topic Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card? in Installation & update

Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Anonymous — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 22:48:39 GMT

I am currently using AC11.

I need to buy a new Macbook Pro 15".

1. Will AC run faster on the 2.66ghz with the additional 9600m video card?

2. Does anyone have the 9600m and turn it off and wish they would of saved money and bought the 2.53ghz model? Why?

3. Do I need to upgrade from AC11 to get the performance boost of the 9600M?

Re: Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Eduardo Rolon — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 22:59:07 GMT

I have the 2.88 MbPro

1. Have not seen a difference.

2. I turn it off if running on battery and AC runs the same. No regrets, eventually more software will use the GPU for acceleration.

3. I don't think that AC is still optimized for GPU acceleration though in 12 the main upgrade was support for multiple cores.

Re: Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Anonymous — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 17:36:07 GMT

Sounds like there is no reason to pay $300 more for the macbook pro that has a second 9600 video card. If AC and Adobe do not use it then I guess its only for games.

Re: Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Eduardo Rolon — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 17:41:23 GMT

Because they don't use it now does not mean that they will not use it within the next 6-12 months. Apple has made a lot about unloading programs to the GPU and having the 9600 will future proof your computer.

If it is your only comp I would spend it if it is a second one I might save the money.

Re: Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Anonymous — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 17:54:25 GMT

I try and upgrade every 2-3 years. I just sold my 17" 2.33 for $1400.

This will be only AC computer.

I have not had any complaints about apple software speeds on a new 13" macbook pro. I am more concerned about AC as its my only high end software.

Well, if no one else in the forum has proof that AC is faster using the 9600 over the 9400 video card then I guess I'll spend the $300 difference on more ram and a faster hard drive.

Re: Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Anonymous — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 02:46:51 GMT

i dnt have a mac book pro, but i do have a dell with the same exact config as the mac book pro, i use a dell xps m1340, with a 2.66 ghz processor and two nvidia graphics cards in SLI, the same cards as the macs,
and ive seen a major difference when the extra card is switched on, and switched off. ( we can save power in SLI config cards by swithing off a card )

yes, AC (version 12 and more notably version 13 (64bit)) can make full use of the GPU acceleration, and further, the 64 bit version is eons ahead of the 32 bit version in speed, im talking bot 200% in performance.
performance difference extremely clear in large models

System Specs :
Dell XPS M1340
Intel Core2duo p8600
4 GB DDR3 dual channel ram
Nvidia SLI motherboard
Nvidia GF 9400m + 9200m

Re: Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Anonymous — Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:41:22 GMT

abhitej wrote:
i dnt have a mac book pro, but i do have a dell with the same exact config as the mac book pro, i use a dell xps m1340, with a 2.66 ghz processor and two nvidia graphics cards in SLI, the same cards as the macs,
and ive seen a major difference when the extra card is switched on, and switched off. ( we can save power in SLI config cards by swithing off a card )

yes, AC (version 12 and more notably version 13 (64bit)) can make full use of the GPU acceleration, and further, the 64 bit version is eons ahead of the 32 bit version in speed, im talking bot 200% in performance.
performance difference extremely clear in large models

System Specs :
Dell XPS M1340
Intel Core2duo p8600
4 GB DDR3 dual channel ram
Nvidia SLI motherboard
Nvidia GF 9400m + 9200m

Just curious, why wouldn't you be using a workstation card instead of a gaming card?

Re: Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Anonymous — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 03:48:24 GMT

LINZ wrote:
Just curious, why wouldn't you be using a workstation card instead of a gaming card?

well, on a notebook , that was the best option i had, besides i do game quite a bit, :p,

Re: Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Anonymous — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 17:37:58 GMT

I find there is a big difference between the discrete and shared video in my MacBook Pro. Project complexity probably plays a big part in this.

BTW: I haven't seen much advantage to the high end workstation cards. An associate of mine has a very pricey nVidia Quadro card and there doesn't seem to be any advantage compared to my GeForce 8800 GT.

Re: Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Anonymous — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:55:27 GMT

LINZ wrote:
Just curious, why wouldn't you be using a workstation card instead of a gaming card?

Because the only difference is marketing, the specs of the card are often identical. 3D CAD and 3D games are largely using the same math behind the scenes and with the OpenGL standard API for graphics cards they're all communicating with the software in the same way. As a good rule of thumb, the more video RAM the card has the better, other considerations are secondary as you're unlikely to notice significant performance differences between two card.

Re: Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Anonymous — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 19:58:53 GMT

Cleverbeans wrote:
LINZ wrote:
Just curious, why wouldn't you be using a workstation card instead of a gaming card?
Because the only difference is marketing, the specs of the card are often identical. 3D CAD and 3D games are largely using the same math behind the scenes and with the OpenGL standard API for graphics cards they're all communicating with the software in the same way. As a good rule of thumb, the more video RAM the card has the better, other considerations are secondary as you're unlikely to notice significant performance differences between two card.

What do you think of these benchmark numbers then? It appears there is a very big difference between them.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-firepro-v8700,2154-10.html

Re: Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Anonymous — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 20:02:46 GMT

These benchmarks and article seem to say the same thing....

http://www.videomaker.com/article/14648/

and....

http://tech.icrontic.com/articles/the-real-difference-between-workstation-and-desktop-gpus/

Re: Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Anonymous — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:01:15 GMT

LINZ wrote:
What do you think of these benchmark numbers then? It appears there is a very big difference between them.

I specifically said "noticeable" difference, because obviously there are differences, but benchmarks have almost no relevance in practice. It's the distinction between how a car performs under optimal conditions on a test track and how reliable and comfortable it is when you're stuck in grid-lock. Sure it can go a lot faster, but you're not driving it that way, so why pay more? Manufactures hype benchmarks because they're engineers, and that's what's important to them as they develop the product, not because it doesn't translates into gains for the end user.

Re: Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Anonymous — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 02:47:23 GMT

It would be interesting to have an opinion from someone at Graphisoft. We all know there are some demands placed on the video card. An authoritative opinion would be very helpful for the consumer I think.

Re: Macbook Pro 2.53 or 2.66 with 9600m card?

Anonymous — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 06:27:10 GMT

This ArchiWiki article is interesting. I didn't know GS actually recommended QuadroFX cards. Now I do!

http://archicadwiki.com/Video%20Cards%20for%20ArchiCAD%2013