NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285 confirmed for June release [Archive]

Jamnabot

Apr 29, 2009, 05:13 PM

http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/29/nvidias-geforce-gtx-285-coming-to-macs-in-june/

http://img2.imageshack.us/img2/5337/macgtx285eng.jpg

Well isn't THAT a nice bit of news.

So, speculation begin. Will this likely work with the 2006 MacPros or will I be out of luck and this will be confined to the 2008+ models?

AdvocateUK

Apr 29, 2009, 05:15 PM

lol you beat me to it by a minute, we must have been posting at the same time.

Chaszmyr

Apr 29, 2009, 05:15 PM

I'd be willing to bet it won't work with 2006 Mac Pros.... But it's going to be coming out approximately the same time as OpenCL... I think I see a new Mac Pro in my future.

cmaier

Apr 29, 2009, 05:19 PM

Awesome. Now we're talking.

Jamnabot

Apr 29, 2009, 05:20 PM

I'd be willing to bet it won't work with 2006 Mac Pros.... But it's going to be coming out approximately the same time as OpenCL... I think I see a new Mac Pro in my future.

I'll admit to needing to be being fairly optimistic to want this to be an option for 2006 MacPros, but...damnit I want it to be an option!

Eidorian

Apr 29, 2009, 05:22 PM

I'm somewhat surprised by this news.

Tallest Skil

Apr 29, 2009, 05:26 PM

I'm somewhat surprised by this news.

As am I.

Looks like I'll be moving my GT 120 up a few slots...

Hmm... 4870, GTX 285, and GT 120...

Nahh... THAT won't be too much of a draw!

Concorde Rules

Apr 29, 2009, 05:30 PM

Ok.

If 10.5.7 doesn't fix the 4870 mouse issue it goes back and gets replaced with the GT120!

Love to have THAT card :D

FRKT

Apr 29, 2009, 05:53 PM

Would a GTX 285 and a Radeon HD4870 be able to work together somehow under Windows, or are we looking at a clean-cut case of replacing the HD4870?

rainmanbk

Apr 29, 2009, 06:27 PM

Little information about the card was directly mentioned, though certain details are evident through an image accompanying the teaser: the GTX 285 will be made by third-party firm EVGA, a company already well-established in making NVIDIA-based cards for Windows PCs. Like the Quadro FX 4800, though, it will forgo Apple's preferred Mini DisplayPort in favor of two dual-link DVI video ports. Both 2008 and 2009 Mac Pros will be supported.

From Appleinsider.com

I currently own an original 2006 Mac Pro and I am still running the Radeon X1900. I'd love for this to be an option, but I feel like it will not be because of the issues with the previous upgrade card from nVidia, requiring that special treatment to deal with the lack of proper PCI Express 2.0 slots, or whatever the deal was. :(

zmttoxics

Apr 29, 2009, 06:44 PM

I too am surprised... eVGA no less... Wow.

Well, hopefully my new software dev job will pay enough so I can get some new age Mac Pro.

turtlebud

Apr 29, 2009, 06:45 PM

with equivalent Radeon 4870 HD running about 1/2 on much on the PC side, would it be safe to assume the GTX 285 is going to be about twice as much as the PC version (which is currently around $350-400)? I'm guess that's going to run about $600 when it first comes out at least.

Tallest Skil

Apr 29, 2009, 06:47 PM

Would a GTX 285 and a Radeon HD4870 be able to work together somehow under Windows, or are we looking at a clean-cut case of replacing the HD4870?

Windows XP and Seven can mix manufacturers. Vista can't. You can't use both cards in one computer simultaneously, anyway. You would need to use all of your PCIe slots and one ODD slot.

From Appleinsider.com

I currently own an original 2006 Mac Pro and I am still running the Radeon X1900. I'd love for this to be an option, but I feel like it will not be because of the issues with the previous upgrade card from nVidia, requiring that special treatment to deal with the lack of proper PCI Express 2.0 slots, or whatever the deal was. :(

ROM.

JollyRogers

Apr 29, 2009, 07:09 PM

And I just received and installed my HD4870 from Apple today. EVGA gives lifetime warranty on their cards (at least they have on their PC versions). Now I wish I had waited... oh well.:(

matthew.russo

Apr 29, 2009, 07:14 PM

hmmm 1 GTX 285 or 2 4870's in xfire..what would be better?

Does the 2008 or 2009 support SLI?

Mackilroy

Apr 29, 2009, 07:24 PM

I'd love to upgrade to a GTX 285 from my 8800 GT, but we'll see. If not, then not. :)

Tallest Skil

Apr 29, 2009, 07:26 PM

hmmm 1 GTX 285 or 2 4870's in xfire..what would be better?

You can't use CrossFire in OS X or without using all five PCIe positions and an entire ODD slot.

matthew.russo

Apr 29, 2009, 07:35 PM

You can't use CrossFire in OS X or without using all five PCIe positions and an entire ODD slot.

It would be for windows only obviosuly, gaming :)

If the 08 mac pro supports sli I would ditch the xfire setup.

Tallest Skil

Apr 29, 2009, 07:40 PM

It would be for windows only obviosuly, gaming :)

If the 08 mac pro supports sli I would ditch the xfire setup.

No Mac Pro supports SLI.

matthew.russo

Apr 29, 2009, 07:43 PM

No Mac Pro supports SLI.

Thats the answer I was after :)

grue

Apr 29, 2009, 07:45 PM

Oh hell yes.

XianPalin

Apr 29, 2009, 07:54 PM

Definitely getting this instead of the 4870.

grue

Apr 29, 2009, 08:03 PM

I suspect they'll ruin my hopes and dreams by making it EFI64-only, unfortunately. If they do, that'll probably push me over the edge and I'll sell my 8x3.0 and get a 2008 used model.

turtlebud

Apr 29, 2009, 08:04 PM

is this card a good choice for aperture & final cut express relative to the 4870 and/or the the XT2600?

how is the power consumption vs. the 4870 (which I read was a power pig from digitalloyd)?

cmaier

Apr 29, 2009, 08:04 PM

is this card a good choice for aperture & final cut express relative to the 4870 and/or the the XT2600?

how is the power consumption vs. the 4870 (which I read was a power pig from digitalloyd)?

Probably little difference for things like aperture and final cut.

Fomaphone

Apr 29, 2009, 08:25 PM

how much better than the 4870 is this card?

is it likely to be about the same price? should i regret my 4870 purchase?

twoodcc

Apr 29, 2009, 08:28 PM

better late than never, right?

and i too would like to see this work in a 2006 mac pro, but i doubt it will

cmaier

Apr 29, 2009, 09:10 PM

better late than never, right?

and i too would like to see this work in a 2006 mac pro, but i doubt it will

It won't. 2008 and 09 only.

grue

Apr 29, 2009, 09:27 PM

It won't. 2008 and 09 only.

To be fair, they said that about the GT120 and Radeon 4870 as well

Tallest Skil

Apr 29, 2009, 09:29 PM

To be fair, they said that about the GT120 and Radeon 4870 as well

Weren't they right? EFI32, and all?

matthew.russo

Apr 29, 2009, 09:31 PM

No Mac Pro supports SLI.

Doing some reading in other threads, some have had sucess running sli on the 2008 mac pro. the 5400 chipset supports sli. though no concrete evidence.

still keen to know a definite answer.

edit: as noted before it will not work as nforce chips are required which the mac pro logic board does not have. the 5400 chipset itself does NOT support SLI.

