It is the future for mainstream computing. If you take a serious look at AMDs chips you will see that integrated GPUs can be very good.
Think about this; Trinity could easily power a 13" retina machine and provide respectable CPU performance. Maybe not Intel state of the art performance but certain an increase in CPU performance over last year. Along with the GPU graphics you get OpenCL functionality that actually works.
As to Intel there are already negative reports about intel trying to drive the retina display all alone. I'm not surprised because the new Intel GPU has been overhyped by many web sites. Intels marketing dollars sure can change people's objectivity.
AMD does seem to balance it better. At the same time Intel seems to be throwing the extra weight behind the gpu for this revision and the next. I've always liked AMD, but it may be that I tend to favor (relatively) smaller companies. We'll probably see third party apps updated to turn off graphics switching in the RMBP, but it would be nice to see integrated graphics that are fully capable given their proliferation and focus in consumer cpu designs.
I had hoped without the optical drive they could squeeze in a discreet GPU. The HD4000 is decent - for normal resolutions. Fine for composing a static desktop but anything more demanding would certainly have to run at a much lower res.
If not a dGPU, I hope for at least a quad core Ivy Bridge processor, there is a 35 watt one now so it could easily fit in, the 13" mbp already used 35w CPUs.
"expects it to have an Intel Ivy Bridge processor with a clock speed greater than 2 gigahertz."
Their APUs have been very successful in laptops. As you note balanced performance and very good power profiles. If you can't have a descrete GPU in a laptop, the AMD APUs are the far better choice for many users.
At the same time Intel seems to be throwing the extra weight behind the gpu for this revision and the next.
Maybe that is their intention but I don't really see success yet on Intels part. Even though they say they are supporting OpenCL on this revision they are still behind actually delivering. Thankfully they are doing a bit better 3D wise, but the reality is they didnt even surpass last years AMD APU.
I've always liked AMD, but it may be that I tend to favor (relatively) smaller companies. We'll probably see third party apps updated to turn off graphics switching in the RMBP, but it would be nice to see integrated graphics that are fully capable given their proliferation and focus in consumer cpu designs.
I'm generally after the best solution as such AMD is a better choice for low end machines. Again that I'd due to a more balanced approach.
I'm distracted by watching the keynote right now and they are talking laptops. Everything tells me that Retina will be coming to many more machines as quickly as Apple can get them to market. I'm drooling again!! It is obvious Apple knows they have a jump the industry and as such I see them getting the 13" MBPR out as soon as possible. It is anybody's guess what will be in there, but realize there are many options or paths to follow.
I would love to see a slimmer 13" MacBook Pro. I've been waiting for this ever since the MacBook Air came out. I never liked that tapered/clamshell look.
News about the impending arrival of a 13" RMBP is most welcome.
It strikes me that Apple has had quite a job cramming all the hardware it needs into the new slimmer enclosure on the 15" RMBP, so you can understand why doing the same job with the 13" might take longer.
I agree that all this nonsense about Intel's integrated GPU not being good enough is ridiculous. The 4000 is a step up. Haswell will be another. Intel gets it. They know that GPUs are a big deal, so they're working on getting them right. In the meantime, Ivy Bridge processors with the 4000 are doing a more than acceptable job running external hi res monitors.
The other point I don't agree with is that Apple's product matrix is a mess. I think it is extremely coherent. Professional and Consumer users are both well catered for in the laptop space. If the difference between professional and consumer models is screen quality more than GPU quality, that's ample justification for a price premium between the two lines and thus two 13" models can easily co-exist.
I certainly don't think that the a 13" RMBP spells the death of the 13" MBA.
Can't wait for the 13" RMBP to arrive, but maybe the new RMBP range won't hit its stride until REV A sees it get Haswells plus even better GPUs. We're probably talking about another 12 months before this happens, by which time, we should be able to get larger 1 TB SSDs and maybe cheaper retina displays that consume less electricity. These things will definitely differentiate the two line-ups. In the meantime, the 15" is a brilliant step in the right direction.
so much confusion..was first waiting for retina 13" mbp...finally some solid news about october launch..was happy until you all again confused me with haswell arriving mid next year.GOD
The lack of a discrete GPU really keeps me from considering the current 13" MBP. It'll keep me from considering a 13" MBP Retina as well.
Ah well.
