Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Why not to be thankful for a 9600M GT

Y

Yixian

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jun 2, 2007
1,483
135
Europe
Rumor has it the new Pros will feature nothing more than a mere 9600M GT. Unlike the 8600M GT, which, whilst not being high end by any means, was at least brand new at the time it was first incorporated into the MBP, the 9600M GT is simply a slightly faster clocked 8600M GT that itself has been around for months and months and there are plenty of alternatives, including both the 9650M GS and GT, not to mention if Apple designed the computer a little more with the GPU in mind, some high end cards.

So if there's a 9600M GT in the new Pros on Tuesday, don't get too happy, Apple will have crippled it's most powerful notebook for hardcore AND mainstream (Diablo 3 and StarCraft II on the horizon, you'd expect a cutting edge Pro laptop to make those shine but with a 9600M GT it'll "just run"), as well as certain kinds of video professionals and those working with CAD and 3D.

MacBook Pro 15" (Intel 2.4GHz T7700, 8600M GT w/512MB)

F.E.A.R. - 37 fps
Doom 3 - 86.5 fps
3DMark 06 - 3900

HP Pavilion dv7-1050eg (Intel 2.53GHz T9400, 9600M GT w/512MB)

F.E.A.R. - 40 fps
Doom 3 - 85 fps
3DMark 06 - 4419
Click to expand...

Taken from: http://blogs.pcworld.com/gameon/archives/007916.html

A good article on why you should be completely underwhelmed and disappointed in Apple for using a 9600M GT should rumors prove true. Let me quote for you the first scentence:

The word on the street is that Apple's new high-end MacBook Pro is set to ship with an NVIDIA 9600M GT, arguably the most underwhelming GPU upgrade to Apple's "pro" part in years.

At least a 9650M GT and all is forgiven.
 
i don't have a lot of experience when it comes to graphics cards, but this is what i know.

my imac's graphics card has 256mb of vram (its one of the radeon cards). now on that imac i have played computer games, ok they are not that modern but they run brillently.

i have done extensive video editing in final cut pro, frequently used the adobe cs2 and cs3 suites, i have also used motion and lightwave.

now i have never seen my imac have any trouble with ANY of those tasks.

ok, yes ill admit that theres not much of a difference between the 8600 and the 9600. however after performing a quick search on google i found out that the 9600 can have 1gb of vram.

now thats incredible (at least it is to me) even if the new macbook pros come with the 512mb vram version i'll be more than happy because this card is tried and tested and i have not heard a single rumor about problems like the 8600 has had.

after all i really don't want a £1600 laptop to stop working all because of a dodgy graphics card :rolleyes:
 
*crossing fingers for something better*

im not even gettin one, but im hoping for some jumps :)
 
RavenWinds said:
i don't have a lot of experience when it comes to graphics cards, but this is what i know.

my imac's graphics card has 256mb of vram (its one of the radeon cards). now on that imac i have played computer games, ok they are not that modern but they run brillently.

i have done extensive video editing in final cut pro, frequently used the adobe cs2 and cs3 suites, i have also used motion and lightwave.

now i have never seen my imac have any trouble with ANY of those tasks.

ok, yes ill admit that theres not much of a difference between the 8600 and the 9600. however after performing a quick search on google i found out that the 9600 can have 1gb of vram.

now thats incredible (at least it is to me) even if the new macbook pros come with the 512mb vram version i'll be more than happy because this card is tried and tested and i have not heard a single rumor about problems like the 8600 has had.

after all i really don't want a £1600 laptop to stop working all because of a dodgy graphics card :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The 9600M GT can't really utilise more than 256mb of RAM due to the 128-bit memory bus. Put as much VRAM as you want into it, it's not going to make any difference.

I'm quite glad that I didn't wait for the next-generation Nvidia cards (9 series at that time), seeing how an overclocked 8600M GT can easily reach the speeds of the 9500/9600 cards.
 
You have to remember that Apple can't just stick *any* card inside because of the thermal considerations and heat dissipation. Be glad that we get a competent GPU in a ~1" thick laptop.
 
cathyy said:
The 9600M GT can't really utilise more than 256mb of RAM due to the 128-bit memory bus. Put as much VRAM as you want into it, it's not going to make any difference.

