Since I don't play games on my Mac, it doesn't bother me the slightest bit that my Mac mini doesn't have a dedicated graphics card. The GMA 950 is perfectly fine for what I do.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Interesting info on the GMA950
- Thread starter Dont Hurt Me
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Its the old story, Mac users arent suppose to enjoy semi modern games yet when you open up Rumors how often do we see Gaming questions? Boot camp questions? questions on gaming? All the time and its on the increase now that apple is going after the PC guys. GMA still cant even paint stuff like real GPU's, its missing things. You should see what it does when trying to paint reflections.
Im not saying All Macs need top end cards I am saying they need to have some kind of option thats a step up from the base line. I love that Apple offers a 7600 GT in 2 foot imac but you still have to get the 2 footer to have just the option. Apple is suppose to be trying to get new customers but is chasing many away with $4 nonsense. 64mb video when others have 128 and then options for 256? Im Making valid points but let those flames continue. Good morning by the way
Im not saying All Macs need top end cards I am saying they need to have some kind of option thats a step up from the base line. I love that Apple offers a 7600 GT in 2 foot imac but you still have to get the 2 footer to have just the option. Apple is suppose to be trying to get new customers but is chasing many away with $4 nonsense. 64mb video when others have 128 and then options for 256? Im Making valid points but let those flames continue. Good morning by the way
No, but it's not like Apple isn't offering a GPU-equipped laptop. It's just that you have to pay more for it.
$4 is just the cost per unit per 1000 right ? what about the cost of putting all of this together - shipping ,wages design - testing
after you factor in all the added extras that apple has to do to make a Mac Mini or a Macbook then i think that $4 GPU will prob cost alot more like $8
after all the moaning about how crap the GPU is - if i want to play the best games , i use my 360 - if i want to use the internet and make a iMovie burn a DVD play music and maybe make a website then the 950 is fine for the most part
if you want better, get better! ie iMac or Mac Pro
but then what do i know - Apple designs it makes it and ships it to me for said price - then i use it
if Apple want to make some money out of that transaction then fine.
after you factor in all the added extras that apple has to do to make a Mac Mini or a Macbook then i think that $4 GPU will prob cost alot more like $8
after all the moaning about how crap the GPU is - if i want to play the best games , i use my 360 - if i want to use the internet and make a iMovie burn a DVD play music and maybe make a website then the 950 is fine for the most part
if you want better, get better! ie iMac or Mac Pro
but then what do i know - Apple designs it makes it and ships it to me for said price - then i use it
if Apple want to make some money out of that transaction then fine.
dpaanlka said:
Actually for people like me it's more like i don't have that much to spend. believe it or not people have physical money limits and as much as i'd like an mbp, I just can't afford one!
I'm not sure why the cost of the 950 matters. Apple could be getting them free for all I care.
There isn't a single person here (well, with this group, maybe there is) who would complain if Apple threw in better graphics chips/cards for the same price, as long as the size of the system didn't change (a key point) and battery life didn't go down appreciably.
That said, though, the overwhelming majority of Mac users do not need and will not ever use the additional speed. The same, of course, can be said for PC users as well.
Gamers and 3D users need the speed. 3D modelers buy Mac Pros. Gamers buy PCs. Mac users who game either choose less demanding games or live with their choice.
Do I want better graphics? Yes. Of course. It annoys the hell out of me that the cards aren't upgraded frequently. But Apple's pretty savvy about what they're putting into their systems, and their game plan, as it were, is working, even if it essentially excludes high-end gamers.
There isn't a single person here (well, with this group, maybe there is) who would complain if Apple threw in better graphics chips/cards for the same price, as long as the size of the system didn't change (a key point) and battery life didn't go down appreciably.
That said, though, the overwhelming majority of Mac users do not need and will not ever use the additional speed. The same, of course, can be said for PC users as well.
Gamers and 3D users need the speed. 3D modelers buy Mac Pros. Gamers buy PCs. Mac users who game either choose less demanding games or live with their choice.
Do I want better graphics? Yes. Of course. It annoys the hell out of me that the cards aren't upgraded frequently. But Apple's pretty savvy about what they're putting into their systems, and their game plan, as it were, is working, even if it essentially excludes high-end gamers.
jsw said:
Quite, would a high end gamer *ever* buy a Mac even with a good graphics card? And as graphics cards advance so quickly I doubt they would buy a laptop as they would have to buy a new one every year or so (and at $2000 for a decent one it's not cheap.)
