Intel HD 3000 slower than the custom built 320M

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by mabaker, Feb 23, 2011.

  1. mabaker macrumors 65816

    mabaker

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    #1
    http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Intel-HD-Graphics-3000-graphics-solution.43710.0.html


    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’s a pretty terrible downgrade from what we have now - not that Apple didn’t do it in the past with the GMA 950 for example but still, I thought they were over it.
     
  2. fenderbass146 macrumors 65816

    fenderbass146

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Location:
    Northwest Indiana
    #2
    I just read that WTF apple
     
  3. SpaceMagic macrumors 68000

    SpaceMagic

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Location:
    Cardiff, Wales
    #3
    I've been trying to find information since they released these pics.

    Apparently they are very similar in speed. Sometimes outperforming sometimes underperforming each other.

    They do largely depend on the CPU, so in the low end 13" MBP, I wouldn't be surprised if it were a little slower.
     
  4. seong macrumors 65816

    seong

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #4
    Well, isn't this like what happened for nVidia upgrade?
    Although when nVidia 9400m was introduced for Macbook Pro 13", it was quite significant, but later on, nVidia built a custom GPU which we now know as 320m.
    Let's hope for the best that Apple is doing this as an "experiment" and have ODDs taken out and replace it with discrete graphics card.
     
  5. hcho3 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    May 13, 2010
    #5
    That's what I have said million times in a forum and everyone called me a liar. Intel graphic card is coming back to mbp and it will be worse in gaming. If u expected more than u are f crazy. Apple isn't going to ditch optical drive. This is low end mbp, period.
     
  6. MrVinney96 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Location:
    Holland :)
    #6
    I don't think Apple is going to downgrade, because it may effect their selling results. I think it is gonna be the GT 220 M as standard and a ATI HD.... for the higher-end models.
     
  7. hcho3 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    May 13, 2010
    #7
    I am sorry, but why are you still delusional? There is no room to put in dedicated graphic card in 13 MBP with Optical drive, battery and Hard drive inside. 13 MBP is already constrained.

    So, Intel doesn't not allow Nvidia's integrated graphic card inside sandy bridge processor. They did not license nvidia, so apple has no choice, but to go for intel Graphic card.

    Which part of this did you not understand? This is why apple went Core 2 Duo last year and now, you guys all getting your wish with sandy bridge with a compromise. Steve wasn't joking around about intel GPU last year. people will find out.
     
  8. Doneaux macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
  9. Sarngate macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    #9
    Stop spreading false information. Sandy Bridge doesn't have a separate processing Chip like Arrandale did, so a discrete GPU was perfectly possible. I've already corrected you once before on this issue.

    Then again you're the kid who lies about what Macbook he has, so why am i surprised ?
     
  10. jeanlain macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    #10
    Where to you see that Intel's HD 3000 is slower than the 320m? The 320M doesn't appear in comparative graphs, and it's mentioned a couple of times in the text. Sometime it performs better, and sometimes the HD 3000 is ahead.

    I suppose drivers will be key, and unfortunately, Intel isn't famous for their openGL support.
     
  11. simplydat, Feb 23, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 23, 2011

    simplydat macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2010
    #11
    Sandy bridge is overrated.

    Keep in mind the Intel HD 3000 used in the benchmark was a i7 quadcore.. 13" MBP uses i5, so the graphics on it is at best on par with 310m. I will not notice the difference in CPU speed for everyday task, but I will definitely notice the downgrade in graphics for the games I play.It's also worth noting, the battery on the last gen MBP is more than enough for everyday tasks. The current 13" MBP battery is rated for 10hrs, how much better do you think sandy bridge can get you? 15hrs? I think not. In conclusion, it's sad, but the downgrade in graphics simply isn't worth the trade-off imo.
     
  12. jjahshik32 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    #12
    Thats not too bad at all IMO.

    The i5 will be MUCH MUCH MUUUUCH faster than the aged old core 2 duo while the HD 3000 will be slightly slower than the Nvidia 320m. :D
     
  13. jjahshik32 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    #13
    Oh trust me, YOU WILL NOTICE A HUGE DIFFERENCE IN CPU SPEED IN EVERYDAY TASKS.

    I've had the 13" 2.4GHz core 2 duo macbook pro with the nvidia 320m and jumping from that to the 17" mbp i5 with integrated gpu was HUGE. I'd figure the same thing for the 13". Also the new i5 will allow MUCH faster playback of HD contents as well due to the faster cpu.
     
