GT 330M with 256 MB vs GT 330M with 512 MB

[Cali3350]

The only REAL thing that the graphics memory effects is the quality of the textures. All graphical processing effects wont make a large difference.

If your main concern is playing games then the 512MB is def worth it. The 256 MB will only allow at best medium textures for the vast majority of games on the market. The 512 should allow high settings.

 

[macwow55]

Shelf life and moving forward?

Hi Everyone.

Am new here. Am definitely getting a new Macbook Pro.

What i have decided is I want the
15inch Size
8GB Ram

What I can't decide, is should I get the 2.66 or the 2.53? I don't buy a new computer very often & I am more interested in real world difference versus theoretical difference here.

I will be using the computer for Photo Editing (Photoshop), Audio Editing, and Video Editing.

I DONT PLAY Computer games at all.

I don't want to be penny smart & pound foolish here. that is,

if Buying the 2.66 would increase the shelf life of the computer for the applications i use it for & would make the computer "last longer", then I would make that choice. (will the i7 processor have capabilities better suited to the future?)

If the 2.66 will make no difference for what i'm doing, then id rather get the 2.53

Since I only buy a new computer once in a blue moon - when I absolute need it (ie not cuz i'm obsessed with tech specs). I want to make the right choice.

Am also wanting a computer that is not noisey.

Any advice?

Thanks!

 

[strang]

The only REAL thing that the graphics memory effects is the quality of the textures. All graphical processing effects wont make a large difference.

If your main concern is playing games then the 512MB is def worth it. The 256 MB will only allow at best medium textures for the vast majority of games on the market. The 512 should allow high settings.

Also AA and AF settings can be turned up higher with more VRAM.

Actual render speeds are limited by the memory bandwidth. Having more room to store textures, AA and AF is what you'll get with 512 MB of dedicated VRAM.

 

[definitive]

n/m

 

[ChronoIMG]

The only REAL thing that the graphics memory effects is the quality of the textures. All graphical processing effects wont make a large difference.

If your main concern is playing games then the 512MB is def worth it. The 256 MB will only allow at best medium textures for the vast majority of games on the market. The 512 should allow high settings.

High settings with a 330M? Nope, not gonna happen.

 

[Garrus]

It's still a good speed bump compare to the 9600m gt
Allowing Far Cry 2 to go from med setting to high setting
and Crysis from low setting to med setting (notebookcheck)

 

[vasuba]

For some expectations of performance http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-330M.22437.0.html

Crysis will average 39 FPS on Medium settings at 720P

So its got enough power to manage acceptable levels but dont expect everything on high with intensive games

 

[Jarcrew]

Thanks for that, very helpful and clear cut explanation. You've now helped me decide towards the 256. The main 2 games I like to play are valve games and blizzard games (Starcraft 2 beta keeps my imac occupied), and none of those are "OMG CRYSIS" graphics so I wouldn't utilize its full power.

Cheers

I'm with you on that. The only games I really want to play on a PC are Valve's games anyway; anything else is usually better on the 360, or is something I don't want to play (like Crysis). The Source engine runs great on most kit. Like I said somewhere else, I've seen 13"s with 9400ms running CS:S and TF2 perfectly acceptably.

I was going to go for the i7 15" earlier, but now I've had time to reflect on that decision, one of the lower end 15"s is seeming like a better option. Might go for the mid-range 15" and plump for the hi-res screen.

 

[MacDannny]

I'm with you on that. The only games I really want to play on a PC are Valve's games anyway; anything else is usually better on the 360, or is something I don't want to play (like Crysis). The Source engine runs great on most kit. Like I said somewhere else, I've seen 13"s with 9400ms running CS:S and TF2 perfectly acceptably.

I was going to go for the i7 15" earlier, but now I've had time to reflect on that decision, one of the lower end 15"s is seeming like a better option. Might go for the mid-range 15" and plump for the hi-res screen.

I'm in the exact same boat as you! I ordered the i7 2.66 earlier, but I'm going to cancel that and order the 2.53 i5 instead. I would just be getting the i7 because I can, not because I need it. i game on ps3/360 so the extra 256mb doesnt bother me. the extra cpu would just eat more battery, when 2.53 would be more than enough.

i don't know whether to get the 500gb 5400 or 7200rpm drive though...

 

[Jarcrew]

A hypothetical question to those who understand GPUs better than I do;

Suppose I go for the mid-range MBP - 2.53GHz i5, GT330M w/ 256. Lovely stuff.

Suppose then I get a Dell monitor. Perhaps a 20" or so (which I will do for Illustrator/Photoshop purposes anyway).

Let's finally suppose I play games - almost exclusively Valve titles, certainly nothing that will strain the processor - on the monitor as opposed to the 15" screen.

Is the 330M powerful enough to drive a display that big?

 

[vasuba]

A hypothetical question to those who understand GPUs better than I do;

Suppose I go for the mid-range MBP - 2.53GHz i5, GT330M w/ 256. Lovely stuff.

Suppose then I get a Dell monitor. Perhaps a 20" or so (which I will do for Illustrator/Photoshop purposes anyway).

Let's finally suppose I play games - almost exclusively Valve titles, certainly nothing that will strain the processor - on the monitor as opposed to the 15" screen.

Is the 330M powerful enough to drive a display that big?

