As Barefeats said, it would be better to buy the 3870 than the 8800GT for faster performance, and the 2600 Pro would still be equal.
That was 10.5.3. We're at 10.5.6 and the Motion 3 performance for the 9400M is 1.4x as fast as with the 2400XT so nVidia OSX drivers appear good now. And as noted above, ATI just hosed up their OpenGL 3.0 support in their latest drivers.
Quote:
A more modern ATI card such as the 4870 still is much better than the currently best Nvidia for this purpose. Far better than a mid Nvidia.
Unless you have current benchmarks for the 4870 1GB vs GTX 260/216 you can't say that for sure. Especially with the current state of the Catalyst drivers.
That was 10.5.3. We're at 10.5.6 and the Motion 3 performance for the 9400M is 1.4x as fast as with the 2400XT so nVidia OSX drivers appear good now. And as noted above, ATI just hosed up their OpenGL 3.0 support in their latest drivers.
Unless you have current benchmarks for the 4870 1GB vs GTX 260/216 you can't say that for sure. Especially with the current state of the Catalyst drivers.
I agree that driver support gets screwed u with everyone. but, as you have shown, thats a temporary situation, and can't be used to evaluate the boards themselves over the long term.
I don't have any tests for the 260/216 yet. I'm just going by what I've read on the sites that check these boards. I'm sure we'll see tests soon.
Thanks for posting this. I'm betting the iMacs and new Mac Pros will see a similar improvement (for similarly priced models) when MacWorld posts their benchmarks.
Not that that will shut any of the doom-and-gloomers who want to bitch about clock speed.
Thanks for posting this. I'm betting the iMacs and new Mac Pros will see a similar improvement (for similarly priced models) when MacWorld posts their benchmarks.
Not that that will shut any of the doom-and-gloomers who want to bitch about clock speed.
I'm hoping for a bigger improvement from my Mac Pro, which Apple has JUST informed me has been shipped!
Thanks for posting this. I'm betting the iMacs and new Mac Pros will see a similar improvement (for similarly priced models) when MacWorld posts their benchmarks.
Not that that will shut any of the doom-and-gloomers who want to bitch about clock speed.
Mostly we're bitching about the pricing with regards to the Mac Mini and iMacs
Comments
It works faster in a number of apps besides Motion. From my own experience, it's faster in Archicad as well.
Since many pro apps use Core Image, yes, poor performance is important. As many 3D pro apps use Core Image, its important for them.
Even after the patch, it was still no better. Worse in some tests still. Not a good buy for pro users.
We have one set of tests here:
http://www.barefeats.com/harper10.html
The later ones here.
http://www.barefeats.com/imp04.html
As Barefeats said, it would be better to buy the 3870 than the 8800GT for faster performance, and the 2600 Pro would still be equal.
That was 10.5.3. We're at 10.5.6 and the Motion 3 performance for the 9400M is 1.4x as fast as with the 2400XT so nVidia OSX drivers appear good now. And as noted above, ATI just hosed up their OpenGL 3.0 support in their latest drivers.
A more modern ATI card such as the 4870 still is much better than the currently best Nvidia for this purpose. Far better than a mid Nvidia.
Unless you have current benchmarks for the 4870 1GB vs GTX 260/216 you can't say that for sure. Especially with the current state of the Catalyst drivers.
That was 10.5.3. We're at 10.5.6 and the Motion 3 performance for the 9400M is 1.4x as fast as with the 2400XT so nVidia OSX drivers appear good now. And as noted above, ATI just hosed up their OpenGL 3.0 support in their latest drivers.
Unless you have current benchmarks for the 4870 1GB vs GTX 260/216 you can't say that for sure. Especially with the current state of the Catalyst drivers.
I agree that driver support gets screwed u with everyone. but, as you have shown, thats a temporary situation, and can't be used to evaluate the boards themselves over the long term.
I don't have any tests for the 260/216 yet. I'm just going by what I've read on the sites that check these boards. I'm sure we'll see tests soon.
Macworld: Benchmarks: New Mac minis http://www.macworld.com/article/1392...mini_2009.html
Thanks for posting this. I'm betting the iMacs and new Mac Pros will see a similar improvement (for similarly priced models) when MacWorld posts their benchmarks.
Not that that will shut any of the doom-and-gloomers who want to bitch about clock speed.
Thanks for posting this. I'm betting the iMacs and new Mac Pros will see a similar improvement (for similarly priced models) when MacWorld posts their benchmarks.
Not that that will shut any of the doom-and-gloomers who want to bitch about clock speed.
I'm hoping for a bigger improvement from my Mac Pro, which Apple has JUST informed me has been shipped!
Thanks for posting this. I'm betting the iMacs and new Mac Pros will see a similar improvement (for similarly priced models) when MacWorld posts their benchmarks.
Not that that will shut any of the doom-and-gloomers who want to bitch about clock speed.
Mostly we're bitching about the pricing with regards to the Mac Mini and iMacs
Mostly we're bitching about the pricing with regards to the Mac Mini and iMacs
People are also bitching about the Mac Pro price.