VirtualRain

Apr 29, 2009, 09:39 PM

Being a fan boy of the 24" LED ACD (with the @#$% mini-display port), this is not an option for me... although it's great to see more choice!

Here's some benchmarks showing how it compares in common Windows games with the 4870 (albeit a 1GB version but still a good reference)...

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_radeon_4890_nvidia_geforce_gtx_275/images/l4d1920.gif

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_radeon_4890_nvidia_geforce_gtx_275/images/far1920.gif

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_radeon_4890_nvidia_geforce_gtx_275/images/cry1920.gif

Full Review: http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_radeon_4890_nvidia_geforce_gtx_275/

grue

Apr 29, 2009, 09:43 PM

Weren't they right? EFI32, and all?

Allegedly they work just fine.

Topper

Apr 29, 2009, 10:09 PM

Here's some benchmarks showing how it compares in common Windows games with the 4870 (albeit a 1GB version but still a good reference)...

The problem with the big name PC games is they are almost all either DX9 or DX10.
If they were to use an OpenGL game like Enemy Territory: Quake Wars, 2560 x 1600, 4x AA, 16x AF, for their benchmarks, the results would go pretty much like this:

1. NV GTX 295 - 97 fps
2. ATI 4870 x2 - 92 fps
3. ATI 4850 x2 - 77 fps
4. NV GTX 285 - 71 fps
5. NV GTX 280 - 66 fps
6. NV GTX 275 - 64 fps
7. NV 9800 GX2 - 62 fps
8. (tie) ATI HD 4890 - 60 fps
8. (tie) NV GTX 260 C216 - 60 fps
10. ATI HD 4870 1GB - 56 fps
11. ATI HD 4870 - 53 fps

But it is all pretty much a moot point since NVIDIA can't seem to provide Apple with good drivers.
.

Topper

Apr 29, 2009, 10:12 PM

Weren't they right? EFI32, and all?

From Barefeats:

"Apple is officially supporting only 2009 and 2008 Mac Pros with the Radeon HD 4870 kit. And it requires either the build of OS X 10.5.6 with the February 2009 ATI drivers -- or OS X 10.5.7 (not yet golden).

As with the Radeon HD 3870 and HD 2600, ATI included both a 32-bit and 64-bit EFI driver in the ROM, so it should work in all models of Mac Pro with the latest drivers. We installed in the Clovertown first generation 8-core Mac Pro (as you can see from the graphs above) and a close colleague installed it in a 2.66GHz Woodcrest 4-core first generation Mac Pro. As long as you have two power feeds for the card in your first generation Mac Pro and have the correct drivers properly installed, it should work fine."

sneezymarble

Apr 29, 2009, 10:31 PM

better late than never, right?

I guess. I hope Apple has plans to start supporting GPUs quicker than they have in the past. There's a lot of interest in offloading things like rendering, decoding and encoding to GPUs. If that ends up happening in a significant way, I'm sure a lot of people with Apple machines will be a little pissed to see their Windows brethren doing the same tasks several times faster with their fancy new GPUs and all.

I mean, it's nice that a GT200 chip is headed to Macs, until you realize that the GT300 (http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/4/22/nvidias-gt300-specifications-revealed---its-a-cgpu!.aspx) chips are right around the corner.

irishgrizzly

Apr 29, 2009, 10:36 PM

I mean, it's nice that a GT200 chip is headed to Macs, until you realize that the GT300 (http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/4/22/nvidias-gt300-specifications-revealed---its-a-cgpu%21.aspx) chips are right around the corner.

Yeah but there's always something in the pipeline – nature of the beast.

skyline r34

Apr 29, 2009, 11:36 PM

I was going to get upgrade my 8800GT to the ATi 4870 but i'm glad that I hold off, i'm definitely getting this for my 2008 Mac Pro can't wait until June

turtlebud

Apr 29, 2009, 11:39 PM

will nvidia supply drivers for this card or will that have to come from apple? are we going to wait through the same delays as we did for the 4870 drivers to be released before the GTX is fully functional on the Mac Pro?

PeterQC

Apr 30, 2009, 12:09 AM

If there's that kind of offering for the Mac Pro in 3 years, I can totally say that this is confirmed, I'm getting an Mac Pro :D

VirtualRain

Apr 30, 2009, 01:15 AM

I guess. I hope Apple has plans to start supporting GPUs quicker than they have in the past.

How is this up to Apple? I don't understand. Can't the graphics card companies supply Mac users with any card and supporting drivers they want whenever they want? They don't need Apple's blessing, do they?

I'm assuming the reason for the traditionally poor selection has been the market size is just not attractive enough to warrant much investment. Until the Mac Pro market increases, I can't really see how anything will change dramatically (eg. more choice in graphics cards) although I'd say it already seems to have improved significantly from where things were previously.

iBug2

Apr 30, 2009, 02:03 AM

The problem with the big name PC games is they are almost all either DX9 or DX10.
If they were to use an OpenGL game like Enemy Territory: Quake Wars, 2560 x 1600, 4x AA, 16x AF, for their benchmarks, the results would go pretty much like this:

1. NV GTX 295 - 97 fps
2. ATI 4870 x2 - 92 fps
3. ATI 4850 x2 - 77 fps
4. NV GTX 285 - 71 fps
5. NV GTX 280 - 66 fps
6. NV GTX 275 - 64 fps
7. NV 9800 GX2 - 62 fps
8. (tie) ATI HD 4890 - 60 fps
8. (tie) NV GTX 260 C216 - 60 fps
10. ATI HD 4870 1GB - 56 fps
11. ATI HD 4870 - 53 fps

But it is all pretty much a moot point since NVIDIA can't seem to provide Apple with good drivers.
.
Well so far drivers for 8800GT turned out to be the best drivers available. 4870 drivers are very poor right now, 4870 doesn't even play all games faster than 8800gt and 2D acceleration is better with 8800gt.

peskaa

Apr 30, 2009, 02:49 AM

And I just installed a GTX 275!

Oh well, my performance is only slightly down on the GTX 280, but I do have to swap monitors and power cables around.

Cindori

Apr 30, 2009, 05:12 AM

It never ends.

I guess we'll see a "Who's first to dump GTX275 ROM?" thread soon :)

DualShock

Apr 30, 2009, 05:29 AM

how is the power consumption vs. the 4870 (which I read was a power pig from digitalloyd)?

power consumption #'s vs the 4870 (and some other cards):

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3501&p=9

less power than 4870 when idle, more power when under load

Valorite

Apr 30, 2009, 06:21 AM

It never ends.

I guess we'll see a "Who's first to dump GTX275 ROM?" thread soon :)

I hope it doesn't end! and we see much more frequent current gen video card releases for the mac :D

10THzMac

Apr 30, 2009, 08:58 AM

:D:D:D Fab news. At least I know not to waste any more time trying to hack my system with nvthis, nvthat, flashing roms and editing EFI strings to try to get my Palit PC 285 up under OS X 10.x.y I have seen about 300 kernel panics in the last week....

EVGA are doing 2G PC versions now - hope we get that option as well.

oddity

Apr 30, 2009, 09:11 AM

Glad I waited, that mini-dick display port was the reason I didn't upgrade.

