well my decision is still between the 15" i5 or i7...and im very much leaning towards the i5 because the only benefit to me for the i7 is the extra 256mb vram for gaming, but having watched a bunch of youtube vids games (current games, including cod and SC2) seem to run pretty dam well on the i5 lol. but now the problem is, with the i5 having only 256mb of vram, is it still worth getting the high-res? if i lower the screens resolution down for gaming will it ruin the picture on the screen? apparently people seem to think playing games on anything but the native resoluton makes it blurry? :S
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.
Any point in High-Res on the 15" i5??
- Thread starter jdhatt
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you're going to lower the resolution for games, then just get the STD screen, it's absolutely gorgeous...
You need to check it out yourself. Whatever people tell you it's their opinion while it's your opinion that counts.
the thing is i KNOW im going to use the high res wherever possible....will i still be able to use it while gaming and have it work ok with the 256mb ram? and im ONLY going to change ti while gaming so i want it for everything else, but gaming is still crucial, so will the screen look, worse than a standard if i put the resolution on the high-res back to standard 1440 x 900
I think in many games interpolation is less of a problem than anywhere else, kind of like with movies. Still at native a game looks the best but it always depends on the details. An RTS I would run at max res and turn down details in favor of better overview. An Egoshooter I might lower the res to 1280x800 (3/4) in favor of more details. Also many games look better with a higher set res than with a lower and AA turned on IMO.
I would not choose the STD but for me gaming is not serious at all but a once every other month thing. We make our 2-3 lan parties a year and they are a lot of fun but that is it.
If you like gaming, you should get a desktop anyway. I just read an article about 2010 GPUs and how they compare. The 330M of the MBP is slower than a GT220 on the desktop and the GT240 was the slowest that they put into the test from nvidia. A GT240 Desktop is about as faster than a 260M and a lot faster than a 360M, which is about 2 times faster than a 330M at least.
The difference in performance is ridiculous. On a Notebook you have a lot less performance and the difference between 1680x1050 vs 1440x900 doesn't really change much. That is maybe 10-20% but the cheaper desktop cards are a few 100% faster.
I would not choose the STD but for me gaming is not serious at all but a once every other month thing. We make our 2-3 lan parties a year and they are a lot of fun but that is it.
If you like gaming, you should get a desktop anyway. I just read an article about 2010 GPUs and how they compare. The 330M of the MBP is slower than a GT220 on the desktop and the GT240 was the slowest that they put into the test from nvidia. A GT240 Desktop is about as faster than a 260M and a lot faster than a 360M, which is about 2 times faster than a 330M at least.
The difference in performance is ridiculous. On a Notebook you have a lot less performance and the difference between 1680x1050 vs 1440x900 doesn't really change much. That is maybe 10-20% but the cheaper desktop cards are a few 100% faster.
i cant get a desktop for reasons 1) i cant sit at a desk and game i like lounging while on my laptop lol, and the times i have to or want to, i always like having the option of it being portable 2) i cant invest in a desktop because i need the new computer and university, gaming is just something on the side to do when im bored lol.....so ur saying that if i bumped the high-res screen down to std when i gamed it can ruin the quality?