GT335M (Alienware M11x) vs. 9600mGT (Macbook pro 15")

I am just curious...

I have a macbook pro 15" with the P8600 2.66 GHz core 2 duo wit 256MB GDDR3 9600 mGT.
running windows 7 64bit on an intel-x25M SSD.

would I see an improved performance if I buy a M11x? I know the thing has a pretty decent 335M, but the cpu looks pretty weak.

I was wondering how much faster the 335M is over the 9600M and how much my core 2 duo 2.66 will offset b/c of the SU9400 in the M11x.

I play various games currently, ex: BF2, Red Orchestra, Hearts of Iron III, Silent Hunter 4.
forgot to add, i play ETW and the new Napoleon TW
Also wondering if I would see an improvement with games I plan to play in the near future such as Silent Hunter 5, BF Bad Company 2, Assassin's Creed 2...

thanks

 

Without having any backup evidence, I would say that there is no way in hell that a SU CULV can be compared to a 2.6 C2D.

The little obese M11X is made for the very mobile gamer. It just cant compete with a big 15'' like a Macbook Pro that has plenty of room for cooling and powerful components.

M11x is more like a mix between a netbook and a laptop. it's like your second notebook, kind of thing. It's capable in some games that are driven by the GPU, but many games are also CPU dependant(like Source games, Empire Total War, many MMOs and RTS) and they will not run as smooth.


So I would say it's a mixed bag.
I own neither products. Just what I gathered from my outside understanding of the machines.

 

The GT335 is a superior GPU, but luffytubby is right, the macbook would be better all around for gaming because of the CPU except for highly GPU dependent games.

Basically, I would expect you to get a few more FPS out of the Alienware on games that don't tax the CPU, but it would have a severe FPS hit on games that need that CPU power (Like L4D and GTA4).

 

I think it would vary from title to title.

The 335m is definitely faster than the 9600m gt in the macbook pro, so on some titles you would see some improvement.

On other titles, it would be more of a crash-n-burn. Left 4 Dead / L4D2 comes to mind in a big way.

 

It's true that the 1.73 GHz C2D from the M11x is weaker than the 2.66 GHz C2D from the MBP. However, the GT 335m from the M11x is much more powerful than the 9600m GT from the MBP. The GT 335m has 72 shaders (compared to 32 on the 9600m GT) plus the memory bus is 256 bits (vs 128 on the 9600m GT). n some rare instances, where the game is more CPU bound, the Macbook Pro could perform a little bit better. But overall, the M11x will make it in the GPU department and will perform better for gaming. You don't buy a MBP for gaming.

 

As much as I know that 3DMark06 is CPU bound:

My laptop: 2,4GHZ + 9600M GT 1280x1024-> 5200 3dmarks 1280x800 -> 5900 3dmarks.

Laptops with the GT335M
M11x @ 1,6GHZ (Standard 1280x1024) 5982 (15% more marks)
M11x @ 1,6GHZ (Standard 1280x768) 6462 (10% more makrs)
Hasee A560-i7 720QM (Standard 1366x768) 7700 (30% more marks whatever that means)

Also, the GT335M's memory bus appears to be 128-bit, the same as teh 9600M GT? http://www.nvidia.co.uk/object/product_geforce_gt_335m_uk.html



IMO, looks like it will perform better, but I personally would not purchase the M11x if you are going to be using it primarily for gaming.

 

If you overclock both notebooks as much as you can (both CPU and GPU),
I think the mac would win by a tiny bit.

http://hwbot.org/community/submission/969845_sard_3dmark_2006_geforce_gt_330m_7252_marks

http://hwbot.org/community/submission/852874_lucky_n00b_3dmark_2006_geforce_9600m_gt_7335_marks

I would keep the mac.

 

The thing is that the macbook pro would blow up....while the M11x wouldn't. I mean the MBP is sub 1" thick plus the cooling system wasn't really meant for OC (I think/In my opinion). Because it gets pretty hot now....That test was done on a MSI GX620 soooo yeah.

 

But even without overclocking MBP-> M11x is like an odd sidestep in terms of performance.

If you keep both computers, it will be awkward(it's essentially like having the same computer twice IMO).

The M11x's main point is portability, and that is the only reason to get one in this case.

 

The M11x should have come with a socketed CPU, so you could upgrade if you didn't want so much battery life.

 

yeah, reason i asked is because i already have a pretty much upgraded macbook pro; but just wondering if it is worth it getting a M11x? I do like to be able to use it during trips (which I don't do much) and also use it to take notes in class.
I currently have the dell XT2 in my sig. That thing lags even watching some 1080p videos. So I'm planning to sell it and replace it with something better.
Of course, being able to game some where else besides my apartment would be great too.

