I'm probably going to get a 13" MacBook Pro this fall when Apple bumps them to use the just-refreshed Haswell processors.
Right now I'm thinking of getting 2.6ghz (2.4 in the current gen but increased in the refresh), 16GB, and the Intel Iris Graphics (5100) integrated chip.
I'm not sure if the Iris graphics get better in the next release.
Obviously I'm not buying this computer FOR Dolphin, but I'm getting it for school and wondering what I can expect Dolphin to do on it.
Would it be worth it to bump up the processor in config to 2.8ghz or 3.0ghz? Would Dolphin benefit enough from these to make it worthwhile?
My general question is what kind of Dolphin performance I can expect, what games I can run, what IR, etc.
Thanks!
Edit: The new base processor will be the Core-i5 4278U, replacing the Core i5-4258 in the current gen.
Link on about the new chips
http://www.macrumors.com/2014/07/21/intel-launches-new-haswell-chips/
Don't expect Ultra low voltage CPUs to run Dolphin well ! According to Dolphin users , most of time those chips will be underclocked
It's rare to see those chips work properly with Dolphin
Dolphin > Prime95 torture test . I doubt that Macbook can hanle Dolphin , it may overheat
https://forums.dolphin-emu.org/Thread-macbook-laptops
Don't know which school you are attending but you can get a thin gaming laptop that has i7 4750HQ (Iris Pro 5200 is twice as fast as Iris 5100) for less money
admin89: Apple does pretty decently on thermals, if my MacBook Air's a valid example – under Linux, powertop reported this thing's
i5-2557M was always running at 2.6-2.7 GHz while running Dolphin for extended periods of time, and that was with the stock half-assedly-applied thermal paste. The aluminium casing does a lot of the heat dissipation, I guess. And, hey, the rMBPs all have dual fans (that sound like white noise), so no worry 'bout cooling.
It may make more monetary sense to buy a cheaper and higher-spec'd Windows laptop, but if you prefer Apple's hardware and want to run OS X without having to go anywhere near the Hackintosh community, feel free to go with the rMBP. I dunno how much of a difference either CPU bump will make (probably a 15% speedup at most, right?), but going straight up to the 15" rMBP+dGPU will make tons more difference, mainly due to the CPU/GPU being non-ULV items.
Quote:Apple does pretty decently on thermals
If you click on the link I provided above and read the 2nd last post , you will see it is not like what you think
It's still a multiti-media notebook , there is a chance that it may overheat
(07-23-2014, 03:56 AM)pauldacheez Wrote: [ -> ]admin89: Apple does pretty decently on thermals, if my MacBook Air's a valid example – under Linux, powertop reported this thing's i5-2557M was always running at 2.6-2.7 GHz while running Dolphin for extended periods of time, and that was with the stock half-assedly-applied thermal paste. The aluminium casing does a lot of the heat dissipation, I guess. And, hey, the rMBPs all have dual fans (that sound like white noise), so no worry 'bout cooling.
It may make more monetary sense to buy a cheaper and higher-spec'd Windows laptop, but if you prefer Apple's hardware and want to run OS X without having to go anywhere near the Hackintosh community, feel free to go with the rMBP. I dunno how much of a difference either CPU bump will make (probably a 15% speedup at most, right?), but going straight up to the 15" rMBP+dGPU will make tons more difference, mainly due to the CPU/GPU being non-ULV items.
From my experience with Apple notebooks, they're pretty good at cooling and heat dissipation, so that's not something I'm too concerned about.
It would be great to get a 15" rMBP but unfortunately they're a bit out of my price range. A 15% speed bump would probably not be worth it to me.
Is the fact that these are low-voltage chips really that much of a factor? If the next gen is 2.6ghz with Intel's latest chip design, shouldn't that be enough to play a lot of games comfortably?
They really are that much of a factor because they really aren't running at 2.6, that's their max Turbo speed. They're actually running closer to 1.6 or something.
That's the problem with recent Apple laptops, sacrificing raw power for better battery by using the ULV CPUs
(07-23-2014, 11:25 AM)KHg8m3r Wrote: [ -> ]They really are that much of a factor because they really aren't running at 2.6, that's their max Turbo speed. They're actually running closer to 1.6 or something.
That's the problem with recent Apple laptops, sacrificing raw power for better battery by using the ULV CPUs
I think the base speed it gives is the actual clock speed. On Apple's order page for the current gens it says "2.4ghz (Turbo Boost up to 2.9ghz), with the 2.8ghz going up to 3.3ghz. I've been googling around and I can't find any reference to the processors used in the rMBPs being under clocked.