Mac Pro Graphics

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
If I ordered a Mac Pro with the most basic GPU or none at all if Apple will allow me to (over the phone), would I be able to install two Radeon X800GTOs? I mean, would they work just fine with the Mac? I'm asking because I'm wondering if any compatability issues exist, if anyone knows, or if theoretically everything should work perfectly... ?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 19
    flounderflounder Posts: 2,674member
    Well, I can tell you they won't allow you to order it with no graphics card. the 7300 is the base card, and you can't go lower than that.
  • Reply 2 of 19
    mordakmordak Posts: 168member
    Yes I just figured that out after speaking with them. It's just 2 of the 7300GTs are not that great, and the one ATI is a little pricy. Can anyone answer my question from above?
  • Reply 3 of 19
    placeboplacebo Posts: 5,767member
    Firstoff:

    This is not a board that's going to work for either SLI or Crossfire dual-card coprocessing. The dual 7300GTs do not work with each other; the only reason they are available is to drive more displays than a single card can, not to act like SLI cards.



    There is only one regular PCI-e slot intended for the GPU. The rest are shorter slots that are half as fast and intended more for sound cards, slow graphics cards for extra displays, RAID cards, etc. Not full-speed graphics cards. That's what the 16x slot is for. Even if there were two 16x slots it's arguable whether that would work on the current mobo.



    Secondly:

    Nobody's sure yet whether 3rd party cards can be used, because the Mac Pro motherboard is EFI and not the more common BIOS found in most every other computer, and requires GPUs with ROMs flashed to work with EFI.



    However, some curious bastard is surely going to try to do so once his Mac Pro arrives, so look for that story in a week or two.
  • Reply 4 of 19
    mordakmordak Posts: 168member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Placebo


    Firstoff:

    This is not a board that's going to work for either SLI or Crossfire dual-card coprocessing. The dual 7300GTs do not work with each other; the only reason they are available is to drive more displays than a single card can, not to act like SLI cards.



    There is only one regular PCI-e slot intended for the GPU. The rest are shorter slots that are half as fast and intended more for sound cards, slow graphics cards for extra displays, RAID cards, etc. Not full-speed graphics cards. That's what the 16x slot is for. Even if there were two 16x slots it's arguable whether that would work on the current mobo.



    Secondly:

    Nobody's sure yet whether 3rd party cards can be used, because the Mac Pro motherboard is EFI and not the more common BIOS found in most every other computer, and requires GPUs with ROMs flashed to work with EFI.



    However, some curious bastard is surely going to try to do so once his Mac Pro arrives, so look for that story in a week or two.



    I have been speaking with an Apple representative for the past 20minutes and they are claiming that the technology in the motherboard and hardware is similar to that of SLI and that the cards will work together, apart from providing for extra displays. The rep said as long as its an ATI or Nvidia card and it matches the necessary drivers, then it will work--for instance, the x800 series.
  • Reply 5 of 19
    placeboplacebo Posts: 5,767member
    Hmmm...well, I'd be interested to see what happens, so go for it.



    But more honestly, wait for somebody else to try.
  • Reply 6 of 19
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,870member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Placebo


    The rest are shorter slots



    They all look the same length to me in this photo.



    Unless of course you meant shorter height-wise. If you put a fat graphics cards in slot 2, you won't be able to get anything in slot 3.
  • Reply 7 of 19
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Placebo


    Firstoff:

    This is not a board that's going to work for either SLI or Crossfire dual-card coprocessing. The dual 7300GTs do not work with each other; the only reason they are available is to drive more displays than a single card can, not to act like SLI cards.



    There is only one regular PCI-e slot intended for the GPU. The rest are shorter slots that are half as fast and intended more for sound cards, slow graphics cards for extra displays, RAID cards, etc. Not full-speed graphics cards. That's what the 16x slot is for. Even if there were two 16x slots it's arguable whether that would work on the current mobo.



    Secondly:

    Nobody's sure yet whether 3rd party cards can be used, because the Mac Pro motherboard is EFI and not the more common BIOS found in most every other computer, and requires GPUs with ROMs flashed to work with EFI.



    However, some curious bastard is surely going to try to do so once his Mac Pro arrives, so look for that story in a week or two.



    But wouldnt 2x7300s be 2x the proformance in Motion, being that it is GPU rendered and all...
  • Reply 8 of 19
    mordakmordak Posts: 168member
    I just decided to not mess around and go with the ATI Radeon X1900 XT 512MB
  • Reply 9 of 19
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by a_greer


    But wouldnt 2x7300s be 2x the proformance in Motion, being that it is GPU rendered and all...



    No. Because there's no linking between them, it's impossible without software implementations specifically designed to handle that, which means that the benefits of doubling the graphics cards (sans SLI, of course) would be nil to negligible at best. Bringing your computer and graphics card "in sync" is basically a disaster in terms of thousands of wasted cycles on both the CPU and the GPU.



