or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Expanded GPU support in Apple's Mac OS X 10.6.7 hints at future Mac hardware
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Expanded GPU support in Apple's Mac OS X 10.6.7 hints at future Mac hardware

post #1 of 32
Thread Starter 
Apple's newly released Mac OS X 10.6.7 security and maintenance update for Snow Leopard features support for the latest -- and even some unreleased -- AMD Radeon graphics cards, hinting at inclusion in future Mac hardware.

As discovered by the tonymacx86 Blog, the Mac OS X 10.6.7 update for early 2011 Mac Book Pro models features native graphics acceleration for some Radeon HD 5000- and 6000-series cards. The supported cards are off-the-shelf graphics processing units, not Mac-only cards as have been in the past.

It's likely that at least some of the cards will be part of the new iMac refresh expected from Apple in the near future. A new rumor this week claimed that Apple plans to ship a refresh of its all-in-one desktop by early May, with Intel's new Sandy Bridge processors and a high-speed Thunderbolt port.

But the number of graphics cards natively supported by Mac OS X 10.6.7 has led "tonymacx86" to suggest that it could signal "the end of the Mac-only graphics card."

"Could Apple be opening up the platform more?" he asked. "What happens to NVIDIA? Why support for cards that aren't in Macs yet? Will the 2011 Sandy Bridge iMacs contain one or more of these new 6xxx cards?"

The Mac OS X 10.6.7 Snow Leopard build unique to early 2011 Sandy Bridge MacBook Pro models apparently contains native support for the following graphics cards:
ATI Radeon HD 5630 Device ID 0x68D8
ATI Radeon HD 5630 Device ID 0x68D9
ATI Radeon HD 5670 Device ID 0x68D8
ATI Radeon HD 5730 Device ID 0x68D8
ATI Radeon HD 5770 Device ID 0x68B8
ATI Radeon HD 5850 Device ID 0x6899
ATI Radeon HD 5870 Device ID 0x6898
AMD Radeon HD 6850 Device ID 0x6739
AMD Radeon HD 6870 Device ID 0x6738
AMD Radeon HD 6970 Device ID 0x6718
Mac OS X 10.6.7 was released this Monday, offering users a variety of bug fixes and security enhancements. The general update improves the reliability of Mac to My Mac, resolves issues when transferring files to SMB Windows File Sharing servers, and addresses bugs with the Mac App Store.

The special build unique to the new MacBook Pros with Thunderbolt also addresses performance issues with FaceTime. It also improves graphics stability and external display compatibility with the new notebooks released in February.
post #2 of 32
One could hope the new iMacs have a true desktop class video card in them, I have the original i7 iMac and it's an awesome computer; however a true desktop class video card in the revision would have me placing an order asap.
post #3 of 32
While the device IDs may be present, that doesn't mean that the card will actually function. I've been following this "development" since it was first discovered in the 2011 MacBook Pro drivers. 68xx series cards seem to work fine at this time, but 6950 / 6970 cards appear to be quite broken.

Don't go out and buy that shiny 6970 just yet.
post #4 of 32
makes sense. ATI/AMD 5xxx/6xxx series have been ahead of nvidia in terms of heat, power and cost requirements. Only recently has nvidia come close w/ aggressive optimization of its fermi based cards. drivers may not quite be as good but since Apple has cooling/power/form factor requirements, radeon HD is a no brainer regarding modern GPU possibilities.
post #5 of 32
Back to my Mac

The number of typos getting through recently hasn't been good.
post #6 of 32
The new support for "commodity" graphics cards is obviously to support the new macpro. The large form desktop will come with multiple thunderbolt connections, freeing up expansion slots for a small farm of graphics cards. Thunderbolt speed will make in-box disk optional, and with multiple displayport connections, the first live hd video in won't need a slot, either. BUT, you will want a few more gpu's to handle all those hi-res bits.

