9400M - Is it really enough?

I was just wondering about the integrated 9400M that's running wild now in most of the Macs available right now.

A big issue with macs is lack of gaming and given that most people don't buy macs to game, alot of people still enjoy being able to play them on Macs. (blizzard titles etc)

The last time I owned an imac, it had a dedicated card and was able to run the few games available for it at the time exceptionally well.

Will a new base imac run Starcraft 2? Diablo 2? Hypothetical I know, but still important I believe as the limited gaming spectrum on OS X requires, I think, the need too be able to run the Blizzard titles adequately.

What kind of longevity would the 9400M have before more than casual users get frustrated?

I'm just looking for some insight from those who are using computers with this chipset as I'm interested in getting another imac, however I'm skeptical about the new graphics solution.

thanks everyone!
-D

 

I was browsing through your previous posts. You seem to have a lot of Mac questions for someone who hasn't owned a Mac in years and is purchasing new Windows notebooks.

 

I have a fiancee who can't make up her mind. She's driving me mad. lol

We both have different needs and are taking our sweet time on his.

My mac owned list:
12" ibook
12" Powerbook G4 (I loved that thing so much)
17" mac 2006 I think? (died prematurely. Twice.)

In between I've had two Dells and an HP. I seem to bounce back and forth due to split needs. (day trading hobby, online poker, gaming, wife)

But I showed her the new Apple releases and she was drooling over the new imacs. She's really interested but my main hesitations is the 9400M as I previously stated.

Quit stalking me! jk.

 

Hello!

I've got the 13' Macbook early 2009 model and believe it or not it runs recent games fairly well. I play WoW in OSX with excellent framerates at native resolution(1280x800) WITH shadows on. On the Win7 side I play Fallout3, L4D and Halflife 2. All play very well, but L4D slows down when playing online(???). All in all I am very pleased with the 9400m, and actually somewhat surprised at how well it performs.
HTH!

 

I'm actually a little surprised you can play Fallout 3 decently. That's pretty good news. Maybe I should be a little more optimistic.

 

I was torn too, was considering selling my 15" macbook pro with dedicated video card for a smaller more portable 13" macbook pro. I chose to stay with the 15" due to the better graphics card.

Oh well. It's a tough choice! Blizzard games usually are backwards compatible through many generations of hardware though.

Just look at WoW, I'm sure they could've made it much better looking but they chose to make it cartoony and easy on the hardware so more people can buy it and feed their greed machine. xD

 

Wait until early or mid 2010,new graphics chips for mobile are supposed to come out then. The Gefore GT105m,ATI 3200HD,4630HD,4650HD is better than the 9400M.
For the $1,000 you spend on a mac,you can get a Asus gaming notebook with Geforece GTX260M if youre really into gaming with decent FPS.

 

Im jusy going to sit back and hope for an ATI 5000 series soon

 

That's fine and all but like I mentioned originally, this computer purchase isn't just for me. As much I would love to just get an Asus laptop and fill it full of games, that just isn't going to happen right now.

The computer will mostly be 'hers' with a small dab of 'ours' with a very very small hint of 'mine'.

Other then the latest imacs the only other thing to catch her eye that I could tolerate is Dell's XPS 16 because it's larger and isn't horribly cheap feeling and could still muscle out a little bit of a game or two when we have alternate days off.

The other thing I just realized with the 9400M is the resolution of the 21.5" screen is much larger than that of he 13" MBP, no? Wouldn't that create some framerate issues, having to power a much deeper resolution?

 

the higher res will drop framerates, I cant say if it still holds true anymore but for every 20% of pixels you add you lost about 12% of frames 5 years ago

 

Yes, the 13" Macbook has a 1280x800 pixel count and the 21 iMac has a 1920x1080 so it would be more demanding.

 

However say if D3 came out whenever the hell it's suppose to, you can run games at a lower resolution, no? Like, I can play it at 1200x800 instead of 1920x1080 to get better performance, no? Maybe?

I just don't want to get hancuffed by this stupid card. I feel like a husband trying to negotiate a compromise with his wife. Lol. (You can have the pretty car as long as it can go fast and has this and this.) You can have the shiny apple computer as long as I can still play a game or two.

 

I'm on the fence for buying one too...
Never sure if I'll be mad if I don't wait, plus I wanted the 13, then I wanted the 15...I waited so long that I missed the education deal Apple had where they were giving you a free Touch with the purchase....I'm hoping they have a similar offer in the near future..

daniellevesquedt - Your wife lets you tell her what she can and can't have?!!?!? Damn!

