Well, the only thing I will say is that ATI seems to be the way to go for all the MacIntels with discrete graphics, so far. How much of that is because of easier drivers to write? Mac drivers AND Bootcamp drivers.
nVidia rules the roost in PowerMac G5s. Will they pony up the sweet deals and driver-writing help for Mac Pros? We can only wait and see.
I'll believe it when I see it....I've heard this all before from the rest of the Mac community, when OS X was first coming out. UNIX based OX: that will make it easier.
Your cynicism is understandable, and I'm sure quite a few people share your irritation with the limited range of graphics cards available for the Mac. Like I said, it's just a waiting game now with the Mac Pros. Don't hold your breath too long though. We know how Apple rolls in the graphic card department. To everyone: Don't expect big changes, and outlandish ideas like SLI or CrossFire (I'll eat my shorts on this if they suddenly come out with "Yes, you can use almost ANY video card, ATI or nVidia, and just for the frack of it, you can custom order SLI OR CrossFire for your Mac Pro"
I'll believe it when I see it....I've heard this all before from the rest of the Mac community, when OS X was first coming out. UNIX based OX: that will make it easier.
Your cynicism is understandable, and I'm sure quite a few people share your irritation with the limited range of graphics cards available for the Mac. Like I said, it's just a waiting game now with the Mac Pros. Don't hold your breath too long though. We know how Apple rolls in the graphic card department. To everyone: Don't expect big changes, and outlandish ideas like SLI or CrossFire (I'll eat my shorts on this if they suddenly come out with "Yes, you can use almost ANY video card, ATI or nVidia, and just for the frack of it, you can custom order SLI OR CrossFire for your Mac Pro"
Yeah. I wish I didn't have to feel that way. I keep my fingers crossed that things will change.
But the only way that will happen is if Apple DOES sell a sh*tload of towers.
...the only way that will happen is if Apple DOES sell a sh*tload of towers.
Heh. Their primary Mac Pro focus is on the photo/ video/ music market, preferably lots of Final Cut Studio use. Universal Adobe/Macromedia CS3 would be the icing on the cake for the towers to fly out the door. At the moment I predict a "marching" out the door for the Mac Pros as compared with "flying" but maybe I've placed too much emphasis on Adobe/Macromedia CS3.
If Nvidia (or ati) develops 1 set of drivers for OS X like they have for windows, linux, solaris... We'll be able to use ANY aftermarket nvidia board. I could walk into compusa and pick up a EVGA 7950gtx and slap it in the mac pro (assuming it has SLI support) and away I go.
There is nothing stopping Nvidia from doing this. Unless apple puts up a potential block... but why, it would only look bad on apple's part? Our graphics card options will all the sudden change when the mac pro comes out.
This is why it is important to look at what is available in the PC world. Mac boards will be PC boards. No more big endian vs little endian stuff. For the most part the internal GPU code will be the same. The interfacing with OS X will obviously be different... but I forsee getting any graphics card we so desire from ATI & Nvidia in the future.
likey the cards in a mac pro will need a EFI bios to work maybe even bios + efi and that may not fit in cards that are out now.
That's interesting. So Intel is now ready to have its Integrated Graphics be full Vista-Aero "Vista Premium" ready.
"Intel prevailed in its fight to achieve Vista premium compatibility and is able to finally wave goodbye to ATI?s entry-level chipset. Intel simply doesn?t need it any more"
"Vista Premium" requirements are:
DirectX 9 class graphics processor that:
Supports a WDDM Driver.
Supports Pixel Shader 2.0 in hardware.
Supports 32 bits per pixel.
Adequate graphics memory.
64 MB of graphics memory to support a single monitor less than 1,310,720 pixels
128 MB of graphics memory to support a single monitor at resolutions from 1,310,720 to 2,304,000 pixels
256 MB of graphics memory to support a single monitor at resolutions higher than 2,304,000 pixels
Meets graphics memory bandwidth requirements, as assessed by Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor running on Windows XP
"Intel licensed Imaginations Technologies' SGX programmable Shader core marchitecture and is using it in its G965. These boards and the graphics capability inside are expected to arrive shortly and they will be Vista premium ready.... one is Muse, actually stands for Media Unified Shading Engine and is the way to use more of the SGX cores in parallel and make a powerful devices, even the multi-pipeline graphic core."
