So I've read that the overclocked 650m in the rMBP is actually more powerful than in the cMBP and even beats the 660. Which raises the question in my head, why did Apple opt to use the 650 only to push it further than a 660? Why not use the 660 in the first place? I'd imagine it's a space issue but I'm not sure. Any ideas, MR?
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.
Out of curiosity... rMBP graphics question.
- Thread starter playsontheleft
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Lol, that hit me just after posting. Yeah that's more likely. Still great that they put the effort into OCing it!
Yeah, and it's weird that they never told it. Usually it's the kind a thing that PC makers would tell in their marketing but I guess Apple wants to keep it simple and not confuse people with technical terms and not make them worry about heating issues.
Maybe they already designed the computer thinking the 650 could handle everything, but they ended up needing a little bit more power.
A lot easier to OC the existing card than to replace it with an entirely new one and start building again.
Cost has never been an issue with Apple...
A lot easier to OC the existing card than to replace it with an entirely new one and start building again.
Cost has never been an issue with Apple...
I agree, I think its form factor. They designed it around the current components. If it were cost, they would just raise the price a little...we all know we would pay the difference!