Comparison of graphics strength - last gen vs current gen

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by raymondu999, Feb 24, 2011.

  1. raymondu999 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #1
    Hey all. Just wondering. With the last gen (like mine) having the nVidia 330M GT (with 512MB) and now having the Radeon 6950 HD with 1GB, roughly how much extra processing power does it give relative to the old card? Thanks:D
     
  2. SamIchi macrumors 68030

    SamIchi

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
  3. Robin Chung macrumors member

    Robin Chung

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Location:
    Netherlands
    #3
    6750 mind you.

    Yeah would love to know this. Maybe you (or any 330m owner) could run some benchmarks. Then a MBP 2011 user can run the identical tests.

    But also post CPU and ram specs because those can help as well. The radeon has amazing backing from this quad core CPU.
     
  4. daneoni macrumors G4

    daneoni

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    #4
    I read somewhere that the 6940 is comparable to/slightly better than the 330m whilst the 6750m is significantly better.
     
  5. grahamnp macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #5
    There are plenty of benchmarks around here for the 6750. You can find a basic comparison at www.barefeats.com

    The 6490 is in between the 320m/8600m and the 9600m while the 6750 is slightly less powerful than the 4850 in the iMac.

    9400 < 320 <= 8600 < 6490 < 9600 < 330 << 6750 < 4850
     
  6. teflonsheep macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2011
    #6
  7. aznguyen316 macrumors 68020

    aznguyen316

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    #7
    Actually the 6490 is better than a 9600GT found in the 2009 models. It's closer to the 330m than we first expected.
     
  8. Robin Chung macrumors member

    Robin Chung

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Location:
    Netherlands
    #8
    Would be helpful if 3dmark actually meant anything.
     
  9. teflonsheep macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2011
    #9
    Thanks for contributing.

    No graphics benchmark "means anything" if we don't know what one is using the GPU for. They are strictly for cross-comparisons between hardware.

    And 3dmark06/vantage are still the defacto standard for generic gaming benchmarks.
     
  10. grahamnp macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #10
    I just looked up some newer comparisons and you're right. The 6490 is marginally faster (<10%) than the 9600. Thanks for the correction.
     
  11. mark28 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    #11
    What?

    Real world performance is the defacto standard, not synthetic benchmarks like 3dmark06.

    Just to show you how ridiculous synthetic benchmarks like 3dmark06 is.

    3dmark06:
    320m = 4155
    Intel H3000 = 5053

    So the Intel H3000 is supposedly much better than the 320m right? :cool:

    Almost every good review tests hardware on real world performance to draw conclusions about the performance of hardware.
     
  12. Inakto macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Location:
    toronto
    #12
    I have the new 17": here are my results: COD MW2: 1920x1200 maxes out settings 40-80 fps Starcraft 2: 1920x1200 maxed out all settings, shadows, aa, etc.: 35+fps. Really good performance all around, im loving it
     
  13. striker33 macrumors 65816

    striker33

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    #13
    Take it SC2 is via Bootcamp too then?

    Either way, I wasnt expecting that fps on such a high resolution. Should be great on my high end 15 AG.
     
  14. Inakto macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Location:
    toronto
    #14
    SC2 seems to to be well programmed for the mac environment and I experienced the same frame rates and quality of picture on each OS. I was also pleasantly surprised of the performance. I used fraps on windows and the in game counter for mac. Whats nice is that the frame rate doesn't even dip significantly when viewing many units in action, such as in a massing game. One minor quirk about the ultra high settings is that the menu screen only gets about 15 fps, so it feels slow, however in game there are no issues. The HD resolution and simply the quality of the screen makes SC2 look amazingly sharp, colourful and smooth compared to my 22inch external monitor. Anyone who drops 3 grand for an alienware is simply retarded.
     
  15. aznguyen316 macrumors 68020

    aznguyen316

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    #15
    But you should know that 3DMark06 is not only about the GPU. You need a CPU to play games too ya know. And in some games, YES the SB cpu the HD3000 is paired with will increase FPS, sometimes largely, other times marginally. You sound like you understand that HD3000 GPU vs GPU is not as good as the 320m, but then you pull up 3dmark06 numbers and make it seem like you don't know it's also CPU scored as well?
     
  16. jman240 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 26, 2009
    #16
  17. raymondu999 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #17
    How about parallel processing? As I understand it nVidia CUDA on the Mac is still very much a beta effort with only developer builds of drivers floating around. Is ATi's (or AMD, I should say) solution to parallel processing any better? Or any more readily accessible for that matter?
     

Share This Page