[Geofries]

Not sure if I got the right forum or not.

I hate that apple has put in a situation where I must consider purchasing a non apple computer.

Thing is I keep reading everywhere how the gpu is severely underclocked in OSX, which really takes a hit on performance for gaming.

Now I can deal with this if it is ONLY under clocked in OSX, because I don't play games under than anyways. I will be using XP or Vista for all gaming needs. So I need to know if the cards are underclocked on the XP side of things also or not.

I'm a college kid and money does NOT come easy. So I can't be spending nearly 3k on a machine that is not going to perform exactly how I want it to.

I'm not expecting my system to run games 3 years down the pipe on ultra high settings, but I do want a system that can handle anything out right now with much ease.

Am I looking at the wrong computer?

[mduell]

Yes, it keeps the same clockrate in all OSs (Win/Lin/OSX), unless you use a software tool to change it (which are also available for Win/Lin/OSX).

But perhaps you're confusing the new MBP with the older MBPs (which did have significant underclocks, especially for the Core Duos). The current 8600M GT only runs the core 5Mhz slower than nominal (470Mhz instead of 475Mhz), and the memory 100Mhz slower than nominal (1300Mhz instead of 1400Mhz). A 7% underclock really isn't that much, and you're welcome to turn it back up to nominal speeds.

[ghporter]

If you want to play Windows games full-out, I don't think the MBP is your best choice. Put together a PC with all the uber-gamer features you want and you'll be happier. I think the most intensive game I play on my MBP is solitaire-got more important stuff to do in school than play games. Not enough time in my day for the complex games anyway.

[Geofries]

Porter you always make sense. Thanks duell.

[Geofries]

I pretty much just want to run games like Kotor 1/2, The Sims 2, and Jade Empire. I think the MBP should wipe the floor with these games.

[mduell]

Perhaps a MacBook and a Windows gaming desktop would be better for you... you can build a hell of a gaming box for a grand today.

[Geofries]

I have a first gen mac book right now. I don't like it though. Its too sluggish for even basic tasks. Do you think increasing the ram would give me a performance increase that'd be worth it? I have 512 now.

[mduell]

Yes. 2GB is only $100ish.

512MB hasn't been enough for OSX for years.

[bballe336]

Originally Posted by Geofries 

I pretty much just want to run games like Kotor 1/2, The Sims 2, and Jade Empire. I think the MBP should wipe the floor with these games.

The 128mb x1600 in the original MBP's would play those all with ease. I don't understand why you are AT ALL worried that the 8600 won't handle it. If you wanted to play fear or oblivion on a 30 inch display then maybe you might want to be concerned.

[Geofries]

Originally Posted by bballe336 

The 128mb x1600 in the original MBP's would play those all with ease. I don't understand why you are AT ALL worried that the 8600 won't handle it. If you wanted to play fear or oblivion on a 30 inch display then maybe you might want to be concerned.

COncerned because I simply didn't know. Coming here I read so many topics. Some people praising Apple for really upping the graphic power of the new MBP, and others downing them saying they crippled the machine.

My only way to learn and make sure I spend my money right is by you guys. So I thank all of you for your help.

By the way, didn't the original MBP handle Oblvion pretty well?

[MacosNerd]

Originally Posted by Geofries 

and others downing them saying they crippled the machine.

I have yet to see any proof that apple has crippled the GPU, I see a lot of posts about people whining that Apple under clocks the GPU but their posts are just that all whining and not substance. While it could be true, I'd like to see some definitive proof to show that they do it on the latest set of MBPs.

Also I think you're focusing on the minors and missing the majors. This laptop is an excellent machine, but its not a game machine, in fact few laptops are engineered to be serious game machines. While I may not push the GPU hard, I do run Aperture and it (the gpu) handles very nicely. A huge improvement of what I was used to on my Macbook

[P]

The 8x00 generation has, with the exception of the 8800s, been a bit of a disappointment. It reminds me a bit of the 5x00 generation, which also brought new features (DirectX 9 support) but only disappointing performance on current games. It may be that future games and drivers will make it shine - it may also be that the current generation will be a bit of a dud, and the next gen is the one that really brings a real performance increase.

In any case, a GPU that handles Oblivion with ease (as it seems to do) is good enough for the current generation, and we don't know enough about the next generation yet to make any sort of predictions. If you really want to game, do what Mark suggested and build yourself a nice gaming PC. If it's just something to do when there's nothing good on TV, the MBP is good enough for you.

