Say what? What does 3D rendering have to do with the GPU?
Also, if you can't afford 2 laptops, why do you have 2 laptops and a desktop?
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.
Why does Apple hate Macbook Pro users?
- Thread starter Nonpython
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Say what? What does 3D rendering have to do with the GPU?
Also, if you can't afford 2 laptops, why do you have 2 laptops and a desktop?
If you're unhappy with what apple has to offer then as others have stated. Move on and find a windows based laptop that has more suitable specifications.
Apple has never used powerful GPUs in their laptops, in fact they have a history of under-clocking the GPUs to save battery. The gaming market sector is not one that apple is interested. If you need a more powerful GPU for rendering, then an apple laptop is not for you.
Regardless of the "strawmen" arguments you see, the fact is that apple chooses to offer laptops that fit the needs for most users, not all. Not gamers, not folks who want full GPU power for rendering or running 3D type software.
no amount of complaining is going to change that fact, just move on if the MBP doesn't fit your needs.
Apple has never used powerful GPUs in their laptops, in fact they have a history of under-clocking the GPUs to save battery. The gaming market sector is not one that apple is interested. If you need a more powerful GPU for rendering, then an apple laptop is not for you.
Regardless of the "strawmen" arguments you see, the fact is that apple chooses to offer laptops that fit the needs for most users, not all. Not gamers, not folks who want full GPU power for rendering or running 3D type software.
no amount of complaining is going to change that fact, just move on if the MBP doesn't fit your needs.
there are only a handful of laptop video cards that can achieve that. I don't think the 360M can do this either.
if decent frame rates at 1920x1200 is your goal, the MBP is simply not the right computer for you. Although many people game on MBPs, I don't believe MBPs will ever be at the forefront of gaming as hardcore gamers are not the target market.
The 6750 is a pretty good GPU actually. It's nowhere close compared to the super high-end gaming GPUs, but it's quite a bit better than middle-end GPUs. This is the best GPU that Apple has ever put in since the 8600M GT from the 2007 models.
Apart from this, I don't think there are any other laptops by any other manufacturer that weigh less than 2.5kg that have a better GPU. The closest competitor is the HP Envy 15" with its ATI 5830 weighing 2.4kg. I've envied the envy for months for it's powerful Core i7 Quad CPU + ATI 5830 along with it's light weight and thin frame. The new 15" Macbook Pro beats it though.
Edit: Snap, I just remembered you were talking about the 17" MBP. You're right, he does hate you guys. But don't feel so bad, he hates the 13" users too. I'm glad I'm a 15" user.
If it's simply a chip on the motherboard then it's an integrated graphic chip.
A dedicated mobile graphics card looks like this:
To be fair, they're all pretty much the same size no matter how weak or powerful they are. But the problem is that the notebook manufacturer has to provide cooling for the card depending on how much heat it produces.
Last edited:
Guys .... Can you not see you are getting trolled so hard right now? lol.
Entirely possible, but regardless he does have a very good point.
If they can fit a ATI 6750 on a 15", why can't they fit a more powerful card on the 17"? The extra space on the 17" allows for better cooling.
Furthermore the ATI 6750 is not powerful enough to play a lot of mordern games with high settings and a good framerate at 1920x1280, which sucks for 17" users who wish to play at native resolution.
Guys .... Can you not see you are getting trolled so hard right now? lol.
Haha, first post I read and instantly went "what a troll". I'm with you on this. Can't affort two computers.. but has a imac w/ macbook air and 2010 mbp. I also can't afford two computers w/ my imac, macbook air, macbook pro and my soon to be 2011 mbp.. we don't all have 100k incomes.. ya know?
You don't know anything about industrial design. I do. Trust me it is a lot harder than you think to budget dissipation in a machine like that. The actual internal air volume is not much greater, with the extra misc ports and other options, the internal volume is probably very similar. The induction method is the same, as is the size of the hinge. You would have to completely custom-design the 17" in a different way to get it to take advantage of "all that extra space". Then it would cost a lot more, probably lose quite a few features that 17' users enjoy (ExpressCard, optical drive). None of these things are on Apple's priority list right now, and it clearly isn't just a matter of plugging in another chip as many people make it out to be.
Not true.
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/features.html
That doesn't mean they solely develop the MBP for gamers, but your proposition that Apple doesn't care about them is wrong.
Not true again.
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/performance.html
What Apple has to say is completely contrary to what you said.
"Up to 3x quicker on the draw. And the render."
"When you need more performance for things like playing 3D games, editing HD video, or even running CAD software, the 15- and 17-inch MacBook Pro models automatically switch to discrete AMD Radeon graphics that let you see more frames per second and experience better responsiveness. With up to 1GB of dedicated GDDR5 video memory, these processors provide up to 3x faster performance than the previous generation."
Besides if Apple isn't designing the MBP for games, rendering etc., who exactly are they developing it for, people browsing macrumors? Apple decided to include a 6750M for web browsing, is that what you're telling me?
I'm personally very satisfied with Apple's choice of GPU in the high-end 15" anyway.
Oh, I guess that's true to some degree. The dedicated GPUs seem to be taking up about the same room, though more on a vertical scale since they have to sit on top of the logic board.
My GTX 460 in my desktop has a logic board that looks about twice that size. Given, the bulk of the entire product is the fan, but the board alone is still pretty massive.
Lets be honest, isn't that the same rational everyone was using two weeks ago when people were saying Apple should use quad core mobile chips? That they would be too hot and Apple would have to do some major redesign to use them? Yet here we are with those hotter parts and there aren't 2011 MBP's melting on peoples laps...
