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

9600M GT worse than 8800M GTX

pyromaniaque said:
The GPUs aren't held back because of price points. They purposely underclock them so that they can keep their fans AT THE SLOWEST SPEED, and not have people complain, "ouch too hot"
Click to expand...

That's not true. It's simply a feature from Nvidia. It was discovered in the same thread that discovered that the card were underclocked. When the Mac is pretyt much idle, it IS underclocked. While gaming or using GPU intensive Apps, it clock back to the normal rate.
 
PeterQC said:
That's not true. It's simply a feature from Nvidia. It was discovered in the same thread that discovered that the card were underclocked. When the Mac is pretyt much idle, it IS underclocked. While gaming or using GPU intensive Apps, it clock back to the normal rate.
Click to expand...
Idle 2D clock speeds and 3D full power ones are one thing.

Are the full load clock speeds still lower then the official stock listed ones? It has been true in most cases for Apple.
 
Bottom line is Apple doesn't try to or care to making "gaming" laptops. They are not trying to lure away gamers from the PC makers and frankly anyone that claims to be a gamer with any sense would build a Windows based PC with 2x the power for the price of a UMBP. I've only been following Apple for a few years and it's very apparent in the marketing they are not chasing the gamers.

People don't buy Macs for the stellar hardware spec's, they buy them for the OS. Plain and simple.
 
Eidorian said:
Sadly I'm in it for the computing hardware. So yes it does make it quite the comparable laptop to me.
Click to expand...

Well if you actually look at the hardware specs...eg 1066mhz fsb vs older 800mhz fsb and the associated matching ram to go with it would you call that comparable? Cause to me that's new tech vs old tech. Machined aluminum body vs cheap plastic enclosure, plastic screen vs glass screen, Lithium Polymer battery technology vs older lithium ion technology. These are all significant differences which you aren't getting with a $900 acer...yes the Apple Tax does stretch the price beyond what Apple is offering but even if you dropped the price of a Macbook Pro by 25% just for being Apple, you're still looking at a $2000 laptop vs a $900 dollar laptop that doesn't compare when you actually look at the hardware numbers. Yes they both have a harddrive and a keyboard etc but lets be realistic buying a $900 laptop instead of a $2000 laptop is price compromizing, and hey if you can get the job done with a $900 laptop thats great, then don't buy a $2000 laptop. But don't insinuate that a $900 laptop is as good as an overpriced $2500 Mac cause thats just stupid. (CDN Pricing...)
 
toyotaoffroadca said:
Well if you actually look at the hardware specs...eg 1066mhz fsb vs older 800mhz fsb and the associated matching ram to go with it would you call that comparable? Cause to me that's new tech vs old tech.
Click to expand...
Front side bus and RAM improvements are going to barely factor in for overall improvements in performance. You're still looking at the raw processor clock speed and the video card.

toyotaoffroadca said:
Yes they both have a harddrive and a keyboard etc but lets be realistic buying a $900 laptop instead of a $2000 laptop is price compromizing, and hey if you can get the job done with a $900 laptop thats great, then don't buy a $2000 laptop. But don't insinuate that a $900 laptop is as good as an overpriced $2500 Mac cause thats just stupid.
Click to expand...
I can only imagine the hardware I could get for $2,500.
 
if you check out the alienware 15" area 51 or whatever edition and put it all together to compete with the mid range MBP it comes out to around 1600.... that is about 500 or 600 cheaper then a MBP with comparable specs. but with that comes a few costs. for one it has a lower bus speed, it weighs almost 2 lbs more is made of plastic, is 1/2 an inch thicker, ha and it makes you run vista.

