Isometric Graphics Engine

Hey,
Does someone have an Isometric 3D Graphics Engine for Java?
Thanks and sorry for English.

For drawing to the screen, it's trivial to set up a isometric projection matrix in opengl, so use JOGL.
Or do you want something more game oriented with a fixed view?

Similar Messages

Graphic Engine Bug?

Why is the graphic performance of Logic Pro so crappy? OK, I'm not using the latest Quad Intel but even when scrolling around in an arrange window with a few tracks and even when not playing, the graphics stutter. Everything takes a little while to respond, e.g. when changing a level. There is also a bug when zooming into/out of a track - when playing in cycle mode, the graphics get a bit messed up and the position of the song pointer doesn't match the audio or there appears two of them: one motionless and another moving. I have to reZoom to update the grahpics.
I reckon there is a serious bug in the Logic Pro graphics engine
Anyone else experiencing this? or found a fix?

I believe its not wise to use Leopard on a G5. I went back to 10.4.11 months ago.
Last week I tried leopard with all the new updates available but I cannot use it because it is so sluggish. I will stay on Tiger.
http://discussions.apple.com/forum.jspa?forumID=1201&start=0
Cheers Eddie

OO Graphic Engine, how to add Rotation?

I'm trying to program a simple GameEngine, so far I've created a gameloop (doing stuff, render stuff and wait)
Now I want to add to the rendering process a way to rotate every single object with a different angle
my object would looke like this:
public class GameObject {
     double angle;
    public int x,y;
    public Image picture;
    public MOB(Image pic, int x, int y, double angle) {
              this.picture=pic;
              this.x = x;
              this.y = y;
              this.angle = angle;
}and my graphic engine should now paint those objects (pictures) at x/y and rotated, and there lies my problem.
how can i rotate the objects without rotating the whole panel? do i have to use a buffered image?
and last but not least, is this method efficient?
thx for helping
Ghley

Take a look at the AffineTransform class and the Graphics2D methods rotate, scale, translate etc. Worry about efficiency if you come up against a performance issue. Micro-optimization seldom helps, and can sometimes be deleterious.
a way to rotate every single object with a different angleThe method create (inherited from Graphics) can be useful here.
Remember that angles in Java are in radians, not degrees. The Math class has a static method that could be useful there.
db

Mercury Graphics Engine, Mercury Playback Engine

I am confused by the required graphics hardware needed to support GPU processing by Adobe Photoshop & Premier CS-6.
Photoshop CS6: "Mercury Graphics Engine" (MGE):
My understanding is that ALL MGE functions are supported by both NVIDIA (CUDA) and AMD (OpenCL).
If this is true, then which of these cards (gaming is not a concern) would give the best PS6 performance:
NVIDIA GTX 560 Ti 448 (? 1.2GB, not clear on this) ($270)
AMD Radeon HD 6870 2GB ($220)
AMD Radeon HD 6870 1GB ($160)
Premier Pro CS6: "Mercury Playback Engine" (MPE):
MPE is even more confusing. Here it seems that CUDA and OpenCL do not both offer the same support.
It seems that AMD OpenCL will NOT support these MPE effects:
Fast Blur effect
Gaussion Blur effect
Directional Blur effect
Basic 3D effect
However, I am not, in general, interested in 'special effects' on my underwater nature videos!
I do now use PP4, but only do color correction, occasional sharpening or blurring, and a lot of cross-fade/cut-through-black transitions. So would MPE speed up any of these processes?
If NVIDIA chips are the only ones which support full MPE playback, does the GTX 560 do so? Looking on adobe (http://www.adobe.com/products/premiere/mercury-playback-engine.edu.html) the GTX 470, 570, 580 are listed as compatible - GTX 560 is not mentioned.
Finally, what about AMD CrossFireX and Nvidia's SLI?
Do CrossFireX and SLI both support all functions of MGE and MPE?
That is, if one uses two identical (to be safe) graphics cards, will MGE & MPE both be able to take advantage of all of the GPUs?
Long and complicated post, I know - but Thanks for any help!
Incidentally, since I think it clear what my needs are (Modest budget Image and Video processing - not gaming) do any of you have other suggestions for a cost effective configuration giving the most bang-for-the-buck. I will not be building this system until W8 is out and stable with CS6.
Again, thank you for any help with this.

