Computing benchmarks, unlike synthetics like 3dmark, are actually great indicator of what level of computing performance we'll get. That said, Iris Pro IS better than 750m/760m in computing. But you can, of course, continue whining. Whatever you may whine or complain, I do believe articles and benchmarks more.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New retina MacBook Pro GPU
- Thread starter NoamTheMac
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Computing benchmarks, unlike synthetics like 3dmark, are actually great indicator of what level of computing performance we'll get. That said, Iris Pro IS better than 750m/760m in computing. But you can, of course, continue whining. Whatever you may whine or complain, I do believe articles and benchmarks more.
Like I have also stated, the 750/760 line are not professional either. That'd be the Quadro Series, but there is no such thing as Quadro Mobile, so we have to go to the closest relative there is. (That would be the Titan based on a GK110 core)
In this case, Apple could jump ship to AMD if Radeon GPUs prove better. Besides, final specs (or if 700 series will be a rebadge) isn't even confirmed yet for you to make such claims. We need final production chips (and hopefully final driver versions) to make claims like yours.
Hell, we still don't know AMD's lineup. Intel has always been slow on the GPU front. Hopefully AMD or nVidia will provide a viable option.
What you mean by saying there is no quadro mobile?
http://www.nvidia.com/object/mobile-workstation-gpus.html
And here we go, our discussion came to its end because of your profanity. Nicely done.
Wrong. The AVX2-optimized x264 encoder (H.264 encoder) is up to 70 percent faster on the Haswell platform, compared to the Ivy Bridge platform.
You have a source for that statement. I can find nothing that big. I guess it depends on settings and there is some gains from AVX, some just haswell and the on die edram also seems to really does it for x264.
And how many consumer laptops do you know use this? Like I said, the MacBook Pro is not a "Pro" product. It just has the moniker.
I think it speaks for itself that the most useful Quadro mobile needs 45W of power just to run. Means the laptop in question will no doubtedly need to be plugged in vast majority of times. Might as well get a nice desktop for the matter.
Yes, I do realize we have 30W Quadros, but for that I'd just slap on a higher end consumer GPU which would be better.
Again, I could care less about gaming. But stop calling Iris Pro the solution to graphics problems. It's not happening. You know what would surely work? An nVidia or AMD based iGPU chipset with a dGPU working on par just like the old 9400/9600 days. The things you can do with so much power.
I just can't wait for the keynote to silence all the prophets and disciples around here whether they're right or wrong.
It's like there's these die-hards that go on about how great or terrible something's gonna be, then the rMBP will come out, and everyone will go along and discover for themselves what works for them.
It's like there's these die-hards that go on about how great or terrible something's gonna be, then the rMBP will come out, and everyone will go along and discover for themselves what works for them.
It's gonna come out that it only has Iris Pro. The real question is, will people still be bitching about it after it comes out?
All I know is I'm skipping out on this gen until I get gpu power which satisfies me. Maybe next year, or the year after
Don't hold out your breathe... whatever happens I know what to do, it is the people who expect the dGPU (and assuming they don't get one) who won't shut up. I will be already on the web, by that time, looking a new PC model to buy.
Vote with the wallet.
There is no sense to pay 2200 on iGPU machine. Only idiots will pay that, sorry about say it. If Apple lauch rMBP 15'' with iGPU, I'll buy rMBP13'', and buy a custom PC desktop.
I'm voting with my wallet. That's why I'm waiting for the Haswell. The Iris Pro will be great for my work.
----------
Ok, I guess I'm an idiot. Meanwhile ill be as happy as a clam with the Haswell. Enjoy your PC.
As someone who (sadly) owns the 9400M MacBook Pro, I agree. Can't wait to get rid of this PoS.
You've said stuff like this before. It kinda doesn't really mean anything, because the "decent" discussion continues.
But yeah, people are a little too worked up about the iGPU-only possibility. The bottom line is that Apple has never gone after the gamer crowd.
