Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > iMac

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 4, 2012, 10:37 AM   #1
beerglass007
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2008
iMac 27" 680mx vs 660ti desktop

Looking at the videocard charts for the 680mx

Is it better than a desktop 660ti

http://www.scan.co.uk/products/2gb-g...4-2x-dl-dvi-dp
__________________
iMac maxed 21" 2013", Iphone 5s , Ipad air 128GB , MBA 13" 2013
beerglass007 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2012, 12:23 PM   #2
forty2j
macrumors 68030
 
forty2j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by beerglass007 View Post
Looking at the videocard charts for the 680mx

Is it better than a desktop 660ti

http://www.scan.co.uk/products/2gb-g...4-2x-dl-dvi-dp
Nobody owns a 680MX yet so the benchmarks haven't been run. However, based on available information, notebookcheck.net rates it approximately equal to the 660ti.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-...X.83519.0.html
__________________
 2012 iMac 3.2GHz 27" 680MX Fusion  iPhone 6  Apple TV 2  iPad Air 
forty2j is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2012, 04:48 AM   #3
Confuzzzed
macrumors 68000
 
Confuzzzed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Liverpool, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by forty2j View Post
Nobody owns a 680MX yet so the benchmarks haven't been run. However, based on available information, notebookcheck.net rates it approximately equal to the 660ti.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-...X.83519.0.html
If you had to decide between 660M and 675MX what would you go for mate?

You probably know what sort of user I am from our board interactions in the run-up to the iMac release. Generally do some light video editing (but not too heavy as the longest rendering run I have had to do was c8 hours on a 2007 MacBook Pro), use multiple applications at simulaneously (some of them being large excel spreadsheets), don't need bootcamp, play some games in a small way (but I am not an avid gamer per se) like Civilization V etc.

Last edited by Confuzzzed; Dec 5, 2012 at 08:37 AM.
Confuzzzed is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2012, 08:21 AM   #4
forty2j
macrumors 68030
 
forty2j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Confuzzzed View Post
If you had to decide between 660M and 675MX what would you go for mate?

You probably know what sort of user I am from our board interactions in the run-up to the iMac release. Generally do some light video editing (but not too heavey as the longest rendering run I have had to do was c8 hours on a 2007 MacBook Pro), use multiple applications at simulaneously (some of them being large excel spreadsheets), don't need bootcamp, play some games in a small way (but I am not an avid gamer per se) like Civilization V etc.
Unfortunately this isn't a straightforward question. The 660M isn't sufficiently better than the 650M to account for the difference in native resolution between the 27" and 21". On balance, in live usage the 660M model will perform somewhere between the two 21" models. For rendering the 660M would be more than sufficient, and better than the 21", but if you plan to run any games at all (and Civ V likes to eat GPUs for breakfast for no apparent reason) then I'd have to advise for the 675M.
__________________
 2012 iMac 3.2GHz 27" 680MX Fusion  iPhone 6  Apple TV 2  iPad Air 
forty2j is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2012, 08:41 AM   #5
Confuzzzed
macrumors 68000
 
Confuzzzed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Liverpool, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by forty2j View Post
Unfortunately this isn't a straightforward question. The 660M isn't sufficiently better than the 650M to account for the difference in native resolution between the 27" and 21". On balance, in live usage the 660M model will perform somewhere between the two 21" models. For rendering the 660M would be more than sufficient, and better than the 21", but if you plan to run any games at all (and Civ V likes to eat GPUs for breakfast for no apparent reason) then I'd have to advise for the 675M.
Thanks for that. I hear you re. increased GPU burden to drive the larger display. On a clarification, you mean 675MX though, right? Or is it one and the same 675M and 675MX

Last edited by Confuzzzed; Dec 5, 2012 at 08:50 AM.
Confuzzzed is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2012, 08:55 AM   #6
forty2j
macrumors 68030
 
forty2j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Confuzzzed View Post
Thanks for that. I hear you re. increased GPU burden to drive the larger display. On a clarification, you mean 675MX though, right? Or is it one and the same 675M and 675MX
My finger missed the X key

