Yeah, but this is shared memory. Neither system has more or less actual video memory; they have none. The more memory used by the graphics subsystem in the shared setup, the less will be available for the OS. It's far more likely the right balance is having the OS use the memory, not the graphics subsystem, for almost any use other than heavy graphical gaming. For gaming, a shared memory video setup is not the choice you'd really want anyway.

In other words, there would be no advantage to whatever that oddball spec is on the HP (288MB? Very strange, sounds like a marketing spec not the real one that needs to be compared.) vs the quoted spec for the MacBook. Neither one of these is telling you the story anyway. The MacBook says 64MB, but if you look at the specs page, it says that the memory usage varies and is a minimum of 80MB. Not sure why the 64MB is the quoted spec. Obviously it's not the maximum, and it would appear that 80 is not the maximum either, so comparing the 64 to 288 is meaningless.