MacBook Graphics Card

[jamesi]

what about half life 2, i play it on my PC when it still used intigrated and that was like a year ago. what Frame rate would i expect out of that/

ahahaha it will run terribly. integrated graphics are awful, everyone hear who is wondering if a certain app will run well on the MB needs only realize this: this is not a game machine and certainly not a professional one either. dont buy this unless all you want to do is browse the interent, listen to music, and the casual likes

 

[Willy S]

ahahaha it will run terribly. integrated graphics are awful, everyone hear who is wondering if a certain app will run well on the MB needs only realize this: this is not a game machine and certainly not a professional one either. dont buy this unless all you want to do is browse the interent, listen to music, and the casual likes

I just paid 450 euros for a new IBM R50e for that purposes, and it performs very well and runs cool.

Now I´m in a market for either a high performance laptop or a desktop with a nice S-IPS panel LCD.

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

ahahaha it will run terribly. integrated graphics are awful, everyone hear who is wondering if a certain app will run well on the MB needs only realize this: this is not a game machine and certainly not a professional one either. dont buy this unless all you want to do is browse the interent, listen to music, and the casual likes

Im glad you said this, the Macfan boys would have folks think Integrated graphics is the best thing since slice bread. HL2 will look like crap on any integrated graphics machine period.

 

[afornander]

r u shure, i used to use old Via KM266 integrated graphics on my pc and i could run the hl2 demo at a good speed (with the default graphic settings). i just dont understand you guys, saying that the macbook is good only if you surf the web and chat, ext. just because its integrated graphics doesnt make it bad.. it just means that if you plan on playing any good games on it it will be at min. graphic levels and little fps.

:edit: i will realy only use it for some mmorpg's that could run like a charm even on the worst intigrated graphics.

 

[jamesi]

r u shure, i used to use old Via KM266 integrated graphics on my pc and i could run the hl2 demo at a good speed (with the default graphic settings). i just dont understand you guys, saying that the macbook is good only if you surf the web and chat, ext. just because its integrated graphics doesnt make it bad.. it just means that if you plan on playing any good games on it it will be at min. graphic levels and little fps.

:edit: i will realy only use it for some mmorpg's that could run like a charm even on the worst intigrated graphics.

allow me to clear up any misunderstandings you might have. i labeled the macbook as a simple internet, word processor, music, etc basic machine b/c thats what it is. the integrated graphics it has is awful, and id loooove to see some benchmarks of HL2 running on it. no one is saying the macbook is bad by any means, its geared to be a computer for the masses. any professional user avoids integrated graphics at all costs b/c they have a workload that requires some muscle. if games run sadly on the macbook now, then imagine a few months from now.

 

[groel220]

So much whining.

...I just find it irritating that people complain about things that a machine is not being marketed as, and does not have the components for. Do you see a MacBook competing with the Dell XPS Laptops or the Alienware laptops? I sure don't.

I agree completely that people need to stop whining about these things having integrated graphics. Actually, if you look at alienware's laptops that start at a comparable price to the Macbook ($1149), they actually ese the GMA 900. If I am not mistaken, that is worse than the 950. And for the price apple is charging for the Macbooks, you get some pretty sweet features. I ordered mine yesterday, and even if it can't play every game in the world, I am sure I will love it.

 

[MRU]

allow me to clear up any misunderstandings you might have. i labeled the macbook as a simple internet, word processor, music, etc basic machine b/c thats what it is. the integrated graphics it has is awful, and id loooove to see some benchmarks of HL2 running on it. no one is saying the macbook is bad by any means, its geared to be a computer for the masses. any professional user avoids integrated graphics at all costs b/c they have a workload that requires some muscle. if games run sadly on the macbook now, then imagine a few months from now.

But it only depends on the task. ProTools LE, Logic Express and 7, Photoshop, Adobe Creative Suite 2 (albeit in Rosetta until natvice CS3 is released), Flash MX, Dreamwaver MX, Director MX, Freeway Pro, Office, Filemaker Pro 8, Corel Painter IX.5, Quark 7 etc all run fantastically well on this machine as they are CPU heavy applications and NOT GPU.

To say ITS NOT a pro machine is slighty MISSLEADING in this regard. As long as the work your doing doesnt require heavy 3D Acceleration its a perfect tool; and for design profesionals, graphics artist this MacBook will offer as much as any MacBook Pro, albeit a lower res screen.

Even apps like Final Cut Studio will all run without a problem and the troublesome apps like Aperture runs grand and Motion WILL run OK even though they arent officially supported.

This is a very good value laptop that can be a pro machine, depending on your needs. To say a pro will rule it out is bull, I'm buying one and the apps I'll be using will work as well on this as they do on my Powermac G5.

To say you can only surf the internet and do very basic tasks is pure rubbish....

 

[Gnorn]

Any serious 3D rendering app will run like **** on the integrated graphics. Get the iMac.

Okay, did just that... gonna pick it up next week

Oooh, and thank God for the optical mouse... no more lint on the trackwheels

 

[RollTide]

Games

I was thinking about getting a FPS for the macbook, 2ghz 1 gb ram and I know it will be like a 3 year old game but how many people still play these games online?

