I DEMAND BETTER GRAPHICS CARDS

Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by jacobj, Aug 14, 2004.

  1. jacobj macrumors 65816

    jacobj

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    Location:
    Jersey
    #1
    I have been reading the thread re the rumoured new specs for the iMac and am inclined to disbelieve the graphics cards specs, but it did get my blood boiling enough to voice one of my main gripes about Apple.

    I have never seen a graphics card (except for the new NVIDIA GeForce 6800 that comes as an optional extra) that made me proud to be a mac user.

    Now I am not particularly bothered by the puny graphics card in my PB most of the time, but when I work in Photoshop I do frequently bemoan the lack of crunch.

    So I am starting this thread to see if others agree.

    Have you noticed that on many of the http://www.apple.com/trailers/ trailer pages there are links to Apple games. I'm not a gamer, but please. I have some friends that are serious gamers and they'd never touch a mac because a) most of the decent games aren't available for mac and b) the graphic cards specs are appalling.

    Now Apple clearly want their computers to be at the centre of the digital home and in nearly all cases (for me at least) they are bang on target, but for many the lack of gaming is a huge handicap.

    I am thinking of buying another computer, and although I always intend to own a mac, I am thinking that my desktop should be a PC, because I can upgrade to serious hardware whenever I want and can play the occassional game that I want to.

    Sorry for the long thread, but let's be honest, Apple's are generally bought by those that like, no, love technology. We want to see graphics at their very best. BUT WE CAN'T and I am protesting.
     
  2. Mord macrumors G4

    Mord

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #2
    join the ever growing club

    as someone mentioned in the main imac thread apple used to do us proud by giveing us cut of the bleeding edge ati 8MB rage cards with imacs but now a 5200 is the lowest of the low

    9600xt should be the bare minimum
     
  3. broken_keyboard macrumors 65816

    broken_keyboard

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Location:
    Secret Moon base
    #3
    I do think that Apple underestimates the importance of games in selling units.

    One thing they could have done would be to work with ID to make the G5 + GF6800 the ultimate Doom 3 box. It may seem like a travesty to do that to the G5, but I think they could have sold quite a few. There are people who are absolutely nuts about this game (I don't understand it)

    I'm sure that if programmed correctly, 2 x 2.5 GHz can go faster than 1 x P4 3.6, and we have a faster bus and the same video card. So it should be possible.
     
  4. Mord macrumors G4

    Mord

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #4
    i hate the way that people think that all the gpu will affect is games, a 5200 on a g5 is a serios bottleneck and slows down the g5 by quite a bit in most applicatios
     
  5. bertinman macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    Davis, CA
    #5
    what applications?

    office? mail? safari? (the usual apps people run)

    3D stuff of course, but most apps don't use 3D at all.

    I do just fine with my ati9000, and i develop with opengl all the time.

    gamers pay more for their machines and apple lets them by offering graphics upgrades. the 9600 and 9800 are perfectly fine for the games out now and coming out this upcoming year. just a few months ago the 9800 was the best card out there.
     
  6. Mord macrumors G4

    Mord

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #6
    buying a g5 to surf and check email is insanely stupid, your 9000 is better than a 5200 a geforce 4mx is better than a 5200 a 5200 is just a crappy card, it's just one dose not expect to get lag on core image effects (as my freind that has a g5 with a 5200 had with the 10.4 beta.

    a g5 is a quality mac but a 5200 limits it on what macs should be used for, creative content creation.
     
  7. Fender2112 macrumors 6502a

    Fender2112

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2002
    Location:
    Charlotte, NC
    #7
    Now that Apple has fully adopted the DVI interface, perhaps we will see better cards from the manufactures.
     
