NVIDIA prepping GeForce GTX 285 for Mac Pro

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 90
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ikir View Post


    To all Mac Pro 2006 owner, Nvidia 8800GT is a cool card, if you don't have it, buy it now! It is an incredible upgrade compared to the old default cards.



    Cool card but certainly not cheap. My local AASP recently quoted me an exorbitant $550 for a piece of industry-outdated card which was retailing at an already-overpriced $279 on the Apple Online Store. It doesn't look anywhere cool to me, does it...?



    If ATI can make their 3870 compatible with both 2006/7 and 2008 Mac Pros, I'm sure nVidia can.



    It's time for another class action suit for Apple.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 42 of 90
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macxpress View Post


    According to Apple's website, the MacPro only has (1) PCI Express 2.0 x16 slot. The rest of PCI Express 2.0 x4 slots. For a total of 3 PCI Express 2.0 slots.







    They have 2 x16 slots and 2 x4 slots. That box is only talking about the available slots. One x16 slot is already being used for the graphics card. What is so hard to understand?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 43 of 90
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,954member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iStink View Post


    The motherboard? You mean the psu? I'm unfamiliar with the guts of a mac pro, does the power get plugged into the motherboard then dispersed from there?



    Yes, the PCIe power socket is actually on the main board. There are very few stray cables in the Mac Pro, the exceptions that I recall are to connect power & data to the optical drives, everything else is tucked away, tied down or replaced with a direct board connection of some sort.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macxpress View Post


    According to Apple's website, the MacPro only has (1) PCI Express 2.0 x16 slot. The rest of PCI Express 2.0 x4 slots. For a total of 3 PCI Express 2.0 slots.







    Note that they say "open", as in the second x16 slot is already occupied with a GFX card.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 44 of 90
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Why the company is releasing the card at this stage isn't completely evident: the ATI Radeon HD 4870 already fills the role of the high-end yet mainstream video choice for the Mac Pro and would have the GTX 285 Mac Edition fight for a subset of an already small market.



    Personally I am overjoyed that nVidia is going to release the GTX 285. Realistically, the product is distinct from the HD4870 since for the 512MB PC version, ATI has a MSRP of $150 making it a mid-range GPU. THe GTX 285 priced at $350 on PCs is definitively a high-end part. At the same time, with the Mac version of the 512MB HD4870 priced at $350 up from $150 on PC, I'd hate to see what price the GTX 285 will have. Although if nVidia prices it aggressively, say at $400, which still allows them a $50 premium over the PC version, the GTX 285 could seriously undercut the HD4870.



    And having a consumer GPU with 1GB is very useful. Certain GPU accelerated applications like Mudbox already complain of insufficient memory with a 512MB GPU. This will only get more common with OpenCL applications and it shouldn't be necessary to go all the way to a Quadro to gt more than 512MB of VRAM. I always wondered why Apple didn't choose 1GB for their HD4870, but if the intention was always to eventually have the 1GB GTX 285, it makes sense now. I guess they were just waiting on the drivers since the GT200 GPU is quite distinct from the previous 8xxx and 9xxx series. For one thing the GT200 GPU can now do 64-bit double precision floats, useful for OpenCL, just as ATI HD3xxx and HD4xxx GPUs can do.



    My next bet is that ATI might hit back with a Mac & PC version of the new HD 4770. There is definitely room for a ~$200 GPU to replace the HD 3870 and this is probably the most popular segment anyways. The 512MB HD4770 is cheap to make, because of it's 40nm process, has great performance, still has decent performance separation with the higher-end 512MB HD4870, yet can use the same drivers so there is very little additional development effort.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 45 of 90
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iStink View Post


    The motherboard? You mean the psu? I'm unfamiliar with the guts of a mac pro, does the power get plugged into the motherboard then dispersed from there?



    Listen, the power connections make no difference. If you ever need more plugs, or perhaps you only have a six pin without an eight pin, you can just by splitters or adapters, and as long as it's all running on the 12v rail, it will all do the same thing. The plugs are definitely not reason enough to not release it. The power consumption is 280w which is like 24 amps. If you look at your psu and see how many amps are on your 12 rail, you can tell if it will run the card fine or not.



    I was actually speaking from experience, from trying to install the 295 from my gaming rig in my Mac Pro. As JeffDM said, there are very few spare power connectors/dangling cables in a Mac Pro. The only ones I could see were 1 spare optical drive power and the 2 PCIe power connectors.



