Is it Physically impossible for the 13" to have dedicated graphics?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by SolidSnak3, Oct 25, 2012.

  1. SolidSnak3 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    #1
    Like the tittle says^
    Is it physically impossible for the 13' retina and non retina macbook pros to have a dedicated graphics card?
    I m asking because i own a ultra Asus laptop and it has a gt620 on it as well as the intel hd4000. And its even thinner than the rMBP.
    Why wont apple put a dedicated gpu inside? is it because its impossible ? or they are too lazy?
    Thanks for the answer.
     
  2. Mr MM macrumors 65816

    Mr MM

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    #2
    Your notebook comes with:

    1)small battery.

    2)ULV CPU.

    3)Quite irrelevant gpu.

    If you look at the mobo design no you cant put in there with this dual fan cooling system that takes a lot of space and the battery. what they could have done is to really use that 2.5'' bay that they put in there and instead they wasted the space with that second hand caddy
     
  3. InlawBiker macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    #3
    I believe the main reason is market segmentation. If you wanna play games or use 3d then you have to buy the more expensive model.

    There are a few things that can change the market coming down the pipe. #1 is the Intel CPUs will receive better and faster on-board GPU's every generation. The jump from HD3000 to 4000 was pretty drastic.

    #2 is the external ports are getting fast enough to (possibly) bring to market external GPU's that plug into the Thunderbolt port.

    Of course, the games will keep getting more demanding too.
     
  4. gbit macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2012
    #4
    yeah sure nobody can do that
    eg asus will never have something like that
     
  5. Exana macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    #5
    The Asus you point to weights 1.3 Kg like MacBook Air 13.3". So of course it has a small battery and not an overpowered GPU. According to the space waisted for a 2.5 inch bay, it's possible to place a GPU.
     
  6. MCAsan macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #6
    Too lazy? You mean the company that is worth more than most countries and rules the market segments of smartphones, laptops, tablets....etc.? Gee, it never occured to me that kind of growth is a result of be lazy. ;)
     
  7. Mr MM macrumors 65816

    Mr MM

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    #7
    Its 1.4kg, its still 200g less than the rmbp 13.

    The gpu in there is irrelevant. Dont think that I dont like the idea, but if the OP was serious, he wouldnt compare something made to compete with the air, with the rmbp.

    The OP should have pointed out the vaio S13. While larger than the rmbp 13, it still carries a good mid range gpu.

    Indeed they could also have used the space in there for the gpu. That bay is a waste of space. and more 8gb in there

    But the thing is, the cmbp are going to die. They need the cmbp 13, its their best seller, how to achieve that with the rmbp 13? one of the ways is to use a HDD in there next year.
     
  8. pgiguere1, Oct 25, 2012
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2012

    pgiguere1 macrumors 68020

    pgiguere1

    Joined:
    May 28, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    #8
    You can have:

    1. Retina display
    2. Thin
    3. 35W (non-ULV) CPU
    4. Decent battery life
    5. Discrete GPU

    Pick four of them.

    Apple chose 1,2,3 and 4. What would you have chosen?

    Asus chose a good display that' still not quite Retina, thin, they didn't go with a 35W CPU, got a good battery life and chose discrete GPU but that is barely better than Intel HD 4000 (a rebranded non-Kepler GT 520M).

    If you wanted a GPU that's considerably better than Intel HD 4000, something like a GT 640M, it would have been possible if the laptop either wasn't Retina to need less battery life, either by making it as thick as a cMBP or by using a MacBook Air CPU and lowering resolution a bit too.
     
  9. mac jones macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    #9
    Yes it's because they're lazy? :confused:

    Maybe they need fresh coffee. Always helps I say!
     
  10. Purant macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2012
    #10
    1,3,4,5

    But Apple keeps chosing form over function every time.
     
  11. Exana macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    #11
    I don't agree ! WoW running @ 1366x768 or similar :
    MacBook Pro Retina : 36 fps
    Asus UX32VD : 98 fps

    Source : http://www.laptopmag.com/review/laptop/apple_macbook_pro_with_retina_display_13-inch.aspx
     
  12. Maczor macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Location:
    LU, Switzerland
    #12
  13. pgiguere1, Oct 27, 2012
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2012

    pgiguere1 macrumors 68020

    pgiguere1

    Joined:
    May 28, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    #13
    GT 620M (or 520M, it's the same thing) :
    3DMark Vantage: 4,235
    3DMark 06: 7,470
    PCMark Vantage: 5,143
    Cinebench R10: 4,963

    Intel HD 4000:
    3DMark Vantage: 3,212
    3DMark 06: 4,860
    PCMark Vantage: 7,425
    Cinebench R10: 4,855

    GT 650M (factory OC'ed in the rMBP):
    3DMark Vantage: 9,466
    3DMark 06: 13,719
    PCMark Vantage: 10,935
    Cinebench R10: 6,252

    Or just go check gaming results on notebookcheck (at same graphical settings and resolution obviously). The GT620M is maybe 40% faster than Intel HD 4000 while the GT650M is around 3.5x as fast.

    I'm not sure putting a GT 620M is really worth the extra battery drain for results that are marginally better than integrated. A GT 640M would be worth it, but putting a 620M seems like a marketing move to me, just so they can say "our utrabook has discrete graphics" just for the heck of dropping the "discrete graphics" buzzword.
     
  14. neteng101 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2009
    #14
    There's all that empty space where the SSD drive is at. Surely they could have found a way to include a dedicated GPU if they really truly wanted to do it.

    Impossible? - NO.

    But the will and desire clearly wasn't there.
     
  15. pgiguere1 macrumors 68020

    pgiguere1

    Joined:
    May 28, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    #15
    Finding space is one thing, but having a proper cooling system is another. Putting a dGPU under the trackpad would not have been a solution. There's no room for a fan, intakes aren't oriented in that direction and people would literally burn their fingers while gaming.
     
  16. Exana macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    #16
    3D Mark is crapy any one know it. PC Mark score depends on CPU far more than on GPU. According to Cinebrench R10, GeForce 650m is only about 50% faster than HD 4000, so it also should be useless... :rolleyes: In games, 40% to 100% more fps is rather nice. And dual GPU did not affect battery life as dGPU is off most time. So a least a GeForce GT 620 should have been used on this Retina 13,3.

    So what ?
     
  17. skippymac macrumors 6502a

    skippymac

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2010
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    #17
    I think you'd have a hard time running a 13' screen with a single graphics card :p
     
  18. Maczor macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Location:
    LU, Switzerland
    #18
    Please come back when you understand the difference between screen resolution and in-game graphic settings and how these affect FPS. Until then, we have nothing to talk about...
     
  19. pgiguere1 macrumors 68020

    pgiguere1

    Joined:
    May 28, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    #19
    You dismissed all benchmarks expect the one that proves your point. If what you're going to do is gaming, compare actual gaming results then, not synthetic benchmarks.

    At the same settings, a GT 650M will get you around 3x the framerate of an Intel HD 4000 in games, not 50% more.
     

Share This Page