PDA

View Full Version : Santa Rosa MacBook (November 2007) Benchmarks




MacRumors
Nov 6, 2007, 09:43 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Primate Labs posted (http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2007/11/macbook-performance-november-2007/) benchmark results comparing the new Santa Rosa MacBooks that were quietly updated (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/11/01/apple-updates-macbooks-to-santa-rosa-gma-x3100/) last week to the Santa Rosa chipset along with the new GMA X3100 integrated video card.

In terms of pure processor speed, the MacBook updates seemed negligible (2.0GHz -> 2.0GHz, 2.16GHz -> 2.2GHz), though the underlying bus speed was increased to 800MHz from 667MHz.

The published benchmarks compared the 2.16GHz previous MacBook to the 2.2GHz new MacBook, and did significantly boost memory performance by 15% and stream performance by 25%, reflecting the increased bus speed. Integer, floating point, and overall performance, however, was only marginally improved.

Graphics performance was not tested, but the GMA X3100 should also provide performance boosts over the previous integrated video card (GMA 950).

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/11/06/santa-rosa-macbook-november-2007-benchmarks/)



queshy
Nov 6, 2007, 09:45 PM
Thought so...I'm looking forward to MWSF where we might see some new notebooks (and not just bumped up versions of the current ones!)

David G.
Nov 6, 2007, 09:48 PM
I was wondering when they were going to release the new info, and now they have.:)

entropy1980
Nov 6, 2007, 09:51 PM
So anybody seen any benches on how WOW performs on new x3100? I may bite but only if performance is up from the lowsy 950....

deathshrub
Nov 6, 2007, 09:56 PM
Graphics performance was not tested

Wonder why.

jholzner
Nov 6, 2007, 09:56 PM
Thought so...I'm looking forward to MWSF where we might see some new notebooks (and not just bumped up versions of the current ones!)

So I assume you define "new notebooks" as a case redesign? This is a new chip set based on Santa Rosa. It's a full 64 bit MB, faster front side bus, and supports twice the memory with much better graphics They can only give what intel has to offer and this is the best they have for their mobile platform right now. it wasn't just a speed bump.

Jdot
Nov 6, 2007, 10:00 PM
Wonder why.

They are probably waiting for the better drivers to be released in a week or so

meagain
Nov 6, 2007, 10:03 PM
it wasn't just a speed bump.

Exactly! I never understood why so many here poo-poo'd this last update.

Undecided
Nov 6, 2007, 10:03 PM
Cool! I just got my new blackbook today, and it's sweet!

Maccus Aurelius
Nov 6, 2007, 10:09 PM
More and more I find less reason to go with a Macbook Pro. I'll replace my MB with a new one when they get LED displays, then hand over the old one to the fiance and all's well with the world.

nagromme
Nov 6, 2007, 10:12 PM
To me, GMA X3100 is the BIG change. Bring on the 3D tests!

celloman
Nov 6, 2007, 10:13 PM
not too big of an update so im waitin for a bigger update for the MB

Eidorian
Nov 6, 2007, 10:16 PM
To me, GMA X3100 is the BIG change. Bring on the 3D tests!I can play Sims 2 on it about as well as it ran on my iMac G5 with Radeon 9600. :eek:

I don't have the multi-threaded expansions yet tough.

Here's my MacBook.

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/22952

queshy
Nov 6, 2007, 10:16 PM
So I assume you define "new notebooks" as a case redesign? This is a new chip set based on Santa Rosa. It's a full 64 bit MB, faster front side bus, and supports twice the memory with much better graphics They can only give what intel has to offer and this is the best they have for their mobile platform right now. it wasn't just a speed bump.

Perhaps I should have been more specific. I meant a case design, and perhaps some new features. And there shouldn't be a combo drive on the base model. The speed of the machine is fine, imo, but there is still a gap in the lineup ever since the 12" G4 Powerbook went away.

AidenShaw
Nov 6, 2007, 10:29 PM
This is a new chip set based on Santa Rosa. It's a full 64 bit MB, faster front side bus, and supports twice the memory with much better graphics.

Sorry, but Santa Rosa is only a 36-bit chipset.

It's limited to 64 GiB max RAM.

(of course, for a laptop today, 36-bit is just as good as 64-bit ;) )

cohibadad
Nov 6, 2007, 10:30 PM
I can play Sims 2 on it about as well as it ran on my iMac G5 with Radeon 9600. :eek:

I don't have the multi-threaded expansions yet tough.

Here's my MacBook.