If NVIDIA chips are the only ones which support full MPE playback, does the GTX 560 do so? Looking on adobe (http://www.adobe.com/products/premiere/mercury-playback-engine.edu.htm l) the GTX 470, 570, 580 are listed as compatible - GTX 560 is not mentioned.
What's not listed is not supported, it's as simple as that.
Do CrossFireX and SLI both support all functions of MGE and MPE?
Crossfire and SLI are just methods to connect multiple cards in addition to your PCI lanes. Connecting the wrong two cards doesn't make any of this work. Same rules apply: What's not listed is not supported.
Mylenium

Graphics Engine

I would like to know wether one can develop a 3D graphics engine in JAVA. If so, what are the things I need to know before I can start trying to make one.
Thanking You in Advance
Lithuvien

Yes.
You should know:
1) it's a good educational experience, but there's a lot of annoying details in 3d graphics and if you'll be learning that a lot more than java. I hope you have a good textbook.
2) If you haven't done 3d graphics before, the first thing you should do is brush up on linear algebra.
3) Bugs are harder to squash than in other programming efforts, because so often the problems are only noticable when viewed and are hard to express in any way other than intuitively: "it looks wrong". It's hard to debug "it looks wrong".
4) there are existing 3d packages for java, etc. If you want to get cool graphics fast, you're probably better off learning those than making something yourself. And it'll look better on a resume if you know an established package.
5) nevertheless, it's really interesting. You can learn a lot. You can get crude but cool results quickly, but there are diminishing returns as you try to add more polish. It's a lot of effort to add even minor effects. There's a reason that there are armies of programmers developing the major 3d graphics libraries.

2011 13 MBP i5 ***debug info for apparent hang in main graphics engine ***

*debug info for apparent hang in main graphics engine *
console is giving me this message and it is affecting my MBP's ability to wake from sleep correctly. I get either a dark screen or scrambled graphics and have to hold the power button to re-boot.
(I do have an external display hooked up to the MBP, this was never an issue with all my past Macbooks.)

My 15" MBP 15 Core i7 has the same problem. Spoke with AppleCare and tried resetting to power management unit and the PRAM; no improvement. Also tried reinstalling the 10.6.7 'early 2011 macbook pro' update - still no change.
Each attempt at waking from sleep produces a series of the same error messages in Console. Here's the full series:
kernel WaitForStamp: Overflowed waiting for stamp 0x70ed on Main ring: called from
kernel timestamp = 0x70eb
kernel ** Debug info for apparent hang in Main graphics engine **
kernel ring head = 0x00200eb4, wrap count = 0x 1
kernel ring tail = 0x000010e0 ring control = 0x00003801 enabled, auto report disabled, waiting, semaphore not waiting, length = 0x004 4KB pages
kernel timestamps = 0x70eb
kernel Semaphore register values:
kernel VRSYNC: (0x12044) = 0x70eb
kernel BRSYNC: (0x22040) = 0x0
kernel RVSYNC: (0x 2040) = 0x0
kernel BVSYNC: (0x22044) = 0x0
kernel RBSYNC: (0x 2044) = 0x0
kernel VBSYNC: (0x12040) = 0x0
kernel Looks like Main ring is stuck waiting on an event
kernel After attempt to clear wait condition = 0x00003001 no longer waiting
kernel kIPEHR: 0x2000000
kernel kINSTDONE: 0x882fbb
kernel kINSTDONE_1: 0x2308a3f
Re-sleeping and re-waking the machine occasionally lets the screen come back on.
The machine itself is running; I can ssh into it from another computer.
I tried disabling hibernation, too (http://danwarne.com/how-to-turn-off-slow-sleep-hibernate-mode-on-a-macbook-pro/), with no change.
Anyone with new information on the issue? Going to take it to the Apple Store, I suppose, once I have time...

Help needed with game graphics engine

I'm creating a game for which I've created my own component system that is independent from AWT and stuff.
I have components such as Button, DropMenu, ScoreBoard, Character... also GamePanel class that acts
same as the Panel class in AWT except that you can add Effects to it. Effects can be as simple as Contrast, Brightness, Gamma, GreyScale or bit more complicated such as noise, flicker, shake. Anyway they deal with pixellevel operations. I see that I must do my own graphics functions such as drawText, drawImage and stuff.
... now let's say that character needs to be painted. First we call my own drawImage method in Character class... then we pass it throught effects assigned to Character... lets say shake, so this is where I it get's a bit complicated for me... should the effect return new image which is then sent to Characters owner for additional effects and layers untill it reaches the main panel which uses Graphics-class to paint the character to screen. Please give me some hints to do this kind of stuff...
Looking foreward for your answers MK.

