applenut can't post in this thread! He's too biased and will choose a Rage Pro over nVidia's offerings! Only kidding.
The Radeon 8500 is sure to be a really great card, however I've heard about ATI crippling the performance as opposed to the PC version (lower clock speed and memory speed). Also, are you sure its 299? I thought they were supposed to be a bit cheaper than that. The PC side has 128 MB version for like 250. I thought I saw the Mac 8500 for around 240, maybe even lower. The thing I like about the Radeon 8500 is the Truform, image quality, superior DVD playback, and straight out of the box Mac compatibility.
I'm thinking about this choice myself. I would see what the prices are like for the Radeon 8500 (are they out in stores yet?) and then see if anyone can get some GF4 Ti cards to work out of the box. The GF4 Ti is going to be the better performer, and will give you features like ADC and dual display. Also, the TOP end card will be priced at 300 something. That's the Ti 4600 aka motherload. With the GF4 Ti you can get the same clock speed and cheaper prices. The Ti 4400 is also equipped with 128 MB DDR RAM at lower speeds than the Ti 4600. This card should be only a bit more if not the same price as the Radeon 8500. Then there is the Ti 4200 coming out in April I believe, which will be a 128 MB DDR RAM card for only about $200.
I might be getting both just for testing purposes. Damn, sure wish ATI would give us their All-In-Wonder cards. I'd be first in line if they did!
Right now I'd say go GF4 Ti. I have heard from various sites that the performance of the 8500 is being hurt by ATI's lackluster drivers, and nvidia is known as having really good drivers. ATI wins for DVD playback and image quality, and has a promising product in the 8500. We'll see what happens.
<strong>Don't forget apple is forced to better support the Ti because that's what their stuff comes with.</strong><hr></blockquote>
1.) radeon is also shipped on macs. not the 8500 but they use the same drivers
2.) Apple's nVidia drivers suck.
3.) iMacs shipped with rage pros and so did powermac g3s and iBooks and Lombards and Wallstreets and apple sees no need at all to support those.
so I would not base my purchase on whether or not its apple's job to support
[quote]applenut can't post in this thread! He's too biased and will choose a Rage Pro over nVidia's offerings! Only kidding.<hr></blockquote>
you betsa be kiddin. cause I would love to have that Geforce 4 Ti. That's one fast card man. too much money though
[quote]
The Radeon 8500 is sure to be a really great card, however I've heard about ATI crippling the performance as opposed to the PC version (lower clock speed and memory speed). Also, are you sure its 299? I thought they were supposed to be a bit cheaper than that. The PC side has 128 MB version for like 250. I thought I saw the Mac 8500 for around 240, maybe even lower. The thing I like about the Radeon 8500 is the Truform, image quality, superior DVD playback, and straight out of the box Mac compatibility.<hr></blockquote>
price is just MSRP from a few months ago. maybe its lower now.
Haven't heard about crippling the hardware.
[quote]
I'm thinking about this choice myself. I would see what the prices are like for the Radeon 8500 (are they out in stores yet?) and then see if anyone can get some GF4 Ti cards to work out of the box. The GF4 Ti is going to be the better performer, and will give you features like ADC and dual display. Also, the TOP end card will be priced at 300 something. That's the Ti 4600 aka motherload. With the GF4 Ti you can get the same clock speed and cheaper prices. The Ti 4400 is also equipped with 128 MB DDR RAM at lower speeds than the Ti 4600. This card should be only a bit more if not the same price as the Radeon 8500. Then there is the Ti 4200 coming out in April I believe, which will be a 128 MB DDR RAM card for only about $200.<hr></blockquote>
1.) Radeon 8500 supports dual display as well. Just not ADC. Although ATI did say they are thinking about offering ADC in the future do to the demand and the fact that any new card they make will likely be bought mostly by 4X AGP mac users (all of which have ADC motherboards)
2.) Don't count on all those PC cards working through flashing their ROMs. I hope they do but you can't use that against the radeon right now. and you know Apple/nVidia would never just release them natively for the mac
[quote]
Right now I'd say go GF4 Ti. I have heard from various sites that the performance of the 8500 is being hurt by ATI's lackluster drivers, and nvidia is known as having really good drivers.<hr></blockquote>
Unfortunately that is true on the PC side. On the mac side its sort of opposite.
