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

Do I need/want NVIDIA 8800 video

Jack Flash said:
My main problem with you is that you fail to look at the criteria the OP has stated.

The OP has stated that when the iMac is purchased, his wife will "want some of the latest games."

If she wants the "latest games" now why wouldn't she want the latest games three years from now? The woman is not playing Bejeweled! When a component cannot be upgraded, consideration has to be made for the future.
Click to expand...

There is not now, nor will there be in the next 2 to 3 years any game that will only run on the nVidia card. Sorry, but you're going to have to accept this fact. The OP wanted to be sure this was not the case.

If getting the max FPS of every game and money was no issue whatsoever I would be advising him to buy the 8800 as well.

With the information from this thread and benchmark test information from Barefeats, I can safely say the 8880 is much faster for 3D gaming and greatly preferable in this particular situation. In three years the 8800 will still be twice as fast as the 2600 Pro; in three years the "latest games" will be even more demanding and since those are the type the wife plays, she wants the best GPU possible.
Click to expand...

Will it still be 22% slower in Core Image/Core Video apps in three years? :p

What can you safely say about that? It's been a few months in the Mac Pro now.
 
SaSaSushi said:
There is not now, nor will there be in the next 2 to 3 years any game that will only run on the nVidia card. Sorry, but you're going to have to accept this fact. The OP wanted to be sure this was not the case.

If getting the max FPS of every game and money was no issue whatsoever I would be advising him to buy the 8800 as well.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but the 8800 GS will always be faster than the 2600 Pro for 3D accelerated games. Always. You are going to have to accept this fact. Three years from now it will run games faster than the 2600. The OP will be enjoying games longer with the 8800 GS. End of story.

I've already pointed out the small cost spread over three years. I've pointed out that his wife wants to play the latest games and I have every reason to believe her desire won't diminish anytime soon.

SaSaSushi said:
Will it still be 22% slower in Core Image/Core Video apps in three years? :p

What can you safely say about that? It's been a few months in the Mac Pro now.
Click to expand...

Could be, but that doesn't matter. The woman does minor photo editing. She probably doesn't even use a GPU accelerated program. Are you trying to feel more comfortable about the GPU in your iMac?
 
Jack Flash said:
Sorry, but the 8800 GS will always be faster than the 2600 Pro for 3D accelerated games. Always. You are going to have to accept this fact. Three years from now it will run games faster than the 2600. The OP will be enjoying games longer with the 8800 GS. End of story.
Click to expand...

If you read what I wrote I was not arguing that it is faster nor that it will remain faster for 3D games. The issue was whether there will be any games that they will not be able to play on the HD 2600 XT but will on the nVidia. There will not.

I've already pointed out the small cost spread over three years. I've pointed out that his wife wants to play the latest games and I have every reason to believe her desire won't diminish anytime soon.
Click to expand...

Well, I won't presume to speak for the OP or his wife and we are starting to beat a dead horse here so let's agree to disagree and move on, shall we? I'm sure everyone else reading this would appreciate it as well.

I don't have any vested interest in whether the OP and his wife go for the 8800 or not. I was just offering my advice based on the questions he asked. :D

Could be, but that doesn't matter. The woman does minor photo editing. She probably doesn't even use a GPU accelerated program. Are you trying to feel more comfortable about the GPU in your iMac?
Click to expand...

I couldn't feel more comfortable about the GPU in my machine, Jack. It's served me well and I expect it to continue doing so for the next 2 years at least.

Why, which GPU is in YOUR iMac? (not that I would accuse you of being biased) ;)
 
SaSaSushi said:
There is not now, nor will there be in the next 2 to 3 years any game that will only run on the nVidia card. Sorry, but you're going to have to accept this fact. The OP wanted to be sure this was not the case.

If getting the max FPS of every game and money was no issue whatsoever I would be advising him to buy the 8800 as well.



Will it still be 22% slower in Core Image/Core Video apps in three years? :p

What can you safely say about that? It's been a few months in the Mac Pro now.
Click to expand...