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/22952

Why does it say Mac OS X 10.5 (Build 9A3110)?

ntrigue
Nov 6, 2007, 10:33 PM
Remember the disgruntled Macbook buyer that bought days before these were released? Someone should post this on his thread in the event he misses it. :)

OdduWon
Nov 6, 2007, 10:40 PM
Originally Posted by ntrigue
Remember the disgruntled Macbook buyer that bought days before these were released? Someone should post this on his thread in the event he misses it.
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r75/odduwon/macboo2new.jpg
HE missed Macboo?

j/k, now AutoCAD will be BLAZING FAST!
and sketchUp...:eek:

drewyboy
Nov 6, 2007, 10:45 PM
I dont expect to see new macbooks till..oh.. may or so, won't be suprised if updated a tad bit earliern. i will expect to see not a case redesign... can someone please tell me why they would? going all alumi is not a valid answer. the macbook is a redesign in itself which has only been around for ..coming up on two years i believe. take a look at what other products have been redesigned. iMac. That's it. Macbook pro stayed the same, Mac Pro's the same, iMac, basically the same just different casing. iBooks had the same design for, please correct me if i'm wrong, but 4 or 5 years. so why were ppl looking for a case redesign a year and half later from release??? I think some ppl need to seriouslly get off the i'm new to apple cloud, but i will admit, i was there once thinking apple would make things that were in my dreams. oh...led screen... probably in the next revision in late spring, but not holding my breath. dedicated graphics in macbook, never. sorry but never. it will also get penryn in the late spring too. so dont hold your breath for next revision...led screen and penryn chip...big woopdee doo dah. i bet you'll all be like..."i'm not gona buy with all these rumors of nehalem right around the corner!" or however u spell the chips name. anyways..remember that apple needs to keep a GAP btwn pro and consumer. once you start realizing that and thinking logically, it will be easy to see what apple will include in the next revision.

Eidorian
Nov 6, 2007, 10:55 PM
Why does it say Mac OS X 10.5 (Build 9A3110)?The new MacBooks have a different build of Leopard.

Lollypop
Nov 6, 2007, 10:55 PM
Are there any "real world" benchmarks somewhere? I want to know how iTunes and iMovie will perform with the new hardware...

Codemonkey
Nov 6, 2007, 11:06 PM
Are there any "real world" benchmarks somewhere? I want to know how iTunes and iMovie will perform with the new hardware...

Uh - then the new MB's will perform great - just the same as the *old* MB's did with iTunes and most of iMovie's functionality.

Why do you want to be an early adopter/on the bleeding edge for apps that don't require the oomph?

Eidorian
Nov 6, 2007, 11:12 PM
I'm loving Dark Crusade and Joint Operations over in Windows. :D

rockinrocker
Nov 6, 2007, 11:26 PM
Sorry, but Santa Rosa is only a 36-bit chipset.

It's limited to 64 GiB max RAM.

(of course, for a laptop today, 36-bit is just as good as 64-bit ;) )

ok, so i just wanted to check, but if upgrade to one of these my 64 bit audio apps will be able to use all 4 gigs of ram, right?

Eidorian
Nov 6, 2007, 11:30 PM
ok, so i just wanted to check, but if upgrade to one of these my 64 bit audio apps will be able to use all 4 gigs of ram, right?That is correct.

rockinrocker
Nov 6, 2007, 11:33 PM
That is correct.

cool, thanks.

Lollypop
Nov 6, 2007, 11:38 PM
Uh - then the new MB's will perform great - just the same as the *old* MB's did with iTunes and most of iMovie's functionality.

Why do you want to be an early adopter/on the bleeding edge for apps that don't require the oomph?

Im trying to find out what real world speed improvements santa rosa will give, if not iTunes then Final cut and handbrake...

I have a 15inch powerbook, never really used the graphical abilities, so just trying to find out (besides the few inches screen real estate) if the new macbooks might be a suitable xmas gift to myself.. hehe :eek:

Eidorian
Nov 6, 2007, 11:53 PM
Im trying to find out what real world speed improvements santa rosa will give, if not iTunes then Final cut and handbrake...

I have a 15inch powerbook, never really used the graphical abilities, so just trying to find out (besides the few inches screen real estate) if the new macbooks might be a suitable xmas gift to myself.. hehe :eek:Moving from a iMac G5 to a Core Duo last year meant at least x2 improvement in HandBrake encoding speeds for me. :eek:

Undecided
Nov 6, 2007, 11:59 PM
I have a 15inch powerbook, never really used the graphical abilities, so just trying to find out (besides the few inches screen real estate) if the new macbooks might be a suitable xmas gift to myself.. hehe :eek:

I was in your situation - I just upgraded from a 15.4" Powerbook G4 (bought about Feb. 2005). It has the scrolling trackpad, backlit keyboard, dedicated graphics chip, etc. but not the denser (higher resolution) screen.

