Question about Mac Mini & 9400M

Before the "OMMFG not another GFX question use search you worthless turd", I have spent the past few minutes hunting down topics for the Mac Mini. However, I just think it's easier that the people who know what they're talking about can answer this without using any brain power:

My Intel 2Ghz C2D is on the way which features the base Nvidia 9400M 128MB shared, I'm adding this next to my current Intel 2GHz CD. One thing I was hoping for was a change in the way videos are handled, seeing as anything that uses more tha 10% of the power of my rape-ass, all high & mighty Intel GMA 950 64MB shared causes my MacBook to heat up and fans to blare. Which is the the time. I constantly find myself fighting to hear simple flash animations or videos since the speakers being pointed towards the screen doesn't really help. I know I have my Z-5500 but I've gotten reported in my dormitory for using it higher than 5% volume (sometimes when I'm not even in the room and its not on). I also find it demeaning when people walk by and stare at the awkward position I put myself in to get closer to the speakers.

For the tl;dr folks, my simple questions are:
-For flash animation, will the better GFX card help improve viewing? Far I've read SL was suppose to bring this feature or something, but anything that makes it so I can watch flash/youtube in my room without needing to argue with the interior fans which is starting to sound like someone constantly raping my ear with a condom made of sandpaper.

-I plan to have my MM hooked to my Dynex. I received the cords and used it to split the screen with my MacBook, however the edgy appearance of the screen raised eyebrow about if I'm going to see the same smooth display as I do on my MB. I heeded the quote from that concern:

The problem is not related to your graphics cards or Macs, any intel Mac is capable of running a 720p display.

Click to expand...

but after talking with some other people, is wasn't a matter of if it can display 720p, its if it would output the same quality as I see on my MB's monitor. Perhaps its something I should of thought of then, but I don't feel like having my flaps chewed for bumping & double posting in my own topic again.

fehhkk said:

Not sure by how much, but Flash 10 uses hardware acceleration (video card) to play certain types of videos.

http://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/features/

When you right click on something that uses Flash, right click -> settings, and you'll see that setting enabled by default (use hardware acceleration).

Hope that helps.

Click to expand...

It's on, and after going to a youtube vid to check it out, my fans are revving up in preparation for the devastating loading of a crappy random film I clicked on.

zedsdead said:

I'm not sure about flash, but adding in 2 gigs of Ram boosts your VRAM to 256. I say it is well worth it to do.

I have my iMac currently hooked up to an HDTV, and while the screen is not as good as the iMac, it doesn't look terrible. Do you have a pic of the screen?

For the record though, Flash is very processor intensive. I hate it personally and really wish it would just go away (but I know that isn't going to happen).

Click to expand...

I plan on adding 4GB. I could try to take a pic of what I;m talking about, I always thought it was something you have to be upclose to see, but let me see what I can do. I know I can't afford a Apple Cinema display for one thing...

The attached picture is the best I could get with my DSLR, I dont know if you can tell, but the black lining on the wood seems a little rough.

fehhkk said:

Yes, so definitely Flash 10 uses the video card to render, especially on HD videos with high resolutions. I put on MLB.TV full screen videos on my HDTV I can see the video card getting hotter (especially when using the 9600GT on my MBP).

But, I don't see much difference in performance between the 9400 and the 9600 for Flash, which is the bottom line. When Snow Leopard comes in, it will be a different story though.

Click to expand...

Well, I'm making a jump from GMA950 to 9400M so I at least to expect some form of "Wow." But then again I've been working on my schools Mac Pros more than my own MacBook so I might already know whats coming at the least.

zmttoxics said:

Flash is actually cpu calculated. Proof of concept, my Dell hackintosh with x3100 graphics is currently using the VESA driver making for 0 acceleration. Yet, it can still watch HD flash videos with 0 lag.

I am not sure what that picture you posted of, but if you are using the VGA adapter to connect, try using the auto adjust on the screen. If its your first time using the DVI, it tends to be a sharper image over using VGA.

Click to expand...

I get heavy lag, mostly when the video is loaded, it'll freeze for a sec then try to continue.

