How bad is ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT graphics ?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by powerbook911, Aug 7, 2007.

  1. powerbook911 macrumors 68040

    powerbook911

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    #1
    I'm having a hard time deciding between the $1199 iMac and the $1499.

    I know the advantages of the $1499, but $300 seems like a big jump.

    So my question is: just how bad is the ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT graphics ?

    Is it a lot worst compared to the 2600 Pro in the more expensive model? Any idea? Thanks for your help.
     
  2. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #2
    The 64-bit memory interface is going to be your biggest issue. Don't expect much performance beyond a X1300/7300 series if that.
     
  3. Jimmery macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2005
    Location:
    Canada
    #3
    For those of us not doing ANY gaming or video editing, is there going to be any noticeable difference between the two video cards?
     
  4. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #4
    You can add image editing as well now.

    No there won't be a difference if you're doing CPU bound tasks.
     
  5. Jimmery macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2005
    Location:
    Canada
    #6
    Well, how about editing 1 MB JPEG photos in iPhoto, just to touch up shots from a digital camera? This sounds pretty innocuous to me.
     
  6. iW00t macrumors 68040

    iW00t

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Location:
    Defenders of Apple Guild
    #7
    According to an earlier MR post it is slightly (but not much) better than intel graphics. Not sure how much weight there is to that.
     
  7. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #8
    Once you start to throw in Core Image and anything else that involves the GPU you're going to notice faster performance on the HD2600 Pro.

    You're a step up over the GMA950 due to the dedicated memory and hardware shaders but not by much.
     
  8. powerbook911 thread starter macrumors 68040

    powerbook911

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    #9
    How is this ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT graphics compared to what I have in my iMac now?

    I have a Radeon X1600 . Would the 2400 XT be a step down? Thanks.
     
  9. Jimmery macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2005
    Location:
    Canada
    #10
    Okay, so I guess the only thing going for the 2400XT (over previous video cards in Apple computers) is the on-board chip to encode and decode H.264. Anything else?
     
  10. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #11
    The h.264 decoding is about it. The 2400 series is in essence a video card designed to be passively cooled for HTPC options. It doesn't have any sort of gaming or 3D capabilities worth mentioning otherwise.

    It would be a step down.
     
  11. powerbook911 thread starter macrumors 68040

    powerbook911

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    #12

    Thanks. Wow. I guess it would be better for me not to upgrade macs then. Maybe the h264 stuff would be good for me. I'm not sure. I encode h264 all day, but sounds like the card is only for decoding. Thanks for clarifying.

    I guess I'll either not get a new one, or get the $1500 model.
     
  12. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #13
    wat would the 2600 be like for encoding?? i do a lot of mpeg and h264 encoding.
     
  13. Wild-Bill macrumors 68030

    Wild-Bill

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Location:
    bleep
    #14
    Very, VERY Bad..

    Pulled from various hardware sites. I think that about sums it up. Great choice Apple :rolleyes:


    Oh, and here's one about the HD 2600xt"

     
  14. stuff99 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 11, 2007
  15. Zwhaler macrumors 603

    Zwhaler

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    #16
    The 2400 will struggle. The least you can do is get the 2600 (which still wont fare extremely well)
     
  16. Wild-Bill macrumors 68030

    Wild-Bill

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Location:
    bleep
    #17
    Badly. Read my post above with the collection of various reviews from the intarweb.;)
     
  17. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #18
    are we able to blame it on bad drivers??? i would hope that we can, and updates of the driver will make for better gaming.
     
  18. Wild-Bill macrumors 68030

    Wild-Bill

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Location:
    bleep
    #19
    No. Even if we could, who's drivers you think have priority over at ATI? ;)

    ATI screwed the pooch with the entire 2000 series. The only thing those cards are good for is HD playback: taking the load off the CPU. But then again that's in Windows. Not sure how they implemented their UVD feature set in the Mac variants.
     
  19. iW00t macrumors 68040

    iW00t

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Location:
    Defenders of Apple Guild
    #20
    Are you willing to bet the cost of your iMac on that?

    Who is to say that Apple would even release updated drivers? nVidia/ATi obviously doesn't do it for Mac users, and if Apple doesn't too...
     
  20. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #21
    im really not an expert on this, as you can tell. but how could a company produce a product that sucks!? and how could apple use it??? i know heat it a major issue because its the imac, and its thin and all. surely they know that the gpu isnt all that good except for HD and BR playback. unless ofcourse taht apple has done something crazy and written their own drivers. which i highly doubt.
    gah i dont have a clue. im just so worked up that i was soo looking foreward to having a decent gpu in it, ive been waiting 9months to buy one. and now i find out that its fairly comparable to my mbp CD........pfft
     
  21. Flaki macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    #22
    eh?? so the hd 2600 pro is worse than the older Imac's GPU:confused:
    if it's true..then why ¤%&/ did they make it thinner????? for what??? the look? oh comon the previous Imac was good, they should have not make it thinner.
     
  22. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #23
    the 7900, yes *cry*
     
  23. stuff99 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 11, 2007
    #24
    time to get a ps3 guys! i got mine already...and it doubles as an apple tv and it will soon have pvr functions

    not to mention the blu ray oh and it plays some games too with some awesome ones coming out next year
     
  24. Flaki macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    #25
    And And Steve Jobs sad it was a better card at the conference...hahaha how ironic.
     

Share This Page