The 675M is a Fermi chip (last year's technology) and isn't getting anywhere near Apple's computers.
__________________
 2012 iMac 3.2GHz 27" 680MX Fusion  iPhone 6  Apple TV 2  iPad Air 
forty2j is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2012, 08:58 AM   #7
Confuzzzed
macrumors 68000
 
Confuzzzed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Liverpool, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by forty2j View Post
My finger missed the X key

The 675M is a Fermi chip (last year's technology) and isn't getting anywhere near Apple's computers.
Thank goodness for that! One final question (you should be charging for this but I haven't found anyone on these boards as knowledgable on GPUs as you are), can you clarify something for me. I have been told that the i7 processor (with its hyperthreading) also interects more efficiently with the 1GB of the 675MX compared to the 512MB of the 660M. Or is that just sales pitch for the supremely gallible? Just don't know how to go about checking this out...

PS. I do realise hyperthreading is less than desirable for the serious gamer so you probably haven't given it much thought...
Confuzzzed is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2012, 09:00 AM   #8
forty2j
macrumors 68030
 
forty2j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Confuzzzed View Post
Thank goodness for that! One final question (you should be charging for this but I haven't found anyone on these boards as knowledgable on GPUs as you are), can you clarify something for me. I have been told that the i7 processor (with its hyperthreading) also interects more efficiently with the 1GB of the 675MX compared to the 512MB of the 660M. Or is that just sales pitch for the supremely gallible? Just don't know how to go about checking this out...

PS. I do realise hyperthreading is less than desirable for the serious gamer so you probably haven't given it much thought...
That sounds like someone speaking out of their rear. The CPU never touches the VRAM at all; that's the GPU's responsibility. Unless you do high-intensity sound processing or crazy serious photo editing, avoid the i7. I'm getting the 2GB 680MX and the i5.
__________________
 2012 iMac 3.2GHz 27" 680MX Fusion  iPhone 6  Apple TV 2  iPad Air 
forty2j is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2012, 09:04 AM   #9
Confuzzzed
macrumors 68000
 
Confuzzzed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Liverpool, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by forty2j View Post
That sounds like someone speaking out of their rear. The CPU never touches the VRAM at all; that's the GPU's responsibility. Unless you do high-intensity sound processing or crazy serious photo editing, avoid the i7. I'm getting the 2GB 680MX and the i5.
Thank you
Confuzzzed is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2012, 10:28 AM   #10
Sue De Nimes
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Confuzzzed View Post
If you had to decide between 660M and 675MX what would you go for mate?
The 675MX is 15X more.

__________________
2011 27" 3.4Ghz i7 iMac, 16GB RAM, 2TB HD, 2GB 6970m
Sue De Nimes is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2012, 03:07 PM   #11
Confuzzzed
macrumors 68000
 
Confuzzzed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Liverpool, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sue De Nimes View Post
The 675MX is 15X more.

I see what you did there! Just as well I am good with numbers
Confuzzzed is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2012, 11:20 AM   #12
Confuzzzed
macrumors 68000
 
Confuzzzed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Liverpool, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by forty2j View Post
Unfortunately this isn't a straightforward question. The 660M isn't sufficiently better than the 650M to account for the difference in native resolution between the 27" and 21". On balance, in live usage the 660M model will perform somewhere between the two 21" models. For rendering the 660M would be more than sufficient, and better than the 21", but if you plan to run any games at all (and Civ V likes to eat GPUs for breakfast for no apparent reason) then I'd have to advise for the 675M.
Seen this thread on 680MX reviews? It's even got me thinking about changing my order...

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthre...ighlight=680mx
Confuzzzed is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2012, 11:46 AM   #13
forty2j
macrumors 68030
 
forty2j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Confuzzzed View Post
Seen this thread on 680MX reviews? It's even got me thinking about changing my order...