So Intel is going on a different route as compared to ATI and nVidia to deliver DirectX9 Pixel Shader 2 and above support?? Via "SGX" and "MUSE" shader engines? Hmm... And how will these shader techs work with Open-GL shaders that are used in Core Image? Interesting.
But looks like Intel is really going to pursue its own GPU capability ... Buying out nVidia becomes less likely. Assuming the Inquirer is reporting sensibly on this.
"[There will be PowerVR technologies with] with programmable pixel and vertex shading...
A second offering, codenamed Athena is the real thing based on SGX, supporting programmable Shaders. It is set for sometime in 2007 - later rather than sooner, we suggest.
As Intel licensed Imagniation's MBX, it may also license the SGX core as well. We suspect Intel wants muscle its way into the discrete graphics. Might it be tempted towards these Muse and Athena cores.
We will keep our eyes open, especially now ATI and AMD have become one."
Well. Graphics manufacturer + Canada + 2006/2007= Buyout or Close Up Shop? Nice real data in that article... Intel is p*owning: showing really how important games are: not that important when you take the *entire* PC market into consideration...! Jeez, can't believe they *actually* included Matrox in that table.
Well. Graphics manufacturer + Canada + 2006/2007= Buyout or Close Up Shop? Nice real data in that article... Intel is p*owning: showing really how important games are: not that important when you take the *entire* PC market into consideration...! Jeez, can't believe they *actually* included Matrox in that table.
I didn't even know matrox was still around. After I spent $2000 on a matrox rc (or something like that) for Final cut pro, I never did get that to work. And after calling them literally hundreds of times, I only talked with them a few times. It sounded as if I had reached someone's wife at home. And the answering machine for the company was a crappy tape based answering machine like you would get at walmart. After that I could never reach them again. I just assumed they went out of business. I still have the unused videocard and breakout box. Anyone interested?
Comments
nVidia rules the roost in PowerMac G5s. Will they pony up the sweet deals and driver-writing help for Mac Pros? We can only wait and see.
I'll believe it when I see it....I've heard this all before from the rest of the Mac community, when OS X was first coming out. UNIX based OX: that will make it easier.
Your cynicism is understandable, and I'm sure quite a few people share your irritation with the limited range of graphics cards available for the Mac. Like I said, it's just a waiting game now with the Mac Pros. Don't hold your breath too long though. We know how Apple rolls in the graphic card department. To everyone: Don't expect big changes, and outlandish ideas like SLI or CrossFire (I'll eat my shorts on this if they suddenly come out with "Yes, you can use almost ANY video card, ATI or nVidia, and just for the frack of it, you can custom order SLI OR CrossFire for your Mac Pro"
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
I'll believe it when I see it....I've heard this all before from the rest of the Mac community, when OS X was first coming out. UNIX based OX: that will make it easier.
Your cynicism is understandable, and I'm sure quite a few people share your irritation with the limited range of graphics cards available for the Mac. Like I said, it's just a waiting game now with the Mac Pros. Don't hold your breath too long though. We know how Apple rolls in the graphic card department. To everyone: Don't expect big changes, and outlandish ideas like SLI or CrossFire (I'll eat my shorts on this if they suddenly come out with "Yes, you can use almost ANY video card, ATI or nVidia, and just for the frack of it, you can custom order SLI OR CrossFire for your Mac Pro"
Yeah. I wish I didn't have to feel that way. I keep my fingers crossed that things will change.
But the only way that will happen is if Apple DOES sell a sh*tload of towers.
...the only way that will happen is if Apple DOES sell a sh*tload of towers.
Heh. Their primary Mac Pro focus is on the photo/ video/ music market, preferably lots of Final Cut Studio use. Universal Adobe/Macromedia CS3 would be the icing on the cake for the towers to fly out the door. At the moment I predict a "marching" out the door for the Mac Pros as compared with "flying"
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33318
Originally posted by emig647
It may matter though.
If Nvidia (or ati) develops 1 set of drivers for OS X like they have for windows, linux, solaris... We'll be able to use ANY aftermarket nvidia board. I could walk into compusa and pick up a EVGA 7950gtx and slap it in the mac pro (assuming it has SLI support) and away I go.
