Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New MBP GPUs: Nvidia 9650M GS vs. ATI Mobility HD3600

Y

Yixian

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jun 2, 2007
1,483
135
Europe
I've been reading around all sorts of sites and it seems like the only possible GPU upgrades we could see in the next MBPs are the following:

ATI Mobility HD3600 Specs
* 378 million transistors using 55nm fabrication process
* 120 pipelines - unified
* Unified Superscalar shader architecture
* Microsoft® DirectX® 10.1
* OpenGL 2.0
* 128-bit DDR2/GDDR3/GDDR4 memory interface
* Native PCI Express 2.0 x16 bus interface
* ATI Avivo HD Video and Display architecture
* ATI PowerPlay 7.0 power management technology

http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mobility-Radeon-HD-3650.8839.0.html

Nvida 9650M GS
* 55nm fabrication process
* 32 pipelines - unified
* 128-bit DDR2/GDDR3/GDDR4 memory interface
* Up to 40% faster performance than the previous generation of GeForce 8M notebook
* New PureVideo® HD video processing for improved color and contrast
* Full support for the latest Blu-ray Profile 2.0 features and Blu-ray Live
* Extensive multi-display connectivity with support for all the latest display standards including DVI, HDMI 1.3, Display Port 1.1, and VGA
* Support for the new MXM version 3.0 graphics module specification

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-9650M-GS.8837.0.html

The question is: which is most likely and how do they compare against each other?

I'm looking to buy a new MBP as soon as they are released and I am hoping for fairly good Crysis performance, and that game also makes a good benchmark, so, to anyone in the know, how will these cards serve us with high end gaming?


Also, is an 8800M GTS out of the question?
 
I'd pick the 8700M GT a.k.a 9650M GS over the HD 36xx Series for raw power.

You're still looking at midrange mobile graphics cards.
 
Yeah I'm hoping for the 9650M GS over ATIs offering. But people keep telling me that the ATI HD3600 is more likely because "Apple switches back and forth between ATI and Nvidia every revision", but why would that be a RULE?!

Any chance though that we could get a better card, eg. the 8800M, BTO on a mid or high end MBP? That card is pretty uch praised by everyone as the best thing since sliced bread..

A dude on here back in May '07 said "The heat of the 8800M's can be dispersed in a 15" form factor, as evidenced by the 15" m15x from Alienware." That was over a year ago... I don't understand why people aren't predicting 8800Ms in Apple's top end laptops..
 
Yixian said:
Yeah I'm hoping for the 9650M GS over ATIs offering. But people keep telling me that the ATI HD3600 is more likely because "Apple switches back and forth between ATI and Nvidia every revision", but why would that be a RULE?!

Any chance though that we could get a better card, eg. the 8800M, BTO on a mid or high end MBP? That card is pretty uch praised by everyone as the best thing since sliced bread..

A dude on here back in May '07 said "The heat of the 8800M's can be dispersed in a 15" form factor, as evidenced by the 15" m15x from Alienware." That was over a year ago... I don't understand why people aren't predicting 8800Ms in Apple's top end laptops..
Click to expand...

Because they suck WAY too much battery power for Apple to even consider them. Apple is BIG on battery life and the 8800s eat through it quickly. This is also what make the 9650 more likely as it's smaller fabrication will allot better battery life.
 
Whoa whoa, stop the press... I had heard a couple of guys seemingly very clued up as to GPUs mention the 9650M GT as a candidate for the next MBPs, but dismissed it as a typo as a google search at first glance turns up nothing.

BUT, Nvidia DO have a 9650M GT coming out very soon, they even put it up on their site but took it down just a few days ago for unknown reasons.

Apparently the 9650M GT is equivalent to a 8800M GTS but smaller and more power efficient, which is why it's thought to be a contender for the Montevina updates.

Anyone know anything about this?
 
I'd like the ATI. Manufactured on the .55 process vs, the .65 process of the Nvidia, so it runs cooler and contributes to better battery life. Support Direct X 10.1 for gaming, Nvidia doesn't. Hopegully the MBP this August will feature the 4000 series ATI mobile video cards, too.
 
Bubba Satori said:
I'd like the ATI. Manufactured on the .55 process vs, the .65 process of the Nvidia, so it runs cooler and contributes to better battery life. Support Direct X 10.1 for gaming, Nvidia doesn't. Hopegully the MBP this August will feature the 4000 series ATI mobile video cards, too.
Click to expand...

