SB LV's IGP vs 320m

Discussion in 'MacBook Air' started by FX4568, Apr 6, 2011.

  1. FX4568 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2010
    #1
    Okay, I have heard theres a 50% performance drop in the GPU IF theres an update of MBA's used with SB.
    Although I would love Sandy Bridge, I am skeptic on the fact that theres a drop in GPU.
    Now my question is: What is the drop? like how much is the drop? Give me an example? Like, if I ran X game at 50 fps, will I see a drop to 25 fps? or is it something like theres a drop in the GPU performance but not in the FPS. For example, although GPU drops half of the 320m's effectivity, it only gives 10 FPS less.
    Will anyone give me numbers?

    Also, since I dont need a laptop until september, I am planning to wait for the new Air, and wait for reviews. But my question is: if I decide to go for the core2duo Air after the SB Air has been released, the only option to purchase a core2duo Air will be through Refurbished store? or will there be "unused" core2duo Airs I could buy at a lower price.
    Thanks for your answers!
     
  2. aleni macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2006
    #2
    do u play hardcore games with your macbook air? if not, then i think the intel IGP might be just fine.
     
  3. fyrefly macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2004
    #3
    If you want numbers, check out the Engadget 3DMark06 score...

    http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/28/samsung-series-9-900x-laptop-review/

    For the ULV SB GPU Benchmarks. But keep in mind they are Windows benchmarks.

    For a broad-based comparison of the SB IGP vs. 320m, take a look at the Anandtech review of the 2011 13" MBPs. But keep in mind he's looking at a Regular Voltage IGP, vs. the Low-Voltage and/or Ultra-Low Voltage CPU/GPUs that would be in the Air (and are clocked lower).

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/18

    Anand shows that Gaming under windows is lower with the SB IGP, but under OSX it's almost on par. It'd be interesting to see someone jark OSX onto the Series 9 and see if the OSX drivers for the LV HD 3000 would produce any better results...
     
  4. bcaslis macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #4
    The GPU affects more than games. Photo software such as Photoshop, Lightroom, and Aperture all use the GPU heavily. Hard to predict what the consequences would be but it's not just games that use the GPU.
     
  5. AbyssImpact macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    #5
    It's not like 320M is a great processor... come on now.
     
  6. bcaslis macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #6
    Who said it's a great GPU? But it seems better than the IGP in SB.
     
  7. impulse462 Suspended

    impulse462

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    #7
    I fail to see the logic. WE UNDERSTAND that the 320M is an integrated GPU, and in reality for professionals, both these GPU's suck ass.

    the HD3000 regular voltage was pretty much on-par with the 320M (in terms of graphics performance) under OS X. The point is that these new SB CPU's will be lower voltage, which means the GPU on the diode will be clocked lower.

    This will mean that the GPU performance will suffer a little more, but its not like going from the 320M back to the GMA. Combined with the raw CPU power that the Sandy Bridge's offer, Apple feels like the little performance drop in GPU is worth it.
     
  8. hcho3 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    May 13, 2010
    #8
    320M will run most of games at decent frame rates with decent settings.

    With Intel HD 3000, god help you.
     
  9. thunng8 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #9
    We'll have to wait for real game benchmarks, but that 50% drop recorded by engagdet was with 3dMark. 3dMark mostly measures GPU performance, but there are a couple of CPU benchmarks there.

    So if the 3dMark numbers are representative, then you'll see a slightly greater 50% drop in frame rates, since the CPU tests in 3dMark would've lifted the overall rating for the SB machine slightly.
     
  10. Scottsdale macrumors 601

    Scottsdale

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    #10
    Urm, normally after a thread is created the OP sticks around to chat... But this one posted and is gone! Looks like a waste of time from all of you, sorry.
     
  11. RedReplicant macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    #11
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/16

    This should give you an idea, the SB w/ Intel murders the C2D w/ 320M. I don't get all of the crying about the new GPU, if you're a gamer you shouldn't be buying a Mac in the first place - and if you aren't a gamer you shouldn't be using it as an argument point.
     
  12. bcaslis macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #12
    The trick is to compare the appropriate things. For example the RAW import doesn't use the GPU. I'm not saying a SB MBA won't be faster, it might. But until Apple actually announces something it's not easy to judge. Personally, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. If a faster machine gets released, great. Until then I'll use my MBA for what I bought it for.
     
  13. jonnysods macrumors 601

    jonnysods

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Location:
    There & Back Again
    #13
    I think you are putting some pretty stiff expectations of a machine that was never designed to be a gaming machine or a heavy lifting processing machine.

    But, SB will destroy the C2D lineup hopefully. Low voltage processing power would be awesome.
     
  14. QCassidy352 macrumors G3

    QCassidy352

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #14
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

    That only means that any loss of performance matters all the more. If you had an awesome gpu in the current MBA, you could take a step back and still play games. But since what we have now is pretty low-end, taking a step back means a lot of games won't run even acceptably well.
     

Share This Page