Macbook Nvidia 9400M Performance?

Man of Honour
Joined
16 Jul 2009
Posts
8,753
Location
Edinburgh
Been considering changing my 2007 Macbook that I've been using for a few weeks now and the natural thing would seem to be a 13" Macbook Pro, although I've also taken a look at 13" Windows Laptops too as I quite like Windows 7 now that I've been using it.
My main query though is what difference does the Nvidia 9400M graphics chip make to the running and usage of a Macbook compared to my one with just the Intel GMA950 chip?
 
From the reviews and benchmarks I've read the 9400M is FAR better than the GMA950. I've got both, and to be honest just using OSX for day to day tasks I can't feel any improvement between the two but I know the 9400M would blow it away when it comes to games.
 
Cheers folks, I'm trying to justify the expense of a 13" Macbook Pro over just buying a 13" Windows PC.
None of the Windows laptops seem to even have anything as good as the 9400M just awful integrated Intel Graphics Chipsets like whats in my current macbook.
I've not found any performance issues yet but I would to have a bit more graphical oomph as I want to use it for light editing of digital photos and watching movies, that said the picure quality of video on the screen I have isn't great.
I am quite tempted by one of the 13.3" Dell laptops but its just not a Mac...
 
If you're trying to justify the MacBook to yourself, don't forget you can use Boot Camp to install Windows 7 natively.

I have Windows 7, and all of Apple's drivers that come on the Leopard disc work beautifully, even though they're meant for Vista. Absolutely flawless. :)
 
If you're trying to justify the MacBook to yourself, don't forget you can use Boot Camp to install Windows 7 natively.

I have Windows 7, and all of Apple's drivers that come on the Leopard disc work beautifully, even though they're meant for Vista. Absolutely flawless. :)

Yeah I've been using W7 on my current Macbook and its very nice even on this.
 
I have the MacBook Pro 15" with 9600M GT 512mb graphics. I can run Bioshock and CoD4:MW on MAXIMUM settings at native resolution with full AA/AF. Crysis I can run on medium settings with a few things at high. Haven't tried Crysis: Warhead yet.

The 9400M though is integrated though rather than dedicated, so your mileage may vary. Even though this MBP has the 9400M graphics aswell, I haven't tried running any games under it, so I couldn't tell you how it well it does.
 
are they that good?

How much better is the Nvidia GT200 on the iMac ?
They aren't that good - it's still low cost integrated graphics at the end of the day.

Do you mean GT120 for the iMac? It's probably at least twice as fast as the 9400M, and even that isn't close to high-end.
 
Sorry to hop in on this thread but which is the best performance in games out of the cards below, I'm looking at a 2.66ghz iMac 20" refurb from Apple and the price is the same £799 only difference is the cards?

Just for some COD4 if the mood takes me and CSS in bootcamp for old times sake?

NVIDIA GeForce 9400M with 256MB memory

or

ATI Radeon HD 2600 with 256MB of GDDR3 Memory

Thanks in advance ;)

EDIT: From what I have read the 2600 is the better card? If someone could confirm I'd be grateful ;)
 
Last edited:
I'd say the 2600 would be marginally better, particularly if you want to go anywhere near higher res. My experience is that the 9400m is just about able to drive COD4 on a 13" screen. Nowhere near top detail or anything but easily good enough for the occassional game. For me, for integrated graphics, that's a very good effort.

Either way it's a different league to GMA graphics...and on the other side, either way it's still not going to satisfy anything other than casual gamers...

I'd quickly add actually - while the 2600 is likely marginally better I wouldn't get a refurb iMac for that reason, as an all round package the 13" macbook pro is far better in my opinion, but it's difficult to compare the two when one is a laptop and one, well, isn't...
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom