Looks like no one’s replied in a while. To start the conversation again, simply ask a new question.

Why do I often get significantly better performance out of the integrated GFX on the new MBP 15"?

I have the new lower-end 15" MBP. I have never once experienced a time where the discrete GPU outperformed the "HD Graphics 3000". Just the opposite, in fact. On a particular itunes visualizer, I get around 55fps with the integrated GFX, and around 32 with discrete. When playing games from The Orange Box, I get 90-140fps on integrated gfx and 30-50 on discreet. These are the only specific benchmarks I have, but I have noticed the same trend elsewhere too. Is there something wrong with my computer, or is this the norm?

MacBook Pro, Mac OS X (10.6.7)

Posted on May 28, 2011 4:36 PM

Reply
8 replies

May 28, 2011 7:27 PM in response to wyager

Cinebench scores:


i5 2415M Intel 3000 HD > 10.58


i7 2620 M Intel 3000 HD > 11.32


i7 2635 QM Radeon 6490M > 18.87 (your machine)


i7 2820 QM Radeon 6750M > 36.27 (my machine)



The last two quad coe machines also use Intel HD Graphics 3000 and with your machine the integrated and dedicated might be very close in performance.


If certain programs were made to run on all machines, like iTunes visuals, naturally the integrated would be preferred over making a more optimized dedicated graphic version.




Another thought, your graphic card only has 256MB of memory, your integrated graphics has 384MB and access to a lot more. 😉

May 28, 2011 7:57 PM in response to ds store

@AussieDJ

What's not so great?


@ds_store

I thought the HD 3000 didn't really have any RAM, but it could borrow 384 megs from the system RAM?



I understand if the HD 3000 gfx performs better at encoding/decoding video, it has a whole new instruction set for that, but it seems like if it performs this well all around, apple shouldn't have wasted the space for the discrete card...

May 29, 2011 8:51 AM in response to wyager

wyager wrote:


@ds_store

I thought the HD 3000 didn't really have any RAM, but it could borrow 384 megs from the system RAM?


Yes the HD 3000 uses main memory where programs and working files are stored, assuming the 384MG is assigned when the machine boots up. If one places more RAM in their machine, there is the possibility that more memory could be used by the HD 3000.


With about 11 on the OpenGL for the dual core with HD 3000, the quad core with HD 3000 might be around 22 or so on the OpenGL which might be just around as fast as the descrete Radeon 6490M. (which is a poor card BTW)


If certain programs were optimized for the HD 3000 by default, yea sure on this machine it's looking like certain programs may be faster on the HD 3000 than on the descrete card.


wyager wrote:


I understand if the HD 3000 gfx performs better at encoding/decoding video, it has a whole new instruction set for that, but it seems like if it performs this well all around, apple shouldn't have wasted the space for the discrete card...


It's looking with the low end 15" one has the same performance on either, all depends upon the software if it's written for integrated or descrete graphics.


Some 3D games won't run unless it has a descrete video card, what's the use.



You can see here though, descrete graphics is way ahead of integrated graphics


http://www.cbscores.com/index.php?sort=ogl&order=desc

Why do I often get significantly better performance out of the integrated GFX on the new MBP 15"?

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple ID.