What do u mean? What if there are multiple effects, say character has few, and the whole screen has some and that way. I see the option that I can create double buffer for every panel, but that's wasting lots of memory. Other option I have thought about is to gather all effects to one class like this so that every effect would only affect the parameters of paintjob, and in the end we would just do special drawImage method.
abstract Class element
abstract void draw(Graphics g);
class ImageElement extends Element
Image img;
void draw(..)=,
class LineElement...
class RectangleElement...
class PaintJob
Element element;
int x,y;
double rotation;
double contrast;
double brightness;
double rmul, gmul, bmul;
void applyEffect(Effect e);
void doPaint(Graphics g);
But this is not good, since say I wanted effect like disortion or noise, and I do not see anyway to apply them here. I am thinking also to do this more simpler, but it would be great for my game to have such wide varierty of FX applied so easily... could you give me some ideas.

How to actually build a great linux machine? Poor graphics performance

I can't believe I am asking this question myself. I've been using linux since 1996, SuSE version 4.1...And yet I am still not able to put together a well performing machine.
I bought a simple box a few months ago. I am a software developer. I don't need high end graphics nor RAID nor stuff like that. My main goal is to have a fast responsive machine. I installed arch linux on it, and i3 as desktop environment - really it should be quite fast.
And yet...the machine responsiveness is very low, especially graphics lag A LOT. I know I didn't opt for a high end graphics engine - but shouldn't such a modern machine be enough for lag-free youtube and other video watching? Lag-free firefox browsing?
Maybe I just misconfigured my machine, and that's what my question is about. Some hardware info follows below. As you can see, I have a AMD E-350 processor with 8GB-RAM - I should think this would be quite enough for a standard linux installation...
What I also did is, as the MoBo comes with a GPU/processor bundle, I thought that maybe upgrading just the graphics card may have some impact - nope. I bought a AMD HD5450 card with 1GB RAM (!!!) - and still I can't enjoy a fluent video on youtube, nor a sufficient experience web browsing...(maybe it's even better to have the original GPU than the added card I bought?). Of course I know that modern browsers are pretty demanding, but I should think such a machine should be able to handle it?
I read the posts on the arch linux forum about optimizing video, and AMD cards are not very well reviewed really...
There are infinite sites about how to choose your distro, there are hardware compatibility lists - but are there any tutorials or guides which actually help setting up a fast and responsive machine?
* Is my machine maybe badly configured?
* Does it just have a bad hardware set up? Should I maybe replace one or the other piece to cheaply get satisfactory performance?
* Am I just asking too much from my cheap hardware?
I am considering replacing the whole MoBo (I know it was cheap and I shouldn't expect too much from it, but I thought I should be able to tweak it...)
(lshw):
*-memory
description: System memory
physical id: 0
size: 7967MiB
*-cpu
product: AMD E-350 Processor
vendor: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD]
physical id: 1
bus info: cpu@0
size: 800MHz
capacity: 800MHz
width: 64 bits
capabilities: fpu fpu_exception wp vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp x86-64 constant_tsc rep_good nopl nonstop_tsc extd_apicid aperfmperf pni monitor ssse3 cx16 popcnt lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch ibs skinit wdt arat hw_pstate npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save pausefilter vmmcall cpufreq
*-pci:0
description: Host bridge
product: Family 14h Processor Root Complex
vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD]
physical id: 100
bus info: pci@0000:00:00.0
version: 00
width: 32 bits
clock: 66MHz
configuration: latency=32
*-pci:0
description: PCI bridge
product: Family 14h Processor Root Port
vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD]
physical id: 4
bus info: pci@0000:00:04.0
version: 00

