If you’re trying to find information on the NVIDIA 9400M Apple is adding to its lower-end MacBooks, here’s a hint: it doesn’t exist. (Not literally, anyway.)

Plain-English summary: NVIDIA’s new graphics card architecture used on the MacBooks combines a chip on the CPU (as found on the old MacBooks) with a dedicated GPU (as found on the MacBook Pros). The dedicated, “discrete” chip is designed for lightweight, power-efficient use, but it should be a boost from the old model. “9400M” applies to both those chips, which have … uh, different numbers. The problem is, no one knows exactly how the combination will perform until they test it; we expect to have more from live visual developers soon.

Updated: Actually, it seems “9400M” on the Mac refers to a new, single-die chip that NVIDIA considers equivalent to their two-chip (discrete + dedicated) combination with the same brand name 9400M. An anonymous reader points us here:
GeForce 9400M G

That last “G” apparently refers to this being a single-chip, motherboard graphics solution. Remove the “G”, and you have a different (though similar), two-chip motherboard + discrete solution. Both seem to have 16 stream processors total, even though the 9400M not on the Mac splits it across two other chips. (Confused yet?) As if it weren’t hard enough to follow whether that “G” is there or not, Apple calls the 9400M G the 9400M. So that means a lot of what I say here refers to the 9400M as on PCs, not the 9400M as on Macs. Ugh.

The information on the site above was added since I first posted this story. Update coming soon, though I’m going to sort my facts first, as this is not exactly Great Moments in Lucid Branding.

Exact details: Yes, as a bizarre twist of branding, the “9400M” is just a brand applied to the combination of two other GPUs. Put a GeForce 9100M G on your motherboard, and add either (bizarrely) a 9300M GS or or 9200M GS as the discrete GPU, and you get a 9400M. What’s the difference between the 9300M and the 9200M (aside from, uh, “100″)? Only the 9300M GS supports hybrid SLI (a technology for combining the two GPUs for better power/performance balance), and Blu-Ray playback.

And that brings us more questions than answers — some questions that are answered for Windows users, but even some questions for them, too (like real-world performance):

As you’ve no doubt heard by now, Apple has new laptops as of today, including even a refresh for the Air. Look past the industrial design and gestural trackpad, and some of the significant under the hood changes to Apple’s laptop line are graphics-related. There’s a new graphics connector, which adds the nice feature of dual-link DVI support, refreshed GPUs, and possibly most importantly, an easier transition to the low-end. While it’s too soon to know for sure, my hope is that means a US$1299 MacBook could now be capable of running software like Final Cut Studio and Resolume 3 might now run on non-Pro machines.

The bad news: when Apple giveth, it also taketh away. FireWire is gone on the non-Pro model. And the Pro is down one FireWire port. And there’s no HDMI or Blu-Ray, if that matters to you. And something went wrong and the 17″ model is still the old 17″ model (though that may not be a deal breaker, if Apple will reduce the price).

It’s the FireWire thing that bothers me — especially strange, given it’s a format Apple helped advocate, and given that Apple has pushed HD video for consumers with iMovie. It’s an absolute about-face. It means that while Apple may have just given you a way to run Final Cut, they may have also taken away the ability to capture footage, so I wouldn’t be surprised if Studio still doesn’t run on their low-end machines. (This despite the fact that, on the audio side, people do pretty heavy-duty audio work in Logic Studio on even a Mac mini.)

GPUs

The MacBook line now uses the NVIDIA GeForce 9400M. It’s an integrated chip, but benchmarks suggest it should behave more like an entry-level, current-generation dedicated GPU. Now, watching Apple’s presentation, you might think this is some revolutionary new design, but it has appeared in PC laptops, too, from makers like ASUS. And while the engineering feat is really significant, and an order of magnitude better than the awful Intel integrated graphics, you’ll still squeeze more GPU performance out of, say, any used $1500 MacBook Pro than a brand-new $1500 MacBook.

Anyway, my sense is that this could bridge the software divide that has separated Pro and non-Pro users. If you have a plastic MacBook, you can’t run Final Cut Studio (Motion, in particular, relies too heavily on the GPU), and you can’t run great upcoming software like Resolume 3. (I do run VDMX successfully on my MacBook, but some fancier effects and extra layers don’t work as well as they do on a dedicated GPU.) We’ll have to see how the NVIDIA drivers work out, but I’m hopeful that this could make the Mac entry level for visualists a lot lower. It’s a pretty big bummer to have to start at US$1999 just to get a GPU fully capable of running live visuals.

