Nvidia Geforce 330M GT

[JamesGorman]

How powerful is the card really? Is it the most powerful card ever in the Macbooks? I am under the impression it is. But is it really a decent card? I see everyone knocking it and what not, but if your not doing any serious gaming, is there really anything wrong with it?

 

[alust2013]

It is the most powerful that they have put in a MBP, and it's midrange. It's not so much for heavy gaming, and neither are Macs really.

 

[JamesGorman]

It is the most powerful that they have put in a MBP, and it's midrange. It's not so much for heavy gaming, and neither are Macs really.

Fair enough, I would never consider a mac for heavy gaming anyway. Actually to be honest Id never consider any kind of computer for gaming. Im a console guy. The only game I play on my mac is Age Of Empires, and with everything turned way up, it handles it like a champ.

 

[tmagman]

Like many other feeds and people will say- Macs are not 'gaming' computers. There's really two types of graphics cards- gaming cards and workhorse cards. I think its safe to say that the 330M is more of a workhorse, designed to not to handle gaming and the rendering of that sort of graphics, but rather design type operations (i.e. video, 3D modelling, digital graphics and such)- you get the idea. Its like comparing a nvidia Quadro to a GTX-580- they have different purposes- a GTX 580 won't handle the 3D rendering and development that someone would do with a Quadro, and a Quadro is a terrible gaming card. The comparison may not be perfect with those two cards, but the concept is sound.

To be honest for the workhorse type of activities the 330 is a great card. I run a lot of intense graphics rendering operations and it handles like a beast.

Just my two cents- people will probably disagree with me on some of my points, but whatever floats your boat!

 

[JamesGorman]

Like many other feeds and people will say- Macs are not 'gaming' computers. There's really two types of graphics cards- gaming cards and workhorse cards. I think its safe to say that the 330M is more of a workhorse, designed to not to handle gaming and the rendering of that sort of graphics, but rather design type operations (i.e. video, 3D modelling, digital graphics and such)- you get the idea. Its like comparing a nvidia Quadro to a GTX-580- they have different purposes- a GTX 580 won't handle the 3D rendering and development that someone would do with a Quadro, and a Quadro is a terrible gaming card. The comparison may not be perfect with those two cards, but the concept is sound.

To be honest for the workhorse type of activities the 330 is a great card. I run a lot of intense graphics rendering operations and it handles like a beast.

Just my two cents- people will probably disagree with me on some of my points, but whatever floats your boat!

That makes sense to me. Anything I've done in any 3d applications has run without any hiccups whatsoever. I never really though of it that way.

 

[LinkMx]

Depends on what games you play, I've played Modern Warfare 2, Left 4 Dead 2 and Batman: AS in high settings (on windows) without any problem, newer and future games probably won't play as fine as these but still it's a pretty decent card for gaming.

 

[JamesGorman]

Depends on what games you play, I've played Modern Warfare 2, Left 4 Dead 2 and Batman: AS in high settings (on windows) without any problem, newer and future games probably won't play as fine as these but still it's a pretty decent card for gaming.

Thats pretty interesting. I have been wanting to try Left 4 Dead but didn't know if it was worth the download.

 

[engaged44]

yeah it could theoretically run some of the most powerful pc games out there like crisis or metro 2033.

it CAN run metro 2033 (which is probably the most cpu intensive game out there) but if you played it it would have to be on medium-low settings.


i run call of duty 2 on windows 7 with the highest settings and it runs fine. usually gets like 50-70 fps.

 

[The-Pro]

The GT 330M is a pretty good card. Definitely the best in the MBP's so far. Benchmarks are pretty good, partly better then the GT 335M.

One thing with the 330M in the MBP is that they are underclocked. The windows version runs at 575Mhz clock speed, mac only at 500 Mhz. This does reduce performance like 8% or somethin.

Its def. a good enough card for anyone, people who do hardcore gaming shouldnt get a MBP in the first place Any normal user and maybe 3D users will get good performance.

 

[neondrgns]

um the 330m is a piece of a crap, I dont know what the guy above me is talking about. Call of duty 2 came out 6 years ago. That is forever and a day ago in technology time. Left 4 dead 2, runs on medium low settings...and hey guess what else ran it on medium settings, my old dell xps 1210 with a Nvidia Go 7400 card...which is what like 4 or 5 graphics card generations old?

