PDA

View Full Version : HD4000 driver hack for custom VRAM size




kpkp
Apr 21, 2013, 04:48 PM
I found a way to choose how much of VRAM you want your HD4000 to use under ML:
http://www.tonymacx86.com/attachments/hp-probook/53574d1366143126-unified-appleintelframebuffercapri-ivy-probooks-1gb.jpg
I also made a script if you want to try it:
sudo perl -pi -e 's|\x00.{1}\x10\x07\x00\x00\x10\x07|\x00\x??\x10\x07\x00\x00\x10\x07|g' ~/Desktop/AppleIntelFramebufferCapri.kext/Contents/MacOS/AppleIntelFramebufferCapri
Change the red ?? with the red number bellow to set the desired amount of VRAM:
10 = 256MB of RAM
18 = 384MB of RAM
20 = 512MB of RAM
30 = 768MB of RAM
40 = 1024MB of RAM
80 = 2048MB of RAM

1. copy AppleIntelFramebufferCapri.kext to the desktop and make a backup of it
2. run the script in the terminal (dont forget to fill in the ??)
3. install the kext, rebuild caches (i would suggest kext wizard)
4. restart pray and let me know how it went

Disclaimer: this was not yet tested on a real mac (just a few hacks), so if you want to be the first to try, here is all the info you need.



Galaxas0
Apr 21, 2013, 07:32 PM
With a grand total of four posts, you seriously can't expect someone to just try this without verification...

kpkp
Apr 22, 2013, 02:30 AM
With a grand total of four posts, you seriously can't expect someone to just try this without verification...

http://www.insanelymac.com/forum/user/215785-kpkp/
http://www.tonymacx86.com/members/kpkp/
Digg in if you are to scared of changing 1 number in your graphic driver... But yes, if you don't know how to recover your Mac from a missing or bad graphic driver, then I guess you should just wait for someone who does... Be sure I would not be asking here if i had a Ivy Mac at hand.

I just posted here in hope there is someone willing to try it, even from a backup partition or something, I tried all the VRAMs mentioned above on my hack and that is all i can do for now... from here on is up to you.

ssn637
Apr 22, 2013, 11:03 AM
Just tried it on my rMBP 15" and upped my HD4000 VRAM from 512 MB to 1024 MB (at least that's what System Info shows).

Thanks for the tip!

Michael Goff
Apr 22, 2013, 11:06 AM
And the performance on your system changed in what way?

It might be nice to throw more RAM at my graphics. My MBA has 8GB of RAM, this would be a good use.

kpkp
Apr 22, 2013, 11:12 AM
Just tried it on my rMBP 15" and upped my HD4000 VRAM from 512 MB to 1024 MB (at least that's what System Info shows).

Thanks for the tip!
Thx for the feedback, yes i was also looking for a effective way of testing it, I checked in IORegistryExplorer under IGPU-IntelAccelerator-PerformenceStatisticsAccum you can see the ram allocation and if you check the "Wired" ram in Activity Monitor it increases also... And photoshop recognises the higher available VRAM too... All positive signs so far, but if someone has a better method to suggest...

NECyclone
Apr 22, 2013, 11:31 AM
Works on my Mid 2012 13in Macbook Pro also. Have only tested the game Civ 5 and I can't say it helped. Certainly didn't hurt though either. Wonder if upping to 2 or 3 megs of VRam would be possible and help. Thanks for the hack. I'll have to try it on my other laptop thats a hackinosh.

benwiggy
Apr 22, 2013, 01:01 PM
Does anyone here know what the HD4000 does with more RAM? Is there a limit to the amount of RAM that it might usefully use? What is the advantage of more RAM, other than "more is better"?

kpkp
Apr 22, 2013, 01:33 PM
Does anyone here know what the HD4000 does with more RAM? Is there a limit to the amount of RAM that it might usefully use? What is the advantage of more RAM, other than "more is better"?
If you do not know why you need it is most likely you do not... The most obvious answers in video and advanced photo editing, games.... And this flexibility makes it a bit more future proof.

benwiggy
Apr 22, 2013, 02:20 PM
The most obvious answers in video and advanced photo editing, games.... And this flexibility makes it a bit more future proof.
What, obviously, does more RAM do for video, advanced photo editing, games?
What flexibility does it bring? I say again: what does the HD4000 do with more RAM?

