GeForce GTX 480 on a Mac PRO. Possible?

[rasert]

Hello guys...

Is there any procedure to make possible the use of the GeForce GTX 480 on a Mac Pro?

I know that some cards that aren't Mac Editions works on Macs. I think that it has something to do with the firmware or bios (something like that) of the graphics card.

( Forgive me about my english. I'm brazilian and I'm still learning. =] )

Well... thanks anyway.

[nanofrog]

If you run Windows natively (not via virtualization), then it's no problem.

Otherwise, you may get into a situation you can't get it to work (OS X). To do so, you could try flashing the firmware (changes BIOS to EFI), but that means you need an EFI version of the card to obtain that firmware (and the card still may not work, as the ROM chip may not be able to contain it).

The other method is via injectors. I've not looked into it, so I don't know if anyone's gotten this to work yet. But I presume not, as the cards aren't readily available yet, and are going to be on the expensive side.

[rasert]

hummmm nice. So... there is still a hope. Let's wait. =]

[Cindori]

Please read the Golden Guide thread by me.


Quoting myself from it:

Even if I asked God to create a Mac 480GTX and he did, it would not work in a Mac. There are no drivers in OSX to run the card.

[inigel]

Why would you want a card that idles at 100°c and sounds like an Airbus during take-off in your Mac Pro?

I'm waiting for an ATI 5000 series upgrade for my Mac Pro.

[DesmoPilot]

Fermi's basically a joke anyway, you wouldn't want one in your machine even if you could.

[grue]

Why would you want a card that idles at 100°c and sounds like an Airbus during take-off in your Mac Pro?

I'm waiting for an ATI 5000 series upgrade for my Mac Pro.

Oh no! Noise! How will the world cope?!

I can't speak for others, but I buy based on performance. The computer goes under the desk where it belongs, not up on the desk to show how cool I am for using a mac, and I don't even notice it running even though I run the fans at higher speed than stock.

[DesmoPilot]

Oh no! Noise! How will the world cope?!

I can't speak for others, but I buy based on performance. The computer goes under the desk where it belongs, not up on the desk to show how cool I am for using a mac, and I don't even notice it running even though I run the fans at higher speed than stock.

Easy to say that when you haven't heard fermi's running at full tilt, they're very distracting. Not to mention the ridiculous power consumption and heat output (running a dual display setup idling @90c, that's pathetic).

[grue]

Easy to say that when you haven't heard fermi's running at full tilt, they're very distracting. Not to mention the ridiculous power consumption and heat output (running a dual display setup idling @90c, that's pathetic).


I suppose we'll see at some point, if we're lucky. I tend to prefer nvidia hardware over AMD, and I can't really care if it costs an extra $20/yr to run it. At least it'll actually handle OpenCL well once stuff takes advantage of that.

That having been said, it's also "First in, best-dressed". I want a new video card, so the first decent one that gets to market for Mac at a palatable price is going to be what I get. 5800 series or GTX4 series, I don't care.

[gfiz]

what is the current mp's power supply rated at? Can it realistically handle the card anyway?

[grue]

what is the current mp's power supply rated at? Can it realistically handle the card anyway?

It's 980w in the 8core, I don't know about the quad.

[alphaod]

Please read the Golden Guide thread by me.


Quoting myself from it:

Buy the OEM that makes it would provide drivers. Much like the GTX285 drivers for Leopard provided by EVGA.

[gfiz]

It's 980w in the 8core, I don't know about the quad.

more importantly, what are the rails like? I've got to do some googling i know...but as other have said, I wouldn't put that pos in my comp anyway.

[nanofrog]

more importantly, what are the rails like? I've got to do some googling i know...but as other have said, I wouldn't put that pos in my comp anyway.
Each of the mini 6pin graphics card power connectors (PEG) should be able to provide 150W each (150W = spec anyway). The 8 pin PEG spec is rated for 225W (so if this port on the card draws more than 150W, it will damage the PSU and may burn the traces on the logic board).

From what I've seen on the card, the GTX480 is rated to pull 305W (75W is provided by the PCIe slot itself). That leaves 230W to be supplied by the PEG connectors (6 + 8). So the MP's PSU should be able to provide it (assuming it meets specification, and not sort-of :eek:; it does happen :().

[waves7]

"Why would you want a card that idles at 100°c and sounds like an Airbus during take-off in your Mac Pro?"

This is a rumor spread by ati-fanboys. True it's a little warmer than ati, but it's also faster and has more features. The discussions are endless as the ati-fanboys like to twist everything, just so they can feel good about the gfx card they bought 6 months prior. Sure, if you own a new ati, there's only a small increase in performance in the GTX, so it's not worth it to dump the ati. But for those shopping for a new card, the GTX is great. And you would want one, especially on a 23 inch Cinama monitor. I've already seen demos where the ati drops to say 10 fps while the GTX is at closer to 19fps due to tesellation ehancements and other DX11 improvements. And I could see the skipping in the ATI. Not that ati is a bad card, but there are at least some advantages to this new GTX 470,480 set.

Temps are closer to 46c and reach about 70-85c in gaming, closer to 75. But again, it is a little warmer than ati. If someone had a poorly ventalated case, and sits in a 85 degree room, the temps could get up to like 93c under full load, which is still ok. But reading random, word of mouth reviews, from people who actually bought the 47x, they keep saying the "heat" issue is WAY over rated. That along with the electric use issue. ati-fan boys were claiming it would cause you to go broke due to the electric. Fact is, an ati system needs about a 550 watt psu. The GTX wants a 600watt, about 50 watts more. Someone playing games 4 hours a day, 365 days a year (having no life), would end up paying an average of maybe $8 more for the entire year. If they can't afford that for a little more speed, they shouldn't be buying a high end graphics card and get a job. My 3.8ghz i7 pc with 650watt psu will likely handle it as I've already read about similar rigs.. Not sure if 4ghz will pull too much power, but I like 3.8 anyway.

As for noise, it's also not a problem unless the fans get above 77%. There are tons of users reporting thier fans usually don't get above 60-65%. Sometimes 70%. But at that point, it's not very loud. But if someone has two or three issues working against them like bad air flow, perhaps doing SLI at the same time, hot hard drives, and it's very hot in their room, then yes, fermi can ramp up and get noisy. But most of the time it's not. Someone with a reasonable case and good ventalation won't have that problem. Is ati cooler? Yes and it will be harder to get it hot, but again the GTX "noise" thing has been blow out of proportion on the net. I really wanted the added features of the new GTX. But I almost ordered an ATI because of all the bad press given to the GTX. That's untril I dug deeper and found out people love to exaggerate things. So I ordered one. I figure if it really sucks, I have a month to return it. I doubt it will.

As for dual idling at 90c, as DesmoPilot mentions, that was an isolated case that happens only when you have dual monitor. They issued a patch for the profiles and they now idle at 45c or so as they should. Man, when rumors fly, they really go far, lol. But I only want ONE GTX 470, and it's an awesome card from what I've seen and heard. I saw a tesselation demo of realistic water and terrain (google it), and the ocean looks like a video of a real ocean instead of a game. It's incredible. Only a few games use that, but it's a nice feature to have. As for it not being available for mac, THAT is just a disadvantage of that platform. They always get everything later, or never and have to "wait" as rassert mentioned. Some claim it's not true and they can do everything etc, but in reality waiting sometimes goes with the territory. That said, I'm no longer worried about the GTX and glad I ordered it. I'll see how it goes.

