Is the HD4000 underpowered for retina screen?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by bobbydd21, Jul 5, 2013.

  1. bobbydd21 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    #1
    I've been reading a lot of different thinks on this question. Some say the reason for the UI lag is that the HD4000 is not powerful enough for retina screens and others say it is just fine for retina screens and it is just a OS issue. Therefore I was wondering what you guys think on the subject.
     
  2. falconeight Guest

    falconeight

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
  3. BlackbookGuy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    #3
    That's my question as well. I need a laptop for school in Sept, and I want the 13 inch retina macbook.

    I would like to just get one now, but if there will be meaningful increases in gpu power and battery life, I will wait and get the 13 retina mbp in Sept-Oct... but it will be annoying to wait those extra weeks into the school year.

    I've read both that the HD 4000 is totally fine and that it is less than one might wish.

    We'll see.
     
  4. munakib, Jul 5, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 6, 2013

    munakib macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 22, 2011
    #4
  5. dazlicous macrumors 6502a

    dazlicous

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Location:
    Manchester
    #5
    It's not the best but don't think it's underpowered to power a retina screen.
    The issues regarding the ui lag seem to be resolved in Mavericks so IMO its more of a software bug


    If you can wait I would deffo wait. The 13" is gonna get a big improvement in GFX
     
  6. jabbr macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    #6
    yes, the HD 4000 doesn't push the retina resolution acceptably, imo. This is especially true if you plan on using the scaled resolutions that emulate 1440x900 or 1680x1050, which is the what I want to run smoothly on the 13. iTunes even lags on the "best for retina" setting when you scroll through albums.
     
  7. w00tini macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2008
    #7
    I haven't noticed any lag either. I've had the rMBP since launch day 2012
     
  8. tmiw, Jul 5, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 6, 2013

    tmiw macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #8
    OP should play with the ones at the local Apple Store and determine that for him/herself. I did, and I did notice stuttering (but only at the scaled resolutions and mostly only when I had a ton of Safari windows open while using Mission Control). From what I hear, it's CPU limited and not GPU limited, which jives with what people have been saying about Mavericks fixing it.
     
  9. sofianito macrumors 65816

    sofianito

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2011
    Location:
    Spain
    #9
    I would definitely say it is GPU instead of CPU issue.

    Sure, Mavericks will bring some optimizations related to windows z-level by refreshing only top-level windows visible areas, but without the Iris graphics, the 13" would likely still suffer...
     
  10. B... macrumors 68000

    B...

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
  11. smakdown61 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2008
    #11
    They can improve the OS X UI with software tweaks, but good luck running any 3rd party graphic intensive software with that 4000 (or pushing to multiple hi res monitors).
     
  12. Zeov macrumors 6502a

    Zeov

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Location:
    Odense
    #12
    First few weeks people talked about lag, everyone said "dont worry, it's a software problem, easily fixed within a week or two"


    now it's almost one year after and still nothing has happened, i think it's a hardware issue.

    Source: Logic.
     
  13. tmiw macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #13
    Nothing has happened?
     
  14. falconeight Guest

    falconeight

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    #14
    When I notice lag I will call it a problem. Right now its just smooth as butter.
     
  15. jcpb, Jul 5, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 6, 2013

    jcpb macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2012
    #15
    It's so incapable of driving my 1800v screen! OMG! It LAGS so much! I can't stand it! I'm selling this wretched laptop!

    Joke's over. No, there is no lag, and I use it as my daily driver.
     
  16. mentaluproar macrumors 68000

    mentaluproar

    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    Location:
    Ohio, USA
    #16
    The 4000 is a great basic GPU. It is cool, power efficient, and generally has great drivers. It even has hardware-accellerated video encode/decode. It is coupled with a nice CPU too. When used as intended, it is the perfect consumer unit.

    It is very poor with high resolution screens or anything that needs lots of memory bandwidth. It will do the job, but not very well.

    To be fair, Intel is making tremendous improvements with each generation of GPUs. They are not trying to directly compete with the titans AMD and NVIDIA. Instead, they are focusing on power efficiency, which is very important in selling a mobile chip.
     
  17. bill-p macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2011
    #17
    Apple has had a "fix" for the lag since as far back as July last year. They implemented it into the Webkit rendering engine via the nightly channel.

