Iris Pro vs. 750m

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by gothamm, Oct 22, 2013.

  1. gothamm macrumors 6502a

    Nov 18, 2007
    This thread had to be made, so figured i'd make it. Just how much of a performance boost are we talking here? my impression is that the 750m is only 10-15% better than 650m. And the 650m is SLIGHTLY better than iris pro.

    So, is it even worth it to opt for the 750m?
  2. leman macrumors G3

    Oct 14, 2008
    Why wouldn't you instead use one of the 10 other active threads discussing the same issue?
  3. bill-p macrumors 68000

    Jul 23, 2011
    650M is NOT "slightly" better than Iris Pro.

    Iris Pro is about on par with 640M.

    650M at stock is 30-40% faster than 640M, but since the one in the rMBP from last year was overclocked, it can be up to 50-60% faster than 640M, and that difference should apply to Iris Pro as well. In fact, the difference should be more pronounced at higher resolutions.

    Anandtech's benchmark showed this.

    750M would show the same difference by convention.

    If Apple didn't think a dGPU would be faster than Iris Pro, they wouldn't stick one in. As it is, it's clear how Apple feels about the situation.
  4. famalka, Oct 22, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2013

    famalka macrumors newbie

    Oct 22, 2013
    No way. The 750M is only 10% to 15% faster than the 650M.
  5. King Shady macrumors 6502

    King Shady

    Aug 22, 2010
    Princeton, NJ
    You guys are forgetting that the "650m" in all of our 2012 rMBP's are actually much faster. Most reports claim that the 650m is really a 660m+. I'm sticking with this baby for another year and then I'll probably upgrade to Broadwell + nVidia's latest gpu (which should be much faster than the 750m). The 750m is not a significant bump at all compared to the "650m" in mine (about 10% increase).
  6. theSeb macrumors 604


    Aug 10, 2010
    Poole, England
    The 650M in the 2012 rMBP is not the same as in the benchmarks on notebookcheck. It is an over-clocked version made specially for Apple, as has already been mentioned in this thread.
  7. Vanilla35 macrumors 68040


    Apr 11, 2013
    Washington D.C.
    Basically, this year's 750M is the same performance as last years 650M - except you pay $600 more to get it :D:D:D:D
  8. kappaknight macrumors 68000


    Mar 5, 2009
    How do we know the 750M hasn't been overclocked as well? I honestly don't know - I haven't been following this at all.
  9. justin216 macrumors 6502


    Mar 31, 2004
    Tampa, FL
    Until the new rMBP is benchmarked, we'll not know. Folks are making "worst case scenario" conjectures based on the stock parts. Apple does tend to get the best binned parts they can and clock them higher, along with using models using GDDR5 memory (whereas many benchmarks out there now are lower-performing GDDR3 parts).

    It'll probably only take a day or two for more accurate benchmarks to hit the net. If you're on the fence, you could wait and see how it really falls out before making your purchase decision.
  10. Evil Merino macrumors newbie

    Oct 22, 2013

    This is a huge point.

    People have all these conjectures using benchmarks of a 650m vs. a STOCK 750m. And following the trend that apple used a higher binned/higher clocked 650m in the previous gen of rMBP, we can assume they followed suit in terms of the newly released versions.

    Crossing my fingers, hoping the 750m in the rMBP is a little more powerful than just a stock 750m.

Share This Page