Quad G5/Quadro 4500 benchmarks

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by jaduffy108, Dec 10, 2005.

  1. jaduffy108 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    #1
    Here are some REAL WORLD benchmarks with comparisons:
    http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=300275

    This thread is focused on 3d apps, etc...a major target audience for the Quad G5...as well as a real test of how the Quad Mac compares to its PC competition.
    Unfortunately, it is clear Apple has continued its long tradition of giving sh*t drivers for its graphics cards. With the Quadro 4500, Apple for the first time offered a *true* Pro performance graphic card..then crippled it horribly. Moral of the story? If you want to see what a Quadro 4500 can do...buy a PC workstation...one is wasting money buying the 4500 card on the Mac.

    peace
     
  2. portent macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2004
    #2
    It's tough to write a good driver for another company's product. If Apple does create its own drivers for the graphics cards in its systems, I don't see how they could ever match the performance of nVidia's in-house drivers for Windows and Linux. Apple simply doesn't have the inside engineering knowledge of the GPUs.
     
  3. Xephian macrumors 6502a

    Xephian

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    Location:
    United States
  4. jaduffy108 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    #4
    >>>Not sure what your point is. Personally, I'm through being an apologist for Apple. Imo, there is NO excuse for Apple to offer a graphics card for $1650(!!!)...then give it drivers that make it perform more like the Quadro FX 1400(!!!) that costs less than half as much. It's unethical actually. Someone goes to the nVidia website..compares the specs of the cards...and thinks they will get that performance....and understandably so...only to then ...basically, get ripped off. I think the Mac Quad is a very good machine...renders almost as fast as the AMD quad Opteron systems..that's great...but what Apple has done with the Quadro FX 4500 is false advertising to put it mildly.
    Imo, it's inexcusable...period. Makes me question Apple's integrity as a company too. Makes *me* think..."do I want to support such a company in the future?" Success appears to be changing Apple..and not in a way I want to support.

    Bottom line.: If i had bought a Mac Quad with the FX 4500 (and I almost did...i got an AMD system instead))...i would be steaming mad..feeling i had been ripped off in a very underhanded, dishonest manner. I know a few people who are feeling exactly that... ripped off.

    So...are we to apologize for Apple or hold Apple responsible for their actions?

    peace
     
  5. FFTT macrumors 68030

    FFTT

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Location:
    A Stoned Throw From Ground Zero
    #5
    Have you even considered the possibility that this is Nvidia's fault?

    There's a lot of money at stake in all of this for Nvidia and there might be
    something going on behind the scenes more or less forcing Nvidia's hand
    in their OSX driver support issues.

    If a Quad with the correct drivers were to leave Every AMD and Wintel box
    in the dust, how do think that would make certain important
    Windows supporters feel?

    There's no point in bashing Apple if you clearly prefer AMD based
    workstations. Just buy an AMD and be happy with your decision.

    If you have any less trouble finding all the software you want running
    Linux that's great too.
     
  6. portent macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2004
    #6
    1. The Quadro card costs as much as it does because that's what nVidia charges for it. Is it unethical for Apple to pass on the costs of the OEM hardware to the consumer? Do you expect Apple to buy a $1500+ card and resell it to you for $200?

    2. I very much doubt that Apple is responsible for these crappy drivers. It's essentially impossible to write a driver for someone else' graphics cards. (Just ask anyone who uses Linux and wants to use the special features on a high-end ATI card.) nVidia makes the cards; nVidia writes the drivers, because only nVidia has the know-how to do it. If blaming nVidia for nVidia's drivers makes me an Apple apologist, then I accept the title.
     
  7. Rocksaurus macrumors 6502a

    Rocksaurus

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #7
    I agree with a lot of what you said, but you've gotta admit that this still is false advertising. If you know that Apple can't program sufficient drivers certainly Apple knows that. So why offer this card? To help move units. If they gave everyone a disclaimer on the performance of this card (like they should) who would pay that much for it? No one! Therefore, it's deceptive. It's wrong. I love Apple, but this isn't very ethical.
     
  8. FFTT macrumors 68030

    FFTT

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Location:
    A Stoned Throw From Ground Zero
    #8
    Apple is offering the Quadro Card BTO, but it's still a 3rd party piece of hardware, so really anyone who buys one should be jumping on Nvidia
    to get their act together on drivers.