[fpsBeaTt]

Oh no! Noise! How will the world cope?!

I can't speak for others, but I buy based on performance. The computer goes under the desk where it belongs, not up on the desk to show how cool I am for using a mac, and I don't even notice it running even though I run the fans at higher speed than stock.

OK, here are a few facts for those not well informed. The GTX 480 is on par with the HD 5870 (the 480 winning in certain synthetic benchmarks and NVidia designed games like Metro 2033), the 2GB 5870 closing the gap between certain apps the 480 outperforms it in. The HD 5970 CRUSHES the GTX 480, the GTX 480 using MORE POWER THAN A 5970, as well as getting hotter and almost the same price. The GTX 480 is the only card where techspot has described the power consumption to be "truly terrifying". If you want ultimate performance, with a card that doesn't need its own power supply or operate @ a temperature akin to the surface of the sun, get an HD 5970. This is not fanboyism, these are the facts, the community at large supporting me concluding the GTX 400 series to be a complete flop. Any earlier reviews which showed the 480 to be beating the 5870 were without ATI's 10.3 drivers, which increase performance quite substantially (it wouldn't surprise me if they were waiting for NVidia to release their 400 series and then to crush them).
It is also noteworthy that NVidia has essentially been forced to release the 400 series simply because they had to release SOMETHING to compete, and are actually selling them @ cost price. ATI can thus lower their prices even further, making only to the die hard NVidia zealots the 5870/5970 a poor choice.

GTX 480 review and benchmark from techspot (http://www.techspot.com/review/263-nvidia-geforce-gtx-480/)

[Cindori]

sorry waves, you don't compare the 5870 to 480GTX when it's the 5970 that is in the matching price range. And versus that card, the 480 loses big time. It's not a bad card, but claiming it's the best alternative out there is a far fetched fantasy.

[kudukudu]

The computer goes under the desk where it belongs, not up on the desk to show how cool I am for using a mac, and I don't even notice it running even though I run the fans at higher speed than stock.

I keep my mac pro on my desk for 2 reasons: 1) easier accessibility to rear ports, 2) in my experience putting a tower on the floor clogs your machine with 10x more dust. I have had my mac pro on my desk for almost 3 years and there is a very thin layer of dust inside. I have seen more than one person in this forum complaining about getting their graphics cards clogged with dust which has resulted in display artifacts.

[macuserx86]

TL;DR

Fermi is a bit of a failure bro, get over it. The 470's not bad, but the 480 is just too power hungry and hot to justify its small performance gains.

1.7%
Porkshoulders
farmville 3D
hey now holy cow
the way it's meant to be fried
1.21 gigawatt PSU
woodscrews
whirring noises

[The Rominator]

All of this chest thumping and flag waving forgets the important fact that this is a Mac forum.

So the only meaningful comparison for us is going to be:

WHO RELEASES MAC EFI ROM AND DRIVERS FIRST.

With an 8 month lead, my money is on ATI 5870 coming for us....oh, at least 6 months sooner. Just a guess.

So until we have BOTH as options to compare in OSX...WHO CARES ???

[fpsBeaTt]

All this bickering, when a GeForce MX100 will do the job.

[macuserx86]

All of this chest thumping and flag waving forgets the important fact that this is a Mac forum.

So the only meaningful comparison for us is going to be:

WHO RELEASES MAC EFI ROM AND DRIVERS FIRST.

With an 8 month lead, my money is on ATI 5870 coming for us....oh, at least 6 months sooner. Just a guess.

So until we have BOTH as options to compare in OSX...WHO CARES ???

Problem Macintosh?

[10THzMac]

I'll stick a 480 in my 08 Pro at the weekend, but as per Cindori's comment, I do not expect much life except in Bootcamp. I am going to power externally, and see just what goes on with Netkas and CoreVidia injectors. Without the drivers my guess is screen of death/kernel panic, but I suppose there is 1% probability of something new with 10.6.4, if I can get my paws on it. We were a bit disappointed yesterday when we stuck it in a regular PC, getting CUDA perf barely better than a 285, so my initial goal is to see what happens under Bootcamp.

[fpsBeaTt]

Here's something which purely illustrates the essence of the GTX 480.
GTX 480 power (http://trolololololololololol.com/)

[10THzMac]

So after some faffing I can report a PNY GTX480 is up and running on my 2008 Mac Pro, under bootcamp for now, with XP32.

Power: I am using an external Toughpower 1000W ATX PSU with lots of 8 and 6 pin PCI connectors to supply the necessary 6 and 8 pin power. As usual the motherboard power is shorted on the green and black slots with a paper clip to get it working without being connected to a computer.

The main card is a Mac edition GTX 285.

Bootcamp drivers usual nightmare, with Windows new hardware wizard (retard?) fighting with the drivers on both the PNY CD and the downloaded NVidia ones. Eventually got it up using manual location and ignoring some rubbish about things not being certified.

My main thing is CUDA programming, not games. I have to do a systematic check, but the thing we all try first is the n-body simulation. Here are the comparisons with the GTX 285, done side by side with nbody --device=0 and nbody --device-1 from the command prompt.

285: 498 Gflops single precision
57 Gflops double precision

480: 561 Gflops single
116 Gflops double

My devicequery is reporting ONLY 1.40 GHz for the 480 against 1.48 for the 285.

More or less as expected, get grey screen of death under 10.5.8 and under 10.6.3 I get the system up but with the card only just recognized, with sysinfo reporting the PCI ID correctly as per screen shot below. I have a mixture of CoreVidia and Netkas injectors in there to manage the PC 285 I just took out, so this is not terribly controlled.

Anyway, it might help readers to know the hardware is perfectly capable of running this card, so it is a matter of OS X drivers now, and perhaps waiting for a full Mac version.

[macuserx86]

Here's something which purely illustrates the essence of the GTX 480.
GTX 480 power (http://trolololololololololol.com/)

well played. very well played.

[10THzMac]

I ran another test on the 480 vs the 285. MonteCarloMultiGPU comes up with about 118000 options per second on the 480 against 83000 on the 285, or just over 40% faster. So this is OK but so far it is only on double precision stuff that we are seeing a real hike (x2). Early days on drivers, compilers is my guess. Found no problems with it under Bootcamp - seems very stable.

Cannot find out much about internals - Nibitor does not recognize the card

[10THzMac]

I should correct my earlier observation about the 480 vs 285. Things are now rather better regarding the 480 perf. If in CUDA you vary the number of bodies in the nbody simulation you find that above about 100000 bodies the 480 easily punches through 700 Gflops compared to about 500 for the 285. Moreover you can do bigger problems - try 200000 on a 285 and it dies, but the 480 pumps it out. I am more impressed the more I play!

