MBP 2012 GPU: Are you hoping for AMD or NVidia?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Pentad, Mar 26, 2012.

  1. Pentad macrumors 6502a

    Pentad

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    Location:
    Indiana
    #1
    For those of you who are thinking about getting a 2012 MPB, are you hoping for AMD or Nvidia for the discreet graphics?

    Personally, I would like to see a Kepler based GPU in the next MBP. While I'm happy with my 1GB AMD GPU in my 2011 MBP, I think Kepler offers more than AMD's current gen. However, I do think both companies do a great job with the GPUs.

    You can read about mobile Kepler GPUs here.

    So, which would you like to see??
     
  2. burningrave101, Mar 26, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2012

    burningrave101 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    #2
    If I had the choice I'd want a kepler based GeForce GTX 680M which is undoubtedly soon to be launched at the high-end. As note both recently announced GTX 675M and 670M are still 40nm Fermi based. Kepler offers better power efficiency and performance than AMD.
     
  3. AppleWarMachine macrumors 6502a

    AppleWarMachine

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Location:
    Michigan, US
    #3
    Neither, give me Intel Integrated 4000...


    ...Just kidding, I'll take AMD
     
  4. Risasi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2011
    #4
    I've boycotted Nvidia since getting burned by their mobile GPU fiasco a few years ago. It doesn't bother me so much there was a flaw, as much as it does that they knew they had a problem and just kept putting out crap. Then fought tooth and nail to quash the class action brought against them.

    Intel or AMD for me.
     
  5. bottleneck macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2012
    #5
    GTX570 is not 28nm

    The two fastest mobile Nvidia chips, the GTX670M = 570M and GTX675M = 580M are rebaged 40nm Fermi chips. The fastest Kepler ist the 660M.

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/5697/...es-keplers-and-fermis-and-die-shrinks-oh-my/2

    Seems like the 680M is going to be a Kepler.
     
  6. Arondel macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    #6
    I think they could include the NVIDIA GT 640M DDR3 in the 13" and the GT 650M GDDR5 in the 15" and 17". I think this to be feasible (with the information out now). This is what I believe could be the performance baseline.
    If AMD can bring something better to the table (same performance-better thermals or better performance-same thermals), then so be it.
    Of course, all of this is supposing the ODD is taken out.

    Cheers! :)
     
  7. psykick5 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    #7
    Either which (as long as the Nvidia isn't problem-plagued like the last time...)
     
  8. chilly7 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2012
    #8
    I want that want which will be the most high end...
    AMD or Nvidia
     
  9. thundersteele macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2011
    Location:
    Switzerland
    #9
    Do you think the larger memory bus will dominate over the higher clock speeds on the 660M? If they are about equal, the 660M will be the best choice, since it uses less power and produces less heat... presumably.

    I can't imagine seeing a 680M in a MBP, this is more something for alienware laptops. The TDP of the 580M is higher than the maximal power consumption of a MBP under full load and brightness. Actually, even the 560M and the 57XM consume too much power.

    640M and 650M are realistic candidates, 660M if the Kepler is really power saving!
     
  10. Mr. Wonderful macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    #10
    I would be happy with the 650M. The 640M would be disappointing.
     
  11. cledet macrumors regular

    cledet

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2012
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #11
    IIRC, AMD graphic chips are more power efficient than Nvidia's. AMD any day.
     
  12. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #13
    I hope they include whatever is the fastest, be it Nvidia or ATi.

    Who wouldn't fight the cases against them? :confused:
     
  13. hafr macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2011
    #14
    Most people have a sense of honor. If we know we're in the wrong, we don't try to get away from our responsibilities.
     
  14. Eithanius macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2005
  15. Mr. Retrofire macrumors 601

    Mr. Retrofire

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Location:
    www.emiliana.cl/en
    #16
    If you really need CUDA, use a Windows machine (always newest drivers) or a Mac Pro, both with a NVIDIA graphics card. If you really need it, you do not wait for Apple.
     
  16. Eithanius macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2005
    #17
    I would have gone for a windows machine with a GTX 680 if not of my power bills here being astronomically expensive... CUDA on my MBP is just decent enough...

    With my place being summer all-year round, a power house is the last thing I want to generate more heat...
     
  17. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #18
    Doesn't matter to me as long as the performance is better and the quality is there. I don't want a repeat of the GeForce 8600M GT debacle.
     
  18. arctic macrumors 6502a

    arctic

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    #19
    Please bring on the 650M for the 15". And let's hope Apple doesn't downclock the 850MHz its capable of (even the 660M is only capable of upto 835MHz). The 650M on our MBPs, if has good thermal management without downclocking, will be smokin'. :eek:

    Can't wait to find out more details on their Shader Clocks.
     

Share This Page