I fixed it for you. It's a basic Networking structure, not a specific wired or wireless structure. Those are add-ons targeting a desktop or laptop platform, specifically.
So are we talking GAMING now on the Macbooks?
Or is Apple going to cripple it?
Macbook Rev 1 71% Open GL
Macbook Rev 3 171% open GL
Then Apple releases X300 and it drops to 70% again. So, you could never play games but you could run motion. Is Steve really going to get over his PARANOID state and realize that gamers would far out weigh the minuscule PRO user base that might buy a cheap macbook for Motion? We still buy high end.
Get over it Steve.
So, does this mean GAMING on ALL MACS now? If so, its a great move, if not, it shows Apple is still trying to stifle the PRO user and could care less about gaming, and it's larger than the music business.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but AMD is in the CPU business, not the graphics accelerator cards or other higgledy-piggledy (sorry if I'm getting too technical ) business.
AMD purchased ATI graphics and last week they split the company and have money coming from Abu Dabi (Middle East) and will now come out with the .22 nano sooner rather than later.
I've worked in tech and this is good stuff. AMD had a chip that had several cores and no heat sink, cool to the touch. Now they can go and focus on design and get back into the business. Remember, Apple was one of the first AMD Hypertransport Consortium members, so they can always use AMD if need be and it works. Think about it. Use Intel for all the X86 kinks and bugs then when AMD has a killer chip or a chip that runs for 24 hours, then they can offer both.
Everyone said Dell would never use AMD and behold, they now do. AMD is a good alternative but they have not been able to match the duo core but there is supposed to be something under the table.
And for what it's worth, know someone that saw the NEW FINAL CUT PRO last AUG (2007) and stated, very deep but as easy as iMovie.
I think and hope Apple releases GREAT GPU for all machines then starts stronger and more cores on MBPros, (8) and 16/32 on Macpro and start to focus on Pro market again.
AMD owns ATi so some people will refer ATi to AMD nowadays.
By the way, I don't get it, why people want to play high-end games on a notebook that is not meant for gaming? If you wan to play games get a Windows Notebook or PC, much more variety and wayy cheaper. Besides portable gaming notebooks is categorized under Desktop Replacement Notebooks, its heavy, its big, its battery life sucks and its expensive but its portable. The MBP was never meant to be categorized under DRN.
Oh yea, don't forget that mobile GPUs are weaker then their desktop counterparts so there is no way you can play high-end games on a notebook unless you are willing to sacrifice a lot of stuffs.
Besides if playing high-end game is so important why go for notebook? You know notebooks are not meant to play high-end gaming. Get a real desktop gaming rig, or if you are like me get a Playstation 3.
Yup and people like to say you are paying extra for a PC internals.....
P.S: Take note that I play games but I consider my self as a casual gamer and the 8600M GT is already sufficient.
Errr, then you should contact Apple and let them know that they should no longer feature motion, FCP, Adobe After Effects running on a MBP which it does pretty well. Having the ability to do this on a $800 machine would be a plus as you could leave your high end note book at home and not worry so much.
While I doubt we'll have great GPU/FPS across the board on all mac's (which IMHO is a great idea), I see price cuts (said that a month ago), more models, and thinner designs.
Well, the machines have potential and appeal for sure, but no way am I buying one for the moment... in 1 year maybe.
They finally get all the bugs out of the current architecture and how it relates to OS X etc, and they jump ship again to another chipset! Another round of Rev A madness...*sigh*
The prognosis is good for a resurrection of Mac gaming... We'll have to see the benchmarks. The moment the MacBooks come out I want to see people benchmark the F*K out of it. Mac, Windows, whatever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac
So are we talking GAMING now on the Macbooks?
Or is Apple going to cripple it?
Macbook Rev 1 71% Open GL
Macbook Rev 3 171% open GL
Then Apple releases X300 and it drops to 70% again. So, you could never play games but you could run motion. Is Steve really going to get over his PARANOID state and realize that gamers would far out weigh the minuscule PRO user base that might buy a cheap macbook for Motion? We still buy high end.
Get over it Steve.
So, does this mean GAMING on ALL MACS now? If so, its a great move, if not, it shows Apple is still trying to stifle the PRO user and could care less about gaming, and it's larger than the music business.
Well, the machines have potential and appeal for sure, but no way am I buying one for the moment... in 1 year maybe.
They finally get all the bugs out of the current architecture and how it relates to OS X etc, and they jump ship again to another chipset! Another round of Rev A madness...*sigh*
Fair enough. However the MacBook Pros have been through a few Revs and even the latest models up to today still have problems...
