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 Skylake MBP thread
- Thread starter adildacoolset
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Guys, think about it. 950M has 55W of TDP. How much clocks have to be pushed down in order to cut the TDP of it by 50%?
20-30%? That would mean that 950M would not be any faster than HD580. And would add cost on top of the HD580. Cost of the board of MBP, cost of the GPU itself. Is it really beneficial to have that Green brand stucked into the MBP?
20-30%? That would mean that 950M would not be any faster than HD580. And would add cost on top of the HD580. Cost of the board of MBP, cost of the GPU itself. Is it really beneficial to have that Green brand stucked into the MBP?
That's the point. It's not worth having a DGPU if it needs to be sufficiently underclocked to fit in within a ~40W thermal envelope available on an rMBP 15" . A Skylake with Iris Pro 580 iGPU runs unthrottled and can probably perform nearly as well, if not better, than any available DGPU today.
There's a constant refrain demanding "why doesn't Apple use {insert latest greatest DGPU} ? It blows Iris Pro out of the water!" . Well, unless there's data showing that it has a sufficiently low thermal envelope and still generates substantially better performance despite being underclocked, that's not valid.
Further, considering the long history of DGPU derived logic board failures on MBPs, I'd rather have an Iris Pro 580 based MBP 15" than one with a DGPU at all. I don't consider the MBP to be a gaming platform.
There's a constant refrain demanding "why doesn't Apple use {insert latest greatest DGPU} ? It blows Iris Pro out of the water!" . Well, unless there's data showing that it has a sufficiently low thermal envelope and still generates substantially better performance despite being underclocked, that's not valid.
Further, considering the long history of DGPU derived logic board failures on MBPs, I'd rather have an Iris Pro 580 based MBP 15" than one with a DGPU at all. I don't consider the MBP to be a gaming platform.
The simpler computer is the better it works. That is why I am fan of iGPUs. They are not great, but they are not rubbish anymore.
I think Apple went with Colin Chapman, CEO of Lotus, the car manufacturer from GB, and his philosophy: Simplify, and add lightness.
Have you seen latest reviews of Intel HD's?
I think Apple went with Colin Chapman, CEO of Lotus, the car manufacturer from GB, and his philosophy: Simplify, and add lightness.
So R9 370X is good for casual, not demanding use in that sense? And HD580 will be on par or faster than that. Gaming in something like Diablo3 in full HD maxed out at constant 60 FPS refresh rate is not demanding use?
Have you seen latest reviews of Intel HD's?
Iris Pro 580 benchmarks should only be compared to comparable DGPU results when throttled to a ~40W power envelope. It makes no sense to compare it to something with an 80W TDP When properly compared, by guess is that the Iris Pro 580 would generate surprisingly strong sustained performance, i.e. it will not throttle down unlike a DGPU that's overheating within the MBP chassis.
Preach on! I'm warming up more and more to GT4e as the days drag on. Folks these aren't pokey old Intel GMA graphics, this is Intel's first serious attempt at mainstream gaming capabilities. I would prefer Apple to bring this type of solution and make it easier to deploy eGPU for enthusiast loads rather than forgo the eGPU and toss in a faulty GPU that may break down in three years.
Even the Iris Pro 5200 in the current MBP 15" is not 'bad' as such. It's capable. The issue primarily is how much differential performance exists vs the DGPU ? The Iris Pro 5200 was still measurably slower than the downclocked DGPU offered by Apple on 15" models.
While Iris Pro 580 data is hard to come by, except for the theoretical 1150GFLOPs quoted on places like Wccftech, the larger point is that at such a performance level, the Iris Pro 580 is almost as good as the current generation DGPUs at the currently throttled 40W envelope. The Iris Pro 580 brings iGPU performance to within 10% of current gen DGPU performance. Of course, Polaris/Pascal at 14nm will again widen the gap, but it would be interesting to see what Apple will choose here - accomodate next gen DGPUs on board, or make MBPs iGPU only, with an eGPU accessory solution for those who need it. Accessories give them additional margin after all.
not demanding doesn't mean full hd at 60fps..it mean you can play some games at 30-60 fps like diablo 2 or 3, csgo , team fortress ,lol or whatever i saw that the macbook can run fine with 750MThe simpler computer is the better it works. That is why I am fan of iGPUs. They are not great, but they are not rubbish anymore.
