Intel's Iris Graphics Boost 13-inch Retina MacBook Pro GPU Performance by 50% or More

[Renzatic]

omg olol tl;dr

And it is a failed device bringing us closer to the day when Microsoft files for bankruptcy.

Ha! That won't happen anytime soon. Times are changing, and MS knows it. That's why they were still able to pull in a record profit, despite the fact their Windows business has taken a slight hit.

Thats what Windows 8 tried to achieve, one OS to rule them all. But you always have to make compromise. When you want both, you will lose a third thing. If you want a Tablet and also USB ports to connect all the old peripherals never designed for mobility, than your battery life will suffer. If you don't create something like AirPrint and make it the only accepted printing method on tablets, than you need to provide drivers for all printers out there. This will bloat your OS and kill the storage space in your 16GB Surface. So you will need to go with 32GB as minimum and loose your price competitiveness. You can create a squashy Touch Cover keyboard but it will never be as sturdy as an actual laptop, which now has kind of the same price as your hybrid device. Any true power user who actual needs the capabilities of a laptop will always go for a laptop and ignore your frankenstein experiment.

You're making the assumption that by one OS, I referring to what we've got now. I'll agree with you insofar that Windows 8 isn't what I'm talking about. It uses a traditional UI with a touch based layer added on top of it that doesn't play to the strengths of either input method. What I'm talking about is a more flexible, more powerful iOS, what I believe will eventually supplant OSX.

Touch is here to stay. There's an entire generation of kids growing up with tablets and smartphones who will come to expect it in every computer they use. These same kids will be using touch and stylus based PCs for the same things we use mouse based PCs for.

Scruff is right in that the Surface Pro shows us the future of touch based hardware, but it's only half the equation. iOS and the iPad are the other half. When these two meet, you're gonna have your powerful multipurpose tablet. One that's both capable and comfortable to use.

In general touch is easier to use. Being able to interact directly with objects onscreen is more natural and intuitive than using a relatively more indirect method such as a mouse or stand alone tablet. We're only gonna see more touch based UIs from here on out, not less.

Thats the majority of people in the world. The same people who never truly needed a desktop.

Yeah? And what's your point? That they should be the only demographic targeted by Apple?

iWork apps are free with all new iPads. That doesn't mean they are or will ever be desktop-class applications.

Why not? There's nothing stopping them from being just as useful as their desktop equivalents besides the current hardware lineup in tablets. They'll require a different UI, but they could easily be just as functional

Touch input limits the precision with which things can be selected and screen size limits the number of selectable choices. These are limitations of the form factor itself.

Only when considering the current form factor. Tablets are gonna be much like PCs in the future, where they'll cover everything from 7 inch entertainment devices all the way up to 32" screens used for CAD applications.

And if you want more precision, then use a stylus. A Wacom stylus with a proper fine tipped end is about 99.9% as accurate as a mouse.

And they keep complaining about no dedicated graphics and no upgradeability because they still misunderstand what a laptop is. Its not a desktop to go, it has its own form factor limitations.

Who are "they"? Anyone willing to drop a grand or more for a desktop replacement laptop is gonna know exactly what they're getting into. There are plenty of portable workstations out there that do an excellent job at performing higher end tasks. The only thing they fall short in are baking renders and other CPU intensive tasks, which will always require as much CPU power that you can throw at them.

But mobility is about removing features, reducing everything to the minimum core of what you need to preserve the most basic functionality together with battery life. Thats what a tablet is and why it can't be a laptop.
Simplicity also means that you can not mess up the system no matter what you try to do. Higher complexity comes with more possibilities for failure and misunderstandings, which is the opposite of simplicity.

Mobility isn't about removing features so much as streamlining them. It's about making a job easier and more elegant, not removing the ability for a device to do a job altogether.

Grandpa is still smart enough to detect complexity where ever it hides and play with it till its broken.

Yeah? My mom and dad have been using Windows on a 5 year old laptop for years. They haven't broken a single thing yet.

I'll admit there comes a point where someone might gain a bit of knowledge, and it becomes a dangerous thing. But hell, those people could screw up iOS given enough time. It's almost impossible to safeguard a platform against someone wanting to do a lot of experimentation against someone with only a little bit of know-how.

But hell, that's how they learn.

