Apple's updated 15" MacBook Pro features Intel Crystalwell graphics, starts at $1999

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 70
    With a glossy screen it's at least conceivable you could find some orientation so that the specular reflections will be minimized. With a matte screen, the light from the general environment will be diffused over the whole screen and obscure the image, which is already obscured by the matte finish.

    Remember for graphics work you used to have to sit in a completely darkened room, wearing black clothes, and work at a $10,000 monitor, being run by a $10,000 computer. The old-timers made so much money doing that that they could buy beach houses, and now complain that they can't do the same work on a $1200 laptop sitting on their decks....
  • Reply 42 of 70
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post



    Remember for graphics work you used to have to sit in a completely darkened room, wearing black clothes, and work at a $10,000 monitor, being run by a $10,000 computer. The old-timers made so much money doing that that they could buy beach houses, and now complain that they can't do the same work on a $1200 laptop sitting on their decks....

     

    LOL - I resemble that remark, only I write code for a living. As long as I can see my source, I guess I'm happy. And I'll be happier if the occasional Final Cut Express and Aperture editing I do is still doable.

     

    In other words, I'll shut up now and reserve judgement on the screen until I see one. I've spent plenty of time inside the Apple Store, but I admit I haven't looked closely at the displays since I've not been shopping for a new computer lately. I stand by my request for at least being able to upgrade the memory. Apparently there are (or will be) SSD upgrades, and the PCIe SSDs are probably not available in a standard 2.5" form factor, so perhaps there's a reason for Apple to be using blade-style storage. And as for RAM, at least Apple isn't overly gouging for it these days.

  • Reply 43 of 70

    User serviceable parts are WAY overrated.  They result in designs that compromise overall fit and finish for the ability to access hdd's and ram.  Most users never upgrade their RAM or change their HDD's, they just buy a new machine.  I am pleased that Apple takes the time to build hardware that is beautiful (at least in my opinion), pushes the state of the art foward (how many other PC manufacturers do you see rethinking the way computers are built like Apple has with the MacPro?), and places a high value on the overall user experience.

     

    I don't think Apple is making these design decisions just to pad their bottom line.  In fact I doubt it changes how much profit they make at all.  Besides, my Mac's have always lasted for years where as most people I know that have crappy window's laptops (laptops that are user serviceable btw) usually have to upgrade every 2-3 years because the machines just stop working all together.

     

    I love Apple products for their fit and finish and am glad to see that they appear to be continuing the tradition.. just placed my order for a new one ;)

  • Reply 44 of 70
    So no Thunderbolt 2 for the new MacBook Pro? Oh well at least we get faster PCIe SSD drives I suppose. Not really big changes IMHO. At least not big enough for me to switch - I guess I can keep my last gen Retina 15" for a while :)
  • Reply 45 of 70
    Originally Posted by QuadESL63 View Post

    So no Thunderbolt 2 for the new MacBook Pro? 

     

    Did you read?

  • Reply 46 of 70
    jdfergason wrote: »
    User serviceable parts are WAY overrated.  They result in designs that compromise overall fit and finish for the ability to access hdd's and ram.  Most users never upgrade their RAM or change their HDD's, they just buy a new machine.  I am pleased that Apple takes the time to build hardware that is beautiful (at least in my opinion), pushes the state of the art foward (how many other PC manufacturers do you see rethinking the way computers are built like Apple has with the MacPro?), and places a high value on the overall user experience.

    I don't think Apple is making these design decisions just to pad their bottom line.  In fact I doubt it changes how much profit they make at all.  Besides, my Mac's have always lasted for years where as most people I know that have crappy window's laptops (laptops that are user serviceable btw) usually have to upgrade every 2-3 years because the machines just stop working all together.

    I love Apple products for their fit and finish and am glad to see that they appear to be continuing the tradition.. just placed my order for a new one ;)

    I agree. Apple knows why they get units back under warranty, better than I do certainly, but reading the complaints on forums for years most problems sound like bad or broken connections. That's the reason for the unibody chassis, for one thing—case flex ix a big problem for laptops. Ever see people picking them up by one corner and then laying them on a desk? Creak, groan, snap!

    Nobody expects any laptops other than Apple's to last more than a year or two, anyway, but they were forced to deal with this problem. Connections are the root of all evil. Until they can put everything on the same chip, soldered connections are at least better than push-in terminals that collect corrosion and dirt.

    I understand the desire for expandability, but I personally will trade it for reliability and longevity.
  • Reply 47 of 70
    zozmanzozman Posts: 393member

    People seemed to think i was nuts when i said i wanted the GeForce GT 750M graphics processor in the next rMBP, then look what happened :P haha. 

    On the apple site, it isnt an optional upgrade, its a higher spec'd model.

    Im really curious about the performance difference Vs the battery life, that could really influence someones decision. 