[macuserx86]

I should correct my earlier observation about the 480 vs 285. Things are now rather better regarding the 480 perf. If in CUDA you vary the number of bodies in the nbody simulation you find that above about 100000 bodies the 480 easily punches through 700 Gflops compared to about 500 for the 285. Moreover you can do bigger problems - try 200000 on a 285 and it dies, but the 480 pumps it out. I am more impressed the more I play!

I'm assuming halfway though the test the heat from the GTX 480 caused this:
http://screengrabx.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/face-melt.jpg

[jav6454]

Hello guys...

Is there any procedure to make possible the use of the GeForce GTX 480 on a Mac Pro?

I know that some cards that aren't Mac Editions works on Macs. I think that it has something to do with the firmware or bios (something like that) of the graphics card.

( Forgive me about my english. I'm brazilian and I'm still learning. =] )

Well... thanks anyway.

Are you crazy? You want massive 3rd degree burns on your body? Do you have a nuclear reactor to power your Mac Pro?

Fermi is a bit of a failure bro, get over it. The 470's not bad, but the 480 is just too power hungry and hot to justify its small performance gains.

1.7%
Porkshoulders
farmville 3D
hey now holy cow
the way it's meant to be fried
1.21 gigawatt PSU
woodscrews
whirring noises

I love you...

[apolloa]

WOW, fanboy alert!! :eek::eek:

Just wanted to say, in the UK, using Scan.co.uk, the price difference between the cheapest 480 and 5970 is £76.22 or $113.48. So they are hardly in the same price range in my country.
The ATI does run faster however people have already noted that the 480 is smoother and doesn't glitch as much. Also quickly read a review in PC Pro today and they concluded the 480 'smokes' the 5870 in all tests. They also said the Cuda cores are a big advantage for OpenCL etc.

If it was my money, I really don't know which I would get to be honest. Most likely the 480, cheaper then the 5970, faster with more features then the 5870. But apparently there's a rumoured 5890 coming out?
As for the Mac, I think Nvidia cards have had more chance of being made to work then ATI ones have they not? I would be happy with either a 5870 or 480 or 5970 working in OSX, especially for Steam.

[jav6454]

If it was my money, I really don't know which I would get to be honest. Most likely the 480, cheaper then the 5970, faster with more features then the 5870. But apparently there's a rumoured 5890 coming out?

That rumor is based upon close inspection of the 5870's power supply ports (two 6-pins).

The PCB shows clear sign of an extra VRM and MosFET that can be added, as well as one of the 6-pins has an extra 2 dots that would accommodate an 8-pin adapter instead. This will deliver 75W from the 6-pin and 150W from the new 8-pin plus 75W from the PCIe port, meaning this new card could be more power hungry card, but the trade off should be a 5870 GPU on steroids, in other words a 5890.

And no, I am not a fanboy, I used nVidia during the 8800 card series, but their recent GPU offering is a big JOKE, and I will not stand by it. It gets hot enough to boil water and cook eggs.

[10THzMac]

I'm assuming halfway though the test the heat from the GTX 480 caused this:
...
Very funny but totally OTT. The thing is sitting there right next to a Mac 285 and it is NOT powered off a "nuclear reactor" but an external Toughpower 1kW supply, as recommended by several people who do CUDA work. OK, it DOES get a but warm but as it is pushing 720Gflops in single precision it is to be expected. It is TWICE as fast as the 285 on double precision and the sums suggest the corresponding Tesla 2050/70 may be 3x faster again. I think we should pay attention to the numbers. :rolleyes:

[macuserx86]

Very funny but totally OTT. The thing is sitting there right next to a Mac 285 and it is NOT powered off a "nuclear reactor" but an external Toughpower 1kW supply, as recommended by several people who do CUDA work. OK, it DOES get a but warm but as it is pushing 720Gflops in single precision it is to be expected. It is TWICE as fast as the 285 on double precision and the sums suggest the corresponding Tesla 2050/70 may be 3x faster again. I think we should pay attention to the numbers. :rolleyes:

You need an external power adapter?!
Oh sweet Jesus i lol'd!

Nvidia status:

[] not told
[x] told


I love you...

thanks uguu~

[10THzMac]

You need an external power adapter?!
Oh sweet Jesus i lol'd!
..

This is not news. The Mac Pro has a whopper of a PSU but in the Apple Pro design it is not configured with a raft of PCI power outputs for many 6- and 8-pin cards. The motherboard supports 2x6-pin and it is easy to get a third 6-pin from the DVD power line. I think Cindori has a post somewhere for how to get 4x6-pin but I was already playing safe with a daughter PSU to power two 285s that need 4x6-pin. A config of a 285 and a 480 needs 3 6-pin and 1 8-pin so rather than do some more rerouting I stuck with daughter PSU. This is actually an **advantage** as I power it up for Windows but do not for some flavours of OS X that crash (for now) when I have injectors trying to load a 480, due to drivers not being here.

So a supplementary PSU is for now exactly the right way to manage a 480 in a Mac, until Apple/Nvidia release drivers and Apple sort out the power routing to support more high end PCI cards, hopefully in a 2010 Pro....

2009 Pro owners with a 120, requiring no PCI connectors, ought to be able to stick in a 470 (2x6?) and run off the motherboard connectors and close the case, and a suspect with some simple wiring a 120+480 is also possible with no other PSU. But this would be fine for Windows, but any injectors would need to be removed.

[nanofrog]

This is not news. The Mac Pro has a whopper of a PSU but in the Apple Pro design it is not configured with a raft of PCI power outputs for many 6- and 8-pin cards. The motherboard supports 2x6-pin and it is easy to get a third 6-pin from the DVD power line. I think Cindori has a post somewhere for how to get 4x6-pin but I was already playing safe with a daughter PSU to power two 285s that need 4x6-pin. A config of a 285 and a 480 needs 3 6-pin and 1 8-pin so rather than do some more rerouting I stuck with daughter PSU. This is actually an **advantage** as I power it up for Windows but do not for some flavours of OS X that crash (for now) when I have injectors trying to load a 480, due to drivers not being here.

So a supplementary PSU is for now exactly the right way to manage a 480 in a Mac, until Apple/Nvidia release drivers and Apple sort out the power routing to support more high end PCI cards, hopefully in a 2010 Pro....

2009 Pro owners with a 120, requiring no PCI connectors, ought to be able to stick in a 470 (2x6?) and run off the motherboard connectors and close the case, and a suspect with some simple wiring a 120+480 is also possible with no other PSU. But this would be fine for Windows, but any injectors would need to be removed.
There are also small supplemental PSU's that fit in an optical bay (5.25" GPU PSU example (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817101044&Tpk=5.25%22%20power%20supply)). IIRC, they've been used successfully in MP's by other MR members.

[10THzMac]

I forgot out the internal PSU options - thanks nanofrog. FYI here is how I have powered my rig. The Mac 285 is on the bottom and is taken its 2x6-pin power from the motherboard connectors at the top right. The 480 is on top and is being fed a 6- and 8-pin feed from the PSU (not shown) sitting on top of the case, via the big black and yellow cables. Hasn't melted yet.

[DesmoPilot]

That looks like disaster waiting to happen; you may want to have the fire dept. on stand-by.

