Nvidia 9400M performance on New Macbooks. how fast?

I saw the Engadget feed, showing 9400M to be four times faster than 'Intel'.

Would this be Intel X3100 or X4500?

How would the gaming performance of a 9400M with 256 MB on a Macbook compare to a Sony Z with 9300M with 128MB?

 

Yes--I am most definately interested in the same thing. How would it compare to the 8400M found in the Dell m1330? I want to use adobe PS CS4 and premiere CS4, and don't want it to suck horribly.

 

I think they were referring to the X3100 on the last gen macbooks

 

not very fast

 

i it will be a lot faster then 8400gt

 

LOL. Apple is making stuff up. According to nVidia, the chipset uses the integrated GeForce 9100M G GPU. If there is no 9600M GT then there is a 9200M or 9300M GS discrete card - there won't be both. Using hybrid SLI, 9100 + 9200 or 9100+ 9300 = 9400M. Since we don't have any real extensive hybrid SLI testing, I can't say for sure - but I doubt it will be "a lot" faster than the 8400M GT as stated above.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_9100m_g_mgpu.html

edit: at least the 9100M G alone is better than the X4500. the performance of the 9300M GS is below the performance of the 8400M GS (which is lower than the 8400M GT)

 

The 9400M and 9600M aren't being announced by nVidia until tomorrow. Apple simply got first crack at the part.

The MacBook Pro will have hybrid SLI between the 9400M and 9600M.

 

-45% from 8600M GT should give an average of 2000 points in 3DMark06. That's about it I think.

Referring to the gpu performance chart shown by Apple where 8600M GT = 100%, 9400M = 55% and Intel (assumable X3100) is 11%. That would also make it 5 x faster than Intel previously was.

 

honestly if you visit their site, they're not being too descriptive about how fast the 9400 actually is. The use a relative comparison for all their benchmarks and but what exactly are they comparing it to?

 

Suppose we'll find out more tomorrow when nVidia release it.

 

If you don't believe their comparsions, you might as well wait a day or two until somebody gets an actual 3DMark score.

 

9400M will be 4x faster than X3100, it's slightly faster than X4500. 9400M will be slightly faster than 9300M since it will be a 9300M + 9100M in hybrid SLI. Until I see a dissected MBP, I won't believe Apple is putting in 2 discrete cards (1 which doesn't even exist).

Your options will most likely be the discrete 9300M GS in the MB with the integrated 9100M G, giving you the "9400M" level performance, while MBP having discrete 9600M GT and integrated 9100M G. This will be comparative to Lenovo's discrete ATI HD 3650 and integrated X4500 solution, except since the discrete and integrated are better, AND they can work together, the MBP solution should give a nice boost over conventional configurations. Again refer to my previous link from nVidia.

 

Just to clarify, the GeForce 9400M is an integrated video card, it hasn't been annoused by NVIDIA, and I don't know how it will perform or anything else about it, but it's definitely not the 9100M G + dedicated.

The MBP has the 9400M + 9600M GT, and you can switch between them.
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/graphics.html

The MB only has the 9400M
http://www.apple.com/macbook/graphics.html

 

Thanks for the clarification... I guess we'll have to see how it performs. nVidia needs to fix their naming scheme...

 

HP's DV3500T is using the 512MB NVIDIA GeForce 9300M GS... I suppose battery life won't be as good as the new MacBooks...since this means it is not a hybrid? without a GeForce 9100M G

http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_9100m_g_mgpu.html

how good is the additional 256MB of ram? neligible I suppose?

torn between the new Macbooks and HP DV3500T now...argh

the $1299 macbook would have been nice but I wanted the backlit keyboard which is the $1599 macbook...and i could have it on the HP for just $25 -_-

 

Same situation man, I really want the backlit keyboard....but the 250$ difference (after student discount) does not justify for the larger hard drive/faster processor/backlit keyboard at all.....still I ordered the 1,299$ MB anyway because of upgrade in CPU, GPU, RAM, and hopefully better shipping

For the GPU, it should be as fast as 9200 and 9300M GS

 

i do think the Macbook will have a better 'feel' while holding,using it...the keyboard touchpad is attractive to me at least...thing that would have swung me for sure to the Macbook would be the backlit keyboard on the $1299 model...even without HDMI...i bought a 22" LCD HDTV and doubt I want to get one of those adaptors for the mini-dv port

seems like i will be going for the HP from bestbuy...

hope you enjoy your 'BMW' while i get my 'Merc'...

 

HP is more like a KIA or Hyundai, to be precise.

 

Yes for other models I will say that...well lets say for the DV3500T series its a 'Lexus'...where i come from in South East Asia...a Lexus is no more than a souped up Toyota...

Just went through the launch video on the Apple site...the 9400M runs Need for Speed...I guess comfortably? guess its still way ahead than e prev gen.