Nvidia lists
Maximum Digital Resolution 2560x1600
Maximum VGA Resolution 2048x1536
http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gt_330m_us.html

 

[Cali3350]

A hypothetical question to those who understand GPUs better than I do;

Suppose I go for the mid-range MBP - 2.53GHz i5, GT330M w/ 256. Lovely stuff.

Suppose then I get a Dell monitor. Perhaps a 20" or so (which I will do for Illustrator/Photoshop purposes anyway).

Let's finally suppose I play games - almost exclusively Valve titles, certainly nothing that will strain the processor - on the monitor as opposed to the 15" screen.

Is the 330M powerful enough to drive a display that big?

Yes, however note that games like Left 4 Dead use more than 256mb of ram so you will have to lower texture quality. Otherwise it will power the game ok. Its going to depend on the game though obviously.

 

[Jarcrew]

Nvidia lists
Maximum Digital Resolution 2560x1600
Maximum VGA Resolution 2048x1536
http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gt_330m_us.html

- Exceptional Viewing Area: See more content with a 16:9 widescreen aspect ratio, 23" diagonal VIS (viewable image size) and high-definition (1920x1080) maximum resolution.

- Flexible Connectivity: Analog (VGA) and digital (DVI/HDCP) cables both come standard. Add an optional DisplayPort cable for excellent digital connectivity.

That's a bingo!

Hell, I couldn't afford a monitor bigger than that card's max resolution.

 

[Mackan]

To be honest, Apple should be offering 512/1024 combo, and not 256/512. But being Apple, I wasn't surprised. And I am tired of having to pick the higher end model to get the 512 MB or VRAM. Same greedy tactics as ever.

 

[Jarcrew]

Also, from what I've heard, that i7 is going to run hot. May even see temperatures to make this a reality.

Then again, from what I hear the 256MB difference in VRAM isn't really going to make that much of a difference to real-world performance - unless you want to run games at crazy res or you're planning on making Toy Story 4 single-handed, I'd just save your money and get one of the i5s.

 

[jav6454]

The 330M is a 128-bit bus width card, so having 512MB will be a waste in many aspects.

 

[Cali3350]

The 330M is a 128-bit bus width card, so having 512MB will be a waste in many aspects.

No, not at all. If the base texture storage in a game is over 256MB (which MANY games are) then all aspects of RAM not related to storage are irrelevant. Bis width ONLY effects bandwidth.

 

[jav6454]

No, not at all. If the base texture storage in a game is over 256MB (which MANY games are) then all aspects of RAM not related to storage are irrelevant. Bis width ONLY effects bandwidth.

Not really, do more homework on the bus, and you'll see its very relevant

 

[Cali3350]

Not really, do more homework on the bus, and you'll see its very relevant

All due respect you seem to be the one thats uneducated here.

Bus width effects bandwidth, nothing else. GDDR5 allows double the data rate as GDDR3, which means the bus is equivalent to a 256bit bus on older cards.

Bandwidth is ONLY relevant when you need to move large amounts of data around, such as when your doing MultiSampling (or especially SuperSampling) operations or have what is equivalent to IO operations within the card. In terms of pure texture storage and display it makes no difference at all.

Since most new games use more than 256MB of memory, it is highly relevant to what can be displayed from the framebuffer.

 

[Libertine Lush]

Also, from what I've heard, that i7 is going to run hot.

Could you link us to where you read that? I'm curious about the heat emission on the i7, but as it's been stated here, it has the same TDP as the i5, so perhaps there'll be no difference.

 

[Jarcrew]

The guy who posted the "i7 might not be such a good idea" (or thereabouts) thread said it.

 

[Cali3350]

The i7 runs hotter as it has 1mb more cache and a higher clock speed, but it wont be anything really noticeable. Having said that, the performance also wont be anything noticeable.

 

[Jarcrew]

Yeah, I've been looking at the Geekbench results that people have uploaded today - if one of these results is from a forum member, thank you - the difference between i5 and i7 is negligible. There's a 2.66GHz MBP from the previous rev with a 3600ish score, an i5 from today with 4750, and an i7 from today with a 5300. The most substantial jump is from C2D to iX, not from i5 to i7.

I suppose you just have to figure out how much 256MB of VRAM is worth to you. I'm not sure it's worth the extra for me.

 

[Libertine Lush]

Maybe I'll go with the i5 15" or 17" then, as heat is a concern for me, especially here in Southern California where the suffocating heat in the summers would surely stress the fan/cooling more than usual.

Just out of curiosity: since Apples are so highly coveted and used by media professionals, why are the graphics cards still so consistently weak? I've read that CAD users need something on the level of the Quardo cards, and I'd assume professionals who edit HD video would benefit from more robust graphics. Am I missing something?

 

[Cali3350]

Maybe I'll go with the i5 15" or 17" then, as heat is a concern for me, especially here in Southern California where the suffocating heat in the summers would surely stress the fan/cooling more than usual.

Just out of curiosity, since Apple's are so highly coveted and used by media professionals, why are the graphics cards still so consistently weak? I've read that CAD users need something on the level of the Quardo cards, and I'd assume professionals who edit HD video would benefit from more robust graphics. Am I missing something?

The 330M is more than adequate for CAD work. Apple is hitting the performance needed by its "mainstay" they just arent hitting what "PC Converts" want.

FYI the difference in Quadro and Geforce cards are purely software based today, there is no actual hardware difference.