Lukáš Čambala In the 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display, Apple uses dedicated graphics, in the rest of the portfolio we mainly find integrated graphics from Intel, which in most cases provide decent graphics performance. As for the aforementioned XNUMX-inch machines, Apple offers us dedicated Radeons here, which, however, tend to be in the cheaper segment and therefore do not have much to impress.
Skylake, a new generation of processors from Intel, is said to offer up to 50% more graphics performance compared to the existing Broadwell series (here Apple in the latest update to the 15-inch Retina MacBook Pros omitted because Intel didn't have the necessary chips ready), which could lead Apple to use this solution instead of cheap dedicated graphics.
The graphics performance of Skylak could be sufficient
This year's 15-inch MacBook Pros with Retina display are currently offered with the Radeon R9 M370X, which is a slightly modified variant of the Radeon R9 M270X. Tests on GFXBench they show, that the R9 M270X doesn't do too badly. IN comparison with this year's Iris Pro graphics from Intel, the Radeon is 44,3-56,5% more powerful.
As mentioned above, Apple has completely skipped Broadwell Iris Pro chips this year and is sticking with Haswell. The engineers in Cupertino must have had a good reason for this, and logically the use of Broadwell does not make sense, since it is a maximum of 20% increase in performance.
For the Skylake series, Intel is planning a completely new architecture that will include 72 new graphics cores, while Broadwell used 48 cores. This should provide up to a 50% difference in performance between the two platforms. Using mathematics, we can add up to the result that Skylake should offer a difference of up to 72,5% in terms of graphics performance compared to Haswell, at least according to Intel itself.
Smaller and thinner MacBooks?
So Skylake could - at least according to the numbers on paper, because the reality may be different - replace the dedicated graphics in MacBook Pro without much difficulty. This would both free up space inside the notebook and reduce consumption at the same time.
One of the other options under consideration could also be that Apple will only offer Skylake in BTO configurations of base models, which would still have dedicated graphics. However, if it omitted these graphics completely, it could make a thinner and lighter device.
The leaks and information so far suggest that Intel will present its new solution as early as September, which Apple will certainly catch and offer in its news. His - sometimes frenzied - pursuit of the thinnest possible products has been evident in recent years, and it is Skylake that could help him in this regard with MacBooks.
In the end, however, it may turn out that Skylake realistically does not bring such an increase in graphics performance. For that, we will have to wait until Intel finally reveals its new processor and offers it to Apple for implementation.
Imho article built on the wrong foundation. Apple did not use Broadwell chips not because of their own lack of interest, but because i7s are not available (or at the time of the release of new MBPs) and Intel gave them a car over the budget not only of Apple. Which evidently did not want to delay further with the 15″ update
Yes, it is certainly not the only factor. You're right. Back then, i7s simply weren't even available.
They aren't even now.
Sure, just shove only integrated graphics into your work machine for 80k. But that's enough for Facebook and YouTube.
It already seems stupid to me to stuff the 370X in there and leave out the 900M from nVidia.
I agree with Martin. The laptop is expensive as a pig and the graphics cards are not cheap. The graphics in Macbooks are miserable. It needs to be cut even more and the price should be increased by €400.
Apple aims for 3 things with integrated graphics:
– longer battery life
– less waste heat
– more reliable hw (mobile dedicated graphics are time bombs in recent years and it doesn't matter if AMD or Nvidia)
Those who want to do 3D and steam games on it will cry. It's a pity for the first group :-( they probably already realized that there is a more suitable hw for gaming than MacBook.
It's not about the games at all, it's about the development. You have both UE4, Photoshop, Maya and ZBrush for OS X. And now here you have a machine for $2500 on which you cannot work effectively with these tools because someone is playing uncle miser. Apple presents MBPro as a professional tool. How can it be a professional tool with this configuration?
I would like to work under OS X because all the software I need is there. But here, the sissy politics of Apple are throwing sticks under your feet.
But Apple did not remove the dedicated graphics from anywhere, the article is pure speculation ;)
Martin, you probably didn't fully understand the intention, or let's say the idea of the article... Apple, even if it removed the dedicated graphics, would not do it because it wanted to "throw sticks under your feet", but purely because it would no longer make sense and its removal would on the contrary advantageous. But as Jakub writes, this is pure speculation for now.