So, I have the first intel iMac with the ATI X1600 128MB gfx chip. I was wondering how the Nvidia 9400M would compare to it performance wise? Anyone have a clue?
Joshua.
Joshua.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
9400M vs X1600
- Thread starter MacinJosh
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is just hearsay from another thread asking the same question. I heard they were comparable, with the edge going to the x1600
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html
9400 gets a tad more in 3dmark 06 (200 points more). Also I cannot find the other tests between em, but I remember seeing some that compared em.
9400 gets a tad more in 3dmark 06 (200 points more). Also I cannot find the other tests between em, but I remember seeing some that compared em.
I think we all know this now. We don't need a post like this in every thread.
The 9400M (integrated) scores somewhere between 2000 and 2344. Thats the only tests I've seen so far. I belive that is a bit higher than the X1600. (between 10-25% perfomance boosts according to the 3dMark06 tests, under the assumption that X1600 scores around 18xx point)
Yeah, Someone with a 2.0 MB reported like 2150 in some post. So the MB is a bit higher then 2000 it seems.
Hehe... sorry about that. 😀
Found another test where the 2.0Ghz MB scored 2178 points (in 1280x800 resolution). I think its the 2.4Ghz model that scores 23XX.
Source: http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=311081
Code:
3dmark01 03 05 06
ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 16789 6565 3708 1821
NVIDIA GeForce 9400M 13845 5759 3930 2067
The newer the 3dmark, the better the 9400m performs. This is probably due to the more recent technology and the DX10 support.