Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Status
Not open for further replies.
NO, it is right there

1718b6529384394f61536dd2b6a59bf7.png
like i said it is a prototype for the already announce 12" macbook
they already told to Charlie that they build many screen dimensions prototypes until they settle to one or two( iphones etc)
 
  • Like
Reactions: WRONG and UnFuzzy
like i said it is a prototype for the already announce 12" macbook
they already told to Charlie that they build many screen dimensions prototypes until they settle to one or two( iphones etc)
Didn't we think, that thing on the table didn't have a trackpad?
 
like i said it is a prototype for the already announce 12" macbook
they already told to Charlie that they build many screen dimensions prototypes until they settle to one or two( iphones etc)
Do you Think it's a prototype or do you Know it's a prototype? ;)
 
but still, that hood say one thing for sure, there were no new imacs or thunderbolt displays since there are no tall objects
 
but still, that hood say one thing for sure, there were no new imacs or thunderbolt displays since there are no tall objects
Or maybe they're laying down the iMacs.
Lol, maybe even there is nothing real on the table anyway.
Just put a desktop on there anybody will know that whether they're covered or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UnFuzzy
Oh well.
I thought he was saying that they're not using the highest-end graphics chip and they should..

Please don't lie: I never said a a "highest end" card, but at least an acceptable mid-range card such as, for instance, an Nvidia 960m, which is cooler and faster than the chosen Radeon m370x.

At the end of the day, this is a $2,500+ machine... shouldn't it sport, at least, a mid-range GPU? I repeat: NOT a high-end GPU, but at least an adequate mid-range GPU... You know, how would you feel to pay premium money for a 3-year old SSD or screen technology? well, that's what Apple does with GPU.
 
Please don't lie: I never said a a "highest end" card, but at least an acceptable mid-range card such as, for instance, an Nvidia 960m, which is cooler and faster than the chosen Radeon m370x.

At the end of the day, this is a $2,500+ machine... shouldn't it sport, at least, a mid-range GPU? I repeat: NOT a high-end GPU, but at least an adequate mid-range GPU... You know, how would you feel to pay premium money for a 3-year old SSD or screen technology? well, that's what Apple does with GPU.
First thing is, many of the 2000 dollars, are the combination of the build quality with the performances they put in, a better graphics chip won't be cheaper.

Even if you do, there is cooling issues to be considered. It's chassis were very thin at the time point, and may not optimized the graphics chips the way it should. The best solution for this its to make it thicker, but we knew it's not going to happened.

Third, it's what it's required for. Even you say you don't care about cooling and want a great graphics chip, they weren't many areas to used for - Macs don't really have many games supported, and mainly we bought graphics were playing games.

If you really need one to play games, think about a thicker gaming laptops. Maybe everyone want a thin, light, and good cooling gaming laptops, but that's just full of a compromises if you really do.
 
Last edited:
The GPU has always been the most questionable point (along with price) of 15" MBPs. That, as well as poor graphic card choices from Apple: there's absolutely no reason for Apple to have chosen the Radeon m370x over the Nvidia 960m, which runs faster, cooler and moreless at the same price level.

Why, Apple, why?! It makes no sense whatever! Did you have any conflict with Nvidia at a corporate level?

I've been an Apple advocate and an avid Mac user for years because I very much prefer OSX over Windows, but if they don't give us a 15" MBP 2016 update with an adequate GPU, I'm seriously considering going back to PC now that Windows 10 has finally delivered a very solid OS... You know, I'd like to play a decent game on my computer here and there too, for Pete's sake!

Please don't lie: I never said a a "highest end" card, but at least an acceptable mid-range card such as, for instance, an Nvidia 960m, which is cooler and faster than the chosen Radeon m370x.

At the end of the day, this is a $2,500+ machine... shouldn't it sport, at least, a mid-range GPU? I repeat: NOT a high-end GPU, but at least an adequate mid-range GPU... You know, how would you feel to pay premium money for a 3-year old SSD or screen technology? well, that's what Apple does with GPU.

