BlackBook has 256MB Dedicated VRAM?

[MRU]

2 explanations.

A) been doctored but I'm wiling to give you the benefit of doubt

B) in the display settings its also reporting the screen wrong under Type:
Yours reads VGA-Compatible Controller - BUT it should read Display

So if it's not seeing the screen right either, then it points to a bugged driver installation.

I imagine if the machine was re-installed with Tiger it would report the correct info.

What you could try is go into system preferences / display and change the resolution. Then change it back and click the detect resolution button.

Then check in system profiler again...

Definetly just an anomaly anyway.

 

[NightGeometry]

Why would you photoshop it? No Idea.

As I said I think it is more likely that someone has put an edited sys profile save file on there, and if i knew how to do that then I may do that because it seems like a lark, and you could set off some fun discussions here.

To reiterate, my MB has same designation and serial number as your screen shot.

Looked up Intel's info on the GMA 950, and they don't do a version with non-shared memory. It also *doesn't* use 256 meg memory anyway, it uses a max of 224 meg.

So yes, this looks like a fake, either you are trying to foist a fake on us, or possibly someone is tricking you.

 

[NightGeometry]

2 explanations.

B) in the display settings its also reporting the screen wrong under Type:
Yours reads VGA-Compatible Controller - BUT it should read Display

Hadn't noticed that part, silly me. Looks like if you install Linux, then run LSPCI one of the outputs is:
0000:00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Mobile Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)
(http://www.mactel-linux.org/wiki/Lspci)

Also the machine name is Mac not MacBook. Strange.

 

[baxterbrittle]

Why would you photoshop it? No Idea.

As I said I think it is more likely that someone has put an edited sys profile save file on there, and if i knew how to do that then I may do that because it seems like a lark, and you could set off some fun discussions here.

To reiterate, my MB has same designation and serial number as your screen shot.

Looked up Intel's info on the GMA 950, and they don't do a version with non-shared memory. It also *doesn't* use 256 meg memory anyway, it uses a max of 224 meg.

So yes, this looks like a fake, either you are trying to foist a fake on us, or possibly someone is tricking you.

I don't think anyone is trying to fake it - I think it's more of an anomaly with the system profiler. Who would bother faking something like this at such a small reseller where it is very unlikely that anyone would ever notice. If it can be done wouldn't they do it at home and post this thread themselves? Wouldn't that be easier. I think if it was reinstalled it would show the correct info. However the only thing I can't explain is the logic board issues - why three? Oh well looks like a white one for me! I like the black better but I can't justify the cost unless it had an advantage over the White model (I know it has 80GB). Thanks for your help though - and it always makes me laugh at how many people are willing to say something is photoshopped just because they can. It's like saying hmm I can't explain that it must be the magic pixies.

Still if anyone can post some info about activity monitor then that would be fabulous.

 

[MRU]

Still if anyone can post some info about activity monitor then that would be fabulous.

Cant see anything in activity monitor I'm afraid.

 

[NightGeometry]

Did anyone ever hear anymore about this?