Consultant

Apr 30, 2009, 09:16 AM

hmmm 1 GTX 285 or 2 4870's in xfire..what would be better?

Does the 2008 or 2009 support SLI?

Tom's Hardware has a
monthly article on "best graphics card for the money" with list according to performance
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-geforce-gtx,2270-6.html

Performance will depend on the type of game.

No Mac Pro supports SLI.

People are able to hack it for windows.

turtlebud

Apr 30, 2009, 09:34 AM

iBug2

Apr 30, 2009, 09:45 AM

The GTX 285 has 1GB of GDDR3 and the Radeon 4870 has 512MB of GDDR5. How much of a difference does the type of RAM make in performance? A naive point of view would think that GDDR5 is better since it's newer.

The amount of ram has absolutely no effect on gaming performance unless the game requires more than 512 MB's of ram. There are a few games available which do, none of them available for Mac OS X.

10THzMac

Apr 30, 2009, 09:51 AM

The amount of ram has absolutely no effect on gaming performance unless the game requires more than 512 MB's of ram. There are a few games available which do, none of them available for Mac OS X.
Maybe so - I dunno as I do not play games - but having a lot of RAM is nice for us Cuda fans who want to program these cards. More memory would also widen scope of OpenCL as well.

Tallest Skil

Apr 30, 2009, 09:56 AM

People are able to hack it for windows.

Yeah, the 7600 GT... that's it. Pretty darn worthless, and it can't be done with the GT 120.

AppleWorking

Apr 30, 2009, 10:15 AM

Will it be possible to run both the 4870 and this card at the same time in a MacPro? Or does only one or the other fit/work?

turtlebud

Apr 30, 2009, 10:25 AM

Probably little difference for things like aperture and final cut.

so is the GTX 285 primarily targeting people that are into gaming and heavy duty rendering? (ie, it's overkill for someone running aperture & FCE)

Tallest Skil

Apr 30, 2009, 10:26 AM

Will it be possible to run both the 4870 and this card at the same time in a MacPro? Or does only one or the other fit/work?

Yes. You will use all of your PCIe slots and an ODD bay. You cannot run Windows Vista, but XP and Seven will work.

AppleWorking

Apr 30, 2009, 10:32 AM

Yes. You will use all of your PCIe slots and an ODD bay. You cannot run Windows Vista, but XP and Seven will work.

Thank you :)

Why won't it run in Vista?

Tallest Skil

Apr 30, 2009, 10:36 AM

Thank you :)

Why won't it run in Vista?

Vista can't mix manufacturers. XP and Seven do it fine, but Vista screams at you/might not boot.

AppleWorking

Apr 30, 2009, 10:49 AM

Vista can't mix manufacturers. XP and Seven do it fine, but Vista screams at you/might not boot. Thanks

I hope SP2 fixes it, if not I'll go Seven.

iBug2

Apr 30, 2009, 10:52 AM

so is the GTX 285 primarily targeting people that are into gaming and heavy duty rendering? (ie, it's overkill for someone running aperture & FCE)

I don't know if the 2D performance of 285 is much higher than 8800. We need to wait and see. But when it comes to Open CL, and it should speed up FCE, more processing cores means better performance. So 285 will speed up Open CL based tasks more than 8800.

Topper

Apr 30, 2009, 02:23 PM

The GTX 285 has 1GB of GDDR3 and the Radeon 4870 has 512MB of GDDR5. How much of a difference does the type of RAM make in performance? A naive point of view would think that GDDR5 is better since it's newer.

I run X-Plane.
One person claims that X-Plane will use the video card's vram for anti-aliasing.
He says that at 16x anti-aliasing, his card uses as much as 940 MB of vram.
His card is a 9800 GTX+ with 1GB.

http://homepage.mac.com/ctopper/.Pictures/vram.jpg

10THzMac

May 1, 2009, 03:23 AM

Will it be possible to run both the 4870 and this card at the same time in a MacPro? Or does only one or the other fit/work?

You might also need to fiddle with power. I have Apple 8800 and Palit 285 in an 08 Mac Pro right now. My 285 needs two 6-pin PCI-E power connectors and the 8800 just one. The 285 is being fed of the connectors on the motherboard and the 8800 has power routed from the optical drive bay via a 4-pin molex to PCI 6 pin adaptor. We can assume that the Mac 285 will also need two and hope that it will ship with the needed power cables. I think the 4870 needs 2 PCI power cables? - I am guessing at least one. If it all adds up to more than 3, or you do not want to get into rerouting power (or possibly splitting supplies??) you will probably need an external PSU, which is not actually a problem - I had one sitting on my case for a while before I read on this forums about grabbing the optical molex for juice. As for the Windows side it is easier even under XP to have all one mnfr - both my cards are driven by same NVIDIA drivers and work together as multi-GPU under CUDA.

matthew.russo

May 1, 2009, 04:20 AM

You might also need to fiddle with power. I have Apple 8800 and Palit 285 in an 08 Mac Pro right now. My 285 needs two 6-pin PCI-E power connectors and the 8800 just one. The 285 is being fed of the connectors on the motherboard and the 8800 has power routed from the optical drive bay via a 4-pin molex to PCI 6 pin adaptor. We can assume that the Mac 285 will also need two and hope that it will ship with the needed power cables. I think the 4870 needs 2 PCI power cables? - I am guessing at least one. If it all adds up to more than 3, or you do not want to get into rerouting power (or possibly splitting supplies??) you will probably need an external PSU, which is not actually a problem - I had one sitting on my case for a while before I read on this forums about grabbing the optical molex for juice. As for the Windows side it is easier even under XP to have all one mnfr - both my cards are driven by same NVIDIA drivers and work together as multi-GPU under CUDA.

have you tested SLI?

10THzMac

May 1, 2009, 07:52 AM

have you tested SLI?

Sorry, no. If I do I will feed back.

Tallest Skil

May 1, 2009, 07:56 AM

have you tested SLI?

SLI doesn't work in any Mac Pro.

jeanlain

May 1, 2009, 12:17 PM

Allegedly they work just fine.

Yes, ATi cards work on Mac Pros 1.1, despite apple indicating they need a Mac Pro with PCIe 2. However, are you sure that the Nvidia GT120 works on 2006 Mac Pros as well? I am pretty sure that the GT120 is EFI 64 only.

soldierblue

May 1, 2009, 01:04 PM

The amount of ram has absolutely no effect on gaming performance unless the game requires more than 512 MB's of ram. There are a few games available which do, none of them available for Mac OS X.

That is absolutely incorrect.

1. Almost any game released in the past 3 years can use more that 512mb of RAM.
2. The higher the resolution, the more RAM usage.
3. The more AA and AF, the higher the RAM usage.

I wouldn't even buy a 512mb card if I was intending to game. 18 months ago? Sure. But not now.

24usedtorock

May 1, 2009, 03:18 PM

Please don't laugh but, how do you guys think a MacPro w/ GTX 285 and 4GB RAM would run WoW?

Highest settings without freezing or heat related issues would you venture to guess (not on boot-camp, on regular OSX which WoW supports and patches constantly).

Thanks in advance.

Tallest Skil

May 1, 2009, 03:19 PM

Dzokayi

May 1, 2009, 07:18 PM

Well, a new MacBook can run WoW, but it certainly can't run it smoothly with all settings maxed. Dalaran is still a slideshow, as are 25 man raids once spell FX start going off. Expect to see your framerates drop to the teens in those situations.

