it doesn't seem like much of a performance boost.. or is it?
8 88888888 macrumors 6502a Original poster May 28, 2008 506 0 Oct 16, 2008 #1 it doesn't seem like much of a performance boost.. or is it?
dukebound85 macrumors Core Jul 17, 2005 19,131 4,110 5045 feet above sea level Oct 16, 2008 #2 it isnt
K kolax macrumors G3 Mar 20, 2007 9,181 115 Oct 16, 2008 #3 Think it was more of a case with getting the dual integrated GPU and dedicated GPU to show off. Also, the whole 8600GT failing fiasco, least, hopefully, with the 9600GT this won't happen.
Think it was more of a case with getting the dual integrated GPU and dedicated GPU to show off. Also, the whole 8600GT failing fiasco, least, hopefully, with the 9600GT this won't happen.
weemanpow3 macrumors 6502 Mar 14, 2008 284 15 Oct 16, 2008 #4 9600M GT = Overclocked 8600M GT with Stablility
K kostasmac macrumors newbie Oct 16, 2008 5 0 Oct 16, 2008 #5 no on macbook pro they are not slower. think that they are new chips. also for a search at wikipedia i found that 8600M GT is giving 114gflops 9400M GT is giving 120gflops Compare please 8600 GT Core clock: 540mhz Shaders clock :1190mhz Memory clock (real speed): 700mhz Production: 114gflops 9600GT Core clock: 500mhz Shaders clock :1250mhz Memory clock (real speed): 800mhz Production: 120gflops Mem. band. :25.6gb/s Comments are yours.
no on macbook pro they are not slower. think that they are new chips. also for a search at wikipedia i found that 8600M GT is giving 114gflops 9400M GT is giving 120gflops Compare please 8600 GT Core clock: 540mhz Shaders clock :1190mhz Memory clock (real speed): 700mhz Production: 114gflops 9600GT Core clock: 500mhz Shaders clock :1250mhz Memory clock (real speed): 800mhz Production: 120gflops Mem. band. :25.6gb/s Comments are yours.
C cathyy macrumors 6502a Apr 12, 2008 727 4 Oct 16, 2008 #6 I have no idea what you are trying to say.