On the Pro is the NVIDIA 9600M GT with up to 512MB of VRAM on the $2499 Pro.

Graphics, FireWire Connectors (or lack thereof)

There’s also a new display connector, the Mini DisplayPort. In fact, the Mini DisplayPort and 9400M are even on the MacBook Air. The DisplayPort is a new, emerging standard, and, for what it’s worth, has gotten standards approval from VESA. Short term: it’s a pain there’s no HDMI, but you could see DisplayPort showing up other places, and it’s clear Apple’s trying to push it over HDMI and DVI. Apple theoretically could have supported both but evidently chose not to for political reasons; DisplayPort has pass-through HDMI compatibility.

Now the bad news: there’s no more FireWire connector on the non-Pro MacBook. That means you can’t connect a DV camera, which to me is a pretty huge deal. Even on my non-Pro MacBook, I can plug in my camera and edit in Adobe Premiere pretty successfully (or, via Boot Camp, in Sony Vegas). There’s no SATA, either, which is the emerging drive standard — even on the Pro. And you can only remedy that situation on the Pro with its ExpressCard slot, which the standard MacBook still lacks.

At least, if you want a second laptop to run visuals on and don’t want to use integrated Intel graphics, you have a reasonably affordable Mac option now.

Bottom line: I don’t think this is anywhere close to a game changer. If you’ve been waiting to upgrade and you were planning to go Mac, it’s all good news, so long as you had your eye on the Pro models. But anyone hoping for a real change in the Mac value equation will be sorely disappointed. Sure, the Mac is wildly popular among visualists, but I have to say, you do have a choice. I think a Windows laptop remains a strong option value-wise. And, hey, competition is good.

MacBook Specs
MacBook Pro Specs

Create Digital Music on FireWire Changes:

No FireWire on MacBooks? Only one FW800 jack on Pros, when you might want a fast bus for an audio interface and another one for storage? Here’s what I think on the audio side of the equation:

What the New Apple Laptop Port Changes Mean for Audio

Updated: It’s time to talk to Apple, say fellow Mac users. Eugenia of Eugenia’s Rants and Thoughts is encouraging unhappy Mac users to tell Apple they want FireWire back on the MacBook:

No firewire on new Macbooks
Apple - MacBook - Feedback

If you haven’t seen it yet, Jamie and Adam did what may be the greatest illustration of a computing concept onstage ever, using an 1100-barrel paintball gun:

Updated: We’ve seen the basic idea before — one of the Max/MSP + Atmel-powered Printball notes his own, similar project, as featured on Pixelsumo way back in 2005. But it’s the first time I’ve seen this used to illustrate this point.

The basic idea: GPUs, by using parallel processing, are able to render graphics more effectively than CPUs. And while the illustration is something of an oversimplification, it is pretty literal in terms of showing people what’s going on — and why GPUs are uniquely well-suited to computing graphics. Conceptually, it’s really one of the most brilliant demos I’ve ever seen.

There are just a couple of problems — and, amusingly, this demo makes them visible, as well.

Okay, I spoke too soon. Just one day after a ZDNet blogger announced he could build a cheaper version of Apple’s high-end Mac Pro, Apple themselves have announced they can make their Mac Pro significantly faster and cheaper. I think the ZDNet machine still works out to be cheaper, but not by nearly as large a margin. Some of you wrote in to say you still want, you know, a cool case design, system-wide warranties, the Mac OS, and not having to, um, build your own system. Whatever. That sounds boring. It might even work out of the box. I’m just glad one of you mentioned hacking Mac OS support in. Needlessly risky and difficulty hacky methods? Now you’re speaking my language!

So, what about this new Mac Pro? It’s better and faster and cheaper and stuff. And it doesn’t have a Blu-Ray drive, whatever that’s worth.

Mac Pro

Seriously, Apple makes a really terrific, high-end system. You can get a number of PCs for significantly less that don’t match up spec-for-spec — and the PC market generally gives you more choices — but there’s no question the Mac has a small selection of really good choices that run both Windows and Mac OS X. You know what you want.

Apple is sticking with ATI graphics by default: the Radeon HD 2600 XT. I think the 8600-series NVIDIA is an all-around better 3D card, but for the Mac’s content creation-geared workflow, the Radeon makes sense. For 3D pros, there’s the NVIDIA Quadro FX 5600, which is of course overkill price/performance-wise for all but high-end applications. But the real story here is the Xeon architecture from Intel. Think dual 45-nm Quad-Core Xeon processors up to 3.2GHz, starting at US$2799, with 1600 MHz front side bus and 800 MHz memory. I like Apple’s description: “the ideal system for creative professionals, 3D digital content creators and scientists.” I think we should just opt for the “scientist” description, fellow visualists.

