Why doesn't the 13" MBP have a discreet GPU?

it was only the beginning because now in june we will get something stronger, like all the users said something equal to nvidia 630M

 

I too would like a 13 form with a dedicated GPU. I prefer the size but don't like that its not offered.

 

People had to be mad to buy the first iteration of the 13" rMBP. Especially with the limited HD 4000 on board. Thankfully the HD 5xxx series looks to give a healthy performance boost.

 

really....you should do some reading on graphics cards.

HD4000 is great for the 13"


i play crysis 3 on it just fine.


i bet you have not even used a HD4000.

 

There are literaly 100 threads in this topic. Short answer: because there is no room for one.

 

I've no doubt Crysis 3 will run on HD 4000, but it runs appallingly at a very low level of performance.

I have HD 4000 built-in to my ThinkPad at work, not that I use it for any kind of gaming because it's pointless when I have a decent PC rig at home for proper PC gaming.

I suggest you also do some reading on "graphics cards". You'll notice HD 4000 won't get a mention as it's not a discrete chip.

You are only kidding & deluding yourself if you think HD 4000 is "great" for gaming on a rMBP. It's rubbish for intensive 3D gaming at a high resolution. Fact.

----------

That's just BS though. Plenty of other vendors manage to pack a descrete GPU inside machines with a 13" footprint. Sony did it with the Z series up until 2010, so they were doing it years ago!

The only issue with a discrete GPU in a 13" chassis is cooling. My Vaio Z which I still have can get very hot when under load.

 

I think there are many reasons for not putting one in.

On the MBA and rMBP there is little room for one, in addition to this the inclusion of one will probably result in many heat issues as well as a big hit on battery life.

In the regular 13" MBP they still have the disc drive in which leaves the above reasons for this.

Without the disc drive in the normal 13" form factor I bet they could have fit one, with the battery to manage it as well as sort heat issues.

However the last reason they don't is that they want you to pay more for the 15".

 

the reason is simple OP, apple didnt knew you wanted one, so they left it out

 

Ya think?

I'd rather forego the serious games on a 13 inch laptop, have something that is light and travels well plus, gives great battery life. In other words, use it for what it was made for.

Oh wait... I have that.

 

Bingo. Seems like most here have spec fever (you would think it's a Windows forum). I've had the 13" for a month now and tried a 15" for the past few days. Hands down in most usages the 13" works way better for me. It's only faster when doing really hard batch stuff. In every day photo and video editing the 13" is just as fast, lighter, cooler, and the perfect form factor for portability. I'd rather see a quad core i7 and 16GB ram in the 13" before a dedicated GPU.

 

what ?

when did i say it was great for gaming ? , it runs games fine , stop spreading bs around.

hows the gaming rig treating you ? , how much that run you ?

probably a lot more then what i have into mine....NOTHING.


have fun with your expensive desktop, ill be enjoying my HD4000.


sheesh....people these days

 

That's the only reason right there. These kinds of decisions always come down to money. Technical issues can be solved. If Apple really wanted to release a 13" MBP with a discrete GPU, they would have done it.

It's the exact same reason why the 13" MBP doesn't have a quad-core CPU and the Mac Mini doesn't have a discrete GPU. They need to give consumers enough reasons to go for the more expensive products.

 

No,a discreet GPU in the 13'' would imply a smaller battery that would also deplete faster due to the use of the discreet GPU and since the MBP is in aluminium you'd also get it to pretty hot temperatures.

 

They could have made it slightly bigger and slightly heavier. Apple built the new rmbps with portability first and performance second. Some people like laptops that are made with those priorities the other way around. Since I am one of those people I just have to accept that I am not in Apple's target demographic for their hardware.

 

Apple will not sacrifice battery life for it,its a portable computer and it has to last long enough,if you require heavy graphics usage from your portable you need either a 15''MBP or a windows laptop.

People keep trying to use one machine for everything and that won't work.

 

I have a macbook air 13" mid 2012 with HD 4000. I tried Crysis 3 (it is 3 not 2 ok?) in bootcamp and on the lowest resolution with everything at low and i believe texture on medium i can play this on 29-30fps, so it is playable. But like i said in only that conditions.So, for a retina macbook 13" with hd4000 it is a shame you cannot play it on a higher level, but i think with the next hd5000 you will can bump this up, but not at a native resolution of 1600p

 

Design the board & internals to incorporate a discrete GPU. It's not rocket science. Dozens of other manufactures manage it.

Just disable it when not required, pretty much how the other MacBook Pro's with a discrete GPU & Integrated Graphics have functioned for years. The solution already exists.

The last version of the Z series had an external GPU if the users required it. A very clever/stupid idea, depending on how you look at it.

 

theres still People who buy it only because it's named Pro? .. wow.. guess they strategy does work.