anyone think macbook pro's will get a graphic card upgrade sooon?

C

coolazn

Gawd
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
614
the 9600gt 512mb is starting to get old on the macbooks.

newer laptops now even have sli 280gtx.

anyone think apple will ever release a new graphics card, mby a 260gtx for the macbook?


i personally think they should have options for a quadro or 260gtx card, or even both together. so it favors everbody. people can always do their autocad work and then switch over to the gaming card when they need to play some hard core games.


why do i think the graphic card is slow? when im not doing editing or maya, i switch over to xp and play games.

the macbook stuggle to play arma 2 on the lowest settings, and some other newer games that just came out.


if you buy a 17inch laptop, you expect everything to be the best.
 
Hell F**king no. Apple is terrible when it comes to graphics card. I don't even know how anybody can stand having a 9600GT at 1920x1200 on the 17" that costs nearly $2500.

I got burned once buying a mbp with a x1600 - if you want a nice looking, thin laptop get a mbp. If you want to play games get a destop. It's the truth.

Macs are falling out of the game - the new dell XPS 15" comes with a 1080 screen and a card that is able to run Aion on maxed - my friend owns one. Apple needs to upgrade first the resolution on the 15". Don't expect them to stick a 260M in there anytime soon - it's just not going to happen.

Don't buy a mbp to game on.
 
nVidia is the primary for Apple's chipset,s and the 9600gt is not the 9600m.
128 bits 'O memory can attest to that. (and DDR2 in most versions, unlike 9600gt's standard GDDR3).

But I'd be interested if AMD can get back into the game (mobile chipsets) via Apple.
 
I hope they do because AMD's mobility line are pretty good in regards to being comparable to their desktop line.
 
coolazn said:
the 9600gt 512mb is starting to get old on the macbooks.

newer laptops now even have sli 280gtx.
Click to expand...

Old? The 9400M and 9600M haven't been in Apple's lineup for even a year yet. Faulty premise.

anyone think apple will ever release a new graphics card, mby a 260gtx for the macbook?
Click to expand...

There's always a chance, but I don't see it. Why bother? The 9400M strikes a good balance between performance and battery life. People already complain about the 9600M's power draw.

i personally think they should have options for a quadro or 260gtx card, or even both together. so it favors everbody. people can always do their autocad work and then switch over to the gaming card when they need to play some hard core games.
Click to expand...

You're describing segments that Apple doesn't really cater to. AutoCAD is not available for OS X, and desktop gaming is tough to get going on OS X simply due to the prevalence of DirectX. If OpenGL ever makes inroads against DX, we might see more OS X games.

the macbook stuggle to play arma 2 on the lowest settings, and some other newer games that just came out.
Click to expand...

Everything struggles to play ArmA 2. Meanwhile, if you load up the OS X port of CoD4, it'll run perfectly on a 9400M.

Armoured said:
Macs are falling out of the game - the new dell XPS 15" comes with a 1080 screen and a card that is able to run Aion on maxed - my friend owns one.
Click to expand...

It would help if NCSoft made an OS X version of Aion.

Seriously, you guys complaining about graphics cards for purposes of gaming are off base. The problem isn't that Apple isn't putting bleeding edge graphics chips in its products, the problem is that there aren't any products on the horizon that need them. Blame DirectX.
 
It seems like you are defending OSX. Even though CAD and even AION aren't made for OSX it still runs on bootcamp.

Hell there's a 4870 for the Mac Pro; almost everyone who I know that owns a Mac uses bootcamp - but you are right in your premise that since those are for Windows - Apple has no need to support high level graphics card for the MBP.

Still Apple desperately needs to step up their game - PC laptops are getting good - REAL good. The new HP laptop with 12+ hours of battery life, above average GPU and a really nice form factor will take business away from Apple.

I know HP will have my business.
 
Terpfen said:
Old? The 9400M and 9600M haven't been in Apple's lineup for even a year yet. Faulty premise.
Click to expand...

lol, just because apple had the for almost a year, doesn't mean it's already old for the rest of the world.
 
Armoured said:
It seems like you are defending OSX. Even though CAD and even AION aren't made for OSX it still runs on bootcamp.
Click to expand...

No, I'm merely pointing out that Apple isn't obligated to offer hardware configurations to improve the ability to run Windows on the Mac. They want you to use OS X, and the ability to boot Windows is there as a safety net. If you want to use intensive graphic apps in Windows, then you ought to buy a Windows PC, not a Mac notebook.

Still Apple desperately needs to step up their game
Click to expand...

In your opinion. People are buying Macs despite the lack of a bleeding edge GPU. The 9400M and 9600M accomplish their tasks: very good mobile graphics performance with a minimum of power consumption.

I know HP will have my business.
Click to expand...

The free market is pretty awesome like that.

jeremyshaw said:
lol, just because apple had the for almost a year, doesn't mean it's already old for the rest of the world.
Click to expand...

