Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
This might be irrevelant, but i've been comparing my Macbook's GMA950 versus my Dell with 8400m GS 128mb DDR3 using the game World of Warcraft. I've been booting my Macbook into WindowsXP to run WoW and in some cases the game runs better on the Macbook than my Dell does under Vista64.. Both are identical in where I have the graphics settings.. the Macbook's GMA950 is a lot more consistent and much more responsive than my Dell machine, despite the FPS being lower.. it's almost more enjoyable..

I'm posting this to say that I think the GMA950 is no slouch.. i'm continually impressed that it can handle itself so well.. All performance goes to crap on the GMA950 when you have terrain distance on max.. so I just leave it all the way down, or +1.. but higher than that it's not worth it.. it can handle all other graphic effects on maximum without hurting performance.

Even the WoW with terrain distance on lowest setting, the FPS are within 5 fps of each other in most situations between the both laptops.. and no, I do not have a driver problem on my Dell.. it's fine..

Don't get me wrong, i'd love to see the X3100 atleast make it to the next Macbook.. it's due for an update for sure.

Jay
I find GMA 950 > 8400M GS to be quite questionable.
 
Well, maybe it depends on whom you know? These people you know don't sound very knowledgeable about computers in general. You're also talking about EXISTING Mac users and we're talking about POTENTIAL Mac users. Apple already sold these 6 people a computer based on total ignorance of what they were buying (beyond it's not likely to get a virus and apparently doesn't need "techy admin stuff" (whatever that means) so why would they care about what a new Mac might have? Why would they ever care about buying a new Mac again for that matter? (Cuz it got like slow and stuff with newer software?)



I have very specific needs. I create virtual pinball games under Windows (cannot move that to OSX due to the software I'm using so I need XP one way or the other plus to run my old software occasionally). I also want to play SOME (even if not very often) newer games on occasion. That means Intel GMA 950 doesn't cut it. It doesn't mean I need a $2000+ MBP (that price range is almost unheard of on the PC these days except bleeding edge gaming systems, which the MBP and MacPro are NOT) and I regularly talk to people at work who say they like the looks of the Mac and what they hear about it, but they're "so darn expensive". I point out there are some cheaper models available and they ask about what they get for that price and when I say Intel GMA 950 integrated graphics on the MacBook and MacMini, they laugh at me. "Who'd want THAT? So you're telling me Apple is basically FORCING a real user to buy their $2k+ lines if they want to do something a $700 PC can do with no problems?" What am I going to respond with? You don't NEED to play games? You don't need to do any 3D stuff? You don't need anything MODERN?

What it comes down to is if OSX is going to be taken seriously as a cutting edge OS, they need MODERN hardware. Apple seems to go to great extremes to keep their CPUs current, but what doesn't make any sense is how they don't seem to care one bit about their GPUs and yet they STILL use it as the only REAL difference (other than screen size) between a Macbook and a Macbook Pro. If MOST Mac users really do not care about GPUs in the first place, why use it like that to force people to go to the model that costs twice as much?

Gaming is not a 'Pro' feature, so why force users to buy 'Pro' equipment just to play a modern CURRENT YEAR game? The Santa Rosa graphics are not cutting edge. They do NOT compete with the MBP, but they DO make the difference between being able to play a 3D game PERIOD in many cases or not. IMO, this creates RESENTMENT. Apple may WANT me to buy a new laptop every single year, but I don't want to do it and OSX fan or not, I will go PC only if Apple will not meet me at least halfway. Why should I start investing in OSX only commercial software if I have to worry whether my next computer will even be a Mac because of them playing games like this with hardware to force me to overspend? I can get TWO capable PCs for the price of one Mac simply because they are trying to force me to buy the MBP instead of the MB over ONE feature (graphics). That feature doesn't even mean much to a non-gamer (who doesn't need fast 3D performance).

