Iris pro 5200 plus nvidia 750m is very unlikely. Hopefully they will have a rMBP with intel HD 5000 + nvidia 750m.
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 Haswell MBP Mega Thread
- Thread starter thadoggfather
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Iris pro 5200 plus nvidia 750m is very unlikely. Hopefully they will have a rMBP with intel HD 5000 + nvidia 750m.
The thing is, even if the assistant you mentioned above didn't know that the result would be upload to the website. But, that has happened to the 13 rmbp, and the news get all over the world. So everyone in apple should have known that the result could go public after that leak. And they could have avoided doing so again on 15rmbp.
And according to someone else mentioned that an average person could easily hide the result from the geekbench website. I have to say I can see Apple is somehow deliberately showing the result and want us to know the specs. Not that it is big secret, but still you can see it is not a mistake or accident.
well, it would please those customers that wanted a retina but only could afford a Hi-Res cMBP.
they could kill the cMBP line and replace it with a rMBP without dGPU ( lets call it rMBP lite)...
then
would offer the lite version as a cMBP replacement for future macbook generations.just my thoughts.
If i was going for the '15, i wouldn't wait either. But since im in the market for it's smaller brother im holding off.
I am so tempted to with all this about no dGPU and just get a 2.7/16/512 but would be gutted if they then released one with a dGPU and it was all BS
They benchmarked the Mac Pro six times, with both Xeon and Sandy Bridge E processors (under AAPLJ90,1 at http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/search?q=AAPLJ90,1), and that doesn't need to be final because it's not expected for a few months.
Based on the CPU's power consumption I'd say unlikely. It is more likely that Apple would use a lower wattage CPU that lacks Iris Pro to be able to stick in an NVIDIA 750m. I think both combined would go over 85 Watts.
I too wouldn't mind having both though.
Even without the dGPU, I'm sure we'd see some modest gains in terms of battery life. I'd hold off unless the purchase was absolutely necessary. Apple has been quite unpredictable as of late.
I bought a 15" rMBP (2.7/16/512) about 2 weeks ago and have been enjoying it so much! Been on vacation for the past week and have almost gotten through Dead Space 2 on my rMBP during patches of downtime. I'm really surprised at what a competent gaming machine this thing makes!
Just tried to tweak a bit my bench... 
Still inaccurate because some value are missing, but it gives you the idea...
Fake GeekBench
Still inaccurate because some value are missing, but it gives you the idea...
Fake GeekBench
Just tried to tweak a bit my bench...
Still inaccurate because some value are missing, but it gives you the idea...
Fake GeekBench
nice...
Let me explain how the flow works:
Basically, GeekBench run the benchmark and posts the result in XML format to their website. The server return two values that are used by GeekBench to open your default browser and point to the result page. To prevent it from publishing the result, you just trick it so that their website IP is resolved to your local host. You achieve this by adding the following line to your /etc/hosts file: 127.0.0.1 browser.primatelabs.com
Now, all you have to do is to download and run a HTTP proxy monitor such as Charles proxy or Apache TCP monitor, and setup your Ethernet or WiFi to use that proxy. You'll be able to see passing the benchmark result in XML format. Since GeekBench is posting the result to your localhost (thanks to the line above), it will simply fail and nothing will go out of your computer
Easy, isn't it? And don't tell me Apple engineers are not aware of these tricks... By the way, I am looking for a job...
----------
As I said in a previous post, a simple firewall rule in the prototype machine prevents from sending stuff to primatelabs...
The assistant would have to go through extra efforts for each machine or reconfigure the testing environment. Doesn't sound right to me.
That was the first generation unibody Macbook Pro. We're talking about a second generation product here.
well, it would please those customers that wanted a retina but only could afford a Hi-Res cMBP.
they could kill the cMBP line and replace it with a rMBP without dGPU ( lets call it rMBP lite)...
then
just my thoughts.
Except Iris Pro costs an arm and a leg so Apple wouldn't be able to offer it at much lower price point than the dGPU line.
On each of the test machine... and then re-enable them on each of the test machine again for network tests...
No thanks.
Perhaps an idea is Apply could have 2 CPUs, one that is very low power and low frequency and another that is ultra performance and uses much power. Design it so can swap (if not dynamically then by a switch before turning the thing on, where the bios checks switch status at boot up to decide which CPU to use). That way if just doing word typing then can choose to get 24hrs life or if 3d gaming can choose 8 hours life.
That is an out of the box idea!