Here's the other thing to think about. nVidia has normally excellent windows drivers. The 8800 is new in OS X and will likely take a while to get a stable, efficient driver. The Core app performance will only get BETTER. But in 2-3 years as you say, I'd expect there to still be a difference in the performance in Core apps. But on the other side. The 8800 is a superior card in both performance and specifications. When nVidia nails the driver (when, not if) we'll look back at this thread and share a laugh.

To the OP: Don't fool yourself for one second. The 2600 is not a card for gaming. It can be used to run some old or low req games, but on anything recent or upcoming, it's not going to help you. You want this to last a long time right? Then don't get the ATI which was obsolete before it shipped. The 8800 will make your wife happy, and therefore you.
 
erummel said:
Here's the other thing to think about. nVidia has normally excellent windows drivers. The 8800 is new in OS X and will likely take a while to get a stable, efficient driver. The Core app performance will only get BETTER. But in 2-3 years as you say, I'd expect there to still be a difference in the performance in Core apps. But on the other side. The 8800 is a superior card in both performance and specifications. When nVidia nails the driver (when, not if) we'll look back at this thread and share a laugh.

To the OP: Don't fool yourself for one second. The 2600 is not a card for gaming. It can be used to run some old or low req games, but on anything recent or upcoming, it's not going to help you. You want this to last a long time right? Then don't get the ATI which was obsolete before it shipped. The 8800 will make your wife happy, and therefore you.
Click to expand...

I agree. The slower core app performance is definently not the hardware on the card, its the drivers. Just wait until good drives come out and then try to defend the 2600.
 
minicoop503 said:
I agree. The slower core app performance is definently not the hardware on the card, its the drivers. Just wait until good drives come out and then try to defend the 2600.
Click to expand...

It's been a few months already for the 8800 on the Mac Pro. ;)

Why does the 2600 need defending? If you want the extra GPU horsepower and frame rates in games from the nVidia card then go for it.

Everyone should get the card that's best for their own individual needs.
 
SaSaSushi said:
It's been a few months already for the 8800 on the Mac Pro. ;)

Why does the 2600 need defending? If you want the extra GPU horsepower and frame rates in games from the nVidia card then go for it.

Everyone should get the card that's best for their own individual needs.
Click to expand...

Like you said, if you're interested in playing the latest games, the 8800 GS is for you.

Just like it is for the OP.
 
Jack Flash said:
Like you said, if you're interested in playing the latest games, the 8800 GS is for you.

Just like it is for the OP.
Click to expand...

I thought we had closed this discussion already.

My interpretation of the OP's original comments, which unlike you I grant may be down to my own misinterpretation, was that he just wanted to be sure that there won't be any games that his wife can't play in the next 2 to 3 years on the ATI but can on the 8800.

Really, why is this so hard for you to understand?
 
SaSaSushi said:
I thought we had closed this discussion already.

My interpretation of the OP's original comments, which unlike you I grant may be down to my own misinterpretation, was that he just wanted to be sure that there won't be any games that his wife can't play in the next 2 to 3 years on the ATI but can on the 8800.

Really, why is this so hard for you to understand?
Click to expand...

I don't want the OP to make a purchase he will regret later. I'm trying to make it as clear as possible to him! It's not about you; don't get that impression please.

When a part cannot be upgraded later, you have to carefully decide what you want to buy.

I agree that the cards play the same games and both will run the same games three years from now. My concern is that the OP has interest in playing the latest games and will regret not opting for the faster GPU. That's all.
 
SaSaSushi said:
It's been a few months already for the 8800 on the Mac Pro. ;)

Why does the 2600 need defending? If you want the extra GPU horsepower and frame rates in games from the nVidia card then go for it.

Everyone should get the card that's best for their own individual needs.
Click to expand...

Well it was just the way I interpreted what you said that made me think that you were defending the 2600. You say go for it if you want the extra frame rates but then throw in "but the 2600 can play any game that the 8800 can and is faster in core apps".