MOHAA
UT2004
Call of duty (is like 100 all rooms combined)
Return to castle wolfenstein
Battlefield 1942 (alot maybe)

I was just wondering if anyone knows if it would be worth buying the game(s)
and playing them online without worrying about having no one to play with. I know the macbook sucks in 3d but these older games should run fine for my mobile needs. I appreciate anybody that knows some of these numbers.
Also any games I didn't list That are popular online would be appreciated.

 

[BKKloppenborg]

But it only depends on the task. ProTools LE, Logic Express and 7, Photoshop, Adobe Creative Suite 2 (albeit in Rosetta until natvice CS3 is released), Flash MX, Dreamwaver MX, Director MX, Freeway Pro, Office, Filemaker Pro 8, Corel Painter IX.5, Quark 7 etc all run fantastically well on this machine as they are CPU heavy applications and NOT GPU.

To say ITS NOT a pro machine is slighty MISSLEADING in this regard. As long as the work your doing doesnt require heavy 3D Acceleration its a perfect tool; and for design profesionals, graphics artist this MacBook will offer as much as any MacBook Pro, albeit a lower res screen.

Even apps like Final Cut Studio will all run without a problem and the troublesome apps like Aperture runs grand and Motion WILL run OK even though they arent officially supported.

This is a very good value laptop that can be a pro machine, depending on your needs. To say a pro will rule it out is bull, I'm buying one and the apps I'll be using will work as well on this as they do on my Powermac G5.

To say you can only surf the internet and do very basic tasks is pure rubbish....

On Intel's website it says it can use up to

Optimization of System Resources Dynamic Video Memory Technology (DVMT) 3.0 supports up to 224MB of video memory; system memory is allocated where it is needed dynamically.

So could the Macbook use that much if you maxed out Memory to 2 GB or is that only for Windows?

Also would i be Ok to use iweb, imovie, iphoto, Warcraft 3, Starcraft, Unreal 2004 on this computer? Or would a Powerbook Pro be better for me?

(If i can afford it lol)

 

[dukebound85]

just glad I don't play computer games ever.

 

[faintember]

this is not a game machine and certainly not a professional one either. dont buy this unless all you want to do is browse the interent, listen to music, and the casual likes

It is not a professional gaming machine.

It is a professional notebook though. The lack of a dedicated graphics card, and the lack of an expresscard slot dont push the Macbook into the role of a "sub" pro machine.

The definition of pro depends on the type of professional. For an audio/composer like myself, the Macbook is just as good as the MBP, and cheaper as well.

edit: MacRumorUser beat me to it. Thanks to him/her.

 

[truz]

Honestly,

I think the macbook should have had MUCH better graphic cards. You don't need high graphic cards for just gaming, you have video editors and designers who require it. I was going to order a macbook if it had a good graphics card. Seeing how it does not, I'm not going to purchase one.

I'm not happy with apple right now. They need to either release a macbook pro 13.3" or a macbook with better graphics.

 

[MRU]

It is not a professional gaming machine.

It is a professional notebook though. The lack of a dedicated graphics card, and the lack of an expresscard slot dont push the Macbook into the role of a "sub" pro machine.

The definition of pro depends on the type of professional. For an audio/composer like myself, the Macbook is just as good as the MBP, and cheaper as well.

edit: MacRumorUser beat me to it. Thanks to him/her.

LOL! Yeah i'm getting seriously sick of people saying 'its not a pro machine', dependant on the task - it is... aghhhhh

Glad theres one more smart person out there

 

[Roba]

With the kind of video card that the Mac Book has i wouldn't say that it was a good future proof buy. It will not be a notebook that you can keep for over two years plus and expect to play anything but the most basic games on.

 

[MRU]

With the kind of video card that the Mac Book has i wouldn't say that it was a good future proof buy. It will not be a notebook that you can keep for over two years plus and expect to play anything but the most basic games on.

Seriously. What computer has EVER been futureproof. It's a ridiculous concept as there is nothing technology wise that is futureproof. Integrated graphics or not, unless gaming is your thing, this laptop will be as much futureproof as any other laptop on the market...

 

[Roba]

Having actually used the Intel Integrated chip on other peoples computers I have noticed that their computers even struggled to play what i would could the most basic of games after a couple of years.
You say that games will be the only thing to suffer. That may well not be the only case. There may well be some apps that some people are specifying here that may work now just about with this chip but may struggle in two years.
You can future proof yourself to some extent in my opinion but i guess that we will have to agree to disagree on that.
For the price i think that the Mac Book is quite good value but it is only wise to consider all things before you part with your money eh?

Seriously. What computer has EVER been futureproof. It's a ridiculous concept as there is nothing technology wise that is futureproof. Integrated graphics or not, unless gaming is your thing, this laptop will be as much futureproof as any other laptop on the market...

 

[ericssonboi]

Honestly,

I think the macbook should have had MUCH better graphic cards. You don't need high graphic cards for just gaming, you have video editors and designers who require it. I was going to order a macbook if it had a good graphics card. Seeing how it does not, I'm not going to purchase one.

