You're wrong. There's one feature of the X1300 Apple can't resist -- hardware H.264 acceleration. And the 64bit memory ATI 9200 is not better than the GMA900 or GMA950--every benchmark shows it.
Sometimes I wonder why I even bother arguing with zealots.
well, it's me, the zealot here again. i just looked up some benches and even if apple put in the x1300 in the mac mini, that is a pretty damn hideous graphic card -- in terms of performance and chip availability. i think apple will go with pci express ati 9650 64mb dedicated vram or maybe a nvidia 6600 LE ?
edit: x1300 for directx9 is quite okay but openGL it is pretty dodgy........
ATI AGP cards are 9nnn. The PCIe cards are Xnnn or X1nnn. Only the X8nn got the Rialto bridge chip.
BTW a X1300 would be much better than the 9200 the mac mini has now, even the new ones with 64MB on a 128bit bus.
wow. i'm getting totally slammed on this thread to clarify i meant that perhaps given the shortages of the x1nn line ati might shift the 9nnn cards to pci express.
anyway, here's my guess on the possibility of a certain graphic card in macintel mac mini and macintel ibook, looking at ati cards only. (percentages do not add up to 100% in this estimate)
macintel mini:
agp 9200 50% chance
agp 9550 60% chance
agp 9650 70% chance
pcie 9650 20% chance
pcie x300 25% chance
pcie x600 15% chance
pcie x1300 2% chance
pcie x1300pro 0% chance
pcie x1600 -10000% chance (okay, 0% chance i mean)
edit: x1300 for directx9 is quite okay but openGL it is pretty dodgy........
That's because the drivers for Windows are much more developed for DX than for OpenGL for non-pro cards. That's been like that for a LONG time!
I'm sure that, since OSX uses OPEN GL exclusively, ATI and Apple will develop an well optimized Open GL driver.
Integrated Intel graphics are not that bad in real life. I have the Extreme 2 GPU as part of the 855GM mobile chipset on my PC notebook and multimedia runs on it fine, no sweat. I can't say that it will win any FPS on modern 3D games, but Raven Shield and GTA3/4/5 run on it just fine at 1024X768 at medium detail level. Certainly more than I need for the amount of gaming that I will do on a sub-notebook.
If I didn't test it out in games, I would have never noticed the difference between it and the ATI 9600XT I have on a desktop. It pulls 720p H.264 decoding just fine with 1.1 GHz ULV Banias.
Actually, Apple uses shared memory video in one model in 2005 - and, in fact, in the ONLY Intel-CPU model they sell! The developer kit machine. So, the only real evidence so far is that Apple WILL use shared memory video.
The people on this board just want to believe so many things that they completely ignore facts in their wild speculation.
I agree, Apple is going Intel that means all those componets will be Intel, anyone who thinks Apple isnt going to use Integrated graphics are nuts. Its easy to get a Cpu/Gpu combo deal from Intel for a cheap price and thats what Apple will do. Integrated graphics = Crap
Lets hope Apple has some way for Mac Users in the know to get a modern graphics chip. Again Apple just may use cheapo graphics to help seperate model lines.
Yeah, because that's just what's most important to their very lowest-end machine! Not.
To have their fresh switchers watch 720p downloads from the iTunes Movie Store, without having a particularly nice CPU? Sorry, but that definitely seems important.
The first computers with EFI shipped back in 2004. Now imagine what apple can do having control of both the hardware and operating system. I'm fairly certain they are not going back to using the outdated BIOS.
To have their fresh switchers watch 720p downloads from the iTunes Movie Store,
720p? Where? They don't even have widescreen at iTMS to begin with.
Quote:
without having a particularly nice CPU? Sorry, but that definitely seems important.
They may do it across the line, but I just don't see something like that happening on the Mac mini (and even more certainly not, as was implied, on the Mac mini first). The mini has absolutely nothing (except arguably DVI) that could be considered a "luxury" feature.
to follow up my predictions previously, new macintel ibooks have a 75% chance, i predict, and hate to admit, that they will contain the 915gm express chipset with intel GMA900 for graphics
well, we are looking at possibilities of each scenario in say a quantum universe.... in my assumptions, each possibility has nothing to do with the other, therefore they are independent odds for each situation.
75% chance means 75 in 100 odds that such a situation might arise
damn, you guys are so smart and so bloody picky
heh. i used to hang out with smart people, now mostly dumbos around me. but the dumbos know how to survive and make money and run businesses, so, well.... whatevah..! \
Comments
Originally posted by Existence
You're wrong. There's one feature of the X1300 Apple can't resist -- hardware H.264 acceleration.
Yeah, because that's just what's most important to their very lowest-end machine! Not.
Originally posted by Existence
You're wrong. There's one feature of the X1300 Apple can't resist -- hardware H.264 acceleration. And the 64bit memory ATI 9200 is not better than the GMA900 or GMA950--every benchmark shows it.
Sometimes I wonder why I even bother arguing with zealots.
well, it's me, the zealot here again. i just looked up some benches and even if apple put in the x1300 in the mac mini, that is a pretty damn hideous graphic card -- in terms of performance and chip availability. i think apple will go with pci express ati 9650 64mb dedicated vram or maybe a nvidia 6600 LE ?
edit: x1300 for directx9 is quite okay but openGL it is pretty dodgy........
