speculations? what may we see as the gpu ? I been getting into gaming and I know the deal with macs/games, i doubt they would use a top of the line mobile gpu this time around?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
GPU for 2012 Imac's
- Thread starter electricdreams
- Start date
I'd love to know the performance difference between the top scec gpu on current imacs (6970m?) against the potential 680M? Percentage wise, how much of a jump is the top scec gpu on current imac to the potential 680m?
Also, if someone could put in in terms of use while gaming. Perhaps BF3 is a good benchmark?
What settings/performance would people expect between the two gpu's?
Also, if someone could put in in terms of use while gaming. Perhaps BF3 is a good benchmark?
What settings/performance would people expect between the two gpu's?
Last edited:
Check out notebookcheck.net...they do comparisons of most laptop cards with some standard benchmark games.
Here are couple of comparisons of the two cards
http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-6970M.43077.0.html
http://www.hwcompare.com/12389/geforce-gtx-680-vs-radeon-hd-6970/
It seems it would actually be quite noticeable upgrade if you do GPU-intensive tasks.
GPU uprade is certainly the most important thing I'm looking forward to. I don't really care about USB 3 and other things rumored. I might even buy the 2011 if it weren't for better GPUs
http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-6970M.43077.0.html
http://www.hwcompare.com/12389/geforce-gtx-680-vs-radeon-hd-6970/
It seems it would actually be quite noticeable upgrade if you do GPU-intensive tasks.
GPU uprade is certainly the most important thing I'm looking forward to. I don't really care about USB 3 and other things rumored. I might even buy the 2011 if it weren't for better GPUs
I doubt there's still be mobile GPU : time for a desktop one ! Especially if Apple gets rid of the optical drive as a lot of rumors are reporting ...
one can only wish, but I'm willing to bet money we wont see an iMac with desktop GPU. though it would have been amazingly cool.
Last edited:
The TDP on desktop GPUs have been lower and lower the last few generations.
The GTX480 had a TDP of nearly 300W, where as the GTX680 is only 190W.
The TDP has been the problem for iMacs over the years and when current midrange cards begins to approach a ~100W TDP they could fit the heating and power consumption target for the iMac.
Rumours claim that the 650TI would be around 120W, which could make it a possibility in the iMacs. If the 650 label scares you, the rumours claim that it will perform about the same or better than the 560TI, which is quite a bit faster than the 6970M.
Comparison between graphics cards:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html
I don't know if we've had a thread dedicated to this, but I know I've written about it a few times.
The smart money is on the 650M for the low 21", 660M for the high 21" and low 27", and the 680M for the high 27".
Nothing below the 675M is even noticeably better than the 6970m in the 2011's, and the 670M and 675M are both rebadged Kepler cards from last year that seem unlikely to appear in a 2012 iMac. The 680M is 80-100% improvement over the 6970m.
A desktop GPU would be shocking, and would probably come with a much fatter form factor.
Its really crazy how people think that the high end graphics card for the current Mac is useless for gaming just because it is mobile. I have a 27" 2011 iMac (just got it) with the 2gb VRAM and it will play minecraft with a 512x texture pack (makes most computers just stall and crash their minecraft) on max settings at 85fps no problem.
Yes I agree, it's kinda dumb that they did not put a desktop graphics card it it but, how often is even a gamer going to do more than what the iMac can handle. And yeah, if you are a gamer.... Go get a windows. There are not many games for Mac.
----------
Uhhh... It already has a desktop CPU. Where have you been???
I can't understand why people think a desktop GPU will be seen in the iMac.
It doesn't make any sense. Look at the form factor of a desktop GPU, then think about the inside of an iMac.
A desktop GPU is forever designed to be used in an ATX style case. It's design for cooling, mounting, video output, power connection, PCIe connection, etc., are all for a typical modular ATX style case. The end.
It doesn't make any sense. Look at the form factor of a desktop GPU, then think about the inside of an iMac.
A desktop GPU is forever designed to be used in an ATX style case. It's design for cooling, mounting, video output, power connection, PCIe connection, etc., are all for a typical modular ATX style case. The end.
Umm, what 2012 iMacs? Has there been some announcement from Apple that I missed?
This is the very definition of trolling. If you're not interested in 2012 iMac speculation, then just don't participate.
No it isn't. I am very interested but I've yet to see any solid information. I asked a legitimate question and you don't like it for some reason. Why is that?
Whenever the next iMac ships it is hard to imagine it not having an upgraded GPU as well but it is awfully hard to speculate on what that GPU could be when there's no real indication there will even be a refresh this year at this point. It would be just as valid for example to wonder about what might go into a system next Summer with the next generation chipset and CPUs actually.
In retrospect I should have said so but why limit the discussion to a possible 2012 model when it could be a 2013 model with more dramatic improvements. That is a possibility you know.
I don't think I'd want a 2012 now this late in the year even if they did come out with one considering what next year is likely to bring - a much more dramatic set of upgrades including the GPU.
Last edited:
If a "2012" comes out this year, what makes you think there WILL be a 2013? It could be another 450 - 500 days between upgrades. The term "2012' or "2013" is meaningless. It's not like these are car model years. It's just a way to name a model, like "iPhone 3G", "iPhone 4s", "the new iPhone". The dates are meaningless and arbitrary, as they haven't been consistent over the past 4 years.
There's ALWAYS new and better technology coming out in the future... can't wait for it to become "the best" as that will never happen!
Benchmarks were I believe on notebookcheck. It's been a while but I think I had to back into the number - 680m vs 7970m and then 7970m vs 6970m.
Top end has to be 7970m or 680m which are effectively equivalent and the logical progression from the 6970m.
However this does leave the "pro" line looking underpowered, so maybe they will decide to nerf the next gen CPU.
However this does leave the "pro" line looking underpowered, so maybe they will decide to nerf the next gen CPU.