Does it make it faster? Does it mean it can handle more polygons? What? If you gave the HD4000 4 GIGAbytes of RAM, or 8, -- would it match a discrete GPU in some regard? Or not?
Is there no limit to the amount of RAM that the GPU can effectively use?

Or put it another way: if the GPU has LESS RAM, what feature of the GPU is inhibited by that? (Don't just say "speed" -- why is it slower?)

If you don't know what it actually achieves, then why are you doing this?

Michael Goff
Apr 22, 2013, 02:23 PM
Stupid question... where is the AppleIntelFramebufferCapri.kext?

:D

I generally don't try to touch the internal files, so I have no idea where they'd be.

kpkp
Apr 22, 2013, 02:49 PM
What, obviously, does more RAM do for video, advanced photo editing, games?
What flexibility does it bring? I say again: what does the HD4000 do with more RAM?

Does it make it faster? Does it mean it can handle more polygons? What? If you gave the HD4000 4 GIGAbytes of RAM, or 8, -- would it match a discrete GPU in some regard? Or not?
Is there no limit to the amount of RAM that the GPU can effectively use?

Or put it another way: if the GPU has LESS RAM, what feature of the GPU is inhibited by that? (Don't just say "speed" -- why is it slower?)

If you don't know what it actually achieves, then why are you doing this?

What the HD4000 does with Vram is no different from what other GPUs would, it all depends on software. Now a practical example, you load a huge NASA image in photoshop if you have enough VRAM you scrolling, zooming... will work smoothly if you run out of VRAM things will slow down.

And if you want to know why i do that... Is just a side product of me making my notebook work with OSX, so if you or someone else can benefit from that cool, otherwise was still fun. And as i said, i am not selling this to you, with your attitude i would actuality prefer you wouldn't use it, because if i have to tell you all this you do not need it.

hagan
Apr 22, 2013, 03:29 PM
Would this work on HD3000 too?

kpkp
Apr 22, 2013, 03:31 PM
Would this work on HD3000 too?

No, different driver.

benwiggy
Apr 22, 2013, 03:35 PM
with your attitude i would actuality prefer you wouldn't use it, because if i have to tell you all this you do not need it.
There is no attitude, I'm just asking for some technical information. I assumed that if you were dabbling at this level, you would know a lot about it.
What sort of usage brings a need for more than 768Mb of RAM? What size image from NASA fills up that amount of memory -- a 768Mb image?

Is the limited frame rate in the latest game a direct result of not enough memory, or of not enough processing power in the GPU itself?

Is there a limit to amount of RAM that the GPU can effectively use? While too little RAM may impede performance, I'm wondering if you are sure that more RAM will always produce improved performance.

Just idly curious. I'm sure the data is out there somewhere.

kpkp
Apr 22, 2013, 03:50 PM
There is no attitude, I'm just asking for some technical information. I assumed that if you were dabbling at this level, you might know a lot about it.
What sort of usage brings a need for more than 768Mb of RAM? What size image from NASA fills up that amount of memory -- a 768Mb image?

Is the limited frame rate in the latest game a direct result of not enough memory, or of not enough processing power in the GPU itself?

Is there a limit to amount of RAM that the GPU can effectively use? While too little RAM may impede performance, I'm wondering if you are sure that more RAM will always produce improved performance.

Just idly curious. I'm sure the data is out there somewhere.

Not everyone has 768MB, I had just 384MB and yes using photoshop and some NASA images it used up to 450MB (after mod). I don't play games and if I would it wouldn't be on a notebook with a hd4000.

I am not sure of anything, that's why I share what I know so people can help me test it...

hagan
Apr 22, 2013, 03:51 PM
No, different driver.

Ok, thanks. I run two screens and parallels on my mini with HD3000 and I have all kinds of problems. Skippy mouse pointer, crashes, flickering when using certain tools in photoshop.

Any suggestions?

:)

Colpeas
Apr 22, 2013, 04:47 PM
Stupid question... where is the AppleIntelFramebufferCapri.kext?

:D

I generally don't try to touch the internal files, so I have no idea where they'd be.

