now thinking about it , apple removing the dgpu completely is relatively plausible idea , as most likely they will not release an 850m with this years model , and then next year mid 2015 when broadwell comes out and they do release it with the 850m , the 950m will be out by then , so they would have fallen a year behind on the dgpu updates . so instead of doing that the will just get rid of the dgpu in general
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.
Waiting for Broadwell MBP Thread
- Thread starter UBS28
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, if they get rid of the dGPU, I'll seriously consider getting a different laptop. So hopefully they don't do that. I don't understand why they would. If people are willing to pay more for those high-end laptops, why wouldn't they keep updating them with a newer dGPU. I don't see how any iGPU would be able to compete.
Apple itself has said it'll be one of the best macs in 25 years so a redesign should be in the plans...
I would be very surprised if the Broadwell MBPs get a new screen or a major redesign. I do not anticipate any significant changes for the Broadwell MBPs that cannot be accomplished with a new motherboard.
There is price elasticity of demand for laptop computers. Apple can reduce their costs and lower the price by eliminating the discrete GPU. The cost reduction for Apple is so large that they can lower the price, increase their margins, and increase sales volumes -- if the Intel integrated graphics are good enough. Apple obviously judged Iris Pro to be good enough for the 2.0Ghz 15" Haswell MBP. With the promised improvements for Broadwell's iGPU, it would not be surprising if Apple were to consider it good enough for all MBPs. On top of all that, switching between iPGU and dGPU has never been flawless, Apple could use the motherboard real estate for other things, like perhaps more DRAM. So, the reasons for dropping the dGPU include cost, size, weight, and reliability.
I remember lots of moaning and wailing in these forums about how loads of customers would abandon Apple if they were to ever switch from SO-DIMMs to directly attached memory for the MBP. There was no mass exodus of customers and the same will be true when the dGPU is gone.
The path of progress in integrated circuits is ever increasing integration. I remember about 30 years ago similar discussions about how an iFPU would never match the performance of a dFPU. That was true then, as now, but missed the point. Even today, Intel could build a faster dFPU if they wanted to. However, by about 25 years ago there were no more dFPUs being made for PeeCees because iFPUs were good enough. By about 20 years ago, the high-end UNIX workstations were also iFPU-only. History is repeating itself with GPUs. Look at the level of integration in Apple's A7. That's the way forward.
While I appreciate the thought that went into your post, I don't really agree with all of it. For starters, I don't care whether or not lots of people would consider other computers...I just know I would. Also, like you mentioned, it really depends on how powerful the integrated chips become. I'm under the assumption that no integrated chip next year would provide the same kind of power that an 850M would. Would it even be more powerful than a 750M chip? There's no way I'd buy an even less powerful computer than the already underpowered 2013 rMBP.
I also don't really view the price argument as valid. If I wanted a weaker, cheaper laptop I'd go with the 15" integrated-only model that already exists. The market for this more powerful laptop is different than for the weaker one. So they'd essentially just be eliminating a (albeit small) segment of customers. The only way that would make sense is if the profit margins are really low, and they think they could convince those same people to switch to the other model. But I'm skeptical about either of those points being true. Just keep offering both options until an integrated chip can match (or come very close) to the performance of a discrete one (will that ever happen?)
Since nearly every mac is better than the last one this statement doens't really mean much
Sadly agree. It would be nice to have a BTO option for a native high resolution 3360x2100 for the 15" rMBP and/or 2880x1800 for the 13". It would hurt battery life and the graphics capability and bandwidth are probably not sufficient yet.
Yeah but this isn't philosophy class, there are such things as sentiments and feelings even Aristotle would've probably told you that
Apple doesn't care what you or I would do. Apple only cares what "lots of people" i.e. millions would do.
The statement you have quoted obviously just means that ultimately the only thing that matters to me is what I do/feel compelled to buy. Did you read the rest of my post? I directly discussed why I don't think it would make sense from Apple's perspective either. Please don't take one comment out of context like that and ignore the rest of the post
eventually i see 4k displays in the macbook pros in the future , but as of know the we don't have the chips to power it and give good battery life , im pretty sure they could power it but the battery life would be relatively bad
The statement you have quoted obviously just means that ultimately the only thing that matters to me is what I do/feel compelled to buy. Did you read the rest of my post? I directly discussed why I don't think it would make sense from Apple's perspective either. Please don't take one comment out of context like that and ignore the rest of the post
I and others have already shot down that argument in this thread. Do you really want me to do it again?
I really hope to see a 13 MbPro with quad inside,this could have sense if a retina lands on Air to me but more generally i'm going to skip Broadwell in order to gain ,hopefully,the new Alpine Ridge Thunderbolt 3 controller in the 15,not to mention a better Iris with.I'm also evaluating if an Ipad Air is able to fill the mobile job while having an updated Mac Mini at home.This if Intel won't land ,well before Skylake as suggested,a Tb3 with Broadwel.Lets wait for October then.
Last edited:
There is a very good chance that we'll see a quad-core 13" Broadwell MacBook Pro. If not, then we'll surely see it with Skylake.
Thunderbolt 3 should come together with Skylake.
Exactly should..if i'm not wrong TB2 came a little before somewhere..mmm..on Notebooks?
I'm not sure..
Then yes,,,TB2 its still not on the Imacs but already on new Mac Pro?
This while Broadwell and Skylake seem very close with each other,about timing i mean...so
maybe...there's a little chance to see something not as scheduled.
We can only wait and see.I just know that my next Mini and MacBook Pro will be with TB3 within so^^...if its late 2015 then my wallet will have more time^^ for my "shut up and take my money^^!! .
Then a 13inch plus quad core would be a remarkable machine,i hope in it^^.
Last edited:
Wait there is are rumors and proof of an upcoming 15" refresh, could it be possible that a refresh to the 15" would happen without refreshing the 13" mbp? I am talking about this:
https://www.macrumors.com/2014/07/27/speed-bumped-15-inch-retina-macbook-pro-16gb-ram/
https://www.macrumors.com/2014/07/27/speed-bumped-15-inch-retina-macbook-pro-16gb-ram/
Its not Apple that gets rid of dGPU. Its Intel with lowering the amount of PCi-Ex Lanes.
Dig up the internet. Evidence is there.
Last edited:
No we will not. 25W with GT3e(yes, eDRAM finally in MBP 13) will be only dual core.
Quad Core with GT4e will be 45W CPU.
Skylake of course
.
Last edited:
I got the original base model 15" rMBP last June for an awesome price on the refurb store. Not looking for a new laptop right now! Although I do think it's great they're making all 15" models have 16GB of RAM. Unfortunately, I went for 8GB when I bought mine and have sort of regretted it since. I've vowed to never buy another computer with less than 16GB.
Do you get a new one at every major spec bump? Do you sell the old one? How much does it cost you every time you upgrade?
I usually hold on to my machines for as long as possible. Just wondering how much more expensive it is to be a frequent upgrader.