I'm not happy with apple right now. They need to either release a macbook pro 13.3" or a macbook with better graphics.

* 2

I'm totally thinking the same...

 

[HiRez]

I'm not happy with apple right now. They need to either release a macbook pro 13.3" or a macbook with better graphics.

Also totoally agree with that. I went into the Mac Store today and played around with the new MacBooks for about an hour and a half. It was only the Intel graphics that kept me from walking out with a black model because they are sweet in just about every other aspect. They seem quite capable for 2D graphics. The interface is snappy, scrubbing video in iMovie is fast, and I can confirm they are capable of playing back 1280x720 HD video at a full 30 fps, but for anything 3D they are completely useless. Bummer. This is the Dark Side of the Intel deal. Apple was clearly forced into accepting this far inferior graphics chip as part of the deal, and consumers will pay the price. It's especially galling because I'd be willing to pay up to $200 extra for a real, dedicated graphics chip (but I don't want a MacBook Pro). I can only hope MacOSRumors is correct about the MacBook Gamer, and that it'll come in black.

 

[MRU]

. I can only hope MacOSRumors is correct about the MacBook Gamer, and that it'll come in black.

Apple have never been bothered about gamer's, so why would they start now.
Gaming on the Mac OSX is pretty lame regardless and it's only with boot camp and XP/Vista that gaming can be seen as viable, but that's still nothing to do with apple so the chances of them releasing Gamer Mac... Slim 2 None.

 

[HiRez]

Apple have never been bothered about gamer's, so why would they start now.
Gaming on the Mac OSX is pretty lame regardless and it's only with boot camp and XP/Vista that gaming can be seen as viable, but that's still nothing to do with apple so the chances of them releasing Gamer Mac... Slim 2 None.

Well...we'll see. I'm not counting on it but some of the weirder Mac rumors over the years have come to pass, so who knows. Apple hasn't concerned themselves with a lot of things in the past...until they did. I disagree with your blanket statement that gaming is lame on OS X. For running the latest games at the highest resolutions at insane frame rates and all the effects turned up, sure. But I'm fairly happy with the performance of World of Warcraft on my now-old dual 2.0 G5 with original 64MB Radeon 9600 Pro (running at 1280x1024 with medium-ish settings). And I've seen it running on the new MacBook Pros and the Intel iMacs with Radeon X1600, the performance is very, very nice, even with all the effects cranked up (75+ fps riding a horse through Stormwind, for example).

The jury is still out on whether the new MacBooks can handle moderate gaming needs. My gut (and some early benchmarks) tell me no, but we'll see.

 

[andiwm2003]

.................................. dont buy this unless all you want to do is browse the interent, listen to music, and the casual likes

you seem to have a very limited view as to what a computer can be used for:

photoshop will run great
imovie will run great
idvd will run great
basically any 2d application will run great
all calcultions will run great
large excel tables will calculate very fast
all layout programs will run fast
even Pages will perform acceptable

there are tons of applications that are beyond internet browsing and music you know

 

[wyrmintheapple]

How about the nVidia 1100Go??

nVidia previewed at e3 to a handful of journalists the 1100Go Mobile GPU.

It supports Shader model 2.0, runs at 400Mhz, with 4 pixel pipelines, supports resolutions up to 2048x1536 at 32 bit colour, with hardware accelerated video playback and video scaling. It supports both display spanning and mirroring. It uses system RAM and dynamically allocates more texture memory as necessary.

Benchmarks show that it supports older games with no problems such as Q3A, enemy territory, and Half life 2 and UT2k4 when SM 2.0 effects are disabled.
This is however, all fake. I'm sure your first reaction was "great", but read again. The specs ARE of the GMA 950, and apart from the name, I have perfectly described the intel GMA 950.
The GPU produces no additional heat, and uses no additional power. Laptops based around this GPU had great battery life.
If Apple chose the intel chipset separately, and picked it for its low power requirements and low heat output, everyone would love it and would see why Apple used it for the MacBook. Because its part of the 945GM chipset (though it could not have been) everyone has jumped on the "integrated" wagon, believing they have been cheated by Apple just using the GPU in the chipset.
Apple Computer has been mentioned as a possibility for using this GPU in future models of the Mac Mini.

 

[HiRez]

Benchmarks show that it supports older games with no problems such as Q3A, enemy territory, and Half life 2 and UT2k4 when SM 2.0 effects are disabled.

If it supports Shader 2.0, why can't it run UT with Shader 2.0 on? And what about built-in accelerated H.264 decoding specifically? That's pretty critical for an Apple GPU right now.

 

[SC68Cal]

I love all the people demanding that the MacBook have a graphics chip in it, while demanding that the price doesn't change. Are there any laptops out there that are at the same price point with a GPU in it?

I'd venture to say no. For all of you that keep whining about graphics performance, get out. If you want to play games buy the iMac, playing games on a laptop is stupid anyway since you need a mouse to actually play, playing on a trackpad has to be one of the dumbest things you can ever do.

I'm sure that the MacBook will do most computer tasks very well, and 98% of the people who buy them will be overjoyed. Not everyone buys a computer just to play video games on.