So if 320M and 330M are integrated graphics, how does the Intel chip fit in? That is, if you're integrated, you're usually, what, integrated with the memory controller or some such? Do the MacBook Pros dodge the Intel vs. NVIDIA lawsuit by having two of essentially the same thing in the box?
The 320M is, I believe, a two-chip chipset solution like the old 9400M. It's an interface controller chip with an integrated GPU, linking the Intel C2D CPU to memory and peripherals on the 13", just like the 9400M did. The C2D processors don't have an integrated GPU, so the GPU on the 320M is 'on' all the time.
The 330M is a separate chip (or discrete GPU) on the motherboard, as Nvidia isn't allowed to integrate the GPU and chipset controller with the i3/5/7 processors (it uses an Intel controller chip). So the chipset is a three chip solution, of CPU, controller and GPU. In fact, with the hardware for the Optimus, it's probably a four chip solution. I think all i5/7 CPUs have an integrated GPU, so the 330M is only activated when required, and fortunately without the log off/on step required with the old 9600GT-based MacBook Pros.
Hope the above makes sense!
This must have been a lot of work for Apple, it's a whole CPU/chipset change for the 15" and 17", and a chipset change for the 13". I'm not surprised it took them so long.
Personally, with Steam coming online for Macs, I think Apple should have started upping their game with better graphic card options. The 330M is a mid-level solution, a tweaked 240 which itself was a die-shrunk 9600; I'd really like to have seen either the Radeon 5XXX series with something similar to the Optimus on-the-fly switching (ATi must be working on it), or a higher level Nvidia chip at least as an option. Though other top-end laptops eg Sony Vaio F Series use the 330M GPU. Even better, but very unlikely for Apple, would be to have the graphics cards as replaceable, for when they go wrong, or so they could be upgraded at a later date. But then I guess there are very few of us that actually like cracking the case on our expensive laptops...
Hmm, interesting that the 320 in the 13 inch and the 330 in the higher end models BOTH have 48 unified shaders. But then, the 320 is handicapped by system memory bandwidth, so I guess it works out.
Also interesting that despite having 48 shaders compared to last gen's 16, performance only doubled as a best case scenario. Again, limited by that system memory.
Yep it's ridiculous but there's a certain group of people who will pay a big premium just to get the fastest. Apple takes advantage of it.
IMO, you're better off to get the low end and then buy a new computer next year, selling the old one.
Apple's lowest end are usually always the better value as they charge a lot for upgrades. It's just artificial to maintain their price points. That upgrade should be £100 at most.
I'm pleased to see the 320M in the low end though rather than the 310M. It looks like it should be at least on par with the 9600M GT so it will handle pretty much any game that's out and 48 cores is decent for GPU processing. I'd imagine it will be close in performance to the following chip, which can just manage to run Crysis on high quality:
If these updates go into the Mini and Macbook, that will be a welcome update... eventually. Steam for Mac is coming this month and it would have been nice to have the entire low-end capable enough to give a great gaming experience. The 9400M is enough to tide people over though.
A 10 hour battery life is pretty cool and they don't exaggerate in this regard. I've seen a MBP last for 7 hours.
Core 2 Duo is a bit weak but at least they bumped the clock speed so it's not all bad. I'm definitely happier with Core 2 Duo + good GPU than Intel's junk with a Core i3.
What?! Is there a single Program for OS X that enables me to encode Videos using my GPU? So far, I haven't seen one. Also, where are all those OpenCL-Programs?
Hi there, I am a college student and I would like to buy a new MacBook pro. I have my budget, so is the 13-inch: 2.4GHz good enough?
That machine was designed for users just like you.
Never mind that i5 or i7 stuff - the processor that Apple put into your machine is a very fast processor in its own right, and it is brand new and it is better than last year's model by a long shot.
Unless you will be doing lots of processor intensive stuff like editing video or crunching giant spreadsheets or spell-checking encyclopedias, the i5 will be fine for your needs.
And it is small and light, and the screen is pretty good. The ten hour battery life alone is astounding.
