Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

rMBP need much better GPU's for Pro status?

It is more like a $1158 laptop rather than $2000.
http://www.amazon.com/Asus-G75VW-NH...TF8&qid=1381950919&sr=8-2&keywords=asus+g75vw

A 670M is actually not that much faster. I also doubt that the 3GB memory make all that much difference here but still Apple should really start using more VRAM (it is a joke to be so cheap on such expensive machines).
Primarily this test shows that Adobe CS6 is just way faster on Windows. Porbably because Nvidia's Windows drivers are just better. What this test says is that OSX is bad not that the hardware in the rMBP is bad.

BTW this is what a G75 looks like.
http://It is an absolute monster but also a lot faster in the newer version with 765M.
670M is a really bad pick for a comparison because it is an older Fermi chip which was always better in GPGPU than the rather terrible 650M Kepler. They should have picked a 650M or at least a 670MX on the windows side.
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
dusk007 said:
It is more like a $1158 laptop rather than $2000.
http://www.amazon.com/Asus-G75VW-NH...TF8&qid=1381950919&sr=8-2&keywords=asus+g75vw
Click to expand...
they bought two crucial 2.5" 512 ssds which added to the price of the asus

---

sure apple computers cost more but this is not the fairest comparison:

1) they are comparing a thin laptop with a 650m 1gb against a thick laptop with a 670m 3gb, of course the 670m 3gb machine will win out in raw graphics performance

2) they used two crucial ssd's in raid 0 (500mb/s per drive) which is faster than the retina's current 500mbs ssd, but on wednesday the retina will get the pcie ssd that should perform somewhere between the 800mbs the air has and the 12500mb/s the mac pro will have... but comparing a minature ssd to dual 2.5" ssds is not fair, where does size, weight, and portability come into value?

3) they ignore any value the 2880x1800 screen has to photographers, and they don't install windows on the rmbp and they dont set the resolution of the rmbp to 1920x1080 - sure "while the native resolution on each display differs, both machines are attempting playback at the actual video file resolution of 1920×1080" while that is true it does not account for the fact the rmbp's 650m is worrying about so many more pixels for ui and crap that it would not have to worry about if they set the resolutions equally to 1080p

4) they exaggerated the price on the retina, why upgrade from the 2.6ghz to the 2.7ghz for $250 if the asus only has a 2.4ghz, that just adds to the $4k price tag without helping in the graphics performance, which is mostly what they compare anyway

5) upgrading the retina ssd to 768 is the majority of the price increase which they did not need to do, they could have left it at 256gb and then compared the performance of the computers stating a $2360 (asus) vs $2199 (rmbp) and the difference in graphics would have been the same - then they could state the rmbp has less storage but is much thinner than the asus

look at the size, it's massive! of course you get more performance at a cheaper price when you can shove two 2.5" drives into it and a 670m without having to worry about heat..

asus-g75vw_2.jpg

asus-g75vw_3.jpg
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Totally agree with actuallyinaus .

They have basically shown how a large heavy gaming laptop with customised hardware bought and added to the system can beat a thin and light laptop on performance. Yep, you guys are the masters of the obvious.

This test says "We approach every test from an unbiased point of view." But it says this in a section titled fanboy arguments. Hmm doesn't sound very unbiased to me. I think there are apple fanboys, and there are also apple bashers. What we have here is an apple basher.

If you want unbiased, Anand La Shimpi is your man (anandtech).


(ps If I had loads of money I would buy an Asus or Alienware gaming system as well as my MBP. But when I can have only one its the MBP).
 
No machine is worth having to deal with Windows. Spoken by someone who had Windows since ver 3. Anyone remember 3.11?
 
Pro does not necessarily mean faster. Some pros also need to account for portability.

rMBP = 2.02 Kg
G75VW = 4.5 Kg

rMBP = 35.89cm x 24.71cm x 1.8cm
G75VW = 41.5cm x 32cm x 1.7-5.2cm

When you have to carry a laptop around every single day, those specifications play a huge role in which laptop you buy.
 
Lol at them claiming it's an unbiased test.

First they give zero value to the rMBP's qualities (form factor, battery life, trackpad, display...) like all that matters is raw performance, but then they artificially inflate the price of the rMBP by choosing the 768GB flash storage and .1GHz CPU upgrade like those things really mattered.

It only serves to prove their point, but it's in no way a good value in terms of raw performance/price. Sure 768GB of storage has a value outside of raw performance, but then they should do a full review and consider the points I mentioned in my last paragraph too if they're going to consider stuff outside of performance.

The main reason why the ASUS is significantly cheaper is because it doesn't have a Retina-class IPS display, but rather a low-res TN screen like the cMBP, and because it uses aftermarket SSDs (two of them) which usually come much cheaper than proprietery miniature stuff.

But hey, guess why the ASUS manages to fit two 2.5" SSDs while the rMBP can only fit tiny non-standard flash blades? Because it's freaking huge, that's why. It's a 17.3" gaming laptop that's over 3 times the size of the rMBP volumetrically, an entire category of product altogether.

They could at least have tried to make the specs a bit more fair. Why the hell did they max out the rMBP at 2.8GHz/768GB flash when the ASUS has 2.4GHz/512GB? Even then a much more fair comparison would be comparing the 15" cMBP (with dual aftermarket SSD as well), even though you would still have a discrepancy in size and GPU power due to the fact that the cMBP isn't a gaming laptop either.

