Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

64 or 128mb vram for new powerbook?

B

bentmywookie

macrumors regular
Original poster
Nov 6, 2002
155
0
Palo Alto
Hi all,

I convinced a friend of mine to switch (yes!).
She's going to get a powerbook for college and her school has a
good deal (as most do) on the stock 15" powerbook w/ 64mb vram.

She's not a gamer so I would think the 64mb vram is fine, but
I think I read somewhere that Tiger will require 64mb vram
(I might be mistaken). So I'm wondering if maybe the 128mb
option would be a better choice for longevity, in case Apple
releases an OS upgrade 2 years down the road requiring 128mb
vram to fully take advantage of it.

Just wanted to see what you guys/girls think. I generally find
people's advice/opinions on MacRumors really helpful.

Thanks.
 
Sorry - I forgot to mention that the school has a deal, $2100 for stock 1.5 ghz model w/ Applecare, so going for the 128mb vram would bump it up to around $2800 if she wanted to get the Applecare.
 
I would just take the good deal on the stock 15" and run. Your friend probably really doesn't need 64mb of vRam unless she renders high end 3D motion graphics or if she is a gamer.

It seems like the trend in Apple operating systems is to be more of a RAM hog rather than a VRAM hog, so I'm sure the 64mb vRam will be plenty. As an example, my old 500mhz iBook G3 with 8mb of vRam and 640mb of ram runs OS 10.3 great. I saw a major performance increase when I maxed out the ram. The graphics card stayed the same.

I don't think that passing a good deal by is worth it just for the extra vRam. To be honest, I'd be more concerned about getting a faster hard drive rather than worrying about the video ram. Overall, though, the 15" Powerbook is a great machine at stock and I'm sure she would be more than happy with it.
 
It is totally NOT necessary for her. Total waste of money, even at $50.

Lee Tom
 
Whoever told you those requirements for Tiger was mistaken.
If she's not playing games, use the money for something else (your commission :D)

AppleMatt
 
seamuskrat said:
Its a BTO option only. I would think its best to invest now, as for no amount of money can you update the VRAM later.
Click to expand...
Are you out of your mind, BTO option only or not, it's $700 for an extra 64MB VRAM.

One word....

NO!
 
bentmywookie said:
Hi all,

I convinced a friend of mine to switch (yes!).
She's going to get a powerbook for college and her school has a
good deal (as most do) on the stock 15" powerbook w/ 64mb vram.

She's not a gamer so I would think the 64mb vram is fine, but
I think I read somewhere that Tiger will require 64mb vram
(I might be mistaken). So I'm wondering if maybe the 128mb
option would be a better choice for longevity, in case Apple
releases an OS upgrade 2 years down the road requiring 128mb
vram to fully take advantage of it.

Just wanted to see what you guys/girls think. I generally find
people's advice/opinions on MacRumors really helpful.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
You misinterpreted what you read. What you should have read was this: Core Image (not Tiger) requires a supported graphics card with at least 64 MB of VRAM. Tiger itself doesn't really have a VRAM requirement - VRAM requirements only apply to Core Image and Quartz Extreme.
 
wrldwzrd89 said:
What you should have read was this: Core Image (not Tiger) requires a supported graphics card with at least 64 MB of VRAM. Tiger itself doesn't really have a VRAM requirement - VRAM requirements only apply to Core Image and Quartz Extreme.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't (underlined).
I don't understand where these random facts and figures come from everytime a new OS is released by Apple.

AppleMatt
 
madforrit said:
Check out this link from Barefeats. Basically, it doesn't make much of a difference (at least for now) for non-gamers, and while it might be worth an extra 50, not worth anymore than that...

http://www.barefeats.com/pb12.html
Click to expand...

64mb vram is fine but these benchmarks show you that the Hard Drive could be worth upgrading. You could always stick with the stock for now and upgrade to 7200 rpm later
 
Since you are getting a great deal from your school for a stock model, you have to take it. If you were ordering from Apple, I'd say get the 128 since you can't upgrade later, but in your case, take the excellent deal.
 
