You sir, just made my morning
And i Think this thread should be rename into:
Sandy Bridge and Thunderbolt + HD3000 vs 320M
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Sandy Bridge and backlit keyboard vs NVIDIA GeForce 320M?
- Thread starter Kendo
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You sir, just made my morning
And i Think this thread should be rename into:
Sandy Bridge and Thunderbolt + HD3000 vs 320M
I would definitely take sandy bridge over what is essentially a 5+ year old CPU.
I don't think the new Intel graphics is horrible as some people suggest. But then again, I am only a light gamer.
If you set the settings to low, you can pretty much run anything on anything. I remember being able to run Crysis on a GMA950.
I don't think the new Intel graphics is horrible as some people suggest. But then again, I am only a light gamer.
If you set the settings to low, you can pretty much run anything on anything. I remember being able to run Crysis on a GMA950.
Well.. I ordered the 320m Air yesterday, after reading up on the latest rumors. Maybe I will regret this but since I plan to do some basic 3D (Maya) modelling and opengl graphics development on the go, I figured the sandy bridge upgrade will actually be more of a downgrade.
We'll see.
We'll see.
I'm saying that's my personal opinion. I know it's capable of playing games, but many people are disappointed about something that no one knows except maybe Apple or Intel.
Really? So if I buy a MBA, using your logic above, then one of the reasons I bought it was because it could play games. This is your opinion, your view of why some people buy a MBA. Just like what I said in my previous post was purely my personal opinion. Not dictation of anything. I'm sure many people agree with you and some that don't.
That's you. I simply stated how I personally use my computer. It's different for everybody. Not everybody is like me or you. Not everyone is a musician or creative artist. Of course, the backlit keyboard is a welcome addition. I never said anything against that.
+1 I agree. They tend to not accept that Apple will release something that is potentially better (at least CPU-wise) and newer than what they have. In case "Icaras" says I'm dictating whatever again, that is my perception, my personal opinion.
Yea, it's definitely not THAT bad. It's not a dedicated card of course, but it's not like as bad as it was back then in the GMA days. Heck, the 3000 is better than the current card I'm using, the 9400M.
Or maybe people who simply prefer the 320 over the 3000?
I like to do some light gaming on-the-go, and while I have my M11x for that, I mostly carry around my Air now.
Before you tell me that the 3000 isn't as bad as I make it out to be, I have a 2011 13" Pro (i7-2.7/4/HD3000). CODMW2 on Medium settings on that, I can barely eke out 20fps while I can get 30 on my Air (although I did slightly OC the 320M).
Last edited:
nice and the new MBA version of the HD IGP will be even lower clocked and the slower processor will only make it worse
No way I'd buy something that expensive with Intel HD 3000. If you need the CPU of a sandy bridge processor get a MBP. The current gen of MBA is such a better mix of CPU/GPU for what the device is meant for.
OpenCL was designed so software could use the processing power of the graphics card/chip to aid the CPU to perform calculations in a way that is not dependent on sending the results to video. In gaming, however, the CPU is enough to run the back-end of the game and the GPU is mainly used to display the image rather than help the CPU in processing the game's engine. Hence OpenCL should not make that much different (perhaps a few FPS but not so much as to make the 3000 better than the 320).
Is OpenCL akin to NVIDIA's PhysX as well as their CUDA? If so then perhaps it can help with the physics engines in some high end games (GTA IV etc comes to mind) I guess?
True on the lower-clocked graphics, but I'm pretty sure the i-series processors will easily beat the 09-era Core 2s.
The only way which the SB i-series+HD3000 will beat the C2D+320M on the gaming front (which I can think of) is if the game in question is CPU intensive.
Agreed. (and not just because I'm a late 2010 Air owner too
)The 320M has OpenCL. CUDA is assembler-like, while OpenCL is C-like. They are general purpose compute engines. It's not just about games.
Intel does not have real OpenCL yet.
Not just about games, yes, but for most users, the only reason one would want to stick with the 320 is for gaming so OpenCL wouldn't make much of a difference [for FPS].
Dunno about video rendering/processing or the like though.
Just saw this thread, so I figured I'd share some knowledge (been gaming for 8 years).
So the reason why people are avoiding these things like the plague is because they STINK. The Intel chipsets ARE more powerful than the NVIDIA 320M, BUT, that doesn't always equal better performance.
Game developers usually design games on nvidia chipsets (Hence, "Nvidia: The way it's meant to be played) slogan.
Although the 3000HD shows better specs, it's been proven to perform worse in game. The reason being that the drivers are total rubbish. Until they can improve the drivers, it's a downgrade. But then again.............who in their right mind would try and game with a laptop!?
So the reason why people are avoiding these things like the plague is because they STINK. The Intel chipsets ARE more powerful than the NVIDIA 320M, BUT, that doesn't always equal better performance.
Game developers usually design games on nvidia chipsets (Hence, "Nvidia: The way it's meant to be played) slogan.