If I am not mistaken, the E-350 is equivalent to the Intel Atom D525. I have the D525 and use it in my media center. It performs very well at one task at a time, but dies a horrible death under multi tasking situations like a desktop. I blame browsers. I have a top-end laptop with the second fastest mobile i7 I could buy (in Dec 2014), a Geforce GTX 970m, that shares 6GiB VRAM with the intel 3D chip, and on top of all that 32GiB quality RAM with reasonable latencies. I'd really like to brag, because the thing was insanely expensive, but there are no grounds for bragging. When I open a browser, I still feel like it's 2004, everything is sluggish and slow and websites become more full of crap every day, everything is big and blaoted. The desktop, no matter which one, does not feel the least bit snappier than it used to ten years ago, although the processing power has multiplied. Desktops now have more crappy features, more "connectivity", more need to do everything. The immense availability of fast hardware and fast networks in metropolis of metropolis centered countries creates the illusion of an abundance of everything. And now I'm sitting here and all I want is a low power low cost machine to do every day tasks. While the industry is going on and on about the internet of things, I still wait for the day the internet of people happens.
It's not you. It's like interface designers are trying to mock us. Instead of snappy technology on snappy hardware with snappy code and a snappy workflow, we get "our interface is based on common technologies like HTML and CSS" in the ads for a static local operating system. Nothing ever works. We just had arrived at the following points in tech development:
- Gnome probably had every possible feature on the planet, that made a desktop useful, there were plugins for everything, a setting, a switch.
- Web sites on big screens finally became versatile, feature rich and less static.
- Desktops generally performed very well. Click-Action without a delay.
Then the following happened:
- Gnome 3, new desktop concept, rewrite, all the plugins are gone, I have to re-learn everything from the scratch and, since it was new, I have to re-arrange my workflow.
- Now we are supposed to look at the internet through a <5" screen. If feels like 2001 again, browsers suck, where are my addons, my plugins, my customization?
- Desktops use simple languages, that swallow performance like a maniac.
Of course you cannot really buy classic stuff the way it was, because the consumer marked is trend based, not centered around ergonomics. Another five years from now on:
- Gnome 3 has all the good features and works well for everybody, because there are plugins, custom interfaces and whatnot. But it has to be replaced by Gnome 4, because it does not work well with tactile feedback and bowel movement based controls. Adapting the old system is not possible, let's do it again.
- Mobile browsers are finally comfortable, but we are not supposed to look at the internet at all anymore, information has been simplified to the point, where it is sufficient to put small plugs into our orifices to be informed about everything important by short bursts of vibration and temperature change.
- Desktops had a chance to catch up with the inefficiency of a "if it's not interpreted or byte code, then I don't want it" mentality, but now everything has to be in 3D, projected on thin air with a multi trillion cubic voxel resolution. And everything is slow again.

Graphics card for Photoshop CS6

I have the p6112p desktop
http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=c01756863&cc=ad&dlc=en&lc=en&jumpid=reg_r1002_us...
It has an onboard video card-- Intel GMA 3100. It appears that I can PCI Express x16 graphics card as well (which seems to automatically [?] shut off the on-board video card?).
I recently loaded Adobe Photoshop CS6 to my computer. When I try to use some of the features I get the error: "This feature requires graphics processor acceleration" and then recommends I check this feature in my CS6 preferences. When I try to check that box it is grayed out & says: "Photoshop detected an error in your display driver. Please update or reinstall your driver."
My driver is up-to-date & I'm guessing (this I have no other problems) that my graphics card is just too weak.
According to Adobe's website here: http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cs6-gpu-faq.html
"The Mercury Graphics Engine (MGE) represents features that use video card processor, or GPU, acceleration. In Photoshop CS6, this new engine delivers near-instant results when editing with key tools such as Liquify, Warp, Lighting Effects, and the Oil Paint filter. The new MGE delivers unprecedented responsiveness for a fluid feel as you work."
They also list some cards that have been tested. Anyone know if I'm the right track? Do I need to add a better card? I don't want to spend a lot-- CS6 is already costing me $200. What card should I get that will work & fit. BTW, my computer has a 300W power supply (which I'd hate to have to replace as well unless I have no options).
Thanks so much for any help anyone can offer.

Hi,
If you followed the troubleshooting procedures and other suggestions listed at the Adobe link you provided then I would try a video card.
This EVGA GT 430 will work with the 300 watt PSU in your PC and it's in the Nvidia 400 range certified by Adobe.
The on board video processor in your PC doesn't support OpenGL 2.0. You need the G35 chipset and your PC only the the G33 chipset.
HP DV9700, t9300, Nvidia 8600, 4GB, Crucial C300 128GB SSD
HP Photosmart Premium C309G, HP Photosmart 6520
HP Touchpad, HP Chromebook 11
Custom i7-4770k,Z-87, 8GB, Vertex 3 SSD, Samsung EVO SSD, Corsair HX650,GTX 760
Custom i7-4790k,Z-97, 16GB, Vertex 3 SSD, Plextor M.2 SSD, Samsung EVO SSD, Corsair HX650, GTX 660TI
Windows 7/8 UEFI/Legacy mode, MBR/GPT

