Intel HD 3000 wow...

[Maven1975]

To be honest, I think this frustration is valid because Apple has refused to make a true pro 13" machine. This would make users that want power CPU and GPU happy. Not every one here actually want an Air, but they see no real use in a 2+ lb maching just for an i7. The GPU bottleneck still remins.

Hate to break the bad news to you, but Apple is not going to change their low power plans anytime soon. iOS was the nail in that cofin. Low power is the wave of their future. Yes, the agument to buy a console is valid. I for one dont have an interest in them.

If companys like gameloft continue devloping low powered games that are good enough to suspend reality, Apple wins. They can sell expensive, low powered quality hardware and get residule money on the sale of each app purchased.

So lets see if Apple can put some magic on the 3000. If they cant, it will be up to all the developers of the app store to optomize for it. Otherwise, their apps will blow on more than 70+% of all current macs to be sold now an the next 24 months.

 

[Icy1007]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone 4: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

L4D plays just fine on low settings with the HD 3000.

 

[dsio]

To be honest, I think this frustration is valid because Apple has refused to make a true pro 13" machine. This would make users that want power CPU and GPU happy. Not every one here actually want an Air, but they see no real use in a 2+ lb maching just for an i7. The GPU bottleneck still remins.

Hate to break the bad news to you, but Apple is not going to change their low power plans anytime soon. iOS was the nail in that cofin. Low power is the wave of their future. Yes, the agument to buy a console is valid. I for one dont have an interest in them.

If companys like gameloft continue devloping low powered games that are good enough to suspend reality, Apple wins. They can sell expensive, low powered quality hardware and get residule money on the sale of each app purchased.

So lets see if Apple can put some magic on the 3000. If they cant, it will be up to all the developers of the app store to optomize for it. Otherwise, their apps will blow on more than 70+% of all current macs to be sold now an the next 24 months.

Just out of interest, do you own one?

 

[shurcooL]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone 4: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

L4D plays just fine on low settings with the HD 3000.

Is that in OS X or Windows?

I would be curious to compare some numbers... I've tried L4D (OS X) on my 2008 aluminum MacBook with 9400M, and I think it can handle medium settings or so. But we can't compare it without numbers.

 

[sporadicMotion]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone 4: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

L4D plays just fine on low settings with the HD 3000.

A lot of things work... If you don't care about games and just load one up once in a while. The HD 3000 is fine.

 

[voigtstr]

Is anyone succesfully playing Eve Online on the macbook pro 13"
I assume if it runs on that it will run on a 13" macbook air?

 

[Maven1975]

Just out of interest, do you own one?

Owned every revision my friend. Do a search and you will find the answer in my previous posts.

I see your a recent member, welcome to the fourm.

Intergrated graphics do not belong in a pro machine without proper dedicated GPU backup. Leave that to the MacBook and MackBook Air lines.

 

[dsio]

Owned every revision my friend. Do a search and you will find the answer in my previous posts.

I see your a recent member, welcome to the fourm.

Intergrated graphics do not belong in a pro machine without proper dedicated GPU backup. Leave that to the MacBook and MackBook Air lines.

I'd actually say the exact opposite. Heavy dedicated graphics belong in two inch thick alienware computers that look like Dracula's briefcase with flashing lights all over them. At 1280x800 the HD3000 is more than adequate, and anything higher is pushing your thermal and power envelope for no reason. I can perhaps see the case for an option of dual graphics, but there are many people including myself that want CPU power by the bucketful and could not care less about the graphics. I want a laptop designed for a professional, not a professional gamer.

That said, I've yet to have a single problem with any games at native res, Starcraft II, World Of Warcraft, CSS/HL2. For me, its spot on.

 

[SuprUsrStan]

maybe YOUR laptop is the problem here. can it play hd videos flawlessly? does everything else work as it should? and if it plays l4d like crap on low settings, there's something strange with your laptop...

I'd argue that. Often, I would forget to enable my 6750m and play a few games before I realize i'm on the 3000HD. It gets like ~30 fps with the integrated.

While this is a MBA thread, I'd like to point out for all those of you bashing on the 3000HD, it does better than the 320m in OSX if you check out the MBP 13 benchmarks.

http://www.techyalert.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2010-vs-macbook-pro-2011/

 

[shurcooL]

While this is a MBA thread, I'd like to point out for all those of you bashing on the 3000HD, it does better than the 320m in OSX if you check out the MBP 13 benchmarks.

http://www.techyalert.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2010-vs-macbook-pro-2011/

Nice link, that's what I wanted to know. HD 3000 does almost the same/slightly better in OS X.

