I was going to go for the low end 2011 15" until I discovered it has a crippled GPU, there is no way I am going to spend that much money on a crippled system. My only other option would be the higher end but at that price point, it would be a pity not to load it with a hires AG and a 128gb SSD. But wait a minute, that means I will be forking out close to 3k!!! Forget it, i'm sticking to my 2010 i5 with the 330gt and maybe upgrade the drive to SSD.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
6750M vs. 6490? Worth the upgrade?
- Thread starter Zauberer
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hi folks
I need a help from you guys.I am new in mac world got an iphone, so this will be my first macbook pro laptop.I still dont know what to buy.
My needs are most time 80% basic.Internet, office, multimedia, videos, and other 10-20% need for autocad, catia, solidworks stuff (not so much some hard 3d work, but its good when normal things go fluently.)
First I thought 17 model, I loved the big hi res screen but price is yes hot.On the other hand, I doubt that this 10-20% will justify such a price to go for this model.Compared to last model nvidia grafics was really nice, so I didnt asume that this years model will be in same range.Some say worse.Now I doubt about 6490 will be enough for my needs and future things.Most of you will say "Hey go to the top 15model" but now comes the right question why I am in doubt.
In my county (we dont have apple store, only resellers who on basic price in euros since I am in europe ripe out they own profit)
So, the base 15 inch will be min 2100 euros.17 inch 2850euros.Diference between base and top 15 model is nearly average salary
.So that model is out of the questin.If I go for top and spend all that money I would go for 17.But is it worth to pay allmoust 3k euros just for let say better grafic compared to needs and to be shure cad stuff will work?
Would the 6490 be enough for my needs, and lats say at least 3 year work?Dont play games, got ps3 for that.But yes its always nice when u got such a pricely laptop you dont have wories about "will it work"
Should I go for base 15 or 17 model when I take all those aspects of needs, future and price?
Thanks for your help, I appreciate it and sorry for my bad english
I need a help from you guys.I am new in mac world got an iphone, so this will be my first macbook pro laptop.I still dont know what to buy.
My needs are most time 80% basic.Internet, office, multimedia, videos, and other 10-20% need for autocad, catia, solidworks stuff (not so much some hard 3d work, but its good when normal things go fluently.)
First I thought 17 model, I loved the big hi res screen but price is yes hot.On the other hand, I doubt that this 10-20% will justify such a price to go for this model.Compared to last model nvidia grafics was really nice, so I didnt asume that this years model will be in same range.Some say worse.Now I doubt about 6490 will be enough for my needs and future things.Most of you will say "Hey go to the top 15model" but now comes the right question why I am in doubt.
In my county (we dont have apple store, only resellers who on basic price in euros since I am in europe ripe out they own profit)
So, the base 15 inch will be min 2100 euros.17 inch 2850euros.Diference between base and top 15 model is nearly average salary
.So that model is out of the questin.If I go for top and spend all that money I would go for 17.But is it worth to pay allmoust 3k euros just for let say better grafic compared to needs and to be shure cad stuff will work?Would the 6490 be enough for my needs, and lats say at least 3 year work?Dont play games, got ps3 for that.But yes its always nice when u got such a pricely laptop you dont have wories about "will it work"
Should I go for base 15 or 17 model when I take all those aspects of needs, future and price?
Thanks for your help, I appreciate it and sorry for my bad english
Benchmarks from Macworld...
http://www.macworld.com/article/157893/2011/02/2011macbookpro_benchmarks.html
it gives an indication of their relative fps performance (with CoD)
Lol, the i5 2010 MBP wins at the Pages test?
But it's interesting to see that the iMac i5 doesn't get destroyed by the 2011 MBP that Geekbench seem to suggest.
I would be interested in a test against the 2010 i7 iMac which has HT ( the i5 iMac has got no HT, which puts it at a disadvantage at these test I'd say ).
Apple kinda screw up casual gaming, after previous versions offering ok casual gaming performance the new ones just doesn't do that.
Macbook air 1.86GHz 40 fps in Cod4
13 Inch 2.7GHz i7 27 fps in Cod4
15 inch MBP i5 2.4GHz with 330m GT 63 fps in Cod4
15 inch MBP i7 2.0GHz with 6490m 51 fps in Cod4
Why apple used a 64 bit 6490m in base 15 inch is a mystery
If you want to game at all, get a refurb 15 inch or buy a $2200 MBP
Macbook air 1.86GHz 40 fps in Cod4
13 Inch 2.7GHz i7 27 fps in Cod4
15 inch MBP i5 2.4GHz with 330m GT 63 fps in Cod4
15 inch MBP i7 2.0GHz with 6490m 51 fps in Cod4
Why apple used a 64 bit 6490m in base 15 inch is a mystery
If you want to game at all, get a refurb 15 inch or buy a $2200 MBP
i highly doubt there's a huge difference. my old macbook pro c2d 2.53ghz with a 9600m gt was also running star2 at 25-30fps in a combination of ultra/high settings.
if somebody with a 6750 can give me his windows exp index and fps in star2 in all settings, that would help me.
I'm kinda with the guy above me. I have a 1st gen 2.4ghz 15" Unibody with the 9600GT 256mb, and play a lot of SC2. I was really looking at getting new MBP's, but the 6490 is really putting me off. Would this feel like a lateral move from my current machine? The high-end 15 is so much more, especially if I wanted the hi-res screen.
Laterally it would be similar maybe a bit better, but that's only in terms of the GPU.
