Intel to Supply Apple with Special High-End Haswell Processors for MacBook Pro [MacRu

[CHADBOGA]

Apple does have an interesting amount of influence. :hmm:

http://www.macrumors.com/2013/07/26...-high-end-haswell-processors-for-macbook-pro/

According to SemiAccurate, Intel will provide Apple with an ultra-high performance version of its Haswell for Apple's upcoming MacBook Pros. The report claims that the chips will include a special version of Intel's highest-end GT3e (Iris Pro 5200) integrated graphics.

Apple has requested a special top bin cream-of-the-crop GT3e selection from Intel, with "as much GPU power as possible." With the top chips going solely to Apple, that leaves the slightly less desirable remains for Intel's other customers.

It was widely assumed that Apple would release its next generation Haswell-based MacBook Pros at WWDC alongside the Haswell MacBook Airs, but that did not happen. Both the 13-inch and the 15-inch MacBook Pros have since shown up in benchmark results, however, suggesting that a release is coming soon.

The benchmarked 15-inch MacBook Pro revealed a Core i7–4950HQ chip running at 2.4 GHz, along with Iris Pro 5200 integrated graphics, which, as noted, are the best that Intel has to offer. Intel’s promotional materials have suggested that the Iris offers 2–2.5x the performance power as the i7–3840QM chip with HD Graphics 4000 in the current high-end Retina MacBook Pro, but the new Retina MacBook Pros could see even greater performance boosts.

Earlier this week, KGI Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo suggested that the updated MacBook Pros will launch in mid-September. It is unclear if Apple will refresh both the Retina MacBook Pros and the standard MacBook Pros, but many believe that Apple is planning to phase out the non-Retina varieties.​

 

[Smartazz]

I guess that means no dedicated graphics in their next Retina Macbook Pro. Should be much better than the HD4000 graphics they use now.

 

[blackened23]

Not surprising! It was apple who actually pushed Intel towards creating their iGPUs - so it makes sense that intel would go out of their way to ensure their graphics are used with the rMBP. My only question is whether both the 13 and 15 inch rMBPs will use GT3e or just the 13 incher. The 2012 rMBP used discrete graphics with the 15 inch model...but that was HD4000 which was obviously significantly worse than GT3e.

I'm actually a big fan of the macbook air and macbook pros, they're very very nice.

 

[blackened23]

I guess that means no dedicated graphics in their next Retina Macbook Pro. Should be much better than the HD4000 graphics they use now.

Is that a certain conclusion though? The 13 inch 2012 model used HD4000 while the 15 inch used nvidia discrete graphics. It is entirely possible for that to happen again... In any case, GT3e is going to be far more impressive than HD4000 and should even be usable for low-end gaming. Looking forward to its release.

 

[Smartazz]

Is that a certain conclusion though? The 13 inch 2012 model used HD4000 while the 15 inch used nvidia discrete graphics. It is entirely possible for that to happen again...

I hope they keep a dedicated card. I have trouble believing that Intel could match an overclocked GT650m.

 

[Smartazz]

Not surprising! It was apple who actually pushed Intel towards creating their iGPUs - so it makes sense that intel would go out of their way to ensure their graphics are used with the rMBP. My only question is whether both the 13 and 15 inch rMBPs will use GT3e or just the 13 incher. The 2012 rMBP used discrete graphics with the 15 inch model...but that was HD4000 which was obviously significantly worse than GT3e.

I'm actually a big fan of the macbook air and macbook pros, they're very very nice.

If Anand is right about Apple pushing Intel to develop better graphics, then Apple def deserves the top end chips. The Air and Pros are awesome computers, a tad overpriced but not totally unreasonable.

 

[blackened23]

I hope they keep a dedicated card. I have trouble believing that Intel could match an overclocked GT650m.

They definitely can't match it, but it does come impressively close. The 650m is a rather significant difference in terms of power consumption, so it all depends on whether Apple is shooting for maximum battery life or maximum mobile performance. The GT3e will likely add an hour or two of battery life, if not more. We'll see I suppose.

 

[Smartazz]

They definitely can't match it, but it does come impressively close. The 650m is a rather significant difference in terms of power consumption, so it all depends on whether Apple is shooting for maximum battery life or maximum mobile performance. The GT3e will likely add an hour or two of battery life, if not more. We'll see I suppose.

