PDA

View Full Version : NVIDIA GT 120 vs ATI 2600 XT




dnadrifter
Apr 26, 2009, 12:47 PM
Hi All,

I am still trying to decide between a 2008 2.8 Octo and a 2009 2.66 quad and would like to know how much of a difference I would be likely to see with the new video GT 120 graphics card for photoshop, iMovie and eventually moving home videos to blu-ray disk vs the older 2600 XT.

(I know virtually nothing about graphic cards) I am starting to lean towards the 2008 because the amount of RAM I can put in it now as well as having 8 cores for the eventual release of snow leopard, but I am wondering about the graphics card.

Thanks.



zer0tails
Apr 26, 2009, 02:14 PM
get the 2008 and buy a Nvidia GT120 to replace the ATI if that's what you prefer. Since the GPU can be replaced so easily I don't you should base your decision on it. Ram would be a better factor, if you foresee needing as much as a 32GB or the option of it anyways, then get the 2008.

The 2009 2.66 is supposedly fast as it is though from what i've seen in bench marks

dnadrifter
Apr 26, 2009, 03:05 PM
To be honest I don't know what I prefer as I don't know anything about graphic cards. If I am not going to see a real world difference in the apps I use, I would have no reason to upgrade the card.

I am so on the fence about the two systems, that I am looking at smaller things that might tilt the balance.

With the GT 120, it sounds if I could run a large monitor from the DVI port and then my smaller 1200x1600 lcd with the $30 adapter to the mini display port. Is this correct?...I called apple and it was hard to get a clear answer in that they just kept talking about their monitors.

If I got the 2008, I would buy an additional 12 Gb of RAM to get to 14 and be done with it...likely would never go beyond that.

If I got the 2009, I would put in 8 Gb of RAM now. Although I could put either 12 or 16 Gb in it in the future, even if the 4gb modules come down to the price the current 800 MHz modules are, I am not sure I would want to drop another $400 on RAM

I am also considering how much more useful 8 physical cores will be once the new OS comes out.

Dr.Pants
Apr 26, 2009, 04:30 PM
12 GB of fully buffered ECC RAM would light my wallet on fire, maybe more so then 12 GB of DDR3 4GB modules.

EDIT - My bad. ECC FB-DIMMs only cost more when they're in 2 GB modules. 4GB modules, DDR3 takes the cake. *facedesk*

netkas
Apr 27, 2009, 12:25 AM
With the GT 120, it sounds if I could run a large monitor from the DVI port and then my smaller 1200x1600 lcd with the $30 adapter to the mini display port. Is this correct?...I called apple and it was hard to get a clear answer in that they just kept talking about their monitors.



wouldnt dual dvi 2600xt be better then ?

gt120 is in fact shrinked g84(8600gt)

in 2007, when 8600gt and 2600xt was released, they was supposed to be competitors in 3d graphics.

mac's 2600xt is downclocked a bit (800 -> 700 Mhz core)

Genghis Khan
Apr 27, 2009, 03:06 AM
get the 2008 and buy a Nvidia GT120 to replace the ATI if that's what you prefer.

i'm pretty sure the GT120 needs ddr3 ram to run (check the apple site)


get an 8800GT or a 4870HD (or flash one if you're game)

zer0tails
Apr 27, 2009, 09:36 AM
i'm pretty sure the GT120 needs ddr3 ram to run (check the apple site)


get an 8800GT or a 4870HD (or flash one if you're game)

Yes Apple states that the GT120 works with the 2009 mac pros. However, OWC has tested 2008 mac pros and so have some other owners http://blog.macsales.com/602-testing-those-new-graphics-cards
and it works fine ;) no reason why it shouldn't