A graphic improvement in v2

The Apple TV can display PNG files as well as JPG files.
As you know, one of the best features of the box is its screensaver, so when you play music, photos can beautifully float around the screen.
I used the feature before to add some floating graphic elements to the mix (stars, icons, etc.) and with trasparency feature of PNG files, it made the layers effect of the screensaver even more interesting.
Well in the old software, each photo had a drop-shadow, and so did each PNG file - whether it was transparent or not - creating sometimes ugly "square fuzzy frames" around the graphic element. BUT now with version2, the shadow is created on a per-pixel basis, meaning each transparent icon has a lovely fitting shadow, and not a black box around the frame. Cool!
I guess they must've tweaked the graphic engine a little...

LeBarroux,
I opened the file in good old 10, with some objects being reinterpreted, where the artwork consisted of a great number of simple paths and a few compound paths. My guess is that some brushed paths have been expanded.
It looks as if the spike is made with a brushed path having a corner Anchor Point at the top.
In any case, I deleted part of the image to concentrate on the spike in front of the cyan rectangle, and then I scaled down to 1:10 in two step ending with 1:100, scaled up again 100:1, to be able to compare directly.
Apart from very small changes in thickness of some very thin paths, owing to inaccuracies of scaling, the before and after were practically identical, every small bit being there.
To rule out any issues with brushed paths disliking corner Anchor Points (which cause other problems), I tried to scale a brushed path down by 1:100 and up again by 100:1, and it showed the same result.
So it seems that something strange is happening in your CS6 (which is why I keep pestering you with the AtG).
Just to rule out an impossibility: does the same happen if you expand the brushed path(s)?
Other (im)possibilities may be some preference corruption or interference from other applications, see below.
Is it an option to scale down in the earlier version?
If no other solution appears, you may try the following (you may effectively have tried/done some of them already) and see whether it helps:
1) Close down Illy and open again;
2) Restart the computer;
3) Close down Illy and press Ctrl+Alt+Shift/Cmd+Option+Shift during startup (irreversible);
4) Move the folder with Illy closed (reversible);
5) Look through and try out the relevant among the Other options; see especially the usual suspects in Item 7;
Even more seriously, you may:
6) Uninstall, run the Cleaner Tool, and reinstall.
http://www.adobe.com/support/contact/cscleanertool.html

Why am I Having Graphics Problems with the Latest Version 29.0.1 of Firefox?

It seems like after I installed version 29.0.1 of Firefox, I'm having intermittent graphics problems I've never had before with any previous version and I don't have with any of my other browsers.
Sometimes Firefox just scrambles the web pages on all of the tabs I have open. No other components of the Windows XP desktop have graphics problems when this happens and no other open applications seem to have graphics problems. It's just Firefox. Sometimes I can refresh the tab/page (F5) and it clears up the blotchy random graphics characters.
Does anyone know if there were changes to the graphics engine in version 29.0.1?
Thanks!

Can you attach a screenshot?
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screenshot
*https://support.mozilla.org/kb/how-do-i-create-screenshot-my-problem
Use a compressed image type like PNG or JPG to save the screenshot.
Try to create a new Boolean pref on the about:config page via the right-click context menu with the name <b>layout.paint_rects_separately</b> and set the value to true and leave hardware acceleration enabled.
See comment 414 in bug 812695:
*https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=812695#c414
That way you still have the benefit from hardware acceleration, but may not suffer from rendering issues.
*Tools > Options > Advanced > General > Browsing: "Use hardware acceleration when available"
*https://support.mozilla.org/kb/upgrade-graphics-drivers-use-hardware-acceleration

I am willing to buy a i mac 21" ,i will use it to edit photos using photoshop cs6 and lightroom 4 is the graphic card 512mb will be enough for my work ? wich one ishould go for thanks

i am willing to buy a i mac 21" , i will use itfor photo editing using photoshop cs6 and adobe lightroom 4 , is the graphic card will be enough ? any recomandation , wich i mac should i buy ,thanks for your help.

