X1800 soon in Macbook Pro?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Kasper Winding, Dec 6, 2006.

  1. Kasper Winding macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #1
    Hi all

    Well ive used a windows based computer for over 10 years now.....but now iam changing my religion and kickin out out my old god, Mr. Gates.

    Iam still gonna make a dualboot cause my work still havent seen the light.

    Ive been looking on the Macbook Pro 17" and it looks great, just one little problem. Why does it come with a Ati X1600 graphic card. In the windows based world this graphic card is old old news and not very fast.

    Ive heard rumors, that the Macbook Pro is soon gonna have a x1800 installed. Is this rumor true? ( Abit of a wow fan)

    Sincerly Kasper Winding Denmark
     
  2. Kasper Winding thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #3
    And MWSF is ?

    And MWSF is ?

    Kasper
     
  3. daneoni macrumors G4

    daneoni

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    #4
    January 9th 07. Although i'd have to disagree MWSF would be focusing on iTV/Mini updates and iPhones and possible Leopard release. Afterall the MBPs just got updated. My prediction would be June when Santa Rosa would've been released
     
  4. mmmcheese macrumors 6502a

    mmmcheese

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    #5
    Maybe they are waiting for something new...as it is, the X1600 is run at a lower clock speed than the maximum it is spec'ed for. The X1800 isn't that much of an improvement if they have to keep it clocked back due to heat as well.

    Who knows, maybe the next version will be nvidia.
     
  5. QCassidy352 macrumors G3

    QCassidy352

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #6
    MacWorld San Francisco

    I agree with you about the graphics in the Macbook Pro - they lag badly behind the rest of the computer. That said, if all you need the graphics for is WoW, you'll easily top 60 fps with the current macbook pro.
     
  6. ToastMaster macrumors regular

    ToastMaster

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Location:
    Tacoma, WA
    #7
    Yeah, the x1600 is a little behind but it still does ok with just about anything I throw at it.
     
  7. e12a macrumors 68000

    e12a

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
  8. prism macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2006
    #9
    I dont know about you guys but I dont consider a 3DM05 score of 3800+ (without overclocking) on my MBP C2D 2.16ghz w/128mb of vram slow at all!!! Im sure you can get above 4000 with the 256mb version.
    You have to consider that the MBP is very thin and therefore not very comparable to others such as Dell. I doubt we will see a change in the gpu for Jan.
     
  9. eXan macrumors 601

    eXan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Location:
    Russia
    #10
    Current MacBook Pros show amazing FPS in WoW, just check out barefeats.com, they have all sorts of Mac benchmarks :)
     
  10. topgun072003 macrumors 6502

    topgun072003

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #11
    MWSF is going to be sweeeeeet! Is nvidia that much better? I've heard a lot of people say that they wish Apple had/goes with nvidia? I don't think that they're stuck with ATI, but what's special about nvidia?
     
  11. Kasper Winding thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #12
    Well Nvidia and ATI is equal when it comes to games on a normal PC/MAC
    But when it comes to the mobility GPU, Nvidia got the fastest GPU.

    But the colour on ATI is best....

    Anyone heard more rumors about new graphiccard in MBP
     
  12. sammich macrumors 601

    sammich

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Location:
    Sarcasmville.
    #13
    I don't think so...

    Come on people, do you think apple will upgrade the GPU in a notebook that already kicks a whole lotta asss (especially the DELAYED 17" C2D MBP)?

    We did expect apple to upgrade their lines more often since the switch but a mere month after people started getting their 17" MBP? (the most likely cadidate to get a slightly faster, but hotter and more battery draining X1800).

    While I wouldn't mind the upgrade myself, plenty of people will be pissed after waiting:
    - about 2 months (after many of other PC manufacturers) simply for the announcement of the chip-swapped MBPs
    - about another month for the delayed 17 inch version to actually ship

    So if we wait ONE MORE MONTH, we get a better MBP, and then what...wait another 2 months before we get it?
     
  13. mmmcheese macrumors 6502a

    mmmcheese

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    #14
    Just the other day I installed Call of Duty 2 (the OSX UB) and turned on all the highest settings except for anti-aliasing, and it ran pretty well at 1440x900. I don't know what the FPS was, but I never felt the need to make it run faster by decreasing a setting. CoD2 may not be the most hardcode graphics game out there, but it shows me that the x1600 is a quite capable chip.
     
