difference BTW 256 VRAM& 512VRAM under Hi res?

[ceshimm]

I am going to buy meself a MBP 15 soon. i use to thinking of the fastest i7 one. After read several posts here, i feel like i5 2.4G might enough for me. The only concern is about the video ram. I understand the MBP is not design for gaming, but unfortunately i have to play some game on that. I will also mostly go with the Hi Res screen as well.

could any one post some comparing link between GT 330 256 AND 512 both under Hi res. i find some gaming test either under standard res, or hi res with i7. rarely find some gaming test on i5 with hi res.

thank you.

 

[iBookG4user]

Here you are

 

[alphaod]

If it's the article I think it is, it won't make a difference until you are driving a display at 2560x1600.

 

[iBookG4user]

If it's the article I think it is, it won't make a difference until you are driving a display at 2560x1600.

True, if you're only going to be playing it at the native resolution of the MacBook Pro display, there shouldn't be much difference between the two.

 

[ceshimm]

thanks.
i realize that even under 1920x1200 res 256and 512 VRAM are not much difference. so can i say under 1680x1050, both of them will be the same. i've heard that 512 VRAM will perform better over 256 if the game is sort of texture intensive, will Diablo 3 be that kind of game? because D3 is the only must play game for now to me. i may not able to buy a new laptop next year, so i have to think about the D3.

 

[iBookG4user]

thanks.
i realize that even under 1920x1200 res 256and 512 VRAM are not much difference. so can i say under 1680x1050, both of them will be the same. i've heard that 512 VRAM will perform better over 256 if the game is sort of texture intensive, will Diablo 3 be that kind of game? because D3 is the only must play game for now to me.

At 1680x1050 you'll see even less of a difference between the two than 1920x1200.

 

[Sankersizzle]

wow! thanks for posting that article. i never knew the difference between the 2.53i5 and 2.66i7 were so small. for all intents and purposes, non-existant.

 

[iBookG4user]

wow! thanks for posting that article. i never knew the difference between the 2.53i5 and 2.66i7 were so small. for all intents and purposes, non-existant.

Gaming is much more dependent on the graphics card than the processor, so typically having a slightly faster processor does not make much of a difference.

 

[Sankersizzle]

Gaming is much more dependent on the graphics card than the processor, so typically having a slightly faster processor does not make much of a difference.

yep! but in the article there was a link to intensive CPU applications where the 2.66i7 was only a small percentage faster than the i5. crazy stuff.

 

[Adidas Addict]

yep! but in the article there was a link to intensive CPU applications where the 2.66i7 was only a small percentage faster than the i5. crazy stuff.

Not really crazy stuff. Its just Intel marketing of the i7 makes you think its some wonder CPU above and beyond the i5's when it reality the difference is tiny.

 

[cathyy]

Not really crazy stuff. Its just Intel marketing of the i7 makes you think its some wonder CPU above and beyond the i5's when it reality the difference is tiny.

I believe there's a larger difference for desktop CPUs as desktop i5s don't have Hyperthreading. However it's still not that great a difference. For notebooks, i5s and i7s are identical, where dual-core i7s are basically the same as a higher clocked i5.

 

[Adidas Addict]

I believe there's a larger difference for desktop CPUs as desktop i5s don't have Hyperthreading. However it's still not that great a difference. For notebooks, i5s and i7s are identical, where dual-core i7s are basically the same as a higher clocked i5.

Yeah, my statement was regrading the notebook CPu's

 

[djasterix]

So there's really not great difference, that's a great notice...

 

[DesmoPilot]

Here you are

Don't know why people still take those benchmarks seriously, they're basically useless. Testing ancient games or games based on old engines. When some of those games were released, 256MB was the highest MB VRAM you could get.

 

[kasakka]

If it's the article I think it is, it won't make a difference until you are driving a display at 2560x1600.

Actually it does. Many games use a lot of texture RAM, regardless of resolution. However, the Macbook Pro's graphics card's speed is more of a limit than the amount of RAM.