 

[radiohead14]

AnandTech benchmarks

i'm not knowledgeable when it comes to specs and benchmarks, but this review from Anandtech (which i know a lot of people trust)

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/8

shows the HD 3000 performing on par or slightly better than the Nvidia 320M. is it because the CPU is helping the HD 3000? i mean if this is the case and if most users won't be able to notice the difference, then i think i'm perfectly fine with the IGP. i'm mostly concerned about the battery life. wouldn't the HD 3000 be just a tad bit more power conservative?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/15

 

[sporadicMotion]

i'm not knowledgeable when it comes to specs and benchmarks, but this review from Anandtech (which i know a lot of people trust)

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/8

shows the HD 3000 performing on par or slightly better than the Nvidia 320M. is it because the CPU is helping the HD 3000? i mean if this is the case and if most users won't be able to notice the difference, then i think i'm perfectly fine with the IGP. i'm mostly concerned about the battery life. wouldn't the HD 3000 be just a tad bit more power conservative?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/15

Most of the people bashing it have never used it.

 

[Scottsdale]

The point I see people missing in this thread, and quite frankly on all of these forums, is that the new MBA's Intel HD 3000 IGP will NOT even come close to the 13" MBP's Intel HD 3000. The low voltage Sandy Bridge will be bad, but the 11" MBA with an ultra low voltage Sandy Bridge will be devastating in comparison to where the MBA has been with both Nvidia GPUs.

I really hope that Thunderbolt provides an external solution for when people are at their desktop at least. Even the 13" MBP is a dog when it comes to graphics, and that is a standard voltage Sandy Bridge CPU. An ACD with a built-in GPU could be a solution, or even a media dock like Sony is introducing could allow the MBA's native display to have a discrete GPU when connected to the external dock via Thunderbolt.

These new MBAs will be fast in terms of CPU processing but a GIGANTIC leap backwards in graphics capabilities... in terms of real world usage. I expect Apple to bring out all of its guns with the backlit keyboard, compare the new graphics to the problematic 10.6.7 with OpenGL problems via the combo update, and possibly update the RAM or Flash drives too to ensure people overlook the loss of a real GPU. It all makes sense that the MBA will definitely have a far inferior IGP and there isn't much hope of an instant solution given the rumors of the backlit keyboard return and such. It shows Apple is aware of the situation... heck they tried but it was consumers who didn't push for an investigation into Intel's anti-competitive business practices.

I really think people need to wait and read real world reviews of people using the same types of apps and games as they want to use before buying one of these new MBAs. Don't just believe the marketing numbers or benchmarks for a select few games where the Intel IGP doesn't fare as poorly as it WILL elsewhere.

 

[sporadicMotion]

The point I see people missing in this thread, and quite frankly on all of these forums, is that the new MBA's Intel HD 3000 IGP will NOT even come close to the 13" MBP's Intel HD 3000. The low voltage Sandy Bridge will be bad, but the 11" MBA with an ultra low voltage Sandy Bridge will be devastating in comparison to where the MBA has been with both Nvidia GPUs.

Are you basing this on the review/benchmarks of the Series 9 with the i5-2537m?

 

[dsio]

The point I see people missing in this thread, and quite frankly on all of these forums, is that the new MBA's Intel HD 3000 IGP will NOT even come close to the 13" MBP's Intel HD 3000. The low voltage Sandy Bridge will be bad, but the 11" MBA with an ultra low voltage Sandy Bridge will be devastating in comparison to where the MBA has been with both Nvidia GPUs.

I really hope that Thunderbolt provides an external solution for when people are at their desktop at least. Even the 13" MBP is a dog when it comes to graphics, and that is a standard voltage Sandy Bridge CPU. An ACD with a built-in GPU could be a solution, or even a media dock like Sony is introducing could allow the MBA's native display to have a discrete GPU when connected to the external dock via Thunderbolt.

These new MBAs will be fast in terms of CPU processing but a GIGANTIC leap backwards in graphics capabilities... in terms of real world usage. I expect Apple to bring out all of its guns with the backlit keyboard, compare the new graphics to the problematic 10.6.7 with OpenGL problems via the combo update, and possibly update the RAM or Flash drives too to ensure people overlook the loss of a real GPU. It all makes sense that the MBA will definitely have a far inferior IGP and there isn't much hope of an instant solution given the rumors of the backlit keyboard return and such. It shows Apple is aware of the situation... heck they tried but it was consumers who didn't push for an investigation into Intel's anti-competitive business practices.

I really think people need to wait and read real world reviews of people using the same types of apps and games as they want to use before buying one of these new MBAs. Don't just believe the marketing numbers or benchmarks for a select few games where the Intel IGP doesn't fare as poorly as it WILL elsewhere.