Just sayin'
post #7 of 32
Please, please, please let's have an HD69XX option on the iMac. BTO is fine. Pretty please with sugar on top.
post #8 of 32
By then AMD would have the 7k series out. Always a step behind in GPU's.
post #9 of 32
I'd rather have nvidia GPUs but ok... let's see what comes out. As far as I remember, Apple always gets graphics cards issues when they decide to go with amd/ati GPUs...
post #10 of 32
Starcraft 2!
post #11 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The general update improves the reliability of Mac to My Mac [...]

where do i obtain this mac to my mac functionality? is it a separate product or is it bundled with something else? cost? availability? documentation?

is this akin to the other day when aperture was removed from the app store and you guys thought a new version was imminent? oh no!

does this mean that the back to my mac functionality is gone and is being replaced by this new mac to my mac?

or does it just mean that you guys are a bunch of unprofessional script-kiddies who can't, won't and don't take the smallest bit of time to proof-read your cutsie little blog entries?
"Personally, I would like nothing more than to thoroughly proof each and every word of my articles before posting. But I can't."

appleinsider's mike campbell, august 15, 2013
Reply
"Personally, I would like nothing more than to thoroughly proof each and every word of my articles before posting. But I can't."

appleinsider's mike campbell, august 15, 2013
Reply
post #12 of 32
Read this on netkas last night. All the OS needs is framebuffer drivers.
post #13 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooch View Post

where do i obtain this mac to my mac functionality? is it a separate product or is it bundled with something else? cost? availability? documentation?

is this akin to the other day when aperture was removed from the app store and you guys thought a new version was imminent? oh no!

does this mean that the back to my mac functionality is gone and is being replaced by this new mac to my mac?

or does it just mean that you guys are a bunch of unprofessional script-kiddies who can't, won't and don't take the smallest bit of time to proof-read your cutsie little blog entries?

and what does type of post make you?
post #14 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post

and what does type of post make you?

I think the technical term is twat
post #15 of 32
I have moved to Nvdia card from ATI when I built my new Windows 7 PC as they are better to me in all dept. than ATI/AMD. Plus, they have CUDA and 3D though the latter is not in use.
MSI GTX560-Ti Twin Frozr II/OC (Review link) , cheap but yet powerful enough.

The inclusion of of-the-shelf components should always be welcome given the larger choice they have including the second hand market.
post #16 of 32
I would bet on this being for the new iMacs, which I believe are coming soon. With the recent Macbook Pro update, it actually seems to me like you may get better value buying a 15" Pro over an iMac now that they are quad-core i7s and the current iMacs are only quad-core starting at the $2000 model. I'm thinking the next iMac refresh will be all quad-core with the possible exception of the $1200 model.
post #17 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjbjohnson View Post

I would bet on this being for the new iMacs, which I believe are coming soon. With the recent Macbook Pro update, it actually seems to me like you may get better value buying a 15" Pro over an iMac.

That doesn't make sense. Unless you need the portability, why would the 15" pro be a better deal?

15" MBP
$2199
2.2 Ghz i7
slower and smaller hard drive
slower FPU
15" screen
less expandable

iMac
$2199
2.93 GHz i7 (or subtract $200 to get a 2.8 GHz i5)
faster and larger hard drive
faster FPU
21" screen
more expandable



Care to explain just how the 15" MBP is a better value????
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #18 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooch View Post

where do i obtain this mac to my mac functionality? is it a separate product or is it bundled with something else? cost? availability? documentation?

is this akin to the other day when aperture was removed from the app store and you guys thought a new version was imminent? oh no!

does this mean that the back to my mac functionality is gone and is being replaced by this new mac to my mac?

or does it just mean that you guys are a bunch of unprofessional script-kiddies who can't, won't and don't take the smallest bit of time to proof-read your cutsie little blog entries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post

and what does type of post make you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt View Post

I think the technical term is twat

Brilliant! It has to be said though, as harshly as he put it, he's right. AI simply don't proof read and it's pretty inexcusable.
post #19 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by pt109 View Post

The new support for "commodity" graphics cards is obviously to support the new macpro. The large form desktop will come with multiple thunderbolt connections, freeing up expansion slots for a small farm of graphics cards. Thunderbolt speed will make in-box disk optional, and with multiple displayport connections, the first live hd video in won't need a slot, either. BUT, you will want a few more gpu's to handle all those hi-res bits.

