[mattyb]

I'm confused about the 'dedicated graphics card' argument. I understand that having for example 512M VRAM and 4G of RAM and a fast chip is good for perf, but I wonder what the MacBook vs. MacBook Pro difference is.

If you have a Macbook with its on board graphics, and yet you max out the RAM to 4G, doesn't this mean that when needed your graphics memory requirements can use the spare RAM that the OS and apps aren't using? If this is the case, shouldn't my apps run pretty near the MBPro speeds ?

[naphtali]

It really depends on what you use your Mac for, how much you're willing to spend and how long you plan to keep your machine.

Discrete graphics chips aren't better just for the amount of VRAM they have; it's the architecture and all that, and there's no denying that within any generation, they are superior to integrated graphics chips.

The discrete graphics chips will fare much better at media intensive tasks, and if you use any of them frequently you're likely to realise that too.

The professional Mac notebooks also generally last longer than the iBooks/MacBooks across more demanding versions of Mac OS X. This may become more significant as more tasks are offloaded to the graphics chips. The more powerful chips will give you room to grow to higher-end applications, so that leads back to your intentions.

That said, general surfing, email, word-processing won't benefit much from a higher-end graphics chip and if that's your day, you'll be better served getting more RAM and saving that money.

[mattyb]

I do the bog standard email, web, easy photo stuff, but I'm also an on-line gamer. I'm not fussed about getting the extreme detail that some of my opponents get with 768M graphics cards in their PCs, but I'd like smoothness when playing. With that 512M graphics card in the MBPro, I'm really tempted - but here in Europe we are really paying high prices for Apple gear.

I was also thinking that only having to drive a 13 inch screen wouldn't be so bad if the RAM was maxed out to 4G.

Oh well, looks like it'll HAVE to be a MBPro.

[mduell]

Apps that don't use the graphics card much have about the same performance on the MB and MBP.

[packet of krisps]

If you want to game it's obvious what your choice should be. Your going to get much better performance with a GPU (256MB) even if you have to run a 15" screen rather than get the 4MB or something running a 13" screen, what you get with onboard. Even at very low gaming resolutions, (1024x 768), the difference is clear. The 8600GTs their putting in the MBPs run very hot, but do perform quite well for a notebook with a single GPU, (some of the XPS' have dual GTX's with like, a gig of VRAM). The system RAM really doesn't have any effect on the graphics at all, even if you have onboard (air and mb), the north bridge doesn't take more than a few MB to dedicate to graphics.

[Simon]

If you don't do 3D stuff (games, Aperture, Motion) there is no performance advantage when going from a 2.4 GHz MB to a 2.4 GHz MBP. Of course the MBP offers other advantages though (screen, extra expansion, etc.).

In most 3D benchmarks the difference between 256 MB and 512 MB VRAM is small. The gains from the increased CPU clock are usually more substantial. If you're on a budget, I would rather go for 4 GB RAM and a fast/big disk than choosing the 2.5GHz/512MB MBP over the 2.4GHz/256MB MBP.

[jev425]

I was also curious if whether I should get the MBP or MB. The reason I am holding-off is because I want to know what would be better. I am currently using a 1.5 Ghz PB with a 64 MB of VRAM. I usually use my computer for viewing online videos and DVDs. I don't really know if this classifies as heavy VRAM usage but what would be better to get the best picture possible. I am also using a 22-inch monitor and curious that if more VRAM will better the picture.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by jev425 

I was also curious if whether I should get the MBP or MB. The reason I am holding-off is because I want to know what would be better. I am currently using a 1.5 Ghz PB with a 64 MB of VRAM. I usually use my computer for viewing online videos and DVDs. I don't really know if this classifies as heavy VRAM usage but what would be better to get the best picture possible. I am also using a 22-inch monitor and curious that if more VRAM will better the picture.

Online videos (Flash) and DVDs don't depend on VRAM. A MB would do these things just as good as a MBP. Apart form games and some pro apps, more VRAM is an advantage when you have lots of windows open on both the internal and a large external screen (Exposé for example). But any current MBP will do that fine even if you attach a 30" screen.

Coming from a 1.5 GHz G4 you will be making a huge step up regardless if you go with the MB or MBP. Base your choice upon price/performance and things like screen size/quality.