|
Quartz Extreme dual display on rev B TiBook
|
Login/Create an Account
| Top
| 42 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
non-square powers of two (2, 8, 32, etc.) as well as non-power-of-two squares (9, 25, 36, etc.)
What he actually meant was that older video cards require textures that are squares, *and* have power-of-two length sides. For example, an 8x8 or 16x16 texture is possible, but a 9x9 or 4x6 texture is not.Carl J Norum
4th Year Electrical Engineering/Computer Science Student
University of Saskatchewan
Saskatoon, Canada
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
by
Anonymous Coward
on Thursday August 29, @03:06PM (#1947)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
Hi,
If the minimum was 16MB then why wasn't a single external monitor accelerated in the first place? I have (thanks to this trick) a single external monitor accelerated by QE but am concerned if it is indeed utilizing the whole 16MB in my Rev.B TiBook.....
D
spam_me_not@alum.dartmouth.org
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
I've heard of marketing dictating software design before, but this takes the cake. The advertised specs list is now used as the preferences file! Des Courtney | 1 Little, 2 Little, 3 Little Endian
ObASCIIArt: ^_^ | 3 Big, 2 Big, 1 Big Endian
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
by
Anonymous Coward
on Thursday August 29, @12:20PM (#1961)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women, man!
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
by
Anonymous Coward
on Thursday August 29, @03:34PM (#1962)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Okay, so you turned it on. Big deal. Guess what? You won't get much out of it. You (and I) have 16MB in our video card. You are running your internal screen at:
1152 x 768 (probably at 4 bytes (32 bit)) = 3.375 MB
External at:
1280x1024 (32 bit) = 5MB
Just to put an image on your two monitors, you have used up 8.375 MB of your video card. OpenGL textures at 32 bit can eat up memory like nothing and you have less than 8 MB to use for textures. So, you are not going to get every window treated as a texture, and, though you may have enabled QE, you aren't going to see much benefit from it.
That is why 32MB is recommended. If you don't use the external, you have 13MB available for textures; otherwise, you only have enough for a few windows.
Open up the Quartz Debug application in /Developer/Applications, click "window list" and look at the amount of memory every window takes up. With only a few windows open, I am using over 5MB total for the windows.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Yes, but if the poster is using dual displays, they have to divide the VRAM between them.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Out of curiousity, what's a Rev B TiBook? I bought my first Mac (a TiBook) 6 months or so ago, and I'm still a bit fuzzy on the Apple Lingo.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
by
Anonymous Coward
on Friday August 30, @06:53AM (#2026)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
So, you are not going to get every window treated as a texture, and, though you may have enabled QE, you aren't going to see much benefit from it.
Think about it for a second. Let's say, hypothetically, that you actually have no VRAM available for textures at all, and thus the contents of every window have to be moved over the AGP bus any time the window is moved/changed/exposed/etc.
This may sound bad, but it's still better than plain old Quartz. Using plain Quartz, the CPU renders the window contents and then initiates a DMA transfer to push it over to the graphics card. So either way, you're still pushing the same number of pixels over the AGP bus, except with plain Quartz the CPU has more rendering work to do and it has to manage the transfer of the data over the the graphics card.
So even there is no VRAM available at all for textures, QE should still be at least a little better since the graphics card is offloading some rendering work from the CPU and managing the AGP transfers on its own.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
by
Anonymous Coward
on Thursday August 29, @11:18AM (#2030)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Be careful of what you do with 2 displays. One of the reasons that QE requires so much VRAM is because unlike the traditional 2D rendering method, QE treats windows like textures, which means you start eating more memory for more windows. You might be allowed to use QE on the external monitor, but it's very possible that 16 is hard-coded in somewhere, and if you open too many windows, it'll expect 16 when you have 8, and result in an overflow.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
by
Anonymous Coward
on Saturday August 31, @08:50PM (#2180)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
try moving a window around the screen really fast, then try the same thing on a non qe computer. you'll know what all teh hype is about.
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
How large a monitor can you connect to your pismo?