/System/Library/Extensions

Michael Goff
Apr 22, 2013, 04:54 PM
/System/Library/Extensions

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x47/Goff256/ScreenShot2013-04-22at45124PM_zps73069285.png

kpkp
Apr 22, 2013, 05:02 PM
Paste to terminal:
sudo cp -r /System/Library/Extensions/AppleIntelFramebufferCapri.kext ~/Desktop/

Colpeas
Apr 22, 2013, 05:03 PM
Image (http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x47/Goff256/ScreenShot2013-04-22at45124PM_zps73069285.png)

That's odd, there should be like 200 files. But I see you have a MBA - careful with that, this hack doesn't seem to work on mine: This is how it messed up my system (see attached), I'm glad I backed that kext up...

kpkp
Apr 22, 2013, 05:10 PM
That's odd, there should be like 200 files. But I see you have a MBA - careful with that, this hack doesn't seem to work on mine: This is how it messed up my system (see attached), I'm glad I backed that kext up...

Are you sure you patched it right?
Idk how are the rules on this forum but i would like to see you patched kext, PM me if attaching a kext is against the rules or something.

Colpeas
Apr 22, 2013, 05:27 PM
Are you sure you patched it right?
Idk how are the rules on this forum but i would like to see you patched kext, PM me if attaching a kext is against the rules or something.

This is what I did:

1) Copied the kext over to the desktop
2) Pasted your script into Terminal and replaced ?? with 40
3) Executed the command
4) Moved the patched kext to /System/Library/Extensions
5) Used KextWizard to rebuild the cache (and repair disk permissions, just for good measure)
6) Rebooted

It took longer to boot and the temperature of colours changed. Now they're a bit cooler, IMHO, and changing a display profile won't change a thing. Take a look at my modified kext to see if it was me who messed up, or if it just doesn't work with Airs. Thanks

Michael Goff
Apr 22, 2013, 07:01 PM
That's odd, there should be like 200 files. But I see you have a MBA - careful with that, this hack doesn't seem to work on mine: This is how it messed up my system (see attached), I'm glad I backed that kext up...

Do you have to check/uncheck something to see all the files or is it just a curious case of me not being able to do it?

ScottishCaptain
Apr 22, 2013, 07:13 PM
Why bother at all?

The HD4000 uses system RAM as VRAM. Having the kernel extension reserve more RAM for the GPU isn't going to magically give your computer new capabilities. In fact, the more RAM you reserve for the HD4000, the more slower your system is going to become when that RAM is fully utilized.

The only thing I can think of where this might be useful is if you're running some sort of 3D package that requires more VRAM (and refuses to run otherwise), but even with this hack- if it did run afterwards, it would still be unbearably slow.

Real VRAM exists for a reason. The HD4000 has none. Apple didn't lock this down "just because they can". A decision was made, and that decision was that the default setting was enough given the fact that the GPU is integrated. If you need more computational resources then that, you'll have to buy a bigger computer.

-SC

iMacC2D
Apr 22, 2013, 08:46 PM
Why bother at all?

There's nothing wrong with letting the tinkerers mess about under the hood.

I have a HD4000 equipped MacBook Air. The GPU is fast enough to play a certain game, say for example Minecraft. It's perfectly capable of sustaining reasonable frame rates regardless of in-game scenario. However once you apply higher quality textures, the GPU video memory buffer fills up very quickly. Modifying the driver to allow for a higher VRAM allocation resolves this issue entirely by raising the ceiling for how many textures can be stored in memory at once. The GPU is already capable of keeping up, now it has the available memory to store the textures to boot, and the game runs without issue.

I can see a number of practical applications for a patch like this one, the above being only one example, and the price of admission means for many there's no harm in trying it.

ssn637
Apr 23, 2013, 01:30 AM
Why bother at all?

Real VRAM exists for a reason. The HD4000 has none. Apple didn't lock this down "just because they can". A decision was made, and that decision was that the default setting was enough given the fact that the GPU is integrated. If you need more computational resources then that, you'll have to buy a bigger computer.

-SC

That decision was also made for the base configuration, so if you've got 16 GB of memory there's no harm in doubling the VRAM with plenty to spare.

kpkp
Apr 23, 2013, 02:41 AM
@Colpeas
The kext you uploaded is patched with 20 (512MB), maybe you did not upload the right version... Maybe you should try with 30, be a bit more conservative, just in case there are some other limitations in the Air.
BTW: did someone else with an Air tried this?