Zedsdead185 said:
I seem to be reading an awful lot of "I'm pissed that Apple doesn't offer better-specced hardware at a lower price than budget manufacturers with no sense of design" recently. You have choice of hardware, and you have choice of OS. It all depends on what you can / want to pay.
Eraserhead said:
No. Says the man who has just received an X1950XTX in the post today. Woohoo!
(However I, er, play BF2 and CS:S perhaps 2-3 hours a week. I'm going to have to find something else to stress the card
)
You know, I honestly don't see how the GMA950 is preventing casual users from playing the odd game anyhow.
These people will turn the options down from Maximum resoltion with all the bells and whistles on it. The average Bloke who buys a Mac Mini can still play WoW perfectly fine, he just might not be able to play it perfectly fine at 1600x1200 with Max detail. Average Bloke might just have to use 1024x768 at Medium Detail or something.
Will most average blokes care if they're not running with everything all the way to the right? My gut instinct tells me that it's not likely.
These people will turn the options down from Maximum resoltion with all the bells and whistles on it. The average Bloke who buys a Mac Mini can still play WoW perfectly fine, he just might not be able to play it perfectly fine at 1600x1200 with Max detail. Average Bloke might just have to use 1024x768 at Medium Detail or something.
Will most average blokes care if they're not running with everything all the way to the right? My gut instinct tells me that it's not likely.
Pop in a better video card, and my productivity and general computing experience doesn't change whatsoever.
In a way, this place makes me sad. Myself, and many many many people like me, would never know that their graphics performance isn't very good because we'd never notice it from everyday usage. It's only reading threads like this, where the aim is to do nothing but get us riled up over something that has no effect on most of our lives that makes me wonder why Apple didn't add better graphics into their MBs. If you put a X1600 into my MacBook, I'm sure I wouldn't be able to tell the difference until I had to check my Mac's serial number to send it in for repair, which may never happen.
Yes, in the computer world, faster is better, but if the GMA 950 wasn't good enough to run today's apps, then Apple, Dell, and other companies would never use it, since it would make their computers run so sluggishly that they would be unusable. This isn't the case here. It runs most apps and many decent games just fine.
I can see a need for an X1600 or whatever graphics card. I didn't expect to run the latest games, Motion, Shake, higher end games, etc, using my Macbook. Some people might want to do this using a laptop once in a while, and if those people want to do so, buy the MBP. I know people want a computer with the MBPs performance at the price point of a MacBook, but I think you'd agree when I say that this is no different from anything else in the world today.
In a way, this place makes me sad. Myself, and many many many people like me, would never know that their graphics performance isn't very good because we'd never notice it from everyday usage. It's only reading threads like this, where the aim is to do nothing but get us riled up over something that has no effect on most of our lives that makes me wonder why Apple didn't add better graphics into their MBs. If you put a X1600 into my MacBook, I'm sure I wouldn't be able to tell the difference until I had to check my Mac's serial number to send it in for repair, which may never happen.
Yes, in the computer world, faster is better, but if the GMA 950 wasn't good enough to run today's apps, then Apple, Dell, and other companies would never use it, since it would make their computers run so sluggishly that they would be unusable. This isn't the case here. It runs most apps and many decent games just fine.
I can see a need for an X1600 or whatever graphics card. I didn't expect to run the latest games, Motion, Shake, higher end games, etc, using my Macbook. Some people might want to do this using a laptop once in a while, and if those people want to do so, buy the MBP. I know people want a computer with the MBPs performance at the price point of a MacBook, but I think you'd agree when I say that this is no different from anything else in the world today.
I don't really see a problem with the GMA. I run The Sims 2 with Nightlife expansion fine. Yeah, it slows down at times when theres alot of people, but its completely playable. Halo runs good, not a problem. My MB runs more than enough games to keep me entertained for hours. Plus, it runs Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark, Lightroom, Word, Excel, and Powerpoint, just as well as a MBP. I wouldnt want to do too much 3d work on it, but then again, I wouldnt really want to do it on a MBP either.