Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

GTX660m?

T

tictaktwonk101

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Quick question.....

How good is the 660m in the 27" ?

Is it just a bit better than the 650 in the 21" to push the extra screen size?
 
It's better on paper than the 650M, but because it was crippled with 512MB VRAM, the 21.5" 650M will perform better than the 27" 660M when each are running at their respective native resolutions.
 
forty2j said:
It's better on paper than the 650M, but because it was crippled with 512MB VRAM, the 21.5" 650M will perform better than the 27" 660M when each are running at their respective native resolutions.
Click to expand...

So the 21" would be a better option the the 27"?????
 
Can I just point out that the playstation 3 only has 512mb ram combined between system ram(256) and GPU ram(256), so cannot see why the gtx660m wouldn't be able to handle itself fine for a bit of mid level gaming😕

It's also an extra £200 from the base 27" to the top level 27" with the top graphics card costing an extra £120 🙁

Total cost would be £320 tops, I thought I was doing well in finding £1500 for the base 27" 😛

But I still absolutely love it😀
 
Last edited:
steve119 said:
Can I just point out that the playstation 3 only has 512mb ram combined between system ram(256) and GPU ram(256), so cannot see why the gtx660m wouldn't be able to handle itself fine for a bit of mid level gaming😕
Click to expand...

Two reasons:
- Console hardware & software are very specifically designed & integrated. That PS3 game is written for exactly 1 level of detail, at exactly 1 resolution (720p), and exploit various approved & unapproved tricks specific to the PS3 chips.
- The native resolution of the 27" iMac is 1440p.. much larger than any PS3 game has to support. The PS3 technically supports 1080p, but isn't powerful enough to actually run games well at that resolution, so no serious 3D games exist for it.

If you were to take a specific resolution (such as 720p) and compare the 21" 650M and 27" 660M, the 660M would definitely perform better. But I'm talking about running at the resolution that is native to the display - 1080p for the 21" and 1440p for the 27". Running at resolutions other than native results in either a letterbox effect or some blurring from scaling, neither of which are exactly desirable.
 
I can only agree with the rest here - if you intend to play games, get at least the 675MX (or better, 680MX, at that price its hard to justify not getting it).

forty2j said:
It's better on paper than the 650M, but because it was crippled with 512MB VRAM, the 21.5" 650M will perform better than the 27" 660M when each are running at their respective native resolutions.
Click to expand...

Mmm, can you point us to some benchmarks?

Edit: what I want to say is that 660M won't be able to play games at resolutions (1440p) where the 512Mb RAM truly starts to cripple you. For most games, playing at 1080 or lower resolutions, there probably won't be too much difference. As example, refer to benchmarks here: http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=583355
 
Last edited:
forty2j said:
Two reasons:
- Console hardware & software are very specifically designed & integrated. That PS3 game is written for exactly 1 level of detail, at exactly 1 resolution (720p), and exploit various approved & unapproved tricks specific to the PS3 chips.
- The native resolution of the 27" iMac is 1440p.. much larger than any PS3 game has to support. The PS3 technically supports 1080p, but isn't powerful enough to actually run games well at that resolution, so no serious 3D games exist for it.

If you were to take a specific resolution (such as 720p) and compare the 21" 650M and 27" 660M, the 660M would definitely perform better. But I'm talking about running at the resolution that is native to the display - 1080p for the 21" and 1440p for the 27". Running at resolutions other than native results in either a letterbox effect or some blurring from scaling, neither of which are exactly desirable.
Click to expand...

But surely we should be able to play games just now at a middle sort of graphic level with this card, which I would personally be happy with.😱
 
I got the base 27" iMac and that includes the NVidia GTX660M. I ran geek bench on my iMac ad scored 9413 (Something like this, definitely 9400) but this was mainly because I ran the 32-bit free version. I have also played games on it to test it and minecraft runs with 180 fps. So there you go.
 