[fpsBeaTt]

WOW, fanboy alert!! :eek::eek:

Just wanted to say, in the UK, using Scan.co.uk, the price difference between the cheapest 480 and 5970 is £76.22 or $113.48. So they are hardly in the same price range in my country.
The ATI does run faster however people have already noted that the 480 is smoother and doesn't glitch as much. Also quickly read a review in PC Pro today and they concluded the 480 'smokes' the 5870 in all tests. They also said the Cuda cores are a big advantage for OpenCL etc.

If it was my money, I really don't know which I would get to be honest. Most likely the 480, cheaper then the 5970, faster with more features then the 5870. But apparently there's a rumoured 5890 coming out?
As for the Mac, I think Nvidia cards have had more chance of being made to work then ATI ones have they not? I would be happy with either a 5870 or 480 or 5970 working in OSX, especially for Steam.

Ohgod! Not this fanboy again! The guy who vigorously defended the 330m being put in the MBP over a 5650! LOL. I've been reading up on the performance between the three cards in question. In tessellation games, the 480 beats the 5870 by about 20%, but on most other games is equalled or beaten (BFBC2 the 480 is outperformed). The 5970 however (I have one btw, I speak from personal experience) has no stuttering @ all, and the quote "bugs" that you refer to were fixed within a couple of months of it being released. Way to dig up old data and compare it with new data, fanboy! This card crushes the 480 even in tessellation heavy games, and in my opinion is worth the extra 15% capital to get an extra 50 - 60% performance.

[macuserx86]

This thread makes me happy.

[10THzMac]

That looks like disaster waiting to happen; you may want to have the fire dept. on stand-by.
There's almost as much hot air coming out the the back of the 480 as there is in some of the posts in this thread, so my guess is it's being cooled OK. If you think I am mad, Google 4x SLI 480 and see some piccies of 4 of the blighters jammed together.

As for the Ati vs Nvidia war that has spilled over here - programming the Ati cards with OpenCL is still in its infancy and I have heard terrible reports of performance. Getting double the DP flops going from 285 to 480 under CUDA is by contrast, a winner by a mile (and that is ignoring the fact that the Tesla's now have 3x the DP cores as the 480).

[apolloa]

Ohgod! Not this fanboy again! The guy who vigorously defended the 330m being put in the MBP over a 5650! LOL. I've been reading up on the performance between the three cards in question. In tessellation games, the 480 beats the 5870 by about 20%, but on most other games is equalled or beaten (BFBC2 the 480 is outperformed). The 5970 however (I have one btw, I speak from personal experience) has no stuttering @ all, and the quote "bugs" that you refer to were fixed within a couple of months of it being released. Way to dig up old data and compare it with new data, fanboy! This card crushes the 480 even in tessellation heavy games, and in my opinion is worth the extra 15% capital to get an extra 50 - 60% performance.

I did not 'vigourously' defend the 330, I stated it was better because of the automatic switching which it is, ATI don't do that. The funny thing is, if you joined this forum in January, December and you bothered to read the decent proper waiting for Arrandale thread which had good normal discussions without silly pictures and flaming you would see me saying I was hoping for an ATI card. But as you obviously haven't then go ahead and put words in my mouth and make assumptions about me that are false. I couldn't care less.


Oh and this video pretty much proves the GTX480 is the same temperature as the 5970, one video of a series:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa_QAgMetG0

So please stop talking crap people. I'm also pretty sure he has one very good PSU. Not a nuclear power plant!!

[jav6454]

I did not 'vigourously' defend the 330, I stated it was better because of the automatic switching which it is, ATI don't do that. The funny thing is, if you joined this forum in January, December and you bothered to read the decent proper waiting for Arrandale thread which had good normal discussions without silly pictures and flaming you would see me saying I was hoping for an ATI card. But as you obviously haven't then go ahead and put words in my mouth and make assumptions about me that are false. I couldn't care less.


Oh and this video pretty much proves the GTX480 is the same temperature as the 5970, one video of a series:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa_QAgMetG0

So please stop talking crap people. I'm also pretty sure he has one very good PSU. Not a nuclear power plant!!

Well you see, the GTX 480 is still a fire hazard because the thermal envelop of the HD5970 is of a dual GPU card on 1 PCB, versus a 1 GPU card that gets similarly hot and noisy.

That's a sign of a one pretty bad card. Imagine, you pay $499 for a single GPU card that creates heat and noise and consumes same power as a dual GPU. BAD BAD BAD is written all over the place.

Also as for GPU switching on the laptop level, true ATI doesn't do that, but neither does nVidia. Apple programmed it to do so (this isn't Optimus or whatever its called, which by the way is another steaming pile of crap). Also, everyone, please do not compare the 5970 to the 480, it's plain wrong. If anything the 480 should be compared to the 5870. Which performs a bit slower but drastically consumes less power, has drastic lower temperatures and noise levels. The GTX 480 is better than the 5870 by only a 6% margin tops in real world usage.

More information on this can be found on Anandtech.

[apolloa]

Well you see, the GTX 480 is still a fire hazard because the thermal envelop of the HD5970 is of a dual GPU card on 1 PCB, versus a 1 GPU card that gets similarly hot and noisy.

That's a sign of a one pretty bad card. Imagine, you pay $499 for a single GPU card that creates heat and noise and consumes same power as a dual GPU. BAD BAD BAD is written all over the place.

Also as for GPU switching on the laptop level, true ATI doesn't do that, but neither does nVidia. Apple programmed it to do so (this isn't Optimus or whatever its called, which by the way is another steaming pile of crap). Also, everyone, please do not compare the 5970 to the 480, it's plain wrong. If anything the 480 should be compared to the 5870. Which performs a bit slower but drastically consumes less power, has drastic lower temperatures and noise levels. The GTX 480 is better than the 5870 by only a 6% margin tops in real world usage.

More information on this can be found on Anandtech.

I see your point on the heat. True, I can see the inefficiency. And you got me on the switching, Apple are geniuses. I'm just very happy to be able to switch without logging out.
And also agree on the comparison, the guy in the video did it because the Australian prices were closer with those models.
But lets face it, you would WANT to have a 5970 in your Mac Pro more right? But would the drivers be better? In Mac OSX that is. Would it give you that dual GPU power on one card?

[nanofrog]

Would it give you that dual GPU power on one card?
No, in OS's current form (no Crossfire support). Its the same way for the 4870X2 (one core works, the other doesn't, unless it's fired up under Windows).

So for now, it's a waste under OS X for a dual GPU card. But if you need it for Windows, it might be worth it to you, depending on your specific needs.

[apolloa]

No, in OS's current form (no Crossfire support). Its the same way for the 4870X2 (one core works, the other doesn't, unless it's fired up under Windows).

So for now, it's a waste under OS X for a dual GPU card. But if you need it for Windows, it might be worth it to you, depending on your specific needs.

How long until it does? I would predict it in the next OSX? Or is it hardware driven from the chipset too?

[macuserx86]

snip.

Nvidia has attepted to play this off as a
"feature" (http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/gtx-480-gtx-470-gf100-fermi-hotness,news-33131.html)

"The chip is designed to run at high temperature so there is no effect on quality or longevity. We think the tradeoff is right."

