which is better and why?
I'm wondering because i currently have an hp laptop, and the only thing i am not satisfied with is my graphics performance.
i would like to upgrade to a macbook pro, but i don't want to buy the very expensive 15" model.
i use the graphics for GIMP mainly.
So, I bought myself new Macbook Pro exactly 21 days ago, and was disappointed to find out that they refreshed it today.
However, I am heading to Apple Store Friday afternoon to find out what I can do to get that refreshed one. (I waited 7 month, until the last day of the presentation)So, to people with 320m graphics, are there any big difference? Does the battery lasts longer?
I have a late 2008 15" MBP with an NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT w/256MB of RAM. I am thinking of trading it for a current 13" MacBook with a GeForce 320M w/256MB.
Am I right in assuming the new MacBook's GPU is inferior to my current's? If so, how much of a hit would I take in games like Left 4 Dead 2, Portal 2, etc.. ?
Before you all start attacking me for having a second Steam thread, I get it. There's already a steam thread. This one is specifically for those of us who have MBPs (from any generation) that use integrated 9400m and 320m graphics. This is a great way for us to compare the two Core2Duo graphics cards.
Please report any info about frame rates, settings, how well or poorly games run etc. Feel free to re-post information about this stuff from the other thread so that we can consolidate the info.
Yes, and as you can see in my signature, I have the previous model which I have bought less than 25 days ago. I will go to Apple store this friday (Japan, and these people should be nice) and try to convince them that they shouldn't have given me the inferior ones.
Back to the point, will Starcraft 2 work well with nVidia 320m? Apple's website says there will be a 80% boost, but what about Starcraft 2?
Does anyone know how to install the latest NVidia drivers from their website?
The installation breaks of because the correct hardware couldn't be found (when indeed I did download the correct 320M drivers).
While the GeForce GT 330M featured in the new 15- and 17-inch MacBook Pros has already been found in competing notebook PCs, the new 13-inch MacBook Pro sports the Nvidia 320M, a graphics processor created just for Apple.
An Nvidia spokesperson told AppleInsider Tuesday that the new 320M was made especially for Apple, and is the successor to the GeForce 9400M, introduced in 2008. The 320M is an integrated graphics chipset for notebooks based on Intel's Core 2 Duo line of processors.
According to Notebookcheck.net, the 320M does not have dedicated graphics memory, but uses shared memory for the system for its graphics processing, giving it poorer performance than a GPU with dedicated memory. The 320M (not to be confused with the GeForce GT 320M) is based on the GT216 core, and offers 48 shader cores.
The report said the gaming performance of the 320M should be comparable to, but slightly better than, a 310M. The 320M also supports PureVideo HD for high definition decoding within the GPU. The processor can also be used to encode videos.
In announcing its new line of MacBook Pros on Tuesday, Apple revealed that the GeForce 320M GPU offers up to 80 percent faster graphics processing. It also helps the 13-inch MacBook Pro achieve 10 hours of battery life. Apple called the 320M the "fastest integrated graphics processor on the market."
The 13-inch model also includes faster Core 2 Duo processors, reaching speeds up to 2.66GHz and featuring a 1066MHz frontside bus with 3MB of shared L2 cache.
Featured on the 15- and 17-inch models is the 330M, which Apple said is more than twice as fast as the low-end 320M. Apple said the GT 330M "provides smooth, crisp on-screen graphics for the most demanding 3D games, creative software and technical applications."
The 15- and 17-inch MacBook Pros also include automatic graphics switching, which Apple has dubbed a "breakthrough" technology. It allows the system to switch graphics processors on the fly, giving users performance when they need it and better battery efficiency when they don't. AppleInsider first revealed Apple was planning dual graphics technology in its future MacBook Pros in February.
At the moment I am testing with my 2010 Macbook Pro with a 330M hooked up to a Denon AVR-3806 receiver via HDMI. The Denon is hooked up to a plasma via HDMI.
I assume that the 320M in the Mini and the 330M are very similar, which is why I am posting here in the Mini forums, since I think I will get more visibility in here where people hook up their Macs to TV sets.
When I plug in the HDMI to the Macbook Pro using a mini displayPort to HDMI adapter, it automatically creates some generic DENON_AVR color profile or something like that. Things look ok, but everything is too dark for my liking. All shadow detail is lost.
It seems like I am getting better results when using the s-RGB color profile or even the Adobe RGB 1998 color profile, but i'm still not happy.
How do I get this video card, the 320M or the 330M, output just 'raw' or default, without having to calibrate the color profile? I tried calibrating using the Color menu on the Macbook Pro, but it just didn't work out. I would like it to just output the default or something so that I can just use the TV to control the final result. I have a few Popcorn Hour boxes that I currently use and I don't have to mess with any sort of color profile on those boxes. It just outputs a great picture. And I can leave the HDMI input on my TV with the same picture settings that I use for my DVR. Since I am using the AV receiver to do the HDMI switching, only one HDMI input on the TV is being used, so I have to leave the picture settings alone. The HDMI input is set on the Pioneer 6070 to accept RGB.
