What are the benefits of integrated graphics vs dedicated graphics?

[Hieveryone]

I know everyone on here tends to favor dGPU.

The obvious benefit is better graphics capability.

But if you don't do anything that NEEDS dedicated graphics, then IMO iGPU is better for these reasons:

1. Better Battery Life
2. Cooler Temperatures for Computer
3. No Chance of dGPU Card Failing Then Spending Hundreds to Fix

So IMO the dGPU if anything is more of a burden than a perk unless you REALLY need it and use it ALL the time.

 

[jetjaguar]

kind of just made the same thread because i just bought a base model 15 and didn't remember that it came with integrated only. Don't really feel like returning it and all the past mbps i have owned i really never used the dGPU. But I still feel like I made a bad choice lol.

 

[Hieveryone]

kind of just made the same thread because i just bought a base model 15 and didn't remember that it came with integrated only. Don't really feel like returning it and all the past mbps i have owned i really never used the dGPU. But I still feel like I made a bad choice lol.

You didn't make a bad choice IMO. I seriously think dGPU is way more of a burden than people think.

Unless you are really using that dGPU because it's your career or something, I would pass.

I have iGPU is in my 13" late 2013 MBPr and have NEVER, and I mean literally NEVER, missed not having a graphics card.

And I never will.

 

[jetjaguar]

i would never game on a laptop. I may possibly have to edit a video in fcpx but no 4k just 1080p. But the main use of my laptop is for online business stuff. But not having a dGPU might really show when you go to sell it.

 

[Hieveryone]

i would never game on a laptop. I may possibly have to edit a video in fcpx but no 4k just 1080p. But the main use of my laptop is for online business stuff. But not having a dGPU might really show when you go to sell it.

Think of this way. There are 5 MacBook Pro Retina models.

Three of them are 13" models.

Two of them are 15" models.

ONLY ONE (1) has a dGPU.

I'm willing to bet those other 4 models will most definitely hold value when selling it.

If you plan on editing 4k video frequently then I'd trade it in for a dGPU. Just saying.

 

[jetjaguar]

Think of this way. There are 5 MacBook Pros.

Three of them are 13" models.

Two of them are 15" models.

ONLY ONE (1) has a dGPU.

I'm willing to bet those other 4 models will most definitely hold value when selling it.

If you plan on editing 4k video frequently then I'd trade it in for a dGPU. Just saying.

nope will never in the life of this laptop. Plus that is what my desktop is for should i ever have the need.

 

[Hieveryone]

nope will never in the life of this laptop. Plus that is what my desktop is for should i ever have the need.

Ok then you're fine IMO. As far as gaming, I agree. I origninally had contemplated gaming but then I thought you can't beat an Xbox One or PS4.

The titles available, and the gaming experience is unrivaled.

So that's why I use a computer for computing and a game console for gaming!

 

[Freyqq]

In my 2010 mbp, the dgpu is a huge headache. About half the apps I want to use trigger the dgpu, so I have to actively seek out alternatives that don't trigger it. It's a huge pain. Also, in bootcamp, it runs hotter than it would with just an igpu, as the dgpu is always on. I just use it for ms office in bootcamp, so an igpu would have been fine.

However, on my late 2013 rmbp 15", the software in osx is much better. The only thing so far that triggers the dgpu are videogames and external monitors. It's great.

 

[Hieveryone]

In my 2010 mbp, the dgpu is a huge headache. About half the apps I want to use trigger the dgpu, so I have to actively seek out alternatives that don't trigger it. It's a huge pain. Also, in bootcamp, it runs hotter than it would with just an igpu, as the dgpu is always on. I just use it for ms office in bootcamp, so an igpu would have been fine.

However, on my late 2013 rmbp 15", the software in osx is much better. The only thing so far that triggers the dgpu are videogames and external monitors. It's great.

That's good. The games I play though run smoothly and the external monitor is great on iGPU.

But the game is old and the monitor is just a standard 24" Dell Ultrasharp not 4k.

 

[jetjaguar]

probably should have gotten the higher end model but i think it would be overkill for what i plan to do. I just hate the idea of having integrated only

 

[yjchua95]

I know everyone on here tends to favor dGPU.

The obvious benefit is better graphics capability.

But if you don't do anything that NEEDS dedicated graphics, then IMO iGPU is better for these reasons:

1. Better Battery Life
2. Cooler Temperatures for Computer
3. No Chance of dGPU Card Failing Then Spending Hundreds to Fix

So IMO the dGPU if anything is more of a burden than a perk unless you REALLY need it and use it ALL the time.

1. Better Battery Life - false. I get around 7.5-8 hours on my dGPU-equipped rMBP, with gfxcardstatus disabling the dGPU.

2. Cooler temperatures - false again. In fact, I find that if I force the iGPU to be active when doing heavy work like rendering, I find that temperatures are higher than with the dGPU on. This is because all tasks are done on one chip, instead of being spread out across two chips. Spreading out across two chips improves heat dissipation and also actually reduces throttling. I did a Macoh throttling test and found that with the dGPU, I did not encounter any CPU throttling at all, while with the iGPU, my CPU throttled badly.

3. The rMBPs have far better ventilation and thermal design than the cMBP. So a GPU failure is much more unlikely now. In the case of the 2010 and 2011 cMBPs, the first of the widespread GPU failures popped up within the first year. It's been 2 years already and there's barely any GPU failures seen in the 1st-gen rMBPs.