I'm not a gamer, but why would you need more power than that? Why wouldn't you just get a desktop? If there are more powerful gpu's out there, there is probably a good reason Apple doesn't include one: too much heat would require a larger heatsink and Apple doesn't want to make a thicker laptop, it is not compatible with the current hardware on the MBP, it is too hard/not possible to write drivers for it, etc. At any rate, you can be certain it will not be finding its way into a MacBook!
OpenCL support. A decent GPU is a very powerful processor and software can take advantage of it in many ways. In current generations MacBooks the GPU is very weak and probably won't do a lot of good with OpenCL (if it's compatible at all).
As an example, GPUs are taditionaly faster with floating point operations then CPUs. Floating points are used extensively in all kind of graphic functions.
So with this nVidia hardware, your Photoshop, iLife or even OS-X can make calculations on the GPU resulting in a faster and smoother operations.
I think intel chips are more stable then nvidia chips.
But consider this: most elite gamer mobos in the world are nvidia chipsets.. nForce7XX series and such. This means that these chipsets are fast and easy to overclock. Of course, one of the reasons is SLI support as well.
Historically speaking, nForce 1 and 2 where not good mobos (I owned 1,2 and 3), but from 3 and up nvidia got their act together. The latest nForce series are considered very good by most gamers.
Anyway, I do not expect it to be a bad mobo, but it's going to be interesting to see how stable these systems are going to be.
How much difference do Nvidia chipsets really make to gaming anyway? Are we realllly talking more than 2 or 3 fps here?
Compared to what and which model?
Price for price, they are about the same as ATI chips - they constantly shift back and forth between who has the fastest.
Compared to Intel chips, Nvidia's equivalent is about double the speed. So the integrated Nvidia should be about twice the speed of the X4500 Apple could have used.
As for stability, I've seen a few GMA 950 related kernel panics using some graphics apps. I would happily put up with a kernel panic once a week for double performance anyway as well the ability to actually use apps that don't support Intel graphics.
Stability issues with the Nvidia stuff will mostly be heat related and Apple generally make sure their devices run cool enough for this not to happen. The Nvidia chipset is supposed to draw less power than the Intel ones too.
Rumours say that the MacBook will have an nVidia chipset (northbridge and southbridge combined into one) with integrated graphics.
The MacBook Pro will continue to have a discrete graphics chip, and may or may not also have an nVidia chipset. That hybrid SLI would be cool - where the machine can switch between discrete graphics and integrated graphics to save power.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kilopopo
i hope it is discrete and about 256mb and supports opengl 2 opengl 3 beta is already out
If you're talking about the non-pro, which presumably you are because the pro already has 256 MB graphics, then keep dreaming
Rumours say that the MacBook will have an nVidia chipset (northbridge and southbridge combined into one) with integrated graphics.
The MacBook Pro will continue to have a discrete graphics chip, and may or may not also have an nVidia chipset. That hybrid SLI would be cool - where the machine can switch between discrete graphics and integrated graphics to save power.
If you're talking about the non-pro, which presumably you are because the pro already has 256 MB graphics, then keep dreaming
for myself, I was getting some pretty good overclocks with an n650sli and two 8500 gts... I was running raid0 as well using nvraid (nvidias onboard raid)
For the MacBooks I hope it is an integrated but 9300m g level integrated chip with dedicated 128mb VRAM... For MacBook pro I think it will be an 9600m gt or better which will fallback to the integrated 9300
So hopefully even the MacBook will have the "integrated" 9300M with DDR2 128MB VRAM soldered on board for lower end MacBook, higher end MacBook with DDR2 256MB VRAM soldered. Hopefully this is the goodnes that is the MCP97 something or other.
MCP - Tron's Master Control Program... No wonder it kept sounding funny to me... LOLs?
So hopefully even the MacBook will have the "integrated" 9300M with DDR2 128MB VRAM soldered on board for lower end MacBook, higher end MacBook with DDR2 256MB VRAM soldered. Hopefully this is the goodnes that is the MCP97 something or other.
MCP - Tron's Master Control Program... No wonder it kept sounding funny to me... LOLs?
Er, as far as I can tell, you've posted links to details of a discrete graphics chip.
If people are talking about the MCP79 having 9300M graphics, presumably they mean the graphics core from the 9300M will be integrated into the MCP79 motherboard chip. If it's actually a separate chip with its own graphics memory, that's not integrated graphics!
Comments
Are you unconcerned about the WiFi security holes accessible via the Nvidia devices?
Links?
I don't think PhysX is supported on the mobile chips though. The Macbooks will still be low end but just much more usable for the majority of apps...
In Windows it should be supported for the 9300M...
http://blog.laptopmag.com/nvidia-unv...-support-by-q3
http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_9300m_g.html
Actual Windows and Mac drivers may not quite be there yet, though.
