Core Image Card for MDD G4

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
2
Randy's House
So, just for fun, I decided to look for a video card for my G4 that is Core Image compliant.

Is it just me, or is there not one with an ADC connector?
 

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
2
Randy's House
It is AGP 4X, but the 9800 (9800 XT does) does not show up on the Core Image list and I cannot find an X800 XT Mac Edition...
 

ravenvii

macrumors 604
Mar 17, 2004
7,584
490
Melenkurion Skyweir
Maybe a vanilla 9800 doesn't exist for the Mac? I wouldn't know, I'm more versed with the PC side of video cards, not the Mac... But if you can find a 9600 XT or 9800 XT for the Mac, you will be fine.
 

Bear

macrumors G3
Jul 23, 2002
8,089
4
Sol III - Terra
iGary said:
So, just for fun, I decided to look for a video card for my G4 that is Core Image compliant.
Which video card do you have in yours?

Core Image will make full use of 9600s, 9800s and the X800. Also, the 9700 that was a CTO for the MDDs would be good.

The GeForce4 Titanium will at best only get partial Core Image accelleration.
 

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
2
Randy's House
So the 9800 Mac Edtion will work?

Apple's site says 9800 XT....

I have a Radeon 9000 Pro in there right now.

I don't mind spending a little dough to get some features...but not 400 duckets...I'll put that toward the G5.
 

drlunanerd

macrumors 68000
Feb 14, 2004
1,615
92
UK
I planned for Tiger a couple of months ago, picking up a Radeon 9600 Pro Mac Edition (dual digital output DVI + ADC) for a song on ebay. It's a system pull from a PowerMac G5, so needs the simple 8x to 4x AGP hack to make it work in an MDD PowerMac. I'd recommend going for one of these as they're relatively cheap (got mine for a ridiculously cheap £20).

It will enable hardware acceleration with Core Image as it supports pixel-level programming.
 

Bear

macrumors G3
Jul 23, 2002
8,089
4
Sol III - Terra
iGary said:
...

Apple's site says 9800 XT...
It also says "Core Image-capable graphics cards include:" - so it doesn't include every card. It just looks like a list of what Apple currently has in the systems.

Look at the capabilities the 9800 Pro has versus say the Mobility 9700.
 

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
2
Randy's House
OK so can we all agree the 9800 Mac Edition will work with Core Image?

:D

Aside form some of those features in Tiger, can I expect any improvements in Photoshop and iPhoto work along with Quark?

I imagine just redraw times will shorten, right?
 

ravenvii

macrumors 604
Mar 17, 2004
7,584
490
Melenkurion Skyweir
iGary said:
OK so can we all agree the 9800 Mac Edition will work with Core Image?

:D

Aside form some of those features in Tiger, can I expect any improvements in Photoshop and iPhoto work along with Quark?

I imagine just redraw times will shorten, right?
Nah, Photoshop doesn't use the GPU at all. It's CPU-dependent, so you won't see much. As for iPhoto, I don't knwo if it uses CoreImage... Probably not, so that means you won't see much on that either. What you WILL see is a massive improvement in 3D performance. Screensavers, 3D rendering, and most importantly... gaming. :)
 

iGary

Guest
Original poster
May 26, 2004
19,583
2
Randy's House
The 9800 is too rich for my blood.

I have a bid on a 9600 XT out of a G5 on Ebay.

If that doesn't work, I'll just put the dough in the G5 fund.

My G4 is about as maxed out as it can get at this point.
 

Bear

macrumors G3
Jul 23, 2002
8,089
4
Sol III - Terra
iGary said:
...
I have a bid on a 9600 XT out of a G5 on Ebay.
...
A waste of money. Most of the G5 Video cards will only run in the G5s. The MDD G4s have an AGP 4x bus, the G5s (so far) have an 8x AGP bus.

For a video card to work in both, it would have to be AGP 4x & 8x compatible.
 

jim.

macrumors 6502
Dec 22, 2004
308
0
C-ville, VA
Raven VII said:
Nah, Photoshop doesn't use the GPU at all. It's CPU-dependent, so you won't see much. As for iPhoto, I don't knwo if it uses CoreImage... Probably not, so that means you won't see much on that either. What you WILL see is a massive improvement in 3D performance. Screensavers, 3D rendering, and most importantly... gaming. :)
NOt even those really unless they were written using CoreImage. All CI enhancements are optimized at compile time, so there is no reason to believe that any app not written with the CI API is going to get a benefit from it. The only thing that is going to speed up current apps and games is new vid drivers.