I'm quite glad that I didn't wait for the next-generation Nvidia cards (9 series at that time), seeing how an overclocked 8600M GT can easily reach the speeds of the 9500/9600 cards.
Click to expand...

sorry my mistake. must have read off the wrong section about the card

at least its 'should' be more reliable than the 8600 cards

should.....
 
With happened with my last few nVidia purchases, I will probably be waiting at least a year and a half more until I buy a macbook pro. It should take about that much time for all the bugs for this system to pop up, and it will probably have something different. At least the 9xxx series failing seems to be false so there's hope. Unfortunately, my wife's laptop has a similar chipset arrangement and not only does it run extremely hot, it failed within a month and the replacement failed within a week. (it's not the same chipset, though)
 
Trebuin said:
With happened with my last few nVidia purchases, I will probably be waiting at least a year and a half more until I buy a macbook pro. It should take about that much time for all the bugs for this system to pop up, and it will probably have something different. At least the 9xxx series failing seems to be false so there's hope. Unfortunately, my wife's laptop has a similar chipset arrangement and not only does it run extremely hot, it failed within a month and the replacement failed within a week. (it's not the same chipset, though)
Click to expand...

:eek: even though its not the same chipset thats not good
 
Apple has always underwhelmed with their video card selections. Across the entire product line, they are never leading edge with the available chipsets.

I won't even attempt the latest generation games on my C2D MBP (2.33/15"), Crysis, Bioshock and the like. At least on my 3.06 iMac, they run reasonably well, but not what I could expect from a $2,500 PC.

It's always been my one major gripe with Apple and the single reason I won't purchase a MacPro.

Anything less than a 96xx in the MacBook and SLI in the MacBook Pro will be greatly disappointing.

Almost all major notebook vendors now offer high-end with SLI.
 
Man, Yix. You're more adamant about this video card deal than Tallest Skil is about crushing people's hopes and dreams! (No offense to either of you, of course.)
 
I think the 9600M GT of the dv7t is the DDR2 one which has much less bandwidth and core/mem clock compared to the DDR3. I would expect to get around ~ 4800 - 5000 points 3Dmark 06 with the DDR3 9600M GT. But I still prefer 9700GT in the new MBP. That would be awesome :D
 
Tex-Twil said:
Are you kidding ? Those games should run fine on a 2008 MBP.

Tex
Click to expand...

That's my point...when my '06 MBP was released with the X1600 it ran current generation games reasonably well, but had no chance with nex-gen stuff.

The X1600 was 2 generations behind what was available (X1800) when it was released.

Releasing a 2008 MBP with a 96xx/97xx puts it behind the curve from day one.
 
I'm hoping for a 9650M gt at least, after all, it has got the same power draw as the 9600m gt, but is faster.

However, i got this feeling that apple will put in a 9600, which would be a disappointment idd
 
why does apple include old GPUs in NEW notebooks..wheres the clue?
are they insane?
a new macbook pro 2008 with an gforce 9600m which was released at the beginning 08...thats sick o_O

apple should add things that are up2date...hdmi,bluray,a new gpu...thats ridicolous...pfff..
apple notebook(PRO!) hardware = newbs...
 
MatthewAMEL said:
Anything less than a 96xx in the MacBook and SLI in the MacBook Pro will be greatly disappointing.

Almost all major notebook vendors now offer high-end with SLI.
Click to expand...

1. A 96xx in a macbook is ridiculous...Find me a 13 inch notebook that has a x6xx card, or a 14 inch. Please. The best I've seen is 8400 or 9400. Maybe 9500

2. Find me a 15" laptop (let alone one that isn't 7-9 pounds) that has equally equipped proc, memory, chipset, and hard drive that has anything better than an 8600 for this price and battery life.