[ghporter]

Geoffries, a lot of opinions posted here are, lets say "exaggerated." Not making the GPU run at 150% of its max safe clock speed, and not giving it four times the system's main RAM complement is "crippling" it to some people. On the other hand, going from a much less capable GPU to a newer one, with more VRAM to boot, is a huge step up, and though I wouldn't "praise" Apple for that, I can certainly see it as a very positive thing.

You must simply read through the hyperbole of the most extreme opinions to get at the reality behind them... Sometimes that's not at all easy.

[PaperNotes]

Originally Posted by P 

The 8x00 generation has, with the exception of the 8800s, been a bit of a disappointment.

That's not true. On the Windows side the 8600M GT performs very well indeed and there is already a much faster 8700.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by P 

The 8x00 generation has, with the exception of the 8800s, been a bit of a disappointment. It reminds me a bit of the 5x00 generation, which also brought new features (DirectX 9 support) but only disappointing performance on current games. It may be that future games and drivers will make it shine - it may also be that the current generation will be a bit of a dud, and the next gen is the one that really brings a real performance increase.

On the desktop side, certainly. But for laptops, the 8600M GT is a big step up from the last generation of mid-range card.

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Geoffries, a lot of opinions posted here are, lets say "exaggerated." Not making the GPU run at 150% of its max safe clock speed, and not giving it four times the system's main RAM complement is "crippling" it to some people. On the other hand, going from a much less capable GPU to a newer one, with more VRAM to boot, is a huge step up, and though I wouldn't "praise" Apple for that, I can certainly see it as a very positive thing.

You must simply read through the hyperbole of the most extreme opinions to get at the reality behind them... Sometimes that's not at all easy.

Watch the hyperbole yourself.
Underclocking a card by 40% (as they did with the CD MBP), so that the performance is no better than the low-end card (X1400) from the same generation, is crippling.

[ghporter]

This has not been the first "crippled" video card issue here-and some of them have been almost as extreme as in my exaggerated example. I thought the clock was more like 25% low, not 40%! I must have read the wrong specs...

[mduell]

If my memory serves correctly, it was at 270 Mhz against a nominal clockrate of 470 Mhz.

[Geofries]

Hmm, seems like they did do bad with the first crop of MBP's.

This here will suffice me. I mean, I'm not big on PC gaming, I just want to make sure that the few games I want to play, I will play with no probs. In between schoo, full time, a g/f, and a 360, PC gaming def takes the back burner.

I plan to play:

Kotor 1 & 2
Morrowind (it's a shame my MB won't run this with no lag, with max specs of course)
The Sims 1 & 2
Jade Empire

The MBP will suffice for that. All you guys have been MORE than helpful.

Dare I ask for one last bit of advice?

Core Duo
1.83 ghz
512 RAM
60 gig hd

How much do I attempt to sell it for? Don't want to rip anyone off, just want to get what it's worth.

[anonymac]

First of all, Apple is not forcing you to make this decision. Apple makes a product to its specifications. If you don't like it, then build a computer that meets your specifications. If you are too lazy/unknowledgeable/unwanting to do it, then take it or leave it.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by mduell 

If my memory serves correctly, it was at 270 Mhz against a nominal clockrate of 470 Mhz.

Gad. I had the numbers 400 and 300 stuck in my mind for some reason. That is WAY more than what I'd have expected.

[P]

The core was indeed underclocked from 400 to 300, but the video RAM was underclocked from 470 to either 270 or 310, depending on who you ask.

It also changed with the first C2D MBPs.

[mduell]

And from what I've seen (although the last time I really looked was ~3 years ago), memory bandwidth is usually the limiting factor for benchmarks. A 10% core overclock nets a 1% performance improvement, but a 10% memory overclock nets a 10% performance improvement.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by P 

The core was indeed underclocked from 400 to 300....

Thanks for letting me know I was not losing my mind!

[mduell]

I think P is confusing the numbers with something else (so I guess ghporter lost his mind? ). The nominal clockrates for X1600 Mobility are 470Mhz core/940Mhz memory, and Apple underclocked it to 310Mhz/555Mhz for the Core Duo MacBook Pros. That's 34% on the GPU and 41% on the VRAM.