256MB graphics ram useful in MBP?

Dr_Maybe

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Sep 17, 2003
277
0
South America
In this test, the 1.83ghz(january, I assume 128MB graphics RAM) MBP is faster than the 2.0ghz MBP (january, I assume 256MB graphics RAM) in Unreal Tournament 2004.
http://www.macworld.com/2006/05/reviews/mbookmain/index.php?lsrc=mwrss

It is probably due to how benchmarks change slighty each time you test. But I think it is safe to say that the extra 128MB graphics RAM don't help in Unreal Tournament 2004. And in theory 256MB vs. 128MB shouldn't make a difference unless the game has textures etc. that are more than ~120MB in size, right?

So what is the 256MB useful for? Driving a 30" inch plus built in 15/17" screen? Shouldn't 128MB be enough for that?

Some times extra numbers are added but not really utilized. For instance ATA 133 bandwith instead of ATA 100 on disks with a maximum transfer rate of ~60 MB. But people still want the 133 since it's "more bandwith". Same with AGP 8x graphics cards, when AGP 2x is sufficient. Is the 256MB graphics in the MBPs such a case?
 

4God

macrumors 68020
Apr 5, 2005
2,112
231
My Mac
Well, your first question is subjective. What will you be using it for?
As far as I know, if you add a 30" display to your MBP, you would be splitting up the video ram.
So, if you have 128MB of video ram, you would have 64MB per monitor - unless you were in closed
lid mode in which case it would all go towards your connected monitor.

Now, consider the use of 256MB of video ram. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong,
but the more video ram to redraw to the GUI the better. It makes for better
responsiveness of GUI intensive tasks.
 

mrichmon

macrumors 6502a
Jun 17, 2003
873
2
Dr_Maybe said:
Some times extra numbers are added but not really utilized. For instance ATA 133 bandwith instead of ATA 100 on disks with a maximum transfer rate of ~60 MB. But people still want the 133 since it's "more bandwith".
Yes, with a single drive on an ATA 133 bus you will not get anywhere near saturating the bus since the drive can only pump out data at ~60MB/s. But if you have two drives on a ATA 100 bus and you are accessing both drives at the same time then the limiting factor will be the bus speed. The same two ~60MB/s drives on an ATA 133 bus are unlikely to saturate the bus (ignoring the effects of bus contention and data collisions).

Dr_Maybe said:
Same with AGP 8x graphics cards, when AGP 2x is sufficient. Is the 256MB graphics in the MBPs such a case?
That would depend on what you deem to be "sufficient".