macbook pro 3d mark...wth?

ok, so I assume everyone saw the review for the mac book pro on the main page: http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=3747
Anyway, the reviewer posted a 3dmark 06 score of 4,674 3D Marks (and on only 128MB VRAM GPU no less). The heck? Am I missing something? I know the stock scores on pc's with the 8600 gt only get around 35-3800 points on 3d mark on 1280 x 1024, and around 4400 points on 1024 x 768. can anyone else confirm these scores, and on what resolutions?
maybe the processor is higher than average... but I'm clueless to what equates to those inflated scores?

 

Actually the reviewer with the GF 8600 128MB said he couldn't run Windows XP to benchmark so he temporarily used Stgben's benchmarks score. Just read carefully you'll spot it.

 

Nicholie purchased the 2.2ghz/128vram and then shows 3DMarks for the 2.4ghz/256vram???




nvm. i see the link now

 

So now that we've all actually read the article rather than skipping to the performance charts...don't those stats look a lil off? It seems like the 8600mGT is keeping pace with 7800/7900gtx! Is this right? If the card is that awesome I can't wait to see benchmarks for a 512mb version!

 

Apart from that, some 8600GT laptops seem to use GDDR2 rather than GDDR3, the Macbook has GDDR3.

 

I never saw any 1024x768 benchmarks from a 7900gs or 7900gtx. But the 8600M GT score from the G1s, which was done in standard res. of 1280x1024, got about 3700. That is about the level of the 7900gs. A bit below but not far off. But most scores from the 7900gs I found were done with a 2.0Ghz C2D only so not 100% accurate to compare them. It is still more then 1000 points behind the 7900gtx and a few hundred below the 7800gtx. But a great card in such a thin and light laptop!

 

eh...sounds reasonable.

 

4674 is about 100 points lower than the 7900GTX. That, more than anything else, is making me question these benchmarks...Is the 8600M GT really that fast?

 

4674 is the 1024x768 score. 3800 is the G1s score at 1280x1024. Use that to compare it to other benchmarks you find.

 

I thought you couldn't modify the resolution if you have the free version or was the full version used in the old bench?

 

i already posted this in the discussion thread for the review.
the benchmarks for all the other systems where done at 1280x1024 but the macbook cant support that because the screen is 1440x900. so the benchmarks should of been done at 1440x900 as there is minimal difference between 1280x1024 and 1440x900. if u compare the the 1024x768 score to the g1s 1024x768 score they are very similar +/- 100 points which means that it looks like they havent underclocked the card.