I'm confused as to why some people think the BTO option of upgrading the VRAM is only $50.00. Initially it was yes but it is already at $100. Even ordering my 15" Powerbook on Apple's Education site the option of upgrading the VRAM was merely $10 less($90) albeit the stock price of the PB was about $2200.
 
AppleMatt said:
No it doesn't (underlined).
I don't understand where these random facts and figures come from everytime a new OS is released by Apple.

AppleMatt
Click to expand...
At least you've got it straight, AppleMatt (I sure don't, as you pointed out - neither did the poster I was correcting).
 
wrldwzrd89 said:
You misinterpreted what you read. What you should have read was this: Core Image (not Tiger) requires a supported graphics card with at least 64 MB of VRAM. Tiger itself doesn't really have a VRAM requirement - VRAM requirements only apply to Core Image and Quartz Extreme.
Click to expand...

... which is a valid arguement for using 128 megs of video ram. CoreImage and Quartz Extreme will make the UI far snappier and lifelike. But I digress...

I don't think a college student will need it unless they are going into the arts (video, graphics, etc.) Personally, considering the massive price differential I would put that towards more RAM and the rest towards paying off school loans! :)
 
AppleMatt said:
No it doesn't (underlined).
I don't understand where these random facts and figures come from everytime a new OS is released by Apple.

AppleMatt
Click to expand...

It seems you are right, but even Apple's CoreImage web page is a bit ambiguous:

The performance gains and features supported by Core Image ultimately depend on the graphics card. Graphics cards capable of pixel-level programming deliver the best performance. But Core Image automatically scales as appropriate for systems with older graphics cards, for compatibility with any Tiger-compatible Mac.

Supported graphics cards:
ATI Radeon 9800 XT
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro
ATI Radeon 9600 XT
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
ATI Mobility Radeon 9700
ATI Mobility Radeon 9600
NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra
NVIDIA GeForceFX Go 5200
NVIDIA GeForceFX 5200 Ultra

These cards are available in today’s PowerBooks, Power Mac G5s and both the 17-inch and 20-inch iMac.
Click to expand...

I don't know why they say it's scalable to any Tiger-capable mac, and then in the same breath only state that recent 64mb+ graphics cards are supported. Suspicious. If *features* are downgraded then it actually could means CoreImage is not enabled on old machines. For example, my gerforce4mx has 64megs of video memory but no pixel shaders. I would probably get crappy results.

Oh well, looks like I will be buying a new mac with OS X 10.4 pre-installed anyway. :) Until then my DP 1GHz quicksilver will do. :)
 
Frobozz said:
It seems you are right, but even Apple's CoreImage web page is a bit ambiguous:



I don't know why they say it's scalable to any Tiger-capable mac, and then in the same breath only state that recent 64mb+ graphics cards are supported. Suspicious. If *features* are downgraded then it actually could means CoreImage is not enabled on old machines. For example, my gerforce4mx has 64megs of video memory but no pixel shaders. I would probably get crappy results.

Oh well, looks like I will be buying a new mac with OS X 10.4 pre-installed anyway. :) Until then my DP 1GHz quicksilver will do. :)
Click to expand...





I don't understand what all the confusion is about for CoreImage...

VRAM isn't going to mean sh*t for CoreImage performance... perhaps other than loading desktop images to the buffer for pixel adjustments.

It's mostly likely that they mentioned all 64 MB cards because ALL of those cards support pixel shading. Whether or not you have 64 MB or 128 isn't really going to matter... it's going to depend on the architecture of the card and how many pipelines it has to do per pixel processing...

Something similar to this would be OS X's compatibility with non Radeon/GeForce cards... an example would be the Rage128 series. There were Rage cards that had 32 MB of memory but really didn't do crap simply due to the fact that the chipset was not advanced enough to handle certain transparency filters...

