[DK-Lach]

I'm really in the market for a 13" MBP but i'm wondering about the Nvidia 9400M.

Does any of you know, if the 9400M's replacement is in the immediate pipeline?

I've been googling a bit, but didn't get any proper results and I would be sad, if they upgrade it a week after I buy.

I don't know anything about the Nvidia roadmap, but the 9400M has been around for a while, hasn't it?

[Dorian Gray]

I don't recall the model number (or if it's yet known), but the GeForce 9400M will be replaced by a model with twice the number of cores (32 instead of 16). So I suppose it will have around twice the performance (i.e. a significant improvement). And importantly, it will do this at the same TDP - achieved by using a newer manufacturing process.

There's no guarantee that Apple will use this GPU, of course, but I would wait to see if I could. The next MacBook Pros will also probably have Nehalem processors, which should also be a significant improvement.

[Quagmire]

We can say welcome back to Intel's GMA's once Apple's lineup goes to Nehalem until NVIDIA's and Intel's dispute is over. Unless Apple wants to continue to put Core 2 Duo's in their machines until it is over, the 9400M replacement won't be seeing a Mac any time soon.

http://www.macrumors.com/2009/10/08/...te-with-intel/

[kdcny]

Originally Posted by Quagmire We can say welcome back to Intel's GMA's once Apple's lineup goes to Nehalem.

Probably, but not necessarily. It could mean that now Apple has to go back to discrete graphics across the board in all Macs. I mean, do Intel's integrated graphics support OpenCL? That's kind of a major feature of Snow Leopard, and I don't see Apple starting to sell computers that can't take advantage of it.

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by kdcny Probably, but not necessarily. It could mean that now Apple has to go back to discrete graphics across the board in all Macs. I mean, do Intel's integrated graphics support OpenCL? That's kind of a major feature of Snow Leopard, and I don't see Apple starting to sell computers that can't take advantage of it.

I am sure if this is indeed the case and Apple does not want to go back to discrete graphics, they will demand Intel to develop their new GMA's to make it OpenCL capable. But, I do hope they decide to go back to discrete graphics.

[PB PM]

I doubt they will go back to discrete graphics, even if they should considering the price of even the low end 13" MBPs. Also next generation Intel graphics will be on the CPU, so Apple wont have too many options.

[DK-Lach]

Even if the nextgen of Intel CPUs has integrated graphics dosen't mean, that Apple can't add another graphic processor to the system.

And a new graphic-subsystem naturally has to be more powerful, than the chip it replaces...

[bassplayinMacFiend]

Originally Posted by DK-Lach Even if the nextgen of Intel CPUs has integrated graphics dosen't mean, that Apple can't add another graphic processor to the system. And a new graphic-subsystem naturally has to be more powerful, than the chip it replaces...

This wasn't the case going from the iBook G4 to the first MacBook with the Intel GMA950 "GPU".

[PB PM]

The biggest problem with the GM950 wasn't so much that it was slower, but rather the lack of dedicated memory. IGPs with dedicated memory do better than those without, but for some reason they don't ship with dedicated memory.

[screensaver400]

Originally Posted by PB PM The biggest problem with the GM950 wasn't so much that it was slower, but rather the lack of dedicated memory. IGPs with dedicated memory do better than those without, but for some reason they don't ship with dedicated memory.

I've heard some chatter that that's why Apple moved to ddr3 with the unibodies, that having the faster memory helped the gpu.

I'm not sure I believe it, since I've also heard comments that ddr3 has minimal speed increases for real world tasks, at least when used as system memory.

[PB PM]

The main benefit of DDR3 is lower power usage, but it has little to no benefit over the fastest DDR2 memory in terms of speed.

[WrestleEwe]

Yup, it's just the way Apple told us with the launch of the first Mini.

I refer to the text in my .sig, which has disappeared somehow:
"That’s because an “integrated Intel graphics” chip steals power from the CPU and siphons off memory from system-level RAM." (c)'06 ww.apple.com

SGI's O2 had unified memory that worked quite well but I don't see Intel completely redesigning their architecture to make this a viable option.

[bassplayinMacFiend]

Originally Posted by PB PM The biggest problem with the GM950 wasn't so much that it was slower, but rather the lack of dedicated memory. IGPs with dedicated memory do better than those without, but for some reason they don't ship with dedicated memory.

GMA950 also lacked hardware T&L (transform and lighting) units. These were added to the X300 or whatever they were called Intel integrated GPUs.

[bassplayinMacFiend]

Originally Posted by WrestleEwe Yup, it's just the way Apple told us with the launch of the first Mini. I refer to the text in my .sig, which has disappeared somehow: "That’s because an “integrated Intel graphics” chip steals power from the CPU and siphons off memory from system-level RAM." (c)'06 ww.apple.com SGI's O2 had unified memory that worked quite well but I don't see Intel completely redesigning their architecture to make this a viable option.

Your post has to be a certain length for your sig to show up. I don't know how long that needs to be though.

[edit]
Original post wasn't long enough to show my sig before. Maybe with this added edit my sig will be visible.

[Robo]

I believe the sig cutoff length is thirty words, but that might have changed since alc (I think) implemented it.