MacBook Pro: 9600M GT w/ 256MB Video Performance? Is it really "better"?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Chantiedas, Jun 10, 2009.

  1. Chantiedas macrumors newbie

    Chantiedas

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #1
    Hi guys :cool:

    I am looking to purchase one of the new Mac Book Pro and wanted to get your thoughts. I am a graphic designer so I use Adobe products a lot (if that gives any indication of my usage.)

    As far as my budget goes, my original plan was to get the 15-inch 2.53GHz Mac Book Pro and upgrade to a 320GB Hard Drive for a extra $50.

    However, I am torn because the 15-inch 2.66GHz Model comes with the the 320GB I want and the 9600M GT with 256MB for increase graphic performance.

    I would rather save the $250 if I can... so I ask.... Is the 9600M GT with 256MB really worth the extra money? Is NVIDIA GeForce 9400M just as good alone? How much better is having the 9600M GT with 256MB? What would you guys suggest?

    Thanks in advance for your thoughts! Have a great day!:D
     
  2. sportsfanMAW macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    #2
    If your a graphic designer then yes you need the 9600 GT. Integrated graphics just won't cut it for you.
     
  3. Chantiedas thread starter macrumors newbie

    Chantiedas

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Location:
    New York, New York
  4. stainlessliquid macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    #4
    why? Hes a graphic designer, not 3d artist. The 9400 is plenty fast enough for Adobe stuff.

    The real question is if Open CL is actually going to help later, and if anything is actually going to use it.
     
  5. Pommy macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    #5
    Most graphics applications (like Photoshop) are not GPU-intensive -- they're CPU intensive.

    A better graphics card would be useful if you do 3D work (modeling, rendering, blah), or if you play games. Although the 9600M GT isn't all that great in the grand scheme of video cards anyways.
     
  6. jhsfosho macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Location:
    Omaha, Nebraska
    #6
    This helps my decision to go from my 128 mb graphics to the integrated graphics of the 13'' mbp. I don't run games on my laptop, thats what the 360 is for.
     
  7. comedine macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    #7
    This makes for interesting reading.

    So, my late 2007 MBP with a GeForce 8600M GT with 512MB RAM which, on paper, appears 'better'.

    How does it compare with the 2.66GHz with its 9400 and 9600 with 'only' 256 of RAM?
     
  8. frou macrumors regular

    frou

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    #8
    This is why you don't take drive-by advice on the internet seriously
     
  9. picklesmand macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    #9
    thank you. there's just so much misinformation out there. for 95% of tasks, all the dedicated graphics card is doing is eating your battery life and making your machine run a lot hotter. it works for 3D optimization only, and even then as shown in the original october 2008 keynote, the 9400M is no slouch. And openCL, when it does come out, and is supported by mainstream software (at least a year, probably later) the 9400M can be used.

    If you're doing 3D gaming, get the 9600M. If not, up to you.
     
  10. ACiB708 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    #10
    Look, if you are going to do 3D artist work, then definitely get the one with the 9600M GT, but if you are going to mainly use say dreamweaver CS4, Fireworks CS4, etc then you are better off with only the 9400M integrated, and since Snow Leopard will have OpenCL, the 9400M will help the task with the Adobe suit nicely
     
  11. John89 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2008
    Location:
    Scotland
    #11
    The 9400m is a very capable chip, it will surprise you! For Adobe products, I would just get that and max out your ram. No need for the 9600mGT unless its 3d work

    John
     
  12. John89 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2008
    Location:
    Scotland
  13. aznguyen316 macrumors 68020

    aznguyen316

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    #13
    3D yes, I've seen benchmarks for games and 9600GT nearly doubles the 9400m in framerate at times. but yeah.. not really important to the OP haha
     
  14. Chantiedas thread starter macrumors newbie

    Chantiedas

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #14
    wow thats pretty close.... thanks everyone for your input!!! ;)
     
  15. sportsfanMAW macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    #15
    wow I stand corrected! Sorry :(
     
  16. Chantiedas thread starter macrumors newbie

    Chantiedas

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #16
    No worries sportsfanMAW :cool:

    Thanks for your input!!!
     
  17. John89 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2008
    Location:
    Scotland
    #17
    Dont be sorry...


    ...just send me some money:D
     
  18. modernmagic macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2003
    #18
    I just got off the phone with an Apple rep. Here is what she told me:

    1. the 9400 and 9600 will be used simultaneously for processing and display on the internal display.
    2. the 9400 will be used for the external Mini Display Port.
    3. The 9600 can be turned off.
    4. "Memory available to Mac OS X may vary depending on graphics needs. Minimum graphics memory usage is 256MB." The 9600 would reduce the main memory usage and therefore allow more memory for the OS.
     
  19. Nano2k macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Location:
    Europe
    #19
    I have the MBP 15 with the 9600 and when its activated, the comp gets really hot even just watching videos, no doubt some people complain about it crashing in their games.

    I think I might have felt that the system was slightly more responsive with the 9600GT running but I'm not even sure, probably an impression.

    No point in getting it unless you really need 3D for rendering or games.
     
  20. whats.the.story macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    #20
    does this mean...?

    does this mean that the integrated 9400M is absolutely no good for games?
    I'm only planning on running NFS most wanted/ Carbon... maybe some COD

    I'm doing heaps of graphic work at school and from what i've heard the 9400M will be fine for that, but is it worth the extra $400 aussie for a bigger drive,
    a slightly faster processor and another graphics card?
    can the 2nd graphics card be put in later on if i choose to get the 2.53 with
    only the 9400M?
     
  21. melman101 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    #21
    Yes, the 9400M plays games but no where near as well as the 9600GT. You can NOT add the 2nd graphics card if you buy the model only with the 9400M. Hope that helps.
     
  22. melman101 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    #22
    1. I don't believe this to be true. It's either the 9400M is on or the 9600GT is on. Not both at the same time.
    2. No, I don't think so. Whatever card is on, that's the card that will be used.
    3. See 1.
    4. I don't understand what she means by this statement.

    Hope that helps.
     
  23. Sneakz macrumors 65816

    Sneakz

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    #23
    ^ The 9400M and 9600M GT run at the same time if the 9600M GT is used. Chipset design doesn't allow for it to be turned off. 9400M is no longer the active card doing rendering and output to the display though.
     
  24. iLog.Genius macrumors 601

    iLog.Genius

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #24
    Just to add more to post above:

    1. They will NOT be used simultaneously, you're either running the 9400M or 9600M GT.

    2. The Mini DisplayPort will be powered by whatever GPU you have set, either the 9400M or 9600M GT. One GPU does not control the Mini DisplayPort.

    3. I guess you can say it can be "turned off" - when you're using the 9400M.

    4. It wouldn't be a minimum. If you have a model with 256MB of video memory, that would be the maximum amount of memory THAT GPU can use and will take from system RAM if you're using the 9400M. If you're using the 9600M GT (256 or 512MB), it has it's own memory and won't take from RAM so you would have more RAM free. I guess the rep whom you spoke to should've been a bit more clearer.

    EDIT

    I guess that makes technical sense but it seems like the poster thinks that both are being used at the same time which offers more performance? Both would be on but won't be active, making it not really working simultaneously but would be on at the same time which is a little misleading.
     
  25. zorahk macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Location:
    North Korea

Share This Page