    750M & Iris Pro VS Iris Pro.

     

  • Reply 48 of 70
    sc_marktsc_markt Posts: 1,401member
    I picked up a new 15" MBP with the DVD drive, anti-glare high-res (not Retina) display and memory that I can put in myself back around May. So far, from what I see of these new MBPs, I'm glad I bought when I did.

    It'd be nice to have a Retina display but I'd rather have a computer that I can put in a HD or memory, a DVD drive, and an ethernet port.

    And who in their right minds would want a MBP with just a cheesy integrated graphics card?
  • Reply 49 of 70
    sc_marktsc_markt Posts: 1,401member
    Wow, I just checked the Apple store and didn't see an option for the anti-glare display on the MBP. Is this not an option anymore or did I miss it?...
  • Reply 50 of 70

    Yeah... the cheapest way to get the dGPU on a MBP is to spend $2600... Nice!

  • Reply 51 of 70
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rune66 View Post

     

    The only way this statement makes sense to me is if some half blind engineer were forced by his employer (happened to Apple) to find some technical way of measuring light that would "prove" Apples mirror screens (also the newest ones) to be as reflective as the matte ones. Fact is still if a human stands in front of these the glossy one will show you a mirror image of yourself which a matte will not. BTW feel free to upload a photo of a matte MBP that shows a mirror image of the person in front of it.


     

    I think he's saying that there is a coating on the newer "glossy" screen that reduces reflections. He's showing the "newer" display on the left I suppose and a typical glossy screen on the right.

     

    I cannot verify any of this as I have not used the NEW retina displays. Apple is at the forefront of experimenting with state of the art glass so it would not surprise me if they have the matt/glossy issue licked. Matt diffuses your image which is not as good for detail and reading, and glossy adds distracting reflections. So if the glass can "choose" to diffuse reflections but not what passes through it from the other side -- that's the best of both worlds.

     

    Apple I think is also playing with Glass that is as impervious to damage as metal. So maybe we get all glass in the future?

  • Reply 52 of 70
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,309moderator
    sc_markt wrote: »
    And who in their right minds would want a MBP with just a cheesy integrated graphics card?

    Iris Pro and the 750M should be close in performance:

    http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Pro-Graphics-5200.90965.0.html
    http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-750M.90245.0.html

    Most real-time benchmarks there have negligible difference. NVidia's only real benefits are proprietary CUDA support and FXAA, their proprietary fast anti-aliasing. Having fast anti-aliasing is what leads to NVidia getting higher scores with high quality presets because they enable anti-aliasing:

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/7399/215inch-imac-late-2013-review-iris-pro-driving-an-accurate-display/3

    Other than that, I don't even know why Apple bothered with the option. When the computer is under load, the one with the 750M will use more power and perform almost identically. The price is a slight plus though because if you spec out the lower one with 16GB, 512GB SSD and the faster CPU, it's also $2599 so the one with the 750M essentially bundles the GPU 'for free'.

    Maybe this is just throwing NVidia a bone but hardly anyone is going to buy the higher model so unless NVidia/AMD come up with something amazing, I expect that dedicated GPUs will be gone from the laptops next year.
    sc_markt wrote:
    I just checked the Apple store and didn't see an option for the anti-glare display on the MBP.

    The rMBP has an anti-glare coating already. It's equivalent to the high-res, anti-glare option from before but everyone gets it and it's even higher resolution, has deeper black levels and IPS so better viewing angles and no color shifting.
  • Reply 53 of 70
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post



    When the computer is under load, the one with the 750M will use more power and perform almost identically.

    If you check real life frame rates (not benchmarks), it seems that the 750M is between 20% and 60% faster than the Iris Pro.

     

    For anyone who wants to use the GPU for more than just benchmarks I guess that the 750M is still a good option.

     

    A shame that the entry price for the 750M in the MBP is $2600.

  • Reply 54 of 70
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,309moderator
    heffeque wrote: »
    If you check real life frame rates (not benchmarks), it seems that the 750M is between 20% and 60% faster than the Iris Pro.

    For anyone who wants to use the GPU for more than just benchmarks I guess that the 750M is still a good option.

    The benchmarks in the previous tests are real life frame rates. Metro Last Light on Notebookcheck lists 34.9 medium for Iris Pro and 35 for the 750M. Here's a video on medium showing 30FPS for the 750M at a higher resolution:



    People have a hard time accepting integrated graphics and it's understandable but it'll just take time to adjust to the reality that Intel's IGPs are now competitive with dedicated mobile GPUs, especially when it comes to OpenCL performance.

    If the extra RAM, SSD and CPU in the $2600 model are not required, choosing it for the 750M is a waste of money.
  • Reply 55 of 70
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Macboy Pro View Post

     

    Unfortunately Apple looks like they discontinued the non-retina.   Sadly, this puts me in a windows 8.1 machine now.


