The truth about the GMA x3100 Macbook...

Question

Level 2

245 points

The truth about the GMA x3100 Macbook...

I'm looking into buying a second hand black Macbook 2.4Ghz with GMA x3100.
However, a lot of my fellow Mac users are telling me that I'm crazy to buy a Mac with Intel graphics. As far as they're concerned, it might as well not have a graphics adapter at all.
They claim that the interface effects in Leopard (core image, quartz extreme) are not even accelerated by the GMA x3100 but that it's the processor that handles those effect, which causes choppy animations in the dock, exposé and dashboard.
Now, I'm well aware that the GMA x3100 is not for people who want to play games (even low end), but I find it hard to believe that Apple would sell a system that doesn't even support the basic UI functions, which were already present in Tiger as well. I've seen a lot of clips on you tube of GMA x3100 macbooks and the animation was really smooth, even when doing the cube effect when switching between windows, linux and os x.
On google, a lot of sites seem to confirm my friends' claims.
So, I'm at a loss. Can anyone give the definitive truth on this ? Please ?

iMac G5 20"/2.1Ghz 2.5Gb - iBook G4 14"/1.42Ghz 1.5Gb - iPod Video 5.5G white, Mac OS X (10.4.11), LaCie external HD Porsche Design 500Gb Firewire/USB2

Posted on Jan 30, 2009 4:34 AM

Reply

Answer 1

JoeyR

Level 6

8,305 points

Jan 30, 2009 6:10 AM in response to Rincewind

Rincewind... You are correct. The GMA x3100 has no problems handling the animations within OS X. I have the original Core Duo with the GMA 950 which was significantly less powerful than the GMA x3100 and even that runs everything perfectly smoothly.

Gaming... yeah... the x3100 isn't great. You can get away with some pretty dated games that have low requirements... but that's about it. For everyday use... office/school type applications, web browsing, etc... the GMA x3100 is fine.

I'm not really sure why your friends would say otherwise.

Reply

Answer 2

Rincewind Author

Level 2

245 points

Jan 30, 2009 6:24 AM in response to JoeyR

Well, it seems that the general idea on the matter is that the GMA950 handles the effects better than the GMAx3100, simply because Apple never released decent drivers for the GMA x3100. I've been hearing about problems with the GMA x3100 with Compiz fusion in Ubuntu as well, whereas the GMA950 handles this without effort.
So is the GMA x3100 flawed hardware wise, or are there simply no decent drivers for it. I'd like to hear from someone who has a Macbook with GMA x3100 to confirm this.

Reply

Answer 3

scalawag

Level 1

95 points

Jan 30, 2009 6:32 AM in response to JoeyR

Hi

I have a mid 2008 white MacBook 2.4Ghz with 4Gb ram. this machine has the intel GMA x3100 graphics you mention.
I use it every day for e-mail, web browsing, itunes iphoto and I have absolutely no issues with the graphics performance at all.

I also have a mid 2008 iMac 2.8Ghz with 4Gb of ram and an ATI 2600 graphics card, and to be honest, I see little difference between to two in everyday use. The MacBook is a little slower at dispalying photos or album art in iTunes but not ridiculously so. It plays back video ok too.

Unless you plan to use it on some heavy graphics work I would just go for it. I consider mine an excellent machine.

Paul

Reply

Answer 4

Lyssa

Level 8

41,415 points

Jan 30, 2009 9:49 AM in response to Rincewind

Personally, I don't see what your friends say I ought to. I have a late '07 MacBook with the graphics card you're talking about and this computer runs fabulously. I've even played a few games (using BootCamp) and have no major issues whatsoever. I've yet to see any "choppy" animations--unless of course I'm running too many applications for my RAM to handle. Then things get a bit dicey.

Also, unless I've misunderstood things, the graphics card in a white/black MacBook shares memory with the RAM--so if you've got several applications open and things seem choppy, you're probably running low on RAM and need to shut some stuff down.