I know not a lot of people game on a laptop, but I do like that this card is capable.

 

[Smartazz]

Does anybody know, does Haswell improve battery life significantly in non-idle scenarios?

 

[StrangerGuy]

Lol @ other vendors. As if there is that much of a market for $1000+ laptops outside Apple. Intel has become Apple's bitch.

 

[mavere]

Lol @ other vendors. As if there is that much of a market for $1000+ laptops outside Apple.

That's a good point, though. What'd happen to all the 'non-special' quadcore-GT3 dies? I can't think of any other OEMs that might want a high-end chip with decent graphics and care enough about perf/watt to skip Nvidia/AMD.

 

[monstercameron]

Does anybody know, does Haswell improve battery life significantly in non-idle scenarios?

not by much, but it has an impressively wide range of power usage. very low idle due to new low power states and turbo rules, while it has plenty of power on-demand. As for sustained high power workload it isnt much better than ivybridge.

 

[Enigmoid]

They definitely can't match it, but it does come impressively close. The 650m is a rather significant difference in terms of power consumption, so it all depends on whether Apple is shooting for maximum battery life or maximum mobile performance. The GT3e will likely add an hour or two of battery life, if not more. We'll see I suppose.

In gaming the HD 5200 anandtech reviewed was roughly 70-75% the performance of the 650m (and that is the top of the line iris model, expect the other cheaper models to perform a bit worse). Considering that nvidia is upgrading the 650m/660m to the 760m/765m class graphics this is a clear step back (in terms of market successor, similar to how the 650m replaced the 540m as nvidia's mainstream chip). Even a 750m (at 1058/1250 with boost) is going to leave this chip in the dust (and don't forget that the highest HD 5200 values in that review are with the TDP of the chip set to 55 watts).


And GT3e isn't going to get any more battery life. Apple already runs the notebook on the igp anyway; sure you can cut out the very little power that the 650m mobo traces consume but the edram according to AT consumes about 0.5-1 watt at idle which is far more than the 650m consumes when its deactivated.

Removing the dgpu will however free up space on the mobo possibly saving costs (though the non iris i7 + 750m is going to be cheaper and perform better than the top of the line 4950HQ let alone the more entry level iris models).
Removing the dgpu isn't going to allow apple to put more battery in there because they already have a 95 watt hour battery and batteries larger than 100 watt hours are prohibited by law for this sort of device .

 

[jpiniero]

Well, it would also mean there would be less cooling needed. 55 W is still less than 45 W + 40 W.

 

[Sweepr]

Special version? Interesting. Even 5-10% better performance than i7-4950HQ would put it dangerously close to Apple's special GT650M (clocked higher than a regular GTX660M) in gaming performance. Anyway, I bet few people buy a >$2000 rMPB to play games when you have much better options (for that) in the Windows space. A ''special sauce'' Iris Pro would be an improvement compared to Apple's 900MHz GT650M in OpenCL, thats probably much more important for professionals interested in these kind of notebooks. Heavy workload battery life is far from great on current 90W (CPU+dGPU) rMPB (2.33 hours 2012 rMPB 15'' vs 5.53 hours 2013 Haswell Air 13''), hopefully a 47-55W rMPB with Iris Pro could close the gap a bit (lower total power + possibly larger battery), all in a smaller and thinner chassis.

 

[Soleron]

Charlie's so pissed.

"So #MacRumors just did the sleaziest thing I can think of. They bought a student subscription then reposted the info on their site.

And #Macrumors violated our terms of service, and screwed all of you. Why? You will find out soon, but unfortunately you all lose.

From now on, thanks to #MacRumors, all #Apple related stories are not going to be at the student level. Sorry guys, you know who to blame."

Oh no, they broke his terms of service! Except that news sites cannot own facts, only their specific text. Did he not realise the only people willing to pay $100 for his stuff were other journalists? This shows the subscription model only stops legitimate readers and not this. I know who to blame. Charlie.

 

[bullzz]

@Smartazz
"I guess that means no dedicated graphics in their next Retina Macbook Pro. Should be much better than the HD4000 graphics they use now"
I dont think Apple will only release a GT3e spec. I am expecting them to have a dGPU model

 

[VirtualLarry]

Removing the dgpu isn't going to allow apple to put more battery in there because they already have a 95 watt hour battery and batteries larger than 100 watt hours are prohibited by law for this sort of device .