Will/\ said:
I got the base 27" iMac and that includes the NVidia GTX660M. I ran geek bench on my iMac ad scored 9413 (Something like this, definitely 9400) but this was mainly because I ran the 32-bit free version. I have also played games on it to test it and minecraft runs with 180 fps. So there you go.
Click to expand...

That will do me, I'm not greedy.😛

Dunno Tredstone, but if you find out then post up.😉
 
Will/\ said:
I got the base 27" iMac and that includes the NVidia GTX660M. I ran geek bench on my iMac ad scored 9413 (Something like this, definitely 9400) but this was mainly because I ran the 32-bit free version. I have also played games on it to test it and minecraft runs with 180 fps. So there you go.
Click to expand...

Minecraft purposely has 8-bit graphics 🙂

It would be great to see some of the serious graphic benchmark results (3DMark11, Heaven, etc.) for your configuration. Geekbench is testing CPU, RAM, chipset. Instinctively I know I'm correct that the 21" 650M will do better at 1080p than the 27" 660M will do at 1440p, but I can't link to any data right now.
 
forty2j said:
Minecraft purposely has 8-bit graphics 🙂

It would be great to see some of the serious graphic benchmark results (3DMark11, Heaven, etc.) for your configuration. Geekbench is testing CPU, RAM, chipset. Instinctively I know I'm correct that the 21" 650M will do better at 1080p than the 27" 660M will do at 1440p, but I can't link to any data right now.
Click to expand...

Maybe so but not all of us bought our macs for primarily playing games, but if it can occasionally do a game or two then I'm happy.....I know call of duty 4 works well with this gpu and that will do me.😀
 
steve119 said:
Maybe so but not all of us bought our macs for primarily playing games, but if it can occasionally do a game or two then I'm happy.....I know call of duty 4 works well with this gpu and that will do me.😀
Click to expand...

I'm glad you're happy. I just wish I had the empirical data to back up my response to the OP's question.
 
forty2j said:
Minecraft purposely has 8-bit graphics 🙂

It would be great to see some of the serious graphic benchmark results (3DMark11, Heaven, etc.) for your configuration. Geekbench is testing CPU, RAM, chipset. Instinctively I know I'm correct that the 21" 650M will do better at 1080p than the 27" 660M will do at 1440p, but I can't link to any data right now.
Click to expand...

I know, but I just thought that I could give some help even though it wasn't much. I also tested cinebench on it but I can't remember what score I got.

----------

I know this has nothing to do with this thread but, I think that the iMac speakers are excellent considering the small space they had to fill.
 
Tbf there are a couple of extra things that the Gtx card can do that the gt cannot do, the SLI feature that allows for better gaming(good luck getting that other GPU into your imac) being one And cuda, which can help with Computing calculations(as read off the nvidia site).
 
Last edited:
forty2j said:
Two reasons:
- Console hardware & software are very specifically designed & integrated. That PS3 game is written for exactly 1 level of detail, at exactly 1 resolution (720p), and exploit various approved & unapproved tricks specific to the PS3 chips.
- The native resolution of the 27" iMac is 1440p.. much larger than any PS3 game has to support. The PS3 technically supports 1080p, but isn't powerful enough to actually run games well at that resolution, so no serious 3D games exist for it.

If you were to take a specific resolution (such as 720p) and compare the 21" 650M and 27" 660M, the 660M would definitely perform better. But I'm talking about running at the resolution that is native to the display - 1080p for the 21" and 1440p for the 27". Running at resolutions other than native results in either a letterbox effect or some blurring from scaling, neither of which are exactly desirable.
Click to expand...

I would say the ps3 has some serious games on it (uncharted, killzone), but tbh the ps3 can barley play games at native 720p same with the 360 as well. It is scaled most of the time. Xbox can scale to 1080p but most games run under 720p on both consoles.
 
njean777 said:
I would say the ps3 has some serious games on it (uncharted, killzone), but tbh the ps3 can barley play games at native 720p same with the 360 as well. It is scaled most of the time. Xbox can scale to 1080p but most games run under 720p on both consoles.
Click to expand...

Sorry, when I said "no serious games exist for it", I meant the 1080p resolution. Not the whole system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back