Practicality/Comparison of graphic card options
Exactly how much of an upgrade is the choice of a NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS w/512MB GDDR3 over the default ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO w/256MB GDDR3 in the 24" iMac? Is it worth the $150 cost bump?
The primary use of a better graphics card would be for photo editing, e.g. possibly Aperture. Opinions? Thanks!
The primary use of a better graphics card would be for photo editing, e.g. possibly Aperture. Opinions? Thanks!
Comments
Exactly how much of an upgrade is the choice of a NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS w/512MB GDDR3 over the default ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO w/256MB GDDR3 in the 24" iMac? Is it worth the $150 cost bump?
The primary use of a better graphics card would be for photo editing, e.g. possibly Aperture. Opinions? Thanks!
Well ... you can run CUDA on the 8800 ... Otherwise, I'm not sure that Photoshop will see any difference, but Aperture might be sped up thanks the the 512MB on the 8800. Apertures makes heavy use of GPU acceleration.
Exactly how much of an upgrade is the choice of a NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS w/512MB GDDR3 over the default ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO w/256MB GDDR3 in the 24" iMac? Is it worth the $150 cost bump?
Can anyone elaborate on this question? I'm purchasing an imac and trying to make the choice, also. I currently have ATI Mobility Radeon x 1400 w/512MB in my laptop, which seems to be sufficient, but am worried about the downgrade to 256MB.
Originally Posted by bitchinmona
Exactly how much of an upgrade is the choice of a NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS w/512MB GDDR3 over the default ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO w/256MB GDDR3 in the 24" iMac? Is it worth the $150 cost bump?
Can anyone elaborate on this question? I'm purchasing an imac and trying to make the choice, also. I currently have ATI Mobility Radeon x 1400 w/512MB in my laptop, which seems to be sufficient, but am worried about the downgrade to 256MB.
Dear Bitchinmona and Linah,
Take my advise and don't burn your fingers on the combination Apple and NVidia; this was a disaster from the moment Apple switched brands some years ago. If you wish to suffer from ghost images, refresh problems and other (driver) troubles, then you shouldn't hesitate and buy yourself a GeForce, otherwise safe your good money and stay with ATI.
Gamers who switched to the Mac liked NVidia because they used this brand successfully in their PC's, therefore couldn't wait and rushed to the Apple shop right at the moment Apple announced this card for the MacPro, and now find themselves complaining and discussing in several forums all over the internet.
If you are doing graphics work on a Mac and/or are using Apple Pro-applications, the 2600 is a far better and even faster choice.
Best regards,
Robbert
Dear Bitchinmona and Linah,
If you are doing graphics work on a Mac and/or are using Apple Pro-applications, the 2600 is a far better and even faster choice.
Best regards,
Robbert
You're wrong about that. The 2600 is nowhere near the 8800 and not even as fast as an 8600GT in most cases. However, in terms of reliability, the ATi does reportedly have fewer problems. Personally, I would just go with the cheapest dedicated GPU that I could get on an iMac.
You're wrong about that. The 2600 is nowhere near the 8800 and not even as fast as an 8600GT in most cases.
In theory you're right, but in practice the 8800 is crippled due to never ending software issues. And because a graphics card's overall performance depends for the most part on the quality of the drivers, professional users discovered very soon that the "slow" 2600 outperformed the 8800 in applications they normally use. This thread on the Apple Discussion Forum is one in a long list of user discussions on the internet.
As long as the "warm" relationship between Apple and NVidia after all these years still results in almost predictable troubles for Mac-users, then the only conclusion should be: stay away from the 8800 or any NVidia product until Apple and/or NVidia finally get the (re)programming job done.
Best regards,
Robbert
In theory you're right, but in practice the 8800 is crippled due to never ending software issues. And because a graphics card's overall performance depends for the most part on the quality of the drivers, professional users discovered very soon that the "slow" 2600 outperformed the 8800 in applications they normally use. This thread on the Apple Discussion Forum is one in a long list of user discussions on the internet.
As long as the "warm" relationship between Apple and NVidia after all these years still results in almost predictable troubles for Mac-users, then the only conclusion should be: stay away from the 8800 or any NVidia product until Apple and/or NVidia finally get the (re)programming job done.
Best regards,
Robbert
Thanks to all for the reply....Mechanic man... the thread was informative. Going with the 2600!!!