<strong>From the GeForce4 benchmarks I've seen, the GF4 rips the 8500 a more than few new as*holes.
:cool: </strong><hr></blockquote>
as it should. but are those mac benchmarks?
both cards perform consderably slower on the mac.
any if you have something like a 17 inch ASD LCD or 15 inch LCD then anything over a radeon 8500 is overkill as you can't play high resolutions which the geforce 4's main advantage is
All I know is that my new Dual GHz has exposed me to something that I had forgotten...Diablo II. I ordered my Dual with a Radeon because I already have a GeForce3 which is better than the GeForce4mx. Diablo II looks like hell on the GeForce cards, the Rave drivers are much better on the ATi for that game so therefore I am able to play it again! Woo HOO!
Because all of you ppl, I'm now totally confused. I don't know anymore what to buy. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
ATI or NVidia ?
I want a G4 @ 933MHz with a very good graphics system. 17" LCD Apple screen, 768 MB ram. First, I'll get the standard GeF4 MX, but I'm sure this card will fall apart soon after some weeks.
Because all of you ppl, I'm now totally confused. I don't know anymore what to buy. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
ATI or NVidia ?
I want a G4 @ 933MHz with a very good graphics system. 17" LCD Apple screen, 768 MB ram. First, I'll get the standard GeF4 MX, but I'm sure this card will fall apart soon after some weeks.
i have NO technical knowledge on this matter, so i'll just give you my personal non-technical layman's opinion. i had a much easier time with the ATI card, since it seemed to be more compatible with games and stuff. the nvidia card is already a PAIN in the neck after a mere 2 weeks. ...i want my ATI!!!!!
Let me simplify this for you Kali. What do you want from your mac? The top priority, maybe the top three. If games are anywhere in that list, then they're influencing your purchasing decision far too much. 4MX is a very nice card. An OpenGL update is coming, and everything of Radeon to 2MX ought to be able to take advantage of it's features. You won't miss anything using the base Radeon or 4MX that comes with PM 800 and 933. And untill we get an udated OpenGL API what's the point of paying for features you can't use? Save your money, and buy yourself more RAM.
Or are games so very important to you? Then don't buy a PowerMac, don't even buy a high-end PC. They're both collosal wastes of money. You'll need to pirate at least 20 cutting edge games to break even with the cost of any of the new generation consoles plus a dozen games. If you're looking at MMPG or RTS, well I've played the warcraft, baldur's gate, star craft and diablo series games on a total POS 300Mhz AMD with an 8MB ATI PCI card, and they all run fine. They're really the only things that computers do so significantly better that they might justify the cost. Nah, the visual differences aren't worth the cost. Will there even be 20 top flight games on the mac in the next 2-3 years. Or even on the PC?
Just buy yourself a gamecube and save your parents some money.
[quote] I've played the warcraft, baldur's gate, star craft and diablo series games on a total POS 300Mhz AMD with an 8MB ATI PCI card, and they all run fine. .[/QB]<hr></blockquote>
notice he said ATI in the same sentence as "Diablo series" and "run fine." but the game doesnt work right on my g4 with nVidia geforce2, yet it worked like a charm on my old g3 233 with 192 mb ram and an ATI card with only 2 mb video ram.
it really sucks that i cant enjoy my fave game on my new computer. i still spend more time playing on the old one.
bottom line: get any kind of ATI card (it doesnt have to be the top of the line) and buy ME some playstation2 games so i can forget about my nvidia woes. hehe.
<strong>From the GeForce4 benchmarks I've seen, the GF4 rips the 8500 a more than few new as*holes.
:cool: </strong><hr></blockquote>
yea the 8500 might be the more versatile but the gf4ti is definatly the most _powerful_
question: do you play alot of FPS games, kali?
if so then the GF4Ti is for you, but If you don't really care for raw speed, I think the 8500 has a bit of an edge over the Ti....but I cannot back this up, this is just from all the different reviews I've heard.
yea the 8500 might be the more versatile but the gf4ti is definatly the most _powerful_
question: do you play alot of FPS games, kali?
if so then the GF4Ti is for you, but If you don't really care for raw speed, I think the 8500 has a bit of an edge over the Ti.....</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ok, I want an all purpose computer. Able to do EVERYTHING fast, without troubles. So it will be (most probably) a G4 at 933MHz (can't afford the dual), with 768 MB ram and the 17" LCD.
