Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Notebooks > can someone explain integrated graphics?

can someone explain integrated graphics?
Thread Tools
sledsbehave
Senior User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 02:45 PM
 
i definitely want a new macbook, but i was hoping to be able to capture and edit video with imovie, it would seem like the graphics card would be involved in this process...

but really, with integrated graphics, is there a GPU still? and if it's sharing RAM, why not make it share 128mb at least right?
as ever,
sonny
     
Maflynn
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 03:04 PM
 
my uneducated definition is that intergrated graphics is using intel's GPU that's intergrated into the motherboard and its using system ram instead of a daughtercard with dedicated ram. Video ram is a lot faster then regular ram and ATI's GPU is a lot more powerful then the basic one intel provides.

As for allowing more ram, its Apple that is capping how much the GPU can access. Unless a hack is provided there's no way around this

Mike
~Mike
     
craigb6
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 03:12 PM
 
"Integrated

In today's OEM computer market, graphics cards are often substituted for an integrated graphics chip on a section of the motherboard. Sometimes the graphics chip is located on the Northbridge chip, if present, and uses either its own dedicated memory or, more commonly, a portion of the system memory (shared memory). Increasingly, it is possible to select the amount of shared memory to be used via the BIOS. Integrated-graphics-displays typically have inferior 3D performance compared to dedicated graphics cards due to the use of cheaper chipsets and sharing system memory rather than using dedicated memory. This is not always the case, as evidenced in higher-end integrated solutions, such as game-oriented laptop architectures. Those who require high performance still prefer non-integrated solutions.

Integrated graphics displays have gradually become more common in pre-built computer systems since the mid 1990s as computer manufacturers such as Hewlett-Packard and Dell look for ways to cut costs while still providing basic video support. In terms of office tasks, web-browsing, email and similar computer activities, integrated graphics displays are a more practical solution than high-powered 3D graphics cards. First person shooter games like DOOM relied on high-performance cards at the time the game was introduced."

(taken from Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_card)
     
harrisjamieh
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 03:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by sledsbehave
i definitely want a new macbook, but i was hoping to be able to capture and edit video with imovie, it would seem like the graphics card would be involved in this process...
The graphics card is not involved in this process, you are good to go with the MacBook and iMovie
iMac Core Duo 1.83 Ghz | 1.25GB RAM | 160HD, MacBook Core Duo 1.83 Ghz | 13.3" | 60HD | 1.0GB RAM
     
TheoCryst
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 03:22 PM
 
In other words, iMovie will be absolutely fine with integrated graphics, but don't expect stellar performance in Doom 3 or Civ4.

Any ramblings are entirely my own, and do not represent those of my employers, coworkers, friends, or species
     
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 03:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by harrisjamieh
The graphics card is not involved in this process, you are good to go with the MacBook and iMovie
Originally Posted by TheoCryst
In other words, iMovie will be absolutely fine with integrated graphics, but don't expect stellar performance in Doom 3 or Civ4.
iMovie leverages Core Video to a certain extent.

If you’re the spontaneous type, you’ll feel right at home in iMovie HD 6 because so much of the editing action happens in real time.

That’s certainly the case with iMovie’s new video effects. No more waiting until they render. No more looking at a tiny preview window. Now you can preview video effects instantly and right in the main iMovie window.

How does iMovie accomplish this real-time feat?* Mac OS X Core Video technology lets iMovie use your video card’s graphics processing unit to deliver hardware acceleration. With most Mac systems, that means you can preview effects immediately.

Once you find the perfect effect — and iMovie HD 6 offers thirty new effects from which to choose — iMovie renders in the background (its performance accelerated by your Mac’s processor), letting you get on with your other editing chores.

*Real-time performance depends on your system configuration.
     
b11051973
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 03:30 PM
 
I don't care at all about the integrated videocard on a laptop. I'm not going to be playing any videogames on it. I've got a gaming PC and Xbox 360 for that. I also have no interest in any of the pro apps like Final Cut or Aperture.

So far, my new MacBook is doing everything I want just fine. It is light years better than my old 12" PowerBook.
     
masugu
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bay Area
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 03:59 PM
 
Light years better than your `12" ? Care to elaborate? Good ammo for me to talk my wife into letting me get one.
     
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 04:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by masugu
Light years better than your `12" ? Care to elaborate? Good ammo for me to talk my wife into letting me get one.
The MacBook is superior to the 12" PowerBook in just about every way IMO, except weight. Well, the GPU is better in the 12" PowerBook, but it's not actually "good".
     
sledsbehave  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 06:23 PM
 
so gaming is the only problem with integrated graphics?

i think i'm gonna start saving for the $1099 model
as ever,
sonny
     
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 09:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by sledsbehave
so gaming is the only problem with integrated graphics?

i think i'm gonna start saving for the $1099 model
I would suggest trying iMovie in a store first on the MacBook. The real-time effects may not work so well on it, but it may not matter to you. Many are kinda gimmicky anyway so you may never use them.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 09:47 PM
 
I wouldn't say that gaming is the "only problem with integrated graphics," but I would say it's the biggest problem most people run into. Integrated graphics uses system RAM, which sorta steals RAM from the rest of the system. And it means that you can't upgrade the video system's hardware-a moot point on a laptop, but important on a desktop. And as for "poor gaming performance," it all depends on whether you like games on the bleeding edge, or are willing to play slightly older games which don't stress the video system as much as newer ones. Hey, I've never found a computer that didn't play some version of Mah Jong pretty darn well!