~Lyssa

Reply

Answer 5

Rincewind Author

Level 2

245 points

Feb 2, 2009 1:39 PM in response to Rincewind

Thanks for the replies so far, they've been helpful.
Still, I'm not convinced yet. Indeed, there are a lot of people saying that the GMA x3100 is more than adequate for Leopard (and Snow Leopard as well, presumably). On the other hand, an equal amount of people is telling me that I should never ever buy a machine with integrated graphics.
The thing is, I've found a second hand blackbook 2.4Ghz with intel GMA x3100, 4Gb RAM and 250HD in mint condition, with still more than 2 years worth of Applecare on it. It's not cheap, however, and would in fact cost me just as much as a new white 2.0 Macbook with nVidia 9400m WITH also 4Gb RAM and 320Gb hard drive (obviously, for the white one, I wouldn't be buying memory and hard drive from apple).
As I've said, I'm not into gaming (well, I am, but I think consoles are better suited for gaming ; I use a computer for work). I'm not sure whether I should buy a Macbook ; maybe I should pay a bit more for a second hand MB Pro. I wouldn't be using it for heavy stuff : some word processing, spreadsheets, internet, some movie-editing now and again with iMovie. And I'm also planning to upgrade to Snow Leopard a few months after its release.
I think the blackbook is a good deal. It's expensive for a second-hand, sure, but it's still got more than two years worth of applecare. The only thing that's holding me back is the GMA x3100. There must be a reason why Apple changed the graphics in their low end white Macbook. Perhaps the GMA x3100 isn't equipped for what Snow Leopard has in store for us. If that's the case, then a blackbook wouldn't be a wise choice. But I don't like the white Macbook. If Apple still offered the MB in black, it'd be a no-brainer. But they don't. So follow the heart (second-hand black) or the brain (new white) ?

Reply

Answer 6

Len D

Level 4

1,004 points

Feb 2, 2009 2:56 PM in response to Rincewind

It sounds like the GMA x3100 should be fine for what you plan to do with the MacBook. I do essentially the same kind of tasks you describe, and my MacBook (the black one) has no trouble at all. If you prefer having the better graphics card, but don't want the white model, you might consider a refurbished Aluminum model. You can get the 2.0 GHz version for 1099 on the web site. Apple is pretty good about making their new versions of OSX run well on older hardware, so not sure if the x3100 is an issue with Snow Leopard.

Reply

Answer 7

Lyssa

Level 8

41,415 points

Feb 2, 2009 3:16 PM in response to Rincewind

So many people talk down integrated graphics. The reality is, they're really not that bad for general use! If you're going to be doing serious gaming (and perhaps extensive video/photo editing?), you'll be better off with a separate graphics card, but for most things, integrated will be just fine.

I'll compare my computer with yours once more. I have a 2.0GHz processor, same graphics card, 1 GB RAM and a 80GB hard drive. I have run a lot of programs on here--some low-end games, using bootcamp, photoshop, VM Fusion (this one has given me some trouble, but I believe this is a RAM issue);

What programs are you going to be running on the MacBook? Perhaps listing them here so we can give feedback about those as well could help you.

~Lyssa

Reply

Answer 8

Rincewind Author

Level 2

245 points

Feb 2, 2009 3:35 PM in response to Lyssa

I'll be using it for mail, internet, iwork (with all transitions working in keynote, though - I remember some not working with the GMA950), iLife (I currently have iLife 08 but will be upgrading to 09 at the same time as Snow Leopard and again, I'd like all effects to be supported by the macbook). I consider iMovie to be low-end editing. I use iMovie 06 for the moment as I don't like iMovie 08, but 09 looks promising, so I'd like it to be supported by a GMA x3100. But the system requirements for iLife 09 on Apple's website don't seem too steep. I only use iMovie and iDVD about twice a year for a week or two, but still, I'd like everything to work. Actually, iMovie is about as high-end as I'll be using. I probably will get something like the latest photoshop elements, which shouldn't be a problem either. Also, I don't want an external monitor to limit graphics performance either (nothing spectacular, 20 inch 1680x1050). The 4Gb RAM would be for VMware or Virtualbox to run XP and Ubuntu. Other than that , I'm not too fussy 🙂

