GTX660m?

[tictaktwonk101]

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?

[forty2j]

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.

[tictaktwonk101]

Originally Posted by forty2j

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.

So the 21" would be a better option the the 27"?????

[Ddyracer]

Originally Posted by tictaktwonk101

So the 21" would be a better option the the 27"?????

Just get the 675mx

[forty2j]

Originally Posted by tictaktwonk101

So the 21" would be a better option the the 27"?????

If you need to play games on it and your budget is less than $2k, the top 21" is the better option than the low 27".

[steve119]

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

[forty2j]

Originally Posted by steve119

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

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.

[leman]

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).

Originally Posted by forty2j

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.

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/s...d.php?t=583355

[steve119]

Originally Posted by forty2j

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.

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.

[Will/\]

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.

[tredstone]

Can the 660m in the 27" run Half-Life 2 as panel resolution with everything maxed out?

[steve119]

Originally Posted by Will/\

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.

That will do me, I'm not greedy.

Dunno Tredstone, but if you find out then post up.

[forty2j]

Originally Posted by Will/\

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.

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.

[steve119]

Originally Posted by forty2j

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.

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.

[forty2j]

Originally Posted by steve119

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.

I'm glad you're happy. I just wish I had the empirical data to back up my response to the OP's question.

[Will/\]

Originally Posted by forty2j

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.

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.

[steve119]

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).

[njean777]

Originally Posted by forty2j

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 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.

[forty2j]

Originally Posted by njean777

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.

Sorry, when I said "no serious games exist for it", I meant the 1080p resolution. Not the whole system.