As for myself, I cannot afford either laptop. So i stick with the refurbs. so my laptop has an 8600m GT in it. It by no means is the most powerful but it is in a laptop. If I felt I would be in crisis mode if I did not have the 10-15% performance increase from a better card I certainly wouldn't be on a notebook.

for everyone who is unhappy with the current state of the MBP and their graphics by all means get something that suits you. Save that money you would be spending to get a mac and take a broad out to dinner. Shell have to put out then your priorities will shift dramatically. :D
 
pyromaniaque said:
We are paying WAY much more than average for the MacBook Pro. Give me 800 dollars, and i can get a laptop with comparable stats, Yet apple rewards us with a peace of crap graphics card? So unfair.
Click to expand...
there are thing you pay for at apple that are not blindly obvious..


pyromaniaque said:
The GPUs aren't held back because of price points. They purposely underclock them so that they can keep their fans AT THE SLOWEST SPEED, and not have people complain, "ouch too hot"
Click to expand...
well. i was at a class a few days ago and a guy pulled out his HP with full keyboard and probably graphics that knocks the hell out of my MBP. but then again, after 30 seconds the thing was louder than my Mac Pro.
and im not kidding, my mac pro runs more quiet.
well i for one am willing to pay for that ~20dB's... :)
because i work with music/audio.

pyromaniaque said:
They could have given us the 9800M which still is a BEAST and runs relatively cool, but nooooooo, let's pay 2K and get a piece of **** gfx card, that only runs intense games (like crysis) on medium. I want a card where I can turn shaders to max, anti-aliasing to max and all that good stuff...We want to pay for quality.
Click to expand...

thats not "quality", thats playing games...quality = quadro

what you want is a Gaming PC and a laptop for bitching on the forums.

cheers
 
First of all, if you would have done your homework, you would have known how nVidia names its cards. I'm willing to bet that a 7800 or 7900 (is there one?) would still match a 9600 in some games (probably not the newest ones though).
Second, have you ever looked at who Apple targets its computers at? Yeah, it's definitely gamers ... Uh ... that should read definitely not gamers. There are, what, 20 actual normal games on the Mac? (not counting those mini games, but actual games like COD or NFS). Have you ever looked at a MacBook Pro? Right, it's VERY thin and it has a hard enough job to keep itself at a good temperature with the 9600 (which by the way, ain't under-clocked).
So, you say you can find me an 800$ laptop better specced than the MBP? OK, so find me one that has better specs than the MBP in a similar shell with similar build-quality and software that is also on par. Just to save you the actual search, the closest machine you will find is almost the same price as the MBP (I think it might have been 250$ or so cheaper) and it came with Windows. Now, please, remind me what the main reason is for why we buy Macs? (no, not the "cool" factor) It's the software! So I think most of us would rather use the 250$ and get the better software together with a thinner and lighter laptop.
We can go on and on about this topic, but the conclusion does end up being that if you look at all the factors in Macs (not just the hardware) then they are either about 300$ more expensive and in some cases the prices is the same, maybe even cheaper.
 
pyromaniaque said:
I don't feel like redoing the the tab thing... This just pisses me off to see apple cutting down on us.
Click to expand...

You must be some whiny little emo kid to call giving us two GPUs, without raising the price, cutting down on us.

Vote with your wallet. Don't like the hardware either Hackintosh it if you can or go with Windows 7, which in all honesty, looks pretty decent.
 
darngooddesign said:
You must be some whiny little emo kid to call giving us two GPUs, without raising the price, cutting down on us.

Vote with your wallet. Don't like the hardware either Hackintosh it if you can or go with Windows 7, which in all honesty, looks pretty decent.
Click to expand...

And I did, hence the Sony in my Sig. However, since I use Macs for all my work, I wish Apple would provide a solution that makes it so i don't have to maintain two laptops when I travel (one for work and one for entertainment). The only Apple system that meets my Mac/Windows/Game needs is the MBP uni 17" (still missing bluray tho) and it costs so much that My Sony, 09 mini, used MBP 15" and 22" 1080p monitor (all with drive and ram upgrades) combined cost less. 3 computers cost less than one 17" MBP!

I'm sorry but that's just nuts!

Cheers,
 
pyromaniaque said:
Dude, of course it wont say MAC OS X. But for 1899, i can get a pc that has better specs than the 17", disregarding the beastly battery life.
Click to expand...

Well show me one person that is pointing a gun to your head and making you buy Apple products. Obviously you don't like them. I think we all got that point here already. So just go buy your Dell/HP/MSI, but don't come crying here with problems.
 
