Uh yeah, is it possible to play HD movies on a Macbook pro at adecent rate? My flatmate is going to get one, and I just want to prove him wrong, really.
Macbook pros vs HD
- Thread starter victor
- Start date
I'm just asking, they're not that powerful.
The lowest end MacBook Pro:
2.2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB memory
NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT graphics with 128MB SDRAM
Except for the video chipset (mine being a 6800GT), those specs beat my desktop, and this plays HD movies just fine. I find it unlikely that a MacBook would encounter difficulty with it.
2.2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB memory
NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT graphics with 128MB SDRAM
Except for the video chipset (mine being a 6800GT), those specs beat my desktop, and this plays HD movies just fine. I find it unlikely that a MacBook would encounter difficulty with it.
Damn it! Oh well, I'm still the boss round here.
Yeah if its a Mac its a safe bet that it owns. It's also a safe bet that the quality of that product will beat almost any other on the market... come on, metal casing, when does that not get cool? You can get really crazy and buy a MAC that can take 15gigs of RAM... My bosses son did that... I'm not sure why... craziest PC i'll ever see.
What the hell do you do with 15 gigs of RAM?? Launch a spaceship?
While I love Macs, especially the laptops, Apple hardware is, very unfortunately, hugely overpriced. It's very good quality stuff, usually, but overpriced nonetheless (sorta like Alienware). Which is the reason I don't own a Mac desktop, even though I grew up using them. I do like my iBook, but that was given to me.Maphusio said:
Alfredtrek88
First time out of the vault
I have the second generation Macbook Pro, the one that comes with the ATI X1600 card and it works just fine. Kind of sucks to know a new version came with that nvidia card though, should have waited abit before buying...Does anyone know of there is much difference between both cards? Like, a big or small difference in terms of performance?
space shuttles work on very old and very basic technology.The Overseer said:
i quote:
"The Shuttle uses five identical redundant IBM 32-bit general purpose computers (GPCs), model AP-101, constituting a type of embedded system. Four computers run specialized software called the Primary Avionics Software System (PASS). A fifth backup computer runs separate software called the Backup Flight System (BFS). Collectively they are called the Data Processing System (DPS).
The IBM AP-101 computers originally had about 424 kilobytes of magnetic core memory each. The CPU could process about 400,000 instructions per second. They have no hard disk drive and load software from magnetic tape cartridges.
In 1990 the original computers were replaced with an upgraded model AP-101S, which has about 2.5 times the memory capacity (about 1 megabyte) and three times the processor speed (about 1.2 million instructions per second). The memory was changed from magnetic core to semiconductor with battery backup."
lulz
Yeah, but then again, they're more dedicated to it.
Kyuu said:
Wait, wait, wait, I recall nVidia unable to compete with the R9800. They then placed a card that could not cut it even if the stars and moon aligned and god himself said this card is holier than ATi! I don't recall the same thing from ATi. Believe me, I would like to know, so lay it on me!
After having re-read that several times, I can only say... what?Maphusio said:
My best guess is you're pointing to a specific instance of nVidia fudging their numbers to make a chipset look better than it is. I was only speaking in generalities... both nVidia and ATI try to finagle the best numbers they can through pretty much any means. Perhaps nVidia is more guilty than ATI, I dunno. I don't pay much attention to anything put out by either of them really. If I want info, I always look at independently done testing and comparisons.
Hah sorry for the colorful shenanigans of mine. A while back during the days of the ATi Radeon 9700 and 9800 nVidia had a problem. ATi was killing them in sales and they had nothing no where near the level of the 9700 or 9800 so they threw out that old George Washington story and told a lie. They claimed their latest and greatest destroyed the 9800 hands down. After their sales had increased and things looked better for them it was found that they had used "enhanced" software to stress test the cards. Once the normal software was applied, it was found that they were selling duds. Hence my leaning toward ATi and my original statement.
The whole ordeal was covered by Maximum PC quite thoroughly. Those guys tend to report on interesting things like that or the IBM hard drive scandal that lead to that particular devision of IBM's demise.
The whole ordeal was covered by Maximum PC quite thoroughly. Those guys tend to report on interesting things like that or the IBM hard drive scandal that lead to that particular devision of IBM's demise.