     

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by benanderson89 View Post

     

    Why would it? From what I gather the price drop on the retina puts it in the same ballpark as the non-retina.

    If its a DVD drive you're after, just get a cheap Samsung USB one or something for £15 and call it a day.


     

    No, it is not in the same ballpark as the non-retina.  The price drop of the retina model from $2199 to $1999 still leaves it $200 higher than the price of the entry-level 15" MBP that it replaces.  Which means that there is no way of getting into a 15" MBP for less than nearly $2,000.   Apple should have kept the non-retina MBP around until they could bring the retina model down closer to the $1799 price point of the non-retina model it is replacing.  

     

    Apple dropped the price of the 13" retina model down to where purchasing it over the non-retina model is attractive; in fact, I'd say it's a no-brainer.  Until they do the same with the 15" model, it is a deal breaker for me.

  • Reply 56 of 70
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,309moderator
    alpha10711 wrote: »
    No, it is not in the same ballpark as the non-retina.  The price drop of the retina model from $2199 to $1999 still leaves it $200 higher than the price of the entry-level 15" MBP that it replaces.

    The old one had 4GB RAM, which was $100 to go to 8GB (3rd party is slightly less).

    $1799 cMBP
    High-res anti-glare option $100
    8GB RAM $100
    256GB SSD was expensive from Apple but say $150 3rd party
    Deduct $79 to buy Apple's optical and 2x $29 for the adaptors to ethernet and Thunderbolt to make it a fair comparison

    = $2012 vs $1999. Looks pretty close IMO. All they've really done is not give the option to downgrade to 4GB RAM, an HDD and a low quality, low-res TN panel.
    alpha10711 wrote: »
    Which means that there is no way of getting into a 15" MBP for less than nearly $2,000.

    There is if you get the old model while they have the stock:

    http://store.apple.com/us/product/FD103LL/A/refurbished-macbook-pro-23ghz-quad-core-intel-i7

    These older ones are a great deal as you get the dedicated GPU and you can upgrade the internals - it costs just $1449. If you want to, get a 3 year warranty and hold onto it until rMBPs come down in price.

    The old rMBPs are discounted quite heavily too:

    http://store.apple.com/us/product/FE664LL/A/refurbished-macbook-pro-23ghz-quad-core-intel-i7-with-retina-display

    If you are happy with 8GB RAM and 256GB SSD, that's $340 less than the new entry model with largely the same performance.
  • Reply 57 of 70
    sc_marktsc_markt Posts: 1,401member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rune66 View Post



    Argh only glossy options left for mac. My gf just had one from work. Awfull. Even in a dark room I see my own reflection. Just hope my old matte MBP will keep on working.

     

    That's one of the concerns I had (although a lesser one) when I bought a new MBP in May.  What I was concerned about was if the new MBPs weren't going to have an ethernet port, a DVD drive, and memory and HDs that can be replaced or upgraded by the user. Looks like my fears came true. 

     

    I think what Apple is doing is wrong. Just my two-cents.

  • Reply 58 of 70
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by benanderson89 View Post

     



    Why would it? From what I gather the price drop on the retina puts it in the same ballpark as the non-retina.

    If its a DVD drive you're after, just get a cheap Samsung USB one or something for £15 and call it a day.


    Because I need a laptop with 16GB RAM and a large drive 1TB, I can no longer choose Apple due to pricing.    A 13" with 16GB RAM and 1TB Storage is $2599 and a 15" is $3299    PLUS TAX.   I put together my 2012 MBP with 1TB 7200RPM Drive and 16GB RAM for under $2K.   Comparable Windows laptops are half the price.   I much rather have OSX but I am not paying $1K or $1.5K extra just to run it.

  • Reply 59 of 70
    sennensennen Posts: 1,472member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Macboy Pro View Post

     

    Because I need a laptop with 16GB RAM and a large drive 1TB, I can no longer choose Apple due to pricing.    A 13" with 16GB RAM and 1TB Storage is $2599 and a 15" is $3299    PLUS TAX.   I put together my 2012 MBP with 1TB 7200RPM Drive and 16GB RAM for under $2K.   Comparable Windows laptops are half the price.   I much rather have OSX but I am not paying $1K or $1.5K extra just to run it.


     

    What's wrong with your 2012 model that it needs replacing? If you are so concerned about the expense, I'd have thought you'd try to get a couple more years out of it. I'm still running my '09 17".

  • Reply 60 of 70
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

    The benchmarks in the previous tests are real life frame rates. Metro Last Light on Notebookcheck lists 34.9 medium for Iris Pro and 35 for the 750M. Here's a video on medium showing 30FPS for the 750M at a higher resolution.

    Check and see if the rest of the games are the same. Check your own links above.

Sign In or Register to comment.