|
|
MBP Graphics: 128 vs 256
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'm thinking of purchasing a MacBook Pro, and I was wondering how noticeable the difference between the 128mb and 256mb video cards is? I have an iMac with 256, and it suits me great. It's a $400 difference in price, so I figure it's worth asking about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status:
Offline
|
|
It's a subtle difference and depending on what kind of work you do you won't notice it at all.
The best argument in favor of going 256 is that it's one of those things you're stuck with forever. There's no later upgrade option. The best argument against it is that unless you're into hard-core 3D games or you work dual-head with an external 30" ACD you won't notice any difference.
Here are some benchmarks. As you can see the difference between 128 and 256 MB VRAM is about as big as the difference between the 15" and 17" model (due to downclocking on the 15"). On average the frame rate difference was 9%. That's surprisingly close to the CPU clock difference.
My advice in short: If you're into 3D games or you work with lots of windows on large external displays, go for it. If you're on a budget, stick with the 128 MB VRAM.
|
•
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kentucky
Status:
Offline
|
|
I was in the same boat last November and opted for the 128. Using Bootcamp, Vista didn't complain about anything on the MBPro, only low score it gave was on the HD. Aero was fine. Leopard runs great and 1080P movie trailers are great. Only thing I noticed was some lag on the BBC HD content that Apple has as demo on their site. My iMac 2.8 Core2Extreme was smooth while the MBPro had some stuttering.
Haven't tried real 3D gaming, I use my 360 for that.
|
24" iMac 2.8 C2Ext,15" MBPro 2.2 C2D,20" iMac 2.0 G5,12" iBook 1.2 G4
16GB 3G iPhone, 60GB 5th Gen iPod, 20 GB 3rd Gen iPod
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
The issue is not just more video memory. The extra cost gets more CPU and hard drive capacity as well.
Each level up in MBPs improves overall performance and each user has to make his/her own cost/benefit judgement based on finances and expected future needs. E.g. I am helping a friend with tight finances and lower end needs buy a refurb Macbook, whereas for me personally I have heavy graphics needs and I find buying highest end to be most life-cycle cost effective.
When I bought a G4 PB I paid $75 for the extra video RAM option expecting future needs. Then when Aperture was announced it turned out that PB ran Aperture while towers would not. I ran Aperture on that box until C2D MBPs came out. The GPU was probably more relevant than the extra VRAM, but my point is that future expectations should guide hardware purchases. I was glad that I had the strongest possible graphics support.
-Allen Wicks
(
Last edited by SierraDragon; Feb 17, 2008 at 06:50 PM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
Thanks for these responses! They really helped.
I think that as nice as saving a little money would be, it would be smarter for me to go with the higher end video card; I am stuck with it forever. I don't do any gaming, and right now I don't have any external monitors. However, I do a lot of video editing, I like having lots of programs active at once, and I definitely would like a large external display in the near future (although 30" is way beyond my budget).
I guess if I'm going to go for it, I might as well go all the way, right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
How often do you replace your laptops?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
Not too often. It would need to last at least 3 or 4 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Yamanashi, Japan
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by BoingoBongo
Not too often. It would need to last at least 3 or 4 years.
I went with the extra VRAM expecting to go the 3 to 4 years route. If you have the money and think you'll have the need, why not go for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by BoingoBongo
Not too often. It would need to last at least 3 or 4 years.
So there you go: it's probably better to go with the 256MB VRAM to be on the safe side - you will be stuck with what you get now for 3-4 years.
|
•
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
Yep, that seems to make the most sense. Thanks for all the help!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Aug 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
for non-3d usage there is literally no difference at all. For 3d applications, the extra ram only matters if you need to load and offload textures and models. That will happen more often on 128 card than on a 256, but its not the end of the world.
as for being 'future proof'. 3-4 years from now 256 will be the what 32 was to 16 like 5 years ago. Cards are already pushing over 512 now and will likely increase to a point where the difference between 128 and 256 doesn't make a lot of difference.
that's my opinion.. i went with 128 when i got my mbp and it's pretty good for gaming. it plays CS at pretty good resolutions and good framerates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2007
Status:
Offline
|
|
I just got a new MBP, the 128 version. I'm loving it and do quite a bit of gaming. I know that there is a update coming soon, but my macbook was giving me some trouble so I had to get rid of it.
|
Macbook Pro 15" / C2D 2.2 / 2GB / 120GB
16 GB iPod touch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|