I fixed it for you. It's a basic Networking structure, not a specific wired or wireless structure. Those are add-ons targeting a desktop or laptop platform, specifically.
So are we talking GAMING now on the Macbooks?
Or is Apple going to cripple it?
Macbook Rev 1 71% Open GL
Macbook Rev 3 171% open GL
Then Apple releases X300 and it drops to 70% again. So, you could never play games but you could run motion. Is Steve really going to get over his PARANOID state and realize that gamers would far out weigh the minuscule PRO user base that might buy a cheap macbook for Motion? We still buy high end.
Get over it Steve.
So, does this mean GAMING on ALL MACS now? If so, its a great move, if not, it shows Apple is still trying to stifle the PRO user and could care less about gaming, and it's larger than the music business.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but AMD is in the CPU business, not the graphics accelerator cards or other higgledy-piggledy (sorry if I'm getting too technical
AMD purchased ATI graphics and last week they split the company and have money coming from Abu Dabi (Middle East) and will now come out with the .22 nano sooner rather than later.
I've worked in tech and this is good stuff. AMD had a chip that had several cores and no heat sink, cool to the touch. Now they can go and focus on design and get back into the business. Remember, Apple was one of the first AMD Hypertransport Consortium members, so they can always use AMD if need be and it works. Think about it. Use Intel for all the X86 kinks and bugs then when AMD has a killer chip or a chip that runs for 24 hours, then they can offer both.
Everyone said Dell would never use AMD and behold, they now do. AMD is a good alternative but they have not been able to match the duo core but there is supposed to be something under the table.
And for what it's worth, know someone that saw the NEW FINAL CUT PRO last AUG (2007) and stated, very deep but as easy as iMovie.
I think and hope Apple releases GREAT GPU for all machines then starts stronger and more cores on MBPros, (8) and 16/32 on Macpro and start to focus on Pro market again.
AMD owns ATi so some people will refer ATi to AMD nowadays.
By the way, I don't get it, why people want to play high-end games on a notebook that is not meant for gaming? If you wan to play games get a Windows Notebook or PC, much more variety and wayy cheaper. Besides portable gaming notebooks is categorized under Desktop Replacement Notebooks, its heavy, its big, its battery life sucks and its expensive but its portable. The MBP was never meant to be categorized under DRN.
Oh yea, don't forget that mobile GPUs are weaker then their desktop counterparts so there is no way you can play high-end games on a notebook unless you are willing to sacrifice a lot of stuffs.
Besides if playing high-end game is so important why go for notebook? You know notebooks are not meant to play high-end gaming. Get a real desktop gaming rig, or if you are like me get a Playstation 3.
Yup and people like to say you are paying extra for a PC internals.....
P.S: Take note that I play games but I consider my self as a casual gamer and the 8600M GT is already sufficient.
Errr, then you should contact Apple and let them know that they should no longer feature motion, FCP, Adobe After Effects running on a MBP which it does pretty well. Having the ability to do this on a $800 machine would be a plus as you could leave your high end note book at home and not worry so much.
While I doubt we'll have great GPU/FPS across the board on all mac's (which IMHO is a great idea), I see price cuts (said that a month ago), more models, and thinner designs.
They finally get all the bugs out of the current architecture and how it relates to OS X etc, and they jump ship again to another chipset! Another round of Rev A madness...*sigh*
So are we talking GAMING now on the Macbooks?
Or is Apple going to cripple it?
Macbook Rev 1 71% Open GL
Macbook Rev 3 171% open GL
Then Apple releases X300 and it drops to 70% again. So, you could never play games but you could run motion. Is Steve really going to get over his PARANOID state and realize that gamers would far out weigh the minuscule PRO user base that might buy a cheap macbook for Motion? We still buy high end.
Get over it Steve.
So, does this mean GAMING on ALL MACS now? If so, its a great move, if not, it shows Apple is still trying to stifle the PRO user and could care less about gaming, and it's larger than the music business.
Well, the machines have potential and appeal for sure, but no way am I buying one for the moment... in 1 year maybe.
They finally get all the bugs out of the current architecture and how it relates to OS X etc, and they jump ship again to another chipset! Another round of Rev A madness...*sigh*
Fair enough. However the MacBook Pros have been through a few Revs and even the latest models up to today still have problems...
I'm not a gamer, but why would you need more power than that? Why wouldn't you just get a desktop? If there are more powerful gpu's out there, there is probably a good reason Apple doesn't include one: too much heat would require a larger heatsink and Apple doesn't want to make a thicker laptop, it is not compatible with the current hardware on the MBP, it is too hard/not possible to write drivers for it, etc. At any rate, you can be certain it will not be finding its way into a MacBook!