Jim
 

jamdr

macrumors 6502a
Jul 20, 2003
659
0
Bay Area
I don't see why everyone is so excited about CoreImage. It's not going to make anything faster, it will just make it easier for developers to add fast image effects to their apps. Access to the gpu was always there, it's just that now Apple has made it easier to developers to use it.
 

MacTruck

macrumors 65816
Jan 27, 2005
1,242
0
One Endless Loop
jamdr said:
I don't see why everyone is so excited about CoreImage. It's not going to make anything faster, it will just make it easier for developers to add fast image effects to their apps. Access to the gpu was always there, it's just that now Apple has made it easier to developers to use it.

I have seen lots of talk from developers that say most of the user interface is using core image so expect the os to be quite a bit faster in opening windows and such. Plus when adobe gets a Core image compatible version of photoshop everyone will be wishing their cards were compatible and they will eventually come out with one. Imagine creating effects and blurs on the fly and never having to wait. That is the dream of photoshop CI. Ok, I just named it for adobe. Copyright 2005. :D
 

Bear

macrumors G3
Jul 23, 2002
8,089
4
Sol III - Terra
jim. said:
NOt even those really unless they were written using CoreImage. All CI enhancements are optimized at compile time, so there is no reason to believe that any app not written with the CI API is going to get a benefit from it. The only thing that is going to speed up current apps and games is new vid drivers.

Jim
You're sorta correct and sorta wrong...

For an application to use Core Image, they have to be written to do so.

However, anything that uses the Core Image API doesn't know what type of GPU it'll be running on, therefore the Core Image library decides at run time how requests to it get handled.

And actually, if any of the system libraries are rewritten to use Core Image, existing appplications could wind up using the Core Image features without realizing it.
 

Rod Rod

macrumors 68020
Sep 21, 2003
2,175
2
Las Vegas, NV
Bear said:
A waste of money. Most of the G5 Video cards will only run in the G5s. The MDD G4s have an AGP 4x bus, the G5s (so far) have an 8x AGP bus.

For a video card to work in both, it would have to be AGP 4x & 8x compatible.
One or two well-placed pieces of tape convert the AGP 8x 9600 Pro / 9600XT to AGP 4x.

It takes a little more than that to route power to the ADC connector, however, so without further modding the ADC connector is rendered (effectively) into a DVI out.
 

Rod Rod

macrumors 68020
Sep 21, 2003
2,175
2
Las Vegas, NV
iGary said:
I'm prolly stuck with this thing as I already placed my max bid. Hope someone outbids me. :D
On the bright side, if you get your dual 2.0 Ghz PM G5 for less than $2k and if it has an nVidia FX 5200, you'll already be ahead of the game.
 

jim.

macrumors 6502
Dec 22, 2004
308
0
C-ville, VA
Bear said:
You're sorta correct and sorta wrong...

For an application to use Core Image, they have to be written to do so.

However, anything that uses the Core Image API doesn't know what type of GPU it'll be running on, therefore the Core Image library decides at run time how requests to it get handled.

And actually, if any of the system libraries are rewritten to use Core Image, existing appplications could wind up using the Core Image features without realizing it.
Yeah, I kinda used the wrong words. While saying optimizing at compile time, I meant linking to the optimizing libraries. You're right.

Most of CI from what I can tell is Image units and transforms. So really the only libs that Apple could include it in would be Aqua, and have it affect everything. Most video and image filters I believe are implemented in the individual apps like PS and FCP. Since FCP is an Apple product, I'm sure it is being enhanced by CI, or maybe some of its filters and effects were used as the units within CI.

As far as Photoshop CI, my prediction: probably not going to happen. PS already implements most if not all of CI in its own filters. Moving to CoreImage ruins portability of PS functions between Win and OSX. Remember Adobe is multiplatform. This doesn't make good business sense. Now it would be cool if they would take some time and write some Quartz or basic CI optimization wrappers into PS. That would probably achieve a similar performance boost.

Jim
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.