or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Independent Graphics card in next Macbook?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Independent Graphics card in next Macbook?

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
Was just curious what you all think. Since the 13 inch Macbook has effectively taken the place of both the ibook AND the 12 inch powerbook...which is more probable in your eyes....

1) The next Macbook getting an independent Graphics Card to replace the integrated graphics in the current Macbook.

OR

2) The next Macbook stays with the integrated graphics and a 13 inch Macbook Pro comes out for those professionals that travel ALOT and need a smaller more Pro oriented laptop?

Anyone? :-)
post #2 of 22
Apple needs to make a discreet graphics card optional in the MacBook.
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
post #3 of 22
There is no technical reason why Apple could not have put a dedicated graphics card in this current MacBook.

Intel will also have new integrated graphics chips that will be better than the current one.

What do you think will change for Apple to put integrated graphics in the future MacBooks?
post #4 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by TenoBell
There is no technical reason why Apple could not have put a dedicated graphics card in this current MacBook.

Intel will also have new integrated graphics chips that will be better than the current one.

What do you think will change for Apple to put integrated graphics in the future MacBooks?

They will be better than the current ones and remain cheaper than a dedicated GPU. But still, the advantages of a dedicated GPU will trump an integrated one for some time.

I think the reasoning behind it was threefold: price, heat, power.

I have no idea what will need to change. Apple is using relatively high end GPUs in the iMacs and the MBPs, so I don't see why they wouldn't have gone with an X600 or X800 or even something lower.

Perhaps another reason behind it was to attempt to not poach the sales of the MBPs. Putting an integrated GPU in it clearly takes away a lot of "pro features" in terms of software. Even if they threw in one of the afformentioned GPUs running under PCIe, they would be quite powerful machines and would easily be able to run Apple Pro software that is GPU intensive.
Apple SexBots powered by Intel
Reply
Apple SexBots powered by Intel
Reply
post #5 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by regan
The next Macbook stays with the integrated graphics and a 13 inch Macbook Pro comes out for those professionals that travel ALOT and need a smaller more Pro oriented laptop?

I haven't seen one up-close, so I can't be sure, but is the 13" MacBook really that much smaller than the 15" MacBook Pro? Weight-wise, the MB is 5.2lb, while the MBP is 5.6lb--not much of a difference (less than 10%). I guess my point is: the MBP is just about as portable as the MB, as I see it.

Also, for someone who has techincal expertise: wouldn't having a dedicated GPU in there require a different internal component design? If that's the case (and I would assume it is), the reason Apple doesn't offer the option of dedicated graphics is that it's too expensive to have a separate assembly line going to satisfy those who want a dedicated GPU for a .4lb-lighter notebook.
"In Xanadu did Kubla Kahn a stately pleasure-dome decree."
Reply
"In Xanadu did Kubla Kahn a stately pleasure-dome decree."
Reply
post #6 of 22
Maybe they also have some deal with Intel that they use Intel GPUs. Intel has to flog them somewhere and they can't go wrong with a few million Mac users.

The thing is, the competition uses integrated Intel chips too. Although the competition is slightly cheaper, their low end machines have a similar spec.

What I've always wondered is why we even need separate GPUs. We have multi-core CPUs so why can't they design a chip where the CPU time is divided to handle graphics or standard processing depending on the requirement? I'm aware that software rendering is much slower than dedicated hardware rendering but I've never discovered why that is.

Rendering using a standard CPU would make programmable shading so much easier. Maybe it'll come some day:

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/new...php?story=6891

I think software amd system optimization neds to be looked at more on desktop machines. Games consoles have really quite crappy spec but the equivalent PC you need to rival the performance is far higher spec and much more expensive.
post #7 of 22
My vote would be for a 13.3" MBP as an option.

Macbooks are not going to get integrated graphics and honestly I don't see why people think this is some sort of oversight by Apple. PC laptops all have Intel integrated graphics (well those using Centrino chipsets) up to about $1500.

Gamers are a small slice of the overall computing market and quite honestly integrated graphics are the sensible choice financially speaking. In fact the whole point of the AGP bus was to REDUCE the need for local framebuffers by having a fast connect to main memory.

I'll glady purchase another integrated chipset as long as it's the new Broadwater G695 which is a pretty nice jump up from the 950. HW Transform and Lighting, Shader Model 3 support OpenGL 2.0 support. That's due this year so the reason for despising an integrated chip are going to be reduced.

If you have to have fast graphics buy a MBP. Plain and simple.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #8 of 22
Marvin

CPUs are 32-bit or 64-bit with 128-bit SIMD units.

GPU can crank out 128-bit or higher in everything. Huge difference in available horsepower. CPUs are fairly general purpose by design. Once you start looking at designs like GPU and DSP units that aren't encumbered by 32 or 64-bit paradigms you have the ability to do some serious number crunching withing a defined area.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #9 of 22
Maybe gamers don't make up a large portion of the market for the MacBooks, but by releasing Boot Camp, Apple is putting a big bet that that those who want to run Windows are. Crippling the MacBook's ability to run Windows VIsta is an oversight.
post #10 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by kuhvorrreiber
Maybe gamers don't make up a large portion of the market for the MacBooks, but by releasing Boot Camp, Apple is putting a big bet that that those who want to run Windows are. Crippling the MacBook's ability to run Windows VIsta is an oversight.

