How high are the chances? I read the review at Anandtech and he said that if you're using a resolution higher than 1280x960, the Expose and GFX effects start to get laggy.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Will Apple up the Video RAM in the Mac Mini to 64MB?
- Thread starter manchurian
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I sure hope so. The pathetic video card is the main reason I cancelled my mini order - I decided the 32mb ram wasn't sufficient to drive the 20" cinema I ordered with it. 
Extremely unlikely. At this price point why should they? The old G4 iMacs, iBooks and eMacs don't offer any more. And it was only last week that the PowerBook was updated to 64MB across the range. Apple is notoriously stingy on base specs. Bottom line - don't hold your breath.
My iBook G4 800 drives my 20" display with no problems at 1680 x 1050 or whatever it is it runs at, Expose and all. And that's while spanning from my iBook screen.
Apple will bump other lines and has allready started with the powerbooks. When imac gets a standard 128 then you will see a 64 in mini is my bet.
Actually it just needs most (f not all) products to have 64MB VRAM before the Mini can have its VRAM bumped to 64MB.Dont Hurt Me said:
Nickygoat said:
Actually, the 12" PB was upgraded to 64 MB VRAM last April. But all consumer Macs (except for the iMac) only come with 32 MB. I don't expect Apple change that anytime soon.
My guess is that the mini and eMac will get the GeforceFX/Go 5200 (64MB) when the iMac gets a new GPU (probably one of the current Radeons). Probably not real soon. For some reason Apple can't let go of that 5200.
altair said:
exactly. A lot of computers in this range come with "integrated" graphics, so 32MB isn't bad.
We'd all love more options. It would be nice to be able to get a kind of spiffed-up $800 or so mini with a better graphics card, another memory slot, and so on, but it's not the mac way.
As a gamer, the Mini's video card alone preventing me from buying one. I think what upsets me more than anything is the fact that they stripped the already horrible Radeon 9200 down to 32 megs, a practice commonly seen in old iMacs/eMacs. Even the 256 meg radeon 9200 is practically worthless, so I feel like Apple just added insult to injury here...
Xeem said:
sorry, im on a rampage, but those two things shouldnt be in the same sentence. nor should Gamer and Mac.
Nickygoat said:
Powerbooks have been 64 MB across the range since at least Rev. C. I have a stock Rev C. 12" that I bought in November, and it's got 64 MB RAM. I do think we'll see the Mac mini get a 64 MB graphics card, but probably not until Rev. C.
altair said:
Correct.
I can undestand Mac owners playing games, but not gamers buying Macs, unless they already own a gaming machine.
The Mac mini is a superb computer for the hardcore gamer....
One can assume that the hardcore gamer already has a 3 GHz+ x86 with GeForce 6800 or Radeon X800, so this Mac mini will be the perfect companion to really do some work on... or iLife etc.
If you plan to get a Mac mini for gaming, you're missing the point, and will be disappointed with the performance.
With Tiger due soon, I expect Apple will offer a 64meg graphics card option on the high end Mac Mini assuming the heat isn't an issue. I also hope that they will offer a faster HDD, and with both of these the performance for multimedia apps will jump.
Tiger does not require 64MB of VRAM. Some of the features in Tiger may require more than 32MB of VRAM to function fully.TheMasin9 said:
no. no it does not require 64 mb vram. some of the extra flourish type core image stuff will run best with 64 mb, but tiger itself as an operating system, and all of its inherent functionality will probably run fine on a computer with 16 mb vram, let alone a 1 ghz mini with 32 mb vram. hasn't this been discussed like 7 million times here?TheMasin9 said:
Apple would have to spend $5 -10 Bucks to have 64 MB video in Mini. It will happen faster if we all email them at this very moment. Apple is dragging its arses on video in every product but powerbooks. Just a matter of time for the bean counters to get it. Apple still playing many games between product lines rather then just letting the customer have it their way. Ill have my Mini with 64 bit video and ill take my iMac with 128 . Whats so darn hard about that? We should demand nothing less then this from Apple. Stop using cheap video to differentiate between products.
Apple is dragging its arses on video in every product but powerbooks. Just a matter of time for the bean counters to get it. Apple still playing many games between product lines rather then just letting the customer have it their way. Ill have my Mini with 64 bit video and ill take my iMac with 128 . Whats so darn hard about that? We should demand nothing less then this from Apple. Stop using cheap video to differentiate between products. Actually, various of the technologies in Mac OS X make use of the VRAM. This includes Quartz Extreme, the Preview application, Expose, and with Tiger you get Core Video that makes use of VRAM.dotdotdot said:
MacsRgr8 said:Correct.
I can undestand Mac owners playing games, but not gamers buying Macs, unless they already own a gaming machine.
The Mac mini is a superb computer for the hardcore gamer....
One can assume that the hardcore gamer already has a 3 GHz+ x86 with GeForce 6800 or Radeon X800, so this Mac mini will be the perfect companion to really do some work on... or iLife etc.
If you plan to get a Mac mini for gaming, you're missing the point, and will be disappointed with the performance.
I'm a hardcore gamer with a 2.4 GHz Windows with a GeForce 128 MB and 1 GB Ram...
