2600xt?

[diamond.g]

What would give you the idea that I even could?

You seemed more knowledgeable on the innards of the iMac than I. Wasn't implying that you should know, more of an "in your opinion" kinda question

Weird - I thought, until i saw "The following performance improvements are noticed with Catalyst™ 7.8:

* Radeon™ HD2600 and Radeon™ HD2400 (single and CrossFire™) show improvements of as much as 6% in 3DMark 2006 and 3DMark 2005
* Serious Sam 2 with HDR enabled improves as much as 14.5% on Radeon™ HD2900, Radeon™ HD2600 and Radeon™ HD2400 products" - Pro is in there, but can't detect iMac's PRO card - because it's an XT 😛

😛 iMac graphics is XT for sure !, let's just hope for a driver update in a near future ! 🙂

Generally speaking the mobility drivers are different than the desktop drivers. You would have to get the Omega drivers, or hack the drivers inf yourself to get them to work with mobility cards.

 

[Eidorian]

You seemed more knowledgeable on the innards of the iMac than I. Wasn't implying that you should know, more of an "in your opinion" kinda question

The 8800 GTS is a power hungry card. You'd have to dedicate the entire iMac's power supply to the card alone.

Even then it's a dual slot card.

 

[Wild-Bill]

Here, this should end the discussion. HD 2600 = PWNED.

And this is only at a modest 1280x800 resolution. The last gen iMac makes the alu-Mac it's bizzitch.
(and so does everything else)

So for all those blindly defending these cards........please, stop now. It's embarrassing.

 

[TBi]

The 8800 GTS is a power hungry card. You'd have to dedicate the entire iMac's power supply to the card alone.

Even then it's a dual slot card.

I'd have preferred an 8600GT like they have in the MacBook Pro. All the reviews for these cards say that while the 8600GT was a disappointing upgrade to the last generation, the ATi/AMD new generation of cards are even more disappointing.

 

[Eidorian]

I'd have preferred an 8600GT like they have in the MacBook Pro. All the reviews for these cards say that while the 8600GT was a disappointing upgrade to the last generation, and then they said the ATi/AMD new generation of cards are even more disappointing.

Don't forget that the older 24" iMac used the desktop 7600GT compared to the mobile components such as the 8600M GT and the Mobility HD2600 XT

 

[shakastange]

It really is depressing. The one hope left is that those benchmarks are from games ported to OS X. We know developers don't always get the best performance on the Mac side of things. If I get this machine I will be doing all my 3D gaming on the Windows side of things. Hopefully performance will be much better. Barefeats will probably have some Windows benchmarks up. This will definitely be the deal breaker. I'm holding onto straws now.

 

[Wild-Bill]

It really is depressing. The one hope left is that those benchmarks are from games ported to OS X. We know developers don't always get the best performance on the Mac side of things. If I get this machine I will be doing all my 3D gaming on the Windows side of things. Hopefully performance will be much better. Barefeats will probably have some Windows benchmarks up. This will definitely be the deal breaker. I'm holding onto straws now.

Those were from Barefeats. Just accept the fact that the new iMacs are a step backward in terms of graphical performance.

 

[DoFoT9]

Here, this should end the discussion. HD 2600 = PWNED.

And this is only at a modest 1280x800 resolution. The last gen iMac makes the alu-Mac it's bizzitch.
(and so does everything else)

So for all those blindly defending these cards........please, stop now. It's embarrassing.

i wouldnt loose hope yet. this card is still new. drivers will come from ATI and they will increase the games. neway,this card is desgined for intense stuff.. not the normal games we see 2day.

It really is depressing. The one hope left is that those benchmarks are from games ported to OS X. We know developers don't always get the best performance on the Mac side of things. If I get this machine I will be doing all my 3D gaming on the Windows side of things. Hopefully performance will be much better. Barefeats will probably have some Windows benchmarks up. This will definitely be the deal breaker. I'm holding onto straws now.

the imac is a mid range gamers computer, and probably more so a workers computer with style. i dont think it was ever intended by apple to have a really powerful gpu in it. there are other computers in the apple line that allow for that.
sure, its depressing, but go into windows and overclock it a bit and put up with it i spose.

 

[Cernunnos]

Here, this should end the discussion. HD 2600 = PWNED.

Why don't quote the Doom3 and Prey benchs ?