Nvidia status:
[] told
[] not told
[x] melted

[nanofrog]

How long until it does? I would predict it in the next OSX? Or is it hardware driven from the chipset too?
Apple's used ATI for a good while now, yet they still haven't introduced Crossfire support. It's theoretically possible to do so, but I wouldn't bet on it, let alone in the next revision. And in the case of Crossfire, it's in the drivers, not the chipset (which is the case with nVidia's products, and OS X doesn't support SLI either).

I wish it were more optimistic, but it is what it is. :eek: :(

[fpsBeaTt]

I did not 'vigourously' defend the 330, I stated it was better because of the automatic switching which it is, ATI don't do that. The funny thing is, if you joined this forum in January, December and you bothered to read the decent proper waiting for Arrandale thread which had good normal discussions without silly pictures and flaming you would see me saying I was hoping for an ATI card. But as you obviously haven't then go ahead and put words in my mouth and make assumptions about me that are false. I couldn't care less.


Oh and this video pretty much proves the GTX480 is the same temperature as the 5970, one video of a series:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa_QAgMetG0

So please stop talking crap people. I'm also pretty sure he has one very good PSU. Not a nuclear power plant!!

As I stated in the GT330m thread, Apple developed the GPU switching independently of NVidia Optimus, so it would've made no difference which brand they went with; ATI or NVidia.
Also, GTX 480 same temperature as the 5970? (http://www.techspot.com/review/263-nvidia-geforce-gtx-480/page13.html) I think not.

[apolloa]

As I stated in the GT330m thread, Apple developed the GPU switching independently of NVidia Optimus, so it would've made no difference which brand they went with; ATI or NVidia.
Also, GTX 480 same temperature as the 5970? (http://www.techspot.com/review/263-nvidia-geforce-gtx-480/page13.html) I think not.

Well, the Nvidia GPU's have some hardware changes to allow them to use the auto switching, so I still don't think the ATI's could do it otherwise they would.
And I shall just post some video proof of that guy above testing both the cards and the same software stating the temperatures:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQLRP24rKhk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eras9dtIuUE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqBjfbHRCXw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIj_Ob_qlsI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa_QAgMetG0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ii90EQF6CmA

So I'll believe all of that thanks.

[wally21]

I'm not what you would call a fanboy of either ATI or NVIDA, but uses of graphics cards extend beyond those related to gaming. As a designer, NVIDIA's development of CUDA and the GPGPU with fermi are still pretty intriguing. I think apple has to seriously consider having at least one fermi based option in any new mac pro.

http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/174393,why-nvidias-cuda-might-change-the-face-of-high-speed-computing.aspx

[fpsBeaTt]

Well, the Nvidia GPU's have some hardware changes to allow them to use the auto switching, so I still don't think the ATI's could do it otherwise they would.
And I shall just post some video proof of that guy above testing both the cards and the same software stating the temperatures:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQLRP24rKhk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eras9dtIuUE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqBjfbHRCXw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIj_Ob_qlsI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa_QAgMetG0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ii90EQF6CmA

So I'll believe all of that thanks.

Did you also notice the insane performance difference? Also, the GTX 480 gets noticeably hotter when it really comes under stress. I'd like to know what fan settings are used as well. btw, the GTX 480 produces far more ambient heat in the case (due to the massive external metal heatsink). Sorry, 5970 allows far more versatility, performance, features and overclockability. Apple will avoid the 480 like the plague.

[10THzMac]

Apple will avoid the 480 like the plague.
You may well be right about that very particular point. A 470 (needing just 2 6pins) would require less re-engineering. I would expect to see either that or a Quadro analog out the door first (Remember we got the Quadro 4800 Mac ed first, followed by the 285). But with so many Macs using Nvidia (like all the new macbook pros) it is hard to imagine Nvidia cards not featuring somewhere with the next Pro. But I would not bet on the 480 either.

[BehindTimes]

Did you also notice the insane performance difference? Also, the GTX 480 gets noticeably hotter when it really comes under stress. I'd like to know what fan settings are used as well. btw, the GTX 480 produces far more ambient heat in the case (due to the massive external metal heatsink). Sorry, 5970 allows far more versatility, performance, features and overclockability. Apple will avoid the 480 like the plague.

The amount of fanboyism and slanted (or completely wrong) facts over a few video cards is ridiculous. This isn't directed specifically at you, but this whole thread.

Unlike probably the majority of people reading this, I do have both a 480 and 5970. Actually they're in SLI and Crossfire modes.

The heat issues and fan issues are completely overblown. Yes, the 480 is hotter under idle, but under load, they are about the same. The same thing with the noise of the fans. Actually, the 5970's are louder under load.

As for versatility? Honestly, what are most people going to be using them as outside of graphics cards? In terms of cost, I realize that outside of the US, the 5970 is about the same as the 480, but in the US, the 480 is more comparable to the 5870.

As for speed, yes, a single 5970 is faster than a 480. But that should be expected with a multi gpu vs single gpu setup. Under sli & crossfire, it varies depending upon the application.

But overall, I notice that the 480 sli setup is faster overall in the minimum frames per second, which is what I care most about. Honestly, I'm not going to notice, and I doubt anyone of you would either, the difference between 200 and 170 fps. In fact, unless you have expensive monitors (or still using CRT), you're probably limited by your monitor on what you can see. But for the few games which stress the cards, they're slow and choppy to begin with, but I feel the 480's give an overall smoother feel due to a higher minimum frame rate. If you're dropping into sub 24 fps consistantly, having 19 fps vs 11 fps is very noticeable.

As for what Apple would decide to do, I guess if they had to choose one to give to their Mac Pro users, I guess it would be the 5970. You don't have to worry about PhysX on the Mac, and with no SLI nor Crossfire, it's obvious that the 5970 is faster and draws less power. Personally though, I can't see how either card will ever make it into the Mac Pro.

[apolloa]

Did you also notice the insane performance difference? Also, the GTX 480 gets noticeably hotter when it really comes under stress. I'd like to know what fan settings are used as well. btw, the GTX 480 produces far more ambient heat in the case (due to the massive external metal heatsink). Sorry, 5970 allows far more versatility, performance, features and overclockability. Apple will avoid the 480 like the plague.

Yes I did see the performance difference, I won't post the dual and tri SLI 480 tests the guy did!! :D

And looking at those videos the 480 had the exact same temps at the 5970.
However, it's all moot as you'll never see either card in a Mac, you'll be lucky for a Mac version of the 4840 or similar low end.
What I guess all teh peeps here want is a half decent mid range card and possibly Quadro or Firepro card options?? Seeing as the Mac Pro IS a dual Xeon workstation after all......

[koruki]

I have a 5970 sitting in my machine that I've spent hours accommadating in order to fit into the case. Lets just say as soon as the 480 arrives at my local shop(delayed shipping here) I'm taking my 5970 back and going back to Nvidia.

This is my 3rd card, the first one's fan squeaked constantly, the second one had a fan that never moved AT ALL. This third one has a working fan but the display drivers would fail a couple times a day even just browing the net. Game drivers are a joke.

Some may say I should of just gotten a 5870 but I have two friends that got those cards, the first one has swapped 4 of them only to be given a full refund at the end and had to find something else. The second friend has swapped 2 cards.