Simple answer, VRAM doesn't really mean as much now as it used to. It's only really going to be helpful with something, say, like Doom3 which has a huge array of texture files that can be quickly stored in the VRAM buffer for quicker access. The 2D application isn't going to be nearly as apparently from an increase in VRAm as it's 3D application.
 
Is PB G4 good for video editing?

Hello im a independant film maker and Ive just spent thousands on a dell M60 and built my own monster of a desktop, only to find out that it was the biggest mistake since Bush was elected.

My roommate is a PC buff, and swore up and down that a PC was my best choice even though my gut told me to go Mac!

To make a long story short my laptop and desktop have grown to hate each other. It seems that i spend 90% of my time fixing them instaed of using my precious time editing! When i fix my dell, my desktop says F@*K YOU!!, gets jeleous, and *****s on me, vice versa. Im am not married for the simple fact that im not ready for kids, but my two hellions need their diapers changed every day!

Im sick and streesed, I think i smoked myself into lung cancer and only after 4 months of fighting these machines im going to make the swicth.

So my question is this...To all video buffs out there...Is the powerbook
G4 with 128 mb of video ram, 2GB memeory, gonna be good? Or is it too slow to handle my video editing needs. Running FCP? My concern is rendering. Among others.

I know that the G5 desktop is a monster of a machine, but i like the portability. Since i do most of my editing at my part time job...Im lucky to have a cool boss that would let me do this at work.

But im afraid that it will be too slow.

Anyone out there with a PB G4, Using Final cut pro, happy with its performance? Or not?

Any input would be great.

P.S. Every night i have sweet dreams of tossing $8000 dollars of Pc out my 7th story window, as my PC loving roomate walks home from work.
 
I got the upgrade because i plan on doing video editing with my pb. I would recommand the 1.5 so in the future it will be less out dated. I would say if you can get a good deal it will be nice, you never know what she/you will be doing with it in the future. And in the future you might be able to sell it for more. If you can afford it, get it...but that's just me!
 
Eatsnax said:
Hello im a independant film maker and Ive just spent thousands on a dell M60 and built my own monster of a desktop, only to find out that it was the biggest mistake since Bush was elected.

My roommate is a PC buff, and swore up and down that a PC was my best choice even though my gut told me to go Mac!

To make a long story short my laptop and desktop have grown to hate each other. It seems that i spend 90% of my time fixing them instaed of using my precious time editing! When i fix my dell, my desktop says F@*K YOU!!, gets jeleous, and *****s on me, vice versa. Im am not married for the simple fact that im not ready for kids, but my two hellions need their diapers changed every day!

Im sick and streesed, I think i smoked myself into lung cancer and only after 4 months of fighting these machines im going to make the swicth.

So my question is this...To all video buffs out there...Is the powerbook
G4 with 128 mb of video ram, 2GB memeory, gonna be good? Or is it too slow to handle my video editing needs. Running FCP? My concern is rendering. Among others.

I know that the G5 desktop is a monster of a machine, but i like the portability. Since i do most of my editing at my part time job...Im lucky to have a cool boss that would let me do this at work.

But im afraid that it will be too slow.

Anyone out there with a PB G4, Using Final cut pro, happy with its performance? Or not?

Any input would be great.

P.S. Every night i have sweet dreams of tossing $8000 dollars of Pc out my 7th story window, as my PC loving roomate walks home from work.
Click to expand...

i think a lot of people edit video for movies on Powerbok. it's a quite capable machine, and if you go to an apple store, i'm pretty sure you can ask them to demo it. but other than that, afaik, people do use a PB G4 to editt videos and they seemed to love it. the G4 is no slouch, especially the latest 1.5 Ghz ones. i say sell your annoying PCs fast and get yourself a Powerbook or Powermac and get the new Production Suite.

or get a nice Powermac and a 12" Powerbook or iBook. so you can transport videos, etc, but also have the monster machine at home to do the heavy lifting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back