Although the 3000HD shows better specs, it's been proven to perform worse in game. The reason being that the drivers are total rubbish. Until they can improve the drivers, it's a downgrade. But then again.............who in their right mind would try and game with a laptop!?
Just saw this thread, so I figured I'd share some knowledge (been gaming for 8 years).
So the reason why people are avoiding these things like the plague is because they STINK. The Intel chipsets ARE more powerful than the NVIDIA 320M, BUT, that doesn't always equal better performance.
Game developers usually design games on nvidia chipsets (Hence, "Nvidia: The way it's meant to be played) slogan.
Although the 3000HD shows better specs, it's been proven to perform worse in game. The reason being that the drivers are total rubbish. Until they can improve the drivers, it's a downgrade. But then again.............who in their right mind would try and game with a laptop!?
You're joking right?I have always gamed on laptops - M17x, M11x, MBP, VAIO Z... list goes on and on. Add the Air to that list now. The 320M is a very capable chip and it can play many modern games at medium settings smoothly.
The way you describe laptop chipsets makes you sound like you've only ever tried laptop gaming with a GMA500
I have always gamed on laptops - M17x, M11x, MBP, VAIO Z... list goes on and on. Add the Air to that list now. The 320M is a very capable chip and it can play many modern games at medium settings smoothly.
The way you describe laptop chipsets makes you sound like you've only ever tried laptop gaming with a GMA500
+1
i have gamed on laptops my whole life...i have no idea where you get the idea that you cannot game on laptops...what do you think the alienware line is for?
real comparison
see this youtube video and you will be able to determine whether CPU affects the overall speed more than GPU. This guy compared 11" MBA(with 320M graphics) and 13" sandy bridge MBP with SSD(with Intel 3000HD graphics )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp720fEnuRs
Of course sandy bridge MBA won't use full power sandy bridge. But you will know that MBA's performance is just overpraised by SSD, not by GPU. Once other notebooks get SSD, MBA's benefit is only limited to small form factor and weight.(maybe + high resolution)
I just don't understand people overpraising 320M on MBA, this made me to join here.
see this youtube video and you will be able to determine whether CPU affects the overall speed more than GPU. This guy compared 11" MBA(with 320M graphics) and 13" sandy bridge MBP with SSD(with Intel 3000HD graphics )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp720fEnuRs
Of course sandy bridge MBA won't use full power sandy bridge. But you will know that MBA's performance is just overpraised by SSD, not by GPU. Once other notebooks get SSD, MBA's benefit is only limited to small form factor and weight.(maybe + high resolution)
I just don't understand people overpraising 320M on MBA, this made me to join here.
Great comparison. Definitely makes me rethink my decision between a 2011 MBP and 2011 MBA. Looking forward to his comparison between those 2, that's for sure. But the higher resolution on the MBA is a huge factor for me (coming down from my current 1600x900 13in), and the 2011 MBP's is just too low IMO.
This comparison is garbage. The reviewer took a 13" MBP 2011 with a 2.3 GHz i5, 4GB and 128GB SSD and compared it to a 11" MBA with 1.4 GHz, 2GB and 64GB SSD. I would have liked to see him put a 13" MBA with 2.1Ghz and 4GB. I don't think the differences would have been so dramatic.
There is no way a decision to purchase a SB MBA should be influenced by such a lopsided comparison.
Last edited:
agreed
he should have done so with an 11" ultimate at least. the 4GB ram makes a hella big difference when opening all the apps. Obviously with 2GB ram it runs the chance of paging to file
2GB RAM = Apps will probably have to use the paging file = slower.
But yes, the additional power of the i-series CPU will inevitably beat the GPU's power for most tasks. Gaming is another question altogether.
People who want to keep the 320M are mostly people who want to do light gaming on their Airs.
That was the point of my post. I was trying to point out that different people will have different uses of a computer and have different skill levels. I was merely pointing out examples of the uses of a backlit kb (creative artists, users not as proficient in keyboarding) and the different audiences (gamers, portable users, media) that bought into an MBA.
Yea, I didn't mean to imply that users bought it generally because of gaming, but that it was just one reason that many users (certainly not all) did happen to buy it for. I myself didn't buy the Air for gaming purposes, though I found myself pleasantly surprised when squeezing in a game or two of Left 4 Dead on it.
And you explicitly said, and I quote you:
I don't know how else to interpret that. Unless of course you demand higher performance on newer games, then yea I would be inclined to agree with you. But I seem to read all the time on this forum that many users do in fact game on the Air and enjoy it. So why shouldn't they?
Last edited:
If someone is going to specifically test disk read/write speeds then one needs to also look into and see if the SSD is the Toshiba or Samsung model. I for one have the Samsung model and scored higher on the disk test then his model.
+1 for at least testing a MBA with 4 gigs of ram.
+1 for at least testing a MBA with 4 gigs of ram.
I agree. I have 13 with 4gb ram. I have the slower TS128 and my Geekbench score goes from from 152 to 160. The 11" unit in test was in the 120's. I would think the 13" Ultimate would be above 160.