I agree ati offers the best deal now, but I have decided to go back to nvidia.


As for versatility? Honestly, what are most people going to be using them as outside of graphics cards? In terms of cost, I realize that outside of the US, the 5970 is about the same as the 480, but in the US, the 480 is more comparable to the 5870.

The price here in NZ is also comparable to the 5870.

[10THzMac]

A minor point but for anyone else getting one of these up under Bootcamp, my system is behaving much better with new drivers. Nvidia have released 197.75 for the 480 and this together with 197.45 for the 285 has eliminated a couple of annoying niggles, such as Windows thinking there is a new device there every time I boot. OpenGL benchmark is now running, though I have not got a sensible comparison with the OSX side as the OSX stuff is not quite there with 3.0 year, whereas under Windows the default tests start at 3.0. I also had nearly 150 Gflops from some double precision CUDA work, i.e. > 2.5x the speed of the 285.

[casw1000]

A minor point but for anyone else getting one of these up under Bootcamp, my system is behaving much better with new drivers. Nvidia have released 197.75 for the 480 and this together with 197.45 for the 285 has eliminated a couple of annoying niggles, such as Windows thinking there is a new device there every time I boot. OpenGL benchmark is now running, though I have not got a sensible comparison with the OSX side as the OSX stuff is not quite there with 3.0 year, whereas under Windows the default tests start at 3.0. I also had nearly 150 Gflops from some double precision CUDA work, i.e. > 2.5x the speed of the 285.

Hi 10THzMAc, thanks for your work and sharing with us here. I use my 2008 MacPro 8 core for folding@home under Windows7 bootcamp. I have reached a point whereby I am thinking of selling the mac, or to get more performance from it, install a GTX470. I like the idea of running a seperate power supply, however two things that I am unsure of.

1. You mentioned about doing some sort of short on the motherboard to get it recognised? 2. How do you switch on your external PSU. Do you have a switch, or are you creating a short again to power the psu?

It may be that I just give up the Mac and get a newer Core i7 and fold on that. However the dual xeon in my view is still an awesome beast.

Thanks,
casw1000
fold4life.com

[10THzMac]

1. You mentioned about doing some sort of short on the motherboard to get it recognised? 2. How do you switch on your external PSU. Do you have a switch, or are you creating a short again to power the psu?


With a 470 there is less of an imperative to use an external PSU as depending on what your boot card is you might find it easy to power internally. E.g. 120 (Zero extra power)+470 (2 x6-pin) might be OK off motherboard, 8800+470 probably OK routing a third 6-pin from optical. If you do NOT try to inject the 470 under OS X it should not crash it due to driver absence. (My system is littered with injectors from netkas and Corevidia to manage a PC 285 as well so it is a bit of a mess)

If you do follow my external PSU route note that I am NOT shorting the motherboard! I am just joining two connectors on the main output of the PSU to fool it into thinking it is attached to something. Green and black are joined by a paper clip on my system, pins 14 and 15 are sometimes referred to. There are several web refs, e.g.

http://www.duxcw.com/faq/ps/ps4.htm

The PSU has a big switch on it - it is the one that would stick out the back of a PC as the main on-off switch.

[casw1000]

With a 470 there is less of an imperative to use an external PSU as depending on what your boot card is you might find it easy to power internally. E.g. 120 (Zero extra power)+470 (2 x6-pin) might be OK off motherboard, 8800+470 probably OK routing a third 6-pin from optical. If you do NOT try to inject the 470 under OS X it should not crash it due to driver absence. (My system is littered with injectors from netkas and Corevidia to manage a PC 285 as well so it is a bit of a mess)

If you do follow my external PSU route note that I am NOT shorting the motherboard! I am just joining two connectors on the main output of the PSU to fool it into thinking it is attached to something. Green and black are joined by a paper clip on my system, pins 14 and 15 are sometimes referred to. There are several web refs, e.g.

http://www.duxcw.com/faq/ps/ps4.htm

The PSU has a big switch on it - it is the one that would stick out the back of a PC as the main on-off switch.

Thanks for clearing up how you are connecting your PSU, that makes more sense. I think I could get away with my 8800GT, 1x spare + 2molex into 6pin PCI-e. Thanks for your help.

casw1000

[jav6454]

nVidia, burning tomorrow's homes.

[10THzMac]

Well, my computer hasn't melted. My face hasn't melted and my house has not burnt down. The fire alarms did go off but that was the toast, not the GTX 480. Meanwhile, for those of you more interested in facts than ranting, here are some bootcamp shots from my not-yet-melted Mac285+PC480 Mac Pro 08 rig. Those of you interested in CUDA can see easily the differences in config from the device query, and the speed increase on a default multi GPU code in the Nvidia example set. I will post a shot for the double precision enhancement later.

[inigel]

nVidia, burning tomorrow's homes.

I got an update to my home and contents from my insurer stating they don't cover Fermi fires.

[miohn]

Hi casw1000,
I've just arrived at the same point as you
and I'm no more satisfied with my currently installed ATI card HD4870.
I have bad OpenGL support for After Effects and also
no CUDA support for new rendering engines such as "Octane", etc.

Does anyone have a recommendation for me?

Should I buy now a, still very expensive (450,- €), GTX 285 MacEdition ?
Or wait, perhaps until a 480 comes out for Mac?
Btw. I'm tired of "flashing" PC cards and "pulling" cables
Or should I just buy a new PC?
because I work anyway with Win 7 on my MacPro (8x 3,2Ghz/20mb RAM)

10ThzMac, how satisfied are you with the GTX 285 alone?

thanks for suggestions
mike

[peakchua]

Hey, thanks for posting such an interesting thread but i will have to say, this will probably never happen until sjobs drops power saving+ makes a better cooling system. Though i love amd gpus better for many obvious reasons, i do not mind nvidia gpus right until the gtx 295 but after that.. fail. First of all, which company makes a gpu that is so frigin hot, is buggy, consumes so much power and has only a little bit more frps than a 5870 or competitorS? doesent seem so practical.. even the gtx 480M sucks. 100 WATTS? come on nvidia. the 5870 consumes wayyy less power than the gtx and so as the 5970 DUAL gpu. since the gtx 480 is stil only a single gpu, what will happen when it goes against the amd 2X 95 w 5970? i bet it will be a mess. and since apple:apple: power consumption strategies and intel hates nvidia and you will obviously see, it will not happen. to me, the 5850-5870 desktop versions are the most likely right now. GTX 480 is a fail. nvidia 2009-2010 is a failure. i would get lower performing components just as long as they are cool, perform and make my bills look good :) decide yourself. remember, i dont hate nvidia.

[10THzMac]

...
Should I buy now a, still very expensive (450,- €), GTX 285 MacEdition ?
Or wait, perhaps until a 480 comes out for Mac?
Btw. I'm tired of "flashing" PC cards and "pulling" cables
Or should I just buy a new PC?
because I work anyway with Win 7 on my MacPro (8x 3,2Ghz/20mb RAM)

10ThzMac, how satisfied are you with the GTX 285 alone?

