Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
okay so its the same as the 13" ? can these play any games like gta 4 on low
 
I don't know

Just google Nvidia 9400M and see.

If your really worried just look for another used model that has the 9600Gt.
 
dont go for the 9400... it sucks. at least something that sports a 9600gt
 
Its integrated, the exact same chip that is in the 13". That '256mb dedicated' is actually main ram that is designated for the graphics chip, not true designated ram. If you want to play games, you need a better chip.
 
I'm playing Dragon Age and Mass Effect 2 on my 13" 9400M Macbook. So GTA 4 shouldn't be a problem.

-d
 
The Macbook Pro 13", with 9400, also runs Star Trek Online in bootcamp, just fine. It doesn't beat todays dedicated graphics cards, but from my experience, it is definitely the next best thing if the ones with the dedicated cards are out of your price range.

It works very well for most important graphic heavy tasks, but not quite ready to take on the latest games with high graphic settings on. That's what the dedicated cards are for. Still, it really helps that you have 4GB in there. The card mainly slows down when you lack a good open resource of ram for the card to do its work. 2GB seems nice, but there are a few things out there for which the amount of ram used severely hurts your performance unless you add 2 more to that ram. (One good example. Neverwinter Nights 2)

Now in comparison to most of the previous integrated cards, it would seem to run like a dedicated card, but it isn't. When faced against stuff like the 9600, or even the 8800GT or above, it doesn't quite compete on their levels for games. However, there are other graphical performance things, outside of all those render engines games use, for which it handles its own on.

Probably has a lot to do with when you have spare ram for which the card can use, unhindered, and the fact that the whole system architecture now utilizes DDR3 speeds (which was the memory advantage of previous dedicated cards). The fact that it is still an Nvidia, with much of the latest bells and whistles, and drivers (eg. not Intel graphics).
 
The subject of how much faster is the NVIDIA GeForce 9400M vs. the Intel GMA X3100 and GMA 950 was covered, in some depth, by EveryMac.com. Follow the link to read the results of various claims, tests, benchmarks, and reviews...

Ultimately, the "Unibody" MacBook models do provide substantially faster graphics performance than the systems that they replaced, but for gaming specifically, they still fall far short of spectacular.
 
The subject of how much faster is the NVIDIA GeForce 9400M vs. the Intel GMA X3100 and GMA 950 was covered, in some depth, by EveryMac.com. Follow the link to read the results of various claims, tests, benchmarks, and reviews...

You are aware that there are other GPU's from intel than those? The GPU from the Arrendale is not much slower than the 9400M in performance so that's a very bad thing.
 
I have the 9400m on my Dell 14z, coupled with the T6500, and under CS:S on medium-high settings. Averaged about 45-50 fps on a 36 man server. Well above my expectations.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.