Power users always only want the best and thats more like a Mac Pro. Power users settle with less mobility in exchange for more power.

Kinda makes you wonder why the Macbook Pro sells as much as it does, doesn't it? Power users are people who know what they need, and buy the device that best fits them. Some of these people might buy a Mac Pro, some an MBP, and some? They can get by with a Macbook Air. There are plenty of people out there programming and designing webpages on the Air. There are even plenty of people out there doing that very same thing with their iPads.

It isn't solely about having the most power available. It's about being able to do what you want to do.

I don't know, maybe the A7 together with iMovie is already good enough to render movies. But it will never be the very best device to do this kind of tasks. As long as fingers are bigger than pixels mouse pointer will always be more accurate than touch screens.

If you're moving around pixel point UI elements, maybe. I could see something like FCPX being built around a touch based setup and still being just as usable.

Plus, if you need extra precision, you've always got a stylus...which Apple is lagging behind on here.

All your higher computing needs are already taken care off by said desktops. The computer development began with fulfilling higher needs and is propagating into lower needs, finally coming down to people who only need them to update their relationship status on Facebook.

Right. But you're arguing that because Device A current fulfills need X, no one ever needs or wants anything more. And I'm saying that's just not true.

The future of computing is gonna look quite a bit different than it does now. Keyboards and mice are still gonna be around, but they'll be playing their role on a more per application basis, rather than being the main method of input.

Comeon. You're an Apple user. Supposedly one of the crazy ones who didn't want to settle with the status quo if all those commercials are to be believed. Think a bit beyond for a moment, rather than settling on what we've got now because you're too comfortable with it.

Course change for the sake of change is never a good thing, but I can see so many advantages to moving towards touch, I don't see a reason why we should stick with the way things are. More flexibility is what we need.

 

[rMBP2013]

Not quite, the new 2.6 wins 6, the new 2.4 wins 1 (only just) and the old 13" 2.6 wins 2.

I don't understand that last test at all. The blurb under it says that the flash storage in the new 2.6 is faster than that in the old 13" in both read and write and that shows up in the copy time, the first of the three tests, what on earth is going on in the other two tests (compress and decompress a 6Gb folder) which is making the new ones so very slow.

That's because they're comparing a 128 GB hard-drive against the much larger 512 GB hard-drive.

The larger drive has more empty space thereby its performance has increased.

 

[HurryKayne]

Iris Pro 5200 was rumored to be two and a half times as fast as the previous HD 4000. So the 150% gain from IvyBridge to Haswell iGPUs doesn't give you the sensation, but the 40% gain from Haswell to Broadwell iGPUs does?

The switch from dual-core to quad-core would mean an instand doubling in CPU power in certain scenarios, additional to the generational gains. But Intel will ask for more money for these chips and Apple wants to bring the price for the 13-inch Retina down. Not so good premises for this to happen.

Ok but if you were Apple what would you do ?
I see both Macbook Pro Line and Air converging somewhere in the middle.
No discrete everywhere,retina everywhere.
Today we have on top retina+quad,in the middle retina with dual and on the lower dual + no retina.
But next year?Lines frozen?Just spec bumps?
But if Retina goes on Air even as Bto,what could be the selling's of the 13 MbPro Retina?Very low i think.

----------

Iris Pro 5200 was rumored to be two and a half times as fast as the previous HD 4000. So the 150% gain from IvyBridge to Haswell iGPUs doesn't give you the sensation, but the 40% gain from Haswell to Broadwell iGPUs does?

The switch from dual-core to quad-core would mean an instand doubling in CPU power in certain scenarios, additional to the generational gains. But Intel will ask for more money for these chips and Apple wants to bring the price for the 13-inch Retina down. Not so good premises for this to happen.

The fact is that or Apple will discontinue the Air 13 to make 13 Pro Retina having a sense or Apple will going to discontinue 13 Pro Retina in order to put the Retina on the 13 Air while maintaining the 11 with a non Retina display as entry level.
I know pro machines are (were) different than consumer machines but the limit is very thin in the middle this time.Just (for the normal consumer sensations,me as well)the retina differentiates the two 13 on the shelves while Air is thinner.

 

[Gudi]

Ok but if you were Apple what would you do?

Oh I think Apple is fine with having a noticeable power and price difference between 13 and 15-inch Pro. Only one Pro with dGPU and quad-core CPU for the most demanding customers is enough.

