[macintologist]

I think the next iteration of the Macbook and the Mac Mini will have an improved Intel integrated graphics chip.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_GMA#GMA_X3000

The GMA X3000 is the next generation intel chip and has hardware T&L so basically it will be an actual graphics card and not some POS that the Macbook currently has.

Let's hope Apple bundles the X3000 and not the plain 3000 in the next Macbook.

[Naaaaak]

Whatever Apple chooses they'll decrease the clockspeed and cap the available memory to half of its capabilities. Because that's how they roll.

[uicandrew]

Originally Posted by Naaaaak 

Whatever Apple chooses they'll decrease the clockspeed and cap the available memory to half of its capabilities. Because that's how they roll.

well, maybe there will be a way to hack it to relieve the cap. if i remember correctly, the mbp's video card was underclocked and they were able to uncap it on the pc/bootcamp side, which is presumably where many people would use it, for games.

my attitude is, if you want to play games, get a mbp. and if you're a restricted budget because you're a student, stop playing games and study more! (i can say that because i'm a quasi student still)

[Eug]

Theoretically it's a significant improvement over current Intel integrated graphics. However, real world reports are that G965 X3000 is a POS, even compared to the el crappo G945 GMA 950:




Hopefully, the currently über-lousy performance of X3000 is just a driver issue:

[mduell]

Originally Posted by macintologist 

I think the next iteration of the Macbook and the Mac Mini will have an improved Intel integrated graphics chip.

Intel GMA - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The GMA X3000 is the next generation intel chip and has hardware T&L so basically it will be an actual graphics card and not some POS that the Macbook currently has.

I think using the word "actual" in that sentence is misleading and disingenuous. The Macbook, and all other Macs with GMA950, has a graphics card. If you want to draw a distinction, call them integrated vs discrete.

Originally Posted by Eug 

Theoretically it's a significant improvement over current Intel integrated graphics. However, real world reports are that G965 X3000 is a POS, even compared to the el crappo G945 GMA 950:

Hopefully, the currently über-lousy performance of X3000 is just a driver issue:

No mention of what resolution those scores are at. I can't read the site they came from, because it's all in Chinese.
I've read a few places that the current X3000 benchmarks are all using drivers that don't support hardware T&L or some of the other new features that X3000 adds. They're basically a direct port of the GMA950 drivers to support the new hardware, without adding support for the additional pipelines. I'm not convinced that's true, since it sounds really strange.

[Eug]

Yeah, X3000 still relies on system memory, and is still integrated. So, going by usual layperson's terminology, X3000 isn't an "actual" separate graphics card by any means.

[Simon]

If you wanna start arguing semantics about 'actual graphics cards' I suggest you drop the 'card' as well. Other than the 24" iMac and the Mac Pro no Mac has a graphics 'card'. The GPU and VRAM circuitry is all soldered onto the main logic board.

[mduell]

Looks like mobile chipsets with GMA X3000 will be out in May and support DX10, which is a good indication that performance is going to be substantially improved.

Intel Crestline chipset will run DirectX 10 | TG Daily