Original Mac Pro (2.66 quad) with GeForce 8800 will dip into the low 30s under the same circumstances.

Get more RAM unless you're rebooting the machine just to play WoW.

jjahshik32

May 1, 2009, 07:39 PM

Man this is a must card for every mac pro!

wedgehammer

May 1, 2009, 11:36 PM

grue

May 1, 2009, 11:38 PM

with a macbook you can't even run it with mid gfx settings unless you want to watch a slow sideshow

with my '09 octo w/ 4870, it only does < 60fps in northrend with maxed settings... so much for a five year old game

Try it under boot camp with the same settings if you can, I'd love to know how much it suffers just because it's under MacOS.

wedgehammer

May 2, 2009, 03:12 AM

Try it under boot camp with the same settings if you can, I'd love to know how much it suffers just because it's under MacOS.

i did a rough check just now under xp, i think about the same, < 60fps in my favourite spot just outside dalaran... didn't do a more scientific test, too lazy to put in all my add-ons

but struck me though, with the same settings, it looked a lil more refined/gorgeous under xp... hmmm

grue

May 2, 2009, 06:14 AM

i did a rough check just now under xp, i think about the same, < 60fps in my favourite spot just outside dalaran... didn't do a more scientific test, too lazy to put in all my add-ons

but struck me though, with the same settings, it looked a lil more refined/gorgeous under xp... hmmm

Interesting. Granted, Blizzard is one of the few companies that actually puts decent effort into coding for the MacOS (so basically pretend I'm not including them in this generalization), but it seems to me that the overwhelming majority of games available for Mac and PC tend to run significantly better under Windows. I'm not qualified to say if this is due to better drivers, better OS support (e.g., DirectX), more experience with the OS, or any combination of these and/or others… but I sure hope it gets better. I'd love to see more top-tier Mac titles, but the current situation that ends in later release dates and higher prices for Mac titles with lesser performance… I just can't bring myself to support them just because they're coding for Mac.

Catch 22, I guess: "They" don't do better Mac versions because the sales numbers blow, but the sales numbers blow because the Mac versions of a lot of games suck.

iBug2

May 2, 2009, 07:15 AM

That is absolutely incorrect.

1. Almost any game released in the past 3 years can use more that 512mb of RAM.
2. The higher the resolution, the more RAM usage.
3. The more AA and AF, the higher the RAM usage.

I wouldn't even buy a 512mb card if I was intending to game. 18 months ago? Sure. But not now.

The only game I know which uses more than 512 is GTA4.

iBug2

May 2, 2009, 07:17 AM

It's a five year old game. A MacBook can run it.

Yes but even with 3.2 octo Mac Pro + 8800GT, wow runs at 10 fps in certain scenes. So surely 285 will be a big upgrade to it. Wow does not have poor graphics anymore. 5 year old game but has seen two expansions, which did play with the graphics engine a lot over the years.

iBug2

May 2, 2009, 07:20 AM

grue

May 2, 2009, 07:59 AM

The only game I know which uses more than 512 is GTA4.

Flight Simulator X will happily do it as well. Anything with large environments nad lots of textures probably will.

Topper

May 2, 2009, 09:22 AM

Flight Simulator X will happily do it as well. Anything with large environments and lots of textures probably will.

X-Plane also which seems to lend support to your environments, textures hypothesis.
.

24usedtorock

May 2, 2009, 12:07 PM

dhammans

May 2, 2009, 10:04 PM

What about the cooling for the GTX 285 under gaming situations where the GPU is used more? Will it run hot as hell like the iMac's 4850 card and face issues? Isn't GTX285 the type of card you want liquid cooling for on PC's, are the Mac fans strong enough to keep that sucker chilled playing WoW all night?

A couple of things to keep in mind here. Generally the PC crowd (of which I used to be a member of) runs liquid cooling for purposes of overclocking. You can push hardware farther under liquid cooling, which is exactly what Apple had to do in the old G5's if you look back a little ways to get the clock speed up.

The second thing is that the Mac Pro is a really well designed computer. There aren't any cables or other obstructions in the case to block airflow, and it has some enormous fans. It also has a nicely integrated thermistor and fan control. I wouldn't expect any cooling issues with the GTX285.

10THzMac

May 3, 2009, 02:04 AM

What about the cooling for the GTX 285 under gaming situations where the GPU is used more? Will it run hot as hell like the iMac's 4850 card and face issues? Isn't GTX285 the type of card you want liquid cooling for on PC's, are the Mac fans strong enough to keep that sucker chilled playing WoW all night?

Happily running Mac Pro 08 right now with both 8800GT and a PC GTX 285 up at same time. Up for hours at a time running CUDA under Windows and busy hacking CoreVidia kexts to get it up in OS X. I am using the Palit 2G card which has two fans and some extra cooling pipes sticking out the side, which is probably one of the cooler-running cards. Here it is - this also shows my power setup, where the 8800 is powered from the optical bay and the 285 from the two motherboard connectors. I'd like a cleaner route from the optical bay but otherwise this is running fine.

Cindori

May 3, 2009, 03:26 AM

I'd like a cleaner route from the optical bay but otherwise this is running fine.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4821315&postcount=2

10THzMac

May 3, 2009, 04:17 AM

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4821315&postcount=2

Cindori's method is absolutely the best way - my photo was taken after rushing into shop to grab decent long molex extender to try other options and only finding a short one and having to do this. I will reorganize as per your photos - thanks! My point was really to show 3 6-pin connectors in play and explain no overheating. But what your post ALSO makes clear is that we can get four 6-pin supplies in place purely internally: Two from your scheme plus two from the motherboard. I guess some posters already new that, but it is news to me for a real Mac Pro. Thanks again - that's two 285s as my next target.

Cindori

May 3, 2009, 04:31 AM

Some info in that post is incorrect though. You can not SLI on Mac Pro. Or well, you can not SLI anything else then 7600...

10THzMac

May 3, 2009, 04:44 AM

Yes - no SLi - important for gamers to note this - but GPU stuff for CUDA and OpenCL does not need SLi, unlike the games stuff - there are some nice multiGPU examples in the CUDA dev kit. Also a proper Apple card can boot and the other one kicks in later, so both cards do not have to have the full EFI ROM code in a two card setup.

brendon2020

May 3, 2009, 01:00 PM

glad to see this, hopefully this will work on my 2.66 mac pro. Also hopefully the price won't be to bad.

netkas

May 3, 2009, 02:30 PM

once we get osx drivers for gt200 chips (prolly with that quadro card release), you can get pc's gtx285 work fine in macpro/osx without flashing. (with same way - http://netkas.org/?p=83)

10THzMac

May 4, 2009, 03:24 AM

once we get osx drivers for gt200 chips (prolly with that quadro card release), you can get pc's gtx285 work fine in macpro/osx without flashing. (with same way - http://netkas.org/?p=83)
Partial success so far on this: hack of CoreVidia 1.0 (plist and binary both modded - truly horrible) has just got my PC 285 up (following 8800 boot). I have multiple res but not much more. Xdarwin has been asked for upgrade of corevidia (formerly nvdarwin) to make it less painful for when when we get good drivers. I plan to get the Mac version 285 anyway and see if this hack will pair with it to drive both GPUs at full throttle under 10.5.7 release.

netkas

May 4, 2009, 05:32 AM

Partial success so far on this: hack of CoreVidia 1.0 (plist and binary both modded - truly horrible) has just got my PC 285 up (following 8800 boot). I have multiple res but not much more. Xdarwin has been asked for upgrade of corevidia (formerly nvdarwin) to make it less painful for when when we get good drivers. I plan to get the Mac version 285 anyway and see if this hack will pair with it to drive both GPUs at full throttle under 10.5.7 release.

that;s because osx hasnt own gt200 drivers yet.