  14. QCassidy352 macrumors G3

    QCassidy352

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #15
    yea, it's certainly not *bad,* but IMO, it's the one part of the MBP that lags somewhat behind the (otherwise exceptional) rest of the computer. I'm not saying that it should be a 2" thick brick like a Dell, but the x1600 is a little old now.
     
  15. Felldownthewell macrumors 65816

    Felldownthewell

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2006
    Location:
    Portland
    #16
    While it does lag behind the times I can run BF2142 at medium settings and Half Life 2 at full settings at native resolution. It is certainly not top of the line, but it gives respectable performance for a mobile chip. (And I'm on a Core Duo machince with only a gig or RAM as well!)

    I do hope they go nVidea though, change things up a bit.
     
  16. mmmcheese macrumors 6502a

    mmmcheese

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    #17
    But since there aren't many mac games, and even fewer that really push the limits of the hardware, what motivation does Apple have to provide more graphical horse power?

    I'm not saying they shouldn't...I just don't see how they would see it as a required expense (it'll cut into the bottom line since the chip will cost more, and they probably wouldn't raise the price...especially if it has to be clocked at similar speeds to the current x1600).
     
  17. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #18
    Serious gaming isn't really possible on any laptop, unless you are prepared to buy a new $2000+ laptop every 18 months-2 years as the graphics cards aren't replaceable, basically you have to be very rich to do it, if you want to game I'd recommend buying (or building) a desktop PC and a Macbook for portability on the road, it will probably cost about as much as an MBP and be much more versatile.
     
  18. e12a macrumors 68000

    e12a

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    #19
    Not to mention ATi's drivers are infamously unstable, and they dont support legacy hardware. Nvidia does. (ex: their newest drivers support my good 'ol GF4 Ti4800, and I've never had a driver related problem)
     
  19. Felldownthewell macrumors 65816

    Felldownthewell

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2006
    Location:
    Portland
    #20
    Now that intel macs can dual boot there is far more motivation. Hopefully Apple has realized that.

    It is, but you have to be willing to pay a very large amount and get a machine that weighs 12-20lb, gets 45 minutes of battery life and runs hotter than Rev. A MBPs.

    (SLI laptop)
     
  20. eXan macrumors 601

    eXan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Location:
    Russia
    #21
    I've never had any driver-related problems on my Macs with ATI chips :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

    I still like ATi more, its has an awesome little utility called ATi Displays :D and ATIccelerator :cool:
     
  21. mmmcheese macrumors 6502a

    mmmcheese

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    #22
    Last time I checked, OS X was the only x86 compatible OS that Apple made...

    (And therefore the only one they would concern themselves with)
     
  22. GoneFishing macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    #23
    I do not see an upgrade soon.

    ATI x1600 and nVidia Go 7600

    These are both the best cards out there for the mainstream notebooks, in other words, they could be top of the line in 14" - 15"; 5lbs - 7lbs category.

    Yes, there are newer cards with more power. x1900 and 7900, but those cards need a lot of space to give off their heat.

    Given Apple's thin 1" design (the only other companies doing close to this is Samsung, who doesn't sell laptops in the US, and Asus, most Europeans are familiar), there really isn't much room to allow enough air flow to cool the system down. Remember the prevoius MBP that was hot enough to make your eggs for breakfast?

    Other factors coming in as well such as battery life. x1800 will drain more power faster. 1" doesn't give a lot of room for battery storage, so again we fall into the design issue here.

    The question is, do you want Apple to give up what it has being doing so hard on design or not?:rolleyes:
     
  23. Felldownthewell macrumors 65816

    Felldownthewell

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2006
    Location:
    Portland
    #24

    Right, but since they now provide a utility to install windows on any intel-based mac, it would make sense for them to recognize that a signifigant number of people are taking advantage of this and installing windows. Of the people doing that, there are a good number doing it for gaming and windows-only graphics programs. This means that there is now a greater demand for a more gaming/3D capable chip than there ever was under OS X.
     
  24. mmmcheese macrumors 6502a

    mmmcheese

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    #25
    So you're saying that Apple considers themselves a Windows PC manufacturer and base their designs on the needs of Windows users?
     

Share This Page