Today I received my Macbook (Black). The screen resolution is the same 1280 wide, but slightly shorter (800 v. 864). But it is more compact - more like a book that I can grab and go. To me, it's a tool - a digital tool for information storing (I scan all my files into PDFs) and gathering (web), and the like. I'm not a graphics artist. I never really used the dedicated graphics in the Powerbook.

I do have a Wii now for games.

I will miss the backlit keyboard, and the screen, but that's about all. (The Powerbook screen had a wider angle of view.)

Now that I finally bought, I bet Apple will come out with an awesome tablet! Argh.

Lollypop
Nov 7, 2007, 12:02 AM
Moving from a iMac G5 to a Core Duo last year meant at least x2 improvement in HandBrake encoding speeds for me. :eek:

mmm.. nice! Other than the screen I dont really need the power of a full macbook pro, just want to be 100% sure that like my powerbook has lasted 3 years the macbook will be a worthy upgrade and will last me another 3..

igazza
Nov 7, 2007, 12:27 AM
The new MacBooks have a different build of Leopard.

yes i notice that i wonder why ?

neonblue2
Nov 7, 2007, 12:50 AM
Wonder why.

Geekbench doesn't test the graphics card, only the CPU, RAM and HDD.

Eidorian
Nov 7, 2007, 12:56 AM
Geekbench doesn't test the graphics card, only the CPU, RAM and HDD.We'll probably have to wait for BareFeats for a full GPU test.

samh004
Nov 7, 2007, 12:57 AM
To me, GMA X3100 is the BIG change. Bring on the 3D tests!

That's what I am waiting to hear about too...

I can play Sims 2 on it about as well as it ran on my iMac G5 with Radeon 9600. :eek:

I don't have the multi-threaded expansions yet tough.

Sounds good, though still want to see a difference in a graph or bar chart or something :p

yes i notice that i wonder why ?

New models always have an updated build of the OS, specially for them, but then they get the same build as every other machine next update.

Eidorian
Nov 7, 2007, 01:00 AM
That's what I am waiting to hear about too...



Sounds good, though still want to see a difference in a graph or bar chart or something :phttp://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4452232&postcount=96

JMac213
Nov 7, 2007, 01:24 AM
how much vram does the mac book have now? still a paltry 64mb? btw wtf happened to the specs on the apple store? there is no way to get info from apple if you follow the few instructions on their site. you can't send an email to the store and despite the site saying representatives are available 24hours a day - but they are not. again wtf?

k2k koos
Nov 7, 2007, 01:29 AM
Does any one know of a comparison of the old versus new integrated graphics, a real world test would suit me fine. :apple:

Eidorian
Nov 7, 2007, 01:51 AM
how much vram does the mac book have now? still a paltry 64mb? btw wtf happened to the specs on the apple store? there is no way to get info from apple if you follow the few instructions on their site. you can't send an email to the store and despite the site saying representatives are available 24hours a day - but they are not. again wtf?144 MB by default and it scales to meet the needs.

eXan
Nov 7, 2007, 03:44 AM
how much vram does the mac book have now?

0, just like the previous models.

The X3100 takes 144 MB from RAM for graphics needs, compared to GMA with 64 MB.

This doesnt matter though, because if video card runs out of VRAM it takes main RAM, but integrated graphics have no VRAM, so all graphics information is stored in RAM.

davidtmarquez
Nov 7, 2007, 03:48 AM
would anyone happen to know if the six new EA games are able to be played on this new macbook? :)

davidM

pixelbart
Nov 7, 2007, 04:15 AM
The published benchmarks compared the 2.16GHz previous MacBook to the 2.2GHz new MacBook

from TFA:
Setup

MacBook (Late 2007)
Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.20GHz
1.00 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
Mac OS X 10.5 (Build 9A3110)

MacBook (Mid 2007)
Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.00GHz
1.00 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
Mac OS X 10.5 (Build 9A581)

So, CPU performance didn't increase at all. But OTOH, these are synthetic benchmarks, I guess that in real-world benchmarks the CPU will perform faster because it gets it's data faster from RAM.


hmm, the captions of the benchmarks say 2.16 vs 2.20, which one is it??

