new macbook gpu?

[rogersmj]

Is everyone in here sarcasm-challenged? I'm pretty sure breakfastcrew was kidding when he wrote that, because I found the previous concerns (Can Photoshop run on a GMA950????!?!?) laughable. Of course those apps can run. Desktop applications generally don't use any of the GPU. Think of the graphics card like the tires on your car. Now think of running desktop applications (Photoshop, etc) like driving your car in a straight line. If you have $50 tires or $500 tires, your car is going to pretty much behave the same in a straight line. Now if you start going around corners (e.g., playing games), that's where you'll see a difference. Because when you try to go around corners with the cheapo tires (GMA950), you...well...you won't.

Now if breakfastcrew was actually serious with his comment, then I'll join the rest of you in calling him an idiot. But until I read the rest of the comments by you kill-joys I had no doubt he was being sarcastic.

 

[mojohojo]

The GPU has NOTHING to do with running Photoshop, Illustrator, AutoCAD, or 3D Studio. The big factors in the role is the CPU and the amount of RAM you have.

i know that photoshop and illustrator would run decently. but 3d studio max has nothing to do with the GPU?
is this true? do rendering times depend on the RAM/processor or GPU?

 

[breakfastcrew]

You guys know I was kiddin right??? I am making fun of all those retards that think a computer must be useless if it has an intergrated graphics card....

 

[jrea]

i know that photoshop and illustrator would run decently. but 3d studio max has nothing to do with the GPU?
is this true? do rendering times depend on the RAM/processor or GPU?

Yes, Processor(s) and RAM are what matters when it comes to rendering. The role of a GPU in a 3d application like max is running the viewports. I used to run max and autocad 06 fine on a GMA950 in my old windows laptop. The viewports did sometimes slow down, or glitch but that was only really with large poly counts.

 

[MacVault]

Apple will probably switch to GMA3000 in february.

What makes you think they'll switch in February? I'm just curious cuz I'm waiting at least until Macworld to order one but I could wait until February if the evidence shows they'll be going to the GMA 3000 at that time.

 

[killmoms]

Apple wont be giving this machine a GPU for a long time and from I hear the gma3000 isnt all that. For some reason Apple has decided consumers arent gamers, dont need Gpu's, etc. Makes no sense when so many real GPU's available. Its almost silly not to have a GPU option for the gamer. Write Apple a letter but I doubt anyone will read it. Apple seems to hate the TV watcher and the gamer for some reason. Benches are starting to show for GMA 3000 and they arent anything to wait for as far I can see. You want a GPU Apple wants you to spend $1000 more.

GMA3000 is comparable with a GeForce 7300, so I don't know what you're on about. The gap is certainly closing. 950's pretty crud, and 3000 will still be behind the curve, but much better in comparison.

But, lest we all forget, this is your pet issue, and favorite topic.

 

[Eidorian]

What makes you think they'll switch in February? I'm just curious cuz I'm waiting at least until Macworld to order one but I could wait until February if the evidence shows they'll be going to the GMA 3000 at that time.

http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom#Future_Developments

GMA3000 is comparable with a GeForce 7300, so I don't know what you're on about. The gap is certainly closing. 950's pretty crud, and 3000 will still be behind the curve, but much better in comparison.

But, lest we all forget, this is your pet issue, and favorite topic.

Yeah the GMA X3000 is comparable to a 7300.

http://guides.macrumors.com/GMA_X3000

 

[MacVault]

http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom#Future_Developments

That guide speaks of Santa Rosa, which will include Intel GMA 3000, being released in Q2 2007 (April through June). It doesn't say anything about February 2007.

Bummer Oh well

 

[jeff303]

i know that photoshop and illustrator would run decently. but 3d studio max has nothing to do with the GPU?
is this true? do rendering times depend on the RAM/processor or GPU?

.

In general, the specialized GPU hardware only gets hit by real-time rendering operations (i.e. OpenGL apps like games). Photoshop doesn't need to do real time rendering - everything is done on the CPU. The only thing your GPU does in that case is draw the picture on the screen.

 

[mat92]

MacBook isn't Bad!

I have had my MacBook 1.83Ghz (Core Duo) 1GB RAM for a couple of months and it runs Photoshop CS2 Pretty Well! I got the CS3 beta yesterday and it ran like butter! It starts up in about 10-20 seconds (compared to CS2, which took almost a minute). Also all of you people saying that the GMA is crap - it is fine for the casual gamer - i run games such as Homeworld 2 (OS X), Half-Life Source and Age of Mythology (in boot camp) with no problems (although the fans can get a bit loud) - comparable performance to my old PC wth 512MB RAM and a ATI RADEON 9250 wth 128MB. To sum it up anything a couple of years old or that requires 32MB or less should run fine. I havn't tried the Sims 2 but i expect it will be quite laggy. If i were you i would buy the MacBook now - thers no point waiting another 6-12 months for a computer that will likely get outdated as well.

 

[dannewell15]

you are right Photoshop, Illustrator or Autocad and 3d studio max are not going to run in fact with the gma950 your macbook will probably crash trying to run a screen saver. The gma 950 is so pathetic that the cursor probably lags when you move it. My 16 mb dedicated video card in my 6 year old dell pwns the gma950 in every possible way.

Yeah keep telling yourself that. I bet that you are a Macbook Pro owner. I don't even have a Macbook yet b/c its still on order but I know that Photoshop and Illustrator will run fine, no problems whatsoever. Even Aperture will run on it FFS! Some people say that they run Final Cut so it really can't be that bad.

Oh, and another thing 64mb>16mb

 

[dornoforpyros]

You guys know I was kiddin right??? I am making fun of all those retards that think a computer must be useless if it has an intergrated graphics card....

apparently the in your face sarcasm was too subtle for most of the people in this thread, rather sad really.

For the 1,000,000th time, the GPU in the Macbook is not that bad. No it's not top of the line, but with enough RAM the Macbook is a perfectly capable machine.

Oh and yes, it will run leopard before some one starts that thread again.

 

[robPOD]

Apple will never make the MB as good graphically as the MBP.