I moved laterally from the 2010 13" to my current i7 in terms of GPU but the CPU carries this thing in SC2. I made an SC2 video on my 13" i7 and it plays VERY well in OSX compared to the 2010. There are a lot less dips in FPS when playing and my graphics are set to the about the same. Except there are several CPU dependent settings that I am now able to turn up to high since the i7 kills it. So yeah it's a solid move. If you were on the 330m I'd say meh but from the 9600m I'd say it's a good move b/c the CPU upgrade is way worth it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJn_69xm1xc
Take note that while it may only be a 64-bit memory bus, the GDDR5 memory doubles the bandwith such that it's equivilant to a GDDR3 128-bit memory busy. The same goes for the 6750. The GDDR5 128-bit memory bus is pretty much the same as a GDDR3 256-bit memory bus.
The 6490 is slightly better than the 9600M GT, but the difference is probably only 10 - 15% better at the very most.
The 6750 has roughly 2.5x the horsepower of the 9600M GT. The 2 cards are in completely different leagues.
So would both of you agree then, that even upgrading to the low-end 2011 MBP 15" would be worth it? To keep it short, time is a factor for a good discount that I could get, but there may be extra expenses coming my way in the next month. Fronting an extra $400 for the high-end is rough.
I just want to be happy when I'm rocking SC2 and Steam, Windows or OSX side, I don't care.
BTW, I'm gunning for the Hi-Res antiglare upgrade.
My current machine
2.4Ghz Core 2 Duo (Unibody 15 2008)
9600GT and 9400m
4GB DDR3 1066mhz (upgraded from 2GB 3rd party)
250GB 7200RPM
Removable battery (30 cycles on it)
Under Applecare until October
Immaculate condition with all items and original shipping box
That brings me to my next question.
Think I can pull $1200 out of this on ebay or to a willing buyer?
I just want to be happy when I'm rocking SC2 and Steam, Windows or OSX side, I don't care.
BTW, I'm gunning for the Hi-Res antiglare upgrade.
My current machine
2.4Ghz Core 2 Duo (Unibody 15 2008)
9600GT and 9400m
4GB DDR3 1066mhz (upgraded from 2GB 3rd party)
250GB 7200RPM
Removable battery (30 cycles on it)
Under Applecare until October
Immaculate condition with all items and original shipping box
That brings me to my next question.
Think I can pull $1200 out of this on ebay or to a willing buyer?
I have had MBP's before with the high end graphics option. Gaming is ruined with the fans kicking way up. If this is going to be the same thing again then I would rather game on an iMac and go the less expensive MBP.
Honestly you're gonna get that no matter what you game on. Xboxes are loud, GTX 580s are leaf blowers.
I'd have liked to see the 6750 on the base 15" and maybe a 6830 on the upper end model. I'd have also liked to see them keep the same price point. I sold my MacBook Air in preparation to pick one of these up and I'm completely disappointed. I can't get the base 15" because the 6490 is junk (I wan't to game on it, no way around it). On top of it, it's $200 more than the old base 15" with the 330m.
I have half a mind to pick up a cheap Acer for Windows and games and a white MacBook or yet another MacBook Air (then why did I even sell it?) on refurb for the less than the cost of a 15". Seriously.
Lol, the i5 2010 MBP wins at the Pages test?
But it's interesting to see that the iMac i5 doesn't get destroyed by the 2011 MBP that Geekbench seem to suggest.
I would be interested in a test against the 2010 i7 iMac which has HT ( the i5 iMac has got no HT, which puts it at a disadvantage at these test I'd say ).
Geekbench's results are skewed because they are geared to specifically reading all four cores, which software won't do all the time in real use. MacWorld's tests are geared toward real world use. Take a look at the graphics intensive applications and you'll see the new machines still lose to last year's high end MBP's with Nvidia graphics.
you are referring to the sound of the fans? why not use headphones?
So it won't fry the MBP within 6 months to a year? I know, AppleCare will fix it.
I don't know where I came up with that.
Either way the $1999 price point has been ditched and pushed up to $2199. That's what I'm getting at here. That's the cheapest model I could get and have it meet what I want.
The AMD Radeon HD 6490M performs worse with games than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M it replaces. Similarly, the Intel HD 3000, while better than the "Intel HD graphics" in the last 15"/17" models, is worse than the NVIDIA GeForce 320M it replaces in the 13" models. The AMD Radeon HD 6750M handily beats the GT 330M. However, if you're coming from a Late 2008/Mid 2009 MacBook Pro (or Aluminum MacBook), either offering (13" Pro or low end 15" Pro) will still be an upgrade in every way. However, that can only be said of the higher-end 15" Pro about the Mid-2010 models. Otherwise, you upgrade speed at the cost of graphics. It's really all about the higher end. ******, but Apple assumes that customers of the lower-end models aren't really gamers and I wouldn't be shocked if they had numbers to support that claim.
This article says it all. tl;dr; both 13" models are better at everything than the respective models they replaces save for graphics, low-end 15" better at everything than the model it replaces save for gaming performance, higher-end 15" and 17" MacBook Pros better at everything than the models they replace. Again, if you want the most improved player, go big or go home.
Will the heat and noise level for the two graphiccards be the same? I bought the 6750M machine anyway, but interested to know this stuff as I am still waiting for delivery. What's your opinion: does the 6750 produce more heat and noise as it's better or is it pretty much the same?
Seriously. I've had every iteration of the Playstation and when I got my first Xbox when Reach was released, OMG. I had to ask each of my friends if theirs sounded like a vacuum cleaner. How the PS3 can be whisper quiet and the 360 like a vacuum cleaner I don't know.