Here's one that's CLOSE, it's an alienware, but once you put the 8800 in there, it costs way more than a MBP. Not to mention that it's 7 pounds, and probably lasts all of 1.5 hours with that 8800 in there.

http://www.alienware.com/customize/...Code=PC-LT-AREA51M15X-AI1&SubCode=SKU-DEFAULT

3. SLI? Please. Laptops with Hybrid-sli DO NOT HAVE 2 VIDEO CARDS. Laptops that do have SLI are like this one here.

Running with the screen brightness at full while surfing on Verizon wireless WAN, I measured 56 minutes of life. With the screen dimmed and the wireless turned off, battery life improved by about 20 minutes
Click to expand...

I'd rather take 3.5 hours (realistically) on a MBP than 1 hour realistically on that 2 inch 10 pound beast...

To the OP, I'm not sure where you got your information, but there IS a die shrink on the 9600 from the 8600 AND a higher 3dmark score etc by quite a bit. Yes I would prefer the 9650 gt as with it being 55nm it would be better in every respect, but the 9600 is not a rebranded 8600...

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/6392017/

Edit: And by the way comparing an HP to a macbook pro, even if the specs are close...doesn't add up to putting that vid card into a MBP, especially with an nVidia chipset.
 
MatthewAMEL said:
The X1600 was 2 generations behind what was available (X1800) when it was released.

Releasing a 2008 MBP with a 96xx/97xx puts it behind the curve from day one.
Click to expand...

The X1600 and the X1800 are from the same generation. The X1600 is a mid range card. The X1800 is a high end card.

Releasing a computer with the most recent mid range graphics card is out of date? Jokes. If the "curve" is the 4870X2, you're right. It's apparent that Nvidia hasn't made a worthwhile midrange card since the 7600GT, but an update's an update.

Tobler51 said:
why does apple include old GPUs in NEW notebooks..wheres the clue?
are they insane?
a new macbook pro 2008 with an gforce 9600m which was released at the beginning 08...thats sick o_O

apple should add things that are up2date...hdmi,bluray,a new gpu...thats ridicolous...pfff..
apple notebook(PRO!) hardware = newbs...
Click to expand...

Asus was the only company to use the 9M series on February 21 2008, so you can't really complain that Apple is the only one. Is Dell insane? HP? Sony?

Maybe you should by a significant amount of Apple stock and hope that Jobs pays attention to his stock holders.

Enough uninformed threads all made by the same person. Everyone wants a GPU update. It'll happen tomorrow. Stop clogging the board with this garbage.
 
The MBP is the best balance of size, weight, and GPU you can find, even today.

That said, Asus and other vendors have 15" models with 9700GTs in them, but they are much thicker, louder, and heavier. But, if gaming is your priority those are the trade-offs you have to accept.

After the Nvidia issues, I would have hoped for an ATI solution, but I think Grand Central will drive Apple to almost 100% Nvidia chip sets.
 
Anyway in response to everyone else, yeah I agree that it wouldn't be anything new for Apple to underwhelm on the GPU front, however this would be exceptionally disappointing even for them. Both the X1600 and 8600M GT were picked up when they were brand new cards and there really wasn't any alternative that wasn't blazingly hot and huge at the time. But now we have the 9650M GT, and, if Apple were to allow the MBP to become a little thicker and would take advantage of the power saving benefits of other components predicted to be inside the new models, a 9700M GT.

The latter would mean we'd get value for our money, which is obviously not possible so long as we're buying a machine designed by Apple in California. So anything less than the 9650M GT and I will be genuinely surprised, and I am, believe it or not, as cynical as the rest of you, just more pissed off.

Seriously, a 9600M GT would really surprise and depress me, there's zero reason to put it in over a 9650M GT. Not even m1stake could cook up some Apple ass-licking reason for it.
 
Everyone wants a new GPU. The 8600m GT is a pretty garbage card next to my 8800GTX. But the MacBook Pro is a pretty garbage computer for playing games. If you want mobility, games, and Apple, and one computer, that's your own barrier. Just get a MacBook and build an $800 gaming PC that destroys the MacBook Pro, and will destroy the next two or three as well. All for $2000, the cost of the base MBP. If you really want to "provide value" for yourself, that's the only option that makes sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back