They aren't hotter parts, necessarily. SB is a much more efficient design. AMD also makes more efficient GPUs than Nvidia (who just seems to like to make hot/big chips). It wouldn't surprise me if Apple is getting a large amount of additional performance for only a token additional heat production.
Actually I disagree and the linked features doesn't not do anything to sway the argument. I've been a mac fan too long to see the games come and then go on the Mac. Apple never really seemed interested in games on their computers since as far back as I can remember. So my words are accurate in that apple is not catering to the gamers. Its a sector they're not interested in for the mac.
Edit: Snap, I just remembered you were talking about the 17" MBP. You're right, he does hate you guys. But don't feel so bad, he hates the 13" users too. I'm glad I'm a 15" user.
If it's simply a chip on the motherboard then it's an integrated graphic chip.
A dedicated mobile graphics card looks like this:
To be fair, they're all pretty much the same size no matter how weak or powerful they are. But the problem is that the notebook manufacturer has to provide cooling for the card depending on how much heat it produces.
No, they just come with their own daughterboards for the convenience. It's entirely possible to put a dedicated gpu on a main motherboard, as apple has been doing it for years. The 6750m that's in the macbook pro is also soldered onto the main motherboard.
The GPU can be soldered onto the motherboard and it's still a discrete GPU. Integrated GPU is something that uses your system RAM instead of its own DDR or GDDR. Apple solders the GPUs onto the logic boards instead of using MXMs.
At least on the CPU's the TDP is higher, therefore one needs to have a cooling system that can handle it. Even if the CPU's actually run cooler than previous gen (most of that is due to finally being able to turn cores off voltage wise) for average usage. I have been reading that AMD GPUs TDP doesn't include the RAM whereas Nvidia does, who knows if that is actually true...
All I am saying is we don't know for sure the limitation of MBP cooling.
Right, that's why they talk about games in the marketing material on their own website.
Of course Apple doesn't cater only to gamers, they try to reach a broader user base. That's not what you said earlier though. Apple, obviously considers gamers a part of their market or they would talk about games and have a WoW graphic on their marketing page.
Indeed, we do not have the data to say definitively.
When you look at the previous generation MBPs, we have an i7 at 35W. 320M IGP at 15-20W, GT 330M at 20-25W. That's 80W max, but the IGP and dGPU were never running at the same time, so lets call it 60W max.
Now we have a 45W CPU, and a 35W dGPU. The IGP is now integrated with the CPU's TDP. If everything was running full tilt, we get back to that 80W number again. However, if the IGP is not running, the CPU's usage is not as high. Furthermore it can and will clock itself down considerably if the chassis is getting toasty… so we might well see that very same 60W number (25W CPU and 35W GPU). We also very well may see the CPU running at 2.8GHz much more often than 3.x when the dGPU is kicking.
Yes this is a very crude way of doing it, probably not at all accurate. There is a lot more depth to how SB manages its own thermal envelope, and the 35W for the 6750M is just a guess (it is probably lower). However, it begins to show how repositioning the IGP makes a lot of difference, and how intelligently throttled bins are exceptionally useful in building laptops.
Ah, PC nerd gamers, who at 28 are still virgins.... Thinking that if they carry around a MacBook Pro, they may be seen as cool/hip and think that by owning a MacBook Pro the chances of getting laid are increased a few points, by some mathematical equation I cannot even get my trendy locks around...
Purchase a notebook/desktop for its intended use.. not for its hotness.
I still cannot believe how many people purchase a MacBook Pro and the FIRST thing they do is install Windows via Bootcamp or VM and a few games?? Nothing else? Wow... just wow. (thats the expression WOW, not World Of Warcraft).
Thanks
Purchase a notebook/desktop for its intended use.. not for its hotness.
I still cannot believe how many people purchase a MacBook Pro and the FIRST thing they do is install Windows via Bootcamp or VM and a few games?? Nothing else? Wow... just wow. (thats the expression WOW, not World Of Warcraft).
Thanks
Thank you.
As apple become more and more popular, its ridiculous how many people are buying macs despite their actual needs. People compare mbps with hp envy and other high end laptops, and say "if you ignore the aesthetics, the os, the better quality track pad, etc, then the envy is better and cheaper"
Well if you don't care for all those things, DON'T GET A ****** MAC. Simple as that.
Guess what, there are people who care about OS, the overall aesthetics, the software that run on macs only, and they are willing to pay the extra money to get them those features.
If you want to play games through bootcamp on a mac and isn't satisfied with your fps in world of warcraft, get a freaking Windows laptop. Because guess what, besides the giant ass apple logo, you are not getting any other features of a Mac. And if you are the kind of person who would pay $1000 extra just to show people your Apple logo, you shouldn't be crying on this forum about apple fanboys, because you are the biggest apple fanboy.
- Well, don't get me wrong, but a lot of people including skeptical gaming websites who like to put quality advertising on power over quality, (just like Chinese airsoft guns) concur on the fact that the
AMD 6750 has faster cores than the 360. Now the memory speed and the shaders are higher in the Nvidia card, however as stated before: If you are sitting with an Imac, use that. As far as gaming, people are getting high/ultra graphics settings with Crysis 2, Starcraft 2, BC2, and Black Ops on OSX at 1680 by 1050 on the 15" 2.2 high end. The 17" has a higher benchmark rating than even that! Now it's understandable that the 17" would suffer a bit from it's massive resolution. But asking new age high-graphics gaming on 1900x1200 from a non-graphics designed Apple laptop isn't practical. From experience, apple has given good computers that will last and carry a variety of upsides that counter the fact that they don't meet some people's graphical needs.
E.
Last edited: