Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Apple May Have Cut Kepler GPUs From Some New MacBooks

Last response: in News comments
Share
March 14, 2012 7:29:24 PM

Its good for every industry that companies have more than one supplier of "the same thing".
Having a more even cake distribution ussualy means more effort on suppliers to make their products better.
Score
3
March 14, 2012 7:31:12 PM

That's too bad... but since when did Apple care about performance?

It's also strange (to me) that Intel would delay Ivy Bridge because of Apple; because Intel would have known beforehand that Apple would want processors- and they'd need the same number anyways even with a Keplar GPU.
Score
22
Related resources
March 14, 2012 7:35:58 PM

Couldn't possibly have anything to do with Tegra 3 and all the devices it powers that compete with Apple directly......
Score
6
March 14, 2012 7:39:25 PM

OMG you won't be able to play on Apple laptops ... oh wait nothing new there :p 

ps: i know there are exceptions so don't start quoting the few rare titles out there :p  don't care now , tomorrow or ever about it :)  PC's > apple in gaming :p 
Score
23
March 14, 2012 7:45:59 PM

First AMD is dumped, now Nividia might get dumped. Intel is going to be so happy.
Score
20
Anonymous
March 14, 2012 8:27:36 PM

I have a toshiba with Intel intigrated graphics, fat chance getting updated opengl drivers through intel, as they let toshiba write custom opengl drivers and Toshiba will only upgrade these openGL drivers when hell freezes over!!! Intel if you create a graphics chip you should update the drivers like AMD or Nvidia and never let the OEM write the graphics drivers for Intel HDgraphics!!!
Score
8
March 14, 2012 8:29:00 PM

Just use the new AMD GPUs. Cheaper and (probably) faster than Kepler, but we'll have to wait and see.
Score
1
March 14, 2012 9:50:05 PM

I'm not even sure why macs need any video cards.
Score
15
Anonymous
March 14, 2012 10:00:47 PM

LuckyDucky nailed it. This would not require a single extra Ivy Bridge CPU than it otherwise would have, the onboard graphics were coming with it regardless of whether they were being used or not. If I had to guess, Intel just requested that the media spin it that way, in the same manner that Intel delays are never really delays... Not that Intel has complete and total control of the tech media.
Score
3
March 14, 2012 10:01:07 PM

Even if the rumor isn't about supply problems, it's just another way for Apple to make more profit per machine.
Score
3
March 14, 2012 10:06:30 PM

olafOMG you won't be able to play on Apple laptops ... oh wait nothing new there ps: i know there are exceptions so don't start quoting the few rare titles out there don't care now , tomorrow or ever about it PC's > apple in gaming


Always have to have the reference to pc being a dominate gaming machine. How about the people who actually use a GPU for something other than a hobby?
Score
6
March 14, 2012 10:07:39 PM

how do you like them apples?
Score
0
March 14, 2012 10:14:35 PM

shardeyAlways have to have the reference to pc being a dominate gaming machine. How about the people who actually use a GPU for something other than a hobby?


Thank you! The 6750m in mine is more than enough for the photoshop work I use it for. However it's also perfectly fine for playing games with. Maybe with a few lowered settings of course. But hey! Looks better on this that its console counterpart. :) 
Score
4
March 14, 2012 10:45:08 PM

shardeyAlways have to have the reference to pc being a dominate gaming machine. How about the people who actually use a GPU for something other than a hobby?

If you don't play games then integrated graphics do a perfectly good job, and if you say you need a dedicated GPU because you like to benchmark high or "fold" then that's like saying you want to buy a Ferrari so you can pop down the shops to pick up some groceries.
Score
-3
March 14, 2012 10:58:03 PM

LOL Keplers in Apples, what a waste of good GPU power. I guess Apple figured out that their users don't need 600 series GPUs to browse facebook and edit bad youtube videos lol.

And back_by_demand hits the nail on the head. MACs are terrible at gaming (what little selection that have). Outside of gaming, most low end integrated GPUs and APUs are more then enough for everything else.

You don't need a bobcat bulldozer to dig a 1 foot hole.
Score
7
March 14, 2012 11:29:49 PM

LuckyDucky7That's too bad... but since when did Apple care about performance? It's also strange (to me) that Intel would delay Ivy Bridge because of Apple; because Intel would have known beforehand that Apple would want processors- and they'd need the same number anyways even with a Keplar GPU.


