Aperture and the new MBPs

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by paulinbognor, Dec 3, 2008.

  1. paulinbognor macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2006
    Location:
    West Sussex, UK
    #1
    Hi

    I was wondering whether anyone has seen any tests on the new MBPs performance running Aperture with the 512MB graphics card and the 256MB graphics card?

    thanks in advance
     
  2. paulinbognor thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2006
    Location:
    West Sussex, UK
  3. bcaslis macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #3
    I've not seen any tests, but either can run Aperture just fine. Even when using the 9400 chip, Aperture runs pretty speedy without any issues.
     
  4. kolax macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    #4
    What resolution are you dealing with that you'd need 512MB's compared to 256MB's?
     
  5. illegallydead macrumors 6502a

    illegallydead

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado!!!
    #5
    Hell I'm running it on a 2.16 MB with GMA 950 and it is plenty fast (granted I only started using it in the past month, so I may not have hit yet on the graphics heavy features). I'm sure the 256 will be quite adequate, especially on the new MBP's nVidia chipset (and DDR3 RAM vs. DDR2). Me thinks you'll be more than satisfied
     
  6. cosmokanga2 macrumors 6502a

    cosmokanga2

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Location:
    Canada, where we live in igloos.
    #6
    I'm running Aperture 2 on the low end late '08 MBP and it works fine. Handles hundreds of raws with ease too.
     
  7. paulinbognor thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2006
    Location:
    West Sussex, UK
    #7
    thanks for the replies.

    I'll be running Aperture at the 15" MBP's default resolution and occasionally on a second monitor/projector.

    I use my macbook for showing files (in preview mode) but trying to do adjustment takes far too long.

    I don't want to waste money but at the same time if the extra 256MB gives me a 15%-20% increase then that'd be worth it.

    Considering that Aperture makes such use of the graphics card its always frustrating that there aren't any tests/benchmarks on this rather than meaningless (for me anyway) benchmarks on games.
     
  8. kolax macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    #8
    Games test the GPU's to their absolute maximum, and are a great benchmark.

    More video memory is good for dealing with extremely high resolution files, if you don't you don't need it. It doesn't increase performance drastically by 20% like you were hoping for anything else.

    Even games, having 512MB of video memory gives little performance improvement over 256MB.
     
  9. noodle654 macrumors 68020

    noodle654

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    Location:
    Never Ender
    #9
    Im running it with the 2.2GHz 128MB GPU MBP and it runs fine.
     
  10. raymondu999 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #10
    My boss has a first-gen 2.16GHz Core Duo (1st Rev) MBP with 2GB RAM and it's still a speed demon, even with Aperture.
     
  11. paulinbognor thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2006
    Location:
    West Sussex, UK
    #11
    thanks for all the info and advice :) I think i'm going to take the plunge with the 2.53 model as I manage to twist a local supplier to give me a very good price (£75 below the apple price) so the price difference is only about £150 now.

    On the off chance anyone is interested i'm going to do a test (mainly for my own curiosity) comparing the Mac Pro vs. white imac vs. alu imac vs. white macbook vs. the MBP to see what the relative speeds are...sad i know lol ..but someone might find it useful lol

    thanks again
     

Share This Page