5770 > 4850m???

[MythicFrost]

According to notebook check the 5770M is not as good as the 4850M, what's the chance it's a desktop card?
I'll also point out, Apple doesn't have any comparison for graphics with the 4850 and the 5770 so I'd say it's the mobile edition... which I'm a bit disappointed in.

Any thoughts?

[prne10]

This subject has been brought up a ton today.

There are several theories right now:

1) the high end card, 5750, is a desktop card that is underclocked
2) the high end card, 5750, is a mobility card.
3) the high end card, 5750, is really an 5850 mobility.
4) the high end card, 5750, is really a jack in the box. You'll power on your new iMac, but instead of a mac screen, a steve jobs will pop out.

[MythicFrost]

Ah, interesting... I'm hoping it's a desktop GPU, or a 5850M would be good. But I'm convinced it's a 5750M purely because Apple doesn't have a comparison showing the improvement from this GPU over the previous 27" i7 model, and it never says "the best graphics yet", it just says great graphics, more or less.

[Blaine]

But if the performance is worse, why on earth did Apple "downgrade" it?

[MythicFrost]

But if the performance is worse, why on earth did Apple "downgrade" it?
I don't know, heat reduction, less power consumption, who knows.

[Blaine]

hmm :confused: this is an interesting topic then

[MythicFrost]

hmm :confused: this is an interesting topic then
Indeed, I only hope I'm wrong. A desktop 5770 1GB would be great and afaik much better than the 4850M, but if it's the mobile edition, performance could be less. We'll have to wait and see, currently notebookcheck doesn't have any games + FPS listed for the GPU.

[prne10]

Indeed, I only hope I'm wrong. A desktop 5770 1GB would be great and afaik much better than the 4850M, but if it's the mobile edition, performance could be less. We'll have to wait and see, currently notebookcheck doesn't have any games + FPS listed for the GPU.

I think you mean 5750.

[MythicFrost]

I think you mean 5750.
Correct, I do. Would Apple really put a GPU that's a bit weaker than the current one? They aren't advertising the speed increase from the 4850, so it'd make sense.

I went from a GTX 285 to a 4850M and was thoroughly pleased with the performance, as it was much better than I expected. I'm not sure I'd be happy going further down, even though I want an SSD in my iMac.

[Intell]

4) the high end card, 5750, is really a jack in the box. You'll power on your new iMac, but instead of a mac screen, a Steve Jobs will pop out.

That wouldn't end well with me. :D

[prne10]

That wouldn't end well with me. :D

POP goes the JOBSY! :D:D:D:D

[MythicFrost]

Hopefully someone with the 5670 and 5750 can use GPU-Z in Windows to see whether it says it's a mobile or desktop GPU.

[ceshimm]

as learn from

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=10672071&posted=1#post10672071

the HD 5750 has a big chance being a mobile card (mobility 5800 series) and mostly like 5850M, otherwise it might beat by last gen 4850M

[spcdust]

Obviously until someone does a proper evaluation of the iMac's 5750 card we cannot be sure what card Apple have actually installed. However, the fact that Apple aren't saying "The Best iMac Graphics Ever", with GPU comparison charts with the previous iMac generation, as is there usual habit (see archived link below - couldn't find an archive for the last generation iMac but do remember they also carried comparison charts), does not particularly fill me with confidence.

http://web.archive.org/web/20080723203147/www.apple.com/imac/features/

Hopefully it's a performance boost but their marketing blurb, this time around, seems to cleverly avoid direct comparisons with the previous generation and just makes sweeping statements about GPU performance.

http://www.apple.com/uk/imac/performance.html

[Hellhammer]

Obviously until someone does a proper evaluation of the iMac's 5750 card we cannot be sure what card Apple have actually installed. However, the fact that Apple aren't saying "The Best iMac Graphics Ever", with GPU comparison charts with the previous iMac generation, as is there usual habit (see archived link below - couldn't find an archive for the last generation iMac but do remember they also carried comparison charts), does not particularly fill me with confidence.

http://web.archive.org/web/20080723203147/www.apple.com/imac/features/

Hopefully it's a performance boost but their marketing blurb, this time around, seems to cleverly avoid direct comparisons with the previous generation and just makes sweeping statements about GPU performance.

http://www.apple.com/uk/imac/performance.html

The device ID matches ATI Mobility 58xx

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=978676

[spcdust]

The device ID matches ATI Mobility 58xx

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=978676

Interesting......

So, at worse it's a slight bump in GPU performance compared to the 4850 card but nothing earth shattering. Reckon Apple's reticence in declaring it as it's best GFX performance ever with "marketing" comparison charts speaks volumes about this GPU.

[Hellhammer]

Interesting......

So, at worse it's a slight bump in GPU performance compared to the 4850 card but nothing earth shattering. Reckon Apple's reticence in declaring it as it's best GFX performance ever with "marketing" comparison charts speaks volumes about this GPU.

It would still be faster if it was only 1% faster and Apple will let us know that it's the fastest iMac :p Anyway, it could be mobility 5870 which would be great news as it's FASTER than desktop 5750

[Mac_Max]

The device ID matches ATI Mobility 58xx

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=978676

Scroll to the bottom:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3758/avadirect-clevo-w860cu-5870-vs-285m

As also shown in your link, the device IDs match because the 5870M is a Juniper core based on the Desktop 5770. This has pretty much been beat to death on the PC side of things.

I have the laptop shown there (waaaay awesome gift) and am actually pretty glad it has the GTX285M a.k.a the GTS250 a.k.a. the 9800GTX a.ka. the 8800GTX (amazing how they do that haha). It gets 50% better battery life over the 5770M, runs cooler etc.

As an aside, mine has the Core i7 940. I get about 2 hours of battery life with the screen dimmed and all the power saving functions on in Win 7. On the Hackintosh side is about an hour because the GTX never goes into low power mode. ATI support is pretty spotty for Hackintoshes but now that drivers exist for it, that 5870M may not have been a bad idea.

Either way, the long and the short is that the core is a bit faster than the 4850. Not by much, it has DX11 for Windows and will get OpenGL 4.1 whenever Apple feels like implementing it.

[Hellhammer]

Scroll to the bottom:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3758/avadirect-clevo-w860cu-5870-vs-285m

As also shown in your link, the device IDs match because the 5870M is a Juniper core based on the Desktop 5770. This has pretty much been beat to death on the PC side of things.

It has been beaten to death in here too. I was the first one to explain the difference and why mobility 58xx sucks

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=875286

Mobility 5870 uses the same "Juniper" core with 800 CPUs as desktop 5770 and has same clocks as desktop 5750 so it performs somewhere between desktop 5750 and 5770 (I'm sure you know these but just to clarify for others so they won't ask). Mobility 5850 has just lower clocks than 5870. We have to wait till some more accurate specs though

Either way, the long and the short is that the core is a bit faster than the 4850. Not by much, it has DX11 for Windows and will get OpenGL 4.1 whenever Apple feels like implementing it.

We don't know is the core faster. Apple might have underclocked it so we have to wait for someone to run GPU-Z.