Just sayin'

And what about Crossfire / SLI support in the Mac Pro?
post #20 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Care to explain just how the 15" MBP is a better value????

CPU's newer, GPU's newer, HDD can easily be replaced with something faster, and as it's SATA III vs. SATA II in the iMac, the iMac can never reach the same speeds transferring to any HDD/SDD.

Arguably, the MacBook Pro is more expandable as you can actually get to the hard drive as a user-replaceable part.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

And what about Crossfire / SLI support in the Mac Pro?

As CrossFire/SLI are for games, provide virtually no benefit in games and none for other applications, are dependent on the ATI/nVidia to write drivers for, and have nothing to do with the Mac Pro's target audience...

I'd say no. But if SLI can be used in conjunction with OpenCL for renders, why we don't already have render farms of Mac Pros+4xSingleSlotCards in SLI is beyond me.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #21 of 32
Interesting.
post #22 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

, why we don't already have render farms of Mac Pros+4xSingleSlotCards in SLI is beyond me.

Because SJ knows what's best for people, absolutely: "Cool" toys.

Apple long ago abandoned all pretence at its vague attempts to target seriously high-end desktop computer users. Now, only the most stupid use Mac's for rendering as Windows PC's overtook Mac OS years ago in the graphics department.

SJ's universe... It's toys all the way...
post #23 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloodshotrollin'red View Post

Apple long ago abandoned all pretence at its vague attempts to target seriously high-end desktop computer users. Now, only the most stupid use Mac's for rendering...

Except in video editing suites. And audio. And high-end scientific labs. And anywhere OS X's software is irreplaceable.

Graphics really don't have much to do with rendering at all.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #24 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

CPU's newer, GPU's newer, HDD can easily be replaced with something faster, and as it's SATA III vs. SATA II in the iMac, the iMac can never reach the same speeds transferring to any HDD/SDD.

Arguably, the MacBook Pro is more expandable as you can actually get to the hard drive as a user-replaceable part.

That's absurd.
- The CPU in the iMac is much faster than the one in the MBP - even after considering the 'newer' CPU in the MBP
- The GPU in the iMac is WAAAAAYYYY faster than the one in the MPB - even after considering that the one in the MBP is newer.
- Hard drives can be replaced in both - although that's something that very few people ever do in a laptop. (Granted, it's not easy on the iMac, but there are services that do it for you). Besides, unlike the MBP, you can have both a hard drive and an SSD in the iMac.

So, your 'greater value' means that the MBP has a slower CPU, slower GPU, less RAM expandability 1/2 the screen area, and a smaller keyboard --- but the user can more easily instal a hard drive?

I'm glad that I don't let you make my 'better value' decisions for me.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #25 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

- The CPU in the iMac is much faster than the one in the MBP - even after considering the 'newer' CPU in the MBP

Have a benchmark on hand? This is just curiosity; I'm not questioning you.

Quote:
- Hard drives can be replaced in both - although that's something that very few people ever do in a laptop. (Granted, it's not easy on the iMac, but there are services that do it for you).

Doesn't refute the difference between SATA II and SATA III

Quote:
Besides, unlike the MBP, you can have both a hard drive and an SSD in the iMac.

Uh huh.

Quote:
So, your 'greater value' means that the MBP has a slower CPU, slower GPU, less RAM expandability 1/2 the screen area, and a smaller keyboard --- but the user can more easily instal a hard drive?

It's a laptop, fool. They're for different demographics. Hard drive replaceability is next to meaningless on a desktop; you're not toting it anywhere, so you can have external drives.

I'm glad I'm not making your decisions simply because you wouldn't seem to know why the decisions exist.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #26 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Besides, unlike the MBP, you can have both a hard drive and an SSD in the iMac.

My MacBook Pro, with 100GB Vertex 2 boot drive and 1TB data drive is magic, I guess.

Though I went with this one instead of the MCE.
post #27 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Doesn't refute the difference between SATA II and SATA III

You'd have to use SSDs like the latest OCZ Vertex 3 or Intel 510 Series to take advantage of SATA III, most existing HDD/SSD will offer the same performance on SATA II or SATA III. Or even SATA I depending on the drive.