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
pat++
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 10:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by sledsbehave
but really, with integrated graphics, is there a GPU still? and if it's sharing RAM, why not make it share 128mb at least right?
It shares 80mb as a MINIMUM (not sure why Apple says 64mb shared)... This can go up to 224mb depending on the needs. Yes, there is a GPU but it doesn't handle all the tasks a non-integrated chip would.
     
StiZeven
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 10:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by pat++
It shares 80mb as a MINIMUM (not sure why Apple says 64mb shared)... This can go up to 224mb depending on the needs. Yes, there is a GPU but it doesn't handle all the tasks a non-integrated chip would.
Unfortunately, this is not the case with Apple and how they use the GMA 950. For some reason Apple has capped the shared ram to 64MB instead of the 128MB that the GMA 950 was designed for.

Perhaps they need better OS X drivers for the proper memory allotment. People using BootCamp are saying that the GMA 950 is showing up with the proper 128MB of memory in System Properties (since Apple is using the same Intel drivers as other PCs out there for XP).

So, it's definitely an Apple software issue (not sure if it's deliberate though). The 'norm' for the GMA 950 is 8-64MB held aside to start (depending on the model/bios in the PC world), with the ability to borrow up to 128MB - 224MB when needed.

It would be Ideal for Apple to make 64MB the default allotted amount with the option to use up to 128MB when needed. Apple is the only computer company shipping the GMA 950 with this limitation (under OS X anyway).
     
Tomchu
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 19, 2006, 11:02 PM
 
Integrated graphics also steal system memory bandwidth. The higher your screen resolution, bit depth, and refresh rate, the more memory bandwidth is stolen.

In an environment like OS X, where a lot is done on the GPU, this can be somewhat significant.
     
popstand
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Denver, CO
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 20, 2006, 12:08 AM
 
The 3D graphics performance is certainly poor on my new MacBook, but it does a hell of a lot better on other things than my old 1GHz 12" Powerbook. The first thing I did when I got it home was to download a 1080p high def clip from the Apple website, and it plays it great. My Powerbook gets about 2fps on this type of media. I seem to remember Intel emphasizing this type of usage for the integrated graphics (media playback, and that seems to work well). Currently Warcraft isn't really playable, but I'm waiting on two gigs of RAM, which I believe will make it tolerable to play. I'll post when they arrive.
Ad Hominem attacks are for losers...
     
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 20, 2006, 12:48 AM
 
I seem to remember Intel emphasizing this type of usage for the integrated graphics (media playback, and that seems to work well).
Actually, it's pretty much all CPU here. The reason the PowerBook did so poorly is because Quicktime H.264 decoding sucks on the G4.
     
Heavy
Forum Regular
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 20, 2006, 01:10 AM
 
Great thread. I needed to learn some of this stuff. But this is kind've a bummer. I've ordered a macbook with 1 gig RAM, I don't do a ton of gaming, but I thought I bought the latest, greatest little machine out there that can handle everything from high tech games to HD movies. I almost caved and bought a Dell and came close to buying a MBP. But a 15" was just too big. So I got the MB. Now I'm not so sure. But according to Apple, it's not returnable since I upgraded RAM!! That's BS.
     
Moderator
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: NYNY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2006, 08:40 PM
 
you'll be happy guaranteed just forget about the video card thing...unless you're working with pro apps alot you won't ever notice.

but a hack to raise the available memory would be nice...i suspect that they are just holding it down for now so that they can give it a quick bump once the initial buying rush ends.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2006, 09:29 PM
 
Intel Extreme Integrated Graphics 2 (it's kind of an appropriate name for hardware for Apple, since Apple has used "extreme" elsewhere), also known as GMA950, supports Tiger Core Graphics (Core Image/Core Video), so apps that use Core Graphics will work. Depending on how much you're using it, it may be a bit slow.
     
pat++
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 22, 2006, 07:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by StiZeven
Unfortunately, this is not the case with Apple and how they use the GMA 950. For some reason Apple has capped the shared ram to 64MB instead of the 128MB that the GMA 950 was designed for.
Where did you get this info from? Quote from Apple website below:

Memory available to Mac OS X may vary depending on graphics needs. Minimum graphics memory usage is 80MB, resulting in 432MB of system memory available.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:09 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,