    But... for whatever reason (likely because they were working on 10.9), they decided not to implement that version of Webkit into Safari, and instead opted to just do minor bug fixes.

    1 year later, 10.9 is upon us, and does contain the "fix".

    So it is a software problem that Apple chose to ignore.

    Source: Fact.

    Even if you force the 650M to be on constantly in OSX, it still lags the same way given the right circumstances. The 650M is even faster than Iris (and Iris Pro), so the logical conclusion is that the GPU is not at fault.

    Is the CPU at fault? Nope. Both the 13" rMBP and 15" rMBP lag the very same way. So at this point, the only conclusion is that the problem is not hardware-related.
     
  18. sofianito macrumors 65816

    sofianito

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2011
    Location:
    Spain
    #18
    The early 2013 13" rMBP is likely better than the 2012 one. Also, people have a different daily usage and run different applications. Some would note it, others would never, and that's fine. The analogy is sport cars. One can buy a Ferrari and never exceed 120km/h, while others would push it to its limits... Viva la Vida! :D
     
  19. Laco macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    #19
    People who DO NOT own an rMBR are convinced that there is a lag scrolling problem.

    People who own an rMBR say that there is no lag.


    Personally, I would be more likely to trust a person who uses the computer daily rather than those who probably haven't even seen one in person.
     
  20. bill-p macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2011
    #20
    It is another fact, though, that the 15" rMBP did suffer from an EFI bug that caused its performance to throttle down to the very lowest state possible.

    At that point, even playing music back in iTunes can create lag (or latency), so doing pretty much anything else would make the machine lag and stutter.

    And that was indeed a software bug. I had to suffer through it for 3-4 months until Apple replaced my screen (because the previous screen, an LG one, had image retention), and then it somehow fixed itself. Next EFI update helped with temperature, though.

    And in case anyone doubts this, I have had this 15" rMBP for 11 months. I've used it pretty much every waking moment to scroll through a lot of documents and websites. If there was ever any lag (and I must admit... there IS), it's actually not that much better on any other Mac. Because I have access to an iMac 27" as well, and man, does that thing LAG.
     
  21. 1member1 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2012
    #21
    after 10.8.4 there's no lag issues as before. I'm using webkit nightly but from what i heard safari is the same in mavericks.

    Overall.. the computer does not lag and intel 4000 is more than enough to run 13 rmbp. I wouldn't buy one now because should be a refresh soon.
     
  22. smakdown61 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2008
    #22
    Pretty sure when doing normal tasks like safari or itunes the 15" uses the hd 4000 and not the 650m.
     
  23. jcpb macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2012
    #23
    The only difference between mid-2012 and early-2013 are 100-200MHz bumps on the CPU due to Intel's mid-cycle Ivy Bridge updates.
     
  24. falconeight Guest

    falconeight

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    #24
    Ok ok the OP wins. Yes the rMBP is terrible. Everything else is better and works. Now he can go somewhere else to make himself and his pixelated screen feel better.
     
  25. pgiguere1 macrumors 68020

    pgiguere1

    Joined:
    May 28, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    #25
    The lag problem is application-specific and you may or may not perceive it. The worst offenders are mainly browsers other than the beta Apple ones (WebKit nightly/Safari 6.1 beta/Safari 7 beta).

    You will get mixed answers from people because they use different software/browsers and because not everyone is equally sensitive to framerates and necessarily notice framedrops when they happen.

    What I can tell you is that a rMBP using a stable browser release (like Safari 6.0.x or Chrome) is not as smooth as a non-Retina Mac using the same software. If you will notice it depends on you, but that's a fact.

    You may use WebKit nightly (which is smooth) until Mavericks comes out but be aware that it does occasionnally crash.

    Also, stop blaming the HD 4000. People seem to always associate scrolling performance with the GPU while the bottleneck is actually the CPU. In this case, bottleneck doesn't mean the CPU is fully used but rather that it's not used efficiently at all. You'll notice the "fix" implemented in WebKit nightly/Safari 7 makes your CPU usage % go a lot higher, but that's a good thing in this case.

    People still haven't notice that manually switching between the HD 4000 and GT 650M on a 15" rMBP has no noticeable effect despite the 650M being several times more powerful? What does have an effect is having software that properly uses all the CPU power. That's where most of the load still is, despite the use of CoreAnimation in ML.
     

Share This Page