andy721
Nov 7, 2007, 04:37 AM
Most of the new games won't work with the GMA graphics card. Or will they come out with an update?:confused:

twoodcc
Nov 7, 2007, 06:02 AM
well this update seems pretty good. looking forward to seeing the graphics benchmarks

Dont Hurt Me
Nov 7, 2007, 06:11 AM
Those looking to see improvements from 950- 3100 are in for disappointment. Sorry folks but integrated is still the same crapo cheap graphics. from what I understand it can do a few more pretty effects but as far as frame rates go dont expect much if anything perhaps a few extra frames at best.

diamond.g
Nov 7, 2007, 06:23 AM
Most of the new games won't work with the GMA graphics card. Or will they come out with an update?:confused:
Chances are if it doesn't work for GMA in Windows, it won't for Mac. At least the EA games wont, since they are just the Windows versions running in a wrapper. Which sucks because the X3100 is supposed to actually have GF 4200Ti level shaders (that can supposedly do D3D10 lvl stuff).

Muzzway
Nov 7, 2007, 06:50 AM
Anyone happened to try out Civilization 4 on it?

gutefahrt
Nov 7, 2007, 07:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eidorian
The new MacBooks have a different build of Leopard.
yes i notice that i wonder why ?

I don't know why, but on mine, Boot Camp Assistant wasn't loaded up. After searching, I found the fix:

I called Apple support this morning, and they guided me to the Boot Camp package on the setup CD - just put the Install Disc 1 in, then in Finder, to to Go -> Go To Folder... and put

/Volumes/Mac OS X Install Disc 1/System/Installation/Packages

in the dialogue box. There you should see BootCamp.pkg. Running that with all the defaults puts the Boot Camp Assistant in /Applications/Utilities/

Seems like an odd thing to leave out, huh? :confused:

Idle
Nov 7, 2007, 07:17 AM
Cool! I just got my new blackbook today, and it's sweet!I never understood why people got the black macbook. It's a waste of money! Unless you really really like the color black, of course.

gutefahrt
Nov 7, 2007, 07:22 AM
I never understood why people got the black macbook. It's a waste of money! Unless you really really like the color black, of course.

Mine's a BlackBook. Why? It replaced a circa 2001 G3 iBook. After 6 years with a white laptop, I was happy to pay the premium just to not see white anymore. It was worth the money, considering I'll have this thing for about 3 years.

MrCrowbar
Nov 7, 2007, 08:42 AM
I never understood why people got the black macbook. It's a waste of money! Unless you really really like the color black, of course.

I don't mind the bathtub white finish of the Macbooks. It's the inside grey stuff that gets dirty too much. Plus, the thick white frame around the screen is more irritating in white. The black one just looks a little sexier.

I think my next one is going to be white or aluminum.

Rocketman
Nov 7, 2007, 08:45 AM
So I assume you define "new notebooks" as a case redesign? This is a new chip set based on Santa Rosa. It's a full 64 bit MB, faster front side bus, and supports twice the memory with much better graphics They can only give what intel has to offer and this is the best they have for their mobile platform right now. it wasn't just a speed bump.

One might even say it is not a speed bump at all but a "capacity bump". Faster FSB, faster Graphics, higher supported memory, Santa Rosa MB.

Rocketman

GodWhomIsMike
Nov 7, 2007, 09:10 AM
Since the new processors aren't exactly that much quicker than the previous generation, do they at least run cooler? That would be a plus, slightly faster, but noticeably cooler.

AidenShaw
Nov 7, 2007, 09:23 AM
Since the new processors aren't exactly that much quicker than the previous generation, do they at least run cooler? That would be a plus, slightly faster, but noticeably cooler.

There is no difference in the CPU. The tiny speed difference comes from a change in the system clock for the faster bus, which means that the effective speed of the cpu (which is a multiple of the base clock) is slightly different.

The 2 GHz should be exactly the same heat output, the 2.2 GHz might be a tiny bit warmer than the 2.16 - but probably too little to measure or notice when it's in the system.

belle2106
Nov 7, 2007, 09:57 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Primate Labs posted (http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2007/11/macbook-performance-november-2007/) benchmark results comparing the new Santa Rosa MacBooks that were quietly updated (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/11/01/apple-updates-macbooks-to-santa-rosa-gma-x3100/) last week to the Santa Rosa chipset along with the new GMA X3100 integrated video card.

In terms of pure processor speed, the MacBook updates seemed negligible (2.0GHz -> 2.0GHz, 2.16GHz -> 2.2GHz), though the underlying bus speed was increased to 800MHz from 667MHz.