Hardware vs Hardware, the 8800 is faster than the 2600, period.
 
Abstract said:
I believe that as well. It's always the case once you look back at technology from 3 years ago. I remember when people were arguing about 933 MHz 12" iBooks vs 1 GHz 12" PowerBooks, and "future-proofing" their purchase. It all looks rather silly now, because they'd all simply be called slow today.
Click to expand...

But you're talking about processors, not graphics cards.

Look back to 2005-06 when the powermac G5 was offered with your choice of an nvidea geforce 6600 or an nvidea geforce 7800. Both are "outdated" cards by today's standards, but the 7800 will still allow you to play almost any modern game, and with respectable settings and frame rates. The 6600 will choke and die on modern games. 2-3 years from now it will be the same situation with the current imac offerings.
 
minicoop503 said:
Well it was just the way I interpreted what you said that made me think that you were defending the 2600. You say go for it if you want the extra frame rates but then throw in "but the 2600 can play any game that the 8800 can and is faster in core apps".

Hardware vs Hardware, the 8800 is faster than the 2600, period.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not arguing that the nVidia is not a more powerful GPU. This is irrefutable fact. ;)

I never said the ATI card will eternally remain faster than the nVidia in Core Image performance either. Only time will tell that tale.

All I was trying to say is that in my opinion it's not a slam dunk choice for the nVidia 8800 upgrade for all buyers. A savings of $150 can be considerable for some who may never notice one bit of difference over the duration of usage of their machines sticking with the stock ATI card.

My comments were directed to the OP's situation. Clearly others disagree with me and that's fine too. In fairness, I think the folks in that camp do tend to be the type who would notice a difference and discern a clear advantage in the nVidia part.
 
Seems to me the issue really is what games are being played. Personally I'm sort of in a similar boat and I'm wondering for myself as well. So what would performance be like on games like Halo 2, CoD, Grand Theft Auto (IV when that comes out or whichever is out now), Need for Speed (Carbon?), Some sports games (Madden, MLB, etc.)? I don't play anything intense (actually I don't really game at all right now) but it'd be fun to play some of these. Would I actually notice a big difference between the ATI and the nVidia? Clearly they can both run these games and sure the nVidia will likely do a better job, but is this going to be a noticeable difference? Note: I'm not asking if there will be a noticeable difference in future games. Thanks for the help.
 
Astral Cars said:
Seems to me the issue really is what games are being played. Personally I'm sort of in a similar boat and I'm wondering for myself as well. So what would performance be like on games like Halo 2, CoD, Grand Theft Auto (IV when that comes out or whichever is out now), Need for Speed (Carbon?), Some sports games (Madden, MLB, etc.)? I don't play anything intense (actually I don't really game at all right now) but it'd be fun to play some of these. Would I actually notice a big difference between the ATI and the nVidia? Clearly they can both run these games and sure the nVidia will likely do a better job, but is this going to be a noticeable difference? Note: I'm not asking if there will be a noticeable difference in future games. Thanks for the help.
Click to expand...

The 8800 GS is almost twice as fast in many benchmarks.
 
Jack Flash said:
The 8800 GS is almost twice as fast in many benchmarks.
Click to expand...

You didn't answer his question.

Of the games you mentioned I only play COD4 and that plays quite smoothly at native 1920x1200 res and medium graphic settings on my Merom-based mid-2007 24" alumiMac.

I expect you would not have any difficulty playing any of the games you listed smoothly. For example, as you can see here the nVidia 8800 does get twice the FPS of the 2600 in Halo UB but will you notice a difference between the 60 of the ATI and the 120 of the nVidia considering 30FPS is fairly smooth?