I'm interested to learn the differences between these video cards : NVidia's GeForce 9400M and GT 320M used by Apple.
Is the GT 330M supposed to be better/faster than the 9400M ? Any benchmarks and comparison stats ?
How can I update my nvidia geforce 320M drivers, I downloaded the drivers from nvidia site, however, i get an error that says "this computer will not support this nvidia graphics solution" - I downloaded this file "NVIDIA Retail Mac Driver 256.01.00f03", I'm using LG 22" TV/Monitor with Res at 1680 x 1050 @ 60Hz which is causing regular text appear blurry.
the 1680x1050 seems to be the best Res setting but text is blurry ..
I tried different HDMI cables, same conclusion ...
I have bought Macbook pro 13 , 2.4 GHz 2010 model with nVidia 320m graphics, Now my question is that I have installed win 7 on bootcamp and windows experience index scores 5.2 (win aero ) and 6.0 (gaming) , these both scores are same as friends 9400m macbook white, so is it ok ??? or future driver updates may increase these score??
View 3 Replies View RelatedI'm planning on getting a MBP 15 for my sister. It's mainly for casual everyday use such as web surfing, streaming videos and movies. She's not into heavy gaming. Mostly casual and maybe MMO games. I will be upgrading to the 1680x1050 screen. Is it worth the $400 upgrade to get 1GB of memory?
Info:
MacBook Pro, Mac OS X (10.7.4)
I am going to college this year to study Graphic Design and i am looking to purchase a MBP 15". I have read a couple of other threads which cover similar questions however i am not truly satisfied with the answers i have read.
My MBP will have to run the following programs on a regular basis: Photoshop, Bridge, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, Flash. It will also have to run basic tasks such as word processing, internet surfing and email. Finally i would also like to install parallels and XP on the machine just in case an work or applications need to be run on windows. Obviously all of these applications will not be running simultaneously however there is a strong chance 2 or 3 maybe running at the same time. My Imac deals with this without problems, will the MBP be the same?
Is there much difference from a stock iMac with Nvidia GT 130 vs ATI HD 4850 for gaming? It would be nice to be able just to buy a stock machines rather than a custom with the ATI for $50.
My real concern is overall gaming proformance and heat produced by the two cards. Current iMac has the ATI 2600 HD Pro, which I think is pretty slow compared.
Is a difference in movie quality between Intel and Nvidia graphics normal.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI currently use a 4 year old MBP with an X1600 GPU. Thinking about going for an Air, and wondering what the 320M is like in comparison.
I play the occasional game but principally would use the machine as a holiday / travel laptop and would hope to be able to do light 3D graphics work on it. I know it's never going to replace a desktop machine but I'm quite good at working within hardware constraints.
Is the 320M a much better GPU? If so by what order of magnitude?
a bunch of people are using the notebookcheck.net 3DMark06 score of 3300 as the average score for the 8600M GT. Due to this, a lot of people are getting the wrong impression that the 320M is faster than the 8600M GT, and that the 330M is 2x more powerful.There are several consistency issues which need to be addressed: 1) 8600M GT (DDR2) vs 8600M GT (GDDR3)While they both have the same name, there are actually 2 different variants of the 8600M GT card. One with DDR2 memory and one with GDDR3 memory. (Note: this is NOT the same as system memory) The GDDR3 variant is between 20% - 30% faster than the DDR2 variant. Majority of the 8600Ms tested used DDR2 memory, while all the 8600Ms in Apple notebooks use GDDR3 memory.
View 24 Replies View RelatedWanted to let you know that I had great sucess overclocking the 320m in the Air. I used the same procedure found in this thread.
[URL]
This might help you starcraft junkies out there as it may give a 20% increase in performance. I played MW2 for two solid hours tonight without lockups at 625 / 1340. (11" 1.6 4GB) Thanks go to all in the refrenced thread that contributed to these findings!
I am looking too use Photoshop CS4 and was wondering if it is worth the upgrade to NVIDIA GeForce 9400M + 9600M GT with 256MB or should I just stick with the NVIDIA GeForce 9400M.I am not able too spend any more than the 1999.00 price point so these are my only two options. I need the portability of a laptop otherwise I would go with the iMac. I am sorry if this has been asked before,
View 4 Replies View RelatedOk, im posting this because im sick and tired of people on here saying "Intel is the only way to go if you want speed"
Your info is like 18 months out of date.
Here are the benchmarks for both drives in RAID 0 config. which is 2 drives and nearly double the speed. if you want a single drive its roughly half the speed shown below.