Do this, Get a MBP for casual gaming (TF2, Garrys Mod, some Fallout 3 Med Setting, Call of duty 4). For hardcore gaming build a desktop PC with high end parts. That is what I am going to do and I already got my MBP 17" so i just need to build a PC soon.
 
James812 said:
Do this, Get a MBP for casual gaming (TF2, Garrys Mod, some Fallout 3 Med Setting, Call of duty 4). For hardcore gaming build a desktop PC with high end parts. That is what I am going to do and I already got my MBP 17" so i just need to build a PC soon.
Click to expand...

Or you can also get a console and not worry about upgrading parts and stuff.
 
Guys,

I can confirm that while you run GPU-intensive programs, the shader clock is up from 0.783GHz to 1.25GHz.

I used CUDA deviceQuery to get the clock speed.

Now it is very clear to me that OSX underclocks the GPU only when idle.
 
Patriks7 said:
Well show me one person that is pointing a gun to your head and making you buy Apple products. Obviously you don't like them. I think we all got that point here already. So just go buy your Dell/HP/MSI, but don't come crying here with problems.
Click to expand...

Dude what the F789 are you talking about? I love Macs. Just because I'm not happy with one thing doesn't mean that I don't like them, so shut the F789 when you really don't know something and are jumping to conclusions regarding someone's opinion.

Ever heard of product reviews? People ALWAYS state their likes and dislikes regarding a product. I'm not going to be a puppet and say I'm happy with a graphics card that I really am not.
 
Patriks7 said:
So, you say you can find me an 800$ laptop better specced than the MBP? OK, so find me one that has better specs than the MBP in a similar shell with similar build-quality and software that is also on par. Just to save you the actual search, the closest machine you will find is almost the same price as the MBP (I think it might have been 250$ or so cheaper) and it came with Windows. Now, please, remind me what the main reason is for why we buy Macs? (no, not the "cool" factor) It's the software! So I think most of us would rather use the 250$ and get the better software together with a thinner and lighter laptop.
Click to expand...

Actually - no. I think we can sweep this sort of fanboy talk aside.

My XPS 16 is about a thousand dollars cheaper in a very similar performance config, similar weight class, replaceable batteries (just under 4 hour power saving life with the 9-cell and GPU since it has no IGP, as opposed to the just under 6 hour power saving life of the 17-inch MBP using the IGP) and with the Sony Imagination Suite providing iLife-and-sometimes-beyond capabilities. The XPS is also better built for a life of roading than the delicate MBP (My XPS shuts with a straight body-lid line for starters. Something my 17-inch MBP's seem unable to manage out of the box).

Right now:
The XPS 16 is $2,846 with a further $100 gift card for a 2.9/4/500, HD RGBLED display, Bluray, MS Office H&S, Sony IS, 3-year onsite.
The MBP 17 is $3,867 for a 2.9/4/320, LED display, DVD, MS Office H&S, iLife, 3-year offsite.

Let's not kid ourselves about this 'value' quotient, shall we? Apple gear isn't grossly overpriced if you consider the whole (and leave out 'actual build quality and reliability' as value factors) but it's hardly competitive. What could you buy for a thousand bucks to extend your productivity in almost any market? Quite a lot I think...
 
No he hasn´t but last years model was considerably cheaper in the 8 core version than this years. 3 year on site is actually overkill as lots of MPs are used at home and not critical to any productive output. The mere fact that Apple has no decently performing desktop keeps the MP afloat.
 
ceres said:
No he hasn´t but last years model was considerably cheaper in the 8 core version than this years. 3 year on site is actually overkill as lots of MPs are used at home and not critical to any productive output.
Click to expand...

You're right there - the web is awash with posts from fanboys who're comparing the likes of the Dell Precision with the Pro and saying how there's no Apple Tax. They have no clue because their fanboy gleefulness at having a Pro thud on their doorstep obscures any attempt at objective comparisons - and not owning / operating a Precision to actually compare the ownership experience in a variety of usage modes compounds the uninformed opinion.

The fact that I got an offended PM from moderators no less regarding this particular comparison is something that leaves me a little open-mouthed. But I realise that the committed Appleist can't help it - so what can you do?
 
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