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.
**
Its a pretty terrible downgrade from what we have now - not that Apple didnt do it in the past with the GMA 950 for example but still, I thought they were over it.
They were until the HD 3000 caught up...kinda... If it had OpenCL support, and came out at last refresh, no one would've complained as it is easily better than the 9400M. It just can't definitively top the 320M. Also, in areas where it does top the 320M, the tests are CPU heavy more than GPU heavy.
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.
The tests in which the HD 3000 outperforms the 320M are CPU-heavy more than GPU heavy. No kidding, the HD 3000 will run StarCraft II much faster on lowest settings than the 320M, at that point, your GPU (IGP) is irrelevant.
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.
If Apple removed the ODD, they COULD use the extra space for a discrete GPU with discrete VRAM, but they WOULDN'T; they'd make it thinner and/or tapered and boast increased thinness at the front or increased battery life. You would not see that discrete GPU so don't even waste time with it.
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.
First off, yeah, the other posters are right, those are discrete cards and the 13" model doesn't have room for a discrete card. Secondly, the "downgrade" doesn't have to be as big of a deal if they downplay it in marketing. If the CPU is their biggest boost, and the GPU is only marginally worse, then they only need not mention it and there's no problem. It's not like a vast majority of the target market audience for the 13" MacBook Pro cares all that much about how beefy the IGP is inside.
Yeah... I'll be picking up the 15".
This was my logic as I was previously saving up for this next generation's 13" model but when it was looking like it'd be Intel inside, I realized that's a silly premium to be paying on a computer that lacks even a decent IGP. Sure, it's decent for Intel's standards, but Intel has never been one for truly decent IGPs.
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 ?
Uh...Arrandale had its GPU on a separate DIE on the same physical chip. It didn't have a separate chip itself. This changes nothing as there's still no room for a discrete GPU. But get your own facts right before you insult someone else's lack of knowledge on the matter.
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.
There's also their lack of OpenCL support which makes me skeptical that the next 13" Pro will even be using Sandy Bridge and not just another round of Core 2 Duo and the 320M. Boxes can be photoshopped.
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.
The CPU ceased to be the bottleneck for performance years ago. GPUs are further up in line for what's most in need of (really noticable) improvement, hence the decision to put (yet) a(nother) Core 2 Duo alongside the 320M in the Mid-2010 13" MacBook Pro (as well as the white MacBook, Mac mini, and MacBook Air) instead of using Arrandale and its "HD Graphics".
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.
I'll buy the HD playback because Intel is, somehow, ahead of most discrete GPUs for video playback on their IGPs. Figures, the pony had to have one trick.
@ Those people who wanted the optical drive :
You got it. Congratulations.
Like Apple was going to give us a discrete GPU in its place instead of thinness. Come on, be realistic.
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!
Again, like Apple would actually utilize the space gained there by actually putting a discrete GPU instead of making it thinner. Seriously. Also, people watch DVDs at their friends houses (especially when the living room TV is occupied). Just because YOU don't need it, doesn't mean that it isn't needed.
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?
Even better question, why do you need better graphics on something that small to begin with? That's certainly Apple's logic and their numbers would appear to agree.
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").
Cite your numbers on this (and sampling members of this forum doesn't count).
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?
).
First off, just because the IGP core was moved from a separate die to the main die doesn't mean that there's magically enough room for a discrete GPU. Period. Secondly, consider the people who are all buying 13" MacBook Pros. Most of them don't care about discrete graphics. They either have a larger more powerful machine for what it is that they'll be doing, or the 13" MacBook Pro will be enough. Very few people would've taken to a 13" MacBook Pro that lacks an optical drive and has discrete graphics. I'm a gamer and a video editor and the 13" is by far my favorite currently shipping Mac, and I wouldn't have gone for it. But again, that's because the 13" Pro wouldn't be the premiere computer in my arsenal for gaming. Video editing maybe; I've heard of actual airing TV shows made on a 13" MacBook Pro before. But again, clearly an IGP is enough in that case.
This post got me thinking. So I get the new model or the old at a discount. I don't plays games,mostly internet, music, actual work. Would I notice a major difference in graphics just in? everday tasks I want portability, but the mba is too thin for me.
Wait until the new model comes out. Read reviews. Compare what you're hearing to the old model. If the old model still appeals more, go to Apple's online refurbished store and find one of the two current (as of 2/23/2011) 13" MacBook Pros and snag 'em. You won't get the pretty box with the picture of said 13" MacBook Pro advertising the long battery life and NVIDIA graphics, but you'll still get a one-year Apple warranty and still be elligable for AppleCare. The lower-end model is currently $999; I can't fathom it not dropping after tomorrow. Apple will probably also have clearance deals on their site as well.
