Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
680MX Benchmarks please
- Thread starter tacokisses
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Honestly there is a difference in the details (sharpness, etc.) but nothing drastic. But I don't see how people can't play at 30fps, it's so smooth and most definitely playable, they human eye probably can't even distinct 30fps from 40-50fps, if it were to drop to 20-25fps I wouldn't play it, but 30fps is just fine for me
35 or so and higher is pretty good to me for the most part, but its an average in the 30's that I have an issue with. When the average is around that value it means that it will drop quite often to 30 and lower, which to me is unplayable. :/
34's or so though aren't a problem, as I've gotten used to playing on my PS3 just fine where most run fixed at that value, plus my current computers are long since out of date, even around when I got them, leaving me no option anyways when playing on it.
35 or so and higher is pretty good to me for the most part, but its an average in the 30's that I have an issue with. When the average is around that value it means that it will drop quite often to 30 and lower, which to me is unplayable. :/
34's or so though aren't a problem, as I've gotten used to playing on my PS3 just fine where most run fixed at that value, plus my current computers are long since out of date, even around when I got them, leaving me no option anyways when playing on it.
I turned post FX to low and left everything else on the highest settings on FC3 and i now average 42FPS at 1440!! This iMac is a beast
I turned post FX to low and left everything else on the highest settings on FC3 and i now average 42FPS at 1440!! This iMac is a beast
How much of a visual difference does post FX make? One setting alone being lowed though I doubt it could make it that much worse if at all.
BTW, anyone get to try Dark Souls, Borderlands 2 or Planetside 2 yet?
It actually makes it look worse with it turned up high, ive found my optimal settings now anyway, 1440 naive res, HBAO turned on, Everything set to the highest setting except Post FX on low and no AA. Averages 60fps like this and looks stunning
Alrighty then... I just completed the Terrace of Endless Spring in a 25-man LFR group. Wow, I am so impressed with this machine.
Here are my specs:
3.2GHz i5, 8GB RAM, GTX680 MX, 3TB HDD
When I was completing this raid, I actually had several things occurring on the machine. This thing is a multitasking beast. I had the following programs running:
- iMessage
- Spotify
- Calendar
- AirDrop (receiving a 50GB iPhoto library from my MBP)
- iTunes (copying my 700GB library off my external drive)
- Tweetdeck
- Google Chrome
I am also running a completely revamped UI, LUIv3.0. I do believe this custom UI is putting additional stress on the VRAM, but I am not 100%. Here's what it looks like in the middle of the raid.
As you can see from this screenshot, the frame rates dip to around 45-50 fps, but I can't even tell the difference whether it is 45 or 60. It is so minor that you can't really see a difference.
However, when just solo questing, the frame rates are through the roof like below (75 fps).
I am really, really happy that I am getting this kind of performance out of a freakin' All-in-One. Hell, I get to game with great graphics, with the always-better OSX, and it wasn't insanely over-priced. I'm a very happy camper.
If/When the new drivers come out - how does one delete the old drivers? Where are they on a windows/bootcamped iMac?
Or is the bootcamp clever enough to overwrite the old drivers?
In bootcamp, Windows 7.
----------
It's all running perfectly quiet. I'm running 768 GB SSD so I don't even get to hear the hard drive clicking, it's kind of surreal.
Alrighty then... I just completed the Terrace of Endless Spring in a 25-man LFR group. Wow, I am so impressed with this machine.
Here are my specs:
3.2GHz i5, 8GB RAM, GTX680 MX, 3TB HDD
When I was completing this raid, I actually had several things occurring on the machine. This thing is a multitasking beast. I had the following programs running:
So, while I was using all the these programs, World of Warcraft still ran superb. Here are the in-game settings I was running. Not everything on Ultra, but some of these things that I marked on High are not even noticeable.
- iMessage
- Spotify
- Calendar
- AirDrop (receiving a 50GB iPhoto library from my MBP)
- iTunes (copying my 700GB library off my external drive)
- Tweetdeck
- Google Chrome
I am also running a completely revamped UI, LUIv3.0. I do believe this custom UI is putting additional stress on the VRAM, but I am not 100%. Here's what it looks like in the middle of the raid.
As you can see from this screenshot, the frame rates dip to around 45-50 fps, but I can't even tell the difference whether it is 45 or 60. It is so minor that you can't really see a difference.
However, when just solo questing, the frame rates are through the roof like below (75 fps).
I am really, really happy that I am getting this kind of performance out of a freakin' All-in-One. Hell, I get to game with great graphics, with the always-better OSX, and it wasn't insanely over-priced. I'm a very happy camper.
Wow thanks for the post. Now i'm really looking foward to getting my imac (i7, 680mx, 32g, ssd). Its a beast! I'm a ElvUI myself
It's funny. When I play Witcher 2 in OS if have to use "low" settings in the native resolution! Despite the "power" of the 680MX, i7 and 24 GB RAM.
Anyone else playing Witcher 2? I can play it on "medium" as well but it's not as fluent as it should be. I guess between 25-30 fps but I have no way to tell for sure.
With settings on "high" or "ultra" it's definitely unplayable (fps < 20).
If have tried to play on "high" with a lower resolution but it's just as bad. So to play with a perfect gameplay I have to use "low" settings which is pretty disappointing :/
On CounterStrike Global Offensive I can put everything on ultra...
Anyone else playing Witcher 2? I can play it on "medium" as well but it's not as fluent as it should be. I guess between 25-30 fps but I have no way to tell for sure.
With settings on "high" or "ultra" it's definitely unplayable (fps < 20).
If have tried to play on "high" with a lower resolution but it's just as bad. So to play with a perfect gameplay I have to use "low" settings which is pretty disappointing :/
On CounterStrike Global Offensive I can put everything on ultra...