I was and am very satisfied with the GTX 285. It has been running in my 08 Pro since it was launched and until recently served as boot card alongside an injected PC 285 (also ext powered), that I have recently replaced by my experimental 480.

I should say that my main interest is in CUDA/OpenCL programming so many of the considerations that worry others do not really apply to me. But it rather strikes me that power users might well be expected do use some, er, power, so many of the comments on this thread are irrelevant to me.

The only caution I would express wrt 285 is for you to check that any specialized high end ($$$) commercial CUDA aware apps you use are not locked to the Quadro 4800. I saw a post elsewhere that indicated that this has happened for at least one application. All my CUDA apps run well on both (and indeed faster on the 285, which has more cores clocked faster) and on the 480 under Windows.

I would not hold your breath for a Mac ed 480. I would bet on a Quadro type card first - after all we got the 4800 before the 285. As has been pointed out elsewhere - we really need a Pro with better cooling and a good supply of 6- and 8-pin PCI power outputs, as well as software drivers and EFI ROM, before these Fermi cards are truly practical in a Mac Pro.

Right now I would wait to see what if anything WWDC brings this week on the Pro front.

[10THzMac]

.. even the gtx 480M sucks.
To quote you, no, No, NO!!! The 480M is a VERY exciting development for me as it brings to a laptop the full power of (double precision) scientific computing. MacBookPro users might have the "latest" 330M chip, but this is in reality a weak GPU. It only has 48 cores against the 128 in the GTX 285M in my latest portable and the 352 in the 480M, which also allows DP computation.

What I really want to know is if anyone has loaded a Tesla C2050 into a Mac Pro, at least under Bootcamp - if you have please post some DP CUDA results, even if it is just nbody under double prec. (Or if you have a 480M laptop already, likewise).

[peakchua]

To quote you, no, No, NO!!! The 480M is a VERY exciting development for me as it brings to a laptop the full power of (double precision) scientific computing. MacBookPro users might have the "latest" 330M chip, but this is in reality a weak GPU. It only has 48 cores against the 128 in the GTX 285M in my latest portable and the 352 in the 480M, which also allows DP computation.

What I really want to know is if anyone has loaded a Tesla C2050 into a Mac Pro, at least under Bootcamp - if you have please post some DP CUDA results, even if it is just nbody under double prec. (Or if you have a 480M laptop already, likewise).

its fine though it is revolutionary in terms of speed, the 480m is very not thought fo and nvidia thinks a super battery can be created to give a gtx a 6 hout battery life. for those that plug in their ac core to their laptop so they can game but also wheen portable, they plug it in, what is a purpose of a laptop then when it consumes hell a lot of power? to me, its not acceptable to keep on pluugging in your laptop, ergonomics count.

[10THzMac]

....to me, its not acceptable to keep on pluugging in your laptop, ergonomics count.
Sure, but others have different priorities. The longest I need a battery to last is 2H, in the case of a longer lecture or seminar, and I work plugged in most of the time. The gripe I have with Apple is their refusal to even give users a *choice* if they wish to trade battery life for power. Not only do they refuse to offer an option of a decent mobile GPU in the MBP, the same attitude cripples their CPU options, which stop at the i7 that isn't a proper i7, with only 2 cores. Why they cannot offer an option of a proper i7-720, when many Windows mfrs offer 720, 820, 920 choices is a mystery to me, and that's why I have bought, through gritted teeth, a Windows laptop with an i7-720 and GTX 285M. The current Mac Pro architecture is correspondingly crippled with a small number of PCI slots and 2 6-pin PCI power outputs. And this is from the company pushing OpenCL and GrandCentral! After that ghastly WWDC keynote with Steve ranting on about yet another fashion accessory instead of a decent new Mac Pro I think I have run out of patience with them on the desktop front as well.

Anyway - here is the promised shot of nbody in benchmark mode doing double precision arithmetic with 50000 bodies - the GTX 480 is about 160% faster than the 285, and I am told there is another factor 3 in the Tesla C20 cards. If I turn off -fp64 the 480 does about 700 against the 285's 500.

[peakchua]

Sure, but others have different priorities. The longest I need a battery to last is 2H, in the case of a longer lecture or seminar, and I work plugged in most of the time. The gripe I have with Apple is their refusal to even give users a *choice* if they wish to trade battery life for power. Not only do they refuse to offer an option of a decent mobile GPU in the MBP, the same attitude cripples their CPU options, which stop at the i7 that isn't a proper i7, with only 2 cores. Why they cannot offer an option of a proper i7-720, when many Windows mfrs offer 720, 820, 920 choices is a mystery to me, and that's why I have bought, through gritted teeth, a Windows laptop with an i7-720 and GTX 285M. The current Mac Pro architecture is correspondingly crippled with a small number of PCI slots and 2 6-pin PCI power outputs. And this is from the company pushing OpenCL and GrandCentral! After that ghastly WWDC keynote with Steve ranting on about yet another fashion accessory instead of a decent new Mac Pro I think I have run out of patience with them on the desktop front as well.

Anyway - here is the promised shot of nbody in benchmark mode doing double precision arithmetic with 50000 bodies - the GTX 480 is about 160% faster than the 285, and I am told there is another factor 3 in the Tesla C20 cards. If I turn off -fp64 the 480 does about 700 against the 285's 500.

true :) i think apple should broaden its options or make their laptops a little bit thicker so that heat can come out, a taller battery and better components.as the macbook pro is 1 inch thick, i think they hsould add another 5mm? would be better im not someone who expands etc. i just make sure i get the right model before i regret :) but then again, apple is the only one making macs ); asus should get rights to os x..

[Major Reeves]

I forgot out the internal PSU options - thanks nanofrog. FYI here is how I have powered my rig. The Mac 285 is on the bottom and is taken its 2x6-pin power from the motherboard connectors at the top right. The 480 is on top and is being fed a 6- and 8-pin feed from the PSU (not shown) sitting on top of the case, via the big black and yellow cables. Hasn't melted yet.

You could route the external psu cables trough the mac pro cooling holes or the last pci bracket. That way you'll be able to close your mac pro case as well help to maintain the airflow inside the case.

[macest]

I have just purchased a Palit GTX 480.

I have tried three different configs for the external power feeds:

1. 6-pin from motherboard, 8-pin from molex > 6-pin adapter to 6-pin > 8-pin adapter.
2. 6-pin from molex > 6-pin adapter, 8-pin from motherboard to 6-pin > 8-pin adapter.
3. 6-pin from motherboard, 8-pin from 2 x molex to 8-pin adapter

These all boot fine, but none cause the fan to spin up - this is worrying since it should spin up, even at idle. When I initially bought the card, I tried it and got the fan problem, took it back to the shop where they tried it on their rig and it worked fine. I got a replacement card anyway just in case and tried it, but the same problem, no fan spin up. Without the fan going, the card hits 110°C and shuts off.

I previously had a 4870x2 (now very glitchy and crashes starting any game) which was powered either using 1 or 2, I can't remember which, but know it was one of them. This setup was working fine, the 4870x2 would power up just fine with it's fan going. The 4870x2 has a higher power usage than the 480 which is confusing me as to why it's not spinning up the fans. My 8800GT also works just fine off the same slot.