 

[grahamnp]

There's really two types of graphics cards- gaming cards and workhorse cards. I think its safe to say that the 330M is more of a workhorse, designed to not to handle gaming and the rendering of that sort of graphics, but rather design type operations

Sorry, but this is not true. Nvidia's mobile GPU line is split into two: Geforce cards and the Quadros as you pointed out. The "workhorse" cards are the Quadros and the Geforce cards are the consumer oriented ones. The is physically little or no difference between the two apart from branding and on the PC notebooks, the drivers. The 330m is a midrange consumer card, and was not designed to be any less proficient at gaming or with any modelling/design speciality. If it's poor at gaming, that's because the card is simply not up to scratch.

 

[henrikrox]

anyone care to guess what the next kind of gpu the macbook pro will get?

And what you will see in a peformance increase over the 330m

 

[wct097]

Sorry, but this is not true. Nvidia's mobile GPU line is split into two: Geforce cards and the Quadros as you pointed out. The "workhorse" cards are the Quadros and the Geforce cards are the consumer oriented ones. The is physically little or no difference between the two apart from branding and on the PC notebooks, the drivers. The 330m is a midrange consumer card, and was not designed to be any less proficient at gaming or with any modelling/design speciality. If it's poor at gaming, that's because the card is simply not up to scratch.

But, but, how is that possible? Everyone knows that MBPs are used exclusively by people for graphics and complex design work. Just about every MBP owner justifies their purchase with the pro video rendering that they have to do in their studio!

 

[JamesGorman]

um the 330m is a piece of a crap, I dont know what the guy above me is talking about. Call of duty 2 came out 6 years ago. That is forever and a day ago in technology time. Left 4 dead 2, runs on medium low settings...and hey guess what else ran it on medium settings, my old dell xps 1210 with a Nvidia Go 7400 card...which is what like 4 or 5 graphics card generations old?

While I appreciate you opinion, It seems that you are in the minority. Everyone else seems to be backing the card, and for what Ive used it for it has been more than capable.

 

[mark28]

um the 330m is a piece of a crap, I dont know what the guy above me is talking about. Call of duty 2 came out 6 years ago. That is forever and a day ago in technology time. Left 4 dead 2, runs on medium low settings...and hey guess what else ran it on medium settings, my old dell xps 1210 with a Nvidia Go 7400 card...which is what like 4 or 5 graphics card generations old?

Haha. Take a look at a Macbook pro and a laptop that has a 480m, it's much thinner.

And the hilarious part is, the laptop that has a 480m can't run Crysis maxed out.

If you think the 330m is crap, get a desktop.

Btw, the 330m is 4 times faster than the Nvidia Go 7400.

 

[dusk007]

Quadro cards are based on the same chips sometimes they are identical chips and sometimes they offer more double precision and some RAS feature and stuff that any consumer wouldn't give ****** about.
They have different Bios and a different BIOS and are easily 3 times as expensive compared to the very same consumer gforce chip. AFAIK is the Quadro BIOS much more OpenGL optimized. Compared to a Geforce they show poor directX but very good OpenGL performance.

You can find them in Dell Latitude and other CAD oriented Notebooks.

The 330M is a Geforce cheap consumer part. The reason people don't complain is because for what most people work with it is really not that important and the few that really need power both usually don't expect it from their MBP and have a Mac Pro at home anyway.

The 330M is good enough for a lot of things but it is definitely only one of the worse mainstream Consumer GPUs and has nothing to do with workstation graphic cards. And if you ask why don't they use Quadro if they are better. Just look at the prices of those cards and unless you do CAD and stuff you don't really need them either. Most people do fine with just about any GPU and usually only measure it by gaming performance in which the Quadro is even worse than Geforce.

 

[mark28]

Quadro cards are based on the same chips sometimes they are identical chips and sometimes they offer more double precision and some RAS feature and stuff that any consumer wouldn't give ****** about.
They have different Bios and a different BIOS and are easily 3 times as expensive compared to the very same consumer gforce chip. AFAIK is the Quadro BIOS much more OpenGL optimized. Compared to a Geforce they show poor directX but very good OpenGL performance.

You can find them in Dell Latitude and other CAD oriented Notebooks.

The 330M is a Geforce cheap consumer part. The reason people don't complain is because for what most people work with it is really not that important and the few that really need power both usually don't expect it from their MBP and have a Mac Pro at home anyway.

The 330M is good enough for a lot of things but it is definitely only one of the worse mainstream Consumer GPUs and has nothing to do with workstation graphic cards. And if you ask why don't they use Quadro if they are better. Just look at the prices of those cards and unless you do CAD and stuff you don't really need them either. Most people do fine with just about any GPU and usually only measure it by gaming performance in which the Quadro is even worse than Geforce.