10THzMac

May 4, 2009, 06:44 AM

that;s because osx hasnt own gt200 drivers yet.
Indeed. What's bugging me is that the info with, e.g. the Quadro suggests that the "drivers" will require both 10.5.7 or later AND stuff on the disk that ships with the card (perhaps likewise or better with 10.6). So all the happy injector writers and ROM flashers might be in an awkward position unless it all lives on the Apple OS, or NVIDIA do the decent thing and put their bit of the Mac drivers on their web site like they do for windows. I would put money on them not doing this for the Quadro as there is a lot of value in optimized drivers, but we might be lucky with a bit more latitude over the 285. My concern is that it is not going to be like it was with the 8800GT, where nothing else came with the card and it was all in the OS, leaving us pretty free to play with your stuff and related tools.

netkas

May 4, 2009, 10:37 AM

Indeed. What's bugging me is that the info with, e.g. the Quadro suggests that the "drivers" will require both 10.5.7 or later AND stuff on the disk that ships with the card (perhaps likewise or better with 10.6). So all the happy injector writers and ROM flashers might be in an awkward position unless it all lives on the Apple OS, or NVIDIA do the decent thing and put their bit of the Mac drivers on their web site like they do for windows. I would put money on them not doing this for the Quadro as there is a lot of value in optimized drivers, but we might be lucky with a bit more latitude over the 285. My concern is that it is not going to be like it was with the 8800GT, where nothing else came with the card and it was all in the OS, leaving us pretty free to play with your stuff and related tools.
well, 10.5.7 beta drivers for hd4870 works fine in 10.5.6, so same will be with nvidia's i think

also, once drivers will leak, it will be all over web.

and, 10.5.8 will have them integrated for sure.

Luba

May 4, 2009, 11:03 AM

Cindori

May 4, 2009, 11:52 AM

So it sounds like the GTX285 will be available in June but not as a custom configure via Apple, but you would have to buy it on your own?

Will it be easy to install myself? Maybe it will be as easy as plug and play?? I can install HDD in a Mac Pro, which is slightly more difficult than plug and play.

No, graphic cards are secured by 24 screws in 3 different sizes. Also you have to solder a power connector to the GPU processor. Failure to install a graphic card correctly may therefore lead to incorrect volt values, possibly frying each and every component in your computer. It's kinda common, you should google it.

wfj5444

May 4, 2009, 12:24 PM

Yes but even with 3.2 octo Mac Pro + 8800GT, wow runs at 10 fps in certain scenes....

My wife's '08 iMac 3.06 with the 8800GS, runs WoW at max rez with the 'Good' Graphics setting (1 below Ultra) at 60+ FPS in most cases.

Sounds like you are like me iBug, I have a 2.8 octo MacPro but only 2GB of ram right now. Thats my limiting factor.

Dalaran is horrible and instances are much better (Naxx/Uld) because they use less memory. My free memory outside an instance is 20-40MB, but inside it is in the 200-300MB range.

Bottom a Mac Pro with 4+ Gigs of RAM an an 8800 GT or better will make WoW smooth as butter.

n00bmuffin

May 4, 2009, 02:32 PM

The GTX 285 has been out for a long time, as well as the GTX 295...what's the big deal?

@cindori You just stick it in a PCIe slot, plug in a couple power connectors, and BAM. That's how it's been for...forever?

Cindori

May 4, 2009, 02:57 PM

My wife's '08 iMac 3.06 with the 8800GS, runs WoW at max rez with the 'Good' Graphics setting (1 below Ultra) at 60+ FPS in most cases.

I guess your wife does not raid, or use full AA.

The GTX 285 has been out for a long time, as well as the GTX 295...what's the big deal?

@cindori You just stick it in a PCIe slot, plug in a couple power connectors, and BAM. That's how it's been for...forever?

You... thought...I...was...serious? :)

As for why this Mac Edition is a big deal... Try putting a PC card into the Mac Pro and boot OSX.

That's right.

iBug2

May 4, 2009, 04:58 PM

My wife's '08 iMac 3.06 with the 8800GS, runs WoW at max rez with the 'Good' Graphics setting (1 below Ultra) at 60+ FPS in most cases.

Sounds like you are like me iBug, I have a 2.8 octo MacPro but only 2GB of ram right now. Thats my limiting factor.

Dalaran is horrible and instances are much better (Naxx/Uld) because they use less memory. My free memory outside an instance is 20-40MB, but inside it is in the 200-300MB range.

Bottom a Mac Pro with 4+ Gigs of RAM an an 8800 GT or better will make WoW smooth as butter.

I have 8GB ram and I can see 10fps if Dalaran is really crowded. Otherwise I'm at 90-100 fps as well.

Topper

May 4, 2009, 06:17 PM

The GTX 285 has been out for a long time, as well as the GTX 295...what's the big deal?

They have been out for less than 4 months.

The GTX 285 is the most powerful single gpu video card available.
The GTX 295 is the most powerful 2 GPU on a single card available.
.
.

StanD

May 4, 2009, 06:47 PM

I find this development very intriguing to say the least...

How much of a price markup do folks expect on this card? Double the PC price or more? That being, $700+ considering the 285 is around ~$350 currently.

I almost said on par with the PC price then immediately corrected myself :eek:

- Stan

BG-Mac

May 4, 2009, 09:16 PM

So will this be a BTO option though Apple?

Dragonforce

May 4, 2009, 10:02 PM

I have 8GB ram and I can see 10fps if Dalaran is really crowded. Otherwise I'm at 90-100 fps as well.

You should let WoW use more than 2 cores if you have a Mac Pro.
If you have 4 cores or more, you should modify the config.wtf

By default, it should read somewhere (I got a quad Nehalem MP, but it detects 8 cores because of HT)

SET coresDetected "8"
SET processAffinityMask "3"

You need to change "SET processAffinityMask" to 15 instead of 3.
This will allow WoW to use more cores. You will notice an increase in FPS and CPU usage.
WoW used like 3% of my CPU according to iStat menus before the tweak - and 22-25% after.

Save the config.wtf and fire up WoW - I got about 15-20 more FPS in Dalaran than before, roughly at 35-50 now when its really crowded.
There is also an blue post on the WoW forums regarding this.

10THzMac

May 5, 2009, 01:59 AM

Try putting a PC card into the Mac Pro and boot OSX.
OK, done that - what next?

Pressure

May 5, 2009, 02:10 AM

OK, done that - what next?

Did it too.

The Radeon HD 4890 even works ;)

http://home20.inet.tele.dk/pressure/Radeon4890.png

Cindori

May 5, 2009, 02:58 AM

Yeah, in slot 2.

