integrated Intel GMA950 graphics

[simie]

Here are some reviews of the integrated Intel GMA950 graphics

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1821808,00.asp

http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/09/15/are_intel/

Apple states that the DVI video output will support digital resolutions up to 1920 by 1200 - Won't drive a 30" Display at 2560 x 1600.

Analog resolutions up to 1920 by 1080 pixels.

 

[yoda13]

I wonder if Apple's take on drivers and OSX will make any difference in the performance of this chip?

 

[generik]

I wonder if Apple's take on drivers and OSX will make any difference in the performance of this chip?

Probably no.. if anything MacOS drivers will make performance worse.

For instance WC3 players really really well on a PC with a Radeon 9550 but on my former PB with a 9700 Pro it was really ****.

I'd probably touch games on a Mac with a 30 foot pole...

 

[bigandy]

Probably no.. if anything MacOS drivers will make performance worse.

For instance WC3 players really really well on a PC with a Radeon 9550 but on my former PB with a 9700 Pro it was really ****.

I'd probably touch games on a Mac with a 30 foot pole...

you're making this assumption after comparing a laptop (9700) chip with a desktop one?

 

[generik]

you're making this assumption after comparing a laptop (9700) chip with a desktop one?

Yeah.

 

[Spanky Deluxe]

And also you have to bear in mind that the G4 processor is seriously underpowered when compared to its modern x86 counterparts.

 

[paperinacup]

What people are failing to remember is the the Mac Mini is a STARTER computer and not a GAMING computer. The GMA950 is perfectly fit for what this computer is. The last card they had in the Mac Mini wouldn't push a 30" display either.

I mean seriously what did people expect.... an X600 XT? Its a $600 machine. I doubt you could find very many PCs without the same graphics for that price. Be VERY glad you aren't stuck with the GMA900 which is ALOT worse.

 

[Airforce]

I mean seriously what did people expect.... an X600 XT? Its a $600 machine. I doubt you could find very many PCs without the same graphics for that price. Be VERY glad you aren't stuck with the GMA900 which is ALOT worse.

Oh, you can pretty easily, but it's the form factor that you won't get.

 

[yoda13]

And also you have to bear in mind that the G4 processor is seriously underpowered when compared to its modern x86 counterparts.

Well the fsb for sure, and of course the dual core blows away the G4, but what about the core solo, wouldn't that be a similar performing chip if the G4 wasn't hobbled by the slow fsb?

Hell, I am no chip expert, that is just what I have deduced by reading these boards after the intel announcement was made...

 

[lssmit02]

Well the fsb for sure, and of course the dual core blows away the G4, but what about the core solo, wouldn't that be a similar performing chip if the G4 wasn't hobbled by the slow fsb?

The core solo still has a 2mb L2 cache, which is better than the G4.

 

[cube]

The core solo still has a 2mb L2 cache, which is better than the G4.

And the pipeline length is 14, which is worse than the G4 7.

The Core has better branch prediction, though.