Graphics Cards on Macbook, Macbook Pro
Hey guys
I've been following the threads with some interest for a while. I notice that alot of people want graphics cards in the macbook and Macbook Pro or at least have the option to add a graphics card.
I've thought about this and asked other forums. Is it even technically possible for Apple to keep the same form factor and battery life that both laptops have. a 8400M would presumably add at least 1 cm to the macbook compared to the x3100 and reduce the battery life significantly. Everyone is talking about the new 8800GT and GTS but these graphics cards will blow the power consumption of both laptops out of the water. My question is, are people here actually willing to sacrifice the thickness and battery life for the option of better graphics cards? or am I technically talking crap?
I've been following the threads with some interest for a while. I notice that alot of people want graphics cards in the macbook and Macbook Pro or at least have the option to add a graphics card.
I've thought about this and asked other forums. Is it even technically possible for Apple to keep the same form factor and battery life that both laptops have. a 8400M would presumably add at least 1 cm to the macbook compared to the x3100 and reduce the battery life significantly. Everyone is talking about the new 8800GT and GTS but these graphics cards will blow the power consumption of both laptops out of the water. My question is, are people here actually willing to sacrifice the thickness and battery life for the option of better graphics cards? or am I technically talking crap?
Comments
The MacBookPros HAVE "REAL" graphics cards in them.
I don't understand your point.
The old iBooks had "REAL" graphics cards in them and weren't much thicker than the current macbooks.
The MacBookPros HAVE "REAL" graphics cards in them.
I don't understand your point.
Yeah, I can understand not having the highest end laptop graphics cards but integrated graphics in the Macbook sucks. It's not as if a higher end card just sits there draining battery life, if you don't use it then it won't drain the battery but it's nice to have the power available when you do need it. Look at the battery details on this page:
http://uk.zepto.com/Shop/Notebook.aspx?notebookid=644
Check the prices there too and note the lowest end Macbook is £699. Sure the Macbook CPUs are better but a trade-off would be nice so we at least get graphics cards that don't stop programs working or display interface glitches. We never had the issues we have now on the old PPC computers with dedicated cards and they fit into an even smaller enclosure than the 13" Macbook.
The MBP have a significantly larger space to install their graphics cards. Lets not mention that the heat the MBP generates is quite horrendous compared to alot of other laptops. There is a point and the point is the Macbook form factor 13" is horrendously hard to install a decent graphics card on it without getting rid of other features of the Macbook. The two examples you listed were 14 inch laptops as well. Lets not mention its also a good half a centimeter thicker. Im just trying to say, adding a graphics card to the Macbook will be too great a sacrifice in that it will never happen. It'll be thicker, and it'll have less battery life. The only Graphics card I've ever found on the 13" form factor is a 8400GS and thats not even for games.
there was a 12"iBook as well don't forget.
but I see you have already answered your own question "it will never happen."
so thats that answered
So again, i don't see your point.
Sure the Macbook CPUs are better but a trade-off would be nice so we at least get graphics cards that don't stop programs working or display interface glitches.
What Programs aren't working?
Hey guys
I've been following the threads with some interest for a while. I notice that alot of people want graphics cards in the macbook and Macbook Pro or at least have the option to add a graphics card.
I've thought about this and asked other forums. Is it even technically possible for Apple to keep the same form factor and battery life that both laptops have. a 8400M would presumably add at least 1 cm to the macbook compared to the x3100 and reduce the battery life significantly. Everyone is talking about the new 8800GT and GTS but these graphics cards will blow the power consumption of both laptops out of the water. My question is, are people here actually willing to sacrifice the thickness and battery life for the option of better graphics cards? or am I technically talking crap?
It's possible to do it all. Circuit's are getting smaller, batteries are getting better, and the graphics on a computer are one the most important factors. There shouldn't be any sacrifice in size what so ever.
there was a 12"iBook as well don't forget.
but I see you have already answered your own question "it will never happen."
so thats that answered
So again, i don't see your point.
True, but the 12" iBook was quite thick compared to the PowerBook, MacBook, or MacBook Pro. Traditionally, the large a laptop gets, the thinner it gets, because they only need so much space, and a wider base allows them to spread out and get thinner. For that same reason, the 15" PowerBook was thinner than the 12", and the 17" PowerBook was thinner than the 15".
What Programs aren't working?
Mainly ones that use OpenGL-based interfaces. Not all of them don't work, just that they don't work properly. It includes Maya, Shake, Blender, there may be others. Two of those are 3D programs and Shake is a compositor. The interface gets all messed up with the integrated graphics in Shake as does Blender. In Maya, the interface only messes up a little but there is no support for hardware rendering, which there was with the dedicated graphics cards as far back as 2002. New developments in Leopard may get round some compatibility issues in software but it's still a bit ridiculous that a brand new machine has less support than one from 5 years ago and I'm not comparing low end now vs high end back then, I mean the low end back then too.