  8. iceTrX macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Outside of Detroit.
    #8
    I think Apple needs to beef up the graphics cards. With Core Image and Video coming, we will see a lot of new applications (from novelties to realtime video filters) that will demand a fast GPU. In the future I think the entire OS interface will be completely driven by the GPU (with no need to waste CPU cycles) and things like video encoding/decoding/realtime filters/image manipulation will be more strenuous on the video card then the CPU, I think this is a reason for Apple to start beefing up the GPU that is included with their machines as we should have the GeForce 6 Series and X800 Series of GPU's included on high end PowerMac G5's with workstation models available with Quadro/FireGL cards. I think the iMac should at least have a X600 (9600) in the high end model.
     
  9. broken_keyboard macrumors 65816

    broken_keyboard

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Location:
    Secret Moon base
    #9
    Yes - good point. It seems a shame for the software guys to do all this hard work to offload stuff to the GPU, and then to ship with a crummy GPU.

    If the gap between the CPU and GPU gets too great, it might be faster not to use the new Core Image and Core Video...
     
  10. justinshiding macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #10
    As much as I'd love to see a 9600xt be a minimum for macs and pcs both. It just doesn't seem to be happening , being these computers (referring to the Imacs) are generally not marketed to people that are going to be using a great deal of highly complex 3d applications or gamers who demand everything turned to high and the resoloution set to the max. They're a consumer machine. What does your average consumer use a computer for , and will a 5200 card do that for them. I would say yes. If you're going to need that extra power...get a powermac where you can actually change the 3d card. On the other hand I totally agree that it seems silly that pm g5's would ship with ship with such a low end card.

    On the good side of things , even if the 5200 is a fairly bad card, which it might be, at least it's not nearly as bad as some of the integrated graphics chips low end pcs have. I was looking at benchmarks for the intel extreme integrated whatever...where it was getting 3fps in splitercell (cant recall settings that were used)
     
  11. nuckinfutz macrumors 603

    nuckinfutz

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2002
    Location:
    Middle Earth
    #11
    The 5200 fx is the most popular card shipping in Dell and Gateway computers and probably HP too.

    The 9600 ATI is used in systems over $1499. The 5200 is a fine card for most Mac users who won't be playing heavy games like Doom III and Half Life.

    Remember this imac was supposed to ship 6 weeks ago. It may be the last motherboard for the iMac with AGP as Apple likely moves to PCI Express next year.

    Until then if the 17" iMac G5 is available for 1299 it's going to be a hot seller regardless of GPU. That's a nice priced iMac.
     
  12. slughead macrumors 68030

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #12
    Uh the 5200 sucks for UT2004 and just about every other FPS released for mac after 2003.

    The 5200 was shipped with the 17" imac, it's time for an upgrade.
     
  13. CalfCanuck macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    #13
    I hope Fender is right!

    Yeah, this is the only thing that makes me a little optimistic - the move away from unique hardware might be a signal that Apple finally gets it and will move this way in the future.

    I'm not demanding bleeding edge stuff, but Apple has been a lagard in this area far too long.
     
  14. MacsRgr8 macrumors 604

    MacsRgr8

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #14
    I do see a slight problem though: 30".

    Dual DVI output could mean not being able to get all grfx cards out there to be Mac compatible.
    What if ATi don't want (read: too expensive) to build an X800 Pro or XT card with Dual DVI...

    ATi has made Retail verisions of their gr8 cards available for Mac without ADC, so maybe they will keep doing so, I mean: just make VGA / DVI cards. Not Apple-specific ones.
    Making an X800 card for Mac will be pretty necessary IMHO. Apple needs the competition between nVidia and ATi.

    Just let Doom 3 come our way....
     
  15. applekid macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2003
    #15
    Games still aren't a big enough selling point for PCs either. A million copies sold at best and over time. Not in an instant. Just getting the gamers to switch alone will only double our small population. Not really enough to get many people switching.

    I do think it's unfortunate that the next generation of iMacs won't be good for any high-end gaming. But, it's not like the iMac was made for gaming in the first place. To get angry over it is pretty stupid.

