Was going to get the rMBP 13 but no discrete graphics is BS. Currently my 2009 MacBook pro has better graphics than a 2012 machine! That is nuts, what was apple thinking?
Last edited:
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.
Will rMBP 13'' ever have discrete graphics? [RANT]
- Thread starter BluAffiliate
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ahem.
I think you meant "discrete" graphics, not "integrated." All Apple 13" laptops have integrated graphics.
The rMBP 13" does have integrated graphics. As for the 13-foot rMBP in your thread title, I'm not sure.
This is not possible. The best what 2009 MBP had is the Nvidia 9600M GT (dedicated GPU), which is a slower card than Intel's integrated HD4000
The quality of graphics is determined by more than simply integrated or discrete. Do you know the difference?
$5 says you've never actually looked at any benchmarks and compared the two. The HD4000 is plenty good and probably way better.
What do you need a discrete GPU for anyway?
Gaming.
And there's no way that integrated graphics can be better than discreet. Get real man, everyone knows.
HD 4000 has over 1Gpixel/sec fillrate, this is enough to continuously render a 2560x1600 quad at over 200 FPS. If there is a problem with the performance, than its a software one, not a hardware one. Besides, CPU still does the majority of the work.
Have you been living under a rock or something? Of course a modern integrated card (which can run Skyrim at 35 fps on 1680x1050) is faster than an ancient GPU (which struggles to get 35FPS on 1280*720).
Bottomline: the new 2012 13" MBP will be considerably faster at gaming even compared to the 2009 top-end 15" MBP. Hell, even a 2012 Air outperforms the 2009 Pro in every possible category.
False.
The integrated graphics in the 2012 machines (HD4000) are considerably faster than the discrete GPU in your 2009 machine.
Well it's certainly better than discreet graphics released in 2009, man
PassMark 3GD Mark (higher is better)
GeForce 9400M - 134
GeForce GT 320M - 240
GeForce GT 330M - 394
Intel HD4000 - 515
For comparison, the 15in rMBP with its 650M gets 1275
So either go for the 15in rMBP or find a better laptop more suitable for gaming
No dGPU means not having to deal with graphics switching, meaning peace of mind regarding the battery being drained faster than the use warrants. Trust me, that's a plus, a big one.
In fact, this would be reason enough for me to consider downgrading from the 15" to the 13". If it wasn't for the 16 GB of RAM and awesome speakers, my 15" would be sold already.
In fact, this would be reason enough for me to consider downgrading from the 15" to the 13". If it wasn't for the 16 GB of RAM and awesome speakers, my 15" would be sold already.
Are you serious? Only a fanboy turns an obvious drawback into a "feature". Lol, downgrade from 15 inch my ass.
If you install gfxCardStatus you can tell it not to use discrete graphics ever when running on battery. Issue solved.
A few errors aside, I completely agree with the OP.
For that price, discrete graphics should be a given.
People are right though - Haswell promises a 100% increase in graphical performance over Ivy Bridge's HD4000. According to Intel, that should put it in line with a $70-90 graphics card (see GT650).
I currently work with a 2011 13" air and I absolutely love it but the HD3000 kills any hopes of casual gaming. I have too much self-respect to play games at absolute minimum settings and still only getting 20 FPS.
And to the guy who claims to run Skyrim just fine on an HD4000 - get some self respect man! Minimum settings are NOT for people who spend $2k++ on a laptop!
For that price, discrete graphics should be a given.
People are right though - Haswell promises a 100% increase in graphical performance over Ivy Bridge's HD4000. According to Intel, that should put it in line with a $70-90 graphics card (see GT650).
I currently work with a 2011 13" air and I absolutely love it but the HD3000 kills any hopes of casual gaming. I have too much self-respect to play games at absolute minimum settings and still only getting 20 FPS.
And to the guy who claims to run Skyrim just fine on an HD4000 - get some self respect man! Minimum settings are NOT for people who spend $2k++ on a laptop!
If you want to play games with stellar graphics, buy a PC. For the same cost as an MBP you can build a high quality gaming machine that packs a bigger punch and will last you longer. Only drawback is lack of OS X, but OS X cannot compete with Windows for gaming (and I'm a Mac guy).
Its a real shame Apple didn't manage to squeeze a dedicated GPU in the 13. I really thought they would have to keep the lines between the Air's and the Pro's clear cut.
Having picked up a 15" Retina at launch weirdly/thankfully I'm relieved as I really like the 13" footprint but always like to run the occasional game and without a dedicated GPU it just wouldn't cut it.
Having picked up a 15" Retina at launch weirdly/thankfully I'm relieved as I really like the 13" footprint but always like to run the occasional game and without a dedicated GPU it just wouldn't cut it.
Thanks but I already know about and used it. It's not that simple of an issue to solve, as sticking to integrated-only incurs a slew of caveats, especially when dealing with external monitors.