    If you bought the card direct from Nvidia and it didn't perform to your satisfaction, then you'd be dealing with their support people right?

    I just spent $1000 on an M-Audio ProjectMix I/O

    There have been some driver issues reported and now M-Audio has
    released a 10.4.3 compatible driver update.

    If anyone thinks this is a hassle, wait till MS releases Vista and see what kind of complaints start rolling in.
     
  9. jaduffy108 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    #9

    >>exactly. It's so obvious. Geeez!
     
  10. jaduffy108 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    #10
    Fftt

    >>>I don't run Linux, though it is a great platform for Maya. What's your point? Where did this OS issue come from? More strawman arguments.
     
  11. psycho bob macrumors 6502a

    psycho bob

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2003
    Location:
    Leeds, England
    #11
    I don't see what the big deal here is. I agree that it is well worth pointing out that the FX in a mac is not as fast currently as it is inside a PC but it is still the fastest graphics card for apps on the mac platform. Drivers can be revised and issued at any time with ease. The mac version of the card is new so it is not fair ro say don't buy because it is slow when a 10.4.4 update or one specific for the card may be released at any time to address performance issues.

    The card also offers unique features such as 3D visialisation and if you need that on your mac then you need this card end of story. If you want bleeding edge performance for Motion or FCP then you need this card. If it were not faster then other GPU's offered by Apple and they were saying it was I would agree that it is unethical but Apple are not doing that. Nowhere on the G5 pages does it compare graphics performance to that of the x86, only the buyer can decide whether or not an extra 5-10% performance gain is worth the price over the 7800GT.

    For those with twin 30in Cinema displays you also need this card or twin 6600/7800's.

    So yes the card may give disappointing performance as currently implemented but it is still fast in general performance, which has been backed up by other testers such as Barefeats, and is faster then anything else on the mac platform whilst offering unique powerful features. You pays your money and takes your choice, Apple may make crap drivers but they haven't stated anything unethical or made unfair claims about performance.
     
  12. jaduffy108 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    #12
    Portent

    >>>Glad you realize the drivers are crap. Who chose to put those drivers in the computer?....Apple did. Do you actually think Apple didn't test those drivers before shipping the product??? Of course not, sooo Apple knowingly shipped those "crap drivers". It is my belief that we will stop getting crap drivers when we stop accepting them..stop buying them... and saying thank you Lord Steve. Apple is responsible for manufacturing the Mac Quad. Apple is responsible for choosing to offer the FX4500 card. Apple ultimately must stand behind the machine's performance and specs THEY provide to their potential customers. It is not "ok" to advertise a Ferrari and deliver a VW bug. NVIDIA did not force Apple to offer the FX4500. Apple wanted the bragging rights...to FINALLY...FIRST TIME EVER...claim to offer a true Pro level graphics workstation. Well, as of right now...it was a LOT of HYPE...aka bullsh*t. I don't buy hype...i buy performance...regardless of whether the computer says Apple or Intel or AMD. I don't like being misled. Clearly, our priorities are different.

    peace
     
  13. jaduffy108 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    #13
    Fftt

    >>>Again with the Apple Cult mentality remarks. I used to say the same kind of stuff...fwiw to you, it's pretty embarassing to me now. I prefer OS X, but if one embraces Windows paradigm, it's actually pretty good. I know..i'm going to hell:rolleyes:
     
  14. prostuff1 macrumors 65816

    prostuff1

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Location:
    Don't step into the kawoosh...
    #14
    This all seems really anal to argue about.

    If you have the $1650 or however much the card cost then go ahead and get it if you need it/want it.

    i love mac becuase of the os and would not change. I by no means hate windows, but i would not make it my first choice.

    And as far as the drivers go i think nVidia supplies the drivers and it is there fault/problem if the card does not preform as well under OS X as it does under windows.
     
  15. Mac Kiwi macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2003
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #15
    Apple write the drivers themselves.I have had numerous discussions with ATI and Nvidia support people in the past about supporting Firegl or Quadro cards,and who writes the drivers.


    My guess would be hold out for the Intel power macs if you want a better quality open gl,or one would hope so.


    I would love to know how many quadros have shipped in quads.If not many have I would imagine Nvidia may look at it as a bad experiment and pull them in the future,until the Mactels that is.
     

Share This Page