The published benchmarks compared the 2.16GHz previous MacBook to the 2.2GHz new MacBook, and did significantly boost memory performance by 15% and stream performance by 25%, reflecting the increased bus speed. Integer, floating point, and overall performance, however, was only marginally improved.

Graphics performance was not tested, but the GMA X3100 should also provide performance boosts over the previous integrated video card (GMA 950).

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/11/06/santa-rosa-macbook-november-2007-benchmarks/)


Help..how do i know when this upgrade has happened I need to order so delivery is beofre 30th of November but obvioulsy wnat the most up to date model..

astrocafe
Nov 7, 2007, 12:02 PM
anyone gotten Motion to run on the upgraded MacBook?
would rather run that on a smaller MacBook than a larger MacBook Pro.

thedudeAbides
Nov 7, 2007, 12:03 PM
Help..how do i know when this upgrade has happened I need to order so delivery is beofre 30th of November but obvioulsy wnat the most up to date model..

it has happened as of last week.

Goldenbear
Nov 7, 2007, 02:46 PM
Help..how do i know when this upgrade has happened I need to order so delivery is beofre 30th of November but obvioulsy wnat the most up to date model..

If you order from Apple, you should be getting the new model. If you order from someone else (Amazon, for example), you need to pay attention to the specs, since they may have older models they'll want to get rid of.

aliquis-
Nov 7, 2007, 09:18 PM
I can play Sims 2 on it about as well as it ran on my iMac G5 with Radeon 9600. :eek:

I don't have the multi-threaded expansions yet tough.

Here's my MacBook.

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/22952Great, a test which doesn't benchmark opengl, that will help! ;D

Eidorian
Nov 7, 2007, 09:20 PM
Great, a test which doesn't benchmark opengl, that will help! ;Dhttp://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4452232&postcount=96

MacinDoc
Nov 7, 2007, 09:56 PM
The more I reflect on this quiet update, the more I think that it's merely a way to replace the EOL'd motherboards of the previous generation. The REAL MB update is yet to come, possibly as early as MWSF '08 (along with the iMac and a substantially redesigned Mini).

DaBrain
Nov 7, 2007, 10:01 PM
Graphics performance was not tested, but the GMA X3100 should also provide performance boosts over the previous integrated video card (GMA 950).

That's weird! I would consider a new graphics card significant enough of an update to include it's performance and value! :(

OttawaGuy
Nov 7, 2007, 10:02 PM
anyone gotten Motion to run on the upgraded MacBook?
would rather run that on a smaller MacBook than a larger MacBook Pro.

I like to know the answer to this too.

madmax_2069
Nov 7, 2007, 11:36 PM
Why does it say Mac OS X 10.5 (Build 9A3110)?

i was wondering the same thing, wouldn't you think you would run a comparison benchmark running the same built of the OS, this benchmark is not a true comparison cause of the different build numbers of the OS

for a true comparison between the 2 systems you need to be running the same build of the OS and same memory config's, only then will it be a true comparison.

All they did in this comparison was piss in the wind or how ever you want to put it

KissStephanie
Nov 8, 2007, 12:45 AM
Thought so...I'm looking forward to MWSF where we might see some new notebooks (and not just bumped up versions of the current ones!)But don't expect any more MacBook releases until about May. Maybe MacBook Pro's though.So I assume you define "new notebooks" as a case redesign? This is a new chip set based on Santa Rosa. It's a full 64 bit MB, faster front side bus, and supports twice the memory with much better graphics They can only give what intel has to offer and this is the best they have for their mobile platform right now. it wasn't just a speed bump.I agree with you. It was more than just a "bump," and these new MacBooks are very impressive for the cost.not too big of an update so im waitin for a bigger update for the MBWhat were you expecting exactly? You'll be waiting until about May, which may suit you, but not others to wait that long.

toninikkanen
Nov 8, 2007, 02:49 AM
Anyone happened to try out Civilization 4 on it?


I know this is crazy but Civ 4 performance is all I care about! Why? Everything else happens fast enough on my MacBook 1.83Ghz/1GB/160GB machine already, but Civ 4 is horrendously slow--it requires heroic effort to play it as it is now. So please, someone buy the new macbook and test it :)

Sarcasmo
Nov 8, 2007, 03:28 AM
That is correct.

Eidoran, you have the Macbook I am about to buy tomorrow (WOOOO!!!!! FINALLY!!!!!)

Judging by these benchmarks, with 2gb of ram, this puppy will flyyyy.