There are laws against large batteries in portable electronics? Would like more info, thanks.

 

[blackened23]

And GT3e isn't going to get any more battery life. Apple already runs the notebook on the igp anyway; sure you can cut out the very little power that the 650m mobo traces consume but the edram according to AT consumes about 0.5-1 watt at idle which is far more than the 650m consumes when its deactivated.

Hmm? The TDP of a discrete-less mobile device is FAR LESS than one without. And a discrete GPU isn't going to be idle 24/7, over time the usage adds up and "pro" macbooks are designed for high end use in terms of mobile devices. These aren't macbook airs. The graphics parts get usage, and i'm guessing apple will not use discrete in either machine. The TDP will nearly double from a 650m. I don't think Apple would find that desirable.

 

[blackened23]

Lol @ other vendors. As if there is that much of a market for $1000+ laptops outside Apple. Intel has become Apple's bitch.

There's a large market, apparently, for ultra portable computers that aren't garbage. And apple proves they can sell it at a premium, precisely because it isn't garbage. I can't tell you how many crap ultrabooks i've used that didn't support higher than 1080p out, had a terrible tracking pad, keyboard that didn't feel right, cheap 1366p screen, among other things. I'm done with that.

I do not want CHEAP in a portable. As I do with my desktop, I will pay more for a high quality device. Apparently, Apple is one of the very few vendors doing that. I will not pay for a windows device, even though I prefer windows - if it has a terrible low-res screen with poor features/design. If Wintel ultrabook makers continue down that path, then i'll just stick with the macbook pro until wintel ultrabook manufacturers learn that quality sells.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

If Apple goes all-in with Intel with their iGPU solution we can expect more of the same lack of fluidity around the OS at retina resolutions. Even the very respectable dGPU they have in today cannot handle retina resolutions in OSX.

This is why I went with the Macbook Air this time around.

 

[PPB]

Does anybody know, does Haswell improve battery life significantly in non-idle scenarios?

Judging by the power consumption figures of the other thread (the one about the SDP 4.5w thing), it does if you are just fully taxing 1 component of the equation at a time (CPU or GPU, but not both).

 

[Soleron]

There are laws against large batteries in portable electronics? Would like more info, thanks.

That much energy stored in one place can cause fires.

 

[Arachnotronic]

You guys think it's any coincidence that Intel focuses on OpenCL performance of its iGPU?

Intel is simply building what its most important customer wants.

 

[Enigmoid]

Hmm? The TDP of a discrete-less mobile device is FAR LESS than one without. And a discrete GPU isn't going to be idle 24/7, over time the usage adds up and "pro" macbooks are designed for high end use in terms of mobile devices. These aren't macbook airs. The graphics parts get usage, and i'm guessing apple will not use discrete in either machine. The TDP will nearly double from a 650m. I don't think Apple would find that desirable.

Unless you are doing something that really stresses the GPU you are not using the dgpu. Anandtech's browsing and video benchmarks on the 15" rmbp are run solely on the igp.

There are laws against large batteries in portable electronics? Would like more info, thanks.

Its the transportation of such devices for security reasons. If its over 100 watt hours you are not taking it on a plane.

Special version? Interesting. Even 5-10% better performance than i7-4950HQ would put it dangerously close to Apple's special GT650M (clocked higher than a regular GTX660M) in gaming performance. Anyway, I bet few people buy a >$2000 rMPB to play games when you have much better options (for that) in the Windows space. A ''special sauce'' Iris Pro would be an improvement compared to Apple's 900MHz GT650M in thats probably much more important for professionals interested in these kind of notebooks. Heavy workload battery life is far from great on current 90W (CPU+dGPU) rMPB (2.33 hours 2012 rMPB 15'' vs 5.53 hours 2013 Haswell Air 13''), hopefully a 47-55W rMPB with Iris Pro could close the gap a bit (lower total power + possibly larger battery), all in a smaller and thinner chassis.

Please explain how the CPU and GPU are using anything close to 90 watts when the entire notebook is running on an 85 watt adapter.