GMA 950 and 1680x1050 display

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by andrewheard, May 15, 2007.

  1. andrewheard macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    #1
    Unfortunately the new MacBooks still have the GMA 950. I'm not a gamer by any means, I don't use pro apps and I don't have a 3D screensaver. All I want to know is if interface performance is decent when the MacBook is connected to a 20-inch 1680x1050 display.

    Thanks for your time,

    Andrew
     
  2. jpfisher macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #2
    With 2GB of RAM in the system I have no complaints about performance on a 23" 1920 x 1200 LCD.

    I was not happy with said performance with 1GB.
     
  3. andrewheard thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    #3
    I should have mentioned that I'm going to upgrade to 2GB. Are you using the MacBook display at the same time as your 23-incher?
     
  4. jpfisher macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #4
    No... my desk is a little too small/cramped for that.
     
  5. Lixivial macrumors 6502a

    Lixivial

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2005
    Location:
    Between cats, dogs and wanderlust.
    #5
    Decent is about the only way to describe it. I have a MacBook running a 20" CRT at 1400x1050 + its internal display with 2 gigabytes of RAM and it works fairly well -- even with many less-than-intensive games -- except if I have a number of windows open and try to do Exposé. The animation can stutter pretty bad with a good number of windows (or a few active motion-based windows), and so do other animations such as Dashboard ripple/transition, etc. There are also some screensavers/Flash games/animations that stutter.

    My monitor can run at 1600x1200 at 60 Hz, but I don't often run it at that so I'm not even running at the highest resolution. When running a secondary monitor, I'd stay away from intensive Quartz Composer-based screensavers as they seem to peg the CPU and you'll begin to hear the fan in short order.

    I should point out, when running without a secondary monitor it works like a charm. And I should point out that lower resolutions seem to run exponentially better as you step down; not a real shocker, but...
     
  6. andrewheard thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    #6
    1680x1050 + 1280x800 is like 20% more pixels than 1920x1080 so hopefully it can still handle it fine.
     

Share This Page