GTX 680MX is practically a Desktop 680

[boto]

If you look at this spec sheet on Nvidia's website, you will notice the value of cuda cores is the same as the desktop version. This will ultimately make the iMac top of the line model a true gaming machine. Sure, Apple will probably underclock the settings, but it will perform somewhat equivalent to a desktop 680, which is a big deal in my opinion. I'm very surprised Apple would offer an even higher graphics card that just recently released, rather than using the GTX 680m, which we all expected.

I hope we see more details of this GPU. It would be interesting to see the benchmark comparison between this and the GTX 680m, although Nvidia claims it is up to 30% faster than the AMD 7970m so we can expect maybe 5~7 FPS game increases for intensive games like BF3. Nonetheless, it is incredible that Apple has figured out a way to manage a high-end GPU in such a slim design.

[theSeb]

Originally Posted by boto

If you look at this spec sheet on Nvidia's website, you will notice the value of cuda cores is the same as the desktop version. This will ultimately make the iMac top of the line model a true gaming machine. Sure, Apple will probably underclock the settings, but it will perform somewhat equivalent to a desktop 680, which is a big deal in my opinion. I'm very surprised Apple would offer an even higher graphics card that just recently released, rather than using the GTX 680m, which we all expected.

I hope we see more details of this GPU. It would be interesting to see the benchmark comparison between this and the GTX 680m, although Nvidia claims it is up to 30% faster than the AMD 7970m so we can expect maybe 5~7 FPS game increases for intensive games like BF3. Nonetheless, it is incredible that Apple has figured out a way to manage a high-end GPU in such a slim design.

It is an under-clocked version of the desktop GTX 680. Whether Apple chooses to muck about with the core or memory clocks remains to be seen. There are quite a lot of comparisons between the 7970M and the 680M out there already.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6343/a...7970m-got-game

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6369/a...m-grudge-match

At our maximum detail settings, NVIDIA’s average margin of victory increases yet again, this time to 22%. Considering these are the settings most likely to be used with high-end gaming notebooks, the win here is the most meaningful. In terms of ties, there are seven games that are under the 15% margin (Battlefield 3, DiRT 3, Skyrim, Guild Wars 2, Max Payne 3, Sleeping Dogs, and The Witcher 2). Somewhat interesting however is that AMD now manages to come away with four moderate to major wins: DiRT Showdown is a 39% lead and Sniper Elite V2 is a 22% lead for AMD while Sleeping Dogs is a small 5% lead and The Witcher 2 is a 9% lead. The bad news for AMD is that of the remaining titles, NVIDIA comes away with resounding victories in many of them: 38% in Batman, 50% in Borderlands 2 (with the option to enable PhysX still available), 33% in Civilization V, 30% in Portal 2, 48% in Shogun 2, and a resounding 100% lead in Diablo 3.

If you want the fastest mobile gaming GPU your money can buy right now, NVIDIA’s GTX 680M is where it’s at. There are a few titles where AMD’s Radeon 7970M comes out ahead, but there are far more instances where the GTX 680M has a substantial lead. More importantly, NVIDIA has a track record of releasing their Verde Notebook Drivers every time they put out a beta or WHQL desktop driver. They’ve been at it for more than two years now, and outside of the first month or so after a laptop first goes on sale (e.g. before the next official driver update), you should be able to update your NVIDIA GPU drivers—regardless of whether or not you use Optimus. AMD is working to get Enduro to that same point, and there are a few games that suggest with more driver enhancements AMD could even close the gap with NVIDIA, but I cannot recommend a product today based on promises of driver support tomorrow. Hopefully everything will be in place by the end of the year so that the next time we do a mobile GPU head-to-head we won’t have to worry about discussions of driver support.

The 680MX should be even faster, but no benchmarks since it only appeared on Nvidia's site today and I've never heard of it until yesterday.

[Onimusha370]

It looks unbelievable! can't wait to get my hands on it...

Seems odd that so many people are disappointed with the iMac update, I think it's the biggest update it's ever had!

[GermanyChris]

It looks to be pretty good that is until next year...

The inherent problems with AIO..

[theSeb]

Originally Posted by Onimusha370

It looks unbelievable! can't wait to get my hands on it...

Seems odd that so many people are disappointed with the iMac update, I think it's the biggest update it's ever had!

If they can keep the thermals within acceptable ranges, then the 2012 27" BTO will be an absolute monster.

[spcdust]

Originally Posted by theSeb

If they can keep the thermals within acceptable ranges, then the 2012 27" BTO will be an absolute monster.