I don't think Apple cares about DirectX
 
Bubba Satori said:
I'd like the ATI. Manufactured on the .55 process vs, the .65 process of the Nvidia, so it runs cooler and contributes to better battery life. Support Direct X 10.1 for gaming, Nvidia doesn't. Hopegully the MBP this August will feature the 4000 series ATI mobile video cards, too.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind the 9M Series is 55nm. :p
 
In other words, there's no benefit to the ATI cards.

Nobody knows the Mobility HD4xxx specs so excluding them, at present, better for us would be the 9650 GT/GS (GT ideally).

I'm still looking for someone to prove me wrong on the assuption that Apple could and probably will use the cutting edge GT rather than GS, as the GT will have been out a few weeks already by mid August.
 
Yixian said:
In other words, there's no benefit to the ATI cards.
Click to expand...

The ATI cards consistently run CoreImage apps better than Nvidia. This is because of the number of steam processors (or pipelines in these readouts)...

So, in conclusion, the ATI card will be much faster than the Nvidia for CoreImage-based apps.
 
crazzyeddie said:
The ATI cards consistently run CoreImage apps better than Nvidia. This is because of the number of steam processors (or pipelines in these readouts)...

So, in conclusion, the ATI card will be much faster than the Nvidia for CoreImage-based apps.
Click to expand...

Um, lolz, sorry dude but Apple obviously cares more about me being able to play Crysis with wtfawesome fps!!1!
 
Yixian said:
Um, lolz, sorry dude but Apple obviously cares more about me being able to play Crysis with wtfawesome fps!!1!
Click to expand...

Except obviously not because the Macbook Pro is targeted toward Aperture/Final Cut users who depend on CoreImage, not DirectX running in Windows.

And if you really cared about Crysis that much you would want the ATI card as Nvidia has crappy DX10 support (read: basically none).
 
I'd guess 9500M. I'd be happier with something faster, but that's what's comparable to 8600M right now.

There's No Way In Hell (tm) you'll see an 8800 card in an MBP.
 
crazzyeddie said:
Except obviously not because the Macbook Pro is targeted toward Aperture/Final Cut users who depend on CoreImage, not DirectX running in Windows.

And if you really cared about Crysis that much you would want the ATI card as Nvidia has crappy DX10 support (read: basically none).
Click to expand...


I was kidding, but on a 9650M GS it'd be a bad idea to try running DX10 anyway.

And to the above poster,if the 9500M is equivalent to an 8600M, the 9650M GS is equivalent to an 8700M and the 9650M GT to the 8800M GTS, why would Apple pick the first when the latter two have far far far better performance and they all have the same power consumption and die size?
 
Bubba Satori said:
Apple isn't buying the laptop. I am. And I want to play the latest games. If I had a dollar for every time I heard " Apple doesn't care..." around here, I could buy a dozen MPBs. :D
Click to expand...

And even if you took all of their 8600M GTs and SLI'd them together they'd still be ground to dust by Crysis and FarCry 2.

Even if it's through bootcamp, Apple would be pretty stupid to ignore the many peeps out there who want their MBP to be competent now and for the next at-least year for frequent/occasional gaming.

One mistake people seem to make is that casual PC gamers will be satisfied with a weaker GPU than hardcore gamers. The mainstream and the hardcore alike is still obsessed with graphics when it comes to computer gaming. This is not the console market, there is no equivalent to the Wii, in fact there is no equivalent to anything on Leopard when it comes to games.

Apple is lucky we are tolerating bootcamp while they shun game developers on their own platform. Is it much to ask to fit their high end laptops with high end mobile GPUs to finally appease us entirely?
 
Tallest Skil said:
Okay. So either deal with it or don't buy the laptop. Apple has never been a company that would conform to the needs of one person. (read: hardware options)
Click to expand...

I'm dealing with it fine, thanks for asking. :D Just hope that Apple offers the lastest mobile video cards in the MacBook PROS with the Montevina update.
 
Tallest Skil said:
Okay. So either deal with it or don't buy the laptop. Apple has never been a company that would conform to the needs of one person. (read: hardware options)
Click to expand...

Actually, make that 3 people. :p

3 today, hundreds tomorrow, thousands in a week. Then they'll have to listen to us ... ;)

I'm expecting Apple to deliver the goods when it comes to the next graphics card update considering how long it's been out there now. I hope they do the right thing in the same way they added a better video card to the top end iMac in the last revision after all the complaints with the choice of the original card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back