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

appletothecore

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Feb 7, 2008
14
0
I am going to say this upfront. I know nothing about testing. I was looking at the updated test at Barefeats for the 8800 card.

http://barefeats.com/harper8.html

I was surprised, nay shocked, to see the results at the bottom. I actually don't care so much about gaming as I do FCP and other graphics reliant apps. I agree that people shouldn't jump on this forum and say this card is now not what it was cracked up to be. Did I spend this extra money with no vastly improved results?

Thanks to people who comment!:cool:
 
Do we know if they ran these test before or after the Graphic Update? That update was supposed to really help the performance of the 2600XT.
 
remote testing?

that's not reliable benchmarking....

you have to take the same machine and change out the graphics card. regardless, looks like the 8800's OS X driver has some serious issues....

there is no way in which the 2600 is faster. none. it is a lesser card in every way. so it has to be a software issue. since apple controls their OS drivers, it has to be their issue.

not that it is surprising to find out that apple's got issues with the 8800...we all knew that already!
 
Do we know if they ran these test before or after the Graphic Update? That update was supposed to really help the performance of the 2600XT.

I'm the guy who ran the tests for Rob and I ran them both before and after the Graphics update. 10.5.2 and the Graphics update did not seem to have any tangible impact on the Motion or iMaginator performance.

I posted my raw numbers here.

I have no idea why the numbers came out the way they did -- but that's what we saw. I've got to assume it's a driver issue. Comparing the hardware there's no way these numbers make any sense.
 
wow, this totally justifies my not-waiting and just getting the MP with the 2600.

I knew that the 8800 was mostly a gaming card, but I thought there would be at least some benefit in Pro Apps.
 
I was surprised, nay shocked, to see the results at the bottom. I actually don't care so much about gaming as I do FCP and other graphics reliant apps. I agree that people shouldn't jump on this forum and say this card is now not what it was cracked up to be. Did I spend this extra money with no vastly improved results?

Could it be that ATI Video cards are better optimized for OS X/Final Cut Studio than Nvidia?

Interesting Thread:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/427716/
 
wow, this totally justifies my not-waiting and just getting the MP with the 2600.

I knew that the 8800 was mostly a gaming card, but I thought there would be at least some benefit in Pro Apps.

Glad I waited as well. I still plan on upgrading when they get drivers optimized, but for now the machine screams in every app. I'm loving motion playback. It's so nice to be able to work in real time vs RAM preview, make minute changes, RAM preview.
 
All this means is that OSX nvidia drivers are not up to par. Dont blame the hardware. If you want to see how things run on more mature drivers, you'd have to check the windows side of things and see pro apps between these cards.

wow, this totally justifies my not-waiting and just getting the MP with the 2600.

I knew that the 8800 was mostly a gaming card, but I thought there would be at least some benefit in Pro Apps.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.