I'm definitely happier with Core 2 Duo + good GPU than Intel's junk with a Core i3.
I suppose I am too. Since Nvidia aren't allowed to make chipsets for i5/i7 the alternative would have been an i5 with the Intel 4500HD which would have been a severe downgrade from the 9400M as it is meant to be twice as slow. The new 320M is meant to be 80% faster than the 9400M and uses 40% less power wow. I hope Nvidia win in the courts so we can see an i5 with 320M 13" soon.
Never mind that i5 or i7 stuff - the processor that Apple put into your machine is a very fast processor in its own right, and it is brand new and it is better than last year's model by a long shot.
Unless you will be doing lots of processor intensive stuff like editing video or crunching giant spreadsheets or spell-checking encyclopedias, the i5 will be fine for your needs.
And it is small and light, and the screen is pretty good. The ten hour battery life alone is astounding.
No need to lie to the guy. The 2.4Ghz has been used in Macbooks since 2007 it's hardly new!!!! But it will do him fine its a decent machine. Just ordered the 2.4 13" for my dad too actually.
Edit: oh you meant the i5 is new, yes, but he was asking about the 2.4ghz core 2 duo in the 13".
What?! Is there a single Program for OS X that enables me to encode Videos using my GPU? So far, I haven't seen one. Also, where are all those OpenCL-Programs?
Edit #2: Quicktime X does use GPU acceleration in encoding H.264 (only with 9400M, at this point). It's not done through OpenCL, however. OpenCL is for GPU computing.
Sure it does.. you just gotta be using Steve's calculator.. then it adds up perfectly!
That about sums it up,
What apple has done to make it even harder,as we know memory and HDD upgrades are simple, but they always tied the faster processor and video performance to HDD and memory Upgrades.
In this case going form a 250GB to 320GB assuming same RPM is only a $3 or $4 cost difference to Apple, possible less and the processor increase may only be a few dollars more too. Believe it or not the slower speed may cost apply more or there could be no cost difference. They could be buying the slow speed at the exact same price as the higher speed depending on a number of factors. However, you can not upgrade the processor so if you want the higher speed you have to get the larger drive and pay lots for it and Apple knows many people will make this trade off.
What?! Is there a single Program for OS X that enables me to encode Videos using my GPU? So far, I haven't seen one. Also, where are all those OpenCL-Programs?
Elemental is working to bring their GPU encoder to the Mac:
They have a product for the Quadro card already. Although you don't see OpenCL apps advertised yet, there are apps that rely on the GPU heavily. Apple's Motion is the most prominent but FCP uses it too for FxPlugins.
Consumer apps won't see it much until the GPUs are powerful enough that a lot of consumers will see the difference. Apple's low-end is still on the 9400M, which is only 54GFlops. The 320M should be 3x that. If the entire lineup gets to that performance all the while having 2 GPUs, then it gets interesting as they can do something to compute on the dedicated chip while running the display off the Intel chip - in fact balance processing between the CPU and dedicated chip.
Edit #2: Quicktime X does use GPU acceleration in encoding H.264 (only with 9400M, at this point). It's not done through OpenCL, however. OpenCL is for GPU computing.
None of the IGPs and GPUs in the new MBPs have H.264 GPU encoding?
Sorry but these aren't custom for Apple. These series of GPU's can be had an any pre-build OEM system. That come straight fro Nvidia. Also the 330m is nothing more an an old mid range GPU 9600 series.
Comments
Ridiculous Apple price point setting. A faster CPU and some hard drive space certainly shouldn't add up to £250 extra.
Yep it's ridiculous but there's a certain group of people who will pay a big premium just to get the fastest. Apple takes advantage of it.
IMO, you're better off to get the low end and then buy a new computer next year, selling the old one.
Sure it does.. you just gotta be using Steve's calculator.. then it adds up perfectly!
By Steve's calculator, $241-$209 = $300. His calculator made him a billionaire. We should all get one of those !!
