Iris Pro Has Been Very Impressive!

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by MikeVera, May 9, 2014.

  1. MikeVera macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2014
    #1
    I previously had a Macbook Air (mid 2013 Haswell), and I was pretty impressed with the way it handled some light OSX gaming (games like Bioshock Infinite were able to run on low settings pretty well). I figured it wasn't bad for a integrated GPU.

    Anyways, I picked up a base Retina MBP 15 inch. I had some reticence spending that much on laptop with a iGPU...

    After installing windows I must say it's a very impressive iGPU! It handles games like Fallout 3, Old Republic, Bioshock Infinite, Planetside 2 etc at higher resolutions, with a good amount of effects enabled (with anti-aliasing being the obvious limiting factor).

    I play a descent amount of Old Republic, and while it was able to run at native rez, I chose to run it 1680 x 1050, where I could bump up most the effects to max ad keep 50-60+ FPS (sometimes 70+).

    Point is, if you are planning to use your Macbook Pro for video editing, sound engineering, production, academic scientific use, CADD, or day to day tasks, etc, and are worried that the integrated GPU wont be able to hang for some moderate gaming (and don't have an additional $600 to get the discrete GPU), fear not!!!!

    Intel did a great job with the Iris Pro!!! I don't know if it's the small cache of RAM, or the extra execution units, but it is surprisingly potent! I'm also impressed how they packed it all on the same die as the i7, without having serious heat issues under load.

    If you are considering the 15 inch rMBP, do it!
     
  2. Hieveryone macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    #2
    I can second this. I have a MBPr 13" late 2013 and the graphics are *excellent*

    I am able to play Call of Duty at full resolution smoothly :apple:
     
  3. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #3
    I went for the GT750M variant because:

    1. I use CUDA-assisted software.
    2. I play Battlefield 4 at high-ultra settings. The GT750M lets me play at 1680x1050, mix of high and ultra, FXAA and 16xAF with frame rates of around 47-50 fps on average, with the lowest being 35 and shooting up into the 60s easily in quite a number of situations. The Iris Pro can't handle that.

    ----------

    CoD isn't a graphics-intensive game, it's a very old game. To accurately measure your GPU performance with the games of today's generation, you should measure it via the OpenGL test in Cinebench R15 or by downloading Battlefield 4, install it via Boot Camp, and play it.
     
  4. MikeVera thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2014
    #4
    Oh ya, by all means the GT750M is much better equipped for serious gaming...

    Usually in the past Intel's integrated cards (even the majority of AMD's APUs) have been very lack luster. The Iris Pro, however, has a little bit of bite to it.

    If serious gaming (or GPU offloading in programs like REDCINE X) are a primary use of your computer, then the GT750M is DEF the winner. For those of us that want to casually game on our macbooks (where the i7 is sufficient for everything else), the Iris pro is no slouch!

     
  5. thundersteele macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2011
    Location:
    Switzerland
    #5
    I find the Iris GPU (not Pro) in the 13'' rMBP somewhat on the weak side. I play some Diablo 3, which is not a demanding game, and I really have to cut back on details and resolution in order to get acceptable FPS. This iGPU is no match for my three years old 6750M in my 15''.

    The Iris Pro in the 15'' is easily 50%-100% faster in gaming benchmarks, so it seems to handle some casual gaming well. The 750M is of course quite a bit stronger.

    Also for only about $2k you can now get a proper TB2 enclosure and drive your Mac with an external 780 TI GPU. Endless possibilities.
     
  6. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #6
    I've not heard too much negative with the iGPU, so much so, I don't mind going to that for my next MBP when the times comes.
     
  7. The Mercurian macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2012
    #7
    Only $2k. Only ?!?! :eek:
     
  8. MikeVera thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2014
    #8

    Haha I was thinking the same thing!
     
  9. got556 macrumors 6502

    got556

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Location:
    Indiana
    #9
    LOL agreed! For "only $2K" I could build one hell of a gaming rig running Windows. For "only $2k" you could more than likely grab 16gb RAM, a 840EVO SSD, i5 or i7 Haswell, and a 780Ti or the likes....

    Maybe it's just me, but if I'm gaming, that means I'm at home, sitting for a good bit, so why not just build a gaming rig at that point. Don't get me wrong, I love the convenience of gaming on OSX or bootcamp but c'mon, at $2K I gotta lean towards a dedicated system.

    Now if that external dGPU was more or less $7-800 to set up, I might weigh my options a little more. But even then you can build a entry level but still very worthy gaming rig w/ an i5-44XX, 256gb SSD, 16gb RAM, and top of the line Nvidia for $850 (minus peripherals).
     
  10. Hieveryone macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    #10
    I'm a little lost here. Why do people spend thousands on gaming computers?

    An Xbox One or PS4 is really good and it's like 500. Are these computers better graphics wise?
     
  11. thundersteele macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2011
    Location:
    Switzerland
    #11
    The $2k solution was of course just a proof of concept ;) In case you haven't seen it, here is the link:
    http://forum.techinferno.com/diy-e-...sonnet-echo-express-iii-d-win8.html#post91182

    On the other hand, if there was a reasonable solution in the $500-$800 range (with a 765M or similar), I would choose that any day over the gaming rig. I'm just not a fan of huge PC setups anymore.
     
  12. whitedragon101 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    #12
    Yes they are.

    The new XBox One and PS4 consoles are basically PCs in boxes built to a price point. The advantage is the games are tuned for the hardware so you get the best out of it. Also they are usually subsidised and they make a lot of them, so it is usually good value for the hardware you get. (Its the games where you pay through the nose).

    However, a PC gaming rig has no limit to what you can spend and can be hugely more powerful. A $2,000 gaming rig will crush an XBox One or PS4, but to be fair it costs 4 times as much.
     
  13. Hieveryone macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    #13

    What?? Are you serious?

    I play Titan Fall on my Xbox One on an 80 inch screen.

    The graphics are IMPECCABLE! How can a computer be better?
     
  14. chrizzz09 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 18, 2013
    Location:
    Germany
    #14
    Iris Pro Has Been Very Impressive!


    Well first of all Titanfall runs only on 792p on the Xbox One. On PC you can turn up the resolution as high your PC lets you. Minimum 1080p. Besides that you can turn on 4xMSAA and turn texture resolution and all graphical effects on ultra.

    If you would saw it on PC , you wouldn't say that the graphics on the xbox are Impeccable! You would say otherwise ;)
     
  15. whitedragon101 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    #15
    chrizzz09 answered this above.

    However don't worry about it. The key to most things is buy what you can afford and be happy. Its only when you start comparing you feel disappointed. For example when I was projector shopping I wanted to look at the £10,000 projector just for fun when I was buying a £700 one. The sales guy said don't ; "the one you picked is amazing, but as soon as you look at the picture on the £10,000 one you will feel its second best."
     
  16. ha1o2surfer macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    #16
    I think he/she is trolling.. lol
     

Share This Page