Will Apple up the Video RAM in the Mac Mini to 64MB?

manchurian

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jan 12, 2005
12
0
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.
 

T.Rex

macrumors member
Jun 23, 2003
67
0
Toronto, ON
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. :(
 

Nickygoat

macrumors 6502a
Dec 11, 2004
992
0
London
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.
 

SilentPanda

Moderator emeritus
Oct 8, 2002
9,808
28
The Bamboo Forest
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.
 

Bear

macrumors G3
Jul 23, 2002
8,089
4
Sol III - Terra
Dont Hurt Me said:
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.
 

Zaty

macrumors 65816
Mar 14, 2004
1,214
0
Switzerland
Nickygoat said:
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.
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.
 

Lord Blackadder

macrumors G5
May 7, 2004
13,521
2,557
Sod off
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. :rolleyes:
 

miloblithe

macrumors 68020
Nov 14, 2003
2,076
28
Washington, DC
altair said:
ITS ONLY 499!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
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.
 

Xeem

macrumors 6502a
Feb 2, 2005
905
9
Minnesota
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...
 

mduser63

macrumors 68040
Nov 9, 2004
3,038
30
Salt Lake City, UT
Nickygoat said:
And it was only last week that the PowerBook was updated to 64MB across the range.
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.
 

MacsRgr8

macrumors 604
Sep 8, 2002
7,830
1,120
The Netherlands
altair said:
sorry, im on a rampage, but those two things shouldnt be in the same sentence. nor should Gamer and Mac.
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.
 

aswitcher

macrumors 603
Oct 8, 2003
5,351
14
Canberra OZ
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.
 

TheMasin9

macrumors 6502a
Dec 22, 2004
585
0
Huber Heights, OH
aswitcher said:
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.
Yes, i agree cuz tiger requires 64 mb vram i believe.
 

kidA

macrumors regular
Jul 22, 2002
119
0
TheMasin9 said:
Yes, i agree cuz tiger requires 64 mb vram i believe.
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?
 

Dont Hurt Me

macrumors 603
Dec 21, 2002
6,056
6
Yahooville S.C.
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. :eek: 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. :rolleyes:
 

dotdotdot

macrumors 68020
Jan 23, 2005
2,381
31
My local Apple store has the minis hooked up to 20" displays and 1 23" display. Set to the highest resolution possible, it looked incredible. It doesn't need much VRAM if you won't be playing games on it, which is pretty unlikely anyway.
 

Bear

macrumors G3
Jul 23, 2002
8,089
4
Sol III - Terra
dotdotdot said:
My local Apple store has the minis hooked up to 20" displays and 1 23" display. Set to the highest resolution possible, it looked incredible. It doesn't need much VRAM if you won't be playing games on it, which is pretty unlikely anyway.
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

macrumors 68020
Jan 23, 2005
2,381
31
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...
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
miloblithe 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.
I think people would feel better if Apple offered 64-128MB of "integrated" graphics memory and 256MB of main memory... :p