PC be gone forever!!!

belle2106
Nov 8, 2007, 05:05 AM
That is correct.

I am a graphic designer so use my current e mac for layout deisgn work. I was going to buy the 13inch mac book in white on sat but i am concerned after a comment from a colleage that this will be to smal to do layout work on.. i cant realy afford to go to the 17 inch pro and as i would install extra ram on the mac book dont see the point other than screen size. i have been told that if i were to hook my mac book up to a flat screen which will be cheaper then it would be very blocky as the resolution is not good enough on a small laptop any advice, much appreciated

madmax_2069
Nov 8, 2007, 06:52 AM
I am a graphic designer so use my current e mac for layout deisgn work. I was going to buy the 13inch mac book in white on sat but i am concerned after a comment from a colleage that this will be to smal to do layout work on.. i cant realy afford to go to the 17 inch pro and as i would install extra ram on the mac book dont see the point other than screen size. i have been told that if i were to hook my mac book up to a flat screen which will be cheaper then it would be very blocky as the resolution is not good enough on a small laptop any advice, much appreciated


i really think it would depend on what resolutions the monitor supports, and if the Macbook can use them.

here is the max screen resolutions of the Macbook with the GMA950 and the GMA X3100

The maximum resolution supported on "Apple DVI displays" is 1920x1200 and 1600x1200 on VGA displays.

i would not know how high of a screen resolution you would need to go or what size monitor you would need. but in the BTO you can add a 20" Apple cinema display or a 23" Apple HD cinema display, but those are rather high in price ($599 and $899). you could find a external flat panel display for allot cheaper somewhere else but have just as good screen quality.

but it depends if it suits you, i think you can go to a Apple store and test one out in the config you want to use it in to see if you like it or not

Eidorian
Nov 8, 2007, 08:08 AM
I am a graphic designer so use my current e mac for layout deisgn work. I was going to buy the 13inch mac book in white on sat but i am concerned after a comment from a colleage that this will be to smal to do layout work on.. i cant realy afford to go to the 17 inch pro and as i would install extra ram on the mac book dont see the point other than screen size. i have been told that if i were to hook my mac book up to a flat screen which will be cheaper then it would be very blocky as the resolution is not good enough on a small laptop any advice, much appreciatedThat's a complete lie right there.

When on the road the screen is fine but you'd be just safe just getting a Mini-DVI to DVI adapter and plugging it into a good external monitor up to 1920 x 1200.

Sarcasmo
Nov 8, 2007, 09:24 AM
That's a complete lie right there.

When on the road the screen is fine but you'd be just safe just getting a Mini-DVI to DVI adapter and plugging it into a good external monitor up to 1920 x 1200.

Yep. Someone tryin to upsell you right there. I'm buying my new MB tomorrow and I can't wait to see all the crap they try and sell me with it. Or if they try and sell me on a pro. Oh well, I'm just happy to have a new computer.

:apple:

gnasher729
Nov 8, 2007, 06:00 PM
how much vram does the mac book have now? still a paltry 64mb? btw wtf happened to the specs on the apple store? there is no way to get info from apple if you follow the few instructions on their site. you can't send an email to the store and despite the site saying representatives are available 24hours a day - but they are not. again wtf?

The MacBook doesn't have _any_ VRAM. It reserves 64 Megabyte of ordinary RAM for use by the integrated graphics card. With the new graphics card, it still has no VRAM, but it reserves 144 Megabyte of ordinary RAM for use by the graphics card. So if you have 1024 MB of RAM, the amount available for other things goes down from 960MB to 880MB.

unwinded
Nov 8, 2007, 08:51 PM
http://barefeats.com/mbook.html

Gaming benchmarks

Not the big jump y'all were hoping for. Which is to be expected, this chipset has been available in PCs for a while and is not a whole lot better than the GMA 950.

Eidorian
Nov 8, 2007, 08:59 PM
http://barefeats.com/mbook.html

Gaming benchmarks

Not the big jump y'all were hoping for. Which is to be expected, this chipset has been available in PCs for a while and is not a whole lot better than the GMA 950.Maybe they should run another round at medium settings. :p

eXan
Nov 8, 2007, 09:17 PM
Maybe they should run another round at medium settings. :p

Yea I was thinking about that too... why did they run the tests at maximum possible graphics settings?

BTW, I'm not impressed with X3100, aside from UT2004 test which showed almost double frame rate.

Eidorian
Nov 8, 2007, 09:21 PM
Yea I was thinking about that too... why did they run the tests at maximum possible graphics settings?