I see both Macbook Pro Line and Air converging somewhere in the middle. No discrete everywhere, retina everywhere.

Not so fast. Yes the trend is going to no discrete everywhere (but the most expensive model). But I don't see Retina everywhere just yet. Apple is still selling a 13-inch Pro without Retina. So even the Pro line is not fully Retina and the Airs are supported to be cheaper alternatives. A better iGPU to drive a Retina display also costs more money besides the costs of the display itself. While battery life seems to be less of a concern, heat remains an issue in smaller machines. It is not the same thing as with ARM CPUs where you can put the fastest A7 in a phone without a fan and be fine.

Today we have on top retina+quad,in the middle retina with dual and on the lower dual + no retina. But next year? Lines frozen? Just spec bumps?

Because of TDP constraints there will remain a measurable difference in CPU and GPU speed with every step in size. The transition to Retina will take much longer than with iDevices and we will never reach a point where the difference between 13 and 15-inch Pro is just the screen size and nothing else.

But if Retina goes on Air even as BTO, what could be the selling's of the 13 MbPro Retina? Very low i think. The fact is that or Apple will discontinue the Air 13 to make 13 Pro Retina having a sense or Apple will going to discontinue 13 Pro Retina in order to put the Retina on the 13 Air while maintaining the 11 with a non Retina display as entry level.

Apple will never discontinue a product to "help" another product to make more "sense". The 13-inch Air and 13-inch Pro are very different machines each with their own customers. The Air might be (or become) more popular than the Pro, but something always is. Who the hell is buying yellow iPhones?

 

[HurryKayne]

13 dual Air Retina or 13 quad retina in the 2014 or just a spec bump of both?
I don't know,what its really clear for me after having found that
even the 15 has soldered ram is that its time for an hackintosh .
I don't accept to buy a 2000 machine without having the chance
to replace my ram.
Its ridiculous.

 

[SmileyDude]

I don't accept to buy a 2000 machine without having the chance
to replace my ram.
Its ridiculous.

Being someone that typically maxes out the RAM on a machine when I buy it, with or without user accessible slots, I don't find this to be too ridiculous. I have no desire to go in there and replace the RAM -- by the time the RAM is the limiting factor on one of these machines, you're probably facing other issues. Unless you get the baseline model with 4GB. In that case, yeah, bad idea.

 

[HurryKayne]

Being someone that typically maxes out the RAM on a machine when I buy it, with or without user accessible slots, I don't find this to be too ridiculous. I have no desire to go in there and replace the RAM -- by the time the RAM is the limiting factor on one of these machines, you're probably facing other issues. Unless you get the baseline model with 4GB. In that case, yeah, bad idea.

Sorry but no.
My issues are to manage the so called "wallet emptiness tendencies"
which is why i use to work and that's also why
i fill it waiting-programming the expense for the machine i desire-need.
Then to last my bought a little i try to enlong its life by maxing out
memory and hard drives through the months if not the years.
With new AirBookPro 15 this is not possible anymore.
This logic to make becoming a pro machine an expensive Ipad
with steroids ( talking about the thin to hell attitude while building)
doesn't buy with me.

 

[Pikkuroope]

What do i really need to do more music, in an ideal world? a macbook pro. so what have I been doing for the last 9 months. Saving moolah every month to put towards it. I am within reaching distance of getting the basic 15" which is going to fulfil my needs with BTO on the ram, and CPU. However, I really cannot be waiting for another month for me to get the money together for the extra GFX card. (this macbook pro im writing on, has a screen that wobbles, literally.)

You might need a Macbook Pro, but you do not need dedicated graphics for making music. You benefit from the quad-core CPU, but not the graphics.

So, yes people shouldn't complain...(I certainly won't be, the laptop i'm gonna be getting in 2 months time-all being well, will be the millennium falcon to my bicycle.) However you can't really make blanket statements like. "Also, those saying that making people pay a few extra hundred bucks for the better one is a huge mistake. How is it that someone can afford the $2000 version but not the $2600? Seriously, if you can put $2000 in a laptop no problem but not a few extra hundred bucks, you shouldn't consider putting the two grand in it in the first place."

