Increase Integrated Graphics Memory?

[JackSYi]

The thing is, MacBooks can run Vista Aero with the use of the Lakeport drivers (which increase the amount of RAM allocated to the graphics). So it is just the matter of Apple releasing a new driver to let us use more memory for the graphics.

 

[savar]

With integrated graphics, it doesn't work like that. There is only one kind of memory, and that is your computer's RAM. Both graphics card and CPU access it when they need to. The only difference between "64MB" and "224MB" integrated graphics memory is that either 64MB or 224MB have been set aside so that the graphics driver can decide what to do with that memory, and the operating system doesn't touch it. If the 64 MB is not enough, then the graphics card can access data outside that region just as fast as data within the 64 MB, because it is all the same kind of memory anyway. So setting aside 224 MB will not have much affect at all, except that your Mac will run slower because it has less memory available to all the applications.

I've been wondering about this. Thanks for posting. Where did you get this information from? Have you read the following article?

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/14

My interpretation is that backing stores are *not* drawn directly from RAM, but must be copied into VRAM first. So I wonder if setting the integrated graphics VRAM low means that you're copying from one part of RAM to another before displaying. I hope its not the case but it well could be. Furthermore, I assume that the GPU can read memory directly without processor intervention, so having a larger VRAM (even if it is virtual) would save CPU bandwidth.

Of course Apple could have optimized this so that the VRAM setting doesn't really matter...but from the above article it sounds like when they wrote Tiger they were never anticipating integrated graphics, so who knows what actually got delivered.

 

[JackSYi]

I've been wondering about this. Thanks for posting. Where did you get this information from? Have you read the following article?

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/14

My interpretation is that backing stores are *not* drawn directly from RAM, but must be copied into VRAM first. So I wonder if setting the integrated graphics VRAM low means that you're copying from one part of RAM to another before displaying. I hope its not the case but it well could be. Furthermore, I assume that the GPU can read memory directly without processor intervention, so having a larger VRAM (even if it is virtual) would save CPU bandwidth.

Of course Apple could have optimized this so that the VRAM setting doesn't really matter...but from the above article it sounds like when they wrote Tiger they were never anticipating integrated graphics, so who knows what actually got delivered.

Thats a good point. Maybe Leopard will fully utilize the GMA 950s power.

 

[Rare]

I think we found ourselves a reason why here... Mac mini vs imac 64 vs 128
macbook vs macbook pro 64 vs 128-256 that just seems to be it... if people who don't know a thing, see that mini has 224 and imac 128.. they go for the mini... if people see macbook has 224 and pro has 128, they go for macbook... it's just marketing....

True, people have to see that the MBP and iMac have much, much faster graphics cards than the onboard Intel one, and memory bandwidth to the processor is not decreased by the graphics chip as it has it's own memory (GDDRIII) - which is also much, much faster than DDR-II RAM

 

[codo]

Maybe Leopard will fully utilize the GMA 950s power.

I couldn’t help but smile.

I'm hoping by Leopard is out, they will have got rid of this disgusting chip and using the GMA X3000 which is far less evil – It should be readily available by then as Intel is pushing it for entry level Vista "Aero" requirements from what I can gather. Nothing stopping Apple.

But yes, if Apple was to re-write some of the system to utilise integrated graphics better, that would be good for everyone.

 

[portent]

The MacBook specs page has this at the bottom

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.

Though there's nothing about this in the developer documentation.

 

[clevin]

Im playing around with HoMMV recently (mac version), is there any new development of possibility of increasing graphic ram in MB? Is OSX still not able to dynamically allocate memory for GMA950?