It just seems like Apple needs to decide whom they're marketing to and for what reasons. Screen size should not determine "Pro" status, IMO. Screen size = portability factor in my book. Graphics card = gaming performance. CPU/Memory/Ports = pro features (fast/big/firewire 800, etc.). This is because CPU speed is not the limiting factor with gaming these days. GPU is almost everything.
Maybe a new keyboard is in order, I think Caps Lock keeps being activated of its own accord. :rolleyes:
Anyway, whatever  do with the new MacBook (when it is finally updated) I am pretty sure it will feature all of the updates most people have asked for. Personally I love the design and look of the current MacBook and the feel of Mac OS X. They go together perfectly, so if the change in design is a drastic one I think I might have to scour eBay and find one of these nice white models. Alu design would look like a Dell, as the MBP does. Yeuch! :p
 
This might be irrevelant, but i've been comparing my Macbook's GMA950 versus my Dell with 8400m GS 128mb DDR3 using the game World of Warcraft.

Is World of Warcraft the best example to compare performance of gaming capabilities? It's not exactly demanding by modern standards (try Doom3 or Prey with the settings turned up or something).

I've been booting my Macbook into WindowsXP to run WoW and in some cases the game runs better on the Macbook than my Dell does under Vista64.. Both are identical in where I have the graphics settings.. the Macbook's GMA950 is a lot more consistent and much more responsive than my Dell machine, despite the FPS being lower.. it's almost more enjoyable..

How would it do under XP? Vista, let alone Vista64 is still a notoriously slow and buggy operating system and does not seem to like a lot of hardware very much so-to-speak.

I'm posting this to say that I think the GMA950 is no slouch.. i'm continually

The fps numbers I've seen in hardware reviews of Macs using such dated engines as Unreal Tournament in comparison to iMacs and the MacBookPro and Mac Pro suggest otherwise to me. Some newer games don't even support it at all.
 
Maybe a new keyboard is in order, I think Caps Lock keeps being activated of its own accord. :rolleyes:
Anyway, whatever  do with the new MacBook (when it is finally updated) I am pretty sure it will feature all of the updates most people have asked for. Personally I love the design and look of the current MacBook and the feel of Mac OS X. They go together perfectly, so if the change in design is a drastic one I think I might have to scour eBay and find one of these nice white models. Alu design would look like a Dell, as the MBP does. Yeuch! :p

Try using <colon>apple<colon> instead of the Apple character.

It will appear like this :apple:, instead of a square box.
 
Try using <colon>apple<colon> instead of the Apple character.

It will appear like this :apple:, instead of a square box.
Ok sorry about that, new to the forum. Waiting for news on the new MacBooks, but as I said before I might consider just grabbing one of the current mid-range ones because I just love the white. But then everything being pure speculation at the moment is making me hold back. If there is one thing about being an :apple: customer that annoys me it has to be the secrecy behind every update of a product (I bought a 30Gb iPod Video about two weeks before they released the iPod Touch and Classic)
 
Ok sorry about that, new to the forum. Waiting for news on the new MacBooks, but as I said before I might consider just grabbing one of the current mid-range ones because I just love the white. But then everything being pure speculation at the moment is making me hold back. If there is one thing about being an :apple: customer that annoys me it has to be the secrecy behind every update of a product (I bought a 30Gb iPod Video about two weeks before they released the iPod Touch and Classic)
Well the reason for MacRumors is to help get the best value from your Apple purchases.
 
Well the reason for MacRumors is to help get the best value from your Apple purchases.

Good point, and that's exactly why MacRumors has been open in one of my Safari tabs being refreshed every minute or so for the past week ;) Don't want another calamity like that one!

As many other previous posters have said the past few days, I'm going to have to be very patient. But waiting for this and Leopard is almost driving me insane! Oh well, here's hoping for SR MacBooks very soon! :cool:

Thanks Eidorian and Floptical :)

Juxtaposer
 
Oh nice one! Thanks for that! :D
Sorry about that, as I said before, I'm new to the forums and probably about as ignorant as they come! :p
Thanks Everyone

Before the Forum Spy, I checked the forums as fast as I could press refresh...If you have multiple websites you often check, there are a few options:Vienna is my favourite free solution for reading RSS feeds, but Newsfire is good if you're willing to pay...
 
Well, maybe it depends on whom you know? These people you know don't sound very knowledgeable about computers in general. You're also talking about EXISTING Mac users and we're talking about POTENTIAL Mac users. Apple already sold these 6 people a computer based on total ignorance of what they were buying (beyond it's not likely to get a virus and apparently doesn't need "techy admin stuff" (whatever that means) so why would they care about what a new Mac might have? Why would they ever care about buying a new Mac again for that matter? (Cuz it got like slow and stuff with newer software?)