I think Apple went with Colin Chapman, CEO of Lotus, the car manufacturer from GB, and his philosophy: Simplify, and add lightness.
So R9 370X is good for casual, not demanding use in that sense? And HD580 will be on par or faster than that. Gaming in something like Diablo3 in full HD maxed out at constant 60 FPS refresh rate is not demanding use?
Have you seen latest reviews of Intel HD's?
Apple had the 750M before; saw no reason why the 950M wouldn't be a viable option. I would figure that NVidia would try to keep the same TDPs for the same range of cards. However, the higher TDP is something I didn't notice before, to be honest.
In theory, if Apple have underclock/undervolt GPU in the past like the 750m before, then they should be able to do the same to the 950m. However knowing Apple and how powerful the intel 580 graphic is, they might elect to skip dGPU altogether and just stick with iGPU (and maybe with an optional eGPU over TB3. One can hope
My current rMBP is Iris Pro-only, and I love it. A significantly more powerful iGPU would be fantastic. However, if Apple is keeping the dGPU around, that would mean the Iris Pro only models would be delayed along with the dGPU. I'd rather Apple slap in a dGPU now so us folks with Iris Pro-only aren't delayed until June.
So.. Okay. What if Apple uses the Xeon E3-1545M (correction) instead of the i7-6970HQ for the 15 inch MacBook Pro? I mean.. They are almost the same price (~$50 more) and the Xeon chip also has Iris Pro graphics (P580 vs 580 but same spec I believe) but also gets a 0.1 GHz boost.
They are both 14nm, I just don't know the power requirement.
They are both 14nm, I just don't know the power requirement.
Wikipedia puts the TDP for 950M at 55W level. It would be hard to imagine that with higher core clock desktop GM107 chip which is in GTX750Ti and 950M/960M would have higher TDP that that. They just assumed that because 75W is max what can be put through PCIex 3.0.
Power requirements fro both Xeon and i7 are the same. The price for Xeon is however much higher. I do not believe Apple would go for them.
One more thing. I have checked which GPU would fit in thermal envelope of MBP.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-940M.138027.0.html
And according to stats it is on par with... Intel HD 540 from 15W CPU from Intel.
That is mind boggling. It is EXACTLY on par with HD540 O_O.
.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-940M.138027.0.html
And according to stats it is on par with... Intel HD 540 from 15W CPU from Intel.
That is mind boggling. It is EXACTLY on par with HD540 O_O.
Anyway, it is higher
.
I would say that HD580 will be between R9 370X and GTX950M. That is more "realistic" estimate.
If we look at non biased game like Bioshock Infinite it looks like 940M is exactly the same performance level as is HD540.
I don't know what to say at this point, really...
If we look at non biased game like Bioshock Infinite it looks like 940M is exactly the same performance level as is HD540.
I don't know what to say at this point, really...
I am thinking that they will max out the new ssd to 256gb and the ram to a whopping 4gb also put a brand new celeron processor 1 and a half core in it. Where are we in the 90's?!?
Last edited:
That's exactly why Apple didn't put any dGPU in the past years.
Because the iGPU were good enough to have decent results, and until the 950m (which was difficult to be used due to TDP) there were no convenient GPUs.
Now it looks like, in a way or another, the GPU supply is really more convenient.
The Iris Pro 580 will definitively do its job.
Still, I'm hoping for Polaris on the 15" on June...
Nice humour ... ;(
I mean the exact models that are referred to be released ..
And not another i5-6xxx, i7-6xxxx?
- Status