320M vs 9600M GT

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Kingcodez, Apr 14, 2010.

  1. Kingcodez macrumors 6502

    Kingcodez

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Location:
    China
    #1
    Does anyone know how they compare? I'm just curious, they both have 256MB of ram, the 9600M has GDDR3 while the 320M has just DDR3...

    I mean there's probably still a gap but it's definitely getting smaller now.
     
  2. murdercitydevil macrumors 68000

    murdercitydevil

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    Location:
    california
    #2
    EDIT: my bad, I thought you were talking about the 330M.
     
  3. waloshin macrumors 68040

    waloshin

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    #3
    Sorry 9600m Gt is discrete so it is better performance wise.
     
  4. Kingcodez thread starter macrumors 6502

    Kingcodez

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Location:
    China
    #4
    Yeah I didn't see the other threads, just popped up.

    I know the 9600M is more powerful, I just want to know by how much.
     
  5. SchneiderMan macrumors G3

    SchneiderMan

    Joined:
    May 25, 2008
    Location:
    Apple state
  6. therealseebs macrumors 65816

    therealseebs

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    #6
    Appears to be a little faster -- not much. Basically, it has more cores, so it seems to come out around 50% faster. It's otherwise basically the same hardware, and likewise, basically the same as the 8600M GT, only faster. The 9600M GT was just a better-clocked 8600M on smaller process, the 330M is roughly the same hardware with 50% more shaders. That's it.
     
  7. saschke macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    #7
    Thread: Comparison between 320M and 9600M GT - please weigh in. This is interesting for some folks.
     
  8. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #8
    320M is crap compared to 9600M; 330M is a die-shrink of the 9700M, so it's a bit better.
     
  9. Chew macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2009
    #9
    We could use a detailed 3DMark06-Scoring of a 9600GT. A detailed scoring of the 320M is around in another thread. We need all three numbers, not only the final score (because we must leave out CPU score)
     
  10. saschke macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    #10
    Thanks for contributing in such a meaningful way. :rolleyes:
     
  11. MrXiro macrumors 68040

    MrXiro

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #11
    I thought the 9600m GT has 512mb or RAM...

    I was wondering about the comparison myself.
     
  12. mark28, Nov 27, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2010

    mark28 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    #12
    The difference between the 330m and 9600m is larger than the difference between the 9600m and the 320m. :rolleyes:

    The 330m is alot better than the 9600m btw. The 330m performs around 50% faster than the 9600m GT.

    3DMARK05 scores

    330m: 12664
    GT9600m: 9592
    320m (integrated): 7168


    Crysis ( high ):

    330m: 20 fps
    9600m: 13 fps
    320m (integrated): 11 fps

    Crysis ( low ):

    330m: 78 fos
    9600m: 59 fps
    320m (integrated): 40 fps

    WoW (high)
    330m: 42 fps
    9600m: 20 fps
    320m (integrated): 23 fps
     
  13. MrXiro macrumors 68040

    MrXiro

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #13
    Wow... I feel kind of jipped that I bought the 15 inch 2.53ghz 2008 uMBP even though it was as a Refurb. Feels like I would have gotten a better machine out of the 13 inch MBP... and more compact too... and I would have gotten an SD card reader.
     
  14. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #14
    Like your contribution was meaningful? :rolleyes:

     

Share This Page