Ordering my G5: 6800 DLL? [Archive]

SkAlex

Jun 28, 2004, 02:29 PM

OK...I want to keep this thing under $5k (w/ monitor) with the edu discount.

Dual 2.5
1 Gb ram
20" cinema

So...

the new 6800 ultra dll or the 9800xt and maybe try to splurge for the 23" HD display? I'm a film major, so most of my work is editting and computer graphics. I'm also concerned that the 23" might be a little too overwheliming, although I might end up mounting it on a wall. So do you think I need the new graphics card, or should I try to save up a little more for the 23"?

Xenious

Jun 28, 2004, 03:02 PM

I decided to drop down to the 9600 XT with the 23" if that helps you. I figure I will upgrade to the Nvidia 6800 sometime this fall (thanks apple for making it a stand alone option, tho they had no choice hehehe). That makes the price point with a 2.5 (1gig, 250gig HD, .mac, bluetooth and airport extreme card) ~4900 with edu discount (before tax).

SkAlex

Jun 28, 2004, 03:48 PM

That's a pretty good point, and nice setup. Maybe I will stick with the 9600 and save up some cash for the 6800. I guess there's no use in upgrading to the 9800 if i'm probably going to end up updating it relavtively soon anyway. I might end up making the same order as you with the 120 Gb hardrive...I don't want anything more because I will be getting a large firewire external drive (required for film school) and might also opt out of the superdrive in place of the lacie dual layer burner. Thanks for the advice.

DTphonehome

Jun 28, 2004, 03:50 PM

I want to buy a PM 1.8, but am not sure what video card I should go with. As I understand it, the NVIDIA 5200 that is standard is pretty lousy. Is the 6800 a better choice, even if I am only going to have a 20" screen (one of the new ones)? Or should I look at upgrading in the future? Does it matter if my PM can't support PCI-X?

Thanks for any help!

--DT

Mord

Jun 28, 2004, 05:29 PM

BrianKonarsMac

Jun 28, 2004, 05:48 PM

the 5200 is garbage...i have it in my 12" powerbook...a G5 deserves better. i'd buy the 9600 (minimum) or wait for the 6800.

slughead

Jun 28, 2004, 05:50 PM

The 6800 IS WORTH THE MONEY.

It is the current generation of video card, we are extremely lucky apple decided to let us get this. It gets literally twice the framerate in games and is more tuned for the newer games which will come out shortly. It is totally necessary for Doom III, which should be available for mac as well as windows. We're talking a difference of 200+%.

Buying the kit afterwards costs $600 and you get a (worthless) ATI 9*00XT 8X AGP that you'll never use. Getting it BTO allows you to not buy the ATI, and put the money towards the 6800.

If it's worth $600 to get your computer 1-2 months early, then so be it, but regardless, THE 6800 IS WORTH THE MONEY.

See my other thread in this forum for more information.

FuzzyBallz

Jun 28, 2004, 06:35 PM

6800 is worth the money, just not the $600 Mac version, which is 2x that of the PC version. For $600, you can get a pair of PC 6800 and run them in SLI mode.

BrianKonarsMac

Jun 28, 2004, 06:40 PM

invaLPsion

Jun 28, 2004, 07:06 PM

6800 is worth the money, just not the $600 Mac version, which is 2x that of the PC version. For $600, you can get a pair of PC 6800 and run them in SLI mode.

Show me where you can get a 6800 PC version for $300.

slughead

Jun 28, 2004, 08:23 PM

it's ID's preferred card (which makes one wonder why...i thought the x800 was better? less power draw, higher fps, smaller).

The FPS are about the same, on most sites the 6800 was better all around.

However, id uses openGL (because they're not stupidly locking themselves into M$), and ATI is MS DX's bitch. In OGL games, the 6800 always wins. ATI wants to support something they'll get the most money for, and DX is the way to go for that. Yeah yeah, NVidia's a bigger company and all that junk but it doesn't mean I care.

NVidia also has the best driver support for alternative operating systems (*nix, mac) hands down, and has a better history for driver support on Windows (presently I still think they're better, but I have no evidence ;)).

After being a mac user for so long, I'll never buy another ATI product if I have a choice. We'll see if my mind changes in the future.

ddtlm

Jun 28, 2004, 08:48 PM

If you don't play games the 5200 is fine. Everyone calls it crap cause it's got weaker 3D... but you know if you don't play games...

slughead:

Yeah yeah, NVidia's a bigger company and all that junk but it doesn't mean I care.
Actually ATI is bigger, and always has been. Strong in the OEM areas.

slughead

Jun 28, 2004, 09:01 PM

Actually ATI is bigger, and always has been. Strong in the OEM areas.

Uhm ATI may have sold more cards, but I'm pretty sure Nvidia's a bigger company (they make chipsets, sound cards, and all sorts of things).

