And the Maxwell-based Nvidia GPU is not exactly available. I am not sure how I am keeping trolls happy, so I am going to finish this discussion.
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.
iMac 5K GPU Performance
- Thread starter robertojorge
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And the Maxwell-based Nvidia GPU is not exactly available. I am not sure how I am keeping trolls happy, so I am going to finish this discussion.
That's not what he said, here's what he said:
Again, as of today, the i7-4790K is the best desktop processor ever produced and was made available for public consumption in June of this year. Is that nothing to write home about and/or is it old?
The CPU is brand new and is based on the latest available architecture and process technology that can be manufactured in the required quantities by the required deadline.
Of course there will be newer CPU architectures in the future. After Broadwell will be Skylake, and after that Cannonlake, etc.
Just because *future* CPU designs are on the drawing board doesn't make the latest available parts old. The 4Ghz i7-4790K in the retina iMac was only released in July.
i never said that. if you want to read into what i said out of nothing, so be it. All I'm stating is IF you want 5K, buy now. If you want 5K + Big performance, wait a year.
----------
I also never said there's a more powerful card. Stop reading into stuff that I DID NOT SAY.
----------
Broadwell is an entire die shrink with 25-30% more graphical performance. If anything, it'll bring some sort of performance enhancement, more so than a rehash of a haswell chip.
----------
thank god someone with reading sense.
----------
thank god someone with reading sense.
----------
Not you specifically, but this entire thread is on 5K GPU performance with trolls wanting a healthy bump and supporters keep arguing "wait until better graphic drivers come out!"
Doesn't matter, we know what AMD has up their sleeves and it isn't an architecture change or a die shrink. THey're squeezing last bit of performance out of existing technologies. I don't expect surprises, neither should buyers.
----------
perhaps i used the wrong word, but my point still stands. architecture/die shrink over repackaging.
Moot point. The iMac always uses a discrete GPU. Unless they end up going the way of the MacBook Air and use integrated, which will make everything slower again.
Not the smartest comment I have read, you have pretty much just insulted everyone on this thread. You will probably find that a number of people have a sense of disappointment that on early indications the M295X is not a decent bump over the 780M. This has come about after seeing early performance numbers from the 970M and 980M, but we understand why Apple had to go with AMD.
I am not stating any opinion on whether buying the retina imac is a good decision or not. I am just tired of seeing people delude themselves into believing in magic. Understand that I'm coming at this from a practicality standpoint. Technology is at a point where people are most likely happy with the power iMac provides. ALl the reviews indicate that it runs speedily in professional applications.
But also understand, all the technology inside leverages older architecture. We're at a point in both GPU and CPU cycles where we're not being propelled forward until maybe next year. If you are in the party that truly cares, than ya, it'd be irresponsible for anybody to suggest you buy now. There are people who don't care if the power is enough for them right now, they just want to be with the new. This isn't an example of something new is always around the corner. The fact is something truly new hasn't come out in a year or two. (Save for Maxwell)
----------
Moot point? You don't care about power efficiencies that can be leveraged? You don't care about professional applications that may not always need a dGPU?
Keep insulting me man. Do we TRULY understand why Apple had to go with AMD? Are you even making a response to what I said? I don't even know your argument anymore.
Here let me state my simple argument. If you want 5K and are okay with existing technologies, buy now. If you want to wait for a die shrink or new architecture, wait for next year.
Last edited:
I don't know how big your OC is, but at stock clocks 3dMark Firestrike posts the following:
680MX: Graphics Score 4773
780M: Graphics Score 5547
Knowing that the m295x is between 15-20% stronger then the 780M, I would estimate a score of around 6300-6600.
You are telling me that you are getting 50% more performance from the OC of a MX chip? You can understand my doubts. And if we OC the 295, what is the ceiling?
Remember that until 6 months ago, the 780m was the fastest bleeding edge mobile card on the market. So for Apple to ship an iMac with a card 15-20% faster then the fastest gaming laptop card from 6 months ago isn't really a disappointment in my eyes. I think to climb significantly higher, you would need a crossfire or sli iMac, which I don't see them doing (but would be the first in line to buy one.)
That they can dissipate heat from cards like these is impressive giving the iMacs thin chassis. Look at Sager, Clevo, Asus and Alienware laptops housing these same chips, and most are the size of a bus...like 2-3 inches thick.
I did go down to my local Apple store today, and played with the i5/290X iMac that was on display. Screen is pretty insane. The biggest issue is that the retina tax is HUGE on any of these machines if your a gamer. I learned that the hard way on my MBP/650m. So in that context, I can understand potential disappointment. But so far, the scores in FPS that the system is putting down seems to be pretty reasonable.
It's really impressive to me that Apple was able to build this machine for the money that they are asking. It was really snappy, and the screen is stunning.
I think we are all aware that Haswell and Tonga aren't brand new but if you want an iMac today, you are getting the newest processor and card on both architectures. If you want to wait, I'd say wait until Skylake but anytime you wait to buy a new computer, the computer will be better, faster. That has how it has been since the dawn of computers.
You're argument boils down to wait, because newer technology is going to be available soon.
You're premise is always true though, so it doesn't make a material difference.
What would be bad is if the iMac wasn't performing well under the stress of professional applications and that there was a technology available that would negate that. Which isn't the case, sourcing the reviews.
Yes, but this "something better will be available in 6 months" mentality just keeps you from ever buying anything. By the time Apple updates the iMac again, Broadwell will be 6-8 months old, AMD and nVidia will be right on the verge of releasing another new round of GPUs.
