Iris performance between 1866Mhz / 2133Mhz?

[Antairez]

Exactly how much difference in gaming performance there would be when comparing the base model 13" pro Iris 540, with the maxed out version of the i7 Iris 550? (faster RAM, higher clock and TDP)
Would 16GB contribute to higher FPS in games?

 

[Ma2k5]

A few FPS perhaps, the bigger difference is more to do with the TDP, not the frequencies/clock speeds or the 540 vs 550.

The 15w non-touch may not even reach the maximum clock speeds on CPU/GPU's, at least not for any long period of time, when strained, while the 28w will.

For burst performances, the difference between the two will be negligible, as would if there isn't that much stress/load applied to the CPU/GPU. If both are worked quite a bit, and for over several minutes/hours continuously, there will be a noticable performance difference between the two - the touch-bar model is almost double the TPD of the non-touch.

There are benchmarks out there but I don't believe they tell the whole story, as people usually have multiple things running, or have things running for pro-longed periods of time - and as a result, several bench marks make the performance gap between the 15w and 28w much narrower than it really is.

 

[Antairez]

A few FPS perhaps, the bigger difference is more to do with the TDP, not the frequencies/clock speeds or the 540 vs 550.

The 15w non-touch may not even reach the maximum clock speeds on CPU/GPU's, at least not for any long period of time, when strained, while the 28w will.

For burst performances, the difference between the two will be negligible, as would if there isn't that much stress/load applied to the CPU/GPU. If both are worked quite a bit, and for over several minutes/hours continuously, there will be a noticable performance difference between the two - the touch-bar model is almost double the TPD of the non-touch.

There are benchmarks out there but I don't believe they tell the whole story, as people usually have multiple things running, or have things running for pro-longed periods of time - and as a result, several bench marks make the performance gap between the 15w and 28w much narrower than it really is.

Why would the 15w throttle while the 28w won't? Is it due to better cooling or is it because 28w is just better made? Or is it simply because 15w has to stay at 15w?

 

[Ma2k5]

Why would the 15w throttle while the 28w won't? Is it due to better cooling or is it because 28w is just better made? Or is it simply because 15w has to stay at 15w?

Even 28w would eventually throttle, but it has a much higher temperature threshold than a 15w. The tDP is the average maximum power a processor can dissipate. So you could say, although clock for clock there isn't much difference between the two when factoring turbo boosts, the reality is a huge difference.

At the same time, it might be no or negligible difference, depends how much power you use and how often/how long.

 

[Softwarez]

Faster ram gives negligible difference in gaming performance.

Strictly comparing Iris 540 to Iris 550, maybe a difference of a few FPS at best.

Like others have said, where it matters is the TDP. The 28W will run at full speed for a longer period of time since it will throttle (slow down due to heat) much less compared to the 15W.

The difference in the TDP is set by Intel. The 15W will throttle the moment it hits it's 15W power envelope, and the 28W will throttle once it hits 28W. As for why they do this, it comes to performance binning at the silicon level and is quite complex. They essentially set different TDP's to meet the power characteristics of each individual chip, so as to prolong the life of each chip under use.

Just curious though, why even consider the mac for gaming? If gaming is a primary use case, there are much better alternatives out there.

 

[leman]

Faster ram gives negligible difference in gaming performance.

Don't forget that the RAM in this case is also used as VRAM, and given that the IGPs are normally bandwidth-limited in the first place, faster RAM can play a substantial role. But I don't think that one can really tell without a benchmark.

 

[Softwarez]

Don't forget that the RAM in this case is also used as VRAM, and given that the IGPs are normally bandwidth-limited in the first place, faster RAM can play a substantial role. But I don't think that one can really tell without a benchmark.

Fair point, the faster ram might result in a few FPS as well.

 

[davidcmc]

Just curious though, why even consider the mac for gaming? If gaming is a primary use case, there are much better alternatives out there.

Those Iris 540 and 550 are very good for some low graphics demanding games.

Macs just aren't for "heavy" gaming. Even though, this phrase is about to change with Thunderbolt 3 eGPU.

 

[Antairez]

I work on macOS and game on Windows. I'm fed up with hackintosh so no that's not an option. I also hate switching computers so I will spend all my time on the machine I love. I won't be playing demanding titles but I do expect games that I enjoy can be played at fairly high FPS and settings just so I can enjoy. Most of the games I play released before 2012. Like diablo, cs go, total war series (the old ones).
[doublepost=1478825060][/doublepost]I would also like to point out I maxed out my 13 inch purchase because I worry total wars could be the deal breaker here. It does sound like a both GPU and CPU intensive title. I also have some hope, not much, just some, on the newest release Warhammer. I have no idea how it will perform.

 

[Ender17]

Might be a few FPS difference but unlikely you would notice without benchmarking it