As large as you like. You'll be able to use 1600x1200 on most any SVGA monitor you connect. 21" or higher should be fine.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
An iBook purchased over a year ago will not support QE. Only the newest revision iBook (the 700 mhz and the CD 600 mhz) will support it. So either your friend did not buy it that long ago, or his system is not supported...
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
by
Anonymous Coward
on Thursday August 29, @02:14PM (#16043)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Then I'm really confused - isn't 16MB VRAM enough according to the original config?
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
QE needs to be able to process textures that are not powers of two (i.e. - not square).
As a math major, I'm obligated to point out that there are non-square powers of two (2, 8, 32, etc.) as well as non-power-of-two squares (9, 25, 36, etc.), but that is probably not worth arguing about.
My next question would be, is there any possible way to install a newer, more competent graphics processor in a summer-2000 iMac?
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
Actually, you should be okay, one reason why QE is even doable (Window buffers on the avg user EXCEED 16MB by a large margin) is that a card on the AGP bus can access RAM without CPU intervention. This means that when the card's memory is full, it just asks for some system memory from the OS... slower access to system memory, but it works to keep those buffers accessible. ----
The lord of the G4 Franken-8600.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
by
Anonymous Coward
on Thursday August 29, @01:00PM (#16054)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Is the 16 meg minimum really important or could you run QE on a card with 8 megs of vram?
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
Would it then follow that a Mac with only 8 MB of VRAM (e.g., a summer-2000 iMac) could enable QE, and by changing only one integer in one file, no less? If possible, that could make a lot of people a little happier.
What are the potential risks, then?
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
My bad. I needed to do more research, Sorry about that.
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
No, because a summer 2000 iMac doesn't have a Radeon or newer or GeForce2MX or newer video chip. The newer hardware is required because QE needs to be able to process textures that are not powers of two (i.e. - not square). If you graphic chip can't do that then all the VRAM in the world can't help since there is no way to render the proper textures which QE composes.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
by
Anonymous Coward
on Thursday August 29, @12:57PM (#16100)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Unfortunately, neither of these .plist modifications were able to turn on QE on my original TiBook's built-in display, and the machine is only about a year and 2 months old, while a friend's iBook which was purchased at the same time runs QE just fine.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
by
Anonymous Coward
on Thursday August 29, @12:55PM (#16102)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
actually I think rev B is 550/667. That's what mine is a 550.
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
hehe... i feel ya man. sell that rev b! i got a decent price for mine on ebay and am glad i did. you can pick up a new 667 and only lose $600 or so if you do it right. people who got those things (like me) got screwed. i think the blame lies more with the apple press than apple, though. no one mentioned the severe performance handicaps that the machine had (macworld never published a real review - i think they new what a dog it was and didn't want to reveal the truth). anyway, not that it's much consolation, but i know what you're going through. the whole apple situation stinks right now (slow machines, jaguar causing major headaches). hope next month things look up!
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
8 still isn't a square number, since the squareroot of 8 is 2root2. The issue is that the video cards don't support textures that don't have power of two dimensions, or differing dimensions. Frauen machen Alkoholiker.
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Apparently whenever an external monitor is plugged in and you are *not* using display mirroring, the VRAM is split 8MB per display, even if only the external display is active.
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
In my case a lot of times I'm using a large external monitor because I have one task to do (like editing code) where a single very large window is of great use.
I have a 16MB Rev B TiBook - I just tried opening up a bunch of applications and windows with an external 1600x1200 monitor set to millions of colors with the 8mb entry enabled. Quartz Debug has my largest windows as something like the following (all numbers in kB):
WindowServer (1600x1200) - 7500
WindowServer (LCD) - 3456
Mail 1708
Finder 1158
Finder 1150
Mozilla 768
Mozilla 662
iTunes 644
Looking down the list, you really only run out of room around the first or second Mozilla window (depending on whatever else might need some VRAM) which is enough apps to do something useful.
I'm curious how the system degrades when running out of VRAM, another poster suggestion it would just go to memory for the textures. Any individual window seemed to perform just fine even with many open.