BTW, I'm not impressed with X3100, aside from UT2004 test which showed almost double frame rate.UT 2K4 at Maximum Settings wasn't that bad.

I play circa 2000-2004 games in Windows on this laptop all the time now. :D

mkrishnan
Nov 8, 2007, 09:33 PM
They are probably waiting for the better drivers to be released in a week or so

Geekbench does not do tests of the graphics system at all, just for what it's worth. So it's not that they suppressed the test results or didn't run them; it's just not what GB does.

Keep in mind that Geekbench 2 only measures processor and memory performance which is why, for example, MacBook and MacBook Pro scores are so similar, despite both having radically different graphics adapters.

(see the top of the chart (http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2007/08/mac-performance-august-2007/))

John Musbach
Nov 8, 2007, 10:25 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Primate Labs posted (http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2007/11/macbook-performance-november-2007/) benchmark results comparing the new Santa Rosa MacBooks that were quietly updated (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/11/01/apple-updates-macbooks-to-santa-rosa-gma-x3100/) last week to the Santa Rosa chipset along with the new GMA X3100 integrated video card.

In terms of pure processor speed, the MacBook updates seemed negligible (2.0GHz -> 2.0GHz, 2.16GHz -> 2.2GHz), though the underlying bus speed was increased to 800MHz from 667MHz.

The published benchmarks compared the 2.16GHz previous MacBook to the 2.2GHz new MacBook, and did significantly boost memory performance by 15% and stream performance by 25%, reflecting the increased bus speed. Integer, floating point, and overall performance, however, was only marginally improved.

Graphics performance was not tested, but the GMA X3100 should also provide performance boosts over the previous integrated video card (GMA 950).

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/11/06/santa-rosa-macbook-november-2007-benchmarks/)
Oh rats, I guess I should've waited to purchase my macbook :( ...oh well

dlacey
Nov 9, 2007, 10:02 AM
The new MacBooks have a different build of Leopard.

As it clearly says under my user name, Iím a "macrumors newbie". So I want to know when is the best time to convert my entire life into Mac. I want to buy a Macbook and I need some help. The thing is that I edit constantly in final cut pro in university, so I want to now if the new Macbook will be enough for me or should I wait for further upgrades. I know that the next upgrades are possibly coming in May next year, but maybe they will release a new Mac before Christmas. What should I do?? Wait or buy it now?? Itís my first Macbook so Iím kind of nervous about it. Thanks!!

Eidorian
Nov 9, 2007, 10:06 AM
As it clearly says under my user name, Iím a "macrumors newbie". So I want to know when is the best time to convert my entire life into Mac. I want to buy a Macbook and I need some help. The thing is that I edit constantly in final cut pro in university, so I want to now if the new Macbook will be enough for me or should I wait for further upgrades. I know that the next upgrades are possibly coming in May next year, but maybe they will release a new Mac before Christmas. What should I do?? Wait or buy it now?? Itís my first Macbook so Iím kind of nervous about it. Thanks!!Do you need the laptop now or not?

TigerPilot
Nov 9, 2007, 06:17 PM
Hi all,

I recognized that in some VAIO Models the GMA X3100 has up to 358 MB shared memory.
1. Why is it 144 MB in SR MacBooks?
2. Is it an adjustable spec?
3. If adjustable will the X3100 with 358 MB shared mem have more fps in games than X3100 with 144 MB version?

Thanks.

unwinded
Nov 9, 2007, 10:14 PM
Hi all,

I recognized that in some VAIO Models the GMA X3100 has up to 358 MB shared memory.
1. Why is it 144 MB in SR MacBooks?
2. Is it an adjustable spec?
3. If adjustable will the X3100 with 358 MB shared mem have more fps in games than X3100 with 144 MB version?

Thanks.

This has been brought up here before regarding the GMA 950 and how OS X reported only 64MB of usage. 144 MB is the minimum amount of RAM that OS X sets aside for graphics, that number can dynamically grow to 358 MB just as in Windows on the VAIOs, it just doesn't report that value.

dlacey
Nov 9, 2007, 10:21 PM
Do you need the laptop now or not?

Mmmm I can wait if thatís what it takes. I have read some of your comments and thatís why Iím asking you. You seem to think your answers, not like others...

OdduWon
Nov 9, 2007, 10:31 PM
Has SantaRosa provided the gaming crowd with a respectable graphics? What games will not run on SR?

x1050us
Nov 10, 2007, 10:27 AM
How much boost can one expect with DDR2 800 instead of stock DDR2 667 that comes with the book. Is 1G + 1G better than 2G + 512M configuration in terms of RAM performance ?