Someone with half a mind for this stuff take a look (isn't it volume x stock price??):

ATI's finances (http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=ATYT&d=t)

NVidia's Finances (http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=NVDA&d=t)

ddtlm

Jun 28, 2004, 11:00 PM

slughead:

Well in the quarter ending May 31 2004, ATI pulled in $491.5 million and in the quarter ending April 25, 2004 nVidia pulled in $471.9 million.

http://www.ati.com/companyinfo/ir/quarterlyresults.html

http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ticker=NVDA&script=410&layout=9&item_id=524344

Mav451

Jun 28, 2004, 11:10 PM

Well, regardless of who is doing better...it has to be huge for Nvidia to get some of this limelight, co-"hosting', if you will, the New Display announcement.

I mean, there is no mentioning of the X800 at all...from this picture of a X800 box in Akiba Japan, it would seem that the ATi's X800 XT also has dual DVI (look for the 2 * DVI in the picture)

What with last year's 5800 debacle, using the 30" Apple display combo as a launchpad for mid-2004 to 2005 is certainly a nice change of pace for nVidia.

FuzzyBallz

Jun 29, 2004, 12:53 AM

Show me where you can get a 6800 PC version for $300.
6800 Standard (http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040628/nvidia-05.html).

Mav451

Jun 29, 2004, 12:56 AM

lol i think he just looked it up on pricewatch.com

in which, yes, quite a few 6800's (128MB Standard) versions show up...

FuzzyBallz

Jun 29, 2004, 12:59 AM

Yup.

ddtlm

Jun 29, 2004, 02:24 AM

Mav451:

Dual DVI ports are not a big deal. I've got a GF-5700 in my Linux box with dual DVI, some places are even selling a dual-DVI GF-5200 for $105:

http://www.directron.com/v9520vs128.html

Can't tell if you are confused or not, but dual-link DVI is not the same thing as dual DVI ports. Apple's 6800 has two dual-link DVI ports, I'm not sure what other cards do.

DTphonehome

Jun 29, 2004, 02:56 AM

If you don't play games the 5200 is fine. Everyone calls it crap cause it's got weaker 3D... but you know if you don't play games...

slughead:

Actually ATI is bigger, and always has been. Strong in the OEM areas.
Thanks everyone for the very informative posts.

I don't play games. Not yet, at least. I have an Xbox for games, and I want to use my G5 for standard household stuff, plus video editing (hence the G5) and DVD creation. I was considering waiting for the iMac G5, but I would want a 20" screen, and in three years, the iMac G5 would be pretty much spent, while it's got a nice screen that I can't do anything with.
If I went for the PM Dual 1.8, I would have far more expandability (RAM, HD, expansion slots, plus I heard Sonnet is working on G5 upgrades), plus a screen that I can use on another computer when the time comes. Sure, it's a bit more expensive, but I reckon I can get quite a few more years out of it.

Now, since I don't play games at this time, is it possible to upgrade the video card in a year or 18 months from now if I don't have PCI-X? What type of graphics bus does the PM have, and will it support the hottest cards? Should I go for the 6800 now and not think about the graphics card for years, or just take the 5200 and upgrade to whatever is new when I need it? And, finally, are new, boxed cards alway compatible with Macs, or do Mac gamers just have to be content with old tech?

I know some of these may be stupid questions, but I am so far behind on graphics cards it isn't funny.
Thanks for all the help!

--DT

Mav451

Jun 29, 2004, 03:10 AM

Bigheadache

Jun 29, 2004, 03:25 AM

Mord

Jun 29, 2004, 06:35 AM

Thanks everyone for the very informative posts.

I don't play games. Not yet, at least. I have an Xbox for games, and I want to use my G5 for standard household stuff, plus video editing (hence the G5) and DVD creation. I was considering waiting for the iMac G5, but I would want a 20" screen, and in three years, the iMac G5 would be pretty much spent, while it's got a nice screen that I can't do anything with.
If I went for the PM Dual 1.8, I would have far more expandability (RAM, HD, expansion slots, plus I heard Sonnet is working on G5 upgrades), plus a screen that I can use on another computer when the time comes. Sure, it's a bit more expensive, but I reckon I can get quite a few more years out of it.

Now, since I don't play games at this time, is it possible to upgrade the video card in a year or 18 months from now if I don't have PCI-X? What type of graphics bus does the PM have, and will it support the hottest cards? Should I go for the 6800 now and not think about the graphics card for years, or just take the 5200 and upgrade to whatever is new when I need it? And, finally, are new, boxed cards alway compatible with Macs, or do Mac gamers just have to be content with old tech?

I know some of these may be stupid questions, but I am so far behind on graphics cards it isn't funny.
Thanks for all the help!

