Either this is a screen issue or a graphics issue more than likely graphics. I went to the following site to as a double take to my observation:Īnd the new MBP disappointingly failed many of the screen tuning test while the MBA was fairly superb. In comparison to the MBA, The MBP images are no where near as details in grays and blacks. Obviously, I'm thinking about returning this to the Apple Store and getting the previous gen with the 320M - even if it's just an "early driver" issue, it's just not good. I have no doubt in my mind the nVidia 320M would be a better graphics chip for this because a 3 year old Macbook should not even remotely compare to a new MBP. Keep in mind, that's skipping from the X3100, past the 9400M, and the 320M.
We went from running all the settings on Low (barely meeting system requirements) to barely scraping by on Medium - a lot of the settings will have to be reduced to low to get a decent framerate, still working on that. While I know an integrated chip isn't the best for gaming, we were extremely disappointed with the difference in performance. My girlfriend uses it primarily to play the Sims 3. Specs: 2.1 Ghz Core 2 Duo, 2GB ram, X3100 integrated w/144MB vs: I just purchased the new 2011 MBP 13" to upgrade from a white Macbook 2008 running an Intel X3100 I don't know if this helps anyone make a decision (because it's not photo editing), but I thought I'd share a real life experience with the Intel HD 3000.
Plus you're likely going to have much better battery life. Ultimately it depends on what you wish to spend but at least for photo editing you'll do quite well with the 2010 Macbook Pros. Sure it is slower but not unbearably slower. For instance I'm happily using CS5 on an "ancient" Macbook late 2008 and it is not much faster in Camera Raw, for instance, than my Mac Pro. But nevertheless, while the new Macbook Pros are significantly faster than last year's models (see [here|> and [here|> for Geekbench scores) that speed increase may not necessarily translate into real-world time savings. However, since Photoshop (since CS4, I think) uses the GPU better, that will also be a factor. Overall speed will depend on other things, mainly available RAM and what storage you use. I don't know about video editing but for Photoshop work the processor will only affect processor-intensive tasks, such as applying filters.
The Core 2 Duo and the NVIDIA GeForce 320M? Will the Core i7 and the Intel HD graphics give me a $500 speed bump over I'll use it for photo and video editing so graphics I'm looking at the new 13" and am wondering how graphics performance will be on the
0 kommentar(er)