Yes but if you read Charlie's article you would learn that Apple originally wanted ULV chips with GT1 graphics. Now they want ULV chips with GT2 graphics which are low yielding parts. It would have taken time for Intel to shift production to meet Apple's order.

It doesn't make sense to start a major launch while there is a huge shift in fab production. With no pressure from AMD to release a better product, a couple weeks of delay in order for the launch to go smoothly is worth it.
Score
2
March 14, 2012 11:44:42 PM

Why dump nVidia in favor of Intel, not AMD GPUs?
Score
0
March 15, 2012 12:18:44 AM

I thought Apple only made iPhones.. Honestly being in the IT field for 16 years any person who knows anything about IT does not use Apple.
I work in the Oil fields of Alberta Canada for 8 years now and not one Apple in our network, never has been and never will.
Linux and Windows..

Any person who bitches about using Apple does not make money using a PC, does not now anything about IT.
I predict in 10 years Apple will be a bad dream and no more.
Just too bad Steve Jobs did not take Apple with him.. yeah I said it..
I will never support an Apple on my network ever.

Even their phones suck, Blackberry, Samsung Galaxy, HTC all the way.
I would love to see a profile of the type of person who uses an Apple...
I feel dirty, degusted to even think of it..lol
Score
2
March 15, 2012 12:32:54 AM

Tab54o : they need graphic cards because the Thunderbolt ports needs a display port.
Score
1
March 15, 2012 12:48:00 AM

airborne11bLOL Keplers in Apples, what a waste of good GPU power. I guess Apple figured out that their users don't need 600 series GPUs to browse facebook and edit bad youtube videos lol.And back_by_demand hits the nail on the head. MACs are terrible at gaming (what little selection that have). Outside of gaming, most low end integrated GPUs and APUs are more then enough for everything else.You don't need a bobcat bulldozer to dig a 1 foot hole.


Apple may use Keplers "only" on their higher end MacBooks, but not for gaming. That is because professionals using Mac Books for production or even science on OSX and W7 on the same machine may benefit from a very powerful GPU, but mostly because of CUDA programing language. How would I know this? Because I use my PC for 3D content creation and I cannot think of any AMD GPU at present time. So I could only salivate with their new offerings anyway.

Personally, I would consider a big mistake from Apple not supporting CUDA on a Mac Book. I may be interested in an upcoming Mac Book but only if they include a GPU from Nvidia and the more powerful the better.
Score
4
March 15, 2012 12:48:49 AM

back_by_demandIf you don't play games then integrated graphics do a perfectly good job, and if you say you need a dedicated GPU because you like to benchmark high or "fold" then that's like saying you want to buy a Ferrari so you can pop down the shops to pick up some groceries.

Not all people use dedicated GPUs just for gaming, they also have other uses. Or do you think that Nvidia has the Quadro and ATI the FirePro for gamers? Now the integrated GPU may be enough for people that want to browse the web or edit text, spreadsheet,... documents. Some people need the power of a dedicated GPU like for example running 3D CAD, modeling, animation, rendering,... software.
Score
4
March 15, 2012 12:59:01 AM

fiduceTab54o : they need graphic cards because the Thunderbolt ports needs a display port.

The Intel HD Graphics 3000 and 2000 support DisplayPort, I'm pretty sure that Intel HD Graphics 4000 and 2500 will also support DisplayPort.
Score
0
March 15, 2012 1:14:06 AM

GozerHozer

"I thought Apple only made iPhones..
Any person who bitches about using Apple does not make money using a PC, does not now anything about IT.
I predict in 10 years Apple will be a bad dream and no more.
I would love to see a profile of the type of person who uses an Apple...
I feel dirty, degusted to even think of it.. lol"

This is not an IT article but you just want to start another bad opinion war on Macs and PCs.
And you just revealed your very personal profile...

