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.
Would you buy a rMBP without a dedicated GPU?
- Thread starter johngwheeler
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That whole part of my post was build on purposely false statements. I guess I should have thrown "sarcasm" remark in there, but it didn't sound right. 🙂
Last edited:
Most of the benefits from a 5200 pro are pure speculation and depend on Apples design decisions. Cooler, thinner, and more battery power are possible. But i think the downsides are obvious: less graphic performance(except OpenGL), only marginal faster CPU, more power for basic tasks needed (a 4600 consumes less while the 750m sleeps), higher price on paper and the intel drivers sucks.
Im not a heavy gamer, but I would not buy a 15 MBPR without a dedicated GPU. If I want some compromises for battery/heat/perfomance etc. I would get a 13MBPR. For the highend 13 MBR the Iris 5200 would be a killer CPU/GPU, but for a 15 MBPR the perfomance is to slow.
Im not a heavy gamer, but I would not buy a 15 MBPR without a dedicated GPU. If I want some compromises for battery/heat/perfomance etc. I would get a 13MBPR. For the highend 13 MBR the Iris 5200 would be a killer CPU/GPU, but for a 15 MBPR the perfomance is to slow.
I believe that Apple will continue to offer dGPU in the 15" Pros. It does look like the GT3e finally offers comparably performance to a dGPU on the 13" platform (here's hoping they offer a GT3e model at least in the high-end) where resolution and expectations are lower.
Here's my radical guess. I think what ships in the MBPr and Mac Pro may not be available yet. Hence (in part) the delay in announcing the new product. Apple is a high-profile enough customer that AMD/ATI may be preparing a new release to coincide with the MP and MBPr. Something that will be very similar in spec to the current Fire line of professional cards (desktop and server) but with a die shrink to save power and heat. Clearly the server version with have a much higher TDP and be more powerful but the chipset will be heavily compute optimized and give Apple a (temporary) bump in value since the mid- and high-end price will stay the same. Apple has done this in the past and it would create positive buzz around some controversial releases.
Of course, it seems reasonable that the low-end 15" will lack a discrete chip but have longer battery life. Heck, this may see the end of the MBP line and the low-end retina w/o dGPU will take up that price point.
Here's my radical guess. I think what ships in the MBPr and Mac Pro may not be available yet. Hence (in part) the delay in announcing the new product. Apple is a high-profile enough customer that AMD/ATI may be preparing a new release to coincide with the MP and MBPr. Something that will be very similar in spec to the current Fire line of professional cards (desktop and server) but with a die shrink to save power and heat. Clearly the server version with have a much higher TDP and be more powerful but the chipset will be heavily compute optimized and give Apple a (temporary) bump in value since the mid- and high-end price will stay the same. Apple has done this in the past and it would create positive buzz around some controversial releases.
Of course, it seems reasonable that the low-end 15" will lack a discrete chip but have longer battery life. Heck, this may see the end of the MBP line and the low-end retina w/o dGPU will take up that price point.
Fixed for you. Sorry, there's a distinction:
OpenGL is a graphics library. It allows developers to display 3D graphics rendered on the GPU.
OpenCL is a computing library. It allows developers to accelerate computing tasks by processing some of them on the GPU. (read: reduce load on CPU)
Basically, the move to Haswell means reduced graphics performance (just reduced, no exception), but potentially increased processing power and battery life.
Only processors that come with Iris Pro (there are only 3 of them) are those that have thermal profiles higher than what the 13" rMBP can handle, so... no, you won't see them in the 13" platform this year. Sadly.
The 13" platform will get the regular Iris (HD 5100) that doesn't come with the massive 128MB L4 cache. It's decidedly slower than Iris Pro.
And the only processors that come with Iris Pro are those that can only fit into a 15" MacBook, hence the general consensus that Apple is moving away from dGPU for this generation.
Considering that both AMD/Nvidia do not have die shrinks in their roadmap until 2014 makes it very unlikely we'll be seeing a new GPU process node this year.
NewishMacGuy
macrumors 6502a
Logical prognostications here - throw in some all around price drops and I hope you are correct.
>
Eduardot
macrumors regular
Discrete GPU in rMBP
Just when a load of us previous windows users are migrating to apple, and coming from a very intense hardware specs, i think that for apple to start fiddling with the hardware specs that came a lot of us to OSX, would definitely force us to reconsider windows a remigrate back........ Careful Mr. Cook....😱
Just when a load of us previous windows users are migrating to apple, and coming from a very intense hardware specs, i think that for apple to start fiddling with the hardware specs that came a lot of us to OSX, would definitely force us to reconsider windows a remigrate back........ Careful Mr. Cook....😱
fskywalker
macrumors 65816
well you can always stay on the previous generation and wait for a real upgrade in performance
i personally dont see any harm if apple will experiment with IGPU(even though i very much doubt it will happen)
but if it would i would just stay on my current rmbp and if it wont. as on owner rmbp i dont see very much reason to upgrade (unless theres going to be nvidia 765 or 780 like imac has which i doubt as well.its actually my dream machine)because what really retian needs to be the ultimate machine is better graphic card and better cooling system
so....why is this such a problem for everyone?