First off, I won't take this speculation that seriously unless the announcement came directly from Apple. Now, in terms of the GPU, if were Apple and was coming out with a 13 inch retina display model, since it is a high model, I would probably have to have the GPU added as well, but I don't know if they have enough room for it. But, I could swallow that they would come out with a 17 inch model before they would come out with a 13 model retina. That's just me and the reasoning behind it would be that I think more Pro users would want a larger screen for the higher end photography, audio, video, and games. This is just MY speculation rather than some analyst's. Analyst's have been wrong, just like us Joe Blow on the street can be wrong as far as future models and release dates. Apple likes us guessing. ;-)
Keep in mind that (1) this is a rumor site, and (2) Apple almost never comments on an unreleased product.
I suspect that Apple may use integrated graphics here for several reasons. (1) Intel integrated graphics has greatly improved from their earlier terrible speed. (2) The new thin laptops by the competition will most likely use Intel's integrated graphics. This spec will keep Apple from being two high a jump to pull over some buyers. (3) While the 15" MBP-R has a lot of pixels to juggle, it is less so on the 13" version, so it may be easier to get the job done.
Apple's competitors may be living in interesting times.
Yeah, well, I've got a great track record when I compare it with analysts, especially with stock price. A lot of my predictions i many times keep to myself. From a what WOULD I DO, if I were Apple. I would make a 17 RMBP rather than a 13 RMBP for the simple fact that more of the guys using Native ProTools, Logic, FCP, and games want MORE Screen Real Estate than less. These new systems are much thinner and lighter than the previous high end MBPs. I've talked with various people and they said that for the Native Pro Tools, FCP, Logic users, they are typically into 17inch screens for the real estate.
For the record, this is NOT speculation, but what I would do if were Apple more than it is, THIS IS WHAT IS SPECULATED TO COME OUT AND WHAT TIME FRAME... OK?
15" Retina weighs 4.46 lbs. ( 0.71 x 14.13 X 9.73 ) which has a slighly smaller 2D footprint compared with the 15" MBP (14.35 x 9.82 ). The current MBP has a footprint of 0.95 x 12.78 x 8.94. Guessing the 13" MBP will be 0.71 x 12.6 x 8.8
Adding a little math:
Density = 4.46 / ( 0.71 x 14.13 x 9.73 ) = 0.04569 lbs/ inches^3
Weight of 13" Retina = 0.04569 lbs/ inches^3 x 0.71 x 12.6 x 8.8 = 3.6 lbs
0.6 lbs heavier than the MBA 13".
And what would it be if they came out with a 17 inch instead? Which some people want as well, and I think there is just as much chance of that happening since the analyst might be wrong.
For basic apps, it's OK, but in terms of more powerful apps, yeah, we would be much happier with discrete GPU. I think that if Apple were to come out with any other retina displays, it would make much more sense to have the discrete GPU because this model is power user model. Personally, I would much prefer a larger screen over a smaller screen. It's just a matter of how much and if I could afford it. If I could afford it, it would be no brainer on this model since it is slimmer and less weight. I was actually surprised at the form factor and weight of the new RMBP, it was slick as snot. Just a beautiful job. For $3749 for a maxed out (RAM, SSD, Processor Speed) system, which is what is to be expected. It's basically put a fork in me, I'm done.
Not only does Intel graphics perform poorly, but on the software side, their drivers are known to perform even worse, compared to the competition.
I bought my MB Air 13" featuring Nvidia 320M to play games among other things. I would NOT switch for a Retina Mac without decent, discrete graphics (Nvidia or AMD).
Diablo 3 - you know, the famous 3D, highly GPU-demanding game - is said to be adapted for Retina display in the coming months (information given during the presentation of the MB Retina 15"). I wish good luck to Blizzard to perform the trick on the sole, underpowered HD 4000. Taking into account that they promised us a game, not a slideshow...
If this were to come out, I'd like it not only because of the size and better screen, but also because I'm not a fan of the bezel around the screen of the MBA...so much dust gets trapped there. A nuisance to keep clean.
To me it doesn't seem likely that we'll get a 13" MBPR this calendar year. Going off memory alone, when they've updated twice in one year it's been early in the new year and then several months later in time for the holiday season.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Do you have trouble picturing someone who wants a 13" computer but still wants a great screen?
I'd take the current 13" MBA's screen over the 13" MBP's at the moment, to be honest. Whilst it seems some prefer the color gamut of the Pro's screen, the resolution of the Air's trumps that for mine. Considering that they both run the same integrated graphics chips, I can see the next generation of MBA being retina as well.
