

If I can buy a whole GK107 chip (desktop 650) from newegg for $90 (with pcb and traces, vram, and including manufacturer and reseller margins) then it doesn't cost apple any more than $70. HP charges $70 to add a 740m to their notebooks. It will take up more space and take additional cooling. Drivers and BIOS will require more work but the actual components will not be that expensive. Most other manufacturers don't really have a hard time with it. A company like apple certainty won't.

How big is a 650 card? Now take than and shrink it down so it fits inside and is kept adequately cooled in a MBP chassis along with the other components that are already there.. It's very clear there's a few people around here that don't have a concept of what's involved.

 

[cirus]

How big is a 650 card? Now take than and shrink it down so it fits inside and is kept adequately cooled in a MBP chassis along with the other components that are already there.. It's very clear there's a few people around here that don't have a concept of what's involved.

A 650 is quite large but that doesn't mean that it is going to take a lot of space on a mobo (generally speaking compared to a desktop the pcb is tiny). Its the cooling that is more of a concern.

Razar managed to fit a 35w 4702mq and a 765m in a VERY thin 14" chassis. I don't see why Apple could not if they tried.

 

[Zeov]

this didn't convince me at all.