I'm not a gamer and perhaps the Nvidia card is a waste for somebody like me. I usually use gfxCardStatus because the only thing the discrete card seems to do for me is generate heat on my legs/lap. I don't notice an effect on scrolling (have it in scaled 1920x1200 mode), importing and editing photos and videos, nada. Where am I supposed to notice the improved performance, if not during video games?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
How to experience benefit of Nvidia card on RMBP?
- Thread starter macbook123
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
At least scrolling in iPhoto with lots of images is noticable faster with discrete enabled. iPhoto also enables discrete if dynamic switching is enabled.
I find mission control to be a lot faster with the discreet card, especially if you have a few dozen windows open...
When it comes to scrolling though, I have a similar experience to you, little to no improvement.
I also run 1920 btw.
I don't even notice a difference in Mission control, not even with dozens of windows open...
I'm starting to think that the only people who need the discrete card are those who play extremely GPU intense games. For most mortals however, Apple should offer a version of the laptop without discrete card. It just unnecessarily adds to the complexity, power consumption, and heat of the system. What's the point?
I'm starting to think that the only people who need the discrete card are those who play extremely GPU intense games. For most mortals however, Apple should offer a version of the laptop without discrete card. It just unnecessarily adds to the complexity, power consumption, and heat of the system. What's the point?
I would imagine as this laptop is aimed at high end users, most people who have bought the laptop for it's intended 'market purpose' would have need for the GPU.
If you don't want the GPU, get an air, or wait and see if they release an air without it.
If you don't want the GPU, get an air, or wait and see if they release an air without it.
Well, so far not a single macrumors user has been able to describe a use for me
That's a silly statement. The Air is a completely different computer. This thread entertains the question whether one of the many components that is different is a necessary component. Your advice is like telling somebody who asks about the purpose of the back-facing camera in an iPad to get a Mac Mini instead, just because that doesn't have said camera.
That doesn't answer the OP's question. Many people who aren't "high end users" bought the rMBP for the gorgeous display.
How is the Air a solution? Going to a smaller, lower res screen because the discrete graphics isn't being used makes no sense.
Other than more heat and fan noise and shorter battery life I don't see the difference either.
Side question - You guys running in 1920 how do you read the small text? It's clear but reading text that small for long periods of time makes my eyes burn!
Setting the minimum font size in Safari helps a little, however if one sets it too large the formatting on some sites can look less than optimal.
I also get closer to the display.
And use command-= a lot to increase font size when I decide I want to read longer passages on a website.
Hmm, but that's a result of an arbitrary software limitation, not the hardware. The integrated GPU on the RMBP is perfectly capable of running a 2560x1600 external monitor, as was the 4 times LESS powerful integrated GPU of my 2011 MBA...
I think a lot of people have under estimated the potency of the Intel 4000 HD chip. in and of itself, it's probably powerful enough to run everything on that notebook. in fact, at most times I never run the dedicated graphics because sometimes it actually performs worse. only on extremely intense graphic purposes, such as video editing or video games do I ever see any performance needs at all. it definitely does not help the UI at all.
List of OpenGL programs
There is a list of applications(not games) at the bottom of that page. Those are programs that will run/render faster while using the Nvidia card.
There is a list of applications(not games) at the bottom of that page. Those are programs that will run/render faster while using the Nvidia card.
The Thunderbolt/MiniDisplay port is linked directly to the discrete card, I believe. Try using GFXStatus to change to integrated only while an external monitor is connected.
Not really like saying buy a mac mini because you don't need the camera on an ipad... they're so completely different thats a fairly extreme comparison to mine, which at least are both laptops.
Lots of people on here have made the toss up of whether they need the power of the rmbp, and ended up siding with an air. If it's more than capable of doing what you need it seems a good choice. (I owned a 1st gen one and loved it but it just wasnt powerful enough for getting anything done other than 'leisure' activities)
I think I would have had to seriously consider whether I would have bought the retina had it not had a dedicated gpu.
Lots of people on here have made the toss up of whether they need the power of the rmbp, and ended up siding with an air. If it's more than capable of doing what you need it seems a good choice. (I owned a 1st gen one and loved it but it just wasnt powerful enough for getting anything done other than 'leisure' activities)
I think I would have had to seriously consider whether I would have bought the retina had it not had a dedicated gpu.
What do you use the dedicated GPU for then?
I think the doubling of CPU and RAM of the Retina is felt by many users more than the graphics improvement...
Again, so far I haven't heard any strong arguments for the dgpu in the retina...
----------
It's still an arbitrary limitation though as any external monitor will be easier to drive than the retina display itself, which is driven marvelously by the integrated one.
----------
I see. I haven't noticed a difference in Aperture scrolling.
I think the doubling of CPU and RAM of the Retina is felt by many users more than the graphics improvement...
Again, so far I haven't heard any strong arguments for the dgpu in the retina...
----------
It's still an arbitrary limitation though as any external monitor will be easier to drive than the retina display itself, which is driven marvelously by the integrated one.
----------
I see. I haven't noticed a difference in Aperture scrolling.
I model and render 3d environments for an 'environmental solutions' company.
It's great to be able to do this with a laptop I can chuck in my bag, work on the go, and present realtime 'this is what this ridiculous pylon will look like from your bedroom window' during consultations.
I haven't really checked it out, but I'd imagine the intel gpu would probably struggle doing any of that.
Anyone watched something like timescapes using intel?
Just curious as to whether it would cope with something like that...
It's great to be able to do this with a laptop I can chuck in my bag, work on the go, and present realtime 'this is what this ridiculous pylon will look like from your bedroom window' during consultations.
I haven't really checked it out, but I'd imagine the intel gpu would probably struggle doing any of that.
Anyone watched something like timescapes using intel?
Just curious as to whether it would cope with something like that...
Other than games, the discrete GPU will be used in applications like Final Cut Pro X, when the user is handling multiple video streams at once (remember that FCPX can handle 9 simultaneous streams, while playing one of them at full 1920x1080 resolution). Likewise, anything utilizing 3D rendering will flip over to the discrete GPU instead of the Intel part because of the improved processing power. Other cases where the discrete GPU will be utilized is in situations where the application(s) in use require the use of all available physical memory (complex Photoshop filters, video rendering, etc). In those cases, switching to the discrete GPU frees up that RAM otherwise used by the HD 4000.