There is a point and the point is the Macbook form factor 13" is horrendously hard to install a decent graphics card on it without getting rid of other features of the Macbook. The two examples you listed were 14 inch laptops as well.
They were 14" laptops with 8800M GTs in them. I am not saying Macbooks should come with those chips if Apple can't make them fit. However, I don't believe they can't fit something better than integrated chips in them when other manufacturers have done it and Apple themselves have done it - I used to have a 12" powerbook with a geforce go 5200fx and a Mini with a Radeon 9200. Now it may be the case that the integrated graphics have better raw performance, it's hard to tell as the CPUs and system bandwidths are so much higher but I'd reckon it's not by much and since the integrated chips are not for performance, I'd sacrifice whatever small amount of performance for much better features and compatibility.
there was a 12"iBook as well don't forget.
1) The 12" iBook had a 32MB card - one that didn't require as much cooling as do current video cards. And it would be: "There was a 12" iBook as well, don't forget." Remember the comma, it really helps.
but I see you have already answered your own question "it will never happen."
2) The point of forums is for discussion. If you don't see the point, you might want to rethink what he's asking in the first place.
Graphics cards are becoming a must in all computers that will do anything more than word processing and "spreadsheeting". It's possible to put them in there - look at comparable Dell computers. The Dell XPS1330 - a 13" notebook - has a 8400GS, and is very close in size to the 13" MacBook. On top of that, it's very well designed. If Dell can do it, the geniuses at Apple can surely do it.
so thats that answered
3) The MacBook Pro has a graphics card BUT no options. You need to read the original post more carefully. Should I explain? The MBP only has one graphics card. The point of the thread is that we need MORE THAN ONE CHOICE FOR A GRAPHICS CARD. Understand? Offer some SLI like Alienware does. Need to increase the thickness of the notebook? Do it. The first goal is functionality, aesthetics is second (replace "is" with "should be".) If Apple refuses to put top-end hardware into its products but still wants to charge top-dollar for them, they will lose me as a customer. Plain and simple.
So again, i don't see your point.
4) Do you see the point now? I'm sorry if you don't like my tone, but your tone and attitude - at least how they come across when read - are very nasty.
I've been thinking for a while Aesthetics is indeed first for Apple. Of all the people on this forum, would you consider yourself the average Apple Macbook or MBP customer? Form Factor is the reason why many of my friends even recognise Apple products let alone. Yet every thread you go to around here it'll harp on about the ability to add more graphics cards, have the option to add graphics cards. It is possible I grant you, the Dell XPS 1330 is a prime example, but the 8400GS is hardly anything special to be honest.
O btw if you look at the two 14" laptops that someone has put in as an example they are a good deal thicker bigger and heavier then the Macbook. For Future product releases like the MBP and Macbook would the customer base change significantly if they got heavier but had top end technology like you say.
The Dell XPS1330 - a 13" notebook - has a 8400GS, and is very close in size to the 13" MacBook. On top of that, it's very well designed. If Dell can do it, the geniuses at Apple can surely do it.
And it's not just being able to do it IMO but Apple should be doing it better to justify charging more. When they are charging more money for less of a computer, something is wrong. If Apple want a reputation as good technical designers then they need to start delivering the goods. Just dropping the spec down so the parts can work in a tight container is not good technical design.
Form Factor is the reason why many of my friends even recognise Apple products let alone. Yet every thread you go to around here it'll harp on about the ability to add more graphics cards, have the option to add graphics cards.
Yeah but nobody is suggesting unreasonable options. It's not as if people want SLI 8800 GTS inside a 13" Macbook. What people are saying is that the graphics cards should not be as low as they are or at least because they are low, Apple shouldn't be charging so much for machines with them.
I personally don't have many complaints about the Macbook Pro as the 8600M GT seems like a good card but the price difference between it and the competition is ridiculous now.
The Macbook was always bad - Intel's integrated graphics chips are just not powerful enough and given how much criticism Apple gave them in the past, it's hypocritical of them to use them now. Yes they aren't as bad as they were but they are still the lowest performing chips of all new chips available today and they still have the compatibility problems they always did.
It is possible I grant you, the Dell XPS 1330 is a prime example, but the 8400GS is hardly anything special to be honest.
It doesn't have to be. It just has to be better than what Apple are offering and it is.
An X3100 gets a 3DMark06 score of about 500.
The 8400GS gets between 1500-2000.
For casual gaming, which a lot of Macbook owners would love to be able to do, the 8400GS is a much better deal.