I know I'll be able to enjoy my fav games (Quake, Oni, Real Myst 3D soon ?) on this settup with the GeF4 MX, but ...
I WANT REAL TIME ANTIALIASING AND FEATURES IN ALL MY STUPID GAMES !!
Sorry, but I needed to scream it loud.
I hate jaggies. I want all the eye candies in my games. All options to best.
I wont buy a PC or a console for the games, because I want to be able to do everything on the same machine, and the serious work (wordprocessing, drawings, Mathematica and internet) will be done on a Mac.
Also, I want to be able to look at DVD movies on the machine, with very smooth playback and high quality images. I just don't want to feel the machine behind the movie I'm looking at.
And I need to play games from times to times.
So I'm now thinking about getting the ATI 8500 card.
Just be honest, you want to spend insane money on basically a gaming rig. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> And you want it to be an expensive pro mac
If you're really looking to the future, then just get the dual and forget about the 17" LCD. Buy a budget 17" monitor and make up some of the difference that way. Later on you can give yourself a very nice 'upgrade' (in a year or two) to whatever Apple or other available ADC panel best suited to your needs. You won't even have to get rid of the 17, you can just use it as a second monitor in a dual display setup.
From the tone of your posts, my guess is you're a teen whose about to grossly overspend for a machine he doesn't need.
<strong>Just be honest, you want to spend insane money on basically a gaming rig. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> And you want it to be an expensive pro mac
From the tone of your posts, my guess is you're a teen whose about to grossly overspend for a machine he doesn't need.</strong><hr></blockquote>
O man, you're hard. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
No I'm not a teen. If I sound childish, that's because English isn't my native language. Sorry about that and I'm doing my best to be readable.
I'm doing lots of things on computers. Mostly scientific writings, scientific drawings, Mathematica calculations.
I don't currently have internet access from home, because my home computer is too old now. So I need a powerfull computer, especially because I need sometimes to do complex calculations in Mathematica and some 3D modelisations.
I like to play games too, but it's not my only concern. Unfortunately (?), I have very high standards about games. I want top quality pictures, eye candies and all the beautiffull stuff. I like Quake, for example, but I want to play this game ONLY with best settings. Or it doesn't worth it.
Anybody here is playing with the ATI 8500 ? Is this too soon to ask ?
How old are you then? Cause it ain't your quebecios english that's making you sound immature. Is the ability to play Quake really going to be a deal breaker for you? This would at least be excusable if you were a teen, it just gets more pathetic if you're not.
Like I said, I think you'll be fine with a 4MX. If you're buying a computer for more than just games, I suggest you get a dual, and forget about Apple's overpriced 17 for now. Everyone seems to have only good things to say about the dual 1Ghz, it's even not too bad in 3D work. It certainly cope best with MP aware OSX, subsequent updates, and OSX versions of the software you use. Especially when you want to run some mathematica clacs in the back-ground. You can pick-up an LCD later on (when the prices have dropped) or you get a little more room in your budget. Then you use it in tandem with your CRT to make a nice dual display set-up.
What's more important to you. Mathematica and 3-D modelling, or Quake? If it really is the first two, then you buy yourself the dual 1Ghz machine (with a CRT to save money), you don't worry about the video card so much, and you treat yourself to a nice little upgrade in a year or two: a new LCD (and maybe even a vid-card)
All the cards get the job done. some do things better than others but none of them suck. You can't go wrong with the geforce 4MX. It'll do everything you want. Maybe won't be the absolute fastest or the most featured but it does everything well.
All the cards get the job done. some do things better than others but none of them suck. You can't go wrong with the geforce 4MX. It'll do everything you want. Maybe won't be the absolute fastest or the most featured but it does everything well.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm just wondering about the antialiasing features. A game without it just don't worth playing IMO. I can't stand the jaggies. That's why I'm asking about cards. The MX doesn't have AA. Of course all other apps will run perfectly with the MX. I don't care about this.
And no, I wont buy a CRT, because of desk clutter and other factors. If I buy a new computer, it will deffinitely be with the 17" LCD. So Matsu, don't tell me to save money with a CRT. I just don't care anymore about CTR. For me, they're really dead. Period.
As for the dual Gig, I was seriously considering it. I guess the 933MHz will be perfect for me for many years to come, but I'm not really convinced yet. So that's where I stand, between the 933 and the dual.