Inserting it alone in slot 1 will not boot OSX since the PC card does not carry EFI
I have a Mac Pro 06 and only my 1st slot is x16

michaelsviews

May 5, 2009, 05:15 AM

I'm somewhat surprised by this news.

Well if it works with my MP I'll get it, but not until I have read reviews of peoples experience from here

multimania

May 5, 2009, 06:31 AM

Does the MP 08 have 2 16xPCIe?

matthew.russo

May 5, 2009, 06:55 AM

Does the MP 08 have 2 16xPCIe?

Yes

multimania

May 5, 2009, 07:25 AM

Yes

Cool, just wondered if I got the 285 if I could still keep the 8800gt in with full bandwidth!

Cheers

lannister80

May 5, 2009, 12:58 PM

You should let WoW use more than 2 cores if you have a Mac Pro.
If you have 4 cores or more, you should modify the config.wtf

By default, it should read somewhere (I got a quad Nehalem MP, but it detects 8 cores because of HT)

SET coresDetected "8"
SET processAffinityMask "3"

You need to change "SET processAffinityMask" to 15 instead of 3.
More info here:
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=1778017311&sid=1

vladid

May 5, 2009, 02:28 PM

Now that's just fantastic news, I can not wait to get one of these for my octo 3.2 MP anno 08.

-js-

May 5, 2009, 03:39 PM

No, graphic cards are secured by 24 screws in 3 different sizes. Also you have to solder a power connector to the GPU processor. Failure to install a graphic card correctly may therefore lead to incorrect volt values, possibly frying each and every component in your computer. It's kinda common, you should google it.

OMG! Now this is funny! LOL!

Wild-Bill

May 6, 2009, 08:59 AM

How much of a price markup do folks expect on this card? Double the PC price or more? That being, $700+ considering the 285 is around ~$350 currently.
- Stan

I don't think much markup at all, if EVGA is the one selling the card. I would hope their price would be comparable to the PC variant. Apple for some reason likes charging double for video cards. And the EFI implementation and shoddy drivers they write are not worth double.

irishgrizzly

May 8, 2009, 11:04 AM

I don't think much markup at all, if EVGA is the one selling the card. I would hope their price would be comparable to the PC variant. Apple for some reason likes charging double for video cards. And the EFI implementation and shoddy drivers they write are not worth double.

I'm wondering about the price as well. I think they'll mark it up because they can. The only competition (if you don't go the flashing route) is the 4870, so I imagine they'll take that price and add 25%.

Sorry for my ignorance, but I've not heard of EVGA before. Do they reproduce the cards under licence from Nvidia?

mattlong1978

May 8, 2009, 11:29 AM

I'm wondering about the price as well. I think they'll mark it up because they can. They only competition (if you don't go the flashing route) is the 4870, so I imagine they'll take that price and add 25%.

Sorry for my ignorance, but I've not heard of EVGA before. Do they reproduce the cards under licence from Nvidia?

Yes they do, I've owned two EVGA cards in my PC's prior to owning a Mac and I can't fault them.

Topper

May 8, 2009, 06:16 PM

Sorry for my ignorance, but I've not heard of EVGA before. Do they reproduce the cards under licence from Nvidia?

Newegg sells 63 different EVGA video cards. (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010380048%2050001402&name=EVGA) That is the most by any manufacturer. The EVGA GTX 260 C216 video card is the number one "consumer's choice card" for April according to Newegg.

10THzMac

May 9, 2009, 01:48 AM

Another interesting fact about EVGA is that when we were all pondering how to flash PC 8800 ROMs to have the Apple 8800 code, EVGA was one of the few manufacturers putting a large enough ROM on a PC 8800 to allow it to be flashed. Given that they will be making the Mac edition 285 it *might* be an easy task to rejig one of their PC cards to have the EFI boot stuff. If anyone has a PC285 can they find out how large the ROM chip is somehow? My PC 285 dumped a 64k file, but I do not know whether that is the file or the chip.

MyRumors

May 11, 2009, 11:43 AM

If you put a pc card in slot 2, and i mac card i slot 1,
will the pc card run full fans in mac os and make a lot of noise?
is there a way to turn the card of in mac os ?

irishgrizzly

May 11, 2009, 11:48 AM

If you put a pc card in slot 2, and i mac card i slot 1,
will the pc card run full fans in mac os and make a lot of noise?
is there a way to turn the card of in mac os ?

AFAIK you'd have to swap the cards when booting into each OS, as it will only recognise the card in the first slot.

10THzMac

May 11, 2009, 12:55 PM

If you put a pc card in slot 2, and i mac card i slot 1,
will the pc card run full fans in mac os and make a lot of noise?
is there a way to turn the card of in mac os ?

My 285 shuts up when the startup chime occurs, but others complain of fans blasting all the time.

Luba

May 11, 2009, 02:39 PM

Any idea on how much faster/better the GTX 285 will be over the 4870? Looked on Barefeats but see no testing on the GTX 285.

I believe the GTX 285 won't be a custom option by Apple so I will have to buy it on my own, correct? Naturally if that's the case then I would get the Pro with the GT 120 card. I could then try to sell the GT 120. Any advantage of keeping the GT 120 if I only plan to use one monitor?

Will installing the GTX 285 be as easy as installing a HDD in the Pro?

Gonk42

May 11, 2009, 03:06 PM

Topper

May 11, 2009, 03:16 PM

Any idea on how much faster/better the GTX 285 will be over the 4870?

I made the following chart after looking at almost 60 benchmarks from numerous tech/gaming web sites.
I used Enemy Territory: Quake Wars because it is OpenGL.
This chart is for PCs of course but it may give you an idea of the power of the top 11 video cards and how they compare to each other.
Unless nVidia has improved it's Mac drivers, this chart is probably not apropos for Macs.

http://homepage.mac.com/ctopper/.Pictures/VC.jpg

Luba

May 12, 2009, 03:39 PM

If I did the calculation correctly, the nVdia 285 is 34% faster than the ATI 4870. And looking at Barefeats the 4870 is about (it varies) 25% faster than the ATI 4850.

Mathematically, can we say the 285 is 59% (34+25) faster than the 4850??

I made the following chart after looking at almost 60 benchmarks from numerous tech/gaming web sites.
I used Enemy Territory: Quake Wars because it is OpenGL.
This chart is for PCs of course but it may give you an idea of the power of the top 11 video cards and how they compare to each other.
Unless nVidia has improved it's Mac drivers, this chart is probably not apropos for Macs.

http://homepage.mac.com/ctopper/.Pictures/VC.jpg

Topper

May 12, 2009, 07:38 PM

If I did the calculation correctly, the nVdia 285 is 34% faster than the ATI 4870. And looking at Barefeats the 4870 is about (it varies) 25% faster than the ATI 4850.

Mathematically, can we say the 285 is 59% (34+25) faster than the 4850??

I would not use that chart to guess percentages of what cards would be most powerful for Macs.
Mac video cards differ too much from PC cards.
For example, for PCs the 8800 GT will out perform the HD 3870. For Macs, it is the other around.
The chart may give you an idea how the video cards compare to each other but it certainly is not set in stone when it comes to Macs.