 

[Fl0r!an]

Those were from Barefeats. Just accept the fact that the new iMacs are a step backward in terms of graphical performance.

Yeah, but the benchmarks were made in OS X, not Windows...
OS X drivers are always crap in the first weeks after a release 😉

 

[shakastange]

I think those games were tested in OS X. This is from their site:

We plan to try running under Windows XP Pro to see of those "mature" GPU drivers close the gap.

I don't think they would use XP home or at least they would indicate that.

 

[superspiffy]

Ok wait. So what do the barefeats result have to say about which chip this really is? Are we closer to figuring out if it's a 2600 Pro or a 2600 XT?

 

[shakastange]

Ok wait. So what do the barefeats result have to say about which chip this really is? Are we closer to figuring out if it's a 2600 Pro or a 2600 XT?

They didn't say anything on that. The benchmarks are all that matter. XT or Pro, once it performs like crap, it is crap.

 

[rainydays]

Don't forget that the older 24" iMac used the desktop 7600GT compared to the mobile components such as the 8600M GT and the Mobility HD2600 XT

You mean that NVidia made a customized MXM module with a desktop chip on it?

 

[paetrick]

They didn't say anything on that. The benchmarks are all that matter. XT or Pro, once it performs like crap, it is crap.

No what's matter is gaming performance in XP...

 

[superspiffy]

No what's matter is gaming performance in XP...

As much as I'm crossing my fingers I ain't holding my breath.

 

[DoFoT9]

it wont be pretty please dont get your hopes up.

re-clocking to default may see *some* improvements...

 

[fblack]

Here, this should end the discussion. HD 2600 = PWNED.

And this is only at a modest 1280x800 resolution. The last gen iMac makes the alu-Mac it's bizzitch.
(and so does everything else)

So for all those blindly defending these cards........please, stop now. It's embarrassing.

To be fair its still preliminary testing and those scores seem plain weird as the 2600 does much better in prey and doom, making me think that in this case it may be a driver issue in OSX. We will see, but here's the prey graph if anyone missed it...

 

[diamond.g]

To be fair its still preliminary testing and those scores seem plain weird as the 2600 does much better in prey and doom, making me think that in this case it may be a driver issue in OSX. We will see, but here's the prey graph if anyone missed it...

The R6xx (2xxxHD) series is going to be hellishly dependent on driver optimizations. ATI/AMD made the line too programable (IMHO). In theory it should allow the R6xx line to last longer than the competing G8X (GF 8xxx) line. But it will depend on the popularity of the game, as those optimizations will have to be coded in the drivers. And I don't think Apple will update the drivers once a month like ATI/AMD does so choose your games wisely 😛.

You mean that NVidia made a customized MXM module with a desktop chip on it?

AFAIK, yes.

 

[Eidorian]

You mean that NVidia made a customized MXM module with a desktop chip on it?

That is correct!

 

[MezicanGangxtah]

Here, this should end the discussion. HD 2600 = PWNED.

And this is only at a modest 1280x800 resolution. The last gen iMac makes the alu-Mac it's bizzitch.
(and so does everything else)

So for all those blindly defending these cards........please, stop now. It's embarrassing.

dude the card is new so the drivers are still suckish 'sides the card is optomized with handling new games! how many times have they said this on this forum ?!!! lots and last time i checked quake 4 and halo arent that new plus the card was also made for DX10 games and we all know how DX9 and 10 are in diffrence.fact is that to truly check the capabilties of this card u need to go into windoze and put the card up to speed the way it was supposed to be using atitool and then test the card out once drivers hit then after doing so come back here and tell one and all how the card performs.

 

[AlexisV]

I'm completely disinterested in those benchmarks purely because they are under OS X.

With no DirectX and poorer drivers, OS X has always sucked for games. Even games under Vista lose 10 - 15% of their framerates because of the poor drivers.

Until DX10 games start to come out, I'm only interested in the one platform for games - Windows XP.

 

[Riezer]

...one week later

How hard can it be to run a 3Dmark test and post the results in this thread?

 

[Red-red]

How hard can it be to run a 3Dmark test and post the results in this thread?

Exactly! I mean what has it been now, A week since it came out. Somebody send one of these to tomshardware and then we would get the figues we want.

 

[DoFoT9]

^^agreed^^

please someone...anyone...