I don't know if I searched well enough or not but I don't think I found a good enough answer for my question.... I was wondering if the Macbook would be sufficient enough for Graphics Design work. I'm attending this University and they're making every second year student buy a laptop from Apple and generally I was wondering if the integrated graphics was good enough for the usual Adobe CS2 apps and some 3d Studio Max work. Does the x1600 in the Macbook Pro that crazy amount of work for 3d apps like 3dSM? I'll mainly use it when I'm attending the actual classes during the day, but I'll MOST likely be using my PC at home to do my work at night. And does the screen resolution on the Macbook do justice? The Macbook Pro is just too rich for my student loands butt.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
macbook or macbook pro
- Thread starter wopsang
- Start date
Arcygenical
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2005
- Messages
- 25,066
Buy a refurbished MBP from the apple store and save an additiona 100$ over the student discount. That's what I did 
.
.Arcygenical
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2005
- Messages
- 25,066
Nope, they don't, but you still save a little bit more money when purchasing the higher level items (for example a refurbished mid level option is 100$ less expensive than one with the education discount).
You *CAN* buy applecare at student pricing (249 CAD | 399 CAD new) on a refurbished apple computer however!
You *CAN* buy applecare at student pricing (249 CAD | 399 CAD new) on a refurbished apple computer however!
Well, the one thing that I have never been able to find an answer to regarding the MacBook and Intel Mac Mini is wether the 64MB video memory that is shared with main memory has it's own dedicated bandwidth path to the Northbridge and/or DAC/Display
I have always contended that the reason why all PC buyers avoid Shared SDRAM like the plague is because the Video RAM needs to pump out ((H. Resolution in pixels) X (Vertical Resolution in pixels) X (Color depth in Bits per pixel 1 for 256 color, 2 for 65K High Color, 3 for 24M True color, or 4 for true color with 256 bit alpha channel) X (Vertical Refresh rate in Hz)) = Total amount of data that must be pumped out of video memory every second.
THat lost chunk of memory bandwidth is the main performance problem in shared SDRAM systems.
64 MB of video memoy is a lot Compare for yourself, if you exclute the refresh rate from the calculation above, you get the size in bytes of your display's image Divide by 2^20 to convert that to Megabytes (2 to the 20th power)
1600X1200 true color requires 6MB of video ram. (The reason 8MB cards can't do that is because they can't move the data out fast enough)
If the 64 MB at least has a dedicated path out to the display, and the remaining RAM appropriated from system memory is just used for frame swapping, or storing textures etc, any of the Mac Systems' video should perform as well as any cheap video card on the market.
I have always contended that the reason why all PC buyers avoid Shared SDRAM like the plague is because the Video RAM needs to pump out ((H. Resolution in pixels) X (Vertical Resolution in pixels) X (Color depth in Bits per pixel 1 for 256 color, 2 for 65K High Color, 3 for 24M True color, or 4 for true color with 256 bit alpha channel) X (Vertical Refresh rate in Hz)) = Total amount of data that must be pumped out of video memory every second.
THat lost chunk of memory bandwidth is the main performance problem in shared SDRAM systems.
64 MB of video memoy is a lot Compare for yourself, if you exclute the refresh rate from the calculation above, you get the size in bytes of your display's image Divide by 2^20 to convert that to Megabytes (2 to the 20th power)
1600X1200 true color requires 6MB of video ram. (The reason 8MB cards can't do that is because they can't move the data out fast enough)
If the 64 MB at least has a dedicated path out to the display, and the remaining RAM appropriated from system memory is just used for frame swapping, or storing textures etc, any of the Mac Systems' video should perform as well as any cheap video card on the market.
tdowning said:
Only if you're using a dumb frame buffer (1600px times 1200px times 4 bytes per pixel) and rendering directly to the screen. And that's pretty much how it was done in the 1980's.
Now, use a backbuffer and you're at 16MB memory. That will bring you up to date with the early 90's at least.
But then you have to add memory for textures, because OSX uses OpenGL for rendering windows, and all of the windows are stored in memory as textures. Don't forget to add shader programs, vertex caching, etc etc etc. which are required to render all those fancy window effects.
There's a LOT more that's stored in video memory than just the pixels you see on the screen.
There is so much to consider... Well I think I'm going to wait for the FINAL minute in September to see if the rumours of the revisions of apples laptops comes true... I just found that the black Macbook is simply stunning in real life, but the slightly higher resolutions of the Macbook Pro's I can't dismiss... decisions decisions.