This is classic Apple (actually, classic Tim Cook since this is more of a supply chain issue).
Apple knows they will sell many more 13" retina MBPs than 15" (they did pre-retina, and they will post-retina). So roll the 15" out first, let it drive the cost of retina panels down, then introduce the 13" version once the economies of scale are where they need them. I'll be buying one.
This is classic Apple (actually, classic Tim Cook since this is more of a supply chain issue).
Apple knows they will sell many more 13" retina MBPs than 15" (they did pre-retina, and they will post-retina). So roll the 15" out first, let it drive the cost of retina panels down, then introduce the 13" version once the economies of scale are where they need them. I'll be buying one.
I wonder where everyone gets the idea that Apple would sell many more 13" MBPs. The only breakdown I've seen says that 13" and 15" sales were roughly comparable (50% to 47%).
I think it's far more likely that Apple simply needs to gain more experience before they're ready to cram things even more tightly into a 13" case.
I wonder where everyone gets the idea that Apple would sell many more 13" MBPs. The only breakdown I've seen says that 13" and 15" sales were roughly comparable (50% to 47%).
I think it's far more likely that Apple simply needs to gain more experience before they're ready to cram things even more tightly into a 13" case.
They've introduced things on high end models before while leaving the lower ones with the old thing. It's not uncommon. With the RMBP look at how they bundled a lot of new with the design to help justify a high cost of entry. You gain an additional thunderbolt port, thinner machine, IPS display with greater resolution, the higher vram configuration on the gpu, and an SSD standard. I don't agree with it being more difficult on the 13" at all. Percentage-wise SolipsismX pointed out a while back that the ODD on the 13" takes up a much greater percentage of the interior space. Beyond that we're talking about a line which uses cooler cpus without discrete graphics. The design work here might be easier rather than harder. If it's an issue of the heat generated powering the display, display engineering tends to run into way more snags as they're scaled up relative to uniformity and color stability where stability degrades due to temperature increases and the power used to stabilize it further contributes to this problem. It was a huge problem with LEDs. I wanted to link a white paper from a few years back on the topic, but I can't find it right now .
I agree. I was simply pointing out that the explanation being given (that they sell far more 13" MBPs) isn't supported by facts.
I misinterpreted you there, but yeah I've noticed the analysts don't really publish their raw data. It seems like their numbers are just conjecture, and the distribution seems weird. Beyond that it's not always clear if they're leveraging the Air in there as it's unlikely that distribution is almost even between the 13" and 15". So did you decide to migrate to the RMBP or stay on a 17"?
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
It is the future for mainstream computing. If you take a serious look at AMDs chips you will see that integrated GPUs can be very good.
Think about this; Trinity could easily power a 13" retina machine and provide respectable CPU performance. Maybe not Intel state of the art performance but certain an increase in CPU performance over last year. Along with the GPU graphics you get OpenCL functionality that actually works.
As to Intel there are already negative reports about intel trying to drive the retina display all alone. I'm not surprised because the new Intel GPU has been overhyped by many web sites. Intels marketing dollars sure can change people's objectivity.
AMD does seem to balance it better. At the same time Intel seems to be throwing the extra weight behind the gpu for this revision and the next. I've always liked AMD, but it may be that I tend to favor (relatively) smaller companies. We'll probably see third party apps updated to turn off graphics switching in the RMBP, but it would be nice to see integrated graphics that are fully capable given their proliferation and focus in consumer cpu designs.
I had hoped without the optical drive they could squeeze in a discreet GPU. The HD4000 is decent - for normal resolutions. Fine for composing a static desktop but anything more demanding would certainly have to run at a much lower res.
If not a dGPU, I hope for at least a quad core Ivy Bridge processor, there is a 35 watt one now so it could easily fit in, the 13" mbp already used 35w CPUs.
"expects it to have an Intel Ivy Bridge processor with a clock speed greater than 2 gigahertz."
O RLY?
I'm generally after the best solution as such AMD is a better choice for low end machines. Again that I'd due to a more balanced approach.
I'm distracted by watching the keynote right now and they are talking laptops. Everything tells me that Retina will be coming to many more machines as quickly as Apple can get them to market. I'm drooling again!! It is obvious Apple knows they have a jump the industry and as such I see them getting the 13" MBPR out as soon as possible. It is anybody's guess what will be in there, but realize there are many options or paths to follow.
I would love to see a slimmer 13" MacBook Pro. I've been waiting for this ever since the MacBook Air came out. I never liked that tapered/clamshell look.
