You're absolutely right. I think the only applications that would really benefit from 128MB VRAM are some of the heftiest 3D games. Video will in general use quite little VRAM because there is no need to store data for later use on the video-card. Photo-work will mostly center around a few images, and anyway, swapping a new image into VRAM doesn't take long. The OSX window system and Exposé benefits from VRAM, but to see any difference between 64MB and 128MB you would probably need two 23" HD Displays filled with windows.Spades said:OK, I have to ask. Can anybody seriously explain what the purpose of 128 MB of video memory over 64 MB of video memory would be? My understanding has been that 2D graphics will not benefit from that much memory at all. The amount it benefits 3D depends on how large the textures you want to store are. The only 3D application that, as far as I know, can push past 32MB let alone 64MB would be games. This has been my assumption, but with everybody whining that 64 isn't enough, I think I missed something. What purpose, besides gaming, does more video memory serve?
The main reason for wanting 128MB of VRAM is that most wintel computers ship with 128MB VRAM these days
1) Hardcore gaming (mostly not an issue with portables)
2) Future progress. Very little software has any need of that large amounts of VRAM now, but this will probably change.