or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Future Integrated Graphics
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Future Integrated Graphics

post #1 of 11
Thread Starter 
What is the next integrated graphics chip to go in the macbooks, and how good is it going to be compared to the current and some dedicated ones?
post #2 of 11
GMA X3000, no one knows how good it will be yet, because Intel hasn't finished the drivers, it will not be available before April 2007.
post #3 of 11
x3000 and much better. Hardware Transform and Lighting, better scaling and deinterlacing etc. Do a search here we have had some decent threads on the X3000 GMA chipset
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #4 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison

x3000 and much better. Hardware Transform and Lighting, better scaling and deinterlacing etc. Do a search here we have had some decent threads on the X3000 GMA chipset

but still it uses system ram why can't Intel give some of it own ram like NVIDIA and ATI does on some low end models
post #5 of 11
Cost

The only reason why you need local memory is for fast access to the frame buffers. The faster main memory and the PCI bus gets the less and less we need power hungry GPU with local memory.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #6 of 11
I saw a few articles on the Inq saying that the GMA 3000 is actually benchmarking slower than the GMA 950, but since there are only a few G965 motherboards on the market it's hard to be sure if this is really a problem or not.
post #7 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmf

I saw a few articles on the Inq saying that the GMA 3000 is actually benchmarking slower than the GMA 950, but since there are only a few G965 motherboards on the market it's hard to be sure if this is really a problem or not.

We know, and I'm suspecting they were using pre-release drivers without support for hardware transform and lighting, SM3.0 etc.
post #8 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmf

I saw a few articles on the Inq saying that the GMA 3000 is actually benchmarking slower than the GMA 950

The GMA 3000 (in the Q965) is a GMA 950 with a few enhancements.
The GMA X3000 (G965) is a complete other GPU based on the Kyro design with all the goodies hmurchison talked about.
post #9 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison

x3000 and much better. Hardware Transform and Lighting, better scaling and deinterlacing etc. Do a search here we have had some decent threads on the X3000 GMA chipset

Well....on top of all the improvements.... HDCP compliance is a must have feature.... if not included, then would it be more than another crappy IGM?
always a newbie
Reply
always a newbie
Reply
post #10 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by smalM

The GMA 3000 (in the Q965) is a GMA 950 with a few enhancements.
The GMA X3000 (G965) is a complete other GPU based on the Kyro design with all the goodies hmurchison talked about.

Ugh, that is mo' confusing if true. Wait, this is Intel; that means it has to be true.
post #11 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by smalM

The GMA 3000 (in the Q965) is a GMA 950 with a few enhancements.
The GMA X3000 (G965) is a complete other GPU based on the Kyro design with all the goodies hmurchison talked about.

Intel has been using Kyro tile technology since Intel Extreme 2 IGP.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Future Integrated Graphics