You can turn a geforce card into a Quadro if you know what you are doing. The difference is drivers and support mainly.

 

[LinkMx]

um the 330m is a piece of a crap, I dont know what the guy above me is talking about. Call of duty 2 came out 6 years ago. That is forever and a day ago in technology time. Left 4 dead 2, runs on medium low settings...and hey guess what else ran it on medium settings, my old dell xps 1210 with a Nvidia Go 7400 card...which is what like 4 or 5 graphics card generations old?

On windows 7 I've run L4D2 with everything on high, as well as Modern Warfare 2, Batman Arkham Asylum and Resident Evil 5.

On Mac I run L4D2 on medium/high, nothing on low.

 

[neondrgns]

Haha. Take a look at a Macbook pro and a laptop that has a 480m, it's much thinner.

And the hilarious part is, the laptop that has a 480m can't run Crysis maxed out.

If you think the 330m is crap, get a desktop.

Btw, the 330m is 4 times faster than the Nvidia Go 7400.

way to show you have no knowledge of graphics cards.
there are so many things wrong with your statements its ridiculous.
1.) he asked about graphics performance, not about how thin the macbook pro is, that is like saying how fast can this car go 0-60? and you say,THIS CAR IS SUPER SHINY
2.) Crysis isn't a good benchmark, it is the benchmark for people who don't know anything about graphics cards. the top of the notebook graphics card (the GTX 480m SLI) runs Crysis at Ultra settings at 30fps, which is on the low end of acceptable.
3.) Did I say I don't have a deskptop? Am I the opening post? Can you read? The answer to all three is NO.
4.) There is another guy who was saying he plays everything like L4D2 etc. on high. This is a stupid statement as no one knows what resolution he is playing at. I can run anything on high and ultra if the screen is small enough. If my screen is 2 inches big I bet I can run crysis on Ultra. Anyone who wants to do any real type of gaming will not be using the laptop screen/keyboard/and trackpad. My monitor resolution is 2048x1152, I like to play games at 1600x900. 1600x900 is barely acceptable for a 21" monitor. 1600x900 also basically limits settings to medium-low settings.
5.) What do you mean 4x faster than the go 7400? What are you talking about? What are you even comparing? You just make yourself look uneducated about this subject. The core speed difference between the 7400 and the 330m is 25 mhz, the only major difference is the number of pipelines, but the more pipelines doesnt necessarily mean anything. The GTX 480m SLI has 704 pipelines. The 330m has 48 pipelines. Is the 480m 15X faster than the 330M?
LETS LOOK AT THIS EXAMPLE: the game Doom 3 runs on the 330m on med settings at 203 fps, the go 7400 runs FEAR at 70 FPS. You will not notice a difference if you play the same game on both systems. It doesnt matter how many fps it is after a certain point cause your eyes can't process the difference. FILMS/MOVIES RUN AT 24 FPS.

The majority of opinions on this site are made by people like you who don't know what they are talking about, repeating what they read by another guy who doesn't know what they are talking about.

See site below for an actual idea of what the graphics card is like. Also be wary that all the benchmarks that show fps have * signs next to them. Saying what is actually playable. Example: Starcraft 2 ran on high at 29 FPS, which appears decently playable. However, the site says that the game is playable at medium settings, and that should be interpreted as the maximum setting that game is ACTUALLY playable is at medium settings.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-330M.22437.0.html

You can turn a geforce card into a Quadro if you know what you are doing. The difference is drivers and support mainly.

This is also stupid because the majority of sites say that Quadros are specifically tuned for CAD and other stuff, and the only difference is that Quadros are manufactured by nvidia directly. So no you can't turn a geforce card into a quadro anymore than I can make a hackintosh into a Apple manufactured Mac.

 

[mark28]