I don't think you would in any of the games you listed. That doesn't apply for yet-to-be-released games but you made it clear that's not what you're asking about. ;)
 
barefeats.com has posted some specs of both cards in normal use. The 2600 beats the 8800 by almost a factor 2 for importing iMovie and iDVD encoding. Now the only question is, is waiting 4 minutes really so bad if you would have spent less money for only waiting 2 minutes? My Workpace breaks take longer than that...
 
netherfred said:
barefeats.com has posted some specs of both cards in normal use. The 2600 beats the 8800 by almost a factor 2 for importing iMovie and iDVD encoding. Now the only question is, is waiting 4 minutes really so bad if you would have spent less money for only waiting 2 minutes? My Workpace breaks take longer than that...
Click to expand...

Wow, thanks for the heads up on that new Barefeats article! Anyone interested can find it here.

Here was the bottom line and I think it is very applicable to this thread:

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]SURPRISE CONCLUSION
We did not expect the graphic processors (GPUs) to play a role in rendering iMovie thumbnails or iDVD projects. But based on our findings, there must be a role for the GPU to play. The ATI Radeon 2600 Pro (and XT) is supposed to be a weaker graphics processor than the optional GeForce 8800 GS (and GT). But in this case, it's not weaker.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]We described how we tested and what test file we used. If you get different results on your iMac or Mac Pro, we welcome you to contact us.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]If you are an avid 3D gamer, there is a strong argument for buying the optional GeForce 8800 GS or GT. If you are not, the Radeon 2600 Pro or XT will likely serve you better. And if you haven't bought the optional GeForce 8800 GT for your Mac Pro yet, I recommend waiting for the soon-to-ship ATI/AMD Radeon HD 3870. It will be a better overall performer than the GeForce 8800.[/FONT]
Click to expand...
 
SaSaSushi said:
You didn't answer his question.

Of the games you mentioned I only play COD4 and that plays quite smoothly at native 1920x1200 res and medium graphic settings on my Merom-based mid-2007 24" alumiMac.

I expect you would not have any difficulty playing any of the games you listed smoothly. For example, as you can see here the nVidia 8800 does get twice the FPS of the 2600 in Halo UB but will you notice a difference between the 60 of the ATI and the 120 of the nVidia considering 30FPS is fairly smooth?

I don't think you would in any of the games you listed. That doesn't apply for yet-to-be-released games but you made it clear that's not what you're asking about. ;)
Click to expand...

Ok, well what is going to happen when a new game comes out in a year or two when the 8800 can only play at 40 or 50 fps. Would 20-25 be acceptable from the 2600 then? Thats not very smooth IMO.


Edit: Just read the last part of your post. :) However, it would be worth it to buy the 8800 so that you would know it would last longer.
 
...don't quote me on this, but I don't think nVidia codes the drivers for OS X, at least not in their entirety.

This whole argument is kind of bewildering. The 8800 would in theory outlast the 2600 since it is more powerful. (I don't mean this to be flamebait.) Okay, so the 8800 can outpace the 2600 by as much as 2:1 in frames per second. Down the road, there will be games that will demand so much from the GPU that even an 8800 will struggle to pull even 20fps. <- At that point, I'd say the 2600 is toast.

Disclaimer: I'm a gamer; I own a PC loaded with an 8800GTS. I'm not satisfied if I can't play a game with high settings and at max res. I do recognize that games evolve and GPUs don't last forever; that's why I own a PC and can upgrade to a faster GPU when necessary. If you're looking for your iMac to last a bit longer, get the 8800.

Plus, the 8-series supports CUDA. Not that CUDA's good for anything, but the demos are fun to play with. :)
 
Jack Flash said:
nVidia really does code awful drivers for OS X.
Click to expand...

So that's going to be your spin for the latest benchmarks as well? :p

We're not talking about a 22% advantage in Core Image now but double the video rendering performance for the ATI over a supposedly vastly more powerful card. Those would be some seriously messed up drivers.

Also, I agree with the poster above. I don't think nVidia codes the drivers for the cards in the Macs, Apple does.

With all due respect, on this debate I will defer to the advice of Barefeats, a respected and unbiased reviewer with no vested interests.

Hey, they still agree with you that those really into gaming on the iMac might consider going for the nVidia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back