Is anyone successfully powering the card off the internal power supply?

[nickarmadillo]

Well, if anybody is interested in a GTX 480, just send me a PM ...

[deconstruct60]

There are also small supplemental PSU's that fit in an optical bay (5.25" GPU PSU example (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817101044&Tpk=5.25%22%20power%20supply)). IIRC, they've been used successfully in MP's by other MR members.

So the thought is to blow heated air directly at the Mac Pro's main power supply ? That isn't going to increase the ambient temperature the power supply has to deal with?

Even if Apple's designers had though someone would stick a hard drive or something that would throw off 10's of W in the external drive bays, this is way past that. It is extremely unlikely even remotely tested something that is radiating waste heat that would correspond to 50% of the total power supply.

There are extremely few boxes out there with power supplies lined up serially in the air flow. In a tower case where the power supply is above the external bay slots this would be less destructive long term if manage to blow out the heat with the change thermals.

[nanofrog]

So the thought is to blow heated air directly at the Mac Pro's main power supply ? That isn't going to increase the ambient temperature the power supply has to deal with?

Even if Apple's designers had though someone would stick a hard drive or something that would throw off 10's of W in the external drive bays, this is way past that. It is extremely unlikely even remotely tested something that is radiating waste heat that would correspond to 50% of the total power supply.

There are extremely few boxes out there with power supplies lined up serially in the air flow. In a tower case where the power supply is above the external bay slots this would be less destructive long term if manage to blow out the heat with the change thermals.
The front fans won't Push air through a supplemental GPU power supply (as it's above the front fans, not behind them), but the exhaust fans will draw air through it (assuming it doesn't have it's own fans, and that linked does from what I can tell from the pics on newegg). Not as ideal (even with the pull fans, as they're small), but acceptable (and what it should have been designed for), unless the unit is so poorly designed, that's not even sufficent (i.e. anything in a 5.25" bay won't have fans pushing air through them, as the device will be at the absolute front of the case).

As per Apple's PSU, if it can't handle the heat increase of what's in the system, it's under cooled. Period. PCIe devices alone will heat the ambient temps of the input airflow, and change the cooling curves. This has to be considered (i.e. 75W* n slots at bare minimum, but better that it include thermals from multiple graphics cards, in this case, 2x would be realistic given the slot configuration, for cards that require additional power beyond the PCIe max power specification + 2x @ 75W to account for the total thermal imprint on ambient pushed through the system PSU, above the rest of the system, such as CPU's, logic board, and HDD's, since heat rises, and the PSU is at the top rear of the system).

[macuserx86]

nVidia, burning tomorrow's homes.

Of all the Asian Ricer shops, that is the best one.
somebody call 911
Fermi fire burning on the dancefloor!
231785

I really hope we can get the ATI 5xxx series in a Mac Pro soon.

[10THzMac]

I have just purchased a Palit GTX 480.

I have tried three different configs for the external power feeds:

1. 6-pin from motherboard, 8-pin from molex > 6-pin adapter to 6-pin > 8-pin adapter.
2. 6-pin from molex > 6-pin adapter, 8-pin from motherboard to 6-pin > 8-pin adapter.
3. 6-pin from motherboard, 8-pin from 2 x molex to 8-pin adapter

These all boot fine, but none cause the fan to spin up - this is worrying since it should spin up, even at idle. When I initially bought the card, I tried it and got the fan problem, took it back to the shop where they tried it on their rig and it worked fine. I got a replacement card anyway just in case and tried it, but the same problem, no fan spin up. Without the fan going, the card hits 110°C and shuts off.

I previously had a 4870x2 (now very glitchy and crashes starting any game) which was powered either using 1 or 2, I can't remember which, but know it was one of them. This setup was working fine, the 4870x2 would power up just fine with it's fan going. The 4870x2 has a higher power usage than the 480 which is confusing me as to why it's not spinning up the fans. My 8800GT also works just fine off the same slot.

Is anyone successfully powering the card off the internal power supply?

So this is interesting and worrying - I only got up to running an 8800 + 285 using the 2 motherboard 6 pin and rerouted optical molex to pricure 3x 6-pin and that was fine.

Can anyone help macest here - maybe

(a) someone who has in the past powered a 295 internally?
(b) does anyone know the actual rated power for the two motherboard 6-pin and optical supplies - maybe it is just falling short of what the 480n needs and the fan is a symptom?

I cannot comment on the heat from an second internal PSU as I went external as soon as I went to 2x285.

[The Rominator]

I used to run a 4870x2 in my 2006. (Single card with Dual GPUs) It has Quad 3.0 5165s i added, which may have added to power issue.

I used a 6 pin to 8 pin adapter.

Whether I ran this from one of motherboard connectors or the molex adapter, i still could run out of juice. However, this would only be playing Crysis on 30" with everything cranked.

And then it would take an explosion or similarly difficult rendering task and BAM the whole machine would shut off. Made the explosion seem very real but after about 5 times I decided to sell 4870X2 since it was only especially useful in Windows and i wasn't interested in replacing a burnt PSU for a silly game. Fan always worked fine however, and quite a fan it was.

I have noticed some 8800GTS and even a GTX285 actually stop fan after initial boot but fan always restarts after a few mins as temps build and saturate heatsink.

this is a very odd issue, hard to imagine it is just a lack of power.

[jav6454]

Of all the Asian Ricer shops, that is the best one.
somebody call 911
Fermi fire burning on the dancefloor!

I really hope we can get the ATI 5xxx series in a Mac Pro soon.

I love you for that reference.

A GTX 480 with 197.75 drivers from nVidia.

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/5/5b/FermiLiftoff.jpg

If you dared install a GTX 480, this is proper cooling

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/4/4a/Fancase.jpg

But the following picture is what nVidia fanboys actually believe:

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/1/14/FermiTitle.jpg

Click to enlarge

[jav6454]

Needs more fermi fire.

[MasterPug]

More or less as expected, get grey screen of death under 10.5.8 and under 10.6.3 I get the system up but with the card only just recognized, with sysinfo reporting the PCI ID correctly as per screen shot below. I have a mixture of CoreVidia and Netkas injectors in there to manage the PC 285 I just took out, so this is not terribly controlled.

Anyway, it might help readers to know the hardware is perfectly capable of running this card, so it is a matter of OS X drivers now, and perhaps waiting for a full Mac version.

Ok, I think I'm in a bit above my head at this point. I have a GTX 470 installed now and running in bootcamp, with an old GT 120 left in there for when I'm in OSX, but it won't finish the OSX boot.

I intend for the 470 to be more or less non-functional in OSX, such as you have in your set up. What sort of horrible driver fiddling do I need to do to accomplish this?

(By the way, once I got the right power cables for it, the 470 is powered just nicely through the motherboard. No extra fiddling required.)

((apologies for the thread necromancy))

[alxklv]

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=955949&page=1

[VanneDC]

just did some reading and i am not sure its as bad as everyone thinks it is, the GTX 480 is amped at 250w tdp, whereas the mac pro (2008) 3,1 has sufficient power to run cards up to 300w.. so if thats the only card your running you should be able to do so???