OpenCL support. A decent GPU is a very powerful processor and software can take advantage of it in many ways. In current generations MacBooks the GPU is very weak and probably won't do a lot of good with OpenCL (if it's compatible at all).
As an example, GPUs are taditionaly faster with floating point operations then CPUs. Floating points are used extensively in all kind of graphic functions.
So with this nVidia hardware, your Photoshop, iLife or even OS-X can make calculations on the GPU resulting in a faster and smoother operations.
this sucks intel chipsets are better IMO
I think intel chips are more stable then nvidia chips.
But consider this: most elite gamer mobos in the world are nvidia chipsets.. nForce7XX series and such. This means that these chipsets are fast and easy to overclock. Of course, one of the reasons is SLI support as well.
Historically speaking, nForce 1 and 2 where not good mobos (I owned 1,2 and 3), but from 3 and up nvidia got their act together. The latest nForce series are considered very good by most gamers.
Anyway, I do not expect it to be a bad mobo, but it's going to be interesting to see how stable these systems are going to be.
How much difference do Nvidia chipsets really make to gaming anyway? Are we realllly talking more than 2 or 3 fps here?
Compared to what and which model?
Price for price, they are about the same as ATI chips - they constantly shift back and forth between who has the fastest.
Compared to Intel chips, Nvidia's equivalent is about double the speed. So the integrated Nvidia should be about twice the speed of the X4500 Apple could have used.
As for stability, I've seen a few GMA 950 related kernel panics using some graphics apps. I would happily put up with a kernel panic once a week for double performance anyway as well the ability to actually use apps that don't support Intel graphics.
Stability issues with the Nvidia stuff will mostly be heat related and Apple generally make sure their devices run cool enough for this not to happen. The Nvidia chipset is supposed to draw less power than the Intel ones too.
i hope it is discrete and about 256mb and supports opengl 2 opengl 3 beta is already out
please reply
so will new macbooks have nvidia cards in it?
Rumours say that the MacBook will have an nVidia chipset (northbridge and southbridge combined into one) with integrated graphics.
The MacBook Pro will continue to have a discrete graphics chip, and may or may not also have an nVidia chipset. That hybrid SLI would be cool - where the machine can switch between discrete graphics and integrated graphics to save power.
i hope it is discrete and about 256mb and supports opengl 2 opengl 3 beta is already out
If you're talking about the non-pro, which presumably you are because the pro already has 256 MB graphics, then keep dreaming
Rumours say that the MacBook will have an nVidia chipset (northbridge and southbridge combined into one) with integrated graphics.
The MacBook Pro will continue to have a discrete graphics chip, and may or may not also have an nVidia chipset. That hybrid SLI would be cool - where the machine can switch between discrete graphics and integrated graphics to save power.
If you're talking about the non-pro, which presumably you are because the pro already has 256 MB graphics, then keep dreaming
for myself, I was getting some pretty good overclocks with an n650sli and two 8500 gts... I was running raid0 as well using nvraid (nvidias onboard raid)
For the MacBooks I hope it is an integrated but 9300m g level integrated chip with dedicated 128mb VRAM... For MacBook pro I think it will be an 9600m gt or better which will fallback to the integrated 9300
For the MacBooks I hope it is an integrated but 9300m g level integrated chip with dedicated 128mb VRAM.
Integrated graphics doesn't use dedicated VRAM. Do you mean you hope the graphics will be apportioned at least 128 MB of system RAM?
Integrated graphics doesn't use dedicated VRAM. Do you mean you hope the graphics will be apportioned at least 128 MB of system RAM?
From what I can tell, luckily with the Nvidia 9300M and above, it does not used shared memory.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-...G.11359.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-...GS.9452.0.html
So hopefully even the MacBook will have the "integrated" 9300M with DDR2 128MB VRAM soldered on board for lower end MacBook, higher end MacBook with DDR2 256MB VRAM soldered. Hopefully this is the goodnes that is the MCP97 something or other.
MCP - Tron's Master Control Program... No wonder it kept sounding funny to me... LOLs?
From what I can tell, luckily with the Nvidia 9300M and above, it does not used shared memory.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-...G.11359.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-...GS.9452.0.html
So hopefully even the MacBook will have the "integrated" 9300M with DDR2 128MB VRAM soldered on board for lower end MacBook, higher end MacBook with DDR2 256MB VRAM soldered. Hopefully this is the goodnes that is the MCP97 something or other.
MCP - Tron's Master Control Program... No wonder it kept sounding funny to me... LOLs?
Er, as far as I can tell, you've posted links to details of a discrete graphics chip.
If people are talking about the MCP79 having 9300M graphics, presumably they mean the graphics core from the 9300M will be integrated into the MCP79 motherboard chip. If it's actually a separate chip with its own graphics memory, that's not integrated graphics!