I really dont understand it sometimes...it does not take much to please most people, but Apple seems to like pissing of its higher end consumers.
With this update Apple has effectively had the EXACT SAME GPU PERFORMANCE FOR 3 YEARS
Here are the numbers, I currently have a Santa Rosa MBP (3 years old) which I am upgrading with this update and it has a 8600m GT card
8600m GT Specs Core Clock:475MHZ Fillrate:3.8GP/s 7.6GT/s Bandwidth 22.4 GB/s
9600m GT Specs Core Clock:500MHZ Fillrate:4GP/s 8GT/s Bandwidth 25.6 GB/s
330M GT Specs Core Clock:575MHZ Fillrate:4.6GP/s 9.2GT/s Bandwidth 25.6 GB/s
So lets recap, over the past 3 years there has been a 16% GPU performance increase based on the texture fill rate, which is basically nothing considering the time span.
All they had to do was use ATI like they do on the rest of the line up, or if they love crappy nVidia so much used the 350GT. This would have yielded TWICE the performance of the 330, with a 5 watt increase in TDP...
why...so they could shave 15 minutes of battery life and save 30 dollars in component costs?
sigh...
With this update Apple has effectively had the EXACT SAME GPU PERFORMANCE FOR 3 YEARS
Here are the numbers, I currently have a Santa Rosa MBP (3 years old) which I am upgrading with this update and it has a 8600m GT card
8600m GT Specs Core Clock:475MHZ Fillrate:3.8GP/s 7.6GT/s Bandwidth 22.4 GB/s
9600m GT Specs Core Clock:500MHZ Fillrate:4GP/s 8GT/s Bandwidth 25.6 GB/s
330M GT Specs Core Clock:575MHZ Fillrate:4.6GP/s 9.2GT/s Bandwidth 25.6 GB/s
So lets recap, over the past 3 years there has been a 16% GPU performance increase based on the texture fill rate, which is basically nothing considering the time span.
All they had to do was use ATI like they do on the rest of the line up, or if they love crappy nVidia so much used the 350GT. This would have yielded TWICE the performance of the 330, with a 5 watt increase in TDP...
why...so they could shave 15 minutes of battery life and save 30 dollars in component costs?
sigh...