How do you think the GeForce 9400M would compare to the GeForce 6600 GT?

[Josh7289]

I'm just looking for a state of affairs on integrated graphics nowadays. Is the 9400M (like in the new MacBook) at least as powerful as the old 6600 GT?

 

[dookulooku]

Yes, the 9400M is easily faster than the 6600GT, especially in newer games.

 

[Josh7289]

Wow, haha. So my desktop is that bad nowadays? XD

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Eh, I disagree. The 9400m is going to be about as powerful as a 6600GT, but it's not easily or substantially faster (especially in older games where the 6600GT would probably be faster). I think if you look at the release of the 8500GT, which has the same 16 stream processors as the 9400m, and you'll see it getting beaten pretty badly by the 6600GT. Just add about 10-15% to the 8500GT's performance and you should have the best estimate for the performance of a 9400m.

 

[dookulooku]

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln
I think if you look at the release of the 8500GT, which has the same 16 stream processors as the 9400m, and you'll see it getting beaten pretty badly by the 6600GT.

The 6600GT does not beat the 8500GT. The Phoronix review doesn't count since it's on Linux and only tests a very limited number of games. Tom's VGA charts for 2008 Q1 shows the 8500GT winning most benchmarks. Granted, we're talking about really low scores for both cards in a lot of new games, like 12 vs 10 fps, but add 20% to the performance of the 8500GT and the 9400M opens up quite a lead over the 6600GT.

 

[hans007]

well the 9400 is probably about the same as a 6600gt.

IF it has ddr3 on it, for more memory bandwidth. the macbooks have ddr3-1066. i would doubt the 9400 woudl be as fast on a laptop that used say ddr2-667 or a desktop using ddr2.