why 256 why not 512

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by Acorn, Mar 8, 2012.

  1. Acorn, Mar 8, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2012

    Acorn macrumors 68020

    Acorn

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Location:
    macrumors
    #1
    why does the ATI mac mini keep this crappy tradition of only 256 megs of video memory. increasing to 512 would not increase the heat in the machine. certainly not enough to matter. 512 would really help out the machine and would still benefit from the decreased cost of a 1 gb card. Video memory doesnt affect the cost of the cards anymore really. you dont see people buying 512 meg cards from newegg instead of 1-3 gb because its cheaper.

    This crappiness has to stop. at this point its just crippling the machine for the sake of crippling the machine.

    and yes 512 would make a considerable difference from 256.

    this post is related to the ATI machine btw.
     
  2. thejadedmonkey macrumors 604

    thejadedmonkey

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Pa
    #2
    Because, lets assume you have to buy a screen with your mac mini... and a mouse/keyboard. That's around $1000 for the mac mini. All of a sudden, why just spend just $100 more to get a better video card?

    Apple is the master at up selling.

    In other words, marketing.

    Plain and simple.
     
  3. Acorn thread starter macrumors 68020

    Acorn

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Location:
    macrumors
    #3
    that may be true but its a little redonkulous to still have 256 mb video card when they have cards at 3 gb now. thats like selling the machine with a 1 gb regular memory cap and a 4gb hard drive. you just wouldnt do that now.
     
  4. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #4
    What Nvidia Mac Mini? The current models have mid-range has an AMD/ATI video chipset....
     
  5. Acorn thread starter macrumors 68020

    Acorn

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Location:
    macrumors
    #5
    brain fart. fixed now
     
  6. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #6
    As far as answering your question, only Apple can answer that for you. I suppose they feel it is "good enough" with just 256mb. But do remember, just like System memory, not all GPU memory is the same. I will often defend Apple in their decisions, but I do agree that 512mb makes more sense. Although it would be nice to see some benchmarks. Maybe the 6630 isn't any faster with 512 than 256 (doubtful, but possible).
     
  7. MattA macrumors 6502

    MattA

    Joined:
    May 15, 2006
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    #7
    They don't want to cannabilize sales of the iMac. Plain and simple.

    If you put a video card in the Mac Mini that completely rocked, suddenly there would be no reason to buy the all in one. You could get a cheap monitor and have a decent Mac without having to spend a bunch more cash on an iMac.
     
  8. ipsychedelic macrumors 6502a

    ipsychedelic

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    #8
    I think personally, what would make a difference is a better GPU, like the one that the MacBook Pro 15" sports (6670m vs 6630m?).
    Yes, more VRAM means more space for textures and the like, but the chip dictates the power.
    It's like my old 8800 GTS 320 MB... that card nowadays gives a good show, and there are newer, more VRAM packed cards, but in mid-low range that would cry in front of it...
     
  9. Ice Dragon macrumors 6502a

    Ice Dragon

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2009
    #9
    A little of both would be nice though of course that would drive up the cost and undercut the iMac.
     
  10. Acorn thread starter macrumors 68020

    Acorn

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Location:
    macrumors
    #10
    well its easy to say just throw a better gpu in there. there is still heat restriction. imho even if they crammed a screaming gpu in there if they only give it 256 megs of gpu memory its going to suck and be crippled.

    pushing whatever they choose to 512 shouldnt bring up cost or heat issues. it shouldnt affect the imac either since the base imac is 1 gig of video memory now and its infinitely better to start with.
     
  11. shortcut3d macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2011
    #11
    The 2011 Mac mini with AMD 6630M is not intended to be a gamer machine. The 1GB - 3GB graphic cards are intended for video gamers. 256MB is fine for casual gamers and general purpose computing. Mac have never really been gamer machines. The advantage of Macs is the design, simplicity, and efficiency gains of OSX over Windows.
     
  12. the read macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2009
    #12
    As others have stated. Adding more video RAM to the card would only make the card faster once it runs out of Video RAM while performing graphics intensive tasks. For most games you would not use more than 256 RAM. (Xbox and PS3 have similar 256 size VRAM).

    For example, Although not used in the mini, Ive heavily tested the Nvidea QuadroFX range of cards from the 600 through to 4800. The extra RAM on these cards has little effect on performance. But change the CPU and GPU and the results are dramatically different.

    If the extra RAM was added to the graphics card in the mini, the difference in performance would not be realized.
     
  13. ipsychedelic macrumors 6502a

    ipsychedelic

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    #13
    Some people would disagree saying that running a game at 2yyy x 1xxxx or other whack resolution would benefit from the extra VRAM.

    But then again (and leaving aside the fact this machine is not meant for gamers, or I'd dare to say OS X is still a bit of a "love thing" if you are a gamer)...

    It's obvious the more advanced the GPUs become, the more VRAM they sport.
    But comparing GPUs on VRAM alone would be like saying "X car is better than Y car because X goes faster" or "This 8 MP camera is better than your 6 MP camera".
    There is usually a correlation with VRAM and quality of the GPU (I mean, nowadays we don't have high end GPUs with just 128 MB VRAM), but the important part of the equation always is the chip inside.

    6630M = Low/mid end anyway.
    Good enough, for the light gamer, video editor and the like, so anyway if it had 1 GB VRAM it wouldn't be earth and hell difference at all.
     
  14. bdodds1985 macrumors 6502a

    bdodds1985

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2011
    Location:
    Tartarus
    #14
    it should be an option is the point here. I honestly would love to see a quad core in this machine as well as better graphics. But, it is a small piece of equipment and apple has to limit our fun some way...
     

Share This Page