20'' (2.4 GHz) iMac vs. 20'' (2.66 GHz) iMac benchmarking

Discussion in 'iMac' started by Charybdisz, Jun 25, 2008.

  1. Charybdisz macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2008
    #1
    Hello,

    I would like to read a performance test, which compares the 20'' (2.4 GHz) iMac modell and the 20'' (2.66 GHz) iMac modell, both the processor and the graphic card.

    I found a test, but it compares only the processor. I wonder how faster is the ATI Radeon HD 2600 pro 256Mb card against the ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT 128MB card?
     
  2. cluthz macrumors 68040

    cluthz

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Location:
    Norway
    #2
    What kinda benchmarks are you after?
    www.barefeats.com is a good source
     
  3. Charybdisz thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2008
    #3
    3D gaming, processing.
     
  4. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #4
    The 2600pro is a good jump in performance vs the 2400xt and the 2.4 cpu vs the newer 2.66 cpu gives a slight bump in performance.

    Bottom line if you enjoy gaming go for the better gpu .
     
  5. NintendoFan macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    #5
    Gaming you're going to want the 2600 Pro, no doubt about that.
     
  6. Charybdisz thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2008
    #6
    I would like to play Call of Duty 4 on this iMac. I read the required spec:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_of_Duty_4:_Modern_Warfare#Development

    So the faster iMac 20" is above the "Recommended" spec, right? I guess that the ATI Radeon HD 2600 pro is much faster than the ATI Radeon X1800(=the recommended card for Cod4), right?
     
  7. NintendoFan macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    #7
    Yes, I believe it is. But regardless the 2600 Pro is the fastest card you can get on a 20" iMac. It also destroys the 2400XT.

    This should help: http://www.barefeats.com/imacal.html
     
  8. eXan macrumors 601

    eXan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Location:
    Russia
    #8
    No, 1800 is faster as it was high-end card, just a generation before.

    But 2600 is a significant improvement over 2400.
     
  9. Charybdisz thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2008
    #9
    ATI Radeon X1800 is really faster than ATI Radeon HD 2600 pro 256 MB??
     
  10. AlexisV macrumors 68000

    AlexisV

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2007
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
  11. eXan macrumors 601

    eXan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Location:
    Russia
    #11
    Yes, but not by much. Why is that such a surprise to you? :confused:
     
  12. kabunaru Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    #12
    The numbers make a difference:
    XX400 and below= low-end card
    XX600= mid-end card
    XX800 and above= high-end card

    So a X1800 XT is a better card than HD 2600 no matter what generation.
     
  13. eXan macrumors 601

    eXan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Location:
    Russia
    #13
    Are you quoting the right person?
     
  14. kabunaru Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    #14
    Oops, wrong person.;)
     

Share This Page