MBP -- difference in 128MB and 256MB VRAM?

[NewSc2]

Thread title pretty much sums it up.

I had first thought of purchasing the 17" MBP, but after the Macbooks came out I don't really feel like spending twice the money for not much more laptop.

Anyways, after looking it over I think I will purchase the lowest end MBP. This is for audio use, but I do play games on occassion (perhaps with OSX 10.5's possible Windows virtualization I'll play more), so I was considering the next bump up for the graphics memory.

I don't think I want to spend the extra $400, but I was wondering if anybody has any benchmarks comparing the two video processors? Possibly for dual-booted Windows games like HL2?

 

[kevin.rivers]

The graphics chipsets are the same in both 15" MBP. The added features of the $2499 Model will all add to performance, i.e. 256MB VRAM, 2.16Ghz processor, 1GB RAM.

However, you could take that $500 extra and bump the Hard drive in the $1999 model to the 7200RPM version and buy 2GB of memory from an online retailer for about $200. This would probably outweigh the added features of the $2499 model.

As far the difference between 128 and 256, it won't be much depending on what games you are playing. If you are a casual gamer, 128MB will be enough for you. And if you were to take my suggestions above, your system would runs leaps around the base $2499 model. Good luck to you!

 

[remowilliams]

I'll also add that it seems that the 17" MBP graphics card is clocked significantly higher than the 15" MBP.

 

[Nate4747]

I'll also add that it seems that the 17" MBP graphics card is clocked significantly higher than the 15" MBP.

How did you come by this information? Is there an OS X application that tells the card specs or did you get the data from Windows?

Thanks

 

[dmw007]

I doubt that the difference in VRAM size would make a real noticeable difference. Both should be fine for gaming.

 

[remowilliams]

How did you come by this information? Is there an OS X application that tells the card specs or did you get the data from Windows?
Thanks

I used that ATI tool under XP/Bootcamp. My MBP17 shows 425/450 (core/mem) by default. That seems to be ~30% higher than the speeds I've seen others post for the MBP15.

 

[joseph2166]

I used that ATI tool under XP/Bootcamp. My MBP17 shows 425/450 (core/mem) by default. That seems to be ~30% higher than the speeds I've seen others post for the MBP15.

Just for the record my 256mb graphics card on my 20" iMac is clocked to 398/396 according to the ATI thing