Its not based on marketing numbers, its based on technical specs, the new 17W TDP low voltage Sandy Bridge chips run their HD3000 at a much lower base clock, but turbo speeds are identical (ok, 1200Mhz vs 1300Mhz for the top 13 MBP and 1000Mhz vs 1100Mhz for the base). Performance will be extremely similar.

 

[clockwise33]

The point I see people missing in this thread, and quite frankly on all of these forums, is that the new MBA's Intel HD 3000 IGP will NOT even come close to the 13" MBP's Intel HD 3000. The low voltage Sandy Bridge will be bad, but the 11" MBA with an ultra low voltage Sandy Bridge will be devastating in comparison to where the MBA has been with both Nvidia GPUs.

I really hope that Thunderbolt provides an external solution for when people are at their desktop at least. Even the 13" MBP is a dog when it comes to graphics, and that is a standard voltage Sandy Bridge CPU. An ACD with a built-in GPU could be a solution, or even a media dock like Sony is introducing could allow the MBA's native display to have a discrete GPU when connected to the external dock via Thunderbolt.

These new MBAs will be fast in terms of CPU processing but a GIGANTIC leap backwards in graphics capabilities... in terms of real world usage. I expect Apple to bring out all of its guns with the backlit keyboard, compare the new graphics to the problematic 10.6.7 with OpenGL problems via the combo update, and possibly update the RAM or Flash drives too to ensure people overlook the loss of a real GPU. It all makes sense that the MBA will definitely have a far inferior IGP and there isn't much hope of an instant solution given the rumors of the backlit keyboard return and such. It shows Apple is aware of the situation... heck they tried but it was consumers who didn't push for an investigation into Intel's anti-competitive business practices.

I really think people need to wait and read real world reviews of people using the same types of apps and games as they want to use before buying one of these new MBAs. Don't just believe the marketing numbers or benchmarks for a select few games where the Intel IGP doesn't fare as poorly as it WILL elsewhere.

Do you game on your Air? If so, which games do you play?

 

[Scottsdale]

Do you game on your Air? If so, which games do you play?

That is the funny part, I don't game at all. I simply remember how inferior Intel's IGP was compared to when Apple switched all the Macs over to Nvidia's real GPU. Integrated with RAM or not, it was an amazing run of graphics power.

My first MBA didn't do much of anything properly, and it was a combination of a terrible IGP paired with an overheated CPU that were the main culprits. I just think people need to consider not what the CPU is doing in the 13" MBP currently, but also consider exactly what is happening here... if computer companies like Apple want to update to the latest and greatest CPU, they're forced to buy Intel chipsets. This is about freedom of competition and the lack thereof in this situation. I find it terribly sad that in all likelihood the MBA will have an inferior graphics system to the 2008 Nvidia 9400m... it is possible with the updated ULV CPUs with a better clock performance for graphics that it will not be as bad as it could be, but it's still not going to be anywhere near good.

Technology should be improving, and we should all demand BETTER performing Macs. With this supposed upgrade, sure the MBA is getting a slightly faster CPU, but force paired with that CPU is a terribly inferior IGP. The net result is going to be a negative in overall capabilities of the MBA. The current C2D is 64-bit, and it will do everything the SB will do just a little slower. As those with 13" MBPs know, the HD 3000 Intel IGP will NOT do the same things as the Nvidia 320m. So whether you think it affects you or not, you're getting an inferior all-around MBA as it simply cannot do some things.

The problem is the GPU is more important than just games. Go read through the 13" MBP forums, and people say their MBP lags when connected to an external ACD, or when doing other graphics tasks. It is a GIGANTIC step backwards coming from an incredibly capable Nvidia 320m to an under clocked Intel IGP.

The sad part is if Apple and consumers had made a stink about what Intel was doing, and its anti-competitive movement against Nvidia's contractual agreement to be able to provide chipsets for Intel CPUs, we would all have Sandy Bridge CPUs with NEXT GENERATION Nvidia GPUs that would probably be 2X faster than the Nvidia 320m. Instead, we're stuck BEHIND the Nvidia 320m probably by a much larger margin than the 13" MBP for several reasons.

Will they eliminate the high resolution 13" display in the MBA to get a better reading for marketing numbers with a 1280x800??? It is a possibility most don't want to consider, but it's a possibility for sure. The Intel IGP is going to be a factor for far more people than are considering it now just because they feel it's games only that will be affected... just not true. I hook up 27" ACDs to my MBAs and I don't want lag with an Intel IGP. I also don't want a lower resolution display as part of the advantage is the 1440x900 display in the 13" MBA.