--DT

get the 9600xt and get the 6800 retail kit when it acctually ships in august because if you get one now your g5 will be delayed until around september

Mord

Jun 29, 2004, 07:20 AM

6800 Standard (http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040628/nvidia-05.html).

but the card apple is selling is not the standard is it it's an ultra and that cists $500 only $100 less not half

iJon

Jun 29, 2004, 09:24 AM

hector is right, pc ultra are going for about 5 so the card isnt that much more expensive right now. problem is tht nvidia will come out with a new card sometime eventually but apple will still sell the ultra for 600. i bet we could still find the geforece 4ti for 400 on apple's site.

iJon

gekko513

Jun 29, 2004, 10:21 AM

pci-X is not pci express they are two different things the g5 has pci-X slots (turbo charged pci slots) pci express is like the next agp it's like agp 16x but it is also a replacement for pci and pci-X
Actually the current pci express is similar in performance to the current agp. In many cases pci express is actually slower. I've seen a couple of tests to confirm this ... anandtech.com (http://www.anandtech.com/textdoc.html?i=2091&p=1) is just one.

As far as I have been able to understand, the advantage of pci express is that it is a serial design as opposed to agp which is a parallell design. The serial design makes it easier (cheaper?) to produce and easier to increase speed in the future.

PCI Express x16 just means that it uses 16 serial links to communicate. It does not mean that it's twice as fast as AGP 8x.

whooleytoo

Jun 29, 2004, 12:48 PM

Mav451:
Can't tell if you are confused or not, but dual-link DVI is not the same thing as dual DVI ports. Apple's 6800 has two dual-link DVI ports, I'm not sure what other cards do.

Yup, I think what the previous poster was seeing is a "dual head" setup, two ports for two monitors.

Does anyone know how exactly Dual-link (or dual-dual-link) work? I was originally under the impression that both DVI ports were linked up via a two-headed cable to the 30" monitor, but if the 6800 can handle two 30" monitors, how does that work?

slughead

Jun 29, 2004, 03:23 PM

Does anyone know how exactly Dual-link (or dual-dual-link) work? I was originally under the impression that both DVI ports were linked up via a two-headed cable to the 30" monitor, but if the 6800 can handle two 30" monitors, how does that work?

Good question, when I talked to an apple engineer yesterday, he told me each both ports were 'standard dvi'

I think Jobs made a mistake, I think it takes both ports to power the setup.

The 'dual link' probably refers to having two ports function as 1 software-wise (so when you 'present movie' in QT, for instance, it'll fill the whole screen using both ports).

I wonder if there will eventually be a PCI-X version that we can link to the first one using NVidia's newly-re-released SSL technology.

Mord

Jun 29, 2004, 03:35 PM

Good question, when I talked to an apple engineer yesterday, he told me each both ports were 'standard dvi'

I think Jobs made a mistake, I think it takes both ports to power the setup.

The 'dual link' probably refers to having two ports function as 1 software-wise (so when you 'present movie' in QT, for instance, it'll fill the whole screen using both ports).

I wonder if there will eventually be a PCI-X version that we can link to the first one using NVidia's newly-re-released SSL technology.

put the crack pipe down if steve said you can drive 2 of them on one card then you can and this means that each one only uses one dvi port and thismeans that dual link dvi is like a super dvi that is backwards compatible

and dont get pci-X confused with pci express they are two very different things

whooleytoo

Jun 29, 2004, 03:50 PM

put the crack pipe down if steve said you can drive 2 of them on one card then you can and this means that each one only uses one dvi port and thismeans that dual link dvi is like a super dvi that is backwards compatible

Judging by Apple's tech docs, that seems to be the case. Although there's no indication what exactly Dual Link DVI is, my guess is it's just a "clock-doubled" DVI.

Grimace

Jun 29, 2004, 04:50 PM

Yep, Dual link DVI is DVI on steroids - or using ALL of the pins (*normal* DVI uses only half of the available pins.)

whooleytoo

Jun 29, 2004, 05:10 PM

Yep, Dual link DVI is DVI on steroids - or using ALL of the pins (*normal* DVI uses only half of the available pins.)

Really? I did not know that.. cheers!

blakespot

Jun 29, 2004, 05:33 PM

like the guy above said...it's almost necessary for Doom 3, not to mention it's ID's preferred card (which makes one wonder why...i thought the x800 was better? less power draw, higher fps, smaller).

regardless, it's worth the money, you already dropped 2.5+k on the computer, is 1/2k that much more to ensure the best performance? not to mention it's damn sexy and will make you feel cool.

