Intergrated Intel GMA950 GPU 64mb vs. ATI Radeon 9200 graphics processor 32mb?

Discussion in 'Mac Basics and Help' started by Alacres, Jul 4, 2008.

  1. Alacres macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    #1
    I was just curious about the performance difference between these two graphic processors. I went with the newer model 1.82 C2D 64mb DDR shared graphics mini specifically for an older game (Everquest) and I've been experiencing some pretty poor performance in certain areas. My friend, on the other hand, who has an older G4 mini with the ATI 32 mb dedicated card, doesn't seem to have any performance issues at all.

    So my question is - is the difference between integrated and dedicated really so big that even with my superior processor and extra 32 megs of vram, it's still not as powerful as my friends older mini, in terms of gaming? I'm starting to feel like I made the wrong choice here since I could have got an old G4 mini much cheaper. I just had no idea that there was such a huge gap between dedicated and shared graphics.

    Thank in advance for any info :).
     
  2. chscag macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Fort Worth, Texas
    #2
    The newer Intel graphic chips provide better performance for certain games. However, if you're a gamer or just someone who likes to play an occasional graphic intense game, nothing beats a dedicated graphics card with plenty of VRAM.

    Remember, your Intel GMA 950 like my GMA X3100 shares memory.

    Regards.
     
  3. MacsRgr8 macrumors 604

    MacsRgr8

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #3
    I recently installed a Mac mini Core 2 Duo 1.83 with the GMA 950, and as it was for a child I tried to install a couple of game just to see if they would work... this boy likes racing games, so I tried the following:

    - Colin McRae Rally 2005
    - NFS Carbon
    - M3 Challenge (Cider ported)

    None of these games are considered new, or demanding 3D gfrx...

    Colin McRae and NFS simply cannot run / install because the grfx is not supported, and the M3 Challenge game will start... but ab-so-lu-te-ly no performance.. unplayable.
    It really shows what cr@ppy hardware integrated grfx is, if you want to play a game... :(
    The 9200 card wasn't gr8 at all, but at least you knew which possibilities it had. Dedicated VRAM makes it a lot easier, and at least you knew which 3D games wold work. :rolleyes:
     
  4. Alacres thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    #4
    Thanks for the input :)

    So far, I've only attempted Everquest, WoW, and Diablo II on my mini. It runs them all ok, but I was expecting better performance for an older game like EQ at least.

    The reason I actually made this thread is because I've been thinking of selling the mini and replacing it with a cheaper, powermac G4. I just wanted to make sure that it would be worth the trouble. The G4 has a much slower processor from what I've heard, but it has the same amount of ram and a 64mb dedicated graphics card. I figured, all in all, it would run EQ better than the mini, but I wanted to be sure.
     

Share This Page