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthre...ighlight=680mx
Yeah, I was just nerdgasming in there. And these aren't even the controlled environment / paid versions of the benchmarks yet.

The 675MX is a fine card and will serve the occasional 3D gamer pretty well at least for the next 18 months or so. The 680MX is a work of art.
__________________
 2012 iMac 3.2GHz 27" 680MX Fusion  iPhone 6  Apple TV 2  iPad Air 
forty2j is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2012, 11:50 AM   #14
Confuzzzed
macrumors 68000
 
Confuzzzed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Liverpool, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by forty2j View Post
Yeah, I was just nerdgasming in there. And these aren't even the controlled environment / paid versions of the benchmarks yet.

The 675MX is a fine card and will serve the occasional 3D gamer pretty well at least for the next 18 months or so. The 680MX is a work of art.
When you put it like that (I intend to keep this machine for 4-5 years if it lasts), I should really change my order to what I want and 'wear' the delay in shipping...it's holidays anyway and unlikely to get mine before 2 Jan anyway, so may as well receive it on 9th or 10th and get what I want.

Question I am still stalling on is HEAT generation differential between 75 and 80 and how is that going to affect the life of the machine.

Or do you think the offset in stepping down to the i5 would compensate?
Confuzzzed is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2012, 08:10 AM   #15
forty2j
macrumors 68030
 
forty2j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Confuzzzed View Post
When you put it like that (I intend to keep this machine for 4-5 years if it lasts), I should really change my order to what I want and 'wear' the delay in shipping...it's holidays anyway and unlikely to get mine before 2 Jan anyway, so may as well receive it on 9th or 10th and get what I want.

Question I am still stalling on is HEAT generation differential between 75 and 80 and how is that going to affect the life of the machine.

Or do you think the offset in stepping down to the i5 would compensate?
Preliminary reports coming out of the 21" is that it has a much cooler heat profile. And really, the primary benefit of Ivy Bridge and a key benefit of Kepler is smaller die size, and therefore lower heat output. I wouldn't worry about it too much. AppleCare should definitely be on the menu, and by the time it expires you'll be past the point where today's cards can play then-modern games at high settings anyway.
__________________
 2012 iMac 3.2GHz 27" 680MX Fusion  iPhone 6  Apple TV 2  iPad Air 
forty2j is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2012, 09:08 AM   #16
Lasweetlife
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
A better point of comparison, at least going by the benchmarks, is the regular GTX 660 (not the ti edition).
Lasweetlife is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 04:02 AM   #17
Confuzzzed
macrumors 68000
 
Confuzzzed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Liverpool, UK
Unashamedly ripping from a post that 42 posted elsewhere which gives some benchmarking against the 660Ti which is the title of this thread.

Some benchmarks appear here

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-...ist.844.0.html


Would be interested in people's thoughts please...


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Official benchmarks for the 680MX are starting to be posted on notebookcheck.net. From what they have so far:
~60% faster than the 675MX
~10% faster than the 680M
Between ~10% faster and ~25% slower than the desktop GTX 660 Ti, but this varies wildly by benchmark -- there are cases where the 680MX outperforms the 660 Ti.
Confuzzzed is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 04:17 AM   #18
Mac32
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Since 680MX is a downclocked desktop GTX680, the performance is a bit disappointing all thing considered. Hopefully newer drivers will help, but then again maybe not, since it's not a new chip, just downclocked...?
Mac32 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 08:13 AM   #19
forty2j
macrumors 68030
 
forty2j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac32 View Post
Since 680MX is a downclocked desktop GTX680, the performance is a bit disappointing all thing considered. Hopefully newer drivers will help, but then again maybe not, since it's not a new chip, just downclocked...?
Drivers do make a difference.. some folks have been reporting ~7% improvement from switching from the Bootcamp driver to Nvidia's beta driver.

