X3000

[Mr. MacBook]

ARGH!

Just when im about to get a MacBook in 2 weeks, i hear about Santa Rosa, with a better graphics chipset! WTF IS THIS?

Anyways, i have some questions about it, because im a casual gamer who plays small, non graphic demanding games.

Will this X300 make things better for me, and will it raise the price?

 

[Zwhaler]

If you play non graphics-intensive games, then you will be fine with the current gen.

 

[Mr. MacBook]

If you play non graphics-intensive games, then you will be fine with the current gen.

Think call of duty 2 and roller coaster tycoon 3 will play ok on a 2ghz Core Duo macbook with 1gb RAM? on boot camp?

 

[nazmac21]

The x3000 will be better than the 950. Check Wikipedia for this.

 

[Mr. MacBook]

The x3000 will be better than the 950. Check Wikipedia for this.

Well of course, but it's hard to wait for 2 months for something as good as a MacBook 😛

 

[nazmac21]

I would go as far as saying you could play today's 3D Games on the x3000. At least on low settings.

 

[Zwhaler]

Think call of duty 2 and roller coaster tycoon 3 will play ok on a 2ghz Core Duo macbook with 1gb RAM? on boot camp?

My friend plays COD 2, Quake 4, Prey, RCT 3, and Age of Empires 3 all in OS X, and he has the same machine as you (except core 2 duo) and it runs fine. In boot camp it should do even better

 

[iW00t]

My friend plays COD 2, Quake 4, Prey, RCT 3, and Age of Empires 3 all in OS X, and he has the same machine as you (except core 2 duo) and it runs fine. In boot camp it should do even better

Quake 4 on integrated graphics?

I really want a lot of what your friend is smoking. Even a 7600GT chokes on Quake at med detail settings, no way can intel graphics handle it.

Mac users have strange ways of defending Apple's lousy choice of hardware, but somebody got to step in and draw the line to prevent you guys from misleading newbies.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

The X3000 will be an improvement over the current integrated hardware - just how much remains to be seen. We know the new chipset supports additional features, but there's no telling how much faster it will run in real-world tests.

I hope it makes a significant difference, but I'd still like to see an emebedded chipset like a GeForce 7300 Go.

Quake 4 will choke a MacBook's low-end GPU. Notice how a 4-year old G4 tower with a high end (7800-class) video card crushes the MacBook, getting almost double the framerate with a much slower CPU/FSB.

 

[Eidorian]

The GMA X3000 if its vertex shaders and other 3D hardware are turned on will preform more or less like a GeForce Go 7300.

That's a MAJOR improvement over the GMA 950 for casual gaming. It's still not a solution for the gamers out there. Still expect to need a lot of system RAM for it though.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

The GMA X3000 if its vertex shaders and other 3D hardware are turned on will preform more or less like a GeForce Go 7300.

...Though the 7300's VRAM will give it a crucial advantage.

 

[Eidorian]

...Though the 7300's VRAM will give it a crucial advantage.

800 MHz DDR2 isn't that bad still.

 

[localoid]

800 MHz DDR2 isn't that bad still.

And Intel's later-in-the-year high-end versions of its 'Bearlake' chipset are expected to support DDR3... perhaps @ 1.3GHz.

 

[combatcolin]

When the GMA X3000 becomes available latter on this year i'll self build an XP PC round it.

X3000 will be very good for QT etc and ok for gaming - as well as giving me the option to upgrade to a normal PCI E card later on.

 

[Abstract]

I would even upgrade my MacBook to get the new integrated graphics. 😱

 

[Lord Blackadder]

800 MHz DDR2 isn't that bad still.

True. I think the X3000 will answer many of the criticisms of the current intergrated hardware. Still, it would be nice to either include VRAM so you aren't robbing system memory, or allow more memory to be shared for the GPU if you choose.

 

[Eidorian]

True. I think the X3000 will answer many of the criticisms of the current intergrated hardware. Still, it would be nice to either include VRAM so you aren't robbing system memory, or allow more memory to be shared for the GPU if you choose.

Memory allocation is dynamic on Windows. There NEEDS to be a preference pane option for it on OS X. It's an improvement in the integrated solutions arena but it still pales in comparison to a discrete solution.

 

[odaiwai]

My friend plays COD 2, Quake 4, Prey, RCT 3, and Age of Empires 3 all in OS X, and he has the same machine as you (except core 2 duo) and it runs fine. In boot camp it should do even better

Dude, don't bogart the whole spliff, pass it on to the left, thanks.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Memory allocation is dynamic on Windows. There NEEDS to be a preference pane option for it on OS X. It's an improvement in the integrated solutions arena but it still pales in comparison to a discrete solution.

Exactly - you should be able to set max memory sharing. I also like the idea of making an integrated solution standard with an optional GeForce Go or Mobility Radeon, but they may never do that due to cost.

 

[Eidorian]

Exactly - you should be able to set max memory sharing. I also like the idea of making an integrated solution standard with an optional GeForce Go or Mobility Radeon, but they may never do that due to cost.

Yeah an optional discrete solution would be nice. Additionally a dual solution on the MacBook Pro would be interesting as well. Just boot with integrated for battery life and then boot with your discrete for performance.

 

[Zwhaler]

Quake 4 on integrated graphics?

I really want a lot of what your friend is smoking. Even a 7600GT chokes on Quake at med detail settings, no way can intel graphics handle it.

Mac users have strange ways of defending Apple's lousy choice of hardware, but somebody got to step in and draw the line to prevent you guys from misleading newbies.

Well, he was at my house the other day, and it ran great with everything off (every thing at bare bones) and at 800x600 it ran surprisingly nice.

A lot of factors come into play. First off, taking it that you said 7600GT, I am assuming you are either on a 24" iMac or a PC. If you are on an iMac, you are most likely running it on native resolution... which totals about 2.3 million pixels. 800x600 totals less than 500,000. So, on the same graphics card (7600), Quake runs a little more than 4 times faster on 800x600 than on the 24". But taking it that the 7600GT is about 4-5x better than intel (probably even more) they should run about the same (between the MacBook on low res and the iMac on hi res). I was right next to him when it did it, so unless he slipped something in my drink, I wouldn't call it misleading.

Keep in mind, if you are able to live without antialiasing and shadows, you should do alright. But it depends on what you want. If you are like my friend on the MacBook, and want to play the game for the game, rather than the looks, you will be alright. But if you are a graphics person, I would suggest waiting for X3000, but do not expect it to be much better than it already is.

 

[weldon]

When the GMA X3000 becomes available latter on this year i'll self build an XP PC round it.

Why wait? There are over a dozen motherboards with the GMA X3000 available on newegg.com today.

 

[combatcolin]

Why wait? There are over a dozen motherboards with the GMA X3000 available on newegg.com today.

UK, and very skint.

 

[weldon]

UK, and very skint.

Stuff is more expensive over there, but still, £75 (and that's after VAT) for the Asus P5B-VM isn't that bad.

 

[Eidorian]

Why wait? There are over a dozen motherboards with the GMA X3000 available on newegg.com today.

You are correct for desktops sir. It's just not out for laptops yet. 😀