@iMacC2D
What you say is theoretical or did you tried it? I ask that because I am interested in any mesurable test results, thx.

@ScottishCaptain
I see that most people here go for 1GB, but that was not even my intention, I like the flexibility, if you don't need VRAM you can lower it to 384 or even 256MB and increase you RAM, it is all about flexibility... To tell you the truth maybe we could go even higher then 1GB I did not test it, because i don't see the need, but be sure soon I will try it, you say why? Because I can and I am curious.

In the original AppleIntelFramebufferCapri.kext apple uses only 18, 20 and 30 as definitions, the top and bottom one were just my guess and since I had the feeling I got high and low enough I stopped guessing and decided to test this for good first.

benwiggy
Apr 23, 2013, 06:04 AM
The GPU is fast enough to play a certain game, say for example Minecraft. It's perfectly capable of sustaining reasonable frame rates regardless of in-game scenario. However once you apply higher quality textures, the GPU video memory buffer fills up very quickly. Modifying the driver to allow for a higher VRAM allocation resolves this issue entirely by raising the ceiling for how many textures can be stored in memory at once. The GPU is already capable of keeping up, now it has the available memory to store the textures to boot, and the game runs without issue.
This is verging on the kind of information I was asking for.

My remaining question is based on the text I've emboldened: at what point do the limits of the GPU's processing ability make giving more RAM to it redundant? There must come a point when the drip from the tap will never fill the bucket!

Colpeas
Apr 23, 2013, 01:25 PM
@Colpeas
The kext you uploaded is patched with 20 (512MB), maybe you did not upload the right version... Maybe you should try with 30, be a bit more conservative, just in case there are some other limitations in the Air.
BTW: did someone else with an Air tried this?


I changed to value to 40 at first, but when it didn't work, I tried to change it back to 20, but the system would behave the same regardless. Could you, please - in case you kept it - upload the original, unmodified version of that kext? Thanks.

kpkp
Apr 23, 2013, 02:08 PM
I changed to value to 40 at first, but when it didn't work, I tried to change it back to 20, but the system would behave the same regardless. Could you, please - in case you kept it - upload the original, unmodified version of that kext? Thanks.

The uploaded kext is unchanged 10.8.3 version...
It is strange... Idk what to say, lets wait for another person to try it with the Air before we can say that it doesn't work with it.

Colpeas
Apr 24, 2013, 12:50 AM
Maybe I found the solution. Rebuilding kext caches wasn't enough, because the system would still omit the new kext, even the stock one you've uploaded. So merely out of despair, I tried to repair permissions for the whole drive and now it works just as it should... with the original kext. I will try it with a modified kext sometime, but not now.

garciausmc
Apr 24, 2013, 12:54 AM
Nice little tweak here. Works wonders when you are doing HD video editing. I have a MacBook Pro 13 (Mid-2012) and I followed you directions. Worked good for the 1024MB. I'm a little adventurous so I doubled that and changed it to 2048 (the number is 80). Since I have 16GB RAM in my MacBook, I did't think it would affect the performance too much. That is however, probably the MAX you are going to want to do. At least that was the max in my MacBook. Tried pushing it further to 3GB (3072GB or 120). Yup, thought I almost bricked my MacBook. I had to go into recovery and recover my MacBook from TimeMachine to get it to boot back up. Also, I took geek bench scores for 1024 and 2048 and the 2048 actually reduces the overall performance of the computer because it takes away from the physical RAM the computer uses and allocates it to virtual RAM. However, I do a lot of HD video conversion with Handbrake and it reduced the conversion time by a few HOURS with 2048. Thanks!

kpkp
Apr 24, 2013, 02:21 AM
Nice little tweak here. Works wonders when you are doing HD video editing. I have a MacBook Pro 13 (Mid-2012) and I followed you directions. Worked good for the 1024MB. I'm a little adventurous so I doubled that and changed it to 2048 (the number is 80). Since I have 16GB RAM in my MacBook, I did't think it would affect the performance too much. That is however, probably the MAX you are going to want to do. At least that was the max in my MacBook. Tried pushing it further to 3GB (3072GB or 120). Yup, thought I almost bricked my MacBook. I had to go into recovery and recover my MacBook from TimeMachine to get it to boot back up. Also, I took geek bench scores for 1024 and 2048 and the 2048 actually reduces the overall performance of the computer because it takes away from the physical RAM the computer uses and allocates it to virtual RAM. However, I do a lot of HD video conversion with Handbrake and it reduced the conversion time by a few HOURS with 2048. Thanks!