I am also considering the Dell Adamo (original one). They are selling it for $999. Is that worth the money? If I end up with that, gaming is out of the question, but it really looks nice!

 

If your XT2 is running Windows 7, you can use the Microsoft DTV-DVD Video decoder to accelerate H.264 video on the 4500MHD video card.

Adamo, I've heard, doesn't even have good battery life. The M11x is cheaper and will run longer on battery. It however probably isn't as light as the Adamo.

In short, even your XT2 has much more to offer than the Adamo does.

 

R-O-F-L! A MBP's internals are squeezed in there like a petite can of sardines. Even the 9600mGT makes it so hot you can't hold the *expletive* thing. I know from first hand experience. I'd actually say the M11x has more internal room! And as for which video card is better... The GT335m will make the 9600mGT cry. Simple as that. Overclock the M11x to 2.13GHz like the ASUS models do and you have a machine that gets P8400 benches, can play pretty much any game you throw at it, and when dialed down and switched to GMA graphics can get 9HR's of battery life. I patiently await the day Apple brings anything to market that can do that, in that size package.

 

The 9600m GT = 128 bit mem @ 800mhz + 32 shaders 500/1250/800
THe 335m GT = 128 bit mem @ 1066mhz + 72 shaders 450/1080/1066

It's the masive shader advantage and faster mem helping it. 3dmark06 is GPU mostly bound with these sorts of cards.

Of course there is a large difference between a CULV and an i7.

 

Are you serious?

A OC'ed CULV SU 7300, is the same performance wise as a P8400?


Do you have any numbers to back that up, because that sounds incredible.

 

If it can be overclocked to 2.13Ghz, I don't see why not because the P8400 is 2.26Ghz

But.... can it reach 2.13ghz?

 

With the OC in the BIOS + Turbo33 = 2.13GHz. OR Just Turbo33 = 1.73GHz. That's been in several reviews I've read, but that's not first hand knowledge, so I'd take that with a pinch of salt. But I've seen the benches, and they come pretty darn close to the P8400.

 

I strongly advise against gaming on a Macbook Pro. It hurts. Badly.

XGX2007 is totally right. (I'll rep when it lets me)

Forget about marginally better performance (if that) and consider safety.

 

At this point, the M11x cannot be overclocked beyond 1.73ghz. We are looking for methods, but currently it's either 1.3 or 1.73, both easily changeable in the BIOS, and supported by Alienware.

And while I'm biased as an owner, I absolultely love the M11x!

EDIT: Also, the CPU is reported to be soldered in place, so don't plan to upgrade.

Cooling wise, the M11x runs very cool, max 64C I've seen so far overclocked to 550 core/ 850mem

 

They won't.. its netbook in a way so for saving space , it is soldered sadly.. it would be great if it had a core i7 CULV processor.... but M11x also has too small of a screen IMO so not worth it.. ur better off selling ur macbook and getting a proper gaming notebook...

 

If you look to where they bench with 3dmark06 you can see which machines they tested to get the scores
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-9600M-GT.9449.0.html
Theres an acer aspire 5930g with a p8600 on the list which scored 5678 and a macbook with a t9400 which scored 5821

People on this forum have been achieving a score around 6.5k with their m11xs
I doubt you would see alot of improvement when playing games, like people have said previously cpu dependent games will perform worse on the m11x with its weaker processor

 

Nope. Memory is a little faster, but the bus width is still 128. Also, the memory is a little faster, not GDDR5 faster.

 

The 335 is quite a bit more powerful than the 9600m GT as I am sure has already been pointed out. The 9600m GT can't really run modern games at 1440*900 unless you turn the details down.

But with Steam on Mac and Bootcamp, the uMBP is a great compromise for non hardcore gamers IMO.

I only got rid of my uMBP because I got a straight trade for this beast (which eats the babies of any Mac I've owned when it comes to gaming - in fact I would not fear a Mac Pro in games).

But I miss the elegant design and operating system of the uMBP.

 

Most games are going to be GPU bound.... the m11x will provide better performance for most games... probably by a decent margin

 

Here's the M11x benchmark thread. The Score that would mean more is 3dmark Vantage. I think 3dmark06 would be biased towards the Better CPU in the MBP.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=459834

I think its safe to say if there was more competition the scores would get a little better. But that should be about it.

 

For the asking price of a m11x you could get a decently specked Asus that would game better than both of em. There's also the option of building a decent tower. You already have the MacBook for portability afterall.