Display 128MB v. 256 memory - which is better for CS2 and FCP

Question

Display 128MB v. 256 memory - which is better for CS2 and FCP

Hi, there was a similar post to this a while back that did not adequately answer the question that I now have. I am deciding between the base model and mid-level 15 inch MacBook Pro:

1) What does the 128MB v. 256 MB video memory directly affect?

Is this important mostly for gamers? Video editors? Downloading graphics intense web sites?

I work on Photoshop, Capture One (for on-set digital photo catpure), Flash, and Final Cut Pro. How much will I notice the difference between the 128MB and 256MB memory in these applications?

Is it worth the extra money between the 2GHz and the 2.16 GHz MacBook Pro?

Thanks.

G5, Mac OS X (10.3.9), iBook running 10.4.6

Posted on Jun 22, 2006 10:24 PM

Reply

Answer 1

Jun 22, 2006 10:32 PM in response to Photo Producer

Currently, 128MB is more than enough for Photoshop and/or FCP. For each of these apps, the video card merely draws the image on the screen. Aperture and Motion on the other hand, make heavy use of the graphics card and the more MB the better. While you may not use Aperture or Motion, keep in mind that future releases of different software may make more use of the graphics card. As far as 2.0 vs 2.16, I can't possible imagine how anyone would ever be able to tell a difference in day-to-day productivity. I have both a D1.8 and a D2.7 and the D2.7 is quite a bit faster at rendering, compressing, batch processing and so on; but editing a project or working on images within Photoshop, I couldn't tell you which is faster.

Mike

Reply

Answer 2

Jun 22, 2006 11:30 PM in response to Mike Bisom1

How long will you keep this computer? As Mike says," Currently, 128MB is more than enough." Will it be enough in a year or two? That might help you decide. There is a lot of things coming out in the next couple of years.

Reply

Answer 3

Jun 23, 2006 5:43 AM in response to Photo Producer

I dont think you'll notice a differance unless you try to play games that push your graphics card.

Reply

Answer 4

Jul 20, 2006 3:24 AM in response to CyberMichael

Or use 3D applications, most of which really make good use of the graphics card to preview animated textures, for instance. After Effects 7 also can really take advantage of powerful OpenGL hardware (but doesn't run natively on Intel Macs yet).]

Reply

Answer 5

Jul 20, 2006 3:32 AM in response to Photo Producer

With new chips/machine around the corner i'd get the highest end model possible now so i dont feel obsolete in the near feature. Might as well just get the 2.16 MBP

Reply

Answer 6

Jul 20, 2006 4:28 AM in response to El Presidente

Video memory as of late is only heavily relied on if you have fully decompressed textures stored there. Such game engines like ID's Doom 3 and obviously other games like Quake for that use the same, but slightly tweaked, version.

If the memory is not used for decompressed textures it is used to help complex detail enhancing algorithms like High Quality Anistrophic Filtering + Adaptive Anit Aliasing.

So you can start to imagine how much better any app that uses large, high quality textures and filters will benefit from more memory!

Reply