way to show you have no knowledge of graphics cards.
there are so many things wrong with your statements its ridiculous.
1.) he asked about graphics performance, not about how thin the macbook pro is, that is like saying how fast can this car go 0-60? and you say,THIS CAR IS SUPER SHINY
2.) Crysis isn't a good benchmark, it is the benchmark for people who don't know anything about graphics cards. the top of the notebook graphics card (the GTX 480m SLI) runs Crysis at Ultra settings at 30fps, which is on the low end of acceptable.
3.) Did I say I don't have a deskptop? Am I the opening post? Can you read? The answer to all three is NO.
4.) There is another guy who was saying he plays everything like L4D2 etc. on high. This is a stupid statement as no one knows what resolution he is playing at. I can run anything on high and ultra if the screen is small enough. If my screen is 2 inches big I bet I can run crysis on Ultra. Anyone who wants to do any real type of gaming will not be using the laptop screen/keyboard/and trackpad. My monitor resolution is 2048x1152, I like to play games at 1600x900. 1600x900 is barely acceptable for a 21" monitor. 1600x900 also basically limits settings to medium-low settings.
5.) What do you mean 4x faster than the go 7400? What are you talking about? What are you even comparing? You just make yourself look uneducated about this subject. The core speed difference between the 7400 and the 330m is 25 mhz, the only major difference is the number of pipelines, but the more pipelines doesnt necessarily mean anything. The GTX 480m SLI has 704 pipelines. The 330m has 48 pipelines. Is the 480m 15X faster than the 330M?
LETS LOOK AT THIS EXAMPLE: the game Doom 3 runs on the 330m on med settings at 203 fps, the go 7400 runs FEAR at 70 FPS. You will not notice a difference if you play the same game on both systems. It doesnt matter how many fps it is after a certain point cause your eyes can't process the difference. FILMS/MOVIES RUN AT 24 FPS.

The majority of opinions on this site are made by people like you who don't know what they are talking about, repeating what they read by another guy who doesn't know what they are talking about.

See site below for an actual idea of what the graphics card is like. Also be wary that all the benchmarks that show fps have * signs next to them. Saying what is actually playable. Example: Starcraft 2 ran on high at 29 FPS, which appears decently playable. However, the site says that the game is playable at medium settings, and that should be interpreted as the maximum setting that game is ACTUALLY playable is at medium settings.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-330M.22437.0.html



This is also stupid because the majority of sites say that Quadros are specifically tuned for CAD and other stuff, and the only difference is that Quadros are manufactured by nvidia directly. So no you can't turn a geforce card into a quadro anymore than I can make a hackintosh into a Apple manufactured Mac.

Why don't you look at Doom 3 on Ultra settings?

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Computer-Games-on-Laptop-Graphic-Cards.13849.0.html

Doom3 Ultra:
330m = 140 fps
7400 = 28 fps

Do you even know what the point of a laptop is? I don't call computers with a 480m laptops anymore. And now you're bring up "laptops" with a 480m SLI.

 

[grahamnp]

But, but, how is that possible? Everyone knows that MBPs are used exclusively by people for graphics and complex design work. Just about every MBP owner justifies their purchase with the pro video rendering that they have to do in their studio!

I'm not exactly sure what you were asking. Just because a 330m has the ability the ability to do 3d work doesn't mean it is good at it, and it isn't. The benchmarks will prove it. People use the MBP because it is the best Mac notebook they can get, not because it is has an awesome GPU.

 

[neondrgns]

Why don't you look at Doom 3 on Ultra settings?

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Computer-Games-on-Laptop-Graphic-Cards.13849.0.html

Doom3 Ultra:
330m = 140 fps
7400 = 28 fps

Do you even know what the point of a laptop is? I don't call computers with a 480m laptops anymore. And now you're bring up "laptops" with a 480m SLI.

do you know what the opening post even asked for? are you going to attack my grammar now that you are in the wrong?

 

[LinkMx]

4.) There is another guy who was saying he plays everything like L4D2 etc. on high. This is a stupid statement as no one knows what resolution he is playing at. I can run anything on high and ultra if the screen is small enough. If my screen is 2 inches big I bet I can run crysis on Ultra. Anyone who wants to do any real type of gaming will not be using the laptop screen/keyboard/and trackpad. My monitor resolution is 2048x1152, I like to play games at 1600x900. 1600x900 is barely acceptable for a 21" monitor. 1600x900 also basically limits settings to medium-low settings.

I play at the native resolution (1440 x 900) and it works great, some people aren't hardcore gamers and don't need a 30" display to enjoy a game.

 

[neondrgns]

I play at the native resolution (1440 x 900) and it works great, some people aren't hardcore gamers and don't need a 30" display to enjoy a game.

you're running l4d2 on high settings on OSX? what frame rates are you getting?
quick google search has a lot of mbp owners finding that they barely get 30 fps and get consistently lower which is basically unplayable

 

[LinkMx]

you're running l4d2 on high settings on OSX? what frame rates are you getting?
quick google search has a lot of mbp owners finding that they barely get 30 fps and get consistently lower which is basically unplayable

No, I can only play on high on windows, on mac I can only play with decent frames at medium/high.