The segment of video cards with a single 6-pin connector is growing very small.
Everything above the HD 6850/GTX 550Ti requires at least two plugs. (+150/225W)
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.
AMD Announces New Mac Pro-Suitable Radeon HD 7970 Graphics Card
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Everything above the HD 6850/GTX 550Ti requires at least two plugs. (+150/225W)
Tired of eating leftovers? Get a PC.
Interesting. I have a 2007 MacPro 8 core 3ghz and just upgraded to a nice ATI 4870 1gb x2 with 2 46" TV's and it runs my Windows 7 Games really well. So I am still trying to figure out where the left overs are? Oh an I am also running Windows 8 DP.
I believe Thunderbolt has to be on the logic board.
I'm wondering if Apple will use a version of this card w/ no ports, and use the PCIe bus to use the card to drive the Thunderbolt ports on the logic board?
Like I said in a few threads already:
Can't wait to have one of these babies inside the new Xeon Mac Pros and be able to play X-Plane 10 at pretty decent settings!!
Can't wait to have one of these babies inside the new Xeon Mac Pros and be able to play X-Plane 10 at pretty decent settings!!
Just been reading reviews of this GPU and thinking to myself, god I'd love to buy one but no mac support, only thn to read this
So my hopes are now up, now I hope they aren't dashed when I find out I won't work with my 2008 Octo MacPro.
So my hopes are now up, now I hope they aren't dashed when I find out I won't work with my 2008 Octo MacPro.
Well...
It is my belief that you can place the Thunderbolt controller where you have spare PCIe lanes or switch to do so.
The HD 7950 is supposedly to launch on January 9th. After that you are waiting until after Chinese New Year's. (Late February/March)
Last edited:
This would not be a significant issue if Apple would just let graphics cards makers write drivers for their OS, and allow GPUs without the "special sauce" Mac BIOS to operate in their computers.
OSX's integration is nice if you buy highly integrated hardware, but once you step up to the "interchangeable parts" Mac Pro, the locked-down approach of OSX has some flaws.
OSX's integration is nice if you buy highly integrated hardware, but once you step up to the "interchangeable parts" Mac Pro, the locked-down approach of OSX has some flaws.
I would not be so concerned with logic/motherboard firmware as much anymore. EFI implementation is finally taking place outside of the few PC OEMs that had adopted it ages ago.
Not that every motherboard vendor has a crack UI team for their EFI user interfaces but it is EFI.
Apple isn't "stopping" GPU manufacturers from writing their own drivers, in fact, have a significant hand in GPU drivers on the mac, how much of a hand I do not know though. Either way, ATI/Nvidia could supply their own drivers if they chose to, but they don't.
At a basic level all video cards should support VESA (or whatever the UEFI equivalent is). The real rub is the lack of a basic hardware level 3d support like there is for 2d. OpenGL doesn't really count.
I suspect they supply tons of drivers, since all iMacs and Minis and MBPs use their GPUs.
I can also see why drivers for new after-market cards would be a low priority, since there are so few of the cards sold into the Mac market.
Thunderbolt is a PCI spec. Graphics cards are a PCI spec. It is totally practical for graphics cards to also have a Thunderbolt I/O.
To the degree graphics card sellers can make devices compatible with 1-2 generations old MacPros they will sell outsized quantities of systems since that is one of the easiest upgrades possible for a system locked into a configuration.
MacPros going forward are a necessity to pros. Even if Apple were to do as I suggest and accept lower margin on Pros to maintain the product line, the overall margins of Apple will not be impacted at all given the rapid growth and large scale of phones and pads now.
Apple should not only not forsake the Mac, but should elevate it to a profitable, but slightly slimmer margin mature product line. Now that Apple benefits from after the sale activities, they can afford to have a very high price point, slightly lower margin "feature product".
I hope they reformat the case for stackability to approximate racks and grids and server farms. Look at all the Mini's sold to colo's!
They need a pro option! Including one which is more processor than storage. Let's at least be honest and say the Pro is a tip of the hat to Intel to sell processors that are very pricey. I wonder if we will see a Pro with 8x A6 processors? I for one hope so, perhaps with that as one of 4 blades. Cheap power.
Rocketman
To the degree graphics card sellers can make devices compatible with 1-2 generations old MacPros they will sell outsized quantities of systems since that is one of the easiest upgrades possible for a system locked into a configuration.