"Crippling" is perhaps a bit of an overstatement. The fact of the matter is, there aren't many PCs that qualify as a "Premium Ready PC" for Vista. IG doesn't mean the MB won't be able to run Windows Vista--it just means some of the Aero Glass interface goodies won't be so pretty. Besides: Boot Camp requires you to purchase a $300 Windows full-install... so a cheapy person who buys a MB probably wouldn't cough up that dough anyway.
"In Xanadu did Kubla Kahn a stately pleasure-dome decree."
Reply
"In Xanadu did Kubla Kahn a stately pleasure-dome decree."
Reply
post #11 of 22
I think an Apple tablet.
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
post #12 of 22
There are no good reasons for the MacBook to have anything but integrated graphics. Anybody that wants the premium feature of dedicated graphics (in Mac or Win) should shell out the extra money for a MacBook Pro.
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #13 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by CosmoNut
Anybody that wants the premium feature of dedicated graphics (in Mac or Win) should shell out the extra money for a MacBook Pro.

I would be very happy to do that if Apple made a MacBook Pro that wasn't friggin' huge.
Attention Internet Users!

"it's" contraction of "it is"
"its" possessive form of the pronoun "it".

It's shameful how grammar on the Internet is losing its accuracy.
Reply
Attention Internet Users!

"it's" contraction of "it is"
"its" possessive form of the pronoun "it".

It's shameful how grammar on the Internet is losing its accuracy.
Reply
post #14 of 22
Thread Starter 
Ensign Pulver makes my exact point....that Apple has once again forced pro users to buy the bigger laptop.

I dont know why they continue to overlook the huge number of people who want a small portable laptop but without sacrificing features.

They always seem to cripple the smaller laptops. They did it continually with the 12 inch (so called Powerbook) and now they are doing it with the Macbook being the only small laptop. No built to order pro features. No 13 inch MacBook Pro.

You either have to buy the small ibook replacement or buy the bigger Pro 15 or 17 inch laptops.

Argh.

Love ya Apple. But come on!
post #15 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
Marvin

CPUs are 32-bit or 64-bit with 128-bit SIMD units.

GPU can crank out 128-bit or higher in everything. Huge difference in available horsepower. CPUs are fairly general purpose by design. Once you start looking at designs like GPU and DSP units that aren't encumbered by 32 or 64-bit paradigms you have the ability to do some serious number crunching withing a defined area.

The other advantage of dedicated graphics cards is that they can utilize faster RAM and have it nearer than the processor. GPUs have great memory bandwidth and fast, low latency RAM that's currently only affordable at 128 or 256 MB per card. Whereas computers today use DDR1 or DDR2, lots of graphics cards use stuff like DDR3 or even faster next-gen stuff that's coming.

Personally, I think the best solution would be integrated, but not shared graphics. If an integrated solution was available for even 64 MB or ideally 128 dedicated RAM, that'd be great for laptops.
post #16 of 22
Personally, I hope the 965M chipset has support for dedicated memory like the Radeon xpress chipsets. The use of system RAM is a much larger roadblock than the chip itself.
post #17 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by BenRoethig
Personally, I hope the 965M chipset has support for dedicated memory like the Radeon xpress chipsets. The use of system RAM is a much larger roadblock than the chip itself.

It has support for both dedicated as integrated graphics

Due to the much improved specs of this new chipset I don't expect Apple to use dedicated GPU in the MacBook for a while.
alles sal reg kom
Reply
alles sal reg kom
Reply
post #18 of 22
The other point is the use of the integrated chipsets should avoid all the Logic Board probs. Seen in the G3 iBooks and the G4 ibooks (not acknowledged by Apple) - that cost Apple big time both in monetary terms and customers relations. Basically, the ATI boards became badly connected over time - now at least that can not happen!
post #19 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by regan
Ensign Pulver makes my exact point....that Apple has once again forced pro users to buy the bigger laptop.

I dont know why they continue to overlook the huge number of people who want a small portable laptop but without sacrificing features.

They always seem to cripple the smaller laptops. They did it continually with the 12 inch (so called Powerbook) and now they are doing it with the Macbook being the only small laptop. No built to order pro features. No 13 inch MacBook Pro.

You either have to buy the small ibook replacement or buy the bigger Pro 15 or 17 inch laptops.

Argh.

Love ya Apple. But come on!

One obvious reason would be heat. Even the 15" MBPs seem to be troubled with overheat issues, and the 13" MB gets very hot even with the integrated graphics. 12" or 13" casing is a lot harder to keep cool if many heat sources are stuffed in there, not least because the Core Duo is in fact quite a hot CPU (to be put in a mobile computer). X1600 outputs A LOT as well. If you really want to put all the state-of-the-art technology in 12-13" laptop, be prepared for a lot of noise and burned customers. And then they would complain about that.

Nevermind that, I still agree with you. A smaller MBP would be really nice.They should have put some dedicated GPU in the black MB, 150 for the colour is ridiculous.
Nothing to see here.
Reply
Nothing to see here.
Reply
post #20 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by CosmoNut
There are no good reasons for the MacBook to have anything but integrated graphics. Anybody that wants the premium feature of dedicated graphics (in Mac or Win) should shell out the extra money for a MacBook Pro.

I agree, even though I would prefer a dedicated graphics card myself.

If you look at the comparison chart Apple has, the only things separating the MacBook from the MacBool Pro are ExpressCard slot, illuminated keyboard, and dedicated graphics card. I did not include FireWire800 since the 15" MacBook Pro does not have it.
post #21 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by gar
It has support for both dedicated as integrated graphics

Due to the much improved specs of this new chipset I don't expect Apple to use dedicated GPU in the MacBook for a while.

Not exactly what I'm talking about. ATI's Readeon Xpress chipsets are designed for HyperMemory, which means they are designed to use up to 128mb of physical memeory plus share whatever they need with system ram. If the next generation Mini and iBook were to employ say 64mb of physical ram, it would really help things.
post #22 of 22
Keep the integrated graphics ( which probably get better in time) and drop the price.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Independent Graphics card in next Macbook?