By the way, I calculate that the GTX 285 is approximately 58 percent faster than the HD 4850 when it comes to PCs playing ET:QW.
And that's about what you figured. http://homepage.mac.com/ctopper/.Pictures/laugh.gif

10THzMac

May 14, 2009, 03:46 AM

I don't know how OpenCL will work in Snow Leopard but in Cuda you can use an unconnected (to a monitor) graphics card for calculations. So, for example, the 120 could drive the monitor and the 285 do some powerful parallel computing without danger of interference from the display grabbing memory.

Given that you probably couldn't get much money for it anyway, it is probably worth hanging onto the 120 as it is always useful to have a backup should display problems arise.

Exactly right: My CUDA setup has an 8800 and a 285, with the 8800 driving my monitor and both doing CUDA, i.e. the 285 is a pure compute engine. This is all working nicely under bootcamp, where the 285 is more than twice as fast at doing pure calculation (checked with the MultiGPU examples) as the 8800, which is consistent with it having about twice as many cores at about the same clock speed. The 120 could be used in exactly the same way, though it has fewer cores. On an 8800 under OS X the CUDA examples (e.g. the spectacular n-body simulation) all seem to work very well even when also driving a display - I doubt the 120 is so good.

I think it a few months we will see similar ideas working under Snow Leopard, once the OpenCL tools are fully enabled for better GPUs. The test examples I have come across were targeted at the 8800 GPU, and we are waiting for both CUDA and OpenCL on OS X with support for better cards, which is itself probably contingent on those infernal long-awaited proper 200/quadro drivers.

Gonk42

May 14, 2009, 04:47 AM

Exactly right: My CUDA setup has an 8800 and a 285, with the 8800 driving my monitor and both doing CUDA, i.e. the 285 is a pure compute engine. This is all working nicely under bootcamp, where the 285 is more than twice as fast at doing pure calculation (checked with the MultiGPU examples) as the 8800, which is consistent with it having about twice as many cores at about the same clock speed. The 120 could be used in exactly the same way, though it has fewer cores. On an 8800 under OS X the CUDA examples (e.g. the spectacular n-body simulation) all seem to work very well even when also driving a display - I doubt the 120 is so good.

I think it a few months we will see similar ideas working under Snow Leopard, once the OpenCL tools are fully enabled for better GPUs. The test examples I have come across were targeted at the 8800 GPU, and we are waiting for both CUDA and OpenCL on OS X with support for better cards, which is itself probably contingent on those infernal long-awaited proper 200/quadro drivers.

I just wanted to say thanks for your several posts on your CUDA work. It is an area I'd like to get into when I have a bit more time (I'm writing up a PhD at present) and though I'm still debating whether to go the Mac route or a DIY build or a Dell it is very useful to have feedback from someone who has got the system working.

shroud

May 15, 2009, 10:58 AM

Hi Guys, just to let you know I found the eVGA card for sale from provantage today.

The price is $436.66. Manufacturer Part# 01G-P3-1080-TR

Link (http://www.provantage.com/evga-01g-p3-1080-tr~7EVGA0EC.htm)

Anyone think their posting is a mistake? It looks legitimate.

Now I just need to decide between this (supporting vendors that make official products is always a plus right!) and flashing a PC 4870 since the Apple version is a way overpriced and only has 512MB or memory.

Update: other world computing (OWC), bottom line telecom, alrightdeals, etc. are selling them now too.
It seems that OWC claims a 19 day waiting period before shipping and I bet the others are the same.

It also seems that the 2006 Mac Pro owners (like myself) may have to resort to flashing as all sites claim 2008 Mac Pro or newer and we know what Nvidia did with the 8800GT. I'm hoping eVGA will change the game and act like ATI by placing in the few extra KB we need in the ROM file.

Topper

May 15, 2009, 12:50 PM

Hi Guys, just to let you know I found the eVGA card for sale from provantage today

Good job by you.
Google Shopping shows some other vendors also.
Provantage is the cheapest so far.

xgman

May 15, 2009, 12:58 PM

Warehouse Available Incoming ETA
California, Southern 0 40 06-03-2009
Tennessee 0 20 06-03-2009
Illinois 0 20 06-03-2009
Pennsylvania 0 40 06-03-2009
Total In Stock: Total Back Ordered: Total Incoming:
0 0 120

pastrychef

May 15, 2009, 02:44 PM

irishgrizzly

May 15, 2009, 02:52 PM

Anyone know who is likely to stock this in Europe?

Also where are the drivers going to be for this? Are they in 10.5.7? or as a small update?

turtlebud

May 15, 2009, 03:03 PM

Topper

May 15, 2009, 04:54 PM

Thanks for the info! My order is in! ;)

We both said we're getting the GTX 285. Now we have it on order. http://homepage.mac.com/ctopper/.Pictures/laugh.gif
.

Topper

May 15, 2009, 05:01 PM

Also where are the drivers going to be for this? Are they in 10.5.7? or as a small update?

OWC (http://eshop.macsales.com/item/EGVA/01GP31080TR/) says that the GTX 285 requires 10.5.7 so the drivers must be in there.
.

netkas

May 15, 2009, 05:05 PM

10.5.7 doesnt have gt200/gt200b drivers, so if they dont include cd with drivers, then u will have gt200 working without resolution change/qe/ci

Topper

May 15, 2009, 05:16 PM

10.5.7 doesnt have gt200/gt200b drivers, so if they dont include cd with drivers, then u will have gt200 working without resolution change/qe/ci

Okay, any idea why it requires 10.5.7?

grue

May 15, 2009, 08:03 PM

Jesus babyraping christ, $490?

Well, if it works on the 2006 & 2007 models I guess I'll pay it, but FFS that's ridiculous. A $50 premium I can swallow, but $150?

Topper

May 15, 2009, 10:00 PM

Jesus babyraping christ, $490?

http://homepage.mac.com/ctopper/.Pictures/laugh.gif

Yes, I know it's a lot of money but what can you do when they have you over the barrel?!

Unless ATI brings out an ATI 4890 for Macs in the near future, I am buying the GTX 285.
I refuse to get a flashed PC card with a "Link Speed" of only 2.5 GT/s.
.

irishgrizzly

May 15, 2009, 11:58 PM

10.5.7 doesnt have gt200/gt200b drivers, so if they dont include cd with drivers, then u will have gt200 working without resolution change/qe/ci

Sorry, what's /qe/ci?

kellen

May 16, 2009, 12:01 AM

quartz extreme, core image. graphics accelerators.

skyline r34

May 16, 2009, 12:16 AM

The only problem i'm facing right now is if I get the eVGA GeForce GTX 285 Mac Edition I will not be able to use Apple's LED Cinema Display and that's were the ATi 4870 comes to play and I know the 285 GTX is the better card but I do want Apple new LED display, if only the desktop LED Displays will give users a choice to either to use Mini display-port or DVi on the same cable from the display if that possible or I just might wait until the new 30 inch to be release and see what's the connection will be but I know the mini display-port will be the main connection unless Apple or evga makes adapter so that users that wants to use Apple LED cinema with the 285 GTX can

10THzMac

May 16, 2009, 04:08 AM

Given the ghastly price of the Mac edition I played a bit with Core Vidia this morning with my PC 285, as per my short thread here:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=694694

I used 10.5.7, CoreVidia 1.1, set the memory to 1536 (I have 2G card but cannot do 2G yet), also edited the CoreVidia plist, pasting in an NVCAP setting from an NVFLASH ROM dump with NVCAP maker and adding the 0x05e3 PCI ID, and after a LOT more fiddling around, have got this far. No QE/CI, Link Speed 2.5, not 5, and CUDA is not working properly, but it illustrates it might be a pure driver issue. My Reward/Effort on this is very low - we really do need to see know what is on that driver disc, and even that I do not know if I will get it totally up without a ROM flash.

mattcube64

May 16, 2009, 11:33 AM

Cindori

May 16, 2009, 01:22 PM

I'd say,

wait for the "Race to dump GTX285 ROM" - thread :rolleyes:

Topper

May 16, 2009, 03:24 PM

EEk!!! :eek:

$450?! FFFFffuuuu....

