512 VRAM vs intel 4000

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by fleawannabe, Jun 26, 2012.

  1. fleawannabe macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2011
    #1
    Im set on a 2012 MBP 13 or refurb MBP 15 with 512 vram

    I know the 4000 is way faster than the 3000, but how much more power will I get out of the 512 vram over the intel 4000? I do not really do much that requires a dedicated GPU, only games I play are ROMS and I do not edit videos. The most labor intensive programs I use are logic and aperture. I do not need the GPU or quad core but do like the larger screen.

    Any input?
     
  2. Auzburner macrumors 65816

    Auzburner

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2008
    Location:
    Syracuse, NY - USA
    #2
    I always opt for the discrete card.

    Reason: Other family in the house buy 13" MacBook's and after 3-4 years their fans start running even when web browsing. My point: the machines without the dedicated card tend to show their age MUCH earlier than my machines with a discrete card. It handles future OS's and updates significantly better in my experience. Granted, they tend to up cost quite a bit, but if you're up for it, I always recommend that decision.
     
  3. fleawannabe thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2011
    #3
    When would he dedicated GPU start working for someone like me who is not that graphic intensive? I can save almost 400 dollars right now going with the new 13 because of the Gift card for back to school, but I would love to have the 15inch screen.

    thanks
     
  4. Auzburner macrumors 65816

    Auzburner

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2008
    Location:
    Syracuse, NY - USA
    #4
    A discrete card may bump in on a 1080p YouTube vid. Aperture will use the card when you start zooming in a lots of photos quickly and make edits. Again, it's a hard call because I can't speak specifically for the Intel 4000 alone. All that I know is that you will you the discrete card increasingly with age. Or you can save the cash and use it towards a new MacBook in lesser time.

    Kind of a dilemma.
     
  5. fleawannabe thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2011
    #5
    I may just bite the bullet and buy the 2012 base MBP 15. After the student discount and 100 gift card it is only 254 dollars more that the refurb, over 3 years that is 23 cents a day.
     
  6. riveting macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    #6
    Why people cares video card so much if you don't game much nor know any program specifically use the video card. Over the years, people stress GPU will get more use, but till now, most of the work is still done on CPU. Personally, I think the decision should be made based on the screen size/CPU and budget.
     
  7. fleawannabe thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2011
    #7
    Actually after weighing everything and crunching numbers I think I am most likely going to go with the 2012 MBP 13 base model and get a 24 inch external. I do not need the quad or the GPU. I am coming from a late 2007 imac that geekbenched at 2650. Im sure that the MBP 13 will be plenty for me and more portable.
     
  8. currahee2100 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    #8
    Intel allocates 512MB VRAM for 8GB, 384MB for 4GB.

    VRAM =/= Indication of performance.

    And the HD 4000 is plenty of good stuff.
     
  9. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #9
    It's a bigger factor if you use any applications that heavily leverage OpenCL. It can help with games too. If the space isn't large enough to contain the texture maps, your game would lag.
     
  10. pragmatous macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    #10
    Agreed. Enjoy your purchase!

     
  11. fleawannabe thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2011
    #11
    The only games ill be playing will be ROMS (nes-n64) maybe ps2. My current 2007 imac has a VRAM of 128, is the intel 4000 is better than the 128 vram?
     
  12. pragmatous macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    #12
    The 4000 on the intel is dx 11 compliant so it is much faster than the 3000. I'm pretty sure the intel 4000 has 512MB vram as well.

     
  13. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #13
    I was just trying to explain when it is and is not a factor. It's only one factor in a gpu. I was just saying that for opencl computation, if it's insufficient, the program will not offload computation to the gpu. This part had nothing to do with games. Games have different factors to them, but ROMs emulations from an ancient console won't be an issue on any of these gpus unless the emulator has known specific bugs with intel's OSX drivers, but I doubt this will be an issue. You can always check the developer's site if you're really worried.
     
  14. doh123 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    #14
    the HD 4000 can do OpenCL... so thats a 3rd core int he dual core systems to help... if the apps use OpenCL.

    the 13" Macbook Pro will smoke your 2007 iMac in every way. The Intel HD 4000 is MUCH faster and better in every way than what you currently have.
     
  15. Sambo110 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2007
    Location:
    Australia
    #15
    PS2 rome might have difficulty on an Intel HD 4000.

    Also, talking about GPU's as vram is completely wrong. Vram is almost irrelevant. My high-end GPU has 1Gb vram, and so do low-end GPU's. Mine would beat the low-end in every way. Vram only matters if you're looking at higher resolution screens.
     

Share This Page