I worked for BP in the IT department and they migrated from Macs more than a decade ago. Most IT guys there did not took Apple seriously, right, but not until Apple came with OSX. But the point is stop bragging so much as if you were the only experienced pro posting here. There is much more business and science beyond the oil industry.
Score
3
March 15, 2012 1:25:51 AM

GozerHozerI thought Apple only made iPhones.. Honestly being in the IT field for 16 years any person who knows anything about IT does not use Apple.I work in the Oil fields of Alberta Canada for 8 years now and not one Apple in our network, never has been and never will.Linux and Windows..Any person who bitches about using Apple does not make money using a PC, does not now anything about IT.I predict in 10 years Apple will be a bad dream and no more.Just too bad Steve Jobs did not take Apple with him.. yeah I said it..I will never support an Apple on my network ever.Even their phones suck, Blackberry, Samsung Galaxy, HTC all the way.I would love to see a profile of the type of person who uses an Apple... I feel dirty, degusted to even think of it..lol


You my friend really showed your ignorance. There is no profile for Apple users. You have been watching to many TV commercials. Juniper, IBM (post Thinkpad) all did massive internal test with their users using Macbook Pros. Less than 3% where returned. I know several CCIE's and a coupe quad CCIE's that use Macbook Pro's. I have been in IT for over 16 years and in security specifically for over 12 years and have seen some extremely crazy stuff. I am a CISSP, CCSE+, RHCE, SCNA, CCNA and a Mile 2 CPTS and currently am a lead engineer for a major SIEM provider and I use a Mac as well as Windows.

You really are in a bubble if you think that no one uses a Mac. If you like Linux you would like a Mac if you used it. BSD under a nice GUI interface. You can access root with a sudo su no problem and there is a repository of linux applications that compile using gcc on OSX.


All kinds of really sharp people use Mac's just as all kind of sharp people use Windows and some like myself use both depending on what I am doing. Personally, I play games on Windows and work on a Mac and only use windows when I have to use an application like Visio or Check Point Smart Dashboard client both of which have no Mac versions.
Score
0
March 15, 2012 1:46:27 AM

LuckyDucky7That's too bad... but since when did Apple care about performance? It's also strange (to me) that Intel would delay Ivy Bridge because of Apple; because Intel would have known beforehand that Apple would want processors- and they'd need the same number anyways even with a Keplar GPU.


Apple always cares about performance, but they temper that against other design goals like size, weight, thermals, etc.. Every other manufacturer is doing the exact same thing - it is a reality of modern industrial design. It's dead wrong to state otherwise.

When it comes to Intel customers - Apple is alone in the highest tier. Apple doesn't buy any of the low-cost Celeron or Pentium brand products. Apple buys Intel products without co-marketing kick-backs for putting Intel stickers on devices. Apple product launches are often covered by major news networks like FOX, NBC, and ABC, and Intel loves that level of exposure. Sure the iPad is a sore spot for Intel, but all they need to do is develop a better chip, and Apple would buy that too. Intel loves Apple!
Score
1
March 15, 2012 2:18:20 AM

I' sorry but how does a company, Apple, that represents less than 8 percent of the pc market share effect supply of cpu's? It doesn't. As much adoration as Apple gets, it did not 'buy up' all of the ivy bridge stock and force a late release to the public. That's just wishful thinking on ifans part.
Score
3
March 15, 2012 2:38:09 AM

Vladislaus : my answer was as sarcastic as the guy I was answering to. So what if they want to give those laptops a second Thunderbolt port ? (second display port --> graphic card)
Score
0
March 15, 2012 4:20:40 AM

shardeyAlways have to have the reference to pc being a dominate gaming machine. How about the people who actually use a GPU for something other than a hobby?


Dedicated Graphics >>

If video editing/encoding or CAD is required, cpu/gpu combos like AMD APU's and Intel HD Graphics + cpu don't come anywhere close to dedicate workstation or mid-high-end graphics.

Regardless, even if your using it for other appllications other than 'hobby' (games) you will still see PC is better simply because of the greater flexibility of better dedicated graphics card options.
Score
0
March 15, 2012 6:17:35 AM

Apple puts in the world worst gpus yet charges more than something with a real gpu, they should at least look to amd to get some real gpu that has real 3d performance unlike intel's junk that is no good for any demanding 3d task. It wouldn't surprise me if some mobile gpus can now outperform intel.
Score
-3
March 15, 2012 7:02:07 AM

/SadMac
Score
0
March 15, 2012 7:22:58 AM

VladislausNot all people use dedicated GPUs just for gaming, they also have other uses. Or do you think that Nvidia has the Quadro and ATI the FirePro for gamers? Now the integrated GPU may be enough for people that want to browse the web or edit text, spreadsheet,... documents. Some people need the power of a dedicated GPU like for example running 3D CAD, modeling, animation, rendering,... software.

