Macbook Pro vs Macbook Pro Retina Graphics.

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by nycmi, Jun 9, 2013.

  1. nycmi macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    #1
    Hi all,

    Apologies if this is in another thread, I couldn't seem to find one. Do the graphics on the Classic Macbook Pro perform better than the graphics on the Retina due to less pixels needing to be pushed?
     
  2. B... macrumors 68000

    B...

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    #2
    Not really. The rMBP 650M is overclocked to behave like a 660M, which more than compensates for the pixels.
     
  3. Stetrain macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    #3
    It depends on the situation.

    If you try to run a game on the 15" non-retina at 1440x900, and run the same game on the 15" retina at 2880x1800, the higher resolution will cause a reduction in performance.

    You can however tell most games to run in a lower resolution, so you could run a game on the 15" retina at 1440x900, and performance there should be roughly the same as on the non-retina models.
     
  4. Storm9 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2007
    #4
    If you run at retina resolution, yes you will see a massive drop in performance. Trying run at such a high resolution is ALOT of work for the GPU.
     
  5. safetravels macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2013
    #5
    The graphics on the rMBP will perform slightly better than the cMBP because it has 1GB of GDDR5 vram whereas the latter has half that amount. This is only in equal tasks though, ie running a game at the same settings with the same resolution. Using the native resolution on the rMBP completely changes the nature of the task and the extra 512mb of vram don't nearly make up for it, you're pushing over 300% more pixels.

    ----------

    That's crazy talk, the overclock does't let it push an extra 300% more pixels with ease. You can't run most games at native res, not even close.
     
  6. B... macrumors 68000

    B...

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    #6
    Obviously. I meant at equal settings. So since the cMBP can go up to 900p, the rMBP overclock lets it go at 900p slightly better, despite the fact that it still is pushing 3x the pixels. It goes without saying that that does not apply to 1800p.
     
  7. maxosx macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2012
    Location:
    Southern California
    #7
    No. I use them both in a graphics intense environment at work. They are very close to each other. For most mainstream work they are equals.
     
  8. omgitscro, Jun 9, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2013

    omgitscro macrumors 6502a

    omgitscro

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    #8
    There appears to be a lot of confusion in the preceding posts; I'll just summarize for you, OP.

    Note that this only applies to the 15” models.

    1) The Retina MBP has more Video RAM, which may help with textures
    2) The Retina MBP has an overclocked GPU, while the regular MBP does not
    3) If you run games on both systems at equal resolution, the Retina MBP will out-perform the regular MBP, but not by very much
     
  9. Mr. RPG macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2012
    #9
    This doesn't apply to the 13" does it?
     
  10. omgitscro macrumors 6502a

    omgitscro

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    #10
    I'm not sure, although I haven't heard anything about the 4000 being different in any way in the 13” RMBP. Perhaps someone else can confirm?
     
  11. Mr. RPG macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2012
    #11
    What do you think the 13" will get tomorrow at WWDC in terms of GPU?

    4600? 5100? 5200? 650M.. or some other dGPU?

    I'm thinking the 5100/5200.
     
  12. B... macrumors 68000

    B...

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    #12
    I'm thinking 4600 or 5100.
     
  13. Mr. RPG macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2012
    #13
    This is what I think..

    MacBook Air: 4600
    MacBook Pro Retina 13": 5100 / 5200 (although I'm leaning toward the 5200)
     
  14. B... macrumors 68000

    B...

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    #14
    Then I suppose you think the rMBP 13" will get a 47W quad?
     
  15. Mr. RPG macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2012
    #15
    That's less wattage than I originally thought it already had. I thought it had 65W.. but remember if you haven't noticed I don't have a Mac yet nor have I ever.. I'm hoping to get one in time for school.
     
  16. B... macrumors 68000

    B...

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    #16
    It is currently 35W for just the CPU. I do not know if Apple would want to jump 12 watts or mke the leap to quad core for their 13" line.
     
  17. Stetrain macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    #17
    There are basically 3 options as I see.

    1) Drop down to a 28w dual core processor with Iris 5100 graphics.

    2) Stick with a 35/37W processor and get HD 4600 graphics.

    3) Move up to a 47W processor and get Iris Pro 5200 graphics.


    Seeing as there are plenty of the Macbook-Air class 15W processor with HD 5000 graphics built in, I think it's likely that Apple will go with those.

    That means that option #2 would give the 13" rMBP a less powerful GPU than the Macbook Air.

    Option #1 isn't a very big step up from the Air either, but would allow for a thinner design and/or longer battery life. Think a rMBP that's a lot closer to a Macbook Air.

    For reference take a look at this Asus notebook with a 2560x1440 display and that 28W processor:

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/7035/...-with-the-most-beautiful-notebook-at-computex
     
  18. B... macrumors 68000

    B...

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    #18
    Isn't option 1 ULV? I don't see that happening in the rMBP line.
     
  19. Stetrain macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    #19
    Yep. I'm thinking at this point that either the 13" rMBP needs to step up a notch (47 quad core + Iris Pro) or merge into a 13" retina Air.
     
  20. B... macrumors 68000

    B...

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    #20
    Which do you see as more likely?
     
  21. Stetrain macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    #21
    No idea, but I hope they go down the route of having a retina Air as well as a quad core 13" rMBP. Maybe the price of the rMBP would have to go back up a bit, with the retina Air taking the lower pricepoint.
     
  22. macjunkie2013 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2013
    #22
    Wrong..

    Nope.

    Wrong wrong and probably wrong for 15.

    #1 Only the base cMBP has less Vram.
    #2 All the 2012-13 15 GPUs are the same
    #3 An equal 2.7 rMBP, in general, is slower in Geekbench according the everymac.com. For sure, the R display is more GPU intensive than a standard LCD.

    http://www.everymac.com/ultimate-mac-comparison-chart/

    This assumes the same amount of ram and both using SSD.
     
  23. omgitscro macrumors 6502a

    omgitscro

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    #23
    Sorry, but you're quite wrong on the last two counts.

    1) True, although the models with higher VRAM are not standard configurations anymore. I'll give you this one, though.
    2) Non-Retina 650M ≠ Retina 650M. Benchmarks at equal resolutions confirm this. They are clocked quite differently.
    3) This is due to resolution differences, as you've stated.
     

Share This Page