N19h7m4r3
macrumors 65816
That's what I'll be doing. If one day intel IGP's match or beat a dedicated card in overall performance I might buy it otherwise no thanks.
john123
macrumors 68030
If that unearthed Geekbench system is a real configuration, then I think your theory goes out the window. It was a 2.4Ghz with an Iris Pro 5200, and that sells for a whopping $657. There's no way that winds up in a low-end configuration.
You're also not going to see a GT3e in the 13" for similar reasons. Those will probably stay dual core for all the usual reasons (heat, cost, cannibalization).
Finally, Apple has never, ever putting cutting-edge graphics cards in their laptops. I don't see any reason to believe that trend is changing now--especially when the biggest reason their stock price has gotten slammed is declining gross margins.
----------
I'd go with "wishful", not "logical"...
rabidz7
macrumors 65816
jav6454
macrumors Core
No... Intel is pushing Iris just because they got nVidia and ATI with their respective CPU/GPU combos. Otherwise, we'd be seeing GMA950 graphic power still to this day. Intel is just trying to save their monopoly.
Like I said, I will sustain it, a "Pro" product without a "Pro" GPU in it not a "Pro" machine. A performance (not mainstream, not entry-level) dGPU will always be needed to classify a mobile PC as "Pro" level graphics.
The day Apple removes a dGPU from all MacBook models is the day I switch back to the PC.
vpro
macrumors 65816
Hmm
It makes more sense to take off the Pro from the 13" r-mb machine, it is just an over blown Air anyways. It makes greater sense to re-introduce the 17" back into the market because this machine is the only worthy beast to accommodate dCPU in a portable.
Just have one configuration for the 15" period and be a man again (with conviction and focus this time)
PLEASE, and just bring back the fully customizable powerhouse, workhorse the 17"MBP already, with or without retina display, I couldn't care less -- just give me the refresh I waited and saved up for.
It makes more sense to take off the Pro from the 13" r-mb machine, it is just an over blown Air anyways. It makes greater sense to re-introduce the 17" back into the market because this machine is the only worthy beast to accommodate dCPU in a portable.
Just have one configuration for the 15" period and be a man again (with conviction and focus this time)
PLEASE, and just bring back the fully customizable powerhouse, workhorse the 17"MBP already, with or without retina display, I couldn't care less -- just give me the refresh I waited and saved up for.Funny how many people argue over the meaning of the term "Pro". The 13" Macbook "Pro" has used integrated graphics for 5 years. There was a 15" Macbook "Pro" in 2009 that used integrated-only graphics.
To Apple, "Pro" is a marketing term used to denote the highest end products in a lineup. The Mac Pro is the most powerful desktop Mac, the Macbook Pro is the most powerful notebook Mac.
Every user's definition of what is required for a machine to be worth the "Pro" name is different. Having discussions about what is and isn't a real Pro machine is pretty pointless because there are many people who use their computers professionally for many different purposes that require many different specifications.
The question (for you) is whether Apple will produce a new machine that fits your specific needs. If it does not then the only logical choice is to go elsewhere.
jav6454
macrumors Core
Yes funny, cause I have never thought of the 13" MacBook "Pro" as a Pro product. I have always viewed it as a MacBook, nothing more.
Irrelevant, that is not how the categorized it. True Pro products tend to be more powerful, but it is not the power behind them as much as the dedicated hardware that moves the software. What good is it to have a powerful Pro class CPU, if the iGPU is crap?
That is why Pro products always carry a performance GPU, to match the CPU. Now, that the combination of both makes them powerful is just an added bonus.
At this point, in terms of laptop, yes they do. But, if in the future they decide to drop that dGPU, then yes it will become a question of choice elsewhere. Why are we questioning this if I stated it so earlier?
john123
macrumors 68030
jav6454
macrumors Core
Which is why it was called the MacBook, Apple later, to try and sell more rebranded it MacBook Pro.
Know your history. This all started with the nVidia 9400M chipset. True it was far superior to any iGPU at the time, but it was no dGPU. nVidia just happened to apply Intel's current layout by removing the Northbridge and making it a ICH, GPU and Memory controller, while the CPU was still fed by the ancient FSB.
They were referring to the entry level 15" MBP, which had only the 9400m at one point with no dGPU.
Count Blah
macrumors 68040
Yes, it was done in the past. The option existed to buy a MBP with and without a dGPU. I can't see how Apple would go away from having both, even if the iGPU was approaching minimally acceptable dGPU status.
Apple is holding off on upgrading all the MBPs so that they can offer the "Max battery life" version, sans dGPU.
Apple is holding off on upgrading all the MBPs so that they can offer the "Max battery life" version, sans dGPU.
jav6454
macrumors Core
I still call that a MacBook. Better yet, a 15" MacBook. Many people referred to it as that as well due to the iGPU. Goes to show how much of a naming difference an iGPU o dGPU can have.