There is nothing stopping Nvidia from doing this. Unless apple puts up a potential block... but why, it would only look bad on apple's part? Our graphics card options will all the sudden change when the mac pro comes out.
This is why it is important to look at what is available in the PC world. Mac boards will be PC boards. No more big endian vs little endian stuff. For the most part the internal GPU code will be the same. The interfacing with OS X will obviously be different... but I forsee getting any graphics card we so desire from ATI & Nvidia in the future.
likey the cards in a mac pro will need a EFI bios to work maybe even bios + efi and that may not fit in cards that are out now.
Here is some interesting news that will affect us as well.
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33318
That's interesting. So Intel is now ready to have its Integrated Graphics be full Vista-Aero "Vista Premium" ready.
"Intel prevailed in its fight to achieve Vista premium compatibility and is able to finally wave goodbye to ATI?s entry-level chipset. Intel simply doesn?t need it any more"
"Vista Premium" requirements are:
DirectX 9 class graphics processor that:
Supports a WDDM Driver.
Supports Pixel Shader 2.0 in hardware.
Supports 32 bits per pixel.
Adequate graphics memory.
64 MB of graphics memory to support a single monitor less than 1,310,720 pixels
128 MB of graphics memory to support a single monitor at resolutions from 1,310,720 to 2,304,000 pixels
256 MB of graphics memory to support a single monitor at resolutions higher than 2,304,000 pixels
Meets graphics memory bandwidth requirements, as assessed by Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor running on Windows XP
"Intel licensed Imaginations Technologies' SGX programmable Shader core marchitecture and is using it in its G965. These boards and the graphics capability inside are expected to arrive shortly and they will be Vista premium ready.... one is Muse, actually stands for Media Unified Shading Engine and is the way to use more of the SGX cores in parallel and make a powerful devices, even the multi-pipeline graphic core."
So Intel is going on a different route as compared to ATI and nVidia to deliver DirectX9 Pixel Shader 2 and above support?? Via "SGX" and "MUSE" shader engines? Hmm... And how will these shader techs work with Open-GL shaders that are used in Core Image? Interesting.
But looks like Intel is really going to pursue its own GPU capability ... Buying out nVidia becomes less likely. Assuming the Inquirer is reporting sensibly on this.
"[There will be PowerVR technologies with] with programmable pixel and vertex shading...
A second offering, codenamed Athena is the real thing based on SGX, supporting programmable Shaders. It is set for sometime in 2007 - later rather than sooner, we suggest.
As Intel licensed Imagniation's MBX, it may also license the SGX core as well. We suspect Intel wants muscle its way into the discrete graphics. Might it be tempted towards these Muse and Athena cores.
We will keep our eyes open, especially now ATI and AMD have become one."
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33359
Matrox. How the mighty have fallen.
Matrox. How the mighty have fallen.
Well. Graphics manufacturer + Canada + 2006/2007= Buyout or Close Up Shop? Nice real data in that article... Intel is p*owning: showing really how important games are: not that important when you take the *entire* PC market into consideration...! Jeez, can't believe they *actually* included Matrox in that table.
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Matrox. How the mighty have fallen.
Well. Graphics manufacturer + Canada + 2006/2007= Buyout or Close Up Shop? Nice real data in that article... Intel is p*owning: showing really how important games are: not that important when you take the *entire* PC market into consideration...! Jeez, can't believe they *actually* included Matrox in that table.
I didn't even know matrox was still around. After I spent $2000 on a matrox rc (or something like that) for Final cut pro, I never did get that to work. And after calling them literally hundreds of times, I only talked with them a few times. It sounded as if I had reached someone's wife at home. And the answering machine for the company was a crappy tape based answering machine like you would get at walmart. After that I could never reach them again. I just assumed they went out of business. I still have the unused videocard and breakout box. Anyone interested?
http://www.nvidia.com/page/quadroplex.html
This is the future, my friends:
http://www.nvidia.com/page/quadroplex.html
Have I seen this post somewhere before?
I think my reply is there too.
FOUR nVIDIA QUADRO-standard GPU CORES !!!!!
Yeah, we get the point.
I'm going for 5000 posts. Shh...
I'll try to follow you in. Hold the door for me.
Yeah dude, pick up the pace a little
I'm working on it. See, this is one more.