News about the impending arrival of a 13" RMBP is most welcome.
It strikes me that Apple has had quite a job cramming all the hardware it needs into the new slimmer enclosure on the 15" RMBP, so you can understand why doing the same job with the 13" might take longer.
I agree that all this nonsense about Intel's integrated GPU not being good enough is ridiculous. The 4000 is a step up. Haswell will be another. Intel gets it. They know that GPUs are a big deal, so they're working on getting them right. In the meantime, Ivy Bridge processors with the 4000 are doing a more than acceptable job running external hi res monitors.
The other point I don't agree with is that Apple's product matrix is a mess. I think it is extremely coherent. Professional and Consumer users are both well catered for in the laptop space. If the difference between professional and consumer models is screen quality more than GPU quality, that's ample justification for a price premium between the two lines and thus two 13" models can easily co-exist.
I certainly don't think that the a 13" RMBP spells the death of the 13" MBA.
Can't wait for the 13" RMBP to arrive, but maybe the new RMBP range won't hit its stride until REV A sees it get Haswells plus even better GPUs. We're probably talking about another 12 months before this happens, by which time, we should be able to get larger 1 TB SSDs and maybe cheaper retina displays that consume less electricity. These things will definitely differentiate the two line-ups. In the meantime, the 15" is a brilliant step in the right direction.
so much confusion..was first waiting for retina 13" mbp...finally some solid news about october launch..was happy until you all again confused me with haswell arriving mid next year.GOD
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
The lack of a discrete GPU really keeps me from considering the current 13" MBP. It'll keep me from considering a 13" MBP Retina as well.
Ah well.
First off, I won't take this speculation that seriously unless the announcement came directly from Apple. Now, in terms of the GPU, if were Apple and was coming out with a 13 inch retina display model, since it is a high model, I would probably have to have the GPU added as well, but I don't know if they have enough room for it. But, I could swallow that they would come out with a 17 inch model before they would come out with a 13 model retina. That's just me and the reasoning behind it would be that I think more Pro users would want a larger screen for the higher end photography, audio, video, and games. This is just MY speculation rather than some analyst's. Analyst's have been wrong, just like us Joe Blow on the street can be wrong as far as future models and release dates. Apple likes us guessing. ;-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky
Kuo's track record is exceptionally good.
Keep in mind that (1) this is a rumor site, and (2) Apple almost never comments on an unreleased product.
I suspect that Apple may use integrated graphics here for several reasons. (1) Intel integrated graphics has greatly improved from their earlier terrible speed. (2) The new thin laptops by the competition will most likely use Intel's integrated graphics. This spec will keep Apple from being two high a jump to pull over some buyers. (3) While the 15" MBP-R has a lot of pixels to juggle, it is less so on the 13" version, so it may be easier to get the job done.
Apple's competitors may be living in interesting times.
Yeah, well, I've got a great track record when I compare it with analysts, especially with stock price. A lot of my predictions i many times keep to myself. From a what WOULD I DO, if I were Apple. I would make a 17 RMBP rather than a 13 RMBP for the simple fact that more of the guys using Native ProTools, Logic, FCP, and games want MORE Screen Real Estate than less. These new systems are much thinner and lighter than the previous high end MBPs. I've talked with various people and they said that for the Native Pro Tools, FCP, Logic users, they are typically into 17inch screens for the real estate.
For the record, this is NOT speculation, but what I would do if were Apple more than it is, THIS IS WHAT IS SPECULATED TO COME OUT AND WHAT TIME FRAME... OK?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tlowe999
15" Retina weighs 4.46 lbs. ( 0.71 x 14.13 X 9.73 ) which has a slighly smaller 2D footprint compared with the 15" MBP (14.35 x 9.82 ). The current MBP has a footprint of 0.95 x 12.78 x 8.94. Guessing the 13" MBP will be 0.71 x 12.6 x 8.8
Adding a little math:
Density = 4.46 / ( 0.71 x 14.13 x 9.73 ) = 0.04569 lbs/ inches^3
Weight of 13" Retina = 0.04569 lbs/ inches^3 x 0.71 x 12.6 x 8.8 = 3.6 lbs
0.6 lbs heavier than the MBA 13".
And what would it be if they came out with a 17 inch instead? Which some people want as well, and I think there is just as much chance of that happening since the analyst might be wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz
Integrated graphics = worthless.