However exaggerated my statements might have been, I can still say that if one cannot somewhat comfortably afford to up the budget by a few extra hundreds, one should not think of spending two grand in a computer. If such a purchase makes you live on the edge of your finances, you should not use such an amount of money on a computer that expensive. Seriously, if it puts considerable financial pressure on you, don't do it. And for you specifically, an entry-level 13" rMBP can make music no problem, despite of what pro applications you use.

I would happily pay if I could, but honestly, my situation doesn't currently support that, and I suspect i'm not the only one in a similar situation, as such I woulda seen the addition of a lower grade card to the 750m as a huge bonus on my side, even if it was only 1Gb of RAM.
However on the flipside of all that I have seen/heard pretty damned good things about the new Iris Pro, besides all that, I seriously doubt that Apple would take such a huge leap backwards in the performance of their biggest n baddest laptop.

First of all, you don't need the dedicated graphics and actually are better off without them if you don't game on it.

At the end of the day, Apple know what they are doing, and know their customer requirements. I am confident that the Iris Pro will be more than sufficient for about 50-60% of people needing a new MBP this year!

I doubt that 40% of people who need a new MBP would really need the dedicated graphics.

----

People in this thread seriously underestimate the capabilities of the Iris Pro. As if there was only one component that goes by the name of integrated graphics and that sucks and therefore Iris Pro must suck as well. Then they go about saying that they do heavy 3D stuff and therefore must get the 750m. I doubt half the people have even thought of looking at any benchmarks.

----------

Sorry but no.
My issues are to manage the so called "wallet emptiness tendencies"
which is why i use to work and that's also why
i fill it waiting-programming the expense for the machine i desire-need.
Then to last my bought a little i try to enlong its life by maxing out
memory and hard drives through the months if not the years.
With new AirBookPro 15 this is not possible anymore.
This logic to make becoming a pro machine an expensive Ipad
with steroids ( talking about the thin to hell attitude while building)
doesn't buy with me.

How many years are we talking about here? In how many years will you run out of practically 12GB of ram? 8GB on Mavericks equals 12GB. This is progress, modularity is not the only way to go. (Neither is hardware.) If you need modularity, you are in the wrong market here. It is clear that Apple is promoting a different approach.

 

[yrelyk]

Not so bad at all.

First off, I own the previous generation 13-inch Retina Macbook Pro. My system has the 3Ghz i7/8GB/256GB. According to the benchmarks, the 2.6Ghz Ivy beats the 2.6Ghz Haswell CPU wise (not GPU). Since I mostly use Adobe apps and not games I am sure the 3Ghz Ivy in mine KILLS the 2.8Ghz Haswell in the new system. Also I had problems with software incompatibilities with Mavericks so I am glad that I can run Mountain Lion still while things work them self out. The only things I would benefit from the new system are the battery life, the 16GB ram (for the same price), the better battery life, and maybe even the faster SSD (maybe). So what if its 0.04" thinner.

Now I want to comment on the new entry level models of both the 13-inch and 15-inch. We have to remember that not only professionals buy macs...thus consumers will welcome the lower prices and for the light use they need less RAM and do not need dedicated graphics. Consumers may want the retina (or just higher resolution) or even just a 15-inch screen instead of the 13 on the air (consumer line). The entry level 13-inch is also a great step up from the 13-inch cMBP for the screen (which is the apple's highest selling model). We also have to remember that this is not the first time apple has not included dedicated graphics on the entry level 15-inch...they did so during the unibody Macbook Pro.

</My Two Cents>

 

[MWPULSE]

You might need a Macbook Pro, but you do not need dedicated graphics for making music. You benefit from the quad-core CPU, but not the graphics.


However exaggerated my statements might have been, I can still say that if one cannot somewhat comfortably afford to up the budget by a few extra hundreds, one should not think of spending two grand in a computer. If such a purchase makes you live on the edge of your finances, you should not use such an amount of money on a computer that expensive. Seriously, if it puts considerable financial pressure on you, don't do it. And for you specifically, an entry-level 13" rMBP can make music no problem, despite of what pro applications you use.


First of all, you don't need the dedicated graphics and actually are better off without them if you don't game on it.


I doubt that 40% of people who need a new MBP would really need the dedicated graphics.