It's a DVI. I was going to use VGA but people on here convinced me to get DVI. The photo is of a dark wood background. Both backgrounds are the same on both screens, however, the black lining on my MacBook is much smoother and on the HDTV, it seems more edgy and sharp. Thats with the sharpness at about 20%, if I turn it off, some areas get a little blurred.

I wasn't sure if it was the TV or just cause the GFX card isn't that great.

zmttoxics said:

TVs often are bigger with smaller resolutions and forcing larger resolutions can cause the sharpness (my 26" LG tv looks incredibly sharp compared to 22" LG monitor).

Troubleshooting the flash. It may be a buffer issue, have you tried waiting for the entire video to load before playing? Are you running out of RAM perhaps? Open the Activity Monitor and check to see if you are doing a lot of swap Page Outs.

Click to expand...

So I should go with VGA? Cause I noticed when doing some photography the photo looks rougher when I dragged it over to that screen.

I have 2GB RAM, thats the highest I can go on my MacBook.

zmttoxics said:

What I was looking for was actually the page outs... I guess with the CD mac you are stuck with 2GB though, but 2GB should be enough.

Anyways, people tend to prefer the dvi / digital stuff (vga is analog) for the sharpness. Thats your call though.

What version of flash / firefox are you using? Flash tends to work better with Safari on the Macs from my experience. Try installing the latest flash from: http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/ and then running the same test / website again.

Click to expand...

/facedesk

I just want the one that'll at least look like the MacBook screen. If I get VGA, I have to get that and another adapter to use with the Mac Mini.

I'm using the latest Flash 10 on FF.

zmttoxics said:

Lawl, *sigh*.

Thats pretty hard because they use different LCD panels. The MacBoot is glossy where I bet your TV isn't. I would doubt that switching to a VGA connector would make it look like your macbook screen.

You are doing quite a bit of page outs, but you still have free memory, so it is hard to say that is the issue. Did you try using Safari yet?

Click to expand...

/facedesk again
Will it at least look any better?

And this is what Safari 4 is giving me.

I WANT TO KNOW HOW I CAN GET RID OF THIS SHARPNESS!

And it fixed itself, I guess.

zmttoxics said:

Heh.

So the website works? How is the flash performance?

I guess I have nothing to really suggest for the sharpness other then try the vga. There is no way it will ever look the same as the macbook though.

Click to expand...

Website works, flash is still chugging (and the video is fully loaded).
I know it wont look exactly like it, I mean in terms of smoothness, cause there is no way I really want to do too much work on the Dynex if thats the best DVI can display.

fehhkk said:

For the sharpness, this is related to the font smoothing I guess...

System Preferences -> Appearance .. then font smoothing style, at the bottom... try what looks best.

Click to expand...

Tried turning it off and changing the numbers and nothing changed.

zmttoxics said:

Then I am bettin that old Core Duo just cant hack it. Also, I thought it was the other way around? I am no graphics artist or anything, but I heard they dont like the glossy soft macbook screens because they cant be considered accurate or what ever.

Oh well, sorry I can't be of any help to your cause.

Click to expand...

I have no idea, I'm not a professional nor have I worked on a matte screen, but I know that I can't work on a screen thats too sharp.

Thanks for the replies.

fehhkk said:

I see what could be happening then. Your Mini is probably not sending the video output resolution that is the same native resolution as your display. If that's the case, then your flat panel's scaler will do some of the smoothing.

For example, you could be setting the video output to be 1366x768, but your monitor is expecting 1280x720.

Click to expand...

No, I don't have the mini yet (est. this wed), thats what it looks like when I split it with my MacBook, I'm just hoping that it doesn't look like that with the mini. I asked my friend who has quite a bit of knowledge in this:

Yeah your assumption is probably right. The crappy onboard Intel graphics is the problem. The 9400 will fair better but 128mb isn't enough for 1080p I bet. Might work fine for 60Hz but deffo not for 120Hz.

Click to expand...

(That was before i told him I only had 720p)

Well, I got the Mini hooked up, doesn't look any better.