BoySetsFire
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2004
- Messages
- 456
refurbed MBP all the way.
hungryduck
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2005
- Messages
- 1,530
wopsang said:
maybe that means youll get a significant discount.........
Black Morty Rackham
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2004
- Messages
- 4,728
Remember that you'll have to use Boot Camp and boot into Windows if you want to run 3dsmax.
Gob said:
Notebooks are so much greater than desktops if you don't need all that power. The only real notable difference is the graphics unit which couldn't allow you to play games all that well to begin with.
Nothing beats minimalism. Get a MBP or MB and plug in an external display. Quiet, very little clutter and looks damn sexy with the option of picking up and going with you within a matter of minutes.
gigglebyte
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2001
- Messages
- 3,814
a ronin said:
the other reason would be if you have to take notes in class and can type faster than you can write...it would be a bitch to run an extension cord into the class so you could do that
another thing to consider is space...even though the imac doesn't take up too much space...it takes more than a portable does and in dorm rooms that can be an issue
I do pro video and I tend to have to use Blender for some 3D effects. I run a MacBook Pro 17".
I'll put it this way, if you intend on doing HUGE 3DS Max scenes, get the MacBook Pro 17".
But for graphic art, there is no need for a macbook pro. I have an old G4 Quicksilver in my arsenal and it runs OSX Tiger and Photoshop CS1 easily with no lag. However, if you're going to be using a lot of Camera Raw files(.cr2 or .raw) then you NEED the power of a MacBook, but not the MBP. Save some money, get the MacBook.
My MacBook Pro runs its little 17" screen and a 23" Cinema Display via DVI to ADC adapter. And it runs FCP, DVD Studio, and Livetype(All parts of Final Cut Studio) at the same time. If you need that kinda power, get the mac book pro, otherwise, youre good with the MacBook
I'll put it this way, if you intend on doing HUGE 3DS Max scenes, get the MacBook Pro 17".
But for graphic art, there is no need for a macbook pro. I have an old G4 Quicksilver in my arsenal and it runs OSX Tiger and Photoshop CS1 easily with no lag. However, if you're going to be using a lot of Camera Raw files(.cr2 or .raw) then you NEED the power of a MacBook, but not the MBP. Save some money, get the MacBook.
My MacBook Pro runs its little 17" screen and a 23" Cinema Display via DVI to ADC adapter. And it runs FCP, DVD Studio, and Livetype(All parts of Final Cut Studio) at the same time. If you need that kinda power, get the mac book pro, otherwise, youre good with the MacBook
Gob said:
If you've read my posts before I've mentioned that my school REQUIRES their students to purchase Apple laptops. I actually don't like the thought of buying stuff when I'm forced to do so...
Nali said:
This is exactly what I needed to know! Thanks! I looked over all the specs of both the MB and the MBP and the only difference that struck me was the lack of a dedicated video card. Hard drive space doesn't matter to me because I have SEVERAL external hard drives I could bring with me to class IF such an occasion arises. But thanks again Nali. So I'm thinking... would the MB be sufficient for rendering LARGE images? How would I configure the MB to handle images with quality of 300-500 dpi in VARIOUS resolutions?
Black Morty Rackham
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2004
- Messages
- 4,728
3D apps will suck on the Macbook non-Pro, due to the lack of a proper video card. CPU-based (ie, rendering) performance is pretty much the same on both. Whether or not it can handle rendering stuff at 300-500 DPI depends entirely on what the heck you mean by "various resolutions."
A pixel is a pixel, regardless of whether it's at 10000000 or 5 DPI. Hell, you can't even measure in DPI at all! The relevant measurement is PPI, or Pixels Per Inch. DPI is Dots Per Inch, and it's used for things like printers and scanners to indicate the smallest possible element to be printed or scanned. A printer can print things smaller than a pixel, thusly the DPI can be higher than the PPI.
If you have a 5000x5000 image, and you want it to be 10" x 10" on a piece of paper, you need to set the PPI setting to 500. If you then print this on a 1000 DPI printer, it will still be 10" x 10". And the renderer does not care about the size on print. All that matters to a renderer, or to Photoshop, is the number of pixels. 3dsmax or Photoshop don't care if that 5000x5000 pixel image will be 10" x 10" when you print it, or 500" x 500". It doesn't matter.
A pixel is a pixel, regardless of whether it's at 10000000 or 5 DPI. Hell, you can't even measure in DPI at all! The relevant measurement is PPI, or Pixels Per Inch. DPI is Dots Per Inch, and it's used for things like printers and scanners to indicate the smallest possible element to be printed or scanned. A printer can print things smaller than a pixel, thusly the DPI can be higher than the PPI.