    And even though a 6-pin can sometimes deliver enough power for an 8-pin, on the Mac Pro it doesn't work. The 295 has power connector lights to tell you if it is getting enough power from each of it's connectors, and the Mac Pro 6-pin can not provide enough it's 8-pin plug.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 46 of 90
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,954member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ltcommander.data View Post


    Personally I am overjoyed that nVidia is going to release the GTX 285. Realistically, the product is distinct from the HD4870 since for the 512MB PC version, ATI has a MSRP of $150 making it a mid-range GPU. THe GTX 285 priced at $350 on PCs is definitively a high-end part. At the same time, with the Mac version of the 512MB HD4870 priced at $350 up from $150 on PC, I'd hate to see what price the GTX 285 will have. Although if nVidia prices it aggressively, say at $400, which still allows them a $50 premium over the PC version, the GTX 285 could seriously undercut the HD4870.



    The problem with penny counting is that there is still a cost to developing for the Mac, and the actual market for the cards is small. If we were generous in saying that the Mac Pro is 1% of the upgrade card market, then you have to consider that that's a lot fewer machines to spread that driver & firmware development cost over.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 47 of 90
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    The problem with penny counting is that there is still a cost to developing for the Mac, and the actual market for the cards is small. If we were generous in saying that the Mac Pro is 1% of the upgrade card market, then you have to consider that that's a lot fewer machines to spread that driver & firmware development cost over.



    I don't doubt a premium for Mac GPUs is required to justify the additional development costs of a Mac version. But while some Mac GPUs have a reasonable premium, others are approaching price gauging to put it bluntly.



    For example, the new Quadro FX 4800 Mac Edition is priced at $1800. The comparable PC version costs around $1600. So a $200 or 12.5% premium. This is reasonable, maybe even a little bit low, considering the very high-price point and small target market.



    However, you have the 512MB HD4870 where the Mac version is $350 and the PC version has a MSRP of $150. A $200 or 233% premium. It's very hard to see development costs and small market justifying this premium. The development costs of the HD4870 drivers are shared with the HD4850 in the iMac, compared to professional Quadro drivers which should be fairly distinct from even GTX 285 drivers and the combined market of the HD4850 and HD4870 would be much larger than the Quadro FX 4800 Mac Edition. Yet the Quadro manages to have a tiny premium in comparison.



    Similarly, the GT120 for the Mac Pro (rebranded 9500GT) retails for $150 while the PC version averages around $60. A $90 or 250% premium. And with the GT120 the standard discrete GPU in both the iMac and Mac Pro the target market is larger than the HD4xxx market and substantially larger than the Quadro market, yet the premium is even higher. What's more, driver development effort is minimal since the GT120 is just a rebranded 9500GT, which is a shrink with upclock of the 8600GT, so the drivers would basically be the same as existing 8xxx and 9xxx GPUs.



    I don't mind a premium to account for development effort and small market, but the facts actually point to the exact opposite. The smaller the market, and the more unique the driver, like the Quadro, the smaller the premium, while the large market, little development effort parts, like the GT120, get a huge premium. I guess the reasoning is that the mainstream mass consumer is subsidizing the high-end niche market. I can actually respect that somewhat, otherwise a Quadro card may never have come to Mac at all. Still, it isn't exactly pretty. From my purchases, I guess it's kind of easier to overlook when buying a MacBook Pro since the GPU is built-in and hard to price, but it's just in plain sight when buying a Mac Pro.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 48 of 90
    As a heavy 3D program user, I bought a Mac Pro for an all out, no compromise system without price being a factor. I'm just glad to see a new graphics card that is actually something useful for the Mac Pro and not a lower end or outdated model. Apple has tended to neglect that area of the Mac Pro for some time by not updating their graphic cards often enough. While I have an '08 Mac Pro and 8800GT, it's nice to know there is an option now if I need more power without going over $1K for it.



    Thanks Apple and nVidia for giving us more options, that's why I got my Mac Pro to begin with and hope this is a trend from now on.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 49 of 90
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Any bumps to look forward to for the iMac, I wonder?



    These are third party cards. You won't see any MXM upgrades for the iMac.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post


    Yes, EFI-32 cards work on both EFI-32 and EFI-64. Apple pulls these dastardly stunts all the time. It's like they WANT to lose customers.



    They just might. This segment doesn't exactly doesn't with the Jobs-Ive mindset and they've done their best to try and marginalize it.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 50 of 90
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,954member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ltcommander.data View Post




    However, you have the 512MB HD4870 where the Mac version is $350 and the PC version has a MSRP of $150. A $200 or 233% premium. It's very hard to see development costs and small market justifying this premium.