MacPros going forward are a necessity to pros. Even if Apple were to do as I suggest and accept lower margin on Pros to maintain the product line, the overall margins of Apple will not be impacted at all given the rapid growth and large scale of phones and pads now.
Apple should not only not forsake the Mac, but should elevate it to a profitable, but slightly slimmer margin mature product line. Now that Apple benefits from after the sale activities, they can afford to have a very high price point, slightly lower margin "feature product".
I hope they reformat the case for stackability to approximate racks and grids and server farms. Look at all the Mini's sold to colo's!
They need a pro option! Including one which is more processor than storage. Let's at least be honest and say the Pro is a tip of the hat to Intel to sell processors that are very pricey. I wonder if we will see a Pro with 8x A6 processors? I for one hope so, perhaps with that as one of 4 blades. Cheap power.
Rocketman
Very much looking forward to having one of those in my 2012 Mac Pro
My Mac Pro at idle uses 175W, 55W of which is due to the GPU which is ridiculous.
My Mac Pro at idle uses 175W, 55W of which is due to the GPU which is ridiculous.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
It's all relative. I am certain my 980x overclocked to 4.8 running 2x580 sli is making ur 2007 mac seem very outdated in very demanding games at high rez. In all seriousness just seeing 4870 in your system tells me your running hand me downs let's say in gaming it like someone saying an iMac can do the same as your 8 core mac pro..... Sure if all you do is run apps that do not push the boundaries.
It's all relative. I am certain my 980x overclocked to 4.8 running 2x580 sli is making ur 2007 mac seem very outdated in very demanding games at high rez. In all seriousness just seeing 4870 in your system tells me your running hand me downs
let's say in gaming it like someone saying an iMac can do the same as your 8 core mac pro..... Sure if all you do is run apps that do not push the boundaries.
This will be a nice new card. It's price is pretty high, though. I was able to get a pair of specially OC'd 6970's for about $350 each, and they will out perform this card by a fair amount. However, two of these would beat my setup by a comfortable margin. It's a good thing I have a 1200 watt power supply. Someday I'll be running 8970's in crossfire ...
With new Retina displays, it might open up a whole new need for higher end 3D graphics cards. I'm sure (actually 1000% certain) that you don't need the extra pixels for smooth perceptive 3D games with anti-aliasing on. But super HD displays will eat GPU RAM fast and they wouldn't even need anti-aliasing. There's no need to blend between pixels if you can't perceive the pixels.
I'm curious what the tradeoff would be in processing 4 times the number of pixels versus processing fewer pixels with AA post-processing.
With new Retina displays, it might open up a whole new need for higher end 3D graphics cards. I'm sure (actually 1000% certain) that you don't need the extra pixels for smooth perceptive 3D games with anti-aliasing on. But super HD displays will eat GPU RAM fast and they wouldn't even need anti-aliasing. There's no need to blend between pixels if you can't perceive the pixels.
I'm curious what the tradeoff would be in processing 4 times the number of pixels versus processing fewer pixels with AA post-processing.
Last edited:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)
Awesome!
Awesome!
Tired of eating leftovers? Get a PC.
I don't understand. On the website they still have the 6000 series as the latest and greatest on the PC.
I bet the Radeon HD 7990 will be available next year for the PC though.
Tired of eating leftovers? Get a PC.
Pretty much this.
If you are a gamer and you use macbook to play games, then all I can say is that you are an idiot.
It's just such a shame that Apple has given up any interest in offering normal consumers any computer in their range to take these things.
It's either a giant laptop on a stand (iMac) with a mobile chipset, or a Mac Pro at the other extream outside most budgets, and at a price point no one will really develop mass market entertainment software to support, given it's price.
I wonder if Apple will ever make a "Proper" home computer again like it used to?
I hope they do as I'm sure it would sell really well.
It's either a giant laptop on a stand (iMac) with a mobile chipset, or a Mac Pro at the other extream outside most budgets, and at a price point no one will really develop mass market entertainment software to support, given it's price.
I wonder if Apple will ever make a "Proper" home computer again like it used to?
I hope they do as I'm sure it would sell really well.
It kind of defeats the entire point of upgradeable graphics when there are no cards to upgrade to. Apple sucks the big one in this department. They have NO ONE to blame but themselves for waning Mac Pro sales. They can't expect someone to shell out over $3k for something that is slower than a $1200 iMac in graphics simply because they never update the darn thing or offer any upgrades for it.