Thx, for the great info... Did not know Handbrake was so heavy on VRAM, maybe that is the testing tool I was looking for.
My script isn't meant to take 3 digits, that messes all up. Also dont forget that the numbers you are changing aren't decimal but hexadecimal (hex), so teoreticaly for 3GB you should enter C0 not 120.

But then again, idk if there is a hardware limit of how much VRAM the HD4000 can address.

Jig3n
Apr 26, 2013, 12:52 PM
I couldn't get it to work on the 2012 mac mini.

kpkp
Apr 26, 2013, 12:55 PM
I couldn't get it to work on the 2012 mac mini.

You could tell a bit more what you did and include the kext you patched...

Jig3n
Apr 26, 2013, 05:13 PM
You could tell a bit more what you did and include the kext you patched...

Sure!

First I copied 'AppleIntelFramebufferCapri.kext' to the desktop and made a backup of that copy,

then I copied the patch code and replaced ?? with 40 and ran it in terminal,

then I installed the patched kext file with kext wizard, repaired permissions / rebuilt the cache and finally rebooted.

I tried it a few times and there wasn't any change in the system information 'about this mac' window.

Here's a link to the kext:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/85554647/Jig3n-AppleIntelFramebufferCapri.kext.zip


Mac mini Late 2012
Processor 2.3 GHz Intel Core i7
Memory 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
Graphics Intel HD Graphics 4000 768 MB
Software OS X 10.8.3 (12D78)

altecXP
Apr 26, 2013, 10:01 PM
I wonder, would this benefit the retina machines more than the non-retina?

kpkp
Apr 27, 2013, 03:55 AM
Sure!

First I copied 'AppleIntelFramebufferCapri.kext' to the desktop and made a backup of that copy,

then I copied the patch code and replaced ?? with 40 and ran it in terminal,

then I installed the patched kext file with kext wizard, repaired permissions / rebuilt the cache and finally rebooted.

I tried it a few times and there wasn't any change in the system information 'about this mac' window.

Here's a link to the kext:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/85554647/Jig3n-AppleIntelFramebufferCapri.kext.zip


Mac mini Late 2012
Processor 2.3 GHz Intel Core i7
Memory 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
Graphics Intel HD Graphics 4000 768 MB
Software OS X 10.8.3 (12D78)
Everything seems right, I did not have a chance to experiment with the "desktop" definitions of the driver so can't be of much help here.

But more feedback specially from people with Airs and Minis would be appreciated, so that we can confirm or deny it working on those machines, or better said if the "problems" are universal or more isolated.

hamiltonDSi
Apr 27, 2013, 04:40 AM
Does someone know how to tweak the HD3000 ?
I have a i5 Late 2011 Macbook Pro with 8Gigs of Ram and Intel HD3000 512MB

Donut4000
Apr 27, 2013, 07:23 AM
I followed the instructions in the initial post by kpkp, and got into a wee spot of bother. I had dropped the modified kext (using the 40->1024 script option) back into the Extensions folder, rebuilt the caches using Kext Wizard, then rebooted. My Mac (a 2012 13" MBP) passed its POST test, but sat at the wee rotating animation below the Apple logo for several minutes till I switched it back off. Second time round, I booted holding Shift down to get it into safe mode, which mercifully it did. I was able to reverse all the changes using a backup version of the original kext, and again, rebuilt the caches >and< repaired the permissions. This last step flagged loads of problems with the kexts in my Extensions folder. Once complete, I managed a reboot back to my desktop without further incident.
That was last night, and I got all itchy to try again this afternoon, which I did; this time rebuilding caches then running a permissions check. Also, I used Kext Wizard to install the kext rather than just dumping it into the Extensions folder by hand. That seemed to make the difference, as I am now typing all this from my Mac, which is showing 1024Mb VRAM. Its a bit early to say if there is any benefit, or problems/bugs, but I'll post back here if there is anything to say. I feel pretty confident I'll be able to put things back the way they were if I do hit any problems.
A final thankyou very much to kpkp for posting the methods used here!

msarro
Apr 30, 2013, 03:27 PM
Is the HD 4000 even capable of handling that much address space? I mean, while the idea that "more is better" is often true, if the GPU doesn't support beyond a certain amount, you're just sacrificing RAM the system could use elsewhere.