There are a lot of possibilities, but I hope that IF we get stuck with Intel's IGP which seems inevitable that Thunderbolt can at least provide a solution when MBA users are at the desktop. Meaning an external GPU via a media dock or built into the 27" ACD is what I suspect will happen.

 

[dsio]

That is the funny part, I don't game at all. I simply remember how inferior Intel's IGP was compared to when Apple switched all the Macs over to Nvidia's real GPU. Integrated with RAM or not, it was an amazing run of graphics power.

At one point the earth was flat too, times change. You had an old intel IGP once that sucked, welcome to the club, so did every other laptop owner on the planet. It has absolutely no bearing on the current discussion.

My first MBA didn't do much of anything properly, and it was a combination of a terrible IGP paired with an overheated CPU that were the main culprits. I just think people need to consider not what the CPU is doing in the 13" MBP currently, but also consider exactly what is happening here...

You were unhappy that your first MBA overheated and ran too hot, but you want Apple to add a discrete graphics chip with a TDP of 10W or more to a chip that already has a TDP of 17W with the integrated graphics on die?

if computer companies like Apple want to update to the latest and greatest CPU, they're forced to buy Intel chipsets. This is about freedom of competition and the lack thereof in this situation.

So now you're getting a dramatically faster CPU, as well as an integrated 3D card with performance on par with the outgoing 320M within 17W when previously you had a Core2Duo which ran at 17W combined with a second chip that required more cooling at over 10W.

I find it terribly sad that in all likelihood the MBA will have an inferior graphics system to the 2008 Nvidia 9400m... it is possible with the updated ULV CPUs with a better clock performance for graphics that it will not be as bad as it could be, but it's still not going to be anywhere near good.

The 9400M was a piece of junk, the HD3000 beats it by a very large margin, if you want to make up nonsense like this to support your position, try to at least make it vague enough that you can't be called out on it.

Technology should be improving, and we should all demand BETTER performing Macs. With this supposed upgrade, sure the MBA is getting a slightly faster CPU, but force paired with that CPU is a terribly inferior IGP.

If you think SB is only slightly faster than a Core2, you need to do some more research, claiming the IGP is terribly inferior points to that as well.

The net result is going to be a negative in overall capabilities of the MBA. The current C2D is 64-bit, and it will do everything the SB will do just a little slower. As those with 13" MBPs know, the HD 3000 Intel IGP will NOT do the same things as the Nvidia 320m. So whether you think it affects you or not, you're getting an inferior all-around MBA as it simply cannot do some things.

As someone that does own one, I can tell you that this entire paragraph is false.

The problem is the GPU is more important than just games. Go read through the 13" MBP forums, and people say their MBP lags when connected to an external ACD, or when doing other graphics tasks. It is a GIGANTIC step backwards coming from an incredibly capable Nvidia 320m to an under clocked Intel IGP.

The GPU does not cause "lag" when connected to an external screen. I'm running one right now at 2560x1600 off a mini-displayport -> DVI-D DL adapter.

The sad part is if Apple and consumers had made a stink about what Intel was doing, and its anti-competitive movement against Nvidia's contractual agreement to be able to provide chipsets for Intel CPUs, we would all have Sandy Bridge CPUs with NEXT GENERATION Nvidia GPUs that would probably be 2X faster than the Nvidia 320m. Instead, we're stuck BEHIND the Nvidia 320m probably by a much larger margin than the 13" MBP for several reasons.

Apple has been pushing the envelope in terms of performance per watt, battery life, and compact form factors for the last several years, this is exactly the type of thing they would go for. The fact is AMD is also doing the same thing, integrating Radeon IGPs into multi core CPUs for small form factors.

Will they eliminate the high resolution 13" display in the MBA to get a better reading for marketing numbers with a 1280x800??? It is a possibility most don't want to consider, but it's a possibility for sure. The Intel IGP is going to be a factor for far more people than are considering it now just because they feel it's games only that will be affected... just not true. I hook up 27" ACDs to my MBAs and I don't want lag with an Intel IGP. I also don't want a lower resolution display as part of the advantage is the 1440x900 display in the 13" MBA.

I'm sorry but that's just hysteria.

There are a lot of possibilities, but I hope that IF we get stuck with Intel's IGP which seems inevitable that Thunderbolt can at least provide a solution when MBA users are at the desktop. Meaning an external GPU via a media dock or built into the 27" ACD is what I suspect will happen.

I doubt it.

 

[scboxa]

Right... my laptop with HD3000 graphic card with sandy bridge runs left 4 dead like crap and I have it on low settings.