That would be my concern, the current iMac with the AMD Radeon HD 6970M gets very hot when gaming or doing any GPU intensive tasks, hence I use SMC Fan control to give the fans a boost. Some have claimed that it's the heat from the GPU that has caused screen discolouration requiring a screen replacement - on my part on both my 2009 and 2011 iMac I've had to have the screen replaced and at work we have had two iMac screens replaced.

Apple have in the past done some serious under clocking to reduce heat, or have been sneaky with their naming conventions of the GPU's which would be a serious blow to everyones hopes of a decent GPU. I guess until a proper tear down it's all up for debate - however how much of a premium price is the 27" iMac going to be with the configuration required to make it a truly great iMac?

[fozzie4]

I will be curious to see if they use the new fan design that's in the macbook pro retina's. I like the white noise in mine it definitely is loud when playing a game , I took back my i7 air because it sounded like a hair dryer when working for a while in a virtual machine.

[krizko]

Originally Posted by spcdust

Some have claimed that it's the heat from the GPU that has caused screen discolouration requiring a screen replacement - on my part on both my 2009 and 2011 iMac I've had to have the screen replaced and at work we have had two iMac screens replaced.

As someone who has made 3 trips to the Apple Store a year since 2009 (and also owned every 27" iMac released since 09) to have my screen replaced due to "black smudges", I do not believe my specific issues ever had anything to do with heat.

It always seemed to be dust of some sort getting behind the LED. My hope is that the new model iMac, with essentially no visible vents or entry ways for dust, will actually improve on this longstanding issue.

From what I can tell, it seems to be the most "sealed off" iMac ever created. I would guess this would lead to a hotter running system, but if it means no more screen replacements due to smudging, I will be ecstatic.

[Lifequest]

I'm not sure if this is it? GTX 680M
there's no suffix "X"

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/vi...Force+GTX+680M

If true: 3,888 bench vs the 650M in the 15" rMBP 1,242.

TOP Desktop GPU benches 4-5.5k.
3.8k is pretty darn good!

[henrikrox]

Originally Posted by krizko

As someone who has made 3 trips to the Apple Store a year since 2009 (and also owned every 27" iMac released since 09) to have my screen replaced due to "black smudges", I do not believe my specific issues ever had anything to do with heat.

It always seemed to be dust of some sort getting behind the LED. My hope is that the new model iMac, with essentially no visible vents or entry ways for dust, will actually improve on this longstanding issue.

From what I can tell, it seems to be the most "sealed off" iMac ever created. I would guess this would lead to a hotter running system, but if it means no more screen replacements due to smudging, I will be ecstatic.

They have removed the gap between the glass and the display on the new imac.

Therefor, now you wont be getting dust between the glass and the display anymore

[theSeb]

Originally Posted by Lifequest

I'm not sure if this is it? GTX 680M
there's no suffix "X"

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/vi...Force+GTX+680M

If true: 3,888 bench vs the 650M in the 15" rMBP 1,242.

TOP Desktop GPU benches 4-5.5k.
3.8k is pretty darn good!

That's just the GTX 680M, which is an under-clocked desktop GTX 670. The GTX 680MX is too new for benchmarks. It's faster than the 680M and is actually an underclocked desktop GTX 680. It appeared on Nvidia's pages today.

In a nutshell, the GTX 680MX is even faster than the benchmark you've just posted. However, I have my issues and reservations about using PassMark for any kind of comparisons. That's a topic for another day though.

[Gauntlet]

here are the specs for the 680mx

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/note...specifications

I have a 2010 iMac but I might have to upgrade

[b0redom]

Anyone know how this will compare with my iMac with a 5750 in it? Time for an update soon I guess.

[Soundburst]

Wonder when it'll be on notebook check and well see what setting we can play games on.

[theSeb]

Originally Posted by b0redom

Anyone know how this will compare with my iMac with a 5750 in it? Time for an update soon I guess.

The 680M is currently the fastest mobile GPU there is. It's just slightly slower than the desktop 670. The 680MX, which is not in any device right now and appeared on Nvidia's product pages this morning is even faster than the 680M.

Your 5750M is very far behind and many times slower.

[trip1ex]

IT's a great update, but buying an Imac for gaming ...not so great.

[Mr Rogers]

I posted on this earlier today, and would like to state clearly that some of you posting seem to have more money than common sense!

