6 replies to this topic

[IMG News]

Barefeats recently released a MacBook Pro GPU comparison test pitting two "early 2008" MacBook Pros against several previous MacBook Pro models. The tests evaluate performance in a variety of applications including games like Quake 4 and Unreal Tournament 2004.

Notice that the fastest MacBook Pro in the game comparison was the "mid 2007" 17" MacBook Pro with GeForce 8600M. Why? Because the core and memory clock of the graphics processor is allowed to ramp up higher in 17" MacBook Pros -- probably because they have a larger (and therefore more efficient) heat sink than the 15" MacBook Pros.

Just looking at 15" MacBook Pros, the "early 2008" Penryn based MacBook Pros have no advantage over the "2007" Santa Rosa based MacBook Pros with the same graphics processor (GeForce 8600M GT) when it comes to gaming.

We didn't bother to post the numbers, but trust us, you don't want to try running 3D accelerated games on the "Penryn" MacBook or the MacBook Air. They have the integrated GMA X3100 GPU which is a real "dog" when it comes to 3D OpenGL.

To check out all the results follow the link below.

Return to Full Article - InsideMacGames News

[Quicksilver]

"Just looking at 15" MacBook Pros, the "early 2008" Penryn based MacBook Pros have no advantage over the "2007" Santa Rosa based MacBook Pros with the same graphics processor (GeForce 8600M GT) when it comes to gaming."

This is another example of why many people avoid using Bare Feats to prove a point--they tend to make definitive statements about hardware without actually devising tests to verify that what they're saying is true.  

Simply running a set of 3-5 comparative benchmarks between a "Conroe" MacBook Pro and a "Penryn" MacBook Pro using the full version of Unreal Tournament 3 (in Windows XP) would have saved them a lot of time.  Not only do you remove the OS X OpenGL "hack" factor, the game itself is geared to eat up the resources that the G80 GPU was designed to supply.

[ikir]

I love Barefeats

[Quicksilver]

 ikir, on April 2nd 2008, 02:23 PM, said:

I love Barefeats

It sounds like you're getting a "I hate Barefeats" vibe from my post.  That's not true--I just don't always agree with their testing methodology and conclusions. It doesn't help that I don't have a lot of time these days.  If I spent an extra 5 minutes every time I sat down to post something in order to include some congenial fluff, I'd never get anything done.

[calroth]

 Quicksilver, on April 3rd 2008, 03:24 AM, said:

Simply running a set of 3-5 comparative benchmarks between a "Conroe" MacBook Pro and a "Penryn" MacBook Pro using the full version of Unreal Tournament 3 (in Windows XP) would have saved them a lot of time.  Not only do you remove the OS X OpenGL "hack" factor, the game itself is geared to eat up the resources that the G80 GPU was designed to supply.

Because all Mac users want is a benchmark in an OS they don't use, for a game they can't (yet) play.

[Malt-Pipefishes]

 calroth, on April 2nd 2008, 05:00 PM, said:

Because all Mac users want is a benchmark in an OS they don't use, for a game they can't (yet) play.

By the gods, have thy foolish eyes not yet perceived the Camp of Boot?

[Sneaky Snake]

 Malt-Pipefishes, on April 2nd 2008, 06:55 PM, said:

By the gods, have thy foolish eyes not yet perceived the Camp of Boot?

What I think he meant is that why test stuff in windows when the sole purpose of the site is test the new upcoming Mac computers performance, there are some people that do use computers for things other then gaming (crazy isn't it). Actually I would say most mac users don't really game at all (they might own 1 game or 2 but don't really ever play it, I know a lot of people like this). The purpose of the test is two see the overall performance of the new computers, doing an FPS test in a game is just one way to test the new hardware.


-Snake