Graphics Performance

Videos will be fine. Games will be... less than impressive.

 

Rendering in Final Cut Express/Pro does not rely on the video card, and displaying video with a proper frame rate does not really rely on the GPU either, as the video frames don't have to be rendered in real time, as they are already rendered and only some things need to be calculated. Even my 2007 iMac and 2008 MBP with an inferior IGP is able to play YouTube video, but it can't play any of the modern 3D games, which involve real time rendering, where the GPU is finally utilised.
Maybe MRoogle can find you some already existing threads on the graphics performance of the current 13" MBP, as it is talked about quite often.

 

Are you talking about the 3D performance?
Maybe this can help: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1102927
via http://www.google.com/search?q=nvidia 320m vs intel hd&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

 

I played battlefield bad company 2 last night. It's playable on low, but don't expect ps3 speed.
Macbook pro 13" i5 4GB on windows 7 in bootcamp.

 

Valve will run on anything. I have an x1600 in my MBP and it runs great on there. I'd hope a 4 year newer CPU and GPU could handle it

 

I just recently picked up a 13". I did not purchase it for heavy gaming. The most I have played on it are some games on a SNES emulator.

I was really worried about the GPU as well because I knew I would be watching some Netflix and be interested in playing HD content on youtube. It works flawlessly.

 

My 2 Cents...

Hey,
I just upgraded last week from an early 2006 MBP that lasted 5 years with no visits to the Apple Store, to the Early 2011 2.2 15" 6750M.
For what it's worth, I've always seen the questions not so much as "Cost vs Performance" as "Fun vs Work".
If you approach your question that way, it makes your choice a lot easier. Do you want something that will actually help you get WORK done? If your work doesn't involve heavy video, you'll actually be a lot less distracted by a lower-end machine with the integrated video card. If you are on the front end of a career that requires you put in a lot of work, go for no frills, and call it an investment.
But if you're comfortable with where you're at, and/or your work DOES involve heavy video, then it's a non-question. Go for whatever has the 6750M and play games guilt-free .

 

It will be fine for any normal use and older games. Nobody would spend 1200 on a computer that can't play youtube videos. It's just that it's not for heavy gaming and video editing.

 

Here's a great article from notebookcheck. The Intel 3000 will play more than older games my friends, here's a quote.

"The performance of the Intel HD Graphics 3000 can indeed be called impressive. In many older and current gaming titles it competes at a level of entry-level graphics cards like the Geforce G 310M, the GT 220M or the ATI HD5470. It multiplies the performance of the previous Intel GMA HD solution. In practice this means that older games can be played at high graphics settings and current games mostly at low graphics details."
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Intel-HD-Graphics-3000-graphics-solution.43710.0.html

 

In a separate thread it was mentioned the Intel HD 3000 will use system RAM, so I imagine bumping that up would be a cheap way to boost the graphics on it...

 

To play valve games I would recommend getting through steam. I run HL2 and portal on my 2011 2.0GHz and they both work great at full res. With the refresh rate and resolution dialled back a bit the ATI card doesn't do that much of the work, so I imagine the 3000 would be okay.

 

My personal experienced has been great. I was pleasantly surprised by the power of the HD 3000, especially considering all the negativity on the forums and reviews I was expecting to be somewhat disappointed but one reason that prompted me to give the 13" a try was the anandtech review that clearly showed better results on the HD 3000 than the 320M it replaces on OSX.
I decided to try it out knowing that if I was not satisfied I could always return it no questions asked within 14 days.
I fired up HL2 on steam and noticed that it was running noticeably better than on my former 330m equipped 2010 15"!!! Granted, HL2 doesnt push the envelope to the limits, but my point of reference was my former laptop which has a clearly better GPU.
I then ran google earth. I have never seen such fluidity when spinning the globe, zooming in and out. Wow I am really impressed and have decided to keep this puppy, its noticeably more responsive than my 2010 arrandale equipped 15"!
Hope this helps!

 

I think he may have said that because initially the Intel HD3000 had some issues with L4D2 and some weird graphical things, but SB is pretty new so I expected that. Valve is great in fixing any errors and driver stuff so no worries there I'm sure.

Also you were right, Gabe Newell talked highly of the SB HD3000 because he said it kind of helps "consolify" PC's of this next generation. Since it's fairly powerful enough they now have a minimum goal in which to support their settings. In other words they can use the HD3000 as the minimum graphical requirements and this really helps in development. This was according to some interview Newell did. So yeah it makes a lot of sense for Valve to fully support the HD3000.