There are other factors I'm considering, like the day to day Backup of any files. I'm using an old MO drive (SCSI) at home, and wont be able to hook it to the new Mac. This is sad because MO are perfect for daily backup and archiving. I heard that the Superdrive isn't really suitable for what I want to do (too slow, limited write number, etc), but that's another thread subject.
Comments
obviously the gf4Ti is going to leap frog the 8500, the 8500 is meant to catch up with the gf3Ti's ...
<strong>What card do you prefer ? ATI 8500 or NVidia GeForce4 Titanium ?
Pros and cons ?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Radeon 8500
-great drivers
-good support
-S-Video Out
-DVI and VGA
-great performance
-FSAA
-great DVD Playback
-299
Geforce 4 Ti
-best performer
-ADC
-399
I would go with the Radeon 8500 as long as I didn't have an ADC display
-ADC
The Radeon 8500 is sure to be a really great card, however I've heard about ATI crippling the performance as opposed to the PC version (lower clock speed and memory speed). Also, are you sure its 299? I thought they were supposed to be a bit cheaper than that. The PC side has 128 MB version for like 250. I thought I saw the Mac 8500 for around 240, maybe even lower. The thing I like about the Radeon 8500 is the Truform, image quality, superior DVD playback, and straight out of the box Mac compatibility.
I'm thinking about this choice myself. I would see what the prices are like for the Radeon 8500 (are they out in stores yet?) and then see if anyone can get some GF4 Ti cards to work out of the box. The GF4 Ti is going to be the better performer, and will give you features like ADC and dual display. Also, the TOP end card will be priced at 300 something. That's the Ti 4600 aka motherload. With the GF4 Ti you can get the same clock speed and cheaper prices. The Ti 4400 is also equipped with 128 MB DDR RAM at lower speeds than the Ti 4600. This card should be only a bit more if not the same price as the Radeon 8500. Then there is the Ti 4200 coming out in April I believe, which will be a 128 MB DDR RAM card for only about $200.
I might be getting both just for testing purposes. Damn, sure wish ATI would give us their All-In-Wonder cards. I'd be first in line if they did!
Right now I'd say go GF4 Ti. I have heard from various sites that the performance of the 8500 is being hurt by ATI's lackluster drivers, and nvidia is known as having really good drivers. ATI wins for DVD playback and image quality, and has a promising product in the 8500. We'll see what happens.
<strong>Don't forget apple is forced to better support the Ti because that's what their stuff comes with.</strong><hr></blockquote>
1.) radeon is also shipped on macs. not the 8500 but they use the same drivers
2.) Apple's nVidia drivers suck.
3.) iMacs shipped with rage pros and so did powermac g3s and iBooks and Lombards and Wallstreets and apple sees no need at all to support those.
so I would not base my purchase on whether or not its apple's job to support
[quote]applenut can't post in this thread! He's too biased and will choose a Rage Pro over nVidia's offerings! Only kidding.<hr></blockquote>
you betsa be kiddin. cause I would love to have that Geforce 4 Ti. That's one fast card man. too much money though
[quote]
The Radeon 8500 is sure to be a really great card, however I've heard about ATI crippling the performance as opposed to the PC version (lower clock speed and memory speed). Also, are you sure its 299? I thought they were supposed to be a bit cheaper than that. The PC side has 128 MB version for like 250. I thought I saw the Mac 8500 for around 240, maybe even lower. The thing I like about the Radeon 8500 is the Truform, image quality, superior DVD playback, and straight out of the box Mac compatibility.<hr></blockquote>
price is just MSRP from a few months ago. maybe its lower now.
Haven't heard about crippling the hardware.