    Are you comparing the same product from the same maker though? It seems like some of these cards are made by the graphics chip makers, and most of the PC card market is about the third party companies. Maybe it doesn't make any difference for actual build quality, and being the same general reference design shouldn't make a difference, but I think that could account for some of the price difference.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 51 of 90
    haggarhaggar Posts: 1,568member
    Still waiting for SLI and Crossfire support.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 52 of 90
    welshdogwelshdog Posts: 1,929member
    What will this card mean for Color? We have a guy who is a trained colorist / editor who wants to use Color on professional jobs. However, it isn't real time in HD and we have been hoping that Apple would offer a card that accelerates the rendering in Color. Clients paying high dollar for color sessions expect a certain level of performance from the equipment - Color is close, but not quite what we want it to be.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 53 of 90
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,715member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macxpress View Post


    According to Apple's website, the MacPro only has (1) PCI Express 2.0 x16 slot. The rest of PCI Express 2.0 x4 slots. For a total of 3 PCI Express 2.0 slots.







    Did you actually read that carefully?



    It says 1 OPEN Express 2.0 x 16 slot.



    That's in addition to the 16 x slot used for the graphics card, which is also a double width slot.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 54 of 90
    istinkistink Posts: 250member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post


    I was actually speaking from experience, from trying to install the 295 from my gaming rig in my Mac Pro. As JeffDM said, there are very few spare power connectors/dangling cables in a Mac Pro. The only ones I could see were 1 spare optical drive power and the 2 PCIe power connectors.



    And even though a 6-pin can sometimes deliver enough power for an 8-pin, on the Mac Pro it doesn't work. The 295 has power connector lights to tell you if it is getting enough power from each of it's connectors, and the Mac Pro 6-pin can not provide enough it's 8-pin plug.



    There's no way to bypass it and plug right into the psu? If not that blows.



    Also, I've been reading about it, and the reason you can't simply plug a pc video card into a mac has to do with the bios on the card. It needs a special bios for the mac motherboard, and also even requires a different bios chip (I think larger in capacity)



    Other than the 295, have you ever tried to run a pc video card in the mac pro before? If so what happened when you turned it on?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 55 of 90
    SpamSandwichspamsandwich Posts: 33,407member
    This might sound completely insane, but are there any kits to upgrade an 'older-than-the-hills' PowerPC G5 Dual 1.8 GHz Mac to an Intel Mac of any sort? I don't follow the technical aspects of computing anymore other than the general specs for RAM, HD size and chip speed. If possible, I'd gut my old computer and install a new motherboard and a few other components... is this even remotely possible?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 56 of 90
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iStink View Post


    Other than the 295, have you ever tried to run a pc video card in the mac pro before? If so what happened when you turned it on?



    I have tried a PC version 8800GT. It works if you boot in to Windows but not if you boot in to OS X.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 57 of 90
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    Did you actually read that carefully?



    It says 1 OPEN Express 2.0 x 16 slot.



    That's in addition to the 16 x slot used for the graphics card, which is also a double width slot.



    I think this tutorial and chart clears everything up.



    http://www.everymac.com/systems/appl...gurations.html



     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 58 of 90
    londorlondor Posts: 265member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    I think this tutorial and chart clears everything up.



    http://www.everymac.com/systems/appl...gurations.html



    {img}http://www.everymac.com/images/other_images/mac-pro-diagram.jpg{/img}



    So you went through all the trouble of finding that article but you failed to read it. Amusing.



    "The Power Macintosh G5 Quad 2.5 has a four slot PCI Express bus with a fixed total of 32 lanes (with a 16-lane, 4-lane, 8-lane, and 4-lane slot) and the subsequently introduced Mac Pro "Eight Core" 2.8 (Early 2008) has a fixed total of 40 lanes (with a double-wide 16-lane PCIe 2.0 slot, single-wide 16-lane PCIe 2.0 slot, and two 4-lane PCIe slots).



    The original Mac Pro Quad 2.66, on the other hand, has a four slot PCI Express bus with a total of 26 dynamically allocated lanes. By default, the graphics card occupies a double-wide 16-lane PCI Express slot, the second slot is allocated as a single lane, and the third and fourth slot are each configured as 4-lane slots."
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 59 of 90
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,455member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    This might sound completely insane, but are there any kits to upgrade an 'older-than-the-hills' PowerPC G5 Dual 1.8 GHz Mac to an Intel Mac of any sort? I don't follow the technical aspects of computing anymore other than the general specs for RAM, HD size and chip speed. If possible, I'd gut my old computer and install a new motherboard and a few other components... is this even remotely possible?



    Besides the fact of the cases being completely different on the inside, the only real way is to gut an existing mac pro and put it in that tower . In other words, no.... You'd have to replace everything.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 60 of 90
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,715member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    This might sound completely insane, but are there any kits to upgrade an 'older-than-the-hills' PowerPC G5 Dual 1.8 GHz Mac to an Intel Mac of any sort? I don't follow the technical aspects of computing anymore other than the general specs for RAM, HD size and chip speed. If possible, I'd gut my old computer and install a new motherboard and a few other components... is this even remotely possible?



    Only if you turn it into a PC based Hackintosh as some have done. But it's not totally compatible that way.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.