For basic apps, it's OK, but in terms of more powerful apps, yeah, we would be much happier with discrete GPU. I think that if Apple were to come out with any other retina displays, it would make much more sense to have the discrete GPU because this model is power user model. Personally, I would much prefer a larger screen over a smaller screen. It's just a matter of how much and if I could afford it. If I could afford it, it would be no brainer on this model since it is slimmer and less weight. I was actually surprised at the form factor and weight of the new RMBP, it was slick as snot. Just a beautiful job. For $3749 for a maxed out (RAM, SSD, Processor Speed) system, which is what is to be expected. It's basically put a fork in me, I'm done.
Not only does Intel graphics perform poorly, but on the software side, their drivers are known to perform even worse, compared to the competition.
I bought my MB Air 13" featuring Nvidia 320M to play games among other things. I would NOT switch for a Retina Mac without decent, discrete graphics (Nvidia or AMD).
Diablo 3 - you know, the famous 3D, highly GPU-demanding game - is said to be adapted for Retina display in the coming months (information given during the presentation of the MB Retina 15"). I wish good luck to Blizzard to perform the trick on the sole, underpowered HD 4000. Taking into account that they promised us a game, not a slideshow...
To me it doesn't seem likely that we'll get a 13" MBPR this calendar year. Going off memory alone, when they've updated twice in one year it's been early in the new year and then several months later in time for the holiday season.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Do you have trouble picturing someone who wants a 13" computer but still wants a great screen?
I'd take the current 13" MBA's screen over the 13" MBP's at the moment, to be honest. Whilst it seems some prefer the color gamut of the Pro's screen, the resolution of the Air's trumps that for mine. Considering that they both run the same integrated graphics chips, I can see the next generation of MBA being retina as well.
Apple almost never comments on future models, so you might was well stop visiting this site if you're not interested in rumors.
Yes. HD 4000 will do it:
http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/quick-reference-guide-to-intel-processor-graphics/
That's just on the main screen - it will also handle external monitors at the same time.
(some earlier reports said it could go as high as 4096x4096).
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy
Is there an integrated GPU that is powerful enough to drive a 2560X1600 screen?
AMD's APUs can, but the CPU performance is subpar compared to Intel's.
This is classic Apple (actually, classic Tim Cook since this is more of a supply chain issue).
Apple knows they will sell many more 13" retina MBPs than 15" (they did pre-retina, and they will post-retina). So roll the 15" out first, let it drive the cost of retina panels down, then introduce the 13" version once the economies of scale are where they need them. I'll be buying one.
I wonder where everyone gets the idea that Apple would sell many more 13" MBPs. The only breakdown I've seen says that 13" and 15" sales were roughly comparable (50% to 47%).
I think it's far more likely that Apple simply needs to gain more experience before they're ready to cram things even more tightly into a 13" case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
I wonder where everyone gets the idea that Apple would sell many more 13" MBPs. The only breakdown I've seen says that 13" and 15" sales were roughly comparable (50% to 47%).
I think it's far more likely that Apple simply needs to gain more experience before they're ready to cram things even more tightly into a 13" case.
They've introduced things on high end models before while leaving the lower ones with the old thing. It's not uncommon. With the RMBP look at how they bundled a lot of new with the design to help justify a high cost of entry. You gain an additional thunderbolt port, thinner machine, IPS display with greater resolution, the higher vram configuration on the gpu, and an SSD standard. I don't agree with it being more difficult on the 13" at all. Percentage-wise SolipsismX pointed out a while back that the ODD on the 13" takes up a much greater percentage of the interior space. Beyond that we're talking about a line which uses cooler cpus without discrete graphics. The design work here might be easier rather than harder. If it's an issue of the heat generated powering the display, display engineering tends to run into way more snags as they're scaled up relative to uniformity and color stability where stability degrades due to temperature increases and the power used to stabilize it further contributes to this problem. It was a huge problem with LEDs. I wanted to link a white paper from a few years back on the topic, but I can't find it right now
I agree. I was simply pointing out that the explanation being given (that they sell far more 13" MBPs) isn't supported by facts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
I agree. I was simply pointing out that the explanation being given (that they sell far more 13" MBPs) isn't supported by facts.
I misinterpreted you there, but yeah I've noticed the analysts don't really publish their raw data. It seems like their numbers are just conjecture, and the distribution seems weird. Beyond that it's not always clear if they're leveraging the Air in there as it's unlikely that distribution is almost even between the 13" and 15". So did you decide to migrate to the RMBP or stay on a 17"?