Intel 160GB x2 and OCZ Vertex 2 120GB x2
Intel = Pwned
I'm going to install either a 160GB Intel X25-M or 120GB OCZ Vertex in my 17'' 2.8Ghz MBP that I use for digital audio production and live performances. Any thoughts on which to choose?
View 1 Replies View RelatedSo I have a 1.8ghz dual G5 with 3gb of ram for work. I mainly work in Adobe CS and do a far amount of Photoshop work. At any given time I may have all of Adobe CS plus Office and a few other apps running -- and a gazillion fonts. Went to the store and saw the new 24" iMac. How would a new iMac compare to my late '04 1.8DP G5? On that same note, how would a new MacBook Pro compare to the above?
View 5 Replies View Related[URL]
AMD IGP is twice as fast in games.
In HTML 5.0 benchmark, AMD is 10 times faster.
Interesting to consider for the MBP 13 next year if the cpu is faster than the C2D.
Which drive is better for OSX considering the lack of trim support?
View 5 Replies View RelatedI've never owned a Mac before, but have a couple of friends who love theirs. So when the stunning new Air came out, I decided I'd join them after using only Windows PCs for so many years. I am trying to decide between the 128GB base 11.6" Air and the base 13.3" one. I prefer the form factor of the 11.6", and ideally, I'd just go ahead and get it, because portability is high on my wishlist.
However, my decision hinges on whether the 11.6" can play 1080p MKVs so I can output them to my TV when I'm not mobile.I've read elsewhere that the 11.6" with the 1.4GHz CPU struggles in OSX, but I'd be installing Windows 7 as well, my media player of choice being Media Player Classic. The reason for this is that it supports hardware acceleration of movie files with the GPU, so allows the CPU to be relatively unused, or assists a slow CPU in playing high bitrate/resolution movies.
So, after the drawn out intro, I guess my questions are: Does the GeForce 320M in the Air support hardware acceleration (DXVA) in Media Player Classic in Windows? If yes, is it capable of playing 1080p MKVs smoothly (for example, a 24 minute show weighing in at roughly 1-1.5GB)?
I would really, really appreciate it if some kind soul would be willing to try this out to help me make my buying decision. As I say, it would be my first Mac, so I'm really not sure when it comes to this kind of thing. And I do realise that what I'm asking is ridiculously specific, but I thought that if anyone could help me, it would be you guys.
How much of a difference in these specs?
I see MacMALL is selling MBA with the former in both categories and i didnt know how much it will affect my performance. Should i spend the money for the upgraded specs?
I would like to get some feedback on these two ssd drives.
I own a MBP 13' late 2010 and I would like to upgrade to an ssd
I'm considering two drives:
Intel x-25m 160Gb
Crucial c300 128Gb
My 24" iMac has been exibiting strange behavior lately... It appears to be if a graphical nature where the screen will randomly flicker or go blank in a variety of colors (black or white or yellow or red or blue). Sometimes a preceeding indicator that this is going to occur is that the system becomes on responsive or extremely delayed, text and other graphics appear garbled/corrupted/scrambled.
I've used Mac Hardware Test, Disk Utility, TechTool Pro 6, anti virus software - even took it to a local authorized Mac repair shop (not Apple Store) and the results are the same - Everything LOOKS fine with no problems reported. I've reinstalled the OS and even gone as far as completely wiping the drive and starting from scratch, just incase it is/was some kind of odd software conflict. Yet, the problem persists and the Console always captures something like this just before another epic fail:
4/13/12 5:55:50.000 PM kernel: NVDA(OpenGL): Channel exception! exception type = 0x8 = Fifo: Watchdog Timeout Error
4/13/12 5:55:51.000 PM kernel: IOVendorGLContext::ReportGPURestart
4/13/12 5:55:51.000 PM kernel: 0000006e
[Code]...
I'm looking for a new monitor to go with my MBP, and I'm stuck trying to choose between the ones listed above.
The 2407WFP is a couple of years old now I guess, but it's the rev A04 version, which supposedly fixed the (few) problems with what was otherwise meant to be a great screen. It's an sPVA screen.
I've heard good reviews of the G2410, with its LED backlighting. It's still a TN panel and I hear so much bad stuff about them.
The 2209WA is an eIPS panel which I like the sound of, but it's smaller and lower resolution.
The F2380 is a cPVA panel, the image quality looks better but I've heard bad things about blacks on this panel.
I'm getting ready to pull the trigger on a pair of SSD's.
Looking at the OCZ forums, it seems like there are a still a number of outstanding issues... random lockups out of sleep, no trim support, (therefore worse write performance on a loaded drive), and on and on...[URL]
Yet there's very little noise around the Intel drives (besides the late bootcamp issue). Is that because I'm just not looking in the right place or there simply is no outstanding issues with Intel's X-25M now?
Does anyone here have any more insights?