[quote]
I'm thinking about this choice myself. I would see what the prices are like for the Radeon 8500 (are they out in stores yet?) and then see if anyone can get some GF4 Ti cards to work out of the box. The GF4 Ti is going to be the better performer, and will give you features like ADC and dual display. Also, the TOP end card will be priced at 300 something. That's the Ti 4600 aka motherload. With the GF4 Ti you can get the same clock speed and cheaper prices. The Ti 4400 is also equipped with 128 MB DDR RAM at lower speeds than the Ti 4600. This card should be only a bit more if not the same price as the Radeon 8500. Then there is the Ti 4200 coming out in April I believe, which will be a 128 MB DDR RAM card for only about $200.<hr></blockquote>
1.) Radeon 8500 supports dual display as well. Just not ADC. Although ATI did say they are thinking about offering ADC in the future do to the demand and the fact that any new card they make will likely be bought mostly by 4X AGP mac users (all of which have ADC motherboards)
2.) Don't count on all those PC cards working through flashing their ROMs. I hope they do but you can't use that against the radeon right now. and you know Apple/nVidia would never just release them natively for the mac
[quote]
Right now I'd say go GF4 Ti. I have heard from various sites that the performance of the 8500 is being hurt by ATI's lackluster drivers, and nvidia is known as having really good drivers.<hr></blockquote>
Unfortunately that is true on the PC side. On the mac side its sort of opposite.
:cool:
<strong>From the GeForce4 benchmarks I've seen, the GF4 rips the 8500 a more than few new as*holes.
:cool: </strong><hr></blockquote>
as it should. but are those mac benchmarks?
both cards perform consderably slower on the mac.
any if you have something like a 17 inch ASD LCD or 15 inch LCD then anything over a radeon 8500 is overkill as you can't play high resolutions which the geforce 4's main advantage is
Because all of you ppl, I'm now totally confused. I don't know anymore what to buy. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
ATI or NVidia ?
I want a G4 @ 933MHz with a very good graphics system. 17" LCD Apple screen, 768 MB ram. First, I'll get the standard GeF4 MX, but I'm sure this card will fall apart soon after some weeks.
<strong>Damn !
Because all of you ppl, I'm now totally confused. I don't know anymore what to buy. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
ATI or NVidia ?
I want a G4 @ 933MHz with a very good graphics system. 17" LCD Apple screen, 768 MB ram. First, I'll get the standard GeF4 MX, but I'm sure this card will fall apart soon after some weeks.
i have NO technical knowledge on this matter, so i'll just give you my personal non-technical layman's opinion. i had a much easier time with the ATI card, since it seemed to be more compatible with games and stuff. the nvidia card is already a PAIN in the neck after a mere 2 weeks. ...i want my ATI!!!!!
Or are games so very important to you? Then don't buy a PowerMac, don't even buy a high-end PC. They're both collosal wastes of money. You'll need to pirate at least 20 cutting edge games to break even with the cost of any of the new generation consoles plus a dozen games. If you're looking at MMPG or RTS, well I've played the warcraft, baldur's gate, star craft and diablo series games on a total POS 300Mhz AMD with an 8MB ATI PCI card, and they all run fine. They're really the only things that computers do so significantly better that they might justify the cost. Nah, the visual differences aren't worth the cost. Will there even be 20 top flight games on the mac in the next 2-3 years. Or even on the PC?
Just buy yourself a gamecube and save your parents some money.
notice he said ATI in the same sentence as "Diablo series" and "run fine." but the game doesnt work right on my g4 with nVidia geforce2, yet it worked like a charm on my old g3 233 with 192 mb ram and an ATI card with only 2 mb video ram.
it really sucks that i cant enjoy my fave game on my new computer. i still spend more time playing on the old one.
bottom line: get any kind of ATI card (it doesnt have to be the top of the line) and buy ME some playstation2 games so i can forget about my nvidia woes. hehe.
<strong>From the GeForce4 benchmarks I've seen, the GF4 rips the 8500 a more than few new as*holes.
:cool: </strong><hr></blockquote>
yea the 8500 might be the more versatile but the gf4ti is definatly the most _powerful_
question: do you play alot of FPS games, kali?
if so then the GF4Ti is for you, but If you don't really care for raw speed, I think the 8500 has a bit of an edge over the Ti....but I cannot back this up, this is just from all the different reviews I've heard.
<strong>
yea the 8500 might be the more versatile but the gf4ti is definatly the most _powerful_
question: do you play alot of FPS games, kali?
if so then the GF4Ti is for you, but If you don't really care for raw speed, I think the 8500 has a bit of an edge over the Ti.....</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ok, I want an all purpose computer. Able to do EVERYTHING fast, without troubles. So it will be (most probably) a G4 at 933MHz (can't afford the dual), with 768 MB ram and the 17" LCD.
I know I'll be able to enjoy my fav games (Quake, Oni, Real Myst 3D soon ?) on this settup with the GeF4 MX, but ...