----

People in this thread seriously underestimate the capabilities of the Iris Pro. As if there was only one component that goes by the name of integrated graphics and that sucks and therefore Iris Pro must suck as well. Then they go about saying that they do heavy 3D stuff and therefore must get the 750m. I doubt half the people have even thought of looking at any benchmarks.

For a lot of music production a 15" quite neccesary for the extra screen real estate (definitely in my case, I am quite comfortable with the extra weight given that I also watch movies on the laptop I have atm, and edit images occasionally)

I have allotted the amount of money I need for my MacBook Pro with the spec that I need, and know that it's a significant investment already. (Much like I did when I bought my original MacBook Pro in 08, as a student) I have no qualms with the spec machine I'm getting, but I'm saying if neccesary I can go with the extra gfx card.

It's inevitable that GPUs are gonna start to be utilised for their better compute capacities for things not related to images/graphics soon enough. (We have been seeing this in super computers for decades already)

At the end of the day sommat like a MacBook pro is an investment. Which you are hoping is gonna pay off. In one way or another..be it via the images you make, the documents you write, the music you make. For me, I'm very used to (as a musician at least) saving up and investing what little I have into my craft, maybe you think that's daft n stupid, but that's your opinion.

The same analogy could be made for cars-my sister saved up over the summer bought a simple second hand car for a grand, and is happy, she doesn't have any money from the summer left, but that's not the point she can now use it to get to her placements she teaching at uni-hence, an investment.

 

[yrelyk]

You might need a Macbook Pro, but you do not need dedicated graphics for making music. You benefit from the quad-core CPU, but not the graphics.


However exaggerated my statements might have been, I can still say that if one cannot somewhat comfortably afford to up the budget by a few extra hundreds, one should not think of spending two grand in a computer. If such a purchase makes you live on the edge of your finances, you should not use such an amount of money on a computer that expensive. Seriously, if it puts considerable financial pressure on you, don't do it. And for you specifically, an entry-level 13" rMBP can make music no problem, despite of what pro applications you use.


First of all, you don't need the dedicated graphics and actually are better off without them if you don't game on it.


I doubt that 40% of people who need a new MBP would really need the dedicated graphics.

----

People in this thread seriously underestimate the capabilities of the Iris Pro. As if there was only one component that goes by the name of integrated graphics and that sucks and therefore Iris Pro must suck as well. Then they go about saying that they do heavy 3D stuff and therefore must get the 750m. I doubt half the people have even thought of looking at any benchmarks.

For a lot of music production a 15" quite neccesary for the extra screen real estate (definitely in my case, I am quite comfortable with the extra weight given that I also watch movies on the laptop I have atm, and edit images occasionally)

I have allotted the amount of money I need for my MacBook Pro with the spec that I need, and know that it's a significant investment already. (Much like I did when I bought my original MacBook Pro in 08, as a student) I have no qualms with the spec machine I'm getting, but I'm saying if neccesary I can go with the extra gfx card.

It's inevitable that GPUs are gonna start to be utilised for their better compute capacities for things not related to images/graphics soon enough. (We have been seeing this in super computers for decades already)

At the end of the day sommat like a MacBook pro is an investment. Which you are hoping is gonna pay off. In one way or another..be it via the images you make, the documents you write, the music you make. For me, I'm very used to (as a musician at least) saving up and investing what little I have into my craft, maybe you think that's daft n stupid, but that's your opinion.

The same analogy could be made for cars-my sister saved up over the summer bought a simple second hand car for a grand, and is happy, she doesn't have any money from the summer left, but that's not the point she can now use it to get to her placements she teaching at uni-hence, an investment.

I would say go for the refurbished 15-inch Retina Macbook Pro with 2.3/8GB/256GB for music production. It actually does have a dedicated GPU, which we know is not needed for music production (I use ProTools myself, but for film). But the refurb is only $1600...which should fit better in the budget. The only real thing he would be sacrificing is battery life. But saving $400 is nice and you get the same warranty with a refurb and can purchase AppleCare.

I am also very happy with my previous gen 13-inch Retina MBP. The 3Ghz Ivy i7 runs ProTools and Logic quite well...and everything fits on the monitor great at 1680x1050 (I can set it higher, but need binoculars to read it. I am also stoked that my i7 beats the 2.8Ghz i7 by atleast 25% for CPU related tasks. I hope whatever the budget, he decides to go with a mac. I really hate working with Windows.