SR MBP 128 vs 256 vram

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by pieman02, Jun 10, 2007.

  1. pieman02 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    #1
    Does anyone have or know where I can find a decent benchmark or comparison between the two new 15" MBP's?

    Lookin at gettin a MBP on Monday and plan on owning it for a couple of years - I want the 256 so it will be more useful when the time comes later in it's life, but right now $500 is pretty steep unless there is an outstanding difference in the two machines and it seems like a good investment...

    ...again I really haven't found a 2.2gHz vs 2.4gHz MacBook Pro benchmark around - just a 2.4 vs the older 2.33, which to me is a completely useless comparison...

    Thanks for any input ;)

    OK nvm found this almost same question in another thread
     
  2. Strigoi macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Location:
    Netherlands
  3. Anonymous Freak macrumors 601

    Anonymous Freak

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2002
    Location:
    Cascadia
    #3
    The big problem is that the video chip is probably underpowered for the VRAM difference to matter. I know that's the case with my Radeon X1600 MacBook Pro. If I turn textures up to the point that the extra VRAM matters, it still runs too slow to be reasonably playable. (My game of choice is Microsoft Flight Simulator X in Windows Vista.)

    I know the nVidia 8600 GT is a little more powerful (theoretically; apparently the OS X drivers aren't tuned very well, so at present it actually benchmarks worse than the Radeon,) but I doubt it's enough better that the VRAM will be a limiting factor before the raw horsepower.

    Texture heavy games, and the few Core Image texture heavy apps out there (Aperture, for example,) are the only apps that will see any improvement at all from the extra VRAM. Photoshop won't, Final Cut won't, web browsing won't, even games that aren't texture heavy won't see any improvement at all.
     

Share This Page