With a test so biased it really makes me wonder if he really tested a maxed-out $4k rMBP, I wouldn't be surprised if he actually used a base model (which would score pretty much the same anyway) and made up the $4k thing just to prove his point. The guy is probably just an Apple hater. That "Connect with him on Google Plus" in his bio (which other authors don't have) is suspicious. Honestly all people I know who use Google+ as their main social network are simply huge Google/Android fans and often Apple haters.
 
Last edited:
You are all missing the fallacy in the comparison. It simply shows that "enterprise" environments and small businesses can't rationalize the costs of Apple in their business models. No surprise here. Apple has a different market target and the reviewers didn't need to go through all this just to show there's a lot of PC's that outperform macs for a lot less money.

So yes... this was a dig at Apple. Nothing new here. We've heard it all before.

MCAsan said:
No machine is worth having to deal with Windows. Spoken by someone who had Windows since ver 3. Anyone remember 3.11?
Click to expand...
Oh for god's sake. Comments like this only fuel the reasons why there are Apple haters. You have to dredge up windows version 3? Seriously?
 
Apple does need to get more serious about the GPUs in these things, especially after going retina. I'm on an i7 retina, and it bothers me how often this thing chokes in normal day to day tasks, likely because of the massive resolution. I like my sharper text, but I'd rather have it be non-retina and have better performance. I expect that a combination of better GPU on the next MacBook Pro + Mavericks will fix this situation completely. It's just a bummer that buyers of the rev1 rMBP got the shaft.
 
priitv8 said:
You could change 3 for 8, would it change anything ;)
Click to expand...
You forget the we OSX users are in the minority. We lost the operating system battle long ago. It's over. Kaput. Done. Finished.

I guess all that's left is to keep bashing MS because that makes us feel better?
 
There is no 'hardware' reason why the ASUS should be that much faster. Most likely, the difference is the software optimisation (either drivers or CS6 - most likely both). Now, could someone with a CS6 licence do such a test on rMBP only, one time under OS X and then under Bootcamp? I would expect a similar difference.
 
Krazy Bill said:
I guess all that's left is to keep bashing MS because that makes us feel better?
Click to expand...
The plain bashing is stupid, but telling good design & technology apart from mediocre, would be OK.
PS Windows didn't win because of superior design or technology, IMHO.
Nothing extraordinary: BetaMax, despite being technologically and qualitatively superior, did lose to VHS, right?
 
priitv8 said:
The plain bashing is stupid, but telling good design & technology apart from mediocre, would be OK.
PS Windows didn't win because of superior design or technology, IMHO.
Nothing extraordinary: BetaMax, despite being technologically and qualitatively superior, did lose to VHS, right?
Click to expand...

I'm so glad my set top box can't play High Definition Digital Video Discs
 
As long as I've owned Apple Laptops (since the G3 days), people have been complaining that a professional laptop needs to have a better GPU. In other words we've always been complaining about the GPU apple puts into its laptops :)

I don't do video, but I am an amateur photography, its a great hobby. I also use photoshop on occasion and other apps and for me the GPU is fine. I'm not a games player and that seems to be one of the areas where people complain about lackluster performance.

As others stated, "pro" is a pure marketing term, apple is making products for the majority, not for the minority (consumers vs. professionals)
 
MCAsan said:
No machine is worth having to deal with Windows.
Click to expand...

this.

I guess I could also demand a faster GPU for the rMBP but then again it wouldn't have that form factor and all in all it's the best computer I've ever owned, hands down.

regards,
Bernhard

----------
priitv8 said:
BetaMax, despite being technologically and qualitatively superior, did lose to VHS, right?
Click to expand...

we did have BetaMax and then Super8, both technologically superior but I could never borrow VHS tapes from friends :(

Well, I guess this stands for the current state of gaming on OSX ;-)

regards,
Bernhard
 
MCAsan said:
No machine is worth having to deal with Windows. Spoken by someone who had Windows since ver 3. Anyone remember 3.11?
Click to expand...

I have been using Windows since 3.11 for workgroups. I remember taking off work for Windows 95. I also remember it taking a full day to install it and get it working properly. It was a great improvement though.

I cant stand Windows 8 and this was one of the reasons I will be switching to Mac for the first time. I still need my Windows though and will be putting Win 7 on bootcamp.
 
If you want pro you sacrifice portability. For the size of the macbook it is simply amazing!

You need something professional? Mac Pro. :cool:
 
Petulka said:
Woah, almost 5kg 670m laptop beats 2kg 650m one. Who would expect that?
Click to expand...
That 670M is still fermi and rather old but it is actually quite comparable in basic performance.
670M is about 2700 pts in 3dmark11
The 650M in the retina is at 2400 pts.
A 670MX (which is the same newer Kepler architecture as the 650M) gets 3600 pts. But that is not the one the tested Asus G75 uses. New G75 starts with 765M (and better) which reaches 4000 pts.

It may be a 5kg laptop but it is a fairly comparable GPU config. It is just that Kepler is a) not as good at the stuff Photoshop needs b) OSX Photoshop and drivers is generally worse than Windows.
They picked a gamer notebook but a slow and old one.
 
Am I the only one who's thinking "why are they calling themselves unbiased?" while having a "fanboy argument" section right at the very top. This just seems very biased. I don't see a "Apple-hater's argument" section.

Also, Asus is on Raid 0? Just my thoughts.

Cool post though, thanks for sharing.
 
The battery life is around 2 hours, 3 hours tops for the ASUS G75VW-DS73. Thats less than half of the retina's battery life.

ASUS G75VW-DS73 is pro like a "Sumo Wrestler", big and eats a lot.
Macbook Pro is thin and powerful while not being as big and hungry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back