On the benchmark links I provided earlier today on mobile GPU's between the top end AMD Radeon mobile and NVIDEA GTX680m, overall, it was considered that the NVIDEA card pipped the AMD Radeon - although in tests conducted on 15 games, the AMD bested 10 of them and in CAD benchmarks was far superior to the GTX680m.

The conclusion was thus, yes overall the GTX680m was a better performing card, but not by much, the major complaint being that the GTX680m carried a US$300 price premium over the AMD offering - now thats huge folks and how much of a premium will Apple charge us to install said card.

In a nutshell, I'd have preferred the AMD with 2GVRAM at a reasonable upgrade cost, rather than the probable US$250-400 premium we can expect from Apple on the BTO.

For these prices, I think the Hackintosh is the way to go, if not pure PC builds if its gaming you are interested in.

[theSeb]

Originally Posted by trip1ex

IT's a great update, but buying an Imac for gaming ...not so great.

The CUDA cores will make it great not just for gaming.

[forty2j]

Originally Posted by trip1ex

IT's a great update, but buying an Imac for gaming ...not so great.

I disagree.. the DirectX->OpenGL gap is narrowing; it could actually be closed in a couple years. You can also throw Windows on it if you really want DirectX performance. This won't give you exactly the performance of dual desktop GTX 680's, but it will scream. If you're willing to sacrifice about 10-15% performance for a better all-around OS, an iMac with 680MX will be a fantastic choice.

I'm assuming they have a heat solution; if they don't, they'll be hearing from me quite often. ;-)

[spcdust]

Originally Posted by henrikrox

They have removed the gap between the glass and the display on the new imac.

Therefor, now you wont be getting dust between the glass and the display anymore

The dust was never between the glass and the display - several people have removed the glass and confirmed this otherwise it would be a simple case of wiping the inside of the glass. The issue is the rear of the of the LCD matrix not being sealed /isolated from the innards of the machine. I believe the fans pull the dust through and then deposit it in the screen matrix. This may be exacerbated by airflow patterns, which fans are pulling the strongest and possibly dust being "burnt" by the heat.

Originally Posted by krizko

It always seemed to be dust of some sort getting behind the LED. My hope is that the new model iMac, with essentially no visible vents or entry ways for dust, will actually improve on this longstanding issue.

The new iMac has the vents all along the bottom if you look at the pictures - my concern would be it's still pulling dust through and unless the screen is now completely isolated at the rear from the machines innards we may see the same issue occurring. Hopefully Apple have addressed this on this revision but the screen lamination, as they have outlined so far, may not have any effect on this issue.

[Mister Bumbo]

I've heard that the nvidia 6-series GPU's runs much cooler than the previous generation, is this true?

[flopticalcube]

The 675MX is slightly slower than the 560Ti according to notebookcheck. The 680M is slightly slower than the 580. I would suspect the 680MX to fall between a 670 and 680, probably nearer the 670. Its amazing what they have done with the power budget considering that the desktop 680 is well over 200W under load.

[forty2j]

Originally Posted by Mister Bumbo

I've heard that the nvidia 6-series GPU's runs much cooler than the previous generation, is this true?

The Kepler ones, yes. There are some 6-series Fermi chips out there just to keep us confused, but as I expected Apple is steering clear of those.

[FFabian]

What do you think will the 680MX BTO upgrade cost?

[karpich1]

Originally Posted by Mr Rogers

I posted on this earlier today, and would like to state clearly that some of you posting seem to have more money than common sense!

On the benchmark links I provided earlier today on mobile GPU's between the top end AMD Radeon mobile and NVIDEA GTX680m, overall, it was considered that the NVIDEA card pipped the AMD Radeon - although in tests conducted on 15 games, the AMD bested 10 of them and in CAD benchmarks was far superior to the GTX680m.
...

If that is the post I'm thinking of.... you weren't comparing apples to apples (so to speak) if you took the Alienware into consideration.

The benchmarks listed one nVidia laptop by Schenker, one AMD laptop by the same Schenker, and ANOTHER AMD laptop manufactured by ALIENWARE

CAD, no contest. AMD blew nVidia away.

Games though, comparing only Schenker to Schenker (ignoring Alienware) it was nVidia 6 / AMD 9. Most the wins/losses were relatively close (a couple of percent). Though each had 1 or 2 insane wins that I attribute to nVidia or AMD tailoring their drivers to do really well in Game X for benchmarks.




Price wise though, I don't know if one is better than the other. Since finding stable/good Prices for Mobile cards is kind of odd.