I feel ripped off...

**rift065** · August 28th, 2006, 07:53 PM

The Intel GMA 950 chipset which is the graphics card in my macbook only has 64 megabytes!!!! what the hell, this is a brand new computer, what is this 1998? How can this even be true?

**DeltaMac** · August 28th, 2006, 08:16 PM

The 64MB is not dedicated graphics memory, as in past models. The Intel GMA 950 graphics processor uses 64MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory. Kind of confusing as the minimum graphics memory usage is 80MB, so you are left with 432MB of system memory available (assuming no additional memory installed). The previous iBook G4 had only 32MB video memory.
The MacBook is just not sold as a high-end video system, but is considered a mid-range performer (testing shows it to be quite good, even with the shared memory).

If you want dedicated vid memory, get a MacBook Pro.

**rift065** · August 28th, 2006, 08:52 PM

i have 1 gig of ram.. so how much memory is being used for video? this is really wierd to me..

**DeltaMac** · August 28th, 2006, 09:15 PM

Simply, the video has 64 MB to use, but remember, it's shared with the main memory, which provides a minimum of 80 MB, and can vary above that. Actual amount in use will vary depending on what you are doing at the moment, the vid memory is not dedicated memory, it's shared with the main memory, so there's no actual vid memory figure, except 'at the moment'.

Maybe someone else here will add another perspective on that.

**hawki18** · August 29th, 2006, 12:37 AM

If I did not know better and had bought a Mac Book I would be very upset. I agree with rift065. The g4 I book has 32mb dedicated video memory and to brag up the speed of the intel cpu's Then charge as much as they do with no video card is a sham. Mac Books should have minium of 64 mb of video memory and option for 128 mb. My Mac Book Pro came with 128 mb memory and max of 256 mb on top Mac Book Pros. I would expect the same of the Mac Books!

**fryke** · August 29th, 2006, 04:19 AM

Oh come on, guys. The iBook's graphics never were something to write home about, either. Actually, the MacBook's graphics perform better than the last iBook G4 if I remember the charts correctly. It's not aimed at the computer gamer, it's Apple's cheapest model and it handles *ALL* iLife's graphics quite well, doesn't it. You feel ripped off? Then you weren't informed. But if you somehow EXPECTED 128 or even 256 MB VRAM, I wonder where that'd come from. If, however, you're so p****d off that this is a dealbreaker for you, then simply bring the baby back. Someone will take care of it.

**hawki18** · August 31st, 2006, 12:48 AM

No I am not feeling ripped off Fryke, I have a Mac Book Pro and the grapic are great, but I think a dual core laptop should have a dedicated video card. Don't misunderstand me not looking Mac Book to be video editing machine, but it should not be slowed down when doing Photo Shop Apps. I was agree with the person who order the Mac Book it should not share ram with the system memory. For the same price as Mac Book you can pick up a Win laptop 1.83 gig dual core and the ATI x1600 video the same video card that comes in my Mac Book Pro. So for the price point Apple should be able to put in 64mb video card.

**blikseme300** · August 31st, 2006, 04:47 AM

Windows is a resource hog, hence you need more resources! The notebook/laptop video chipsets are designed to work with memory sharing. Heat and excessive power consumption forces the designers to do this. Try and compare the Mac and the Windoze machines side-by-side. You might just be surprised.