We're talking about whether or not a Mac lineup should see an update. Therefore, the overall age of the chips being used is less relevant than how long those chips have been used in the line being discussed.

The 9400M and 9600M could be five years old; it still wouldn't make sense to replace them just for the sake of replacing them. Are the new chips equally or more power efficient? Are they equally or lower priced? Will the new chips benefit OS X in some way? Right now, probably the most demanding graphics application in OS X is video acceleration in Quicktime X; the 9400M does it perfectly.

So, no, "old" isn't a legitimate reason to change the product offering.
 
You would make a good business man but you won't be liked. I hate the way Apple gimps their laptops and people STILL buy them.

I hate their core models - my sister bought a white macbook that came with a CD reader - not even a burner. It also came with 256mb of ram, integrated graphics and cost $1100. It just shows you that Apple can sell anything as long as they have the apple label.

They are now just introducing back lit keyboards to the 13" and are making an effort with their GPU's. Mostly because PC laptops are just introducing those aspects in their CORE laptops.

I used to dread those laptop hunter ads but looking back - they have a point.
 
my sister bought a white macbook that came with a CD reader - not even a burner. It also came with 256mb of ram, integrated graphics and cost $1100. It just shows you that Apple can sell anything as long as they have the apple label.
Click to expand...

In 1999? My $1,100 bought a MBP with dvd burner, backlit keyboard, 2GB RAM, 9400M graphics, and processor with a higher FSB than comparable models, and ended up being less than anything else any other manufacturer had, even if I was to go to a form factor that was almost double the thickness. Not to mention the battery life, screen quality, and solid aluminum construction. Then there was also the better touchpad, the free Ipod, and a free printer. The 13" MBP is one of the best VALUES when it comes to laptops right now.
 
Nope in 2007. That's what I'm saying. Apple was gimping their own laptops until the unibodys were made. Apple just realized that they can't gimp anymore - not in this economy.
 
well i run maya 2009 which is part of autodesk.

final cut

adobe stuff.

when doing normal work its fine, but when it comes to rendering the film out, or rendering production quality work its very slow. slower then a duel 3.0 intel on a desktop


i run autodesk on xp and when im lazy also maya.

i agree with the price. your not really getting what your paid for, when comparing other alptops.

only reason i have macs is that, i do audio, video, animation which all run or need osx.



i just went on alienware, for the same price, i can get a quad extreme, 260 gtx sli, 4gb ram. but the trade off is that it cant run osx apps. :(
 
Last edited:
coolazn said:
only reason i have macs is that, i do audio, video, animation which all run or need osx.



i just went on alienware, for the same price, i can get a quad extreme, 260 gtx sli, 4gb ram. but the trade off is that it cant run osx apps. :(
Click to expand...

Unless you have a specific need to work on the go all the time, you're probably in the market for a Mac Pro, not a notebook.
 
saving up for one.

im always on the go so the air and the pro are always with me.

i use the air at university and the pro at work and art school.



since intel repleased a quad extreme for the notebook. mby, mby apple will hae a silent update on the macbook with quads and mby a newer video card :D
 
coolazn said:
since intel repleased a quad extreme for the notebook. mby, mby apple will hae a silent update on the macbook with quads and mby a newer video card :D
Click to expand...

I'm waiting for the quad core MBPs to replace my Dell M1330. They have to be coming don't they.
 
Does it matter? Buying a laptop expecting to game on it is the first problem. Even a machine that comes with a relatively powerful GPU is going to be matched by a desktop for what... 1/2, 1/3 the price? Then in 6 months it won't play the newest and greatest games anyway.

Apple has a pretty routine upgrade path for it's machines. Compared to a machine that's been in the lineup for 6 months, ya you can probably find a better deal from another manufacturer.

Maybe I just look at it differently since I don't have the money (or time for that matter) to keep up with new games. My 9600 does anything I care to do. After all, you'll never beat Diablo 2 or AoE2.;)
 
As laptop graphics go, the current offerings are adequate considering the product's marketing goals (battery life & weight). Frankly, I'd be much happier if they'd get off their dead asses and make a 15" model with a screen that can do better than 1440x900... <sigh> I mean, I love my Santa Rosa MBP, but the screen resolution is probably my single biggest overall gripe with the machine. :(
 
As far a 260, I don't think apple or most of its consumers want to trade the small thin design of the macbook pro. The 9600gt already gets hot enough. I think graphics card update within half year is likely but I doubt they will use cards like the 260gtx.

silence, good battery life, slim design, little heat is what hopefully they will stick with. 17inch, a lot want it not for additional power but for more screen space. More models from apple would not be a bad idea though but they would have to re-image the mbp as actually being professional and not the typical laptop. They are basically using the pro line just like they attached i in front of everything.
 
Armoured said:
Hell F**king no. Apple is terrible when it comes to graphics card. I don't even know how anybody can stand having a 9600GT at 1920x1200 on the 17" that costs nearly $2500.