Hope someone reading this thread works for Apple and takes into consideration the ideas and concerns shared here
How is the availability of laptops with quad core i7 Haswell at the moment? I checked a few:
Dell.com: Estimated shipping date July 24 (most non Iris Pro CPUs)
Razer Blade: 5-7 days (4702HQ)
MSI: 1-3 days (4700MQ, microcenter)
Has anyone seen any machines with Iris Pro that are available? Could those be delayed?
Dell.com: Estimated shipping date July 24 (most non Iris Pro CPUs)
Razer Blade: 5-7 days (4702HQ)
MSI: 1-3 days (4700MQ, microcenter)
Has anyone seen any machines with Iris Pro that are available? Could those be delayed?
Probably just the fact that no one wants to use them but apple. Iris Pro is too expensive for what it does. Apple has been pushing intel to start using edram and better igpus for a while now, but they have been reluctant since none of the other manufacturers seem to care.
Ok, so I'm sitting here biding my time with a Late '08 MBP until the Haswell MBP emerges.
My needs are not computationally huge, but I have one very necessary requirement/desire: a 15" screen, so no MBAir for me.
Having seen the Retina display, if I'm going to fork over that much cash, I will definitely go Retina.
I don't game, so no need for a dedicated GPU (I've rarely needed the dGPU in the late '08).
I also want to give myself 5-6 years of "future proofing" before having to pony up for the next machine.
So it seems the ideal MBP for me would a 15" rMBP with: no more than a "medium strength" Haswell, Iris 5100/5200 iGPU, 16 GB ram, at least 500GB SSD (preferably 768GB), and 802.11ac (Thunderbolt 1.0 would be sufficient).
My no-doubt-naive question to those speculating Apple will only sell one "type" of MBP (iGPU or dGPU) is:
Why *won't* you expect Apple to offer machines directed to two different markets?
There have to be a lot of folks like me that want a MBP, but don't need a true "pro level" machine -- in other words, a lot of gravy on the table for Apple to slurp up.
There also are certainly a lot of folks that actually *need* pro-level performance (a lot fewer than most of us, I expect) and not including an dGPU would lower cost (bringing the machine into the reach of a larger audience).
I would expect that Apple would want/need to have a "powerhouse" machine to meet these needs, as well as for top-end "halo"/pride purposes.
If I'm correct about the above, it seems like a no-brainer to proceed, as Apple has done in the past, with both iGPU and dGPU/iGPU configurations.
I'm well aware of economies of scale, logisitics, etc. that come from simplifying model variations -- but at some point narrowing the options too far begins to *decrease* revenue and profit when you don't have product that a large chunk of the market wants (i.e., if only one iGPU-only model, some "pro level" folks will make do, but a lot of high-margin pro-level buyers will go elsewhere; if only one dGPU/iGPU model, some non-pro-level buyers will strech to pay the extra for an dGPU machine, but a *lot* won't).
Anything I'm missing here?
My needs are not computationally huge, but I have one very necessary requirement/desire: a 15" screen, so no MBAir for me.
Having seen the Retina display, if I'm going to fork over that much cash, I will definitely go Retina.
I don't game, so no need for a dedicated GPU (I've rarely needed the dGPU in the late '08).
I also want to give myself 5-6 years of "future proofing" before having to pony up for the next machine.
So it seems the ideal MBP for me would a 15" rMBP with: no more than a "medium strength" Haswell, Iris 5100/5200 iGPU, 16 GB ram, at least 500GB SSD (preferably 768GB), and 802.11ac (Thunderbolt 1.0 would be sufficient).
My no-doubt-naive question to those speculating Apple will only sell one "type" of MBP (iGPU or dGPU) is:
Why *won't* you expect Apple to offer machines directed to two different markets?
There have to be a lot of folks like me that want a MBP, but don't need a true "pro level" machine -- in other words, a lot of gravy on the table for Apple to slurp up.
There also are certainly a lot of folks that actually *need* pro-level performance (a lot fewer than most of us, I expect) and not including an dGPU would lower cost (bringing the machine into the reach of a larger audience).
I would expect that Apple would want/need to have a "powerhouse" machine to meet these needs, as well as for top-end "halo"/pride purposes.
If I'm correct about the above, it seems like a no-brainer to proceed, as Apple has done in the past, with both iGPU and dGPU/iGPU configurations.
I'm well aware of economies of scale, logisitics, etc. that come from simplifying model variations -- but at some point narrowing the options too far begins to *decrease* revenue and profit when you don't have product that a large chunk of the market wants (i.e., if only one iGPU-only model, some "pro level" folks will make do, but a lot of high-margin pro-level buyers will go elsewhere; if only one dGPU/iGPU model, some non-pro-level buyers will strech to pay the extra for an dGPU machine, but a *lot* won't).
Anything I'm missing here?
Last edited:
- Status