 

[snaky69]

I know everyone on here tends to favor dGPU.

The obvious benefit is better graphics capability.

But if you don't do anything that NEEDS dedicated graphics, then IMO iGPU is better for these reasons:

1. Better Battery Life
2. Cooler Temperatures for Computer
3. No Chance of dGPU Card Failing Then Spending Hundreds to Fix

So IMO the dGPU if anything is more of a burden than a perk unless you REALLY need it and use it ALL the time.

It's quite simple, really. It's just a case of more power vs. more battery life.

 

[blueroom]

Reasons to have the integrated GPU only:
Less things to break, some dual GPUs have be a problem for some MacBooks in the past.
Less heat and less complex heat management.
Possibly longer battery life.
It's a decent GPU e.g. Iris Pro.

Reasons to have a dual GPU:
Gaming.
Rendering that uses the GPUs cores.

 

[UBS28]

Don't get integrated GPU only option, it's just not good enough. Sometimes OS X lags with the Integrated GPU. Manually switching to the 750m makes it smooth as butter.

 

[mcarling]

Reasons to have the integrated GPU only:
Less things to break, some dual GPUs have be a problem for some MacBooks in the past.
Less heat and less complex heat management.
Possibly longer battery life.
It's a decent GPU e.g. Iris Pro.

Reasons to have a dual GPU:
Gaming.
Rendering that uses the GPUs cores.

Also, integrated GPUs offer much better value for money than discrete GPUs.

 

[Drakas]

Don't get integrated GPU only option, it's just not good enough. Sometimes OS X lags with the Integrated GPU. Manually switching to the 750m makes it smooth as butter.

the new mid 2014 rMBP lag with Mission Critical or Yosemite? Irish Pro isn't enought?

 

[alex0002]

These "do I need a dGPU" threads are a bit like the "do I need 16GB of RAM" threads. The people that need it should already know who they are and know why they need it.

If you have to ask the question, then you probably don't need a dGPU.

Each generation of integrated GPU performs a little better than the last. It wouldn't surprise me if a dGPU becomes a BTO option with Broadwell or Skylake.

 

[iososx]

probably should have gotten the higher end model but i think it would be overkill for what i plan to do. I just hate the idea of having integrated only

Apple has done a terrific job with integrated.

I use a fully maxed out 15" MacBook Pro Retina with dedicated GPU only because my resource intense work demands it.

They're both very nice laptops. My model of choice for many years.

 

[UBS28]

the new mid 2014 rMBP lag with Mission Critical or Yosemite? Irish Pro isn't enought?

If you got alot of things running, the Iris Pro can make OS X lag. Switching to the 750m manually solved it for me.

 

[maflynn]

I think at this stage of iGPU development, the days of discrete GPUs in MBPs are numbered. Last generation, we saw apple remove the dGPU from all but the high end model.

I'd also point out the track record for apple is not the best when it comes to dGPUs, the 2008, 2010, 2011 models all have failing discrete GPUs. I believe that needs to be considered as well when looking at what choice is best.

 

[TRC-WA]

You didn't make a bad choice IMO. I seriously think dGPU is way more of a burden than people think.

Unless you are really using that dGPU because it's your career or something, I would pass.

I have iGPU is in my 13" late 2013 MBPr and have NEVER, and I mean literally NEVER, missed not having a graphics card.

And I never will.

I've had my 15" Pro for a week... paid $1709.99 plus tax after discounts.

It does everything I want it to do... AutoCAD... amateur photo/video editing... and web surfing.

No need for a dedicated GPU. It wasn't worth the premium price for what I do.

 

[maflynn]

No need for a dedicated GPU. It wasn't worth the premium price for what I do.

I think that's the case for most users and that's one reason why I think the dGPU is a dinosaur ready for extinction.

 

[introsuit]

If you got alot of things running, the Iris Pro can make OS X lag. Switching to the 750m manually solved it for me.

That's probably mostly because Yosemite has really poor UI performance. I believe on Mavericks Iris Pro would be perfectly smooth.

 

[vbedia]

That's probably mostly because Yosemite has really poor UI performance. I believe on Mavericks Iris Pro would be perfectly smooth.

I agree. Yosemite UI performance is not as good as Mavericks is; barely have I ever seen Mavericks UI lagging on the Iris Pro. I have seen it more often on Yosemite, the only thing I can think of is that Yosemite's is not as well optimized as Maverick's is, at least not yet.

I am not a hungry power user. On Yosemite, as well as on Mavericks, I use some Microsoft Office (basically Word and Excel), some basic photo editing, and typical stuff (checking email, browsing, etc...)

 

[cambookpro]

I personally wouldn't touch another MBP with a dedicated GPU after Apple's history with them. Out of four MBPs with dGPUs we've had in our house over 8 years, two have failed. A tiny sample size I know, but these things regularly fail and it just isn't acceptable on a >£1.5k machine.

The iGPUs are getting pretty good nowadays. Even on an Intel HD 3000 you can run FCP and edit HD fairly well. By all accounts, the Iris Pros are very capable chips and unless you're editing multiple 4K streams, 3D rendering or gaming, I don't really see a reason for a dGPU.