So if 320M and 330M are integrated graphics, how does the Intel chip fit in? That is, if you're integrated, you're usually, what, integrated with the memory controller or some such? Do the MacBook Pros dodge the Intel vs. NVIDIA lawsuit by having two of essentially the same thing in the box?
The 320M is, I believe, a two-chip chipset solution like the old 9400M. It's an interface controller chip with an integrated GPU, linking the Intel C2D CPU to memory and peripherals on the 13", just like the 9400M did. The C2D processors don't have an integrated GPU, so the GPU on the 320M is 'on' all the time.
The 330M is a separate chip (or discrete GPU) on the motherboard, as Nvidia isn't allowed to integrate the GPU and chipset controller with the i3/5/7 processors (it uses an Intel controller chip). So the chipset is a three chip solution, of CPU, controller and GPU. In fact, with the hardware for the Optimus, it's probably a four chip solution. I think all i5/7 CPUs have an integrated GPU, so the 330M is only activated when required, and fortunately without the log off/on step required with the old 9600GT-based MacBook Pros.
Hope the above makes sense!
This must have been a lot of work for Apple, it's a whole CPU/chipset change for the 15" and 17", and a chipset change for the 13". I'm not surprised it took them so long.
Personally, with Steam coming online for Macs, I think Apple should have started upping their game with better graphic card options. The 330M is a mid-level solution, a tweaked 240 which itself was a die-shrunk 9600; I'd really like to have seen either the Radeon 5XXX series with something similar to the Optimus on-the-fly switching (ATi must be working on it), or a higher level Nvidia chip at least as an option. Though other top-end laptops eg Sony Vaio F Series use the 330M GPU. Even better, but very unlikely for Apple, would be to have the graphics cards as replaceable, for when they go wrong, or so they could be upgraded at a later date. But then I guess there are very few of us that actually like cracking the case on our expensive laptops...
Also interesting that despite having 48 shaders compared to last gen's 16, performance only doubled as a best case scenario. Again, limited by that system memory.
Yep it's ridiculous but there's a certain group of people who will pay a big premium just to get the fastest. Apple takes advantage of it.
IMO, you're better off to get the low end and then buy a new computer next year, selling the old one.
Apple's lowest end are usually always the better value as they charge a lot for upgrades. It's just artificial to maintain their price points. That upgrade should be £100 at most.
I'm pleased to see the 320M in the low end though rather than the 310M. It looks like it should be at least on par with the 9600M GT so it will handle pretty much any game that's out and 48 cores is decent for GPU processing. I'd imagine it will be close in performance to the following chip, which can just manage to run Crysis on high quality:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-...M.17646.0.html
If these updates go into the Mini and Macbook, that will be a welcome update... eventually. Steam for Mac is coming this month and it would have been nice to have the entire low-end capable enough to give a great gaming experience. The 9400M is enough to tide people over though.
A 10 hour battery life is pretty cool and they don't exaggerate in this regard. I've seen a MBP last for 7 hours.
Core 2 Duo is a bit weak but at least they bumped the clock speed so it's not all bad. I'm definitely happier with Core 2 Duo + good GPU than Intel's junk with a Core i3.
Steam for Mac is coming this month...
Just what I said a couple of posts earlier!
The processor can also be used to encode videos.
What?! Is there a single Program for OS X that enables me to encode Videos using my GPU? So far, I haven't seen one. Also, where are all those OpenCL-Programs?
Hi there, I am a college student and I would like to buy a new MacBook pro. I have my budget, so is the 13-inch: 2.4GHz good enough?
That machine was designed for users just like you.
Never mind that i5 or i7 stuff - the processor that Apple put into your machine is a very fast processor in its own right, and it is brand new and it is better than last year's model by a long shot.
Unless you will be doing lots of processor intensive stuff like editing video or crunching giant spreadsheets or spell-checking encyclopedias, the i5 will be fine for your needs.
And it is small and light, and the screen is pretty good. The ten hour battery life alone is astounding.
I'm definitely happier with Core 2 Duo + good GPU than Intel's junk with a Core i3.