We can't expect the 680MX to catch the 680, but catching the 660 Ti is within reach. Notably, all 3 cards are the same basic chip (GK104), just with varying #'s of cores and clock speeds. The 680MX has about 10% more cores and about a 15% slower clock than the 660 Ti. Makes sense, then, that the chips would be comparable but not equal in every task.

Things I learned today: 670's are made from chips rejected for 680's, and 660 Ti's are made from chips rejected for 670's.
__________________
 2012 iMac 3.2GHz 27" 680MX Fusion  iPhone 6  Apple TV 2  iPad Air 
forty2j is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 05:22 PM   #20
Confuzzzed
macrumors 68000
 
Confuzzzed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Liverpool, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by forty2j View Post
Things I learned today: 670's are made from chips rejected for 680's, and 660 Ti's are made from chips rejected for 670's.
Mind boggles. Presumably marginal decisions and not necessarily significantly inferior? But don't know enough about the manufacturing process to make a comment
Confuzzzed is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2012, 07:51 PM   #21
forty2j
macrumors 68030
 
forty2j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Confuzzzed View Post
Mind boggles. Presumably marginal decisions and not necessarily significantly inferior? But don't know enough about the manufacturing process to make a comment
Basically, they make the chip once, and load it up with decreasingly stressful firmware until it passes a test, and that determined whether the chip sells for $500, $400, or $300. It helps them increase yield rates by reusing otherwise defective chips.
__________________
 2012 iMac 3.2GHz 27" 680MX Fusion  iPhone 6  Apple TV 2  iPad Air 
forty2j is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 23, 2012, 02:37 AM   #22
Confuzzzed
macrumors 68000
 
Confuzzzed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Liverpool, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by forty2j View Post
Basically, they make the chip once, and load it up with decreasingly stressful firmware until it passes a test, and that determined whether the chip sells for $500, $400, or $300. It helps them increase yield rates by reusing otherwise defective chips.
So I theory as drivers get more optimised for overclocking and software developers make these units work harder we can perhaps expect the 680s to outlive the 670s and 660ti units? All else being equal of course (like miles on the clock)
Confuzzzed is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 23, 2012, 11:48 AM   #23
forty2j
macrumors 68030
 
forty2j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Confuzzzed View Post
So I theory as drivers get more optimised for overclocking and software developers make these units work harder we can perhaps expect the 680s to outlive the 670s and 660ti units? All else being equal of course (like miles on the clock)
Not necessarily. One of the shader cores may have been misprinted to make the chip unusable as a 680 but qualify as a 670. That doesn't mean the problem will cascade to other sections of the chip. The firmware will disable the defective section, and the rest will continue as normal.

Depending on the degree of defects, sometimes you can squeeze a broader range of power out of the lower chips. If one "just missed" being a 680, it will be sold as a 670 but you can probably rev it up close to 680 performance. On the other hand, it may have just barely passed the 670 test and crap out if you try to rev it at all. You have no way of knowing when you buy it - all you know is that it is promised to perform within stated specifications. And again, this doesn't suggest anything about the future failure rate when used to specification. (The drivers won't overlock the chip; you need to do that yourself with special utilities.)
__________________
 2012 iMac 3.2GHz 27" 680MX Fusion  iPhone 6  Apple TV 2  iPad Air 
forty2j is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > iMac

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Putting a 680MX into a 27" 2011 iMac? omvs iMac 5 Nov 15, 2013 07:58 AM
OS X: New iMac grfx: 780M vs "old" 680MX MacsRgr8 Mac and PC Games 17 Oct 4, 2013 05:03 PM
Windows: Crysis 3 on 27" iMac with 680MX AndiS. Mac and PC Games 19 Feb 27, 2013 11:27 AM
2012 iMac 3.2GHz 27" 680MX Fusion colenso iMac 9 Feb 24, 2013 01:12 PM
My 27" iMac with 680mx first impressions torana355 iMac 70 Dec 18, 2012 10:55 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:04 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC