Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2600xt?

Would you people just put an end to the tomfoolery and run some real world benchmarks on real games?

Oblivion is the game I'm most interested in. If you can run that at 1680x1050 with medium to high detail settings at a consistent frame rate above 30 fps in the outdoors environment, I would be very very happy and much relieved. Use the latest patches, and use FRAPS to measure framerate. Publish minimum, average, and maximum, and tell us all the graphics detail settings used.

Half-Life 2 would also be appreciated.

I want hard numbers, no more speculation.
 
capran said:
Would you people just put an end to the tomfoolery and run some real world benchmarks on real games?

Oblivion is the game I'm most interested in. If you can run that at 1680x1050 with medium to high detail settings at a consistent frame rate above 30 fps in the outdoors environment, I would be very very happy and much relieved. Use the latest patches, and use FRAPS to measure framerate. Publish minimum, average, and maximum, and tell us all the graphics detail settings used.

Half-Life 2 would also be appreciated.

I want hard numbers, no more speculation.
Click to expand...


You know you could actually do the research and work and not have to rely on someone else lol :eek:
 
Please Run Tests

capran said:
Would you people just put an end to the tomfoolery and run some real world benchmarks on real games?

Oblivion is the game I'm most interested in. If you can run that at 1680x1050 with medium to high detail settings at a consistent frame rate above 30 fps in the outdoors environment, I would be very very happy and much relieved. Use the latest patches, and use FRAPS to measure framerate. Publish minimum, average, and maximum, and tell us all the graphics detail settings used.

Half-Life 2 would also be appreciated.

I want hard numbers, no more speculation.
Click to expand...

Yes, please. I went out of my way to run basic benchmarks AT THE APPLE STORE because I knew so many people here had concerns about the GPU. Some one who actually owns one can at least take a few minutes to just try a few of these games out and post how many fps they can get. We will have official benchmarks within a few days probably, but it's a bit crazy that none of the current owners have taken the time to run some basic tests in the meantime.
 
If nobody does it before my 24" comes in next week, I'll do it.

It has left China but will probably be Tues or Wed before it arrives here I'm guessing.
 
I'mAMac said:
Yes the XT would be better and at least make people happier seeing it as a substantial upgrade.

Also, adom, try going into OSX and checking apple system info. If that says XT as well...niice.

OR.. you can go to www.systemrequirementslab.com , its a website that tells if software mostly games will be compatible on your comp. Just click on Can you run it? and itll do its thing and then it gives you a report and it tells which gfx card you have. If it says XT then you have an XT.
Click to expand...

No... SRLabs uses the same string to identify your GPU as the driver... so its guess is as good as the driver so really that was just redundant.

RRK said:
I have already been thinking that this could be an overclocked version like the sapphire hd 2600 pro. Maybe that could be making windows think it is an XT.

That would be totally weird and awesome if Apple was giving the wrong info.
Click to expand...

Cards are not identified by their clockspeeds, if I have an unlocked overclocked watercooled 6800LE running at 6800 Ultra speeds with all pipes and vertex unlocked... it will still show up as a 6800LE.

Oh and its not wise or even sane to use the word overclocked when talking about Apple and a computer with mobile components. For Christ's sake Apple underclocks the X1900XT on the Mac Pro...

What you guys on windows with iMacs should do is get the specifications for the card and then we'll see what it is. ATITool is good for that but I'm not sure if it supports the HD 2k series, maybe try the latest beta.
 
I'm not sure if anyone has raised this up before but...

The ATI website indicates that the Mobility Radeon HD 2600 comes in 2 flavours only: plain vanilla and XT

Marketing error by Apple then?
 
Chemeddy said:
I'm not sure if anyone has raised this up before but...

The ATI website indicates that the Mobility Radeon HD 2600 comes in 2 flavours only: plain vanilla and XT

Marketing error by Apple then?
Click to expand...

What do you mean by plain vanilla? Pro version?
 
adom said:
test2xb5.gif
Click to expand...

It says your chip type is 9583. According to ATIs device id page this is not a desktop 2600 Pro, but a Mobility 2600 XT.
http://ati.amd.com/developer/vendorid.html
 
Ah! So it seems we have the XT then and the OS X driver is reporting the card incorrectly?

Here is my system profiler screenshot for my 20', 2.4Ghz:

Note that although it says ATI Radeon HD2600 Pro, it also says the device ID is 0x9583, which according to ATI is the HD2600 XT Mobility as posted above.

See here: http://ati.amd.com/developer/vendorid.html

Hmm, I wonder what card we have. Do we trust the OS X driver, or the Device ID?
 

Attachments

  • Picture 1.png
    Picture 1.png
    31.3 KB · Views: 207
This is what my System Profiler says:

ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro:

Chipset Model: ATI,RadeonHD2600
Type: Display
Bus: PCIe
PCIe Lane Width: x16
VRAM (Total): 256 MB
Vendor: ATI (0x1002)
Device ID: 0x9583
Revision ID: 0x0000
ROM Revision: 113-B2250F-207
EFI Driver Version: 01.00.207
Displays:


Says Pro but has Chip ID 9583
 
Eidorian said:
The only changes that were made were to the drivers in OS X. I didn't change the card settings. It wouldn't apply to Windows either.
Click to expand...

that is not necessarily true. i know that with the old PC nVidia GeForce cards, you could, with drivers only, turn your GeForce into the Quadro version for a significant boost in 3D performance and a savings of $$$.
a lot of vid cards are not different from one level to the next with in a model range (ex. the 26xx level) - the lower end cards are just clocked down and in some cases slower/less vram is installed.
note that the specs for a 2600 pro from ATI don't list DDR3 ram, they list DDR2, but apple clearly lists DDR3 in the iMac tech specs.

so XT could still be a possibility, yes?
 
starting to get interesting

I would be happy if this is starting to be a re-occuring theme. I may have found true love yet! this is the best thread I have read in days! keep it coming. I will eat crow if this starts to move in this new direction. MMMMM I love Crow.

Trout
 
Curiouser and curiouser... I was also looking for a mobility version of the 2600 Pro and couldn't find one, which makes one wonder. Was Apple so caught up in not mentioning they use laptop gpus that they made this oversight? Very strange indeed. I'm gonna head by my Apple Store later today and do some investigating myself, it's not very far at all.
 
mzd said:
that is not necessarily true. i know that with the old PC nVidia GeForce cards, you could, with drivers only, turn your GeForce into the Quadro version for a significant boost in 3D performance and a savings of $$$.
a lot of vid cards are not different from one level to the next with in a model range (ex. the 26xx level) - the lower end cards are just clocked down and in some cases slower/less vram is installed.
note that the specs for a 2600 pro from ATI don't list DDR3 ram, they list DDR2, but apple clearly lists DDR3 in the iMac tech specs.

so XT could still be a possibility, yes?
Click to expand...
Didn't we just prove it's the Mobility HD2600 XT?

I don't think you'll be able to unlock additional pipelines using the new OS X drivers or in Windows for that matter. At least on this card.
 
The software used to determine the make of the card is on Windows. It is entirely possible and even likely that Windows is reading the card incorrectly. Aspyr offers a similar application for the OSX called game agent that provides a similar function to the windows application. I am not sure if it is correctly updated for the iMac yet but it is worth a shot. Here is the link http://www.aspyr.com/product/info/63.

I am agonising over the 1499 or 1199 model. As of now I am leaning toward the 1199 model. The 3D performance is the real deal breaker. The extra 400Mhz would be nice as well as the extra HD space. But these really wouldn't matter if there isn't a significant difference in 3D performance. As it stands now, current benchmarks don't show a marked difference between the 2400XT and the 2600 Pro. If the 1499 model indeed uses the 2600XT, Windows benchmarks indicate we can expect some decent gaming from that model. That would sway my decision toward the 1499 model definitely.
 
Eidorian said:
Didn't we just prove it's the Mobility HD2600 XT?

I don't think you'll be able to unlock additional pipelines using the new OS X drivers or in Windows for that matter. At least on this card.
Click to expand...

yes, agreed, you can't "unlock" a physical feature that doesn't exist. :)
i was just saying that you can, on occasion, get significant increases via a driver/firmware update. again, provided they were on the actual card in the first place. and yes, i'm not that familiar with the 26xx cards.
 
I think that either:
- Apple was going to use the Desktop Pro and at the last minute changed to the Mobility XT
- OR the Desktop Pro and the Mobility XT are actually the same thing

Note: as Durmortec said, there's actually no such thing as a Mobility Pro.
 
aLoC said:
I think that either:
- Apple was going to use the Desktop Pro and at the last minute changed to the Mobility XT
- OR the Desktop Pro and the Mobility XT are actually the same thing
Click to expand...

no. has to be a mobility card. there isn't room for a desktop version. that type of decision would have to be a major design decision very early in the game.
but, what does happen is that apple gets it's own, unique versions of graphics cards. this has always been the case in the past. ati specifically makes cards for apple that don't always match the pc version. now with apple on intel and chipsets being shared, that doesn't need to be the case, but it still could.
 
aLoC said:
I think that either:
- Apple was going to use the Desktop Pro and at the last minute changed to the Mobility XT
- OR the Desktop Pro and the Mobility XT are actually the same thing

Note: as Durmortec said, there's actually no such thing as a Mobility Pro.
Click to expand...

Didnt that one guy take the iMac apart?? couldnt he look at the physical card and tell us what it is?
 
aLoC said:
I think that either:
- Apple was going to use the Desktop Pro and at the last minute changed to the Mobility XT
- OR the Desktop Pro and the Mobility XT are actually the same thing

Note: as Durmortec said, there's actually no such thing as a Mobility Pro.
Click to expand...

No they are not the same thing. The mobility 2600XT is better than the 2600 pro desktop and got a higher 3dmark06 score.

Here is a picture of a 2600 pro desktop. Anyone think that would fit in the new imac? If not then it looks like it may be an XT mobility in there.
http://regmedia.co.uk/2007/05/14/amd_2600_xt_2.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back