Of course the low end gets shafted
aaaaaaaw.......
Doesn't paying $1000 for a low-end MacBook and $700 for a Mini with Intel Graphics give you "The Warm and Fuzzies"?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
NVIDIA Exits Chipset Business for Good? Apple to Continue to Use Old NVIDIA Chipsets
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
aaaaaaaw.......
Doesn't paying $1000 for a low-end MacBook and $700 for a Mini with Intel Graphics give you "The Warm and Fuzzies"?
i agree with this, and gpus are excellent for the money as their cpu as well
the 68xx series of gpus are more than fast enough to hold their own for the price, the only thing AMD sucks at is programs that require Physx, but i dont think anything on OSX uses that so Apple users wont even see the diffrence
another thing is maybe Optimus, AMD to my knowledge has power xpress but im not sure if its as intelligent as optimus
however i dont think OSX can use either of those technologies anyways.
brands mean absolutely NOTHING to me, nobody makes their own stuff, nobody can call anything their own, i go purely by performance numbers and the dollar value.
if Asus can pull off a faster ATi card than Sapphire, then ill get Asus if its approx the same price.
also i guess the time of release is important too, if i want something right away ill get whoever has the product to match my needs. (if archos can pull an android tablet out first with a 1+Ghz cpu, ill buy it over a viewsonic tablet, i really need one for a christmas present, i dont really care who makes it as long as its 1080p capable and has HDMI out, even if its mini or micro HDMI)
and if i have alot of choices i guess warranty and comes into play.
i have all brands of computer parts in my house
Asus
evga
xfx
sapphire
PNY
samsung
acer
etc
etc
etc
Don't the 15" and 17" MBPs use Optimus? Or is it just a similar technology that does the same thing, but under a different name?
I guess I'm more asking what you've had better experience with. I'm currently building a PC tower as there will never be a comparable Mac on which to game with.
aaaaaaaw.......
Doesn't paying $1000 for a low-end MacBook and $700 for a Mini with Intel Graphics give you "The Warm and Fuzzies"?
Even paying $300 for Intel graphics makes me want to vomit.
Though I suppose I'm fine with a Netbook with Intel Graphics. It's not like I'm going to be doing heavy-duty gaming or editing on the thing anyway. On a full sized laptop though, I'd definitely vomit.
Last edited:
yeah they do now i just looked it up, automatic switching came out half way through this year. before i think you had to log off.
i technically havent had any failures with any PC components except for 1 (which i think a brownout killed the board, not a defect of the manufacture)
XFX cheap garbage mobo with an HDMI out.
everything else is either still working overclocked, or sold off and replaced with faster stuff.
for mobos i generally only get eVGA and Asus, but my HTPC has a Gigabyte mobo which is working great, it has too many USB Ports but thats ok (12x)
for video cards, i generally get Asus, eVGA, or XFX, all of them worked really well, the sapphire card i used in the guest pc is still working,
ram i usually get OCZ, Crucial, Corsair or Gskill (for cheap builds), only 1 defective stick of ram from the hundreds ive used, but i think i shocked the stick when i took it out
aaaaaaaw.......
Doesn't paying $1000 for a low-end MacBook and $700 for a Mini with Intel Graphics give you "The Warm and Fuzzies"?
Cue the Darth Vader NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!
I'll hold judgement, maybe they will surprise me/us and have a nice config. Doubt Nvidia really knows their plans.
Okay, that's pretty much what I've done so far too. Though I bought an MSI board, but only on MaximumPC's recommendation of it being the best AMD 890FX board on the market.
No. See the current iMacs and Mac Pros as well as the last revision of both models. Also see the first two revs of MacBook Pro, and the first four revs of Intel iMac.
I cannot see them going AMD at all. The drivers are so much better ( especially with Linux which essentially OSX is based off ) with nVidia, they also have optimus technology which AMD currently has no answer to. Not only that but nVidia have finally got some massive sales of the Tegra 2 platform.
I see the future for Macbook 13 and Airs as Tegra 2 based with Arm processors. ARM is coming on in leaps and bounds and will eventually be the de-facto standard for all sub 15" laptops due to performance, cost and battery life.
I see the future for Macbook 13 and Airs as Tegra 2 based with Arm processors. ARM is coming on in leaps and bounds and will eventually be the de-facto standard for all sub 15" laptops due to performance, cost and battery life.
"Most Mac mini and white MacBook customers could care less whether they have a Core i3 or a Core 2 inside. Most of them don't even know what that stuff means."
Really?
Yes. Those who know or care about the difference between the two processors AND who are in the market for either of THOSE TWO machines (not necessarily any others) tend to be in the minority of customers for those two products. This would also explain why the white MacBook doesn't have a FireWire port. You tell them "it doesn't have a FireWire port", they say "What's that?" Don't believe me, test it out. Find people in the market for those machines and ask them if they'd be better off with an i3. I guarantee you they won't know what the hell it is.
While NVIDIA's drivers are more compatible, ATI (AMD) is quicker to produce Mac drivers and is more cooperative when working with Apple. When Steam came out, AMD's drivers were out well before NVIDIA's.
Unfortunately, none of your software will run....
I really doubt it - since no Windows 7 or Apple OSX software would run on a Tegra system.
I really doubt it - since no Windows 7 or Apple OSX software would run on a Tegra system.
So where exactly is the problem? Apple will use the IGP of the new Sandy Bridge processors and a discrete graphic card for all Pro Models and call it a day. Don't tell me the 320M is/was sooo much faster compared to the Sandy Bridge IGP that anyone would notice.
Besides why try adding another IGP somehow if you already get one with your main CPU?
What I am more concerned off is Apple opting to run only Core i5 Dual Cores vice Core i7 Quad Cores in their new MacBook Pros. That would be a huge deal breaker for me.
Also I hope they still keep the normal 2,5" harddrive bay despite their new flash sticks on the MacBook Air. I haven't seen any comparative benchmarks but it would bet that a discrete SSD will be much faster then those sticks on in the MacBook Air.
Besides why try adding another IGP somehow if you already get one with your main CPU?
What I am more concerned off is Apple opting to run only Core i5 Dual Cores vice Core i7 Quad Cores in their new MacBook Pros. That would be a huge deal breaker for me.
Also I hope they still keep the normal 2,5" harddrive bay despite their new flash sticks on the MacBook Air. I haven't seen any comparative benchmarks but it would bet that a discrete SSD will be much faster then those sticks on in the MacBook Air.
ATI drivers have always been sub-par - few updates and always with bugs. Anyone remember the banding on horses in Oblivion?
nVidia, however, have always updated their drivers regularly with performance improvements, and bundled other technologies such as CUDA in with them.
At least that was my experience a couple of years ago. Things may be different now ATI are AMD but still, on track record, I'd take nVidia over ATI any day. And that's even before considering AMD's CPU offering *shudder*
Macbook minus SuperDrive plus Intel with LightPeak plus Dedicated nVidia graphics chip = Win.
Edit: mix up with names - alliteration has never been my strong point!
nVidia, however, have always updated their drivers regularly with performance improvements, and bundled other technologies such as CUDA in with them.
At least that was my experience a couple of years ago. Things may be different now ATI are AMD but still, on track record, I'd take nVidia over ATI any day. And that's even before considering AMD's CPU offering *shudder*
Macbook minus SuperDrive plus Intel with LightPeak plus Dedicated nVidia graphics chip = Win.
Edit: mix up with names - alliteration has never been my strong point!
Last edited:
Most reports that I've heard say that the 320M beats the crap out of Sandy Bridge's IGP. Though they could be wrong, I suppose. I'm open to anything. Customers of the Mac mini and white MacBook (and probably the MacBook Air too) wouldn't care. Customers of the 13" MacBook Pro might have a problem, but Apple could probably discontinue it and differ its customer base to either the 13" Air or the 15" Pro.
Agreed. Though, I'm pretty sure the thinness is the answer as to why we don't have quad-core i5/i7s in the 15 and 17" MBPs.
If you've followed the Steam for Mac release, you'd know that ATI was far more cooperative with drivers than NVIDIA was. It was quite annoying for those who were with recent model NVIDIA-based Macs. Those with ATI based Macs had very little downtime.
Man am I lucky in getting my Mac Mini during Black Friday. It displays on my HDTV like a dream! Even HD content previews & .mkv files.
I am currently in the market for a macbook white or pro 13 and I definitely know what an i3 is and know the tradeoffs of not having a faster processor. However, most people that buy a lower-end computer usually do so for portability or price. I don't have the money to spend on a higher-end pro with more discrete graphics chips and CPUs, so I am forced to sacrifice