    I really don't like the sound of the design and price of the iMacs. I'm ready to be disappointed in the iMac just as a computer. I'm sure consumers will still buy it, but it's sad we have to say good bye to the G4 iMac design.

    The only three things you really hope for are: a) These rumors are all complete lies and it'll be better than expected, b) These cards will be upgradable despite what the rumors say, c) Apple somehow improves the drivers of the 5200 Ultra. I find the 5200 Ultra to be quite lacking compared to its PC version.

    Anybody in Paris be sure to boo Steve if he says anything about the 5200 Ultras being in the iMacs and not being upgradable.
     
  16. Horrortaxi macrumors 68020

    Horrortaxi

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2003
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #16
    Mark 1 vote in the "who gives a rat's ass?" category.
     
  17. Mord macrumors G4

    Mord

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    the fact is that it would cost apple around $25 per 5200 mac to give us a 9600pro for that proformence leap it's stupid that they do not do this, also the lack of availability of mac graphics cards is bad aswell only ati and apple make retail cards and ati cards are overpriced as are the apple ones which there have only ever been 2 of the 6800 dll and the geforce 4 ti, so what your saying is that you dont care if apple is offering a cheapo card in a high end expensive system?
     
  18. satty macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Location:
    You can't beat Wellington on a good day
    #18
    I just had a look on the Apple online store. It's additional 40£ for a 9600, so if you need a better graphic card just pay about 2% - 3% more and you get one.

    Many people might not need a better graphic card, so why should they pay for it?
     
  19. Megaquad macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    #19
    It would be nice if mac users would assemble and make some kind of petition to add better graphic card in iMac. It is possible that there's still time for Apple to put something else there instead...
    We need to send message to Apple that we want to play latest games!

    But I think its no use, Apple has a virtue for making consumer machines that are sloooow.
     
  20. adamfilip macrumors 6502a

    adamfilip

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2003
    Location:
    burlington, Ontario canada
    #20
    I do agree but .. I was just playing unreal 2004 with my g5 and a 5200 ultra card
    it was very smooth.. yes it was a pretty low res but very playable
     
  21. MacsRgr8 macrumors 604

    MacsRgr8

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #21
    Exactly the point.
    An expensive new G5 not able to play UT 2004 at high-res settitngs... :rolleyes:

    Point is, what is a 5200 doing in a G5 at all. All the components of a G5 are based on speed, speed, speed. There is no 5400 rmp HD in there, no PC 133 RAM or other older and slower technology. But they put a 5200 in it.
    I bet many wealthy, but uninformed cosumers who buy a (Dual) G5 don't know about the crappy grfx card. They expect to buy an expensive fast machine which should easily be capable of playing any modern game. But they can't even play UT 2004 a high res and setiings, and blame the G5 for being a slow computer.
     
  22. link92 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2004
    #22
    I have recently bought a Dual 2.5GHz G5, with a nVida 6800 Ultra, and a 30" monitor, knowing fare well how bad the graphics card was, that said, it will mainly be used for things like Final Cut Pro, Photoshop, BBEdit, and a couple of games.
     
  23. adamfilip macrumors 6502a

    adamfilip

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2003
    Location:
    burlington, Ontario canada
    #23
    why buy the low end..

    atleast splurge on a good monitor..

    * insert lots of sarcsam *
     
  24. MacsRgr8 macrumors 604

    MacsRgr8

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #24
    The 6800 Ultra is a gr8 card!
    The best OpenGL card out there at the moment.

    BTW... congrats man! what a superMac.... < drool >
     
  25. Chaszmyr macrumors 601

    Chaszmyr

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    #25
    G5s don't need to come standard with a good video card. There are plenty of people who use a G5 who really have no use for a decent video card. As long as it is upgradable (and preferably for a reasonable price, which it isnt) theres no harm.

    If the iMac G5 comes out with a 5200 and no upgrade option, though, I'm going to be shocked and disappointed with Apple.
     

Share This Page