 

must have a wife like mine, I tell her what she can have in electronics, SHE tells me what I can have for powertools..... and a few other things

sidenote: im not going to bite on any more MBP's till they update alot of hardware including the 9400m

 

fiancee for now. I'm sure I'll lose more and more say as time goes on. LOL. Ugh.... jk.

No but seriously, she doesn't know squat about computers but we're in desperate need of an upgrade. We just have different needs and wants that I'm TRYING to meet in the middle.

One thing I enjoyed about the imacs of the last few years was the longevity of them. I feel like apple computers as a whole lived longer before the feeling of obsoletion (is that even a word?) sets in. My dell laptop felt old and unenjoyable after only 2 years. A friend of ours still has an imac from '06 and it's still snappy and a pleasure to use. It's one of the things that causes me to hesitate with the 9400m. Will it still have that longevity that I used to love about macs?

 

if it has heat issues like im finding in alot of the products ..... better get the applecare after looking at the 27" imac teardown ant the cooling systems im gonna stay away for atleast a year... as for longevity with all the new video cards, CPU's etc coming up, for me personally the new imac will seem outdated by January. for an AIO im eyeing the HP touchsmart 600xt or its refresh

 

You make it sound like Blizzard makes games for the Mac that can't run on "most of the Macs available right now."

Is that your belief?

 

No, my THOUGHT is that the level of graphics power available during 2005-2006 in the base level imacs is stronger for it's time than perhaps the 9400m might be now. (being that they were dedicated graphics card solutions)

I would've thought that my technical background that came across in my posts (or lack there of)wouldn't be strong enough to support something as strong as a belief but instead curiosity to prompt this discussion to begin with.

 

your not wrong, the 2005 imacs came out with then mid to mid high end video card and had a good lifespan, the 9400m is still good for light gaming but outdated, Hey we now have 2 refreshes of Nvidia, 3 refreshes of ATI cards out more right around the bend, why no 260m or similar atleast?

 

With the new imac and its price,it should include a GT 200 series,not a outdated 9400M,but if it did,the AIO would have more overheating issues than they do now.

 

true enough and I am all too aware of Apples dislike of venting and cooling equipment. but come on if we can stuff them in mid grade laptops that AIO shouldnt be TOO hard, it still has the 3.5" HDD in it generating heat !!!! and there is lots of surface area back there for dissipation

 

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding whats so wrong with the nVidia 9400m? I've got some casual games working BEAUTIFULLY on my MBP 13:
- Halo
- Portal
- Half Life 2

And for that note, if I wanted to game harder, I had the option of a MBP 15 with a switchable 9600m GT! Thats one of the best GeForce cards on the market with DirectX 10 support, etc. and 512MB RAM from a non-gaming focused OEM. Pretty sweet.

If you're going to do any serious gaming on a Mac, you're in the wrong product area. But for most of us who just want the gaming capability, the 9400m is fine for casual and the 9600 GT is great even for some of today's tougher games. (BTW they are BOTH Dedicated GPUs, one simply uses its 256MB DDR3 RAM from Main memory)

Why does everyone expect these things to make EVERY niche user happy? Apple is finally starting to appeal to the masses, and I for one couldn't be happier about it. If you want the HIGHEST possible gaming rig, build it out of PC parts from Tiger Direct, Micro Center, of Frys... Don't expect Apple to build it in a notebook. Sheesh!

 

the AIO has options for legitimate dedicated gaming cards. the 9400m is simply a cost saving measure in those machines.

 

well, off the bat, both the 105m and 3200 are worse than a 9400m.
anyway, i love the 9400m. it rivals the intel integrated graphics in terms of power usage but is way faster. hands down the best integrated graphics you can get. The reason the 9400m is used is because of its low power usage and small size.
if you want to game, spend that $1000 on a desktop with a corei7 and a 5870 instead of some asus notebook

 

The imac he's talking about has the res of 1920x1080. This is the resolution of a 24" monitor! You're playing games on a puny 13".

OP, if you plan on playing games, hate to break it to ya, but a 9400m ain't gonna cut it.

A laptop would be better at playing games than the imac.

 

LOL!
Don't you find this statement funny?
You should probably stop gaming and read up on notebookcheck.
This statement would probably be valid around 1 or 2 years ago...

 

Notice he said from a non-gaming focused OEM

 

There are better graphics from Non-Gaming OEM as well.
G130M Anybody?