Pretty sure they went AMD because the AMD card outperformed Nvidia in OpenCL. OpenCL is used in all of Apple's professional apps. So they went AMD this time.


AMD’s GPU handily bests Nvidia’s when it comes to OpenCL-accelerated tasks—even the Iris Pro comes close or beats Nvidia’s performance in some of these benchmarks. It’s also worth noting that Apple’s own professional apps—Final Cut Pro X, Motion 5, and Compressor 4—use OpenCL rather than Nvidia’s proprietary CUDA platform. It’s a trade-off. You’ll get better performance in Apple’s apps and in anything that’s OpenCL-accelerated, but you can’t use CUDA at all on an AMD GPU.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2015/0...e-2015-15-inch-retina-macbook-pro-reviewed/2/
 
Pretty sure they went AMD because the AMD card outperformed Nvidia in OpenCL. OpenCL is used in all of Apple's professional apps. So they went AMD this time.




http://arstechnica.com/apple/2015/0...e-2015-15-inch-retina-macbook-pro-reviewed/2/
M370X is mid-range GPU from AMD. New compiler from AMD will allow CUDA code to be executed on AMD hardware. OpenCL performance is much higher on AMD GPUs, than on Nvidia. 4 year old Tahiti in Radeon R9 7970 is faster in OpenCL compute than GTX 980 Ti from Nvidia.
http://cdn.sweclockers.com/artikel/diagram/10130?key=6e3c39edaaa5f182742dac364baf5b54 Like here for example.

Great, I didn't knew about that.
 
i think apple always change after 2 years from amd to nvidia and so on. probably in 2016 and 2017 are nvidia time
 
The same people loosing the iPhone prototype at the bar?
Is he in there?
And that's something they forgot, and this time you're facing in front of the camera and they probably told you that they're coming before so you will have enough time to prepare for it.
If you still lose your secrets..get out of there.
 
At the end of the day, this is a $2,500+ machine... shouldn't it sport, at least, a mid-range GPU? I repeat: NOT a high-end GPU, but at least an adequate mid-range GPU... You know, how would you feel to pay premium money for a 3-year old SSD or screen technology? well, that's what Apple does with GPU.
Choice is driven by TDP, not price. m370X = ~40W TDP. 960M = 60W TDP . They can downclock the 960M and get better TDP, but downclocking the dGPU means loss of performance. I have not seen anything that proves that Apple picked a worse chip despite the existence of another with comparable TDP and better performance.

The MBP is a heavily TDP constrained device, with a history of GPU failures due to both Nvidia and AMD dGPUs, all pointing to just how hard it is to make it work within that tiny enclosure. The history of logic board failures is a symptom of underestimating damage from heat dissipation and thermal cycling over time. The MBP problems are even more prominent because Macs themselves tend to last longer than PCs, and Macs have a greater reputation for reliability and longevity.
 
Last edited:
Choice is driven by TDP, not price. m370X = ~40W TDP. 960M = 60W TDP . They can downclock the 960M and get better TDP, but downclocking the dGPU means loss of performance. I have not seen anything that proves that Apple picked a worse chip despite the existence of another with comparable TDP and better performance. The MBP is a heavily TDP constrained device, with a history of GPU failures due to both Nvidia and AMD dGPUs, all pointing to just how hard it is to make it work within that tiny enclosure. The MBP problems are even more prominent because Macs themselves tend to last longer than PCs, and Macs have a greater reputation for reliability and longevity.
Just because of that, even you put a better performance graphics chips eventually it won't be optimized that the way it should.

People will still be complaining if they really did this anyway...no offense though.

Is "Macs having a longer life span" means Macs were made to lasts longer than any other else?
 
Damn. So even on the fully-loaded, highest-priced MBP 15" the Nvidia will be 950M at best?

Also, what do you think of the Dell XPS 15 with 960M? How is the hardware build quality and trackpad? I'm looking for a reliable machines like a Macbook, and don't mind Windows if the build quality is similar and trackpad just as good.
 
Guys, GTX 950M and GTX 960M have THE SAME GM107 core inside them. How can one be crap, and second brilliant?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.