  14. AppleMacFinder macrumors 6502a

    AppleMacFinder

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    #14
    @ Those people who wanted the optical drive :

    You got it. Congratulations. :mad:
     
  15. simplydat macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2010
    #15
    Hmm.. I have a 13" and my friend has a 15" with I5.. i felt very little difference using his, in fact, for everyday task, the only time i felt a difference is when I switched to a SSD. Everyday tasks I do have less than 30% CPU usage on the current Core 2 Duo.
     
  16. mattk3650 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    #16
    I agree on every level

    If the took out that ********** optical drive! They could fit a bigger battery, 330M or better graphics, SSD boot drive, and more ********** RAM!

    When's the last time you had to use your optical drive outside of your house? I don't remember the last time I went to a library and had to install Microsoft office from a DVD drive, or wen't to my friends house to watch a movie. Everything is download based these days for god's sake!
     
  17. htc fan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Location:
    Ottawa
    #17
    I like that macbook pro has an optical drive so, I can burn dvds and cds. People still Burn CDS.:p
     
  18. Yinmay macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    #18
    If the rumors about the new MBP13 turn out true I'll be quite disappointed. I wanted something like a 13" Air with i5 Sandy Bridge, discrete graphics and 10h battery, no ODD, and lightpeak with adapter hub to firewire, ethernet, SD, etc.

    Why do we have to sacrifice mobility and be forced to purchase a 15" to get decent graphics when we can just plug in an external display for more real estate?
     
  19. tom vilsack macrumors 68000

    tom vilsack

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2010
    Location:
    ladner cdn
    #19
    hope all this is not real...

    if so ill just go buy a air....
     
  20. mattk3650 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    #20
    Next time I watch/read a laptop review that critcizes a laptop for not having an optical drive, I'm personally going to mail a letter filled with dog s*** to them.
     
  21. c1phr macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    #21
    This has been in the making for a while now. I entirely and 100% agree that the machine could have done without an optical drive. There are far more people that would have rather seen powerful graphics over an optical drive (then again, this is a marketing strategy that Apple could be using to force those who want graphics to pay more for the 15").


    The Intel graphics were known to be slower all along. Intel just doesn't have it down for 3d yet, though it will do anything 2d like a champ. For some things, I'm sure the HD 3000 will work fine. Some people don't play games, or need much graphic power. With the proposed removal of the Polycarb MB line, the 13" becomes the baseline model, and plenty of users will be fine with that.

    While I almost NEVER use my optical drive in both my desktop or laptop, I know that there are still people who use them on a daily basis for whatever reason. Many agree that optical media (in the form of CDs and DVDs) is not yet dead, and that is also respectable. So long as the drive is still useful, Apple will likely feel that it should be included in the machine.

    However, I believe that there is a very valid user-base that love having somewhat powerful graphics in the ultra portable 13" model. I feel that Apple should have created an option (customized online or however this would be executed) that would drop the opti-drive for a "useful" (personal definition, please don't flame) graphics card.

    Yes, I realize that some say there is now room for a discreet GPU now that the controller die was moved to the CPU die. This may be true, but there is also the thermal issue, as not only does the card need to fit on the board, another heat-pipe and heatsink need to be fit into the case. Engineering-wise, this may or may not have been possible. My point here is to remember that there are other limitations beyond logic board space.

    No matter, the HD 3000 will play Minecraft (which is the only game you need right? :p).
     
  22. thedarkhorse macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #22
    The specs on the photo from the box look a lot more like the MacBook white replacement. Remember one of the rumors said the white mb was going away in favor of a pro and non pro aluminum. Also a rumor said that the 15" pro would have 1680x1050 and the 13" pro would have 1440x900. The box photo says 1280x800, those details along with lack of dedicated flash storage for osx make me believe the 13" pro specs have yet to be revealed.
     
  23. menez macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    #23
    I don't get it. The only thing that bothers me about this is that Apple will probably still have the same prices and increase their margin... other than that its not like the NVIDIA outperforms the Intel by a reasonable margin which then would be concerning.

    The less parts on a computer the less things that can go wrong... Hopefully they decrease the prices or make it up perhaps with the new port...
     
  24. simplydat macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2010
    #24
    LOL .. in your dream.. When was the last time you see Apple have mercy on price? It is a business out to make a profit, and it's doing very well in that. In my opinion, Apple is making the right choice here, fanboys here no matter what will buy Apple, only difference is MBP or MBA. Apple wins either way.
     
  25. jjahshik32 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    #25
    Apparently your usage pattern must have been only to surf the web. In that case its hardly noticeable but if you use it as a main machine to play alot of hd content and multitask with 4 spaces and running vmware fusion, its going to be a difference of night and day.

    Also I had a 80GB Intel G2 SSD drive in my 13" mbp with the nvidia 320m.
     

Share This Page