If you have a 5000x5000 image, and you want it to be 10" x 10" on a piece of paper, you need to set the PPI setting to 500. If you then print this on a 1000 DPI printer, it will still be 10" x 10". And the renderer does not care about the size on print. All that matters to a renderer, or to Photoshop, is the number of pixels. 3dsmax or Photoshop don't care if that 5000x5000 pixel image will be 10" x 10" when you print it, or 500" x 500". It doesn't matter.
brownboi512
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2006
- Messages
- 334
if u got the money get MBP
Outrigger said:I think its such BS that some universities MAKE you buy apple laptops. what if you just bought a computer or a laptop? you have to go out and buy another one? ok end rant.
And some universitiess make you buy a certain brand of wintel laptop...
My university is full of fascists! Even if we have just bought brand new software from THAT SCHOOL, we're going to have to REPURCHASE the software because they have an agreement with Adobe that they have 100% of the students cooperation to buy new licenses without even asking us... I can't believe they can do this... They did, however, mention that the Macbook would be sufficient for Graphic Design.
I recently talked to a guy who just purchased his MBP through his wife's company and he said that the school reimages the laptop to the specifications of the school. I love OSX and I love my school... but why all these RULES... WELL I just read on my school's website there is a huge benefit down the road IN A WAY... I get Adobe CS3 for 475 as an upgrade... but in the end I get no software discs. Would reformatting ....well I guess the question is... is reformatting necessary on a mac?
Arcygenical
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2005
- Messages
- 25,066
What if you already own licences for said software?
It could be worse... In highschool, I was forced to purchase a Thinkpad R40 (with a grand total of 256mb of ram, minus ram for the integrated graphics, upgrades were against IT policy) with a downgraded processor (1.2ghz Pentium M) for almost $2000 (the same configurations could be had for closer to 700$ used).
It could be worse... In highschool, I was forced to purchase a Thinkpad R40 (with a grand total of 256mb of ram, minus ram for the integrated graphics, upgrades were against IT policy) with a downgraded processor (1.2ghz Pentium M) for almost $2000 (the same configurations could be had for closer to 700$ used).
Black Morty Rackham
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2004
- Messages
- 4,728
That's downright fucked up.Arcygenical said:
Arcygenical said:
Even if we own the licenses for "said" software there MUST be a repurchase of the new ones. It is ridiculous. I'm going to start a petition in my school to AT LEAST give us the cds for the software after our final 3 year stay at school.
wopsang said:
What's the old adage about what they don't know won't hurt them? Ignorance is bliss.
That's downright illegal I think. Adobe sells you a license but does not give you a CD in case of reformat? Specifically, what they are doing is charging you for the lease or rental of the software. I don't know how much CS2/3 is full retail, but for $400+ I would imagine you can get the full suite online.
That's utterly and grossly ridiculous of your "institution of higher learning" to commit such act.
if you truly are going to use it for graphics only, ie adobe suite, macromedia, etc then the mb will be fine. both are reasonably quick. currently you will see faster results with a dual g5 if you can handle a desktop instead of the laptop but that should change. otherwise save the money get a MB not the MBP. use the money you saved and get a 23" ACD, and a seperate mouse as well. you will love it. okay so you do your school work on your laptop and then hook up to the ACD to do your real graphics intensive work in your dormroom. you cannot reliably do photoshop work with out a mouse at a minimum in the future look to a tablet, once you learn it you will be light years ahead, you will kill yourself trying to use the pad. the screen of all the laptops is to small. even the 17 doesnt display enough pixels to do work. you spend way to much time scrolling and zooming to get any work done. and memory is key! adobe is a memory hog. apple cahrge way to much for memory. get the 512x2 for the cheapest option, go to Newegg and get yourself 1024 x2 for $150 and save the cash. will save yourself another $200 and have two chips to sell to someone else or put in another laptop if for somereason you have another laptop siting around that could use the memory.
in sumation:
MacBook will sufice.
Buy the cheapest memory option, and upgrade third party.
Buy yourself a 23" ACD for home use and a mouse.
the 17" MBP with memory will cost more than the MB + Memory + 23"ACD
.02
in sumation:
MacBook will sufice.
Buy the cheapest memory option, and upgrade third party.
Buy yourself a 23" ACD for home use and a mouse.
the 17" MBP with memory will cost more than the MB + Memory + 23"ACD
.02