    I've spent a good part of today coming up with solutions to that today, in fact, for my application. I have one that may work, but needs further scrutiny later. It's actually the simplest: split the drawing area in two and draw half of it on one GPU to a buffer, draw the other half directly to the screen. Then you move the buffer back to the CPU and then back to the GPU currently drawing the screen. Again, no idea if it'll really work that well, and it definately won't work in Motion unless they did that themselves already.



    Also, 7300's are SOOOOO slow. Ungodly slow compared to what was standard on the Power Mac. They're only there for people who need a bare bare bones graphics card, they were NEVER intented for games or use in programs like Motion.
  • Reply 10 of 19
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,870member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gregmightdothat


    Also, 7300's are SOOOOO slow. Ungodly slow compared to what was standard on the Power Mac.



    Um... I believe that the PowerMac used to come standard with the 6600LE, which is slower than the 7300GT.
  • Reply 11 of 19
    placeboplacebo Posts: 5,767member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mordak


    I just decided to not mess around and go with the ATI Radeon X1900 XT 512MB



    Good, you and I can play some Counter Strike: Source in mid-September.
  • Reply 12 of 19
    ensoniqensoniq Posts: 131member
    The 7300GT is not "slow". No matter how many times people say it, it doesn't make it true.



    It is NOT the top of the line video card available, and it is not going to give you 4000 FPS in Quake 4, and this makes some people very sad. But again, the 7300GT is as fast as any video on any currently shipping Intel-based Mac and is faster than the base card on any previous PowerMac G5.



    For it's intended purpose it's more than enough power. For those who think it's not, that is why Apple provides upgrade options...go with the ATI card. If you can afford the $2500, you can afford $300 more so you can get your game on. But Apple is including a more than powerful enough card with the base system for about 95% of the people who will be buying it. And from a marketing standpoint, that is the right decision for them to have made on choosing what the base graphics card is...not the 5% variance of "speed freaks" out there.
  • Reply 13 of 19
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H


    Um... I believe that the PowerMac used to come standard with the 6600LE, which is slower than the 7300GT.



    It came with the LE? Oh, then I guess you're right.



    The 6600GT is still about 30% faster than the 7300GT for fill rate, which is pretty much all that matters this day and age.
  • Reply 14 of 19
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ensoniq


    The 7300GT is not "slow". No matter how many times people say it, it doesn't make it true.



    It is NOT the top of the line video card available, and it is not going to give you 4000 FPS in Quake 4, and this makes some people very sad. But again, the 7300GT is as fast as any video on any currently shipping Intel-based Mac and is faster than the base card on any previous PowerMac G5.



    For it's intended purpose it's more than enough power. For those who think it's not, that is why Apple provides upgrade options...go with the ATI card. If you can afford the $2500, you can afford $300 more so you can get your game on. But Apple is including a more than powerful enough card with the base system for about 95% of the people who will be buying it. And from a marketing standpoint, that is the right decision for them to have made on choosing what the base graphics card is...not the 5% variance of "speed freaks" out there.



    No shit. We're not talking about it's intended purpose. Mordak is looking for a powerful system.



    The 7300GT is a shit card for people that won't be using the graphics card at all (ie, Photoshop users). Anyone actually using it (ie, 3D or Maya users, gamers) WILL need to upgrade to the X1900.
  • Reply 15 of 19
    mordakmordak Posts: 168member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Placebo


    Good, you and I can play some Counter Strike: Source in mid-September.



    LoL you're dead.
  • Reply 16 of 19
    mordakmordak Posts: 168member
    I've had a Radeon 9700 Pro since it came out, and it still works wonders, and I'm sure the 7300GT would be much better than what I currently use, however, the ATI is what i want, and what i need... plus I'm an ATI fanboy woohoo! not for long though, depending on how AMD destroys ATI
  • Reply 17 of 19
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mordak


    I've had a Radeon 9700 Pro since it came out, and it still works wonders, and I'm sure the 7300GT would be much better than what I currently use, however, the ATI is what i want, and what i need... plus I'm an ATI fanboy woohoo! not for long though, depending on how AMD destroys ATI



    They're actually about the same.
  • Reply 18 of 19
    zozo Posts: 3,117member
    it WOULD be nice if we could FINALLY just go out and buy ANY ATI or nVidia graphics card and stick the sucker into a PowerMac.. err.. I mean MacPro.



    Thats probably the biggest thorn in the PowerMac's side.. having to buy overpriced, Mac-specific graphics cards. What a pain in the bahookey.
  • Reply 19 of 19
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,870member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ZO


    it WOULD be nice if we could FINALLY just go out and buy ANY ATI or nVidia graphics card and stick the sucker into a PowerMac.. err.. I mean MacPro.



    Sorry, but that's a no-go



    Mac Pro = EFI



    Windows = BIOS



    And, even more annoyingly, the hope of the rest of the industry moving to EFI took a significant blow when Microsoft announced they were dropping support for it from Vista
Sign In or Register to comment.