why 256 why not 512

Because, lets assume you have to buy a screen with your mac mini... and a mouse/keyboard. That's around $1000 for the mac mini. All of a sudden, why just spend just $100 more to get a better video card?

Apple is the master at up selling.

In other words, marketing.

Plain and simple.

Acorn said:

why does the nvidia mac mini keep this crappy tradition of only 256 megs of video memory.
this post is related to the nvidia machine btw.

Click to expand...

What Nvidia Mac Mini? The current models have mid-range has an AMD/ATI video chipset....

Acorn said:

brain fart. fixed now

Click to expand...

As far as answering your question, only Apple can answer that for you. I suppose they feel it is "good enough" with just 256mb. But do remember, just like System memory, not all GPU memory is the same. I will often defend Apple in their decisions, but I do agree that 512mb makes more sense. Although it would be nice to see some benchmarks. Maybe the 6630 isn't any faster with 512 than 256 (doubtful, but possible).

They don't want to cannabilize sales of the iMac. Plain and simple.

If you put a video card in the Mac Mini that completely rocked, suddenly there would be no reason to buy the all in one. You could get a cheap monitor and have a decent Mac without having to spend a bunch more cash on an iMac.

Acorn said:

and yes 512 would make a considerable difference from 256.

Click to expand...

I think personally, what would make a difference is a better GPU, like the one that the MacBook Pro 15" sports (6670m vs 6630m?).
Yes, more VRAM means more space for textures and the like, but the chip dictates the power.
It's like my old 8800 GTS 320 MB... that card nowadays gives a good show, and there are newer, more VRAM packed cards, but in mid-low range that would cry in front of it...

A little of both would be nice though of course that would drive up the cost and undercut the iMac.

The 2011 Mac mini with AMD 6630M is not intended to be a gamer machine. The 1GB - 3GB graphic cards are intended for video gamers. 256MB is fine for casual gamers and general purpose computing. Mac have never really been gamer machines. The advantage of Macs is the design, simplicity, and efficiency gains of OSX over Windows.

Acorn said:

well its easy to say just throw a better gpu in there. there is still heat restriction. imho even if they crammed a screaming gpu in there if they only give it 256 megs of gpu memory its going to suck and be crippled.

Click to expand...

As others have stated. Adding more video RAM to the card would only make the card faster once it runs out of Video RAM while performing graphics intensive tasks. For most games you would not use more than 256 RAM. (Xbox and PS3 have similar 256 size VRAM).

For example, Although not used in the mini, Ive heavily tested the Nvidea QuadroFX range of cards from the 600 through to 4800. The extra RAM on these cards has little effect on performance. But change the CPU and GPU and the results are dramatically different.

If the extra RAM was added to the graphics card in the mini, the difference in performance would not be realized.

the read said:

If the extra RAM was added to the graphics card in the mini, the difference in performance would not be realized.

Click to expand...

Some people would disagree saying that running a game at 2yyy x 1xxxx or other whack resolution would benefit from the extra VRAM.

But then again (and leaving aside the fact this machine is not meant for gamers, or I'd dare to say OS X is still a bit of a "love thing" if you are a gamer)...

It's obvious the more advanced the GPUs become, the more VRAM they sport.
But comparing GPUs on VRAM alone would be like saying "X car is better than Y car because X goes faster" or "This 8 MP camera is better than your 6 MP camera".
There is usually a correlation with VRAM and quality of the GPU (I mean, nowadays we don't have high end GPUs with just 128 MB VRAM), but the important part of the equation always is the chip inside.

6630M = Low/mid end anyway.
Good enough, for the light gamer, video editor and the like, so anyway if it had 1 GB VRAM it wouldn't be earth and hell difference at all.

it should be an option is the point here. I honestly would love to see a quad core in this machine as well as better graphics. But, it is a small piece of equipment and apple has to limit our fun some way...