--> Kendall (proper spelling is this post brought to you by Safari [if I remembered to turn it on])
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
I have a Rev B 667 TiBook - I tried setting the minimum VRAM setting to 8, and after a reboot the handy "QuartzExtremeChecker" says that indeed both displays are accelerated, the external display running at 1600x1200 in "Millions" of colors.
As others have pointed out I'm not sure how much real benefit I obtain from this - but from what little playing I've done it does seem faster. I generally have only a few large windows open when using the second monitor anyway (using Emacs to edit), so I think I should be able to stay within a range that doesn't greatly wander . It's certainly better than just having the acceleration disabled without any say in the matter!
I'll try running some tests later with lots of windows and see if anything breaks. Does anyone know of some graphical benchmarks I could run to see if there's really a difference?
--> Kendall (proper spelling is this post brought to you by Safari [if I remembered to turn it on])
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
by
Anonymous Coward
on Saturday October 26, @06:32AM (#19253)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
square as in the shape, not as in a number = x^2, dumbfuck. get it? now go back to algebra class.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
by
Anonymous Coward
on Thursday August 29, @04:43PM (#38422)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Don't get your hopes up, these hacks will only allow you to use a PCI version of a supported chipset (e.g. a PCI Radeon) or a supported chipset with 16MB per head (e.g. as described in the original post). What you're talking about is an unsupported chipset (Rage Pro), and the hack won't help.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Because he wasn't using it in single monitor mode, he was using it in dual-display. I thought I heard that QE worked on them when using only 1 display or 2 displays mirrored, but would not work when using 2 displays non-mirrored (because then VRAM is split into two 8MB banks, one for each monitor.)
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
by
Anonymous Coward
on Thursday August 29, @05:19PM (#38436)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Why are people so worried about this anyway, firstly it's hard to tell if QE is turned on or not most of the time on a 667Mhz PB, and secondly you're not losing anything relative to the last version of the OS by having an unaccelerated dual head display, in fact you're gaining over the last version of the OS, because the original quartz has had a going over by engineers from ATI and NVidia to squeeze every last drop of speed out of it.
Also, it's not like Apple have canned support for non accelerated displays, or that there's anything that only works in QE. This is a whole lot of whining about nothing. Sure, most poeple are keen to have any speed boost going, but whining about how you want to sell your PowerBook in disgust sounds like a desperate cry for attention.
Maybe you should sell your PowerBook and buy a wintel laptop, then you'll never have to worry about not being able to use a new feature in an OS upgrade that makes your machine faster, because there's never been such a thing. I know plenty of people prepared to give you a reasonable price for your rev.B.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
by
Anonymous Coward
on Thursday August 29, @05:19PM (#38437)
|
|
 |
 |
 |
Well my point was if you could use the single internal LCD accelerated, then why not a single external monitor, devoting all the VRAM to just that display in the first place.
D
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
[...] secondly you're not losing anything relative to the last version of the OS by having an unaccelerated dual head display [...]
Yes, and the last verison of the OS was dog slow. The new one is just slow, so any extra speed I can eke out of it is great.
[...]but whining about how you want to sell your PowerBook in disgust sounds like a desperate cry for attention.
Actually, the "disgust" part stems from the facts that a) this machine is less than 9 months old and has now effectively been obseleted and b) that this limitation to QE is not mentioned *anywhere* in official Apple documentation. It not being a supported configuration I can live with, but what effectively amounts to deception of customers is what *really* pisses me off.
Maybe you should sell your PowerBook and buy a wintel laptop [...]
Except then I wouldn't be able to use OS X which, slow and flawed as it is, provides the best mix of functionality for the tasks I do.
then you'll never have to worry about not being able to use a new feature in an OS upgrade that makes your machine faster, because there's never been such a thing.
Actually there has, but the trend comes more from the hardware not being so damn slow to start with on the x86 side.
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Your first assumption is wrong. Evil is not simply a state of mind. It is a state of the heart and will.
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Can somebody tell me how large an external monitor I can connect to a PowerBook Pismo (384 Ram)?
|
|
 |
 |
|