I suppose I am too. Since Nvidia aren't allowed to make chipsets for i5/i7 the alternative would have been an i5 with the Intel 4500HD which would have been a severe downgrade from the 9400M as it is meant to be twice as slow. The new 320M is meant to be 80% faster than the 9400M and uses 40% less power wow. I hope Nvidia win in the courts so we can see an i5 with 320M 13" soon.
Never mind that i5 or i7 stuff - the processor that Apple put into your machine is a very fast processor in its own right, and it is brand new and it is better than last year's model by a long shot.
Unless you will be doing lots of processor intensive stuff like editing video or crunching giant spreadsheets or spell-checking encyclopedias, the i5 will be fine for your needs.
And it is small and light, and the screen is pretty good. The ten hour battery life alone is astounding.
No need to lie to the guy. The 2.4Ghz has been used in Macbooks since 2007 it's hardly new!!!! But it will do him fine its a decent machine. Just ordered the 2.4 13" for my dad too actually.
Edit: oh you meant the i5 is new, yes, but he was asking about the 2.4ghz core 2 duo in the 13".
What?! Is there a single Program for OS X that enables me to encode Videos using my GPU? So far, I haven't seen one. Also, where are all those OpenCL-Programs?
Edit #2: Quicktime X does use GPU acceleration in encoding H.264 (only with 9400M, at this point). It's not done through OpenCL, however. OpenCL is for GPU computing.
Shows no real difference except i3 uses more power.
Sure it does.. you just gotta be using Steve's calculator.. then it adds up perfectly!
That about sums it up,
What apple has done to make it even harder,as we know memory and HDD upgrades are simple, but they always tied the faster processor and video performance to HDD and memory Upgrades.
In this case going form a 250GB to 320GB assuming same RPM is only a $3 or $4 cost difference to Apple, possible less and the processor increase may only be a few dollars more too. Believe it or not the slower speed may cost apply more or there could be no cost difference. They could be buying the slow speed at the exact same price as the higher speed depending on a number of factors. However, you can not upgrade the processor so if you want the higher speed you have to get the larger drive and pay lots for it and Apple knows many people will make this trade off.
What?! Is there a single Program for OS X that enables me to encode Videos using my GPU? So far, I haven't seen one. Also, where are all those OpenCL-Programs?
Elemental is working to bring their GPU encoder to the Mac:
http://www.badaboomit.com/node/47
They have a product for the Quadro card already. Although you don't see OpenCL apps advertised yet, there are apps that rely on the GPU heavily. Apple's Motion is the most prominent but FCP uses it too for FxPlugins.
Consumer apps won't see it much until the GPUs are powerful enough that a lot of consumers will see the difference. Apple's low-end is still on the 9400M, which is only 54GFlops. The 320M should be 3x that. If the entire lineup gets to that performance all the while having 2 GPUs, then it gets interesting as they can do something to compute on the dedicated chip while running the display off the Intel chip - in fact balance processing between the CPU and dedicated chip.
Edit #2: Quicktime X does use GPU acceleration in encoding H.264 (only with 9400M, at this point). It's not done through OpenCL, however. OpenCL is for GPU computing.
None of the IGPs and GPUs in the new MBPs have H.264 GPU encoding?
Do you think the new 2.4 MBP13 is worth upgrading from last year's 2.26?
No. Unless you can sell your 2.26 for more than you paid for it.
Custom for the MBP?
Nice.
Sorry but these aren't custom for Apple. These series of GPU's can be had an any pre-build OEM system. That come straight fro Nvidia. Also the 330m is nothing more an an old mid range GPU 9600 series.
I'd wager that for the average 13" MBP buyer the C2D w/ Nvidia 320M is better option than Core-i3 w/ Intel HD.
Why is it an either or proposition?
Sony is able to put i5 cpus and Nvdia 330m gpus in their 13" Z series. A 13 " MBP with an i3 and the 330m like on the 15" and 17" would have been very attractive.
The 15" and 17" MBPs got a real update. The 13" 'update' is a joke, IMO.
An unnecessary joke at that.