Undecided
Nov 10, 2007, 11:37 AM
Has SantaRosa provided the gaming crowd with a respectable graphics? What games will not run on SR?

No, not really. If you want to play games, in particular 3D games, then you simply need a dedicated graphics chip. Integrated won't do.

With every iteration of integrated graphics since the dawn of time, we keep hoping that the next one will be good. It never is.

My own gaming solution is a Wii.

Eidorian
Nov 10, 2007, 11:41 AM
Has SantaRosa provided the gaming crowd with a respectable graphics? What games will not run on SR?I play Dawn of War: Dark Crusade and Joint Operations just fine over in Windows using Intel's latest drivers.

How much boost can one expect with DDR2 800 instead of stock DDR2 667 that comes with the book. Is 1G + 1G better than 2G + 512M configuration in terms of RAM performance ?There's no benefit using DDR2-800.

barefeats
Nov 11, 2007, 11:01 AM
To me, GMA X3100 is the BIG change. Bring on the 3D tests!

Here's three pages of GPU intensive test results:
http://www.barefeats.com/mbook.html
and
http://www.barefeats.com/mbook2.html
and
http://www.barefeats.com/mbook1.html

Eidorian
Nov 11, 2007, 11:21 AM
Here's three pages of GPU intensive test results:
http://www.barefeats.com/macbook.html
and
http://www.barefeats.com/macbook2.html
and
http://www.barefeats.com/macbook1.htmlThey're all 404 for me.

http://www.barefeats.com/mbook.html

http://www.barefeats.com/mbook1.html

http://www.barefeats.com/mbook2.html

I remember reading an article on raw CPU performance on desktops with the GMA 3100 and the G33 chipset. Just moving to a dedicated card from the integrated graphics improved the performance of non-GPU tasks.

diamond.g
Nov 11, 2007, 01:16 PM
They're all 404 for me.

http://www.barefeats.com/mbook.html

http://www.barefeats.com/mbook1.html

http://www.barefeats.com/mbook2.html

I remember reading an article on raw CPU performance on desktops with the GMA 3100 and the G33 chipset. Just moving to a dedicated card from the integrated graphics improved the performance of non-GPU tasks.

Those results are depressing, yet expected. I wonder if Intels T&L + Shader Engine is active yet. Or is the system fill rate bound?

Eidorian
Nov 11, 2007, 02:00 PM
Those results are depressing, yet expected. I wonder if Intels T&L + Shader Engine is active yet. Or is the system fill rate bound?I think it's more of an Apple driver issue then anything else right now.

The GMA X3100 runs admirably for 2003/2004 games in Windows.

barefeats
Nov 11, 2007, 06:21 PM
I think it's more of an Apple driver issue then anything else right now.

The GMA X3100 runs admirably for 2003/2004 games in Windows.

Ahh. That gives me an idea. I wonder how well those games will run if I install Vista in a Boot Camp partition...

Eidorian
Nov 11, 2007, 06:28 PM
Ahh. That gives me an idea. I wonder how well those games will run if I install Vista in a Boot Camp partition...That would be a good idea.

I've had a good time with Half Life 2. :D

thejane
Nov 13, 2007, 08:24 PM
I'm one of the unfortunate and uninformed who bought a Macbook just a few days before the upgrade.... I can still return/exchange for the new setup, but will have to pay a 10% restocking fee (so $170 CDN) since I took my new computer out of the packaging. I'm looking for (informed) opinions on whether or not the improved configuration is worth the cost. I appreciate the help!

Eidorian
Nov 13, 2007, 08:26 PM
I'm one of the unfortunate and uninformed who bought a Macbook just a few days before the upgrade.... I can still return/exchange for the new setup, but will have to pay a 10% restocking fee (so $170 CDN) since I took my new computer out of the packaging. I'm looking for (informed) opinions on whether or not the improved configuration is worth the cost. I appreciate the help!You might want to check MacWorld (http://www.macworld.com/2007/11/firstlooks/macbook_bench/index.php) or even the first post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4455153&postcount=1) in this thread.

wheelhot
Nov 23, 2007, 08:37 PM
Hmm,
I wonder how much RAM upgrade will be good if you are planning to use MacBook - SolidWorks (Win XP)? Im not a heavy gamer, I rarely play games right now, no time. So what Im planning to do with a MacBook is graphic stuff (mainly photo edit and 3D design). Or maybe I should wait till the next MacBook update which is unknown.