That would be why I used the word "most" when I said most people just want a computer that works. And no, they would not be looking to upgrade but you're missing the point. My point was that they did not care about it when they first bought it, so most people will not care about the graphics card when they switch as well.

Also, let me explain "techy admin stuff" since you dont understand:

"techy" = Technical
"admin" = Administrative
"stuff" = procedures

So.. to simplify.. (pay attention now).. Most people want a computer that just works. They do not want to have to worry about the technical complexities of a windows based pc such as crapware that comes with new pc's, virus and spyware updates, add/remove programs etc... They want to turn it on and go, and most of the time that just involves surfing the net, email, playing vids, music, pictures, and other trivial stuff. That sir, is what MOST users want.
 
That would be why I used the word "most" when I said most people just want a computer that works. And no, they would not be looking to upgrade but you're missing the point. My point was that they did not care about it when they first bought it, so most people will not care about the graphics card when they switch as well.

Also, let me explain "techy admin stuff" since you dont understand:

"techy" = Technical
"admin" = Administrative
"stuff" = procedures

So.. to simplify.. (pay attention now).. Most people want a computer that just works. They do not want to have to worry about the technical complexities of a windows based pc such as crapware that comes with new pc's, virus and spyware updates, add/remove programs etc... They want to turn it on and go, and most of the time that just involves surfing the net, email, playing vids, music, pictures, and other trivial stuff. That sir, is what MOST users want.
If they want a computer that just works, it should include the hardware in order for their applications to just work. This includes gaming as well. I don't expect enthusiast level hardware but integrated solutions can barely handle a "just works" scenario.

I still remember the line of people coming to me trying to get Lego Star Wars to work on there brand new Dell machines.
 
If they want a computer that just works, it should include the hardware in order for their applications to just work. This includes gaming as well.

Why do you think that what YOU want is what everyone else wants? Am I speaking Greek? Jesus H man... most people dont care about games. Most people that I know who switched from Windows just wanted internet, email, music, pictures, and to not have to worry about viruses. Please re-read the previous sentence until you actually understand it because Im getting tired of repeating myself.
 
Why do you think that what YOU want is what everyone else wants? Am I speaking Greek? Jesus H man... most people dont care about games. Most people that I know who switched from Windows just wanted internet, email, music, pictures, and to not have to worry about viruses. Please re-read the previous sentence until you actually understand it because Im getting tired of repeating myself.
I don't get gamers that come to me when their computers can't handle 3D work. I get parents, teachers, and students

It's hard enough to explain to them that their shine new Mac or even Dell can't play a simple modern 3D game well if at all.
 
I don't get gamers that come to me when their computers can't handle 3D work. I get parents, teachers, and students

It's hard enough to explain to them that their shine new Mac or even Dell can't play a simple modern 3D game well if at all.

First of all, you referenced "games" in your last post.

Second, what 3d work are you referring to? because if its anything graphically taxing, well... then they should know what the hell they are buying.

and third, if students and teachers keep coming to you, why are Macbooks SO popular on college campuses?
 
First of all, you referenced "games" in your last post.
I'm sure you consider Lego Star Wars to have as large of a following as Supreme Commander and be as demanding on hardware.

Second, what 3d work are you referring to? because if its anything graphically taxing, well... then they should know what the hell they are buying.
But it's supposed to just work! I spent so much money on my new computer. It should be able to do anything!

I'm referring to running casual 3D games. FPS and RTS are not the only ones. Lets not get into CAD/CAM or other modeling. I whole can of worms can be brought up on the lack of a mobile workstation graphics solution for Macs.

and third, if students and teachers keep coming to you, why are Macbooks SO popular on college campuses?
Everything works until it comes to 3D power. Just because you're in college doesn't mean you're an expert on computer technology. My MUG has several members that outright admit they bought a Mac since they know nothing about computers.
 
I'm sure you consider Lego Star Wars to have as large of a following as Supreme Commander and be as demanding on hardware.

But it's supposed to just work! I spent so much money on my new computer. It should be able to do anything!