You get a lot of QuadroFX and FireproGL cards in Macbooks?
...
All those things are done on a dedicated workstation, usually accompanied with a massive professional 30" monitor, never, ever, a laptop
Score
-2
March 15, 2012 8:15:26 AM

airborne11bYou don't need a bobcat bulldozer to dig a 1 foot hole.

I see what you did there.
Score
1
March 15, 2012 8:19:34 AM

Kepler probably just performs too well, so Apple has to ignore it to keep up with expectations
Score
-4
March 15, 2012 9:22:36 AM

Love my Mac Pro and MacBook Pro and OS X. ...but to be honest they perform amazingly well and smooth, and I don't think its just because they have RAID'd SSDs and 24GB and 16GB of RAM respectively. ...but yet I can't find the interest within myself to game on them lately. ...or on my overclocked Phenom II x4 965.

...but my Apple gear's graphics abilities are fine for when I do decide to game...trust me.
Score
1
March 15, 2012 11:34:59 AM

Nope. More like Nvidia is not ramping up production at the prices Apple is willing to pay. As always, Apple sells one generation back technology at premium prices to people who care more about marketing hype than specs. Nvidia is far to smart to play their games.
Score
0
March 15, 2012 3:16:47 PM

GozerHozerI thought Apple only made iPhones.. Honestly being in the IT field for 16 years any person who knows anything about IT does not use Apple.


Maybe people don't want to spend the extra money for the aesthetics, or the great battery life? 16 years in the field, well the past 3-4 years is when Apple has finally been keeping up-to-date with their machine specifications. I would like to se a 17" thats less than an inch thick, has a 93 w/H battery, maintains around 7-8 hours of use (I get more battery life from running OS X and Windows in parallels then I do running bootcamp) and looks as nice as this machine does. To me, it sounds like some people don't like to spend the extra money on something like this. I have my 6750m under volted and over clocked and runs cooler (AS-5 installed) and performs well. Not to mention it isn't a plastic monster.

Your ignorance isn't bliss

Score
0
March 15, 2012 7:59:15 PM

shardeyMaybe people don't want to spend the extra money for the aesthetics, or the great battery life? 16 years in the field, well the past 3-4 years is when Apple has finally been keeping up-to-date with their machine specifications. I would like to se a 17" thats less than an inch thick, has a 93 w/H battery, maintains around 7-8 hours of use (I get more battery life from running OS X and Windows in parallels then I do running bootcamp) and looks as nice as this machine does. To me, it sounds like some people don't like to spend the extra money on something like this. I have my 6750m under volted and over clocked and runs cooler (AS-5 installed) and performs well. Not to mention it isn't a plastic monster.Your ignorance isn't bliss


The folks that don't value a MacBook Pro for what it offers are the same folks that think the Asus, HP, and Sager are the machines that are the best. Its okay. ...as long as those folks don't stop me from getting my MacBook Pro or Mac Pro and decide for me that I have to build a PC to be as intelligent as they we're fine.

...I just built yet another PC...a little overclocked AMD Phenom II x4 965-based toy. ...and that's precisely all I think an AMD CPU'd machine could ever be next to my Mac Pro. ...but it will have its purposes. ...sheesh...while money is certainly not irrelevant its not everything either.
Score
0
March 15, 2012 10:55:38 PM

philipjacobsIntel $300M Investment UltrabooksJust curious, Has no one read anything abou this????Google anything about this. Intel is trying to directly compete with the macbook air. http://newsroom.intel.com/communit [...] abook-fundI know it doesn't directly corelate, but who knows?


Actually, Intel is NOT trying to compete with the AIR. The AIR represents less than 10% of the laptop market. Besides, Apple uses Intels chips, why would they compete against themselves.

I believe they are trying to, indirectly, compete with ARM. People would tend to buy an ultrabook and not a tablet or the other way around but not both. Also, $1000 for a full computer v/s 500-1000 for a computer-lite. The ultra book would be the logical, most cost effective purchase. At least that it what intel is hoping.

I will give you that Apple is a huge/profitable company, but you people give way too much credit to their influence on other company's direction, decisions, and abilities.
Score
0
March 20, 2012 2:35:08 PM

This can mean that Ivy Bridge's integrated graphics can be considered powerful enough for a lot of things, or Apple is simply trying to use their large sales figure as leverage.
Score
0
!