Message was edited by: Rincewind

Reply

Answer 9

Feb 5, 2009 1:41 PM in response to Rincewind

I have the MacBook 2.2 ghz core duo with 4GBs of RAM and the x3100. Like everyone else is saying, every day use it fine. It even plays 1080i HD clips off of Apple's trailers website perfectly smoothly.

However,

Spore on its lowest settings is choppy, Company of Heroes on its lowest settings is unbearably choppy and realistically unplayable, World of Warcraft is choppy and almost unplayable, Command of Conquer Generals on its lowest setting is fine. My friend has the newst Macbook pro and it handels graphics beautifully. Company of Heroes can run full settings perfectly. Its really amazing.

I have a 2004 Powermac G5 with an after market video card that plays games at a much higher resolution.

So basically, I am not a fan of the x3100. In fact, I wish I hadn't gone with it. Sure, its great for web browsing, looking at your photos, checking out trailers on Apple's website, doing some iMovie editing in high definition, Apple's GUI runs perfectly smooth in it (most screen savers are a little choppy) but if you ever want to do any mac or windows gaming, its going to let you down (unless the games are old). Personally, I'm upset I can't play Company of Heroes, that game is a lot of fun (and historically accurate)!

Reply

Answer 10

Rick Jay

Level 1

40 points

Feb 5, 2009 4:14 PM in response to Rincewind

Hi,

Here's my $0.02. I have two MacBooks...one with the GMA 950 and one with the GMA 3100. In everyday use for non-game applications, I can't tell the difference.

My disappointment with the new 3100 video came when I tried to run some of the older games the kids have on the the 3100 equipped MacBook. They won't run because the driver does not support the "thousands of colors" option, only the "millions of colors" is supported. Most of the older game software won't run without the 256 color/thousands of colors support.

Now, on the other hand, the kids have a "Harry Potter" game that won't play on the 950 video (MacBook/Macmini), but does run acceptably on the 3100 MacBook. So that was a pleasant surprise.

One work-around I've been able to do on some of the games: there are both PC & Mac versions on the disks. By running WinXP through either BootCamp or Parallels, I've found the PC version of these games WILL usually work on the 3100 equipped MacBook. I'd rather run the Mac and not have to deal with the kids booting/switching to Windows, but apparently Apple isn't going to address this issue as I've been waiting for a resolution to this problem since before the summer of '08.

But for e-mail, web-surfing, productivity software, iLife etc., I can hardly tell any difference in video performance.

~Rick

Reply

Answer 11

Apr 27, 2009 6:32 PM in response to Rincewind

My wife and I both have Macbooks; hers is a white 2.16Ghz GMA950 and mine a black mid-2008 X3100. I have my black MB maxed out to 4GB and hers to 2GB and other than RAM, I can't find any highly difference in graphics performance in Leopard or iLife

I had purchased a 15" unibody Macbook Pro last Feb but returned it b/c of a flickering display; the extra screen space was nice but I noticed no major difference in computing performance except that the added GPU power made gaming possible. However, since I have returned the MBP (no replacement), I haven't longed for anything other than just the added screen real estate. The nice thing about the 13" MB is the good battery life--it's definitely a nice trade-off compared to the more-powerful GPU.

The 13" Macbook has been a solid little machine and always seems to run well. I don't see too many 'surprises' except for some unexplained cracking recently.

Unfortunately, we ended up having to take my wife's MB in to the Apple store a few weeks ago because of cracking plastic. They had it for 3 full days and when we went to pick it up, it looked like a brand new machine.

Reply