That being said, I would gladly get a 2014/2015 refresh that had a dGPU. It's just funny to see how people respond to Apple's business decisions.
But yeah, people are a little too worked up about the iGPU-only possibility. The bottom line is that Apple has never gone after the gamer crowd.
That being said, I would gladly get a 2014/2015 refresh that had a dGPU. It's just funny to see how people respond to Apple's business decisions.
Last edited by a moderator:
Then you should study the Apple products history a bit betterThey are ALWAYS saving money on components.
They are not anything like PC manufacturers in this regard who buy the cheapest possible thing. They also have much higher quality control standards. Further they design their own motherboards and other non-standard components that cost them more than if they used standard parts with standard quality controls.
You can't compare 9400M and the Iris Pro. The 9400M was already slow when it was released. Iris Pro is actually a decent part, but as already discussed, most users will see a performance hit compared to the 650M/750M. The only users that would benefit are those doing GPGPU computations which are not memory-bound. Gamers will suffer most, of course.
Weird..compare to this article from yesterday...a gaming laptop has chosen the iris 5200...can anyone explain this please? I ask because of the loads of criticisms being leveled out against iris pro 5200. Also, isn't apple suppose to release some "special" version of iris pro 5200 according to some previous news leaks?
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/zeus-hercules-pc-gaming-iris-pro-5200-haswell,23871.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/zeus-hercules-pc-gaming-iris-pro-5200-haswell,23871.html
How could they possibly save $500-900 off a retail price of a rMBP?? Usually Apple only discounts maybe 20% when they go to clearance.
Craigslist, Kijiji, eBay, Amazon or if you can find them at BestBuy on clearance.
I've seen this link before...the computer actually looks like a snag compared to the rMBP for $1000! Of course it'd be $1,300 for the same sized SSD. Still, 1k cheaper for same specs, with same low eight and slim design (not as slim). Anyway, point of my post here:
Looking at the "Intel Iris Pro graphic Scores" table on their site they give a few "benchmarks" for games.
Bioshock Infinite ("Very high") 29 FPS
Bioshock Infinite (Medium) 42 FPS
Tomb Raider (Ultra) 31 FPS
Tomb Raider ("Normal") 59 FPS
Starcraft 2 (Ultra) 41 FPS
Starcraft 2 (High) 68 FPS
Starcraft 2 (Medium) 69 FPS
------------------------------------------------------
Comparing to the Nvidia 650M's benchmarks from Notebookcheck:
(http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-650M.71887.0.html)
Bioshock Infinite (Ultra - Assuming "Very high" means ultra) 17 FPS
Bioshock Infinite 56 FPS
Tomb Raider (Ultra) 14 FPS
Tomb Raider (Medium - Assuming "Normal" means medium) 54 FPS
Stacraft 2: (Ultra) 25 FPS
Starcraft 2: (High) 65 FPS
Starcraft 2: (Medium) 88 FPS
-----------------------------------------------------------------
So if you look at the comparison's of those games specifically, it's kind of weird. Because Overall it would seem the Iris Pro does 15-25 FPS better in some games on Ultra, but then you have it performing 15-30 FPS worse on some games in Medium settings..I'm not sure how to explain the discrepancies there. It could be that these games were specifically picked out to show Iris Pro's best case scenario, but even so it's weird to compare.
The point of the point though, is that the Iris Pro's graphics seem to be completely acceptable. In terms of casual gaming. I'm assuminggggg these benchmarks were done in 1366x768 resolution, and that the 650M would still carry through better into the higher resolution of 1080p though. Just thought I'd post this though, to see other's comments
This is the kinda stuff that's gonna blow people's minds. If real-life comparisons show the Iris Pro as being on par or slightly better than the 650m, then the only people complaining will be the ones who (rightly) point out that there "shoulda/coulda" been a bigger step up with 3D graphics performance in the new rMBP, instead of just holding the line with 1 year old performance.
I'm fully expecting, however, that with the Iris Pro there will be a handful of games or applications that greatly disappoint. Just what those applications are will be interesting to see.