Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why is Apple not using current graphics hardware?
- Thread starter w00t951
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Gaming is the only reason I recommend going with Windows over OS10. Apple just isn't the best for high end gaming.
But if you do want to do gaming with Apple, the benchmarks show the 27" iMac is the machine to get with almost double the performance to MBPs.
But if you do want to do gaming with Apple, the benchmarks show the 27" iMac is the machine to get with almost double the performance to MBPs.
Well, its nice to know that most people agree with me... And I wasn't thinking when I put down the 280M. But seriously? Can't we have an option in the 17" Macs to have two GT 330M cards? With 1 GB of vRAM?
Since those are starting to be available on the iMacs/Mac Pros hopefully it will be sooner rather than later.
[edit] Are the 27" iMacs equipped with mobility or desktop class GPUs?
+1 let the macbooks be for all the people who want to follow fashion and have a mac, let the PRO line be exactly what it says in the name - a PRO machine with PRO specs aimed at people who need the extra power and are willing to pay for it
27" iMacs use mobile ATI R4850 512MB GPU. The gaming performance is 64% to 113% faster than the MPB G330M (depending on the game).
http://www.barefeats.com/mbpp21.html
That's just sad. Apple should be alerted to this issue, as it seems that many people are willing to cough up the money to get a high end computer system, not a Macbook with the "Pro" slapped on the end. 
Erm,
no they don't mate. You need to rephrase that. And if you want all those options then it's really very simple. Do not buy an Apple mac because Apple don't and never have really offered those options on the laptop range.It's part of what differentiates them from Apple from Sony and everyone else and I for one really appreciate it.
And I would also like to add if you are a serious gamer, and you want a laptop, you would normally buy a laptop aimed at gamers with all the options you want to choose and it would run Windows by default. Now I know we all went off on one demanding full true 4 core CPU's and the highest end mobile graphics cards, however, Alienware offer these, and there laptops are ugly and massive, at least twice as thick as the MB Pro is (The M15x is 1.92 inches thick, the MB Pro is 0.95 Inches) plus they have battery life's of around 2 to 3 hours. People that buy them accept this as they know they will get the most powerful machine.
And this is also the second or third thread I've seen on this subject already. And 40 people aren't going to be able to demand Apple to change it's market plans for it's laptop range, especially when they are selling more then ever before happily with it's current plan and range of options. How many MB Pro's do you see photographers use, people editing on the go video in FCP use, how many are on the stages of massive music events. Lots, these are the 'Pro' users in the name.
Cool, thanks! That's a pretty impressive performance increase just within the range of mobile GPUs. I'm sure desktop class chips blow the lid even further off...
It's pretty ridiculous to compare a high end workstation to a notebook, don't you think?
Actually, part of the reason for sticking to NVidia seems to be workstation-type apps. Many of the applications that use graphics acceleration to do anything EXCEPT simply putting polygons on the screen (essentially all non-games that use the graphics card at all) run MUCH faster on NVidia's CUDA architecture. Going to ATI would have meant better gaming, but much reduced Photoshop filter acceleration, while Apple's target MBP customers use Photoshop (CS5 really uses the GPU), Aperture, Final Cut and Premiere much more than they do ANY game...
Unfortunately, it's a common ailment. A lot of people like to focus on the numbers on paper rather than the realities of the hardware, and then base their (often misguided) assumptions accordingly.
I think those "workstation-type apps" are more processor dependant than GPU. That being said, iMacs with ATI 4850 run those programs much faster than the MBP with the GT 330M.
http://www.barefeats.com/mbpp20.html
For anyone that wants to look up things like TDP, fill rate, etc:
Comparison of Nvidia Graphics Processing Units
Comparison of ATI Graphics Processing Units
Comparison of Nvidia Graphics Processing Units
Comparison of ATI Graphics Processing Units
But for the price of a macbook pro, there are plenty of notebooks that will run circles around a iMac i7 in gaming
You shouldn't buy a Mac for gaming imo.
links please
It's not ridiculous to compare a "pro" to a "pro." Mac Pro, FCP, LP are all highest-end hardware (or close) in their respective lines. MacBook Pro isn't.It's pretty ridiculous to compare a high end workstation to a notebook, don't you think?
There's also QuickTime Player Pro…don't know where that ranks but I recall complaints that QT Pro-exclusive features should be in regular QT Player.
Only thing that makes MacBook Pro a Pro, is the three letters. 13" shouldn't be a Pro, other models, hmm, well, Apple doesn't offer anything better so they can be considered as "Pro" model
Mac Pro is a "Pro" machine though, it use Xeons and other real high-end components, not the same as 999$ PCs
Basically this unfortunately; pay top dollar for OS X with above average build quality combined with some good parts and some sub-par parts.
I think even the MP is dated now...due for a refresh. FCP and LP are not hardware either...
The thing with the MBP's is the thin form factor and excellent battery performance (which I love, on my 5,1 anyway) necessitates low TDP on all the components in order to keep internal heat levels and power usage under control. So you gotta give up something in performance to get the gains in form and battery life. [edit] Which is perfectly fine in a notebook IMHO.
Actually, in this case, it is ridiculous. Most of Apple's product lines have a "Pro" in their name. It stands for the high-end product models from THAT line. So don't compare a Mac Pro to a MacBook Pro. Please.
alienware 15
What GPU does the super thick n hot alien use ? oh yeah, a gt 240
oh wait ! the 330 is a faster rebadged 240
oh no, whats the processor on that ... oh my god .
And i thought we needed an upgrade on those c2d 9600s
gaming pc (15" base ) my a$$
What GPU does the super thick n hot alien use ? oh yeah, a gt 240
oh wait ! the 330 is a faster rebadged 240
oh no, whats the processor on that ... oh my god .
And i thought we needed an upgrade on those c2d 9600s
gaming pc (15" base
) my a$$What GPU does the super thick n hot alien use ? oh yeah, a gt 240
oh wait ! the 330 is a faster rebadged 240
oh no, whats the processor on that ... oh my god .
And i thought we needed an upgrade on those c2d 9600s
gaming pc (15" base
Sorry, but we typically speak English here.