 

I guess the 9400M IGP is as fast as the 8400GS dedicated, will see the announcement tomorrow.

 

also take into account im pretty sure it said during the new macbook video it was a specially designed 9400 integrated card, dunno what thats going to mean....

 

Apple at it again with their "fuzzy" specs again. I am not surprised in the least.

 

How does 9400M compare to the 8600M GT?

 

dont trust apple, its a trap!

 

No comparison, 8600M GT is a dedicated gpu...9400M is still an integrated one...8600M GT is way ahead performance wise.

 

^Jobs said that it is half of 8600gt

 

just checked out the specs page for the 9400m that was released and it says 128 bit interface which could mean it is better than the 9300m gs in the sony z and ati's 34x0 series in the sony sr(64 bit interface). My choices for a laptop just got harder -.-.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_9400m_g_us.html

 

yet it's still integrated...

 

It is not better than the 9300GS. It shares memory.

 

Not necessary true....will see when benchmark results come out...but looks like it will be faster though

 

My friends, here are the benchmarks:

comparison chart from the pc magazine review:

http://www.pcmag.com/image_popup/0,1871,iid=219447,00.asp

full review:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2332519,00.asp


Macbook 2.4 ghz nvidia 9400m
3DMARK06 result (1024x768) = 2344 points

quite fast i have to say. I guess this is the fastest 13" thin/light notebook around? how much does the Sony Vaio SR with the ATI 3470 score?

 

quite disappointed the PC magazine has used the HP Pavillion DV2800t for comparison instead of the DV3500t with the 9300M GS.

 

Wow, actually more powerful than an 8400GS with 64MB. Still probably fairly well behind the 9300 with 512MB like in the HP dv3500t, but still nice.

 

Wow that's pretty impressive

i got 2277 with my SR.. and i got that with an unstable driver (using ati mobility mobber)

and they tested the macbook with 1024x768.. i ran my test with 1280x800...
so i guess my score could've been higher if i ran the test with 1024x768.. i think

 

Very Very happy to see it in the range of ATI HD3450,

 

I ran 3DMark06 again using 1024x768 resolution.. and got 2328



still 16 points below the 9400M...

the 9400M is very impressive for an integrated GPU!

 

thats an impressive score!!! I m really tempted to buy those MB now. Also The MB Air will have quite a good GPU punch as well and its thin as hell.

 

am i the only person who is really dissapointed? i meen, i know its an integrated chip and all...but outside of wow, what can the 9400 actually run?

 

^Crysis,FarCry2 etc.

 

On a 13.3" notebook, gaming could be quite uncomfortable, Yes I've had many 13" ultraportables, they suck at gaming.

I much rather have the Intel integrated graphics for better better life on a 13" notebook.

Apple should've chose the 9700m GTS on the Macbook Pro, that will open the doors to many modern games.

 

^if you know how to fit it in 0.95 thick case,then call apple

 

yeh, the qosmio f55 has the 9700 GTS, but its 1.8in thick.

Even if they did release it, it would be like a 500$ upgrade

 

Anyone have any idea of the frequencies for the 9400m in the MBP? I saw nvidia default frequencies for 9300(450)/9400(580) but those are desktop variants plus apple has a habit of underclocking chips so I was curios if anyone knows them.

 

But Tony you got 2277, the Macbook got 2054. http://www.pcmag.com/image_popup/0,1871,iid=219447,00.asp

So yours is faster at 1280*720.

 

anyone know if the MB would run programs such as Illustrator, Photoshop, ArchiCAD etc etc nicely? im contemplating whether or not i should fork out approximately an extra AU$800 for the MBP to use these programs regularly....

 

That's your opinion, many people would prefer decent graphic card for programs like Adobe Photoshop, light gaming, and not the mention an edge in the performance when Snow Leopard is released. Battery life won't be that bad as it is still and integrated graphics.

 

I think macbook is enough-progrmas like photoshop don't use GPU,they are CPU and RAM dependent...but,with Snow Leopard release it will change

 

Decent integrated graphics has been something that we've been waiting for FOREVER. As much as I love the looks of the MBP, this news allows me to either focus on the upgraded Air or the 1599 MB. I'm not a heavy PC gamer but I want to be able to play stuff when consoles don't have something.

 

Yes.

It can run almost any game older than 2 years at a pretty good pace. Half-Life 2, Far Cry, Doom 3-engine games, etc. Quite frankly, that's amazing to me from an integrated graphics card.

 

yes, i was really dissapointed in the lack of a 9700 in the pro, but i guess ill still keep holding my break for a centrino 2 alienware m15x refresh...but as those benchmarks show, xirug, unless you are talking about crysis on low settings @ 800x600, then its not playable...13.2fps @ medium/1024x768 is...bleh