I WANT REAL TIME ANTIALIASING AND FEATURES IN ALL MY STUPID GAMES !!
Sorry, but I needed to scream it loud.
I hate jaggies. I want all the eye candies in my games. All options to best.
I wont buy a PC or a console for the games, because I want to be able to do everything on the same machine, and the serious work (wordprocessing, drawings, Mathematica and internet) will be done on a Mac.
Also, I want to be able to look at DVD movies on the machine, with very smooth playback and high quality images. I just don't want to feel the machine behind the movie I'm looking at.
And I need to play games from times to times.
So I'm now thinking about getting the ATI 8500 card.
What do you think about all theses ?
If you're really looking to the future, then just get the dual and forget about the 17" LCD. Buy a budget 17" monitor and make up some of the difference that way. Later on you can give yourself a very nice 'upgrade' (in a year or two) to whatever Apple or other available ADC panel best suited to your needs. You won't even have to get rid of the 17, you can just use it as a second monitor in a dual display setup.
From the tone of your posts, my guess is you're a teen whose about to grossly overspend for a machine he doesn't need.
<strong>Just be honest, you want to spend insane money on basically a gaming rig. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> And you want it to be an expensive pro mac
From the tone of your posts, my guess is you're a teen whose about to grossly overspend for a machine he doesn't need.</strong><hr></blockquote>
O man, you're hard. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
No I'm not a teen. If I sound childish, that's because English isn't my native language. Sorry about that and I'm doing my best to be readable.
I'm doing lots of things on computers. Mostly scientific writings, scientific drawings, Mathematica calculations.
I don't currently have internet access from home, because my home computer is too old now. So I need a powerfull computer, especially because I need sometimes to do complex calculations in Mathematica and some 3D modelisations.
I like to play games too, but it's not my only concern. Unfortunately (?), I have very high standards about games. I want top quality pictures, eye candies and all the beautiffull stuff. I like Quake, for example, but I want to play this game ONLY with best settings. Or it doesn't worth it.
Anybody here is playing with the ATI 8500 ? Is this too soon to ask ?
Like I said, I think you'll be fine with a 4MX. If you're buying a computer for more than just games, I suggest you get a dual, and forget about Apple's overpriced 17 for now. Everyone seems to have only good things to say about the dual 1Ghz, it's even not too bad in 3D work. It certainly cope best with MP aware OSX, subsequent updates, and OSX versions of the software you use. Especially when you want to run some mathematica clacs in the back-ground. You can pick-up an LCD later on (when the prices have dropped) or you get a little more room in your budget. Then you use it in tandem with your CRT to make a nice dual display set-up.
What's more important to you. Mathematica and 3-D modelling, or Quake? If it really is the first two, then you buy yourself the dual 1Ghz machine (with a CRT to save money), you don't worry about the video card so much, and you treat yourself to a nice little upgrade in a year or two: a new LCD (and maybe even a vid-card)
All the cards get the job done. some do things better than others but none of them suck. You can't go wrong with the geforce 4MX. It'll do everything you want. Maybe won't be the absolute fastest or the most featured but it does everything well.
<strong>
All the cards get the job done. some do things better than others but none of them suck. You can't go wrong with the geforce 4MX. It'll do everything you want. Maybe won't be the absolute fastest or the most featured but it does everything well.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm just wondering about the antialiasing features. A game without it just don't worth playing IMO. I can't stand the jaggies. That's why I'm asking about cards. The MX doesn't have AA. Of course all other apps will run perfectly with the MX. I don't care about this.
And no, I wont buy a CRT, because of desk clutter and other factors. If I buy a new computer, it will deffinitely be with the 17" LCD. So Matsu, don't tell me to save money with a CRT. I just don't care anymore about CTR. For me, they're really dead. Period.
As for the dual Gig, I was seriously considering it. I guess the 933MHz will be perfect for me for many years to come, but I'm not really convinced yet. So that's where I stand, between the 933 and the dual.
There are other factors I'm considering, like the day to day Backup of any files. I'm using an old MO drive (SCSI) at home, and wont be able to hook it to the new Mac. This is sad because MO are perfect for daily backup and archiving. I heard that the Superdrive isn't really suitable for what I want to do (too slow, limited write number, etc), but that's another thread subject.