And it's not just being able to do it IMO but Apple should be doing it better to justify charging more. When they are charging more money for less of a computer, something is wrong. If Apple want a reputation as good technical designers then they need to start delivering the goods. Just dropping the spec down so the parts can work in a tight container is not good technical design.
Yeah but nobody is suggesting unreasonable options. It's not as if people want SLI 8800 GTS inside a 13" Macbook. What people are saying is that the graphics cards should not be as low as they are or at least because they are low, Apple shouldn't be charging so much for machines with them.
I personally don't have many complaints about the Macbook Pro as the 8600M GT seems like a good card but the price difference between it and the competition is ridiculous now.
The Macbook was always bad - Intel's integrated graphics chips are just not powerful enough and given how much criticism Apple gave them in the past, it's hypocritical of them to use them now. Yes they aren't as bad as they were but they are still the lowest performing chips of all new chips available today and they still have the compatibility problems they always did.
It doesn't have to be. It just has to be better than what Apple are offering and it is.
An X3100 gets a 3DMark06 score of about 500.
The 8400GS gets between 1500-2000.
For casual gaming, which a lot of Macbook owners would love to be able to do, the 8400GS is a much better deal.
I agree with all the points above. The 8600GT is indeed fair game for a laptop. But the laptop itself is a good price level above most of its compeitition. I think Dell laptops are a good sticking point against Apple since their prices are ridiculously different to Apple yet have much better specs. Even the relevant dimensions arent all that different.
For the Macbook, i've been comparing it to the Dell XPS 1330 and there simply is no comparison in terms of price point, features especially now since that laptop is offerred in a 2cm format similar to the Macbook. Add one more year of warranty to boot and I dont see how they can justify not even adding a video card. I bet you they do though, by saying form factor is everything and screwing it up will cost us too much sales.
Mainly ones that use OpenGL-based interfaces. Not all of them don't work, just that they don't work properly. It includes Maya, Shake, Blender, there may be others. Two of those are 3D programs and Shake is a compositor.
Apple did not design or market the Macbook to do that sort of work. That's the wrong tool for the job. The macbook is a consumer machine. IMO the argument shouldn't be, 'why doesn't the Macbook have a dedicated graphics card' but rather 'why isn't the macbook cheaper'?
Consumer laptops don't need dedicated graphics cards IMO.
IMO the argument shouldn't be, 'why doesn't the Macbook have a dedicated graphics card' but rather 'why isn't the macbook cheaper'?
Or "why the entry level Macbook does not have a Superdrive?". You can hardly find today any portable at $1100 without a DVD burner.
Good post Alex
I've been thinking for a while Aesthetics is indeed first for Apple. Of all the people on this forum, would you consider yourself the average Apple Macbook or MBP customer? Form Factor is the reason why many of my friends even recognise Apple products let alone. Yet every thread you go to around here it'll harp on about the ability to add more graphics cards, have the option to add graphics cards. It is possible I grant you, the Dell XPS 1330 is a prime example, but the 8400GS is hardly anything special to be honest.
O btw if you look at the two 14" laptops that someone has put in as an example they are a good deal thicker bigger and heavier then the Macbook. For Future product releases like the MBP and Macbook would the customer base change significantly if they got heavier but had top end technology like you say.
I have always bought Apple products because they, at one time, were on the cutting edge of technology, and had "state of the art" components, which included cutting edge performance CPU's, and Graphics cards. I guess that time has passed, and Apple has indeed changed into somewhat of a "Barbie PC" style of manufacturer. If the average person/computer buyer now looks at Apple and thinks that Apple isn't about cutting edge technology it's about the look, and if looks, and AIO is better than performance; I really shouldn't be using Mac's any more. If Apple thinks internals are no longer as important as the form factor they have indeed changed into a company who's products no longer interest me. I guess it took a post like yours for me to notice it because I have been complaining about these factors for a while, and just didn't see it because I am a "legacy" Mac user from a time and era of Apples history that has indeed passed. Thanks for bringing this intro the light for me. Apple has changed and I just didn't want to see it.
When you can get a portable GPU that smacks Apple's tower range?
How embarrassing.
How pathetic.
Sure, that's really 'Thinking Different'.
Maybe Apple are still figuring how to compete in GPUs?
iMac? Sucking GPU.
Mac Pro. Sucking GPU.
Macbook. Integrated Crapics.
Mac Mini. Integrated Crapics.
Mac Book Pro. Well. Erm. It's not a 8800M, now, is it?
Flagship video/print/3D production machines?
Poor.
At least give us the goddamn choice. You don't even get a choice on the Mac Pro. Unless two years out of date is your kind of 'choice'?
Dire.
Lemon Bon Bon.