I plan on purchasing my new Mac Pro this summer with my ADC discount. Adding a 4870 to a CTO build is only an additional $160. I would *much* rather have the GTX285, but I just don't think I can justify the near-$300 premium for the card over the already pricey ATI card.

Does anybody here think it would be worth it in my situation?!

I don't even know what you are using the computer for.
The HD 4870 Mac card is more than satisfactory for running pro applications and playing games.
For most people the GTX 285 is overkill, but not for me.
.

turtlebud

May 16, 2009, 08:50 PM

I don't even know what you are using the computer for.
The HD 4870 Mac card is more than satisfactory for running pro applications and playing games.
For most people the GTX 285 is overkill, but not for me.
.

I guess for me, I kind of want to get a card that I could grow into potentially - get the best card (within reason) so that 1 or 2 years down the road, I don't regret not spending the extra $100 to get the "better" card. (and I put better in quotes, cause I really don't know which is better)

I hope that I have the patience to wait it out and see some real world benchmarks & experiences, then decide if I will go with the 4870 of the 285.

Topper

May 16, 2009, 11:07 PM

I hope that I have the patience to wait it out and see some real world benchmarks & experiences, then decide if I will go with the 4870 or the 285.

That's the smart thing to do.
I can't picture the 4870 512MB card coming close to the performance of the GTX 285 even with nVidia's shabby drivers.
The card I would really like is the HD 4890. HD 4870 X2 even better.
But it will be nice to say that I've got the world's most powerful single gpu consumer video card.
.

Cindori

May 17, 2009, 03:36 AM

That's the smart thing to do.
But it will be nice to say that I've got the world's most powerful single gpu consumer video card.
.

Until the next generation of cards, which are just a couple of months away.

MacAndy74

May 17, 2009, 04:07 AM

Until the next generation of cards, which are just a couple of months away.

:D

What I'm looking forward to, and I hope the card is released for the Mac Pro - is the ATi 4890 :cool:

Wild-Bill

May 17, 2009, 05:30 AM

I'd say,

wait for the "Race to dump GTX285 ROM" - thread :rolleyes:

That's what I'll be doing. I REFUSE to pay a 150.00+ premium for a video card (which in some cases nearly doubles the price of the card) just because it has Mac drivers. That is total lunacy.

Time to send some "feedback" to EVGA about their pricing policy. ;)

Topper

May 18, 2009, 01:48 PM

Thanks for the info! My order is in! ;)
.
My GTX 285 is scheduled to be shipped on June 3rd. :)
.

turtlebud

May 18, 2009, 02:20 PM

.
My GTX 285 is scheduled to be shipped on June 3rd. :)
.

since this isn't an "apple" branded card, hopefully it won't be subject to the same delays that the 4870 were.

Topper

May 18, 2009, 02:38 PM

since this isn't an "apple" branded card, hopefully it won't be subject to the same delays that the 4870 were.

Looks like the delay will be minimal.
My shipping date is June 3rd.
OWC shows availability in 16 days.
.

nasabaer

May 18, 2009, 02:39 PM

hmm anyone found a place to order in germany or europe ?

Topper

May 18, 2009, 04:07 PM

hmm anyone found a place to order in germany or europe ?

I can't read German but how about something like this? http://tgscomputer.de/shop/index.php?aid=58954
.

beaker7

May 18, 2009, 04:34 PM

Will the 285 and Quadro 4800 be available from Apple as BTO or a kit?

Topper

May 18, 2009, 05:03 PM

Will the 285 and Quadro 4800 be available from Apple as BTO or a kit?

Neither one will be BTO.
.

Heliconsoul

May 19, 2009, 04:01 AM

hmm anyone found a place to order in germany or europe ?

Ordering through OWC is quite safe, I've just placed my GTX285 order through them and I've used them for memory before. Even with international shipping the price isn't actually too much higher than the UK PC GTX prices.

The only bugger is sometimes you can get caught for the VAT :D

nasabaer

May 19, 2009, 06:43 AM

thanks topper for the link - but ...boaey.. 528 Euro - thats about 719 US Dollar - argh.. NO GO.

Topper

May 19, 2009, 07:25 AM

thanks topper for the link - but ...boaey.. 528 Euro - thats about 719 US Dollar - argh.. NO GO.

Maybe that includes a Mac Pro? :eek:
.

grue

May 19, 2009, 08:45 AM

Ordering through OWC is quite safe, I've just placed my GTX285 order through them and I've used them for memory before. Even with international shipping the price isn't actually too much higher than the UK PC GTX prices.

The only bugger is sometimes you can get caught for the VAT :D

The money to run a police-controlled nanny state doesn't come out of thin air, ya know :p

Chad H

May 19, 2009, 08:59 AM

Might be a dumb question but I have the new ATI card in my MP. All I do is game on windows, would it be worth it to upgrade to this? :)

Topper

May 19, 2009, 09:26 AM

Might be a dumb question but I have the new ATI card in my MP. All I do is game on windows, would it be worth it to upgrade to this? :)

Well, The GTX 285 is the most powerful single gpu consumer video card made.
NVIDIA cards work better under Windows than they do with OS X.
The GTX 285 is a Mac card so I don't know if the above will hold true.
PC people would kill to have a GTX 285 for gaming.
.

Chad H

May 19, 2009, 01:16 PM

Well, The GTX 285 is the most powerful single gpu consumer video card made.
NVIDIA cards work better under Windows than they do with OS X.
The GTX 285 is a Mac card so I don't know if the above will hold true.
PC people would kill to have a GTX 285 for gaming.
.

So I take that as a yes. Has anybody pre-ordered from OWC yet?:apple:

Topper

May 19, 2009, 01:41 PM

So I take that as a yes. Has anybody pre-ordered from OWC yet?:apple:

OWC is too high. I went with Provantage.
.

TheStrudel

May 19, 2009, 01:55 PM

Topper

May 19, 2009, 03:04 PM

Well, on the other hand, people can claim, at least for a while, that they're using a current graphics card instead of being behind as usual. The thing that is encouraging about all of these developments, though, is that it seems to be indicating that the mac graphics card market - despite still being limited to one product line - is really beginning to open up and get stronger. Regardless of how you feel about the offerings, this is unequivocally a good thing.

Absolutely!

Everytime I've bought a Mac computer, I bought the best Mac consumer card at the time; ATI Radeon 9700 Pro, ATI Radeon X800XT, and NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT.
Everytime those cards were 2nd class citizens compared to the PC cards.

I belong to a couple gaming forums. The PC people would show off their 8800 GTX or 8800 Ultra or 9800 GX2.
Heck, Mac people built PCs just so they could have the most up-to-date, most powerful video cards.

Maybe, just maybe, we have finally arrived!
.