If you really want 5K, buy the iMac now. If you really need/want a new iMac, buy the iMac now.
If you aren't sold on the 5K screen, and don't really want or need a new computer - by all means, wait until you're ready to buy.
You know what i don't understand about these style of discussions i.e 'wait for next year, or buy now'? To be blunt, you could be dead next year... that combined with the fact that financially Apple devices maintain so much value from a cost perspective you're better to buy a machine now, keep it in good condition for 1 year, eBay it, and use the $ to part pay for the new model.
By taking the high end model, you create some demand since eBay isn't full of the CTO devices, and you get even more $/age ratio.
So you can have this model, enjoy it, and get next years model, and enjoy that. Rather than buy something now and watch its value depreciate to 0, or wait, and risk having no enjoyment from new devices at all.
I agree, the 295x performance isn't world shattering, but its an improvement over the 780m in the 2013 model, and thats good enough for me.
Edit : to add to it, buy the new device now and trial it for 14 days, if you aren't happy, return the thing for a 100% refund.
By taking the high end model, you create some demand since eBay isn't full of the CTO devices, and you get even more $/age ratio.
So you can have this model, enjoy it, and get next years model, and enjoy that. Rather than buy something now and watch its value depreciate to 0, or wait, and risk having no enjoyment from new devices at all.
I agree, the 295x performance isn't world shattering, but its an improvement over the 780m in the 2013 model, and thats good enough for me.
Edit : to add to it, buy the new device now and trial it for 14 days, if you aren't happy, return the thing for a 100% refund.
Totally agree. I'm gonna buy the new retina iMac. What I am on the fence about is the MBP. I need a new one of those too, and buying a 15" with a 750m hurts. Wish it had an 850m or higher.
That's one way of interpreting it. Let's not forget that currently we are hitting the limits of what we can do with electronics/silicium. That's why we see old hardware and little improvements. The improvements we do see are aimed at saving energy, running a bit more efficient and multithreading (multicore, gpgpu).
So technology is not at a point where people are most likely happy with the computing power, technology is at the limit of the materials and machinery used. Software is changing things a bit. More use of multithreading and other components than the cpu to do calculations (OpenCL, CUDA...using things like videocards and DSP cards).
This is just wishful thinking and a good example of what you defined as "magic". We will see some improvement in performance but it won't we a huge difference, just a small increase.
Yep, it is that simple but be prepared to be disappointed because the performance won't be that much different.
There are 2 questions that most people are wondering: how well do the 290 and 295 handle the 5K display in general? Is it worth the extra money to upgrade to the 295? Previews and reviews currently show that the 290 is able to handle the 5K display without problems when it comes to photo and video editing.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/68934
So, 5345 is easily attainable on the 680MX, which is ~same as the 780M. The 780M won't overlock without throttling.
That's a mild overclock, by the way. We don't know for sure the M295x is 15-20% faster than the 780M. Barefeats has an at least 15% faster CPU in that 4.0Ghz i7 Haswell chip to get 15% faster results.
So, as of right now, where's the big improvement? Maybe it IS out there, but for now, at least, I'm disappointed.
I still have one on order, of course.
Except, this isn't my argument and this isn't true. This isn't something new is 6 months around the corner. This is something new hasn't come out in 1 year. You wouldn't recommend someone buy an iphone 5S back in September for the same reason. This is obvious less drastic as its' just speed increases.
Again, I'm not buying this either way. I'm just stopping this [incessant argument. Both of you guys are right. Performance won't knock anybody's boots off because the architecture is the same, die is the same size. You won't get a leap unless one of those things changes.
----------
refreshing, but not everybody enjoys ebaying their things. By all means though, for the last time, I NEVER told anybody to not buy this machine. If you want 5K now, by all means buy it. I just want people to operate under full information.
Remember, people are arguing over the GPU performance. It won't shatter the world, if you want it to, wait a year. And i'll reserve judgement on the 295 being 15% better than GTX980M
All you guys arguing is funny, dual SLI and crossfire barley work for 4k let alone 5k, and you guys are complaining, seriously. Even if Apple put in a GTX980m it was not gonna make a difference at this level for GPU performance. 5-10 more frames is not gonna make an unplayable experience any better. You will get decent mid grade performance like every other year of the iMac release, if you are expecting to run BF4 at 5k above 25fps, thats unreasonable and naive. These resolutions are 2-4 years off from a fully acceptable frame rate on a mobile GPU, and even then the demand for more resources to scale up will increase so it will be the same thing.
I think many of us realize none of these cards is good enough for 5k gaming. We do wish, however, they were good enough for 1440p gaming at higher settings...
A die shrink which for both AMD and nvidia will help hugely for 1440p but while they don't have any silicon fabs free thanks to seemingly to apple hogging all of TSMC's capacity making Axx chips for iOS in their quest not to rely on Samsung who knows when that will happen!
But we are years away from getting 5k gaming when it'll probably need 5 way crossfire with desktop R9 cards to push that many pixels with the silicon we have now. Something that looks like one of tutor's rendering beasts in the Mac Pro forum
Barefeats just posted WOW, Diablo 3 and Tomb Raider all running 1440p over 60 fps with the settings cranked. It was also running D3 and WOW at 5k over 35 fps with the settings cranked.
I'm still trying to figure out where the disappointment is. You guys do realize the entire machine cost the same as Dell gets just for the panel right???