Modernape
May 2, 2013, 06:19 AM
Anyone done any before & after benchmarking on this?

hackerwayne
May 3, 2013, 02:46 AM
This tweak is useless. Intel HD 4000 can't even use anything close to 1024MB of RAM. Why bother? Like the above poster just said, do you guys have too much RAM to waste by limiting 1GB ram to the GPU? C'mon. Whats the point? Apps doesn't run faster after you did this.

kpkp
May 3, 2013, 03:31 AM
This tweak is useless. Intel HD 4000 can't even use anything close to 1024MB of RAM. Why bother? Like the above poster just said, do you guys have too much RAM to waste by limiting 1GB ram to the GPU? C'mon. Whats the point? Apps doesn't run faster after you did this.
Can you back up your claims with anything beside your ignorance?
In Windows HD 4000 can dynamically allocate up to 1692MB of VRAM and that is not me saying that but Intel (http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/guides/performance-xeon-e3-1200-hd-graphics-p4000-guide.pdf).

Now if you and the "above poster" do not find any use for it, why even bother responding to this thread? Or if you think that VRAM is that useless for what you use your Mac, then you can reduce it to 256MB and have more RAM available, I really dont understand people that just see 1GB...

garciausmc found a good use for the big amounts of VRAM and I agree that most of the time even 512MB of VRAM is useless, but if in future OSX or apps will use OpenCL more heavily that might change.

justperry
May 3, 2013, 05:02 AM
Can you back up your claims with anything beside your ignorance?
In Windows HD 4000 can dynamically allocate up to 1692MB of VRAM and that is not me saying that but Intel (http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/guides/performance-xeon-e3-1200-hd-graphics-p4000-guide.pdf).

Now if you and the "above poster" do not find any use for it, why even bother responding to this thread? Or if you think that VRAM is that useless for what you use your Mac, then you can reduce it to 256MB and have more RAM available, I really dont understand people that just see 1GB...

garciausmc found a good use for the big amounts of VRAM and I agree that most of the time even 512MB of VRAM is useless, but if in future OSX or apps will use OpenCL more heavily that might change.

I have a 2012 Ma Mini-Base model, tried a few times, does not work on my Mini.

kpkp
May 3, 2013, 05:20 AM
I have a 2012 Ma Mini-Base model, tried a few times, does not work on my Mini.

It seem there are some differences with the Mini's... I have a question that might help me understand them:
Does the mini also change the amount of VRAM according to the RAM that is currently installed or is always "stuck" at 512MB?

Unfortunately I do not have the hardware so all I can do is "educated guesses" based on the differences I see in the driver definitions and the feedback I get from you.

justperry
May 3, 2013, 06:09 AM
It seem there are some differences with the Mini's... I have a question that might help me understand them:
Does the mini also change the amount of VRAM according to the RAM that is currently installed or is always "stuck" at 512MB?

Unfortunately I do not have the hardware so all I can do is "educated guesses" based on the differences I see in the driver definitions and the feedback I get from you.

The 2012 Mini has 768 MB set aside, I don't know if this changes if it has less RAM, mine has 8 GB currently, think 4 standard, maybe I will try one stick of 2 GB later.

kpkp
May 3, 2013, 06:15 AM
The 2012 Mini has 768 MB set aside, I don't know if this changes if it has less RAM, mine has 8 GB currently, think 4 standard, maybe I will try one stick of 2 GB later.

Then probably it changes according to the RAM amount, since the original driver allocation is 512MB.

Maybe somehow that gets "bypassed/overwritten" when you have more ram and that's why it isn't effective.

I asked someone with a desktop hackintosh with a HD4000(that uses the minis driver definition) to try it, then I will see if it does something for him.

justperry
May 3, 2013, 06:33 AM
Then probably it changes according to the RAM amount, since the original driver allocation is 512MB.

Maybe somehow that gets "bypassed/overwritten" when you have more ram and that's why it isn't effective.