Mercury Graphics Engine
The Mercury Graphics Engine (MGE) represents features that use video card processor, or GPU, acceleration. In Photoshop CS6, this new engine delivers near-instant results when editing with key tools such as Liquify, Warp, Lighting Effects, and the Oil Paint filter. The new MGE delivers unprecedented responsiveness for a fluid feel as you work.
http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cs6-gpu-faq.html

Photoshop CS6 trigger to Upgrade Graphics Card?

Photoshop CS6 beta release "the first version to integrate the company's GPU-accelerating Mercury Graphics Engine (MGE)". Does this mean that I could expect speed benefits in Photoshop if I upgrade the NVIDIA 8800GT card in my early 2008 Mac Pro?
I have been wondering about whether I should upgrade my 8800GT for a while (my box is fine: new PSU, plenty of RAM) and thought if Photoshop will benefit that might be my prompt to act.

I have read from couple people at different times that 1GB VRAM is not enough and the "special" MVC 2.5GB GTX's have lots of... punch.
The 5770s is okay standard Mac Pro offering - two yrs ago = some had noisey fans but there have been 3 revisions since probably and they are and should be quiet.
Quiet and high performance do not always go togehter. One of the downfalls of the 8800GT is... they fail, and they don't have the best fan and cooling, they aren't dual-slot width in desgin. There are copper coolers but I wouldn't - it has just 512MB unless you got a custom flashed version.
OpenCL has improved but hard to develop, it needs too much work to optimize the code for one thing. And new compilers - great but will they get used to develop CUDA+OpenCL code?
Hope the Nvidia GTX 670 becvomes a real offering. At $399 it is actually in the same cost as a 5870 was.
A Quadro 4000 or whatever comes after it with 2GB is or should be considered as well. Yes?
64-bit kernel mode and 24GB RAM or more. 16GB and not using 64-bit mode may help from where you are of course, but might want to have more to get the most out of your system.
Check www.macperformanceguide.com for ideas lately?

Having trouble with Mercury Engine, do I have this right?

Ok, so after many months of looking for a replacement for Sony Vegas Pro we decided that the Adobe solution was the best option for our needs and bought a license for CS5 and two new machines for our video editing.
The desktop is a poweful beast with the latest and greatest installed, and we also invested in a new laptop which was custom built for on the road editing. This laptop includes the GeForce GTX285M graphics engine but for some reason the Mercury engine within CS5 is not working with this card.
Can someone explain why this is the case and what the solution may be? I am new to Adobe software so have I installed evrything correctly or is there something I need to install or change within the program to get the mercury engine working with the card. I have tried the usual route with the drop down for Renderer but it is greyed out. Help?

This laptop includes the GeForce GTX285M graphics engine but for some reason the Mercury engine within CS5 is not working with this card.
Can someone explain why this is the case and what the solution may be?
Hardware acceleration doesn't work, officially, with any laptop GPU chipset at this time. Search around here for the "GPU hack."

MacBook Pro 13,3 and 15,4 : graphic memory

I would like to buy a MacBook Pro but I'm worried about the graphic memory. On the MacBook Pro 13,3 tech specs I can read:
"NVIDIA GeForce 320M graphics processor with 256MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory"
Shared? Does this mean that the video card hasn't got dedicated RAM?
On the other hand in the MacBook Pro 15,4 tech specs I can read:
"NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M graphics processor with 256MB of GDDR3 memory on 2.4GHz; Intel HD Graphics with 256MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory"
Please could you explain me what does they mean with "shared" memory?
How about performance? Usually NB has a lot more video memory such as 1GB...

eww wrote:
As I wrote above, I've been doing lots of work in Adobe CS4 applications using the integrated GPU and *its 256MB of "shared" RAM (not really shared, because only the GPU can use it)*. I have 4GB of RAM installed, and I'm getting my work done just fine in 3.75GB of it.
If nothing we can say will reassure you, then you'd better buy some other computer.
Precisely. It appears that the integrated graphics engine has 256MB of dedicated memory available, but it's advertised as "shared" because it comes from the (main) system memory. In reality, it's not the 256MB of graphics memory that's being "shared", it's the 4GB of system RAM that's being shared
And 4GB is plenty of RAM.
Also consider this: the discrete graphic cards available on the 2.4Ghz and 2.53Ghz 15" MBP come with 256MB of dedicated RAM. Only the top two configurations have 512MB of RAM available (the i7 15" and the 17" models).
You should be fine.

Isometric Graphics Engine

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for