SATA I is OK for most HDDs (up to 150MB/s)
SATA II is OK for those and mainstream SSDs (up to 300MB/s)
SATA III is for the future (up to 600MB/s)

For the performance evaluation, you can use geekbench, if you want, but IMO there are too many weird results for it to be fully reliable:
MacBook Pro (17-inch Early 2011) Intel Core i7-2820QM 2.3 GHz (4 cores)\t10383
MacBook Pro (17-inch Early 2011) Intel Core i7-2720QM 2.2 GHz (4 cores)\t10045
iMac (27-inch Mid 2010) Intel Core i7 870 2.93 GHz (4 cores)\t9122
MacBook Pro (15-inch Early 2011) Intel Core i7-2635QM 2.0 GHz (4 cores)\t8794
iMac (27-inch Late 2009) Intel Core i7 860 2.8 GHz (4 cores)\t8328

Or you can rely on Mac World's speedmark, that IMO are more relevant:




In this case, the 2010 iMacs still "win". But the jump in performance for the MBPs over the previous generation is impressive.
In any case, the iMac will get its refresh too in a few weeks.
post #28 of 32
It would have been nice if they included support for more of the GPU's they used in their machines produced around the time they originally built in OpenCL. When it was announced I thought it would only be a matter of months and I would get a speed boost from my GeForce 8600 equipped MBP.
Still waiting.
It shouldn't have been all that hard for them to do.
post #29 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooch View Post

where do i obtain this mac to my mac functionality?

it's part of Mobile.Me - I use it all the time, and whilenit generally works perfectly, it sometimes has issues - Especially with weirdness that can occur on free wifi hotspots. If this udate improves that I'm all for it!
post #30 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonamac View Post

AI simply don't proof read and it's pretty inexcusable.

Coming to AI for the articles is analogous to reading PlayBoy for the articles
post #31 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Graphics really don't have much to do with rendering at all.

Well, they really do - but for people with serious rendering to do the have one, or more often than not many external headless computers crunching away. In that case that the computer isn't a Mac doesn't really matter too much. Indeed the typically are running a really stripped version of Linux or BSD.

Now having said that, this is a very positive development since the choice of graphics cards is indeed pathetic
post #32 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjteix View Post

You'd have to use SSDs like the latest OCZ Vertex 3 or Intel 510 Series to take advantage of SATA III, most existing HDD/SSD will offer the same performance on SATA II or SATA III. Or even SATA I depending on the drive.

SATA I is OK for most HDDs (up to 150MB/s)
SATA II is OK for those and mainstream SSDs (up to 300MB/s)
SATA III is for the future (up to 600MB/s)

For the performance evaluation, you can use geekbench, if you want, but IMO there are too many weird results for it to be fully reliable:
MacBook Pro (17-inch Early 2011) Intel Core i7-2820QM 2.3 GHz (4 cores)\t10383
MacBook Pro (17-inch Early 2011) Intel Core i7-2720QM 2.2 GHz (4 cores)\t10045
iMac (27-inch Mid 2010) Intel Core i7 870 2.93 GHz (4 cores)\t9122
MacBook Pro (15-inch Early 2011) Intel Core i7-2635QM 2.0 GHz (4 cores)\t8794
iMac (27-inch Late 2009) Intel Core i7 860 2.8 GHz (4 cores)\t8328

Or you can rely on Mac World's speedmark, that IMO are more relevant:




In this case, the 2010 iMacs still "win". But the jump in performance for the MBPs over the previous generation is impressive.
In any case, the iMac will get its refresh too in a few weeks.

WOW
ai a
i am bakazingb fast

i am blazing fast
w/ my
brand new

15"MBP 2.3GHz intel core i7 8g 1333

AMD Radeon HD 6750M
Chipset ModeltIntel HD Graphics 3000

fir a lowly speed jerk like me i am so happy
nmany slow games just sppeeeeeddd along

pow
bam
cachow
pow pam bam

and i can walk arounds a bit
so i think that apple say now they can unclock these chips meansn
something


clint eastward walks in the room

Clint walk out

he turns back and ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Expanded GPU support in Apple's Mac OS X 10.6.7 hints at future Mac hardware