I got burned once buying a mbp with a x1600 - if you want a nice looking, thin laptop get a mbp. If you want to play games get a destop. It's the truth.

Macs are falling out of the game - the new dell XPS 15" comes with a 1080 screen and a card that is able to run Aion on maxed - my friend owns one. Apple needs to upgrade first the resolution on the 15". Don't expect them to stick a 260M in there anytime soon - it's just not going to happen.

Don't buy a mbp to game on.
Click to expand...


Actually, there is a new superior mbp out that is much better for games!

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9556394&st=envy&type=product&id=1218123849552




....




ok it's a pc, but has the mbp like form factor
 
Last edited:
I don't think anyone is going to confuse that HP with a MacBook Pro.
 
Terpfen said:
The 9400M and 9600M could be five years old; it still wouldn't make sense to replace them just for the sake of replacing them. Are the new chips equally or more power efficient? Are they equally or lower priced? Will the new chips benefit OS X in some way?

So, no, "old" isn't a legitimate reason to change the product offering.
Click to expand...

1) Yes, there are 40nm GPU's now, which are more power efficient
2)Yes, smaller manufacturing process means lower cost to create
3) Yes, better performance in OpenCL, which they seem to be pushing
 
bholstege said:
1) Yes, there are 40nm GPU's now, which are more power efficient
2)Yes, smaller manufacturing process means lower cost to create
3) Yes, better performance in OpenCL, which they seem to be pushing
Click to expand...

1 and 2 are of course true, but newer components are always more power efficient and smaller. It's practically a given. It doesn't make sense for Apple to immediately upgrade its lines when a new GPU comes out. We're not talking about slapping a new card into a PCI-E slot. There's more to it than that, especially regarding point 2. Smaller die processes mean lower production costs for the manufacturer, not necessarily for OEMs who buy those parts in bulk. The manufacturer has other costs that factor into the pricing of their products, and the OEM has its own costs as well. It's not as simple as you make it out to be.

3 is a little off base, as Apple has more to factor in to component decisions than OpenCL. And by the way, OpenCL is not GPU-dependant. AMD demonstrated OpenCL working on a CPU just as easily as nvidia demonstrated OpenCL working on GPUs. OpenCL is just a way to take advantage of spare cycles in other components: it doesn't necessarily have to be a GPU. I believe there are projects working on special embedded processors specifically for executing OpenCL tasks, but I might be wrong about that.

Here's something to consider: since Intel is getting the courts to bar nvidia from developing Core i series chipsets, what makes anyone think that Apple will be upgrading their notebook offerings any time soon? If Apple transitions to the Core i series, they upgrade in CPU power but lose in the GPU arena. If they stick with nvidia, they can upgrade the GPU, but we won't get any significant CPU updates. There's always AMD/ATi, but their mobile offerings aren't as good as nvidia's, and The Steve probably still holds a grudge against them for leaking product details ahead of an Apple keynote a few years ago.
 
OpenCL was designed to take advantage of GPU's, although it can as you say be run on other components. There is just less benefit in doing so. If they maintain the same transistor count at a lower manufacturing process, there is no reason some of those cost cuts would not be passed on to Apple.

The point regarding i7/i5 in notebooks is valid, and is one I had though about myself. My guess is the integrated on CPU graphics + low end dedicated Nvidia card.
 
bholstege said:
OpenCL was designed to take advantage of GPU's, although it can as you say be run on other components. There is just less benefit in doing so.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say there's "less benefit." After all, if you're taking advantage of an otherwise idle device, then the net result is a benefit. But that's another thread.

If they maintain the same transistor count at a lower manufacturing process, there is no reason some of those cost cuts would not be passed on to Apple.
Click to expand...

You're presuming all other costs are constant. They are not. For example, what if the part has a lower manufacturing cost but has a higher R&D cost? Or, what if it's a premium product? The net result is a higher-priced product, even though it costs less to manufacture. Manufacturing cost is just the final cost in a long string of expenses.

The point regarding i7/i5 in notebooks is valid, and is one I had though about myself. My guess is the integrated on CPU graphics + low end dedicated Nvidia card.
Click to expand...

We probably won't see any updates until the Intel/nvidia lawsuit is resolved in nvidia's favor, or Apple bites the bullet and goes with ATi for mobile chips.

Of course, there are rumors on the Internets that Apple is about to unleash a huge lineup refresh tomorrow, hitting the iMac, Mac Mini, Mighty Mouse, and MacBook (not MBP) lines, plus a new desktop multitouch device. So we'll see how this unfolds, if this is true.
 
As I have understood, MBP are selling like crazy.

I have been having my eyes on one since the swich to Intel and bootcamp, but I need a better graphics board.

It is quite funny because I complained about this to a former collegaue a year ago, a die hard mac addict, instantly he told me, "Apple does not make gaming computers, get a Wii if you want to play games".

IMHO if they added a serious GFX chip and upped resolution on the MBP 15" it would sell even better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top