The GeForce 6800 beats the ATI x800 in most benchmarks thought it draws more power. What's more, the architeture of the GeForce 6800 is much more robust than ATI's and has far more "breathing room" for growth of the chipset. This speaks to superior platform viability for nVIDIA over ATI.

blakespot

slughead

Jun 29, 2004, 05:45 PM

put the crack pipe down if steve said you can drive 2 of them on one card then you can

Just like Jobs talking about 3ghz, right?

Anyways I read up on Dual link and basically it's dependent upon total pixels times the hertz.

I had no idea apple would release a $3,200 monitor with a max of 60 hz, but I overestimated them! At 60 Hertz, dual link is more than enough for 4.1M pixels (this screen runs at less than that, of course)!

Again, it looks to me that Apple didn't make a huge monumental mistake. Dual Link DVI is able to transmit enough data to run 5,500,000 pixels at 60Hz!

So yes, standard dual link DVI + [the crappy] 60hz is way bigger than 2560x1600. At that res, they could get over 80hz!

oingoboingo

Jun 29, 2004, 06:06 PM

Just like Jobs talking about 3ghz, right?

Anyways I read up on Dual link and basically it's dependent upon total pixels times the hertz.

I had no idea apple would release a $3,200 monitor with a max of 60 hz, but I overestimated them! At 60 Hertz, dual link is more than enough for 4.1M pixels (this screen runs at less than that, of course)!

Again, it looks to me that Apple didn't make a huge monumental mistake. Dual Link DVI is able to transmit enough data to run 5,500,000 pixels at 60Hz!

So yes, standard dual link DVI + [the crappy] 60hz is way bigger than 2560x1600. At that res, they could get over 80hz!

Quick question...I thought that with LCD panels, refresh rate wasn't really an issue, as there isn't an electron gun sweeping across a phosphor screen paiting the display line by line...when an LCD screen refreshes, all the pixels are updated at once...so no flickering. The only problem would be if you were playing some kind of game at a refresh rate higher than the panel could supply...then the actual FPS you saw on the screen would be limited to only the refresh rate of the screen itself (in this case, 60fps). Err...so my question is, does a 60Hz refresh rate on an LCD panel matter? 60Hz would be bad on a CRT and cause eye-strain, but is the same true for a 60Hz panel? Is there any discernable difference between an 80Hz panel and a 60Hz panel?

HasanDaddy

Jun 30, 2004, 03:37 AM

Will the Nvidia 6800 make graphic applications, particularly Final Cut Pro, and I guess, DVD Studio Pro, any faster??

if so, by a lot?

THANKS

Fordan

Jun 30, 2004, 11:17 AM

I'm about to jump back in to the Mac world with a dual 2.5GHz G5 and 23" HD Cinema Display, and had been planning on going with the Radeon 9800XT before the WWDC announcement. I'm wondering about going for the 6800, since we don't have any indications of it's capabilities... There are the PC reviews, but those aren't of the card that will be in the G5, and I've heards some statements saying that the Apple flavor of some video cards were downclocked. The card doesn't look like the other 6800 cards, and NVIDIA has nothing on their website talking about it.

Other downsides would be cost and availability... But if the card is enough of an improvement over the 9800XT, I can cope with that.

I am a gamer, though how much I'll do on my Mac vs PC I don't know.

Bob

slughead

Jun 30, 2004, 12:56 PM

There are the PC reviews, but those aren't of the card that will be in the G5, and I've heards some statements saying that the Apple flavor of some video cards were downclocked. The card doesn't look like the other 6800 cards, and NVIDIA has nothing on their website talking about it.

Other downsides would be cost and availability... But if the card is enough of an improvement over the 9800XT, I can cope with that.

You're absolutely right to be concerned. The truth is we don't know.

The fact that it has dual monitor support each with dual link DVI is definitely advantageous over the PC version, however, we won't have any benchmarks until the cards come out.

The biggest problem, IMO, with mac vid cards is that the drivers aren't optimized and re-optimized every month (or even every 6 months), like they are on the PC. The second biggest problem is Apple doesn't let 3rd parties benchmark their hardware before they release it, so early adopters are always the ones getting hosed.

So basically, nobody knows if the FX6800 will be as fast as the PC version. However, I assure you it will be at least 50% faster than 9800XT for Mac.

------------

Final cut pro:

No, this will not increase performance until at least Tiger, and even then they'd have to modify FCP to use Apple's new Core Video. Currently, it does not exist.

Fordan

Jun 30, 2004, 05:15 PM

You're absolutely right to be concerned. The truth is we don't know.

Actually, in http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=77363&page=2&pp=31, JNasty4G63 makes a pretty good case for the 6800 not being underclocked based on the specs that Apple published about the card.

And so, given that it's not underclocked, and that NVIDIA focuses more on OpenGL versus ATI on DirectX, I guess the 6800 is the way I will probably go, even if it means no Mac before September. :(

(Besides, 30" may become cheaper in the future. :D )

Bob