I'm referring to running casual 3D games. FPS and RTS are not the only ones. Lets not get into CAD/CAM or other modeling.

Everything works until it comes to 3D power. Just because you're in college doesn't mean you're an expert on computer technology. My MUG has several members that outright admit they bought a Mac since they know nothing about computers.

Oh.... my.... god.... Im at a loss for words.....

ok... lets try this again. MOST PEOPLE SWITCHING TO A MAC DO NOT CARE ABOUT $^%&#(@ GAMES!!!!! Get it???? Geez

Also, No.. your computer should not be able to do "anything". If I spend $350,000 on a Ferrari should it be able to tow a camper? No.
 
Oh.... my.... god.... Im at a loss for words.....

ok... lets try this again. MOST PEOPLE SWITCHING TO A MAC DO NOT CARE ABOUT $^%&#(@ GAMES!!!!! Get it???? Geez

Also, No.. your computer should not be able to do "anything". If I spend $350,000 on a Ferrari should it be able to tow a camper? No.
There there's no need to include any sort of discrete graphics solution unless you're buying a Pro line of hardware?

The masses will never need it?

Why does Apple spend so much on getting some of the fastest mobile processors then?
 
I really really really hope they upgrade the graphics. At least to a cheap 128mb. Its the biggest set back at the moment. The processors are miles ahead already.

The days of dedicated GPU on a low-end Mac are over. As of Intel-era, there will not be a dedicated GPU on anything but PRO line of computers. Integrated chip may evolve over time, but graphics on a non-pro Mac will continue to suck.
 
Damn, if it's true, it means I should hold off buying a new MacBook now. Which is bad.

Any confirmations of this yet?
 
The vast majority of Macbook users don't care about 3D performance. They probably don't even know what a video card/controller is

Yep, but sadly not even everyone responsible for IT purchases truly know about technology. I used to love that every Apple had a dedicated GPU so no matter what you bought had a crisp and clear image. Not anymore.

A certain finnish publishing house keeps buying MacBooks because they're cheap. They keep wondering why the image is fuzzy on their computers. Once I was there troubleshooting their problems and we compared image between my MBP and their MB's, and what a difference! MacBooks are so much softer even when using external display, which puts the blame on GPU (or lack of). I had to explain what a dedicated GPU does to their IT manager and only seeing the situation by himself made him convinced.

Anyway, currently I cannot recommend anything but Pro line computers (even though I surely recommend anything Apple if a PC is an option for somebody).
 
Oh.... my.... god.... Im at a loss for words.....

ok... lets try this again. MOST PEOPLE SWITCHING TO A MAC DO NOT CARE ABOUT $^%&#(@ GAMES!!!!! Get it???? Geez

Also, No.. your computer should not be able to do "anything". If I spend $350,000 on a Ferrari should it be able to tow a camper? No.

Can't quite believe that somebody's getting so stressed over a simple discussion. I think it's fair to say that the integrated graphics are fine for low-end switchers (Mac Mini owners like myself) but what Eidorian is saying is that when it comes to the best selling model (MacBook) they should seriously consider at least a slight update. I find that my Mini will do most things that I ask of it (e-mail, surfing, entertainment, and music editing via Logic) but I now want a faster, upgradeable and more portable solution. The main reason that I want this is due to a lot of recent trouble with multi-tasking - sorry to say but the Mini just doesn't cut it anymore. Once I have the MacBook, then I will also be able to open the Mini to upgrade the RAM without worrying about damaging it and not being able to access the internet/record music.
As we are all aware, the Mac ethos is 'it just works', but at the moment that doesn't seem to cut it when the only games or 3d apps you can use are over 2 years old. If your friends only want a computer that does e-mail/surfing/entertainment then may I suggest a G4 iMac or the equivalent. That machine also 'just works' as it will still run OS X. And the 'just works' idea is based entirely around how easy it is to do anything using OS X. Don't get me wrong, the Mini is a great switchers machine, but the MacBook (At over twice the price in the UK at least) should at least have a few modern additions that allow it to compete with similarly priced PC Notebooks. I'm just going to be patient and see what Mr Jobs has in store.

Juxtaposer

P.S - regarding the Ferrari, I was just out for a drive and saw a Ferrari owner towing a caravan - should I give him a slap for you?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.