Nvidia launches the 8700M GT

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by ivanlo2, Jun 14, 2007.

  1. ivanlo2 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 13, 2007
    Location:
    Berkeley/San Diego
    #1
  2. ivanlo2 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 13, 2007
    Location:
    Berkeley/San Diego
    #2
    It's a little better than the 8600M GT in most of the specs but one that stands out is the big bump to the shader clock. More and more games are getting heavier on shaders so that's a plus.
     
  3. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #3
    How much power does it consume? How much heat does it produce? I doubt we will see Apple adding it in the lineup. It took them over a year to go from the X1600 to the 8600M.
     
  4. cbatt macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2004
    #4
    I don't know the details, but the first PC that it'll be used in is a Toshiba 20" enthusiast laptop. It's going to be hotter and suck more juice - requiring a bigger battery and more cooling. You might see this in the 17" MBP, but I don't think it'll be seen until the next revision as it'll probably require a bit more space (for cooling) than is currently available.

    It's just an overclocked 8600M GT, there's no significant difference except clock speeds - in fact, I'm betting it comes out of the exact same bins as the 8600M GT, it just tests higher and can thus handle higher clock speeds. It was just released because they finally have a high enough yield of the chips to offer them for mass purchase.
     
  5. aethelbert macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Location:
    Chicago, IL, USA
    #5
    It's not something that will make a complete update worthwhile. Don't count on ever seeing it in the Macbook Pro. By the time the video cards does get updated, it will likely be with something out of the new 9000 series from nvidia, maybe even something newer.
     
  6. Atomic-Ed macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    #6
    Personally, I am quite happy with the 8600m. While it is not the most powerful gpu out there, it is no slouch either and to think how much better it is than the previous x1600 is really exciting. DX10 support is a major plus and the image quality is very good IMO. All in all for a laptop GPU with 256mb ram, it is more than acceptable to me. Power, heat and cost have to be considered as well.
     
  7. Butthead macrumors 6502

    Butthead

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    #7
    OP, the search engine is your friend, this is already 'old news' (but never fear, like so many of my posts, MR Admin's may get around to making it front page news in a few more weeks, lol).

    MBP 17in, why no Nvidia 8700M as annouced today?
     
  8. Butthead macrumors 6502

    Butthead

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    #8
    Oh yeah, and there's even a faster 8800M due out later this year too(it's in one of the article/news stories I linked to with respect to the 8700M, but I expect, unless it's on a smaller nm process die size, it will generate too much heat for the 1in thin Apple notebooks.
     
  9. aliquis- macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    #9
    Well it seems to just be the same thing but on a higher clock? So probably quite much more, but what do I know.
     
  10. aliquis- macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    #10
    Yeah, they are probably more suited for 2inches desktop replacements than 1 inches portables. Not that I would care about the size if I got that performance =P
     
  11. dmw007 macrumors G4

    dmw007

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Location:
    Working for MI-6
    #11
    Nice and powerful but not the best chip for a 1" think laptop computer. :eek: :)
     
  12. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
  13. Wolfpup macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    #13
    Faster GPUs are always a good thing, though this looks like it's "only" clocked up 30%. I sort of have a hard time believing it's really faster than a 7950GTX-but maybe it really is in newer games. I bet it's slower in old games, but then again, I bet it's perfectly fine for older games.

    The Geforce 8800 is supposedly launching in Q3, and while it's supposedly paired down in some way it only draws 22 watts, which obviously gives it the best power/performance ratio on the planet (actually the previous winner would be the current 8800s, even though they draw around 100 watts).

    At any rate, I wouldn't worry too much about not getting this. Yeah, it's better than the 8600GT, but it's not like the kind of difference there was last year between the pathetic x1600 and the Geforce 7600GT/79x0 cards. I don't think anyone would be stopped from buying a Macbook by having a part that's 30% slower.
     

Share This Page