If you dont need USB 3, the 2011 is better. Same speed, runs Snow and speedier graphics capable of medium level gaming. It only runs a little hotter, but still very silent and low power.
If you dont need USB 3, the 2011 is better. Same speed, runs Snow and speedier graphics capable of medium level gaming. It only runs a little hotter, but still very silent and low power.
Yeah, I'd agree with this. The Radeon in the 2011 is a really nice perk over the 2012.
Those are PC notebook benchmarks, and their radeons use shared DDR3. Apples GPU did dedicated DDR5, which takes it above HD4000 quite a bit.I'm fairly certain many benchmarks have put the HD4000 on par with the 6630M.
I think the fact that we have to have this discussion at all reflects how unimpressive this upgrade is. 🙁
If you dont need USB 3, the 2011 is better. Same speed, runs Snow and speedier graphics capable of medium level gaming. It only runs a little hotter, but still very silent and low power.
Those are PC notebook benchmarks, and their radeons use shared DDR3. Apples GPU did dedicated DDR5, which takes it above HD4000 quite a bit.
Hack is a big word. You need to install it in target disk mode from a SL capable mac.the Base 2011 will run Snow Leopard? I thought since it came with Lion, you had to hack the system to get it to run SL?
Hack is a big word. You need to install it in target disk mode from a SL capable mac.
You don't have to find any drivers. The ones needed will be installed along with the OS.Ok, so I have a MacBook that has a superdrive, but where do you get all the drivers etc.
I am technical, just that last I knew that one guy on this forums had to go thru a lot to get it working, I am just looking for a simple install, if now, I guess I will stick with Lion
OP: You left out Sandy Bridge, though I don't know what that actual means in terms of real advantages.
Can anyone comment on how the Intel 4000 compares to the AMD 6630M as far as video codec support/smoothness? I don't care about gaming, but am thinking about buying a Mini to act as an HTPC running Windows 7 Media Center. Currently I have a large tower PC serving this purpose, but wouldn't mind dedicating that to ripping my Blu-rays in my home office, and have my bedroom HTPC be much smaller, quieter, and power-efficient. I've got a SiliconDust HDHomeRun Prime network-based cablecard tuner and a few external USB HDs. Would the Intel 4000 be more/less capable then the 6630M in terms of playing back vc-1 Blu-ray encodes, MPEG2 HD video, 24Hz support, etc.?
Thanks, I added the bridges to the initial post.
For the video benchmarks, I found this PassMark site that listed some bench.
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php
Per that site:
Intel HD 4000: 523
Radeon HD 6630M: 572
Also, from Windows 7 benchmarks, I found:
Intel HD 4000: 6.4/6.4
Radeon HD 6630M: 5.8/6.6
You don't have to find any drivers. The ones needed will be installed along with the OS.
If you dont need USB 3, the 2011 is better. Same speed, runs Snow and speedier graphics capable of medium level gaming. It only runs a little hotter, but still very silent and low power.
OP: You left out Sandy Bridge, though I don't know what that actual means in terms of real advantages.
Can anyone comment on how the Intel 4000 compares to the AMD 6630M as far as video codec support/smoothness? I don't care about gaming, but am thinking about buying a Mini to act as an HTPC running Windows 7 Media Center. Currently I have a large tower PC serving this purpose, but wouldn't mind dedicating that to ripping my Blu-rays in my home office, and have my bedroom HTPC be much smaller, quieter, and power-efficient. I've got a SiliconDust HDHomeRun Prime network-based cablecard tuner and a few external USB HDs. Would the Intel 4000 be more/less capable then the 6630M in terms of playing back vc-1 Blu-ray encodes, MPEG2 HD video, 24Hz support, etc.?