Thats not true. The 9500 gt's memeory runs at 500mhz while the 8600 gt's runs at 700mhz. The desktop 9600 gt is completely rearchitectured from the 8600 gt. You can;t mix and mathc mobile cards with desktop cards. They are compeltely different.
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.
Apple Quietly Adds 3.33 GHz Quad-Core Option to Mac Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Thats not true. The 9500 gt's memeory runs at 500mhz while the 8600 gt's runs at 700mhz. The desktop 9600 gt is completely rearchitectured from the 8600 gt. You can;t mix and mathc mobile cards with desktop cards. They are compeltely different.
Well there are always going to be horror stories, but when you encounter these "truly bizarre" issues (and I've been there myself, so I understand), I find it a bit comforting dealing with one source as opposed to having my graphics card vendor blame the memory vendor who blames the HDD vendor who blames the motherboard vendor who blames the graphics card vendor in an endless circle of "pass the blame".
AppleCare may not be perfect, but at least the buck stops with them.
Indeed. I still shudder when I recollect my experience with HP tech support when my brand new laptop kept BSODing. They insisted I clean reinstall the OS before they'd attempt to debug it, because they weren't responsible once I installed software.
This is true. We do have the option of going to an Apple store (my boss drove it there), and I've always had good experiences with the genius bar. They also kept a track of every time we called, and have labeled it a "problem machine," much as we have in our office.
I'm pretty sure the issue is a hard drive with some bad sector on it. Every time we reach that point on the disc, things go wrong. I know how to replace a hard drive on my non-unibody MacBook Pro, but I think the disadvantage of an iMac really reared it's head in this case.
On my work Mac Pro, I can throw in a new one in two minutes. If Apple could make the iMac user serviceable I'd feel better about buying one for >$2k. Apple has got me in a weird spot. I'm uncomfortable to spend so much on a stand alone given the serviceability (even though the disaplay makes it a decent deal), but I cannot justify the cost of the overly expensive but wonderfully serviceable mac pro.
No Blu-ray=No Sale. Ever
My $15,000 cart at the Apple store has languished, updated with each useless decoy (afaiac) upgrade, and still, no Blu-ray = Steve Jobs not getting my cash ever.
I do just fine with my two USED iMac 2.33's with external Blu-ray burner and MATTE screen, thanks.
Tip of the Iceberg
My $15,000 cart at the Apple store has languished, updated with each useless decoy (afaiac) upgrade, and still, no Blu-ray = Steve Jobs not getting my cash ever.
I do just fine with my two USED iMac 2.33's with external Blu-ray burner and MATTE screen, thanks.
Tip of the Iceberg
My $15,000 cart at the Apple store has languished, updated with each useless decoy (afaiac) upgrade, and still, no Blu-ray = Steve Jobs not getting my cash ever.
I do just fine with my two USED iMac 2.33's with external Blu-ray burner and MATTE screen, thanks.
Tip of the Iceberg
and you would use BR for......?
backups.... za! so old school but yea people still use them i guess.
watching BR movies, i prefer having digital copies - converting to a .mp4/.m4v/.mkv etc file is all too easy on the mac side of things now, no need for silly BR playback/decoding etc. files can be distributed and there is no need to worry about silly optical media!
thats just me though
I just delivered 20 Blu-ray discs of several band video projects as well as two TV reality show pilots.
That was just last month.
My colleagues deliver approximately 10 Blu-ray wedding videos a month.
My clients have big plasmas. My clients (and others) want quality Apple absolutely refuses to deliver out of the box.
Go here and find out why pros would want Blu-ray.
It is pathetic that Apple OS still as yet does not support the highest res/most inexpensive delivery method for pro video.
But downloads are superior to BD!I just delivered 20 Blu-ray discs of several band video projects as well as two TV reality show pilots.
That was just last month.
My colleagues deliver approximately 10 Blu-ray wedding videos a month.
My clients have big plasmas. My clients (and others) want quality Apple absolutely refuses to deliver out of the box.
Go here and find out why pros would want Blu-ray.
It is pathetic that Apple OS still as yet does not support the highest res/most inexpensive delivery method for pro video.
I just delivered 20 Blu-ray discs of several band video projects as well as two TV reality show pilots.
That was just last month.
My colleagues deliver approximately 10 Blu-ray wedding videos a month.
My clients have big plasmas. My clients (and others) want quality Apple absolutely refuses to deliver out of the box.
Go here and find out why pros would want Blu-ray.
It is pathetic that Apple OS still as yet does not support the highest res/most inexpensive delivery method for pro video.
FTR, Mac OSX doesn't really support BR any less than Win7 or Linux. You still need BR players in Win and burning support is limited.
I just delivered 20 Blu-ray discs of several band video projects as well as two TV reality show pilots.
That was just last month.
My colleagues deliver approximately 10 Blu-ray wedding videos a month.
My clients have big plasmas. My clients (and others) want quality Apple absolutely refuses to deliver out of the box.
Go here and find out why pros would want Blu-ray.
It is pathetic that Apple OS still as yet does not support the highest res/most inexpensive delivery method for pro video.
that is understandable completely. the majority of people would want something physical that they can use/touch etc.
apple has their reasons for not supporting it, maybe its harder then it looks?
big plasma doesnt mean that they know what quality they are looking at
I like the correction. Honestly I wish Apple would just support BD (specifically playback).
The upgraded processor carries a hefty price tag as a $1,200 option over the base quad-core 2.66 GHz model, or $800 over the upgraded 2.93 GHz processor. Pricing, however, remains well below the company's top-of-the-line 8-core models running at 2 x 2.66 GHz or 2 x 2.93 GHz.
Pricing remains well below the company's top-of-the-line 8-core models? No it doesn't. A single 3.33 GHz quad core Mac Pro is now considerably dearer than a Mac Pro running at 2 x 2.66 GHz. And it only has half the standard RAM. Did somebody do bad math on this story?
3.33GHz quad is $3,699
2.66GHz octo is $4,699
I think the poster made a typo and meant the 2.26GHz Octo not the 2.66GHz one. However, the story may mean "top of the line octo" as being the top of the line configurations for the octo.