Intel hd vs nvidia 320m

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by notw618, Jun 22, 2010.

  1. notw618 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    #1
    which is better and why?

    I'm wondering because i currently have an hp laptop, and the only thing i am not satisfied with is my graphics performance.
    i would like to upgrade to a macbook pro, but i don't want to buy the very expensive 15" model.

    i use the graphics for GIMP mainly.
     
  2. mikeo007 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    #2
    The 320m is much better, 3-4 times faster on average. It's better because it's built by a GPU company, rather than a processor company. Seriously though, it's more advanced technology, a faster clock speed, more shader cores and just a more efficient architecture. It's not a graphics powerhouse, and can't be compared to a modern dedicated GPU, but I would say it's one of the best (if not the best) integrated solutions out there.
     
  3. notw618 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    #3
    thank you.

    thank you for your response, that's what i figured pretty much.
    question 2 is if i did purchase the lease expensive 15" mbp would i see a great graphics improvement over the base 13"?
     
  4. jjahshik32 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    #4
    320m by a mile!

    To give you an example using 3dmark06 as a benchmark:

    Nvidia 9400m (much faster than the intel GPU) and it scores a 1500-1800 in 3dmark06.

    Nvidia 320m scores around 4300-4600 in 3dmark06.

    Keep in mind that the intel gpu is much slower than the nvidia 9400m.
     
  5. Sefk macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    #5
    Yes (around 2x the performance)
     
  6. jjahshik32 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    #6
    Having tested the nvidia 9400m (mac mini) and the nvidia 320m (13" macbook pro) and testing using a plex player and big mkv files and overall usages under OSX, I concluded that the 320m is easily 3x faster than the 9400m in the real world usages. Sometimes I swear that it feels like 4x faster.

    Basically I had the 17" i7 2.66GHz macbook pro (had it for about 2 months but sold it to pocket extra cash) and that macbook pro had a 330m and under overall usages in OSX I dont feel a difference between the 330m and the 320m, honestly.

    :D

    Go for it man, you will not be disappointed!!
     
  7. mikeo007 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    #7
    9400m and Intel HD are pretty comparable in speed if you're just using 3dmark06 scores.
     

Share This Page