ATI AGP cards are 9nnn. The PCIe cards are Xnnn or X1nnn. Only the X8nn got the Rialto bridge chip.
BTW a X1300 would be much better than the 9200 the mac mini has now, even the new ones with 64MB on a 128bit bus.
Originally posted by smalM
PCIe ATI 9650? Where did you find that?
ATI AGP cards are 9nnn. The PCIe cards are Xnnn or X1nnn. Only the X8nn got the Rialto bridge chip.
BTW a X1300 would be much better than the 9200 the mac mini has now, even the new ones with 64MB on a 128bit bus.
wow. i'm getting totally slammed on this thread
anyway, here's my guess on the possibility of a certain graphic card in macintel mac mini and macintel ibook, looking at ati cards only. (percentages do not add up to 100% in this estimate)
macintel mini:
agp 9200 50% chance
agp 9550 60% chance
agp 9650 70% chance
pcie 9650 20% chance
pcie x300 25% chance
pcie x600 15% chance
pcie x1300 2% chance
pcie x1300pro 0% chance
pcie x1600 -10000% chance (okay, 0% chance i mean)
macintel ibook:
agp mobility 9550 20% chance
agp mobility 9650 68% chance
pcie mobility x300 20% chance
pcie mobility x600 38% chance
pcie mobility x700 1% chance
edit: x1300 for directx9 is quite okay but openGL it is pretty dodgy........
That's because the drivers for Windows are much more developed for DX than for OpenGL for non-pro cards. That's been like that for a LONG time!
I'm sure that, since OSX uses OPEN GL exclusively, ATI and Apple will develop an well optimized Open GL driver.
Integrated Intel graphics are not that bad in real life. I have the Extreme 2 GPU as part of the 855GM mobile chipset on my PC notebook and multimedia runs on it fine, no sweat. I can't say that it will win any FPS on modern 3D games, but Raven Shield and GTA3/4/5 run on it just fine at 1024X768 at medium detail level. Certainly more than I need for the amount of gaming that I will do on a sub-notebook.
If I didn't test it out in games, I would have never noticed the difference between it and the ATI 9600XT I have on a desktop. It pulls 720p H.264 decoding just fine with 1.1 GHz ULV Banias.
Originally posted by skatman
That's because the drivers for Windows are much more developed for DX than for OpenGL for non-pro cards. That's been like that for a LONG time!....
yes, but how would you account for nVidia Windows drivers whipping ati to the moon and back when it comes to openGL??
Originally posted by speed_the_collapse
Don't the current-gen iBooks already have 9550's?
yes, that's why i'm betting on odds that 1 in 5 chance that apple will continue to use 9550s in the macintel ibooks
Originally posted by cubist
Actually, Apple uses shared memory video in one model in 2005 - and, in fact, in the ONLY Intel-CPU model they sell! The developer kit machine. So, the only real evidence so far is that Apple WILL use shared memory video.
The people on this board just want to believe so many things that they completely ignore facts in their wild speculation.
I agree, Apple is going Intel that means all those componets will be Intel, anyone who thinks Apple isnt going to use Integrated graphics are nuts. Its easy to get a Cpu/Gpu combo deal from Intel for a cheap price and thats what Apple will do. Integrated graphics = Crap
Lets hope Apple has some way for Mac Users in the know to get a modern graphics chip. Again Apple just may use cheapo graphics to help seperate model lines.
Originally posted by Chucker
Yeah, because that's just what's most important to their very lowest-end machine! Not.
To have their fresh switchers watch 720p downloads from the iTunes Movie Store, without having a particularly nice CPU? Sorry, but that definitely seems important.
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/chi...9118819,00.htm
The first computers with EFI shipped back in 2004. Now imagine what apple can do having control of both the hardware and operating system. I'm fairly certain they are not going back to using the outdated BIOS.
Originally posted by Chucker
Yeah, because that's just what's most important to their very lowest-end machine! Not.
Actually, I think h.264 decoding on-board is a very important part of Apples media strategy. I expect all the Mactels to have this from start.
Originally posted by Placebo
To have their fresh switchers watch 720p downloads from the iTunes Movie Store,
720p? Where? They don't even have widescreen at iTMS to begin with.
without having a particularly nice CPU? Sorry, but that definitely seems important.
They may do it across the line, but I just don't see something like that happening on the Mac mini (and even more certainly not, as was implied, on the Mac mini first). The mini has absolutely nothing (except arguably DVI) that could be considered a "luxury" feature.
HDMI output mmmmmm....
Originally posted by sunilraman
(percentages do not add up to 100% in this estimate)
Then in what sense are they "percentages"?
well, we are looking at possibilities of each scenario in say a quantum universe.... in my assumptions, each possibility has nothing to do with the other, therefore they are independent odds for each situation.
75% chance means 75 in 100 odds that such a situation might arise
damn, you guys are so smart and so bloody picky
heh. i used to hang out with smart people, now mostly dumbos around me. but the dumbos know how to survive and make money and run businesses, so, well.... whatevah..!
Originally posted by sunilraman
but the dumbos know how to survive and make money and run businesses, so, well.... whatevah..!