One thing I’m not going to repeat that many blogs are is Apple’s hyperbolic-yet-obvious tagline, “fastest Mac ever.”

Actually, wait a minute: oil prices rising, polar ice caps melting, the potential of running out of oil, global terrorism and the potential collapse of the world economy — maybe some day we will see “The New Mac Green: Much Slower and More Expensive Than Last Year’s Model!”

No, scratch that — Obama’s campaign is gaining momentum. I’m sure we’ll avoid all of that; it’s like one of those nasty alternate realities in the sci fi movies we manage to escape.

Audio, relying primarily on the CPU, can do fine on the non-pro MacBook: a fast CPU and FireWire 400 can be all you need. But for visualists, the GPU has become more and more vital. The integrated Intel GPU on the MacBooks is surprisingly capable, and certainly gets through basic video mixing. But throw enough shaders at it (even just processing video, without any 3D modeling or gaming), and it can’t keep up. That’s the reason Apple requires the MacBook Pro for Final Cut Studio; with Motion, at least, they’re absolutely right.

You’d be wise to postpone a MacBook Pro purchase over recent months, though, with Intel’s new Santa Rosa architecture coming and NVIDIA working on taking their 8000-series GPUs mobile. Apple today announced they’ve got the new machines with both — and better displays, too.

MacBook Pro [Apple]

For more on the music and CPU side of this, see our sister site, Create Digital Music:
MacBook Pro Revision: Big Santa Rosa Performance Boost, 4GB RAM Option, More

The short version: better displays, finally a 1920px option, the latest-and-greatest NVIDIA GPU for faster performance in Motion and OpenGL goodness for geeks, faster CPUs, more RAM — just generally fewer ways your wallet can avoid buying one of these silver surfers. I got some additional performance details from Apple, and hope to follow up with my own benchmarks.

Gaming gurus can obsess all they want about things like vertex performance. What I see when I look at the video card lineup is that graphics cards right now are very, very cheap for the performance they deliver. With DirectX 10 just over the horizon but not yet here on Windows, the current generation of cards just keeps getting cheaper, all while gaining from tweaks in performance and power. Result? $150 buys you an excellent graphics card if you’ve got a PC case that can handle it. (Small form factor Shuttle, anyone?)

Budget ATI salvo

Today’s announcement is that ATI is coming out with its own X1650 XT offering to counter the dominance of the NVIDIA 7600 GT. When it ships mid-month, the 1650 should be priced at around $150, provided vendor partners don’t up the price. That could make it an excellent deal if you want to stick with ATI, though the 7600 GT remains a fantastic card; I have one in my Shuttle and love it.

For VJs and live visualists, a cheap but reliable video card is a great asset. I use my 7600 to power custom graphics in Unreal, 3D in Processing and Jitter, and better video performance. What’s stunning is that the cards that were $300 this summer are now going for US$150, so if you’ve been waiting to upgrade, now is the time. Put it on your Christmas list if you have to. Coverage of the new card has been quick in appearing:

Apple has finally delivered on the Intel Mac towers for which we’ve been waiting. The new machines give you basically everything you wanted: the slick, cheese-grater chic of the old Aluminum G5 towers, plus the expansion options missing on those machines, all with Windows dual-boot capability and top-of-class Xeon Woodcrest architecture. US$2500 isn’t pocket change for everyone, but these machines are very price-competitive with Woodcrest PCs; as with Apple’s Intel laptops, a customizable single configuration lets Apple ship in greater volume than some of its larger PC competitors by focusing on one model.

My full take is available at CDMusic:
WWDC: New Mac Pro Towers Blaze Through Logic, Soundtrack, Offer Better Storage Options, Says Apple [Create Digital Music]

But let’s talk specifically about what these machines mean for creative visual work. The new Mac Pros offer two significant benefits, beyond the additional expandability and Windows booting: they’ve got even more computational muscle than the mighty Quad G5 towers, courtesy Intel, and they feature beefed-up video card options for playing Unreal 2007— I mean, um, serious graphics work. Add to that new, cheaper, brighter Cinema Displays, and I expect even some PC lovers may go Mac.

(PS, anyone else note the irony of the image above, Apple’s promotional image taken from Apple Aperture, resembling Adobe box art? Is Apple trying to send a subliminal message about Intel-native compatibility of Creative Suite, or is it just me?)