The onboard video for a Macbook

[GhettoBlaster]

My frame of reference would be the GeForce series. I currently run a Geforce 6800 in my desktop with an AMD64 3000+. So I know CPU-wise a Macbook would be an upgrade but what about the video card. I know on board video isn't as good as a deicated card but I was curious as to maybe what Geforce version it would be roughly equivilent to. The mobo that hold my Geforce 6800 is hosed so it may be time for me to make the switch.

 

[Kmax82]

If you were getting a MBPro then it would be an upgrade, but if you're getting the regular MacBook, then it's going to be a downgrade. I doubt you'll be able to play many games. I'd say it'd be the equivalent of the GeForce6150, possibly? Either way it's not a great gaming card.. check out benchmarks at the link below:

http://www.barefeats.com/mbook2.html

 

[GhettoBlaster]

I can afford the MBPro, not worried about the cash. I am just having a debate about it being "worth it". I've got games like HL2 and the like that I play from time to time. By no means am I a hard core gamer and need a GeForce 8 series in a desktop. Thanks for the link. Hopefully it will give me an idea of how it will compare to my PC rig.

 

[Kmax82]

Yea, granted those are OS X scores, so it will perform similarly to a Windows PC with the same specs in Bootcamp. So that's an option also.

Really the main reason to go with a Mac over a PC is if you're heavy into Adobe applications, music production, photo work, or video editing. If you're going to be using the machine for things other than that primarily, then it'd probably be cheaper and easier to go with a Windows PC. But you can't really beat the 8600GT-M in the MBP, it's definitely a nice card!

Anyway, do your research and you should be fine with whatever you choose.

 

[pukemon]

I have a Macbook with the GMA950 - the GMA950 is in a class of its own, and not in a good way. In Geforce terms, a four year old 5200 is better. But it supports Quartz Extreme and Core Image and can do the nifty effects in Tiger and Leopard so it's "good enough" for me. I don't play games on the computer at all.

The new Macbooks have the GMA x3100 which is somewhat better... I have an x3100 in an el-cheapo Compaq notebook, and it works fine in Vista.

 

[Tegeril]

x3100 is VASTLY superior to the older GMA950.

 

[chcarnage]

The MacBook Pro is running circles around the MacBook in gaming. The X3100 is not that much of an improvement compared with the GMA 950. Kmax82's link to Barefeats shows that depending on the game's CPU load, the improvement is negligable to thirty something percent in low end gaming.

There's a similar Barefeats website for high end gaming with a comparision of the MB 2.16/GMA 950 and the MB 2.2/X3100. The results are similar.

Last but not least I've recently seen a Doom 3 benchmark in a German computer magazine (Demo1, 1024*768).

MB C2D 2,0 Ghz: 6 fps
MB C2D 2,16 Ghz: 6 fps
MB C2D 2,2 Ghz: 8 fps
MBP C2D 2,2 Ghz: 64 fps

If money is of less concern than gaming and mobility, the MacBook Pro is Apple's best offer.