I don't even want to try SC2. It might die.

ur expectations are to high. sc2 medium settings works fine for me.

 

[soapsudz]

...
The problem is the GPU is more important than just games. Go read through the 13" MBP forums, and people say their MBP lags when connected to an external ACD, or when doing other graphics tasks. It is a GIGANTIC step backwards coming from an incredibly capable Nvidia 320m to an under clocked Intel IGP.

The sad part is if Apple and consumers had made a stink about what Intel was doing, and its anti-competitive movement against Nvidia's contractual agreement to be able to provide chipsets for Intel CPUs, we would all have Sandy Bridge CPUs with NEXT GENERATION Nvidia GPUs that would probably be 2X faster than the Nvidia 320m. Instead, we're stuck BEHIND the Nvidia 320m probably by a much larger margin than the 13" MBP for several reasons.
...

My first Macbook was a 2006 Core Duo with the snail-slow Intel GMA950 IGP. Basic web browsing was OK but throw in a large external display and big photos in Lightroom and the whole thing would slow down. Gaming? Don't even talk about it

The next upgrade came with a 2010 Macbook Core 2 Duo with the Nvidia 320m. It's still my main work machine and has no trouble working with large RAW files in Lightroom on an external display. It even handles Windows gaming pretty well, thanks to that overclockable little IGP.

My 2010 Macbook Air 11.6" runs a snail-slow 1.4 GHz low-voltage Core 2 Duo but I don't feel it, even when going through large images on an external display. The 320m IGP handles most of the graphics duties although the system does slow down when editing large RAW images, due to the slow CPU and low RAM. If it wasn't for the fast GPU and SSD, this computer wouldn't be much use beyond basic web browsing and typing office documents.

The basic appeal for the C2D/320m combo was about getting the best bang for the buck - long battery life from the low-power CPU when you're just browsing the web and editing spreadsheets in OS X, decent GPU power for video, images and gaming in Windows. Thanks (or no thanks) to Intel's behaviour against Nvidia, I think Apple had little choice with its upcoming notebook designs. It could go with AMD's Fusion APUs which had better GPU performance but slower CPU performance and higher power consumption, or go with Intel's barely-enough HD graphics on a low-power core. I guess Jobs signed off on the latter

Too bad there was no way to legally use a ULV i5 with an updated Nvidia IGP. Anyone know if Nvidia has an IGP available with lower power consumption and higher performance than the 320m, or was that chip the end of the line?

 

[mrklaw]

anyone play minecraft on a HD3000? I might bite on a new air to replace my 2008 MBP but it needs to play minecraft smoothly - pretty much the only game that is played on it. My wife's core i3 (previous gen, non-sandy bridge) and Intel 'HD' IGP wasn't good enough.

 

[PaulWog]

anyone play minecraft on a HD3000? I might bite on a new air to replace my 2008 MBP but it needs to play minecraft smoothly - pretty much the only game that is played on it. My wife's core i3 (previous gen, non-sandy bridge) and Intel 'HD' IGP wasn't good enough.

Minecraft of all things it will definitely run well.

 

[mrklaw]

Minecraft of all things it will definitely run well.

you tested it? Sorry if that sounds dismissive, its just that some people look at minecraft and assume it can run on a pocket calculator. It is actually fairly demanding on GPUs (no crysis obviously)

 

[PaulWog]

you tested it? Sorry if that sounds dismissive, its just that some people look at minecraft and assume it can run on a pocket calculator. It is actually fairly demanding on GPUs (no crysis obviously)

Yes, I know for a fact.

Just do a quick google. "HD3000 minecraft" (without quotations just google that line).

Also, just looking at the HD3000's 3dmark06 and 3dmarkvantage scores, it's evident that it will be able to play Minecraft But yes, I did look into it actually running Minecraft in practice.

 

[Oppressed]

i'm not knowledgeable when it comes to specs and benchmarks, but this review from Anandtech (which i know a lot of people trust)

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/8

shows the HD 3000 performing on par or slightly better than the Nvidia 320M. is it because the CPU is helping the HD 3000? i mean if this is the case and if most users won't be able to notice the difference, then i think i'm perfectly fine with the IGP. i'm mostly concerned about the battery life. wouldn't the HD 3000 be just a tad bit more power conservative?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/15

Those tests were biased toward the CPU a bit. A more interesting test was done on the Samsung series 9, which for all intents and purposes similar in specs to the upcoming MBA refresh. Due to it using a ULV iCore processor. See below as the numbers are stacked with the current MBA.

http://www.laptopmag.com/review/laptops/samsung-series-9.aspx?mode=benchmarks