I asked someone with a desktop hackintosh with a HD4000(that uses the minis driver definition) to try it, then I will see if it does something for him.

Yes it does, from everymac:



Standard VRAM: 512 MB* Maximum VRAM: 768 MB*

hackerwayne
May 3, 2013, 12:15 PM
Can you back up your claims with anything beside your ignorance?
In Windows HD 4000 can dynamically allocate up to 1692MB of VRAM and that is not me saying that but Intel (http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/guides/performance-xeon-e3-1200-hd-graphics-p4000-guide.pdf).

Now if you and the "above poster" do not find any use for it, why even bother responding to this thread? Or if you think that VRAM is that useless for what you use your Mac, then you can reduce it to 256MB and have more RAM available, I really dont understand people that just see 1GB...

garciausmc found a good use for the big amounts of VRAM and I agree that most of the time even 512MB of VRAM is useless, but if in future OSX or apps will use OpenCL more heavily that might change.

Excuse me? First off, maximum supported VRAM on MacBooks Intel HD 4000 is 768MB. Second, even if you can get 1,692MB. Does it do any good?
1 VRAM ≠ Performance.
2 Why allocate that much RAM reserved for GPU when you don't need it?
3 Theres a reason why Apple set the amount of RAM available.

Jig3n
May 5, 2013, 12:13 AM
I thought this was kind of neat. I'm not sure if it's forcing the ram to use 1024 mb or if it's stating the limit that can be forced.

Modernape
Jun 30, 2013, 10:55 AM
http://i40.tinypic.com/2rcv9g0.png

Did this about a week ago, no problems at all, and switching between Desktops is definitely smoother.

Mr. Retrofire
Jun 30, 2013, 11:01 AM
1 VRAM ≠ Performance.
Wrong.

kpkp
Jun 30, 2013, 11:42 AM
Some head ups:
- It seems the "trick" will work fine in 10.9 too.
- In 10.9 on Haswell computers it seems apple decided to use 1GB of VRAM as standard, but in the future I could do a similar script for Haswell based Macbooks too... since for some having 1GB of 4 for VRAM is a overkill. Anyways, can someone with the Haswell Macbook Air confirm that thats the case (1GB Vram)?

mvmanolov
Aug 27, 2013, 10:25 PM
Just did this on a MBP 9,2 8GB RAM with a 840 pro SSD - up to 1024 works like a charm :D

also the VRAM on a 6,2 MBA (BTO Haswell i7 8GB RAM) is 1024...

mvmanolov
Aug 27, 2013, 10:36 PM
the MBP is feeding a 50" Samsung LED 3D Tv as the only monitor...
I'm hoping this will make some of the video rendering smoother (occasional jumpy mouse etc.)

Also does anyone know how to check how much of the VRAM is being used at any given time?

gwang73
Aug 28, 2013, 03:47 AM
Thanks kpkp, just updated my 15" 2012 rMBP running ML 10.8.5 beta and it works great! Animations seem slightly improved. I use 1920x1200 resolution on the laptop screen.

Frank S.
Aug 29, 2013, 09:37 AM
Please delete this post.

Alphanano
Oct 15, 2013, 10:46 PM
Wait so how do we increase the total vram i have Macbook pro 13 inch 2012 stock model and does it take of the warranty?

----------

I found a way to choose how much of VRAM you want your HD4000 to use under ML:
Image (http://www.tonymacx86.com/attachments/hp-probook/53574d1366143126-unified-appleintelframebuffercapri-ivy-probooks-1gb.jpg)
I also made a script if you want to try it:
sudo perl -pi -e 's|\x00.{1}\x10\x07\x00\x00\x10\x07|\x00\x??\x10\x07\x00\x00\x10\x07|g' ~/Desktop/AppleIntelFramebufferCapri.kext/Contents/MacOS/AppleIntelFramebufferCapri
Change the red ?? with the red number bellow to set the desired amount of VRAM:
10 = 256MB of RAM
18 = 384MB of RAM
20 = 512MB of RAM
30 = 768MB of RAM
40 = 1024MB of RAM
80 = 2048MB of RAM

1. copy AppleIntelFramebufferCapri.kext to the desktop and make a backup of it
2. run the script in the terminal (dont forget to fill in the ??)
3. install the kext, rebuild caches (i would suggest kext wizard)
4. restart pray and let me know how it went

