So what? I have been quoting it lots of times myself. Don't see any FCP X benchmarks on it though. The Vegas Pro test might be an approximation, no idea how similar these software kits are.
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
So what? I have been quoting it lots of times myself. Don't see any FCP X benchmarks on it though. The Vegas Pro test might be an approximation, no idea how similar these software kits are.
Intel can't and will never catch up with nVidia or ATI. Technologically speaking, they are several years far ahead from Intel... It is too late... well unless Intel acquires nVidia...
What are you talking about? Intel has all the SIMD unit research backing them. If we are talking about efficiency, they have already passed both Nvidia and ATI. Iris Pro has more processing power then 650M, and that consuming less power. What is lacks is (again) memory bandwidth and texturing units.
I want broadwell
. Iris pro sucks.It's so annoying to look at this from an outside perspective and see that such a huge feat for Intel graphics is dwarfed by something so limiting as bandwidth. It's like they designed it to be the best integrated graphics to ever, and then looked at it and said, oh s***! We forgot about the memory!
I want broadwell
It's so annoying to look at this from an outside perspective and see that such a huge feat for Intel graphics is dwarfed by something so limiting as bandwidth. It's like they designed it to be the best integrated graphics to ever, and then looked at it and said, oh s***! We forgot about the memory!
Iris Pro does not suck. Compare it to an HD 4000 like intended and it rules. Compare it to a 750M (completely different class. Now, anyway.) and of course it will do worse with some things. The dGPU was meant to just be a GPU, and the best for its TDP. Iris Pro has a CPU on the same die (discounting the 128MB L4 cache).
In terms of comparing price, it's not the best. Comparing the previous generations shouldn't even be mentioned...of course every future generation is going to be better. So obviously we're comparing dGPU's, and yes it is becoming a different class. But until it's completely a different class, I don't think it's the best. Next year it'll be great, but right now I'd still prefer a 700 series card or a 600 series gtx
And what if rumored Apple's "special Iris Pro part" is actually the one with dedicated gddr5 on pcb that will truly outperforn the 750m in games so all that whining "pro" guys are left holding the bag? Almost sure it's not gonna happen, but would be really funny though.
I'll take an i7-4950HQ GT3 Iris Pro 5200 with a Quadro K5000M.
That's probably gonna be in the next rMBP, that's what Tim told me
----------
Link to this fantasy part?
That's probably gonna be in the next rMBP, that's what Tim told me
----------
Link to this fantasy part?
Did you even read my entire comment? It's RUMORED part (go and check macrumors news), and since it's the rumored one, all of its specs are fantasy (or, in other words, speculation).
Entirely possible. Be ready to pay $5000+ for that laptop though to cover the cost of R&D
Entirely possible. Be ready to pay $5000+ for that laptop though to cover the cost of R&D
why are you so sceptical on it? maybe it will cost $4900, what would you say on THAT?
Yet, the 9400M was much better in comparison to the then released X3100 GMA graphics iGPU.
The 9400M is an iGPU, but the performance it had, plus the architecture on which it was based made it a GPU/Northbridge solution comparable to today's H55 platform.
The 9400M had direct memory access which reduced latency quite a lot for the GPU. Also, eliminated the clunky and antiquated then Intel architecture bottlenecks by combining GPU and Northbridge.
why are you so sceptical on it? maybe it will cost $4900, what would you say on THAT?
Thats is a very good deal, given the circumstances
I absolutely agree, and I also liked the 9400M. What I mean, it was slow compared to the then-existing mobile (non-integrated) GPUs. In comparison, the current Intel integrated graphics actually make low-level dGPUs completely obsolete. With HD4000/5000, it is actually possible to play modern games and be able to enjoy it, albeit at lower settings/resolutions. That said, I played through Fallout 3 and Stalker: Clear Sky on a 9400M equipped MacBook
Fun times.
I absolutely agree, and I also liked the 9400M. What I mean, it was slow compared to the then-existing mobile (non-integrated) GPUs. In comparison, the current Intel integrated graphics actually make low-level dGPUs completely obsolete. With HD4000/5000, it is actually possible to play modern games and be able to enjoy it, albeit at lower settings/resolutions. That said, I played through Fallout 3 and Stalker: Clear Sky on a 9400M equipped MacBook
Entry level dGPUs have always been a joke and never intended for gaming or professional usage of any kind. These entry level dGPUs are there for the HTPC sector/market in either laptops or small desktops for this use in mind.
Mid-level dGPUs (like the 650M GT) should not be on the Mac given that the Mac line is a "Premium Class" product. It is not about gaming, its about what you pay for and the performance you expect from a "Pro" product.
The MacBook Pro needs at least a 770M GT at least given the Pro market. Gaming aside, gaming was never the target audience for Apple, it just happened to be, but is not.
Whoa, chill out, dude. You do realize that there are plenty of parts that Apple will use that *already* exist? And that there are links to websites which discuss these real, not fantasy, parts? When you said "the one..." I thought that there may have been a released version of the GT3 I hadn't read about yet. Many other people here post about actual parts and press releases to make actual hypotheses about Apple's next MBP. My mistake was thinking that you were doing the same- but apparently you were talking about unicorn tears.
Man it really throws me for a loop when in the middle of people making smart suppositions and reasoned predictions based on reliable sources, someone straight up pulls something out of their "hat" and calls it a rumor.
Sheesh.
Last edited:
Man, my comment about that part ended up with "almost sure it's not gonna happen, but would be funny though". Does it say anything to you?
Man, my comment about that part ended up with "almost sure it's not gonna happen, but would be funny though". Does it say anything to you?
Not really, because there's plenty of other parts out there that can be/are being used in other laptops, but Apple probably wouldn't use those parts, but it would be funny.
1. Macbook Pro enclosure is pretty limited in terms of TDP it can handle, I guess you didn't know that? The rMBP of my dreams has two 780m's, 8-core haswell, 64gb RAM, 4tb+ of pcie ssd storage. Should I explain in detail why it ain't gonna happen?
2. Again, did I miss something? Since when should the product have a GAMING gpu to be a PRO product? Stop fusing your own dreams of it with what it actually is.
Intel Intentionally Killing dGPUs?
I posted this in another thread yesterday, but I think the thread is now mostly just collecting dust. So here is the question:
Has anyone else here read the semiaccurate rumors concerning Intel killing dGPUs by limiting access to / placing restrictions on the PCI-e?
The details presented are speculative, but the general thrust of the articles makes sense and would explain why the next rMBP might only include an iGPU.
(Did Intel restrict anandtech's testing of the Iris Pro because it would confirm the speculation by Charlie Demerjian?)
I know some here don't like Charlie, and I rarely read his articles, but this story (over three articles) at least seems plausible. Comments?
I posted this in another thread yesterday, but I think the thread is now mostly just collecting dust. So here is the question:
Has anyone else here read the semiaccurate rumors concerning Intel killing dGPUs by limiting access to / placing restrictions on the PCI-e?
The details presented are speculative, but the general thrust of the articles makes sense and would explain why the next rMBP might only include an iGPU.
(Did Intel restrict anandtech's testing of the Iris Pro because it would confirm the speculation by Charlie Demerjian?)
I know some here don't like Charlie, and I rarely read his articles, but this story (over three articles) at least seems plausible. Comments?
1. TDPs are actually low for the new generation dGPUs, so stop using this as an excuse.
2. Sees you have a reading problem. I have numerous times said that gaming is a side market that happened to happen. I am not looking for a Gaming GPU.