MacBook Pro refreshed with Nvidia Kepler GPU, Retina display
As expected, Apple announced new hardware at its WWDC keynote. Of most note to gamers is the upcoming MacBook Pro refresh, which includes a Kepler video card.
NVIDIA's comparison of its current mobile GPUs
-
Shacknews
replyAndrew Yoon posted a new article, MacBook Pro refreshed with Nvidia Kepler GPU, Retina display.
As expected, Apple announced new hardware at its WWDC keynote. Of most note to gamers is the upcoming MacBook Pro refresh, which includes a Kepler video card.-
I'm all for pushing tech forward, but I have to wonder why Apple pushes these extremely high resolutions on such small screens?
Shouldn't Retina be on the next gen. iMacs rather than the tablets, phones, and laptops?-
Isn't a bit easier to push the resolution on smaller screens?
-
[deleted]
-
-
Resolution is resolution no matter what screen you put it in. It's really more of a case of having monitors with a native resolution that can match.
What I am saying is, why not make some retina enabled machines built for 20 inch screen and beyond?-
he just explained it... powering a retina type display at that size/resolution is manageable. Going retina on a desktop size display and requiring a triple SLI GPU setup to drive anything demanding at native res isn't a product that's going to sell.
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
The gtx670 and gtx675 are based off Fermi's GF114 die. The gt 650m is Kepler's lowest end die, the GK107. It's still a fairly fast GPU for notebooks, though. The gtx 680m was also announced last week, using the same amount of shaders as the new gtx670 (kepler's GK104-based desktop card) and being anywhere from 50-80% faster than the gtx675.
-
Pick a number between 1 and 100
Winner buys the laptop for me-
6!
-
101
-
Total yawnfest this news is. As much as bloggers love their MacBook Pro's, they are anything but gaming machines aside from light gaming... "a fan that's indistinguishable to the user" and thinner than the last... that's a recipe for overheating right there... and that mediocre 650M... please, your money is better spent somewhere else... unless you just want a status symbol with watered down hardware.
-
Or it does exactly what you need on a nice SSD with USB3.0 and Thunderbird.
Like say, portable game streaming or video editing triage. -
i have a 2 yr old Macbook Pro and and it had a GT450M.. it handled many games quite well, some of them on moderate settings though.. there is no way it would handle Skyrim on high-res..
however, i found that the keyboard setup was sometimes really annoying.. even with windows installed, it was difficult to use the F1, F2 etc keys without changing their functions first...
eventually, i got a bit fed up and bought a proper windows gaming laptop. with my mobile kind of lifestyle, i could never justify buying a PC.. -
[deleted]
-
-
Mac D3 performance is indeed bad, but tell me: what is the resolution of this screen shot?
http://images.anandtech.com/doci/5998/Screen%20Shot%202012-06-11%20at%208.39.24%20PM.png
-
-
[deleted]
-
The GT 650M isn't too far off from the performance of a desktop GTX 550 Ti.
-
-
-
-
The 650M has already been benchmarked: http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-650M.71887.0.html. It's not bad but like most laptop GPUs it can't do newer games at 1080p and very high settings (unless you consider 16 fps in Max Payne 3 acceptable).
-
-
-
Yeah but no laptop GPU in existence can and probably won't ever as long as games keep pushing graphics capabilities.
But what this hopefully does is make HiDPI more popular, and more manufacturers start making them, which will lead graphics card makers and developers to rethink having 1080p@60hz be their target.
-
-
-
Go ahead and find a PC laptop with the same specs for cheaper.
-
OMG! Have you seen the PR video for the MBP with retina display: http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/11/3078215/apple-stub-etc-whatevs (end of the article).
IT'S A WHOLE NEW WORLD OF DESIGN!
THE BEST COMPUTER APPLE HAS EVER BUILT!
IT DISPLAYS SHARPER TEXT THAN A PRINTED PAGE!
ASSYMETRIC FANS MOTHERFUCKER!
They even busted out coldplay for emotional appeal.-
lol at coldplay.
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
Time to start pestering my boss for that upgrade!
-
-
-
What do you mean by "addressable?"
In terms of screen real estate, yes it's still 1440x900 equivalent on a 15 inch display.
But in terms of apps, they can absolutely make use of the extra pixels however they want, this isn't iOS where devs are forced to do it a certain way. Though I will say most devs will go the obvious route where they do Retina versions of their apps, allowing for some incredible looking apps.
Personally I think the real estate is perfectly fine, though a slider for DPI would be pretty cool as a toy (probably can be done with a hidden setting actually).-
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
This is not iOS where applications have to be sized in a specific manner. Just think of your desktop resolution as 2880x1880 and your desktop apps have "no predetermined size" -- simply resize them as you want.
It's a ton of freaking pixels for you to resize all your apps any way you like. There aren't any limitations on how to use it, just play with a ton of possible pixels!-
all this "apps dont have size maaaaaan" stuff really makes me think this is all hand wavey bs. I get the idea about resolution independence and scaling and stuff, but it turns out some things are measured in pixels and not inches. If I have an image that is 2880 pixels wide, I can weather I can see the whole thing on the screen or not. There doesn't appear to be a clear answer to this (yes, no, yes if the dev updates the app, etc).
I totally understand why high pixel density is awesome. I have the highest pixel density 13" laptop available and it's amazing.-
Let's break it down this way:
If you have an image that is 2880 pixels wide, with this screen, you can see every pixel of that image.
If you have a image that is 1880 pixels high, with this screen, you can see every pixel of that image.
Some believed that apple simply doubled the 1440x900 screen (it would be 4x, technically) and all images are really 4x larger. This is NOT the situation, at ALL (unlike iOS and how it handles scaling)!
You have a legit canvas of 2880x1880 pixels, period. There *can* be scaling for applications for that high DPI, but it will only work for apps that support it. Think of it this way: for applications that support this, you will use a slider to make the icons and text bigger/smaller. If the application doesn't support this, then that slider will do nothing for the icons or text for that application.
Now that Apple is pushing this kind of PPI, I want to buy the Asus Zenbook that will stuff a 1080p screen in a 13.3" panel. -
I think the answer you're looking for is it will function just like your 13". the thing with OSX though is it supports making the OS interface 4x as big so that its not super tiny on the big ass resolution
-
I dont get how you're struggling with this concept...
-
-
-
-
-
For those of us who have seen and used the high PPI setups, we know exactly why its a big deal and buy. Everyone else? It's not a big deal to them until we can show them this kind of cool stuff, side by side.
i'm curious how Apple is pushing that resolution. Even dual-link DVI doesn't push that resolution:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface
They must be using something displayport related.-
DisplayPort is only limited by bandwidth in terms of what resolution it can do.
60 fps * (3 * 8) bit colour * 2880 * 1800 = 7.464Gbit/sec which is well below the limit of Thunderbolt and DisplayPort.
I think that for Apple to do external displays above that resolution, they will need newer Thunderbolt chipsets with much higher speeds, with optical cables and such.
GPU speed is also important as everything in OS X uses it, so that is very important as well, and probably the reason the MBA didn't get Retina this time.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
This. Plus in like 2 years we won't even have HDD in laptops any more.
-
-
-