Disclaimer: this was not yet tested on a real mac (just a few hacks), so if you want to be the first to try, here is all the info you need.
===============================================
Does this work and how do we do this with version osx10.8.5 and does this hack take of your warranty? Thanks

Walkyrie
Oct 26, 2013, 04:09 PM
It did work gr8 had my mbp boost to 2048mb of ram but now that i have installed maverick osx 10.9 it turned it back to 1024 ram so i though ok just run the script again but it dint all i got was a failed boot long story short luckily i could reboot in to save mode and reinstall the os fixing the issue.....so can some pleas tell me how to fix it that i can have my 2048mb again is there a tweak to the sodo script ?:confused:

----------

Wait so how do we increase the total vram i have Macbook pro 13 inch 2012 stock model and does it take of the warranty?

----------


===============================================
Does this work and how do we do this with version osx10.8.5 and does this hack take of your warranty? Thanks


It does work but it seem does not on osx 10.9 does not void your warranty but would suggest that if you would like to in crease it that you ad more ram the system is bit weak to increase vram with out increasing actual ram from 4gb to 8gb or even 16gb

Alphanano
Oct 31, 2013, 11:36 PM
----------

[/COLOR]


It does work but it seem does not on osx 10.9 does not void your warranty but would suggest that if you would like to in crease it that you ad more ram the system is bit weak to increase vram with out increasing actual ram from 4gb to 8gb or even 16gb:apple::apple:

Alphanano
Nov 7, 2013, 11:12 PM
I found a way to choose how much of VRAM you want your HD4000 to use under ML:
Image (http://www.tonymacx86.com/attachments/hp-probook/53574d1366143126-unified-appleintelframebuffercapri-ivy-probooks-1gb.jpg)
I also made a script if you want to try it:
sudo perl -pi -e 's|\x00.{1}\x10\x07\x00\x00\x10\x07|\x00\x??\x10\x07\x00\x00\x10\x07|g' ~/Desktop/AppleIntelFramebufferCapri.kext/Contents/MacOS/AppleIntelFramebufferCapri
Change the red ?? with the red number bellow to set the desired amount of VRAM:
10 = 256MB of RAM
18 = 384MB of RAM
20 = 512MB of RAM
30 = 768MB of RAM
40 = 1024MB of RAM
80 = 2048MB of RAM

1. copy AppleIntelFramebufferCapri.kext to the desktop and make a backup of it
2. run the script in the terminal (dont forget to fill in the ??)
3. install the kext, rebuild caches (i would suggest kext wizard)
4. restart pray and let me know how it went

Disclaimer: this was not yet tested on a real mac (just a few hacks), so if you want to be the first to try, here is all the info you need.




:):cool:

Anthony. S
Nov 12, 2013, 09:22 PM
Thanks on my mid 2012 13' MacBook Pro with an intel core i7 16Gb of corsair vengeance 1600mhz memory, samsung 840 series 500gb ssd and a 1tb hdd in the optic drive bay i stepped the vram from 512mb to 2gb. thanks again

RukusOne
Jan 30, 2014, 09:28 AM
Hey there,

First off thanks Kpkp for posting the script.

I have a mid 2012 MBP i5 with 16gb of RAM. I am looking for posters with a similar system that have tried the 1gb Vram and 2gb Vram versions of the script.

Have you benchmarked the results? What have you noticed in terms of performance?

I am definitely going to be boosting it to 1gb vram and with 16gb of RAM available I will boost it to 2GB vram if there is a noticeable performance increase.

I don't actually have the mbp yet or I would just test it myself. It is being delivered and will be here in the next few days.

Just curious since this thread has been active for quite some time now.

Thanks

kpkp
Jan 30, 2014, 12:02 PM
Hey there,...
Why don't you update to 10.9? in 10.9 Apple implemented dynamic VRAM allocation up to 1GB.
I guess that could be also hacked to 1,5 or 2GB, but I have no need for it.

RukusOne
Jan 30, 2014, 06:26 PM
I was unaware that 10.9 increased the "max" vram to 1gb. I suppose the question still remains about a noticeable performance increase from 1gb to 2gb.
My upgrade arrives tomorrow. At which point I will probably be on here posting my findings.

Thanks