You're playing Witcher 2 in OS X? That's why you get the bad framerates, as Apple's graphics support in OS X is not nearly as good as in Windows. (I guess they haven't had time to improve on the OS X graphics performance yet, because they're so busy making new, brilliant additions like "Notes", "Resume", "Autosave" and "Launchpad".
)
Last edited:
Try Bootcamp, then it should be right.
It you bought the game at steam you can download the windows version for free.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/5310568
First OC attempt (+200/+350), using latest beta drivers. OC took me from 6272 to 7587 graphics score.
First OC attempt (+200/+350), using latest beta drivers. OC took me from 6272 to 7587 graphics score.
Nice results, do you mind me asking how you OC'ed it and what temperatures the GPU got too?
Final results: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/5310953
So 8069 graphics score. I don't have much time to tweak right now, but anything higher than +270/+370 causes hard crashing and is totally unstable for me. I'm not interested in playing with voltage, especially with the temperature this is getting to.
Running 3DMark11 max GPU temp was 87, and it floated between high 70s/low 80s throughout the test.
When I get home later I'll run some stress tests for a longer duration, see if I can push it just a bit more, and monitor CPU temps as well.
Try Bootcamp, then it should be right.
It you bought the game at steam you can download the windows version for free.
I know every game is gonna run much smoother in bootcamp but I don't want to buy and install windows and I don't want to switch to Windows just for gaming. I like to switch between a game and browsing/facebook quickly and I don't want to do the latter in windows. That's why I bought the high-end iMac. I thought I might be able to play well in OS X but apparently it's more average than well.
Unfortunalety OSX isn't optimized for gaming, as far as I know.
Or maybe they just made a bad port of the Witcher...
reality check for 680MX -- game design skews results
I posted some "extreme" game results on Friday (high settings at 2560x1440). I was particularly curious about how the mobile 680MX compared to to the desktop 680 Classified running in our 6-core Mac Pro.
http://barefeats.com/imac12g3.html
In those tests, the only time the 680 Classified beat the 680MX was when running WoW Pandaria and Diablo III. One expert source informed me that WoW and Diablo III are designed to let the GPU do its thing without the CPU getting in the way. Not necessarily so with the other games. X-Plane 10 was CPU bound according to our amperage readings of CPU vs GPU.
I pushed the GPUs further by increasing the Anti-Aliasing from zero or 4X to 8X when possible. In the case of Heaven Benchmark, when I went from no AA to 8X AA, the 680 Classified went from losing to winning against the 680MX.
However, the 680MX still beat the the 680 Classified when Left 4 Dead 2 and Team Fortress were increased from 4X to 8X MSAA. But there could be other factors -- like a "weak" port from Windows DirectX to OS X OpenGL. For example, at our extreme settings, the 680 Classified's 64 FPS (L4D2) under OS X jumped to 111 FPS with the same settings under Windows.
So the next task is to install Windows on the iMac with 680MX and run the same seven games at max settings including high anti-aliasing setting.
All this may be academic if you run at lower settings in which case you will be very satisfied with the performance of the 2012 iMac with the 680MX (or 675M) compared to a top performing Mac Pro.
I posted some "extreme" game results on Friday (high settings at 2560x1440). I was particularly curious about how the mobile 680MX compared to to the desktop 680 Classified running in our 6-core Mac Pro.
http://barefeats.com/imac12g3.html
In those tests, the only time the 680 Classified beat the 680MX was when running WoW Pandaria and Diablo III. One expert source informed me that WoW and Diablo III are designed to let the GPU do its thing without the CPU getting in the way. Not necessarily so with the other games. X-Plane 10 was CPU bound according to our amperage readings of CPU vs GPU.
I pushed the GPUs further by increasing the Anti-Aliasing from zero or 4X to 8X when possible. In the case of Heaven Benchmark, when I went from no AA to 8X AA, the 680 Classified went from losing to winning against the 680MX.
However, the 680MX still beat the the 680 Classified when Left 4 Dead 2 and Team Fortress were increased from 4X to 8X MSAA. But there could be other factors -- like a "weak" port from Windows DirectX to OS X OpenGL. For example, at our extreme settings, the 680 Classified's 64 FPS (L4D2) under OS X jumped to 111 FPS with the same settings under Windows.
So the next task is to install Windows on the iMac with 680MX and run the same seven games at max settings including high anti-aliasing setting.
All this may be academic if you run at lower settings in which case you will be very satisfied with the performance of the 2012 iMac with the 680MX (or 675M) compared to a top performing Mac Pro.
Then unfortunately, you will be stuck with the mediocre playing experience as its not the lack of hardware power, but the OS.
Not exactly the OS - it's more the drivers and the ports of the games themselves. In the past year or so the OpenGL support in the OS has improved quite a bit; I think we might actually hit performance parity w/ Windows DirectX within the lifetime of these 2012 iMacs.
I would actually doubt that, so far ports seem to be way behind, which indicates that developers aren't that keen on improving gaming performance in OSX. But who knows, it might happen, but as long as there is boot camp I don't have an issue either way.
So dude, did I got it right? You OC'ed it to 990/5740 (GPU/vRAM) respectively? What's the temperature delta between standard clocks and OC'ed version? Did your iMac become louder?
The P8000 Graphics score is identical to desktop 660ti and 7950, which is quite nice, but the 680MX is identical to desktop 680, which has P10500 Graphics score, according to 3dmark website. And your clocks are just 5% lower than the desktop 680 clocks (1050/6000). The question is - why there is such a huge difference in 3dmark results between them (about 25%)?
Last edited:
Planetside 2: Win7 in bootcamp with 310 nvidia drivers. All settings high, 1440p. Average 45fps, 35 in large battles and 50 otherwise. 10+ hours and the fan barely broke a sweat.