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

iMac 5K GPU Performance

Yep now im happy to see these numbers :)

The only thing is why the numbers of the m290x dont look good at all? Why theres such a difference between the 290 and 295?

And the desktop R 290x doesn't impresses either - http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8489778 - 8578

Could it be that the m295x is a complete game changer instead of all the rebrands that we are used to see? Lets just hope so
 
First of All: That benchmark for R9 290X is Extreme.

And 8k pts. in that benchmark is exceptionally good.

Secondly:
The design of the Radeon R9 M290 series has its roots to the Pitcairn chip as found on the desktop Radeon HD 7870.
Click to expand...
http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-R9-M290X.108643.0.html

Thats why the numbers are not that good for that chip. Its old Architecture, and old GPU.

For you all people asking: Forget M290X. Go straight for M295X. It will be way, way, wayyyyy faster and you will benefit from it wayyy more than from higher clocked CPU.
 
koyoot said:
First of All: That benchmark for R9 290X is Extreme.

And 8k pts. in that benchmark is exceptionally good.

Secondly:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-R9-M290X.108643.0.html

Thats why the numbers are not that good for that chip. Its old Architecture, and old GPU.

For you all people asking: Forget M290X. Go straight for M295X. It will be way, way, wayyyyy faster and you will benefit from it wayyy more than from higher clocked CPU.
Click to expand...

Yep :) My bad . R9 290x Desktop http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8763193 - 32094
 
:) shame on me. Im just not used to use that benchmark. Usually i rely on passmark. Didnt realize it was crossfire though :)

Well excited to see those numbers on the m295x though. There is hope NOW!! thanks for sharing that one :)
 
Im really excited about them as well.

Cause that shows what can AMD do with Fiji, and Treasure Islands GPUs, for Mac Pro...

If this benchmark really is about R9 M295X...
 
Good to see the M295X is surpassing expectations. I think many people have been assuming there'll be very little difference between it and the M290X because the model names sound so similar, apparently oblivious to the fact that the specs, twice the RAM, and £200 jump indicate that it's probably not the case.
 
robertojorge said:
That looks good :)

If we compare the scores:

980m - http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8680916 - 11229
m295x - http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8832926 - 11491

My GTX 760 - http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/7815392 - 8746

If it proves to be at the level than the 980m as it seems on this bench, then it will be a GO!! :)
Click to expand...

Something is off with those 3Dmark scores, the 980M is shown as only 1MB of ram, whereas it should have 4MB which is correctly reported for the AMD gpu, it can't be the correct card?
 
Guys ! check the post on the front page with the GeekBench scores. The base model is performing very well, no scores on the i7 cpu though.
 
Georgio said:
Something is off with those 3Dmark scores, the 980M is shown as only 1MB of ram, whereas it should have 4MB which is correctly reported for the AMD gpu, it can't be the correct card?
Click to expand...

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8849578 - 12248 8GB ram

Even if these scores are correct and the 980m is +-1k superior than the m295x

These are really nice results.

If it proves to be between the GTX 880m and 980M that will be great
 
It is not superior.

Graphics score is still 1.5 k points above the one from GTX980M 8GB Model.
 
RyanJWilliams said:
Good to see the M295X is surpassing expectations. I think many people have been assuming there'll be very little difference between it and the M290X because the model names sound so similar, apparently oblivious to the fact that the specs, twice the RAM, and £200 jump indicate that it's probably not the case.
Click to expand...
Yes the difference should be bigger than people expect, I'l repost what I wrote in another thread:

The name doesn't do justice to the M295X, if the leaked specs are true they're two completely different cards

ha6L9v3.png
 
This benchmark is so lolworthy, I don't even know why we're discussing it. I won't even tell you what I just got with a Mac Pro 6 core with dual D700s.
 
steve23094 said:
How do you know that is a R9 M295X? There are various desktop versions of the 200 series.
Click to expand...

Have you ever seen a desktop GPU connected in laptop to a mobile CPU?

But overall, I agree, to be 100% sure, we have to wait, so far, everything points out that this really is R9 M295X.
 
koyoot said:
Have you ever seen a desktop GPU connected in laptop to a mobile CPU?

But overall, I agree, to be 100% sure, we have to wait, so far, everything points out that this really is R9 M295X.
Click to expand...

Very, very good point. I'm more optimistic about the M295X now.

It's a low clock speed too, weren't the M295X's rumoured to be 800/850Mhz?
 
Are you really going to try to compare a system minus a monitor that starts at $4600 (6 core, d700) with a system that tops out at the same price that includes a really nice monitor? Also, the mac pro has the same issue the iMac will, you can't upgrade the gpu and sure you may be able to add more memory, maybe swap out the cpu (?) and it will last you longer than an iMac unless you have some gpu intensive activities. I mean for $4000, I'm getting a complete computer setup that I'd be willing to sell in a few years to get an upgrade. Sure, I could also spend $5000 on the config I want for a mac pro, then add on a monitor, keyboard and trackpad. Spending around $6000 and I'd still want to sell it in a few years to get an upgraded gpu.

And not that the mac pro isn't a great machine but it isn't meant to be a consumer machine. I heavily considered the mac pro and even scouted for the refurbished ones. The iMac is the better choice for me (and oh my that screen).
 
Last edited:
leenak said:
Are you really going to try to compare a system minus a monitor that starts at $4600 (6 core, d700) with a system that tops out at the same price that includes a really nice monitor? Also, the mac pro has the same issue the iMac will, you can't upgrade the gpu and sure you may be able to add more memory, maybe swap out the cpu (?) and it will last you longer than an iMac unless you have some gpu intensive activities. I mean for $4000, I'm getting a complete computer setup that I'd be willing to sell in a few years to get an upgrade. Sure, I could also spend $5000 on the config I want for a mac pro, then add on a monitor, keyboard and trackpad. Spending around $6000 and I'd still want to sell it in a few years to get an upgraded gpu.
Click to expand...

Totally respect your opinion.

But what we are trying to establish here is to gather as much info as we can on the GPU specially the m295x witch was unknown to me till a few days.

Lets not argue prices and what we should buy or not please :)
 
Edit

Results:

Screenshot%202014-10-20%2019.25.30.png


I am fairly sure that this is based on one GPU. Spinning rectangles are not really a reliable benchmark of much these days to be honest. The memory score is dodgy since 1866 MHz should be getting around 14933 MB/s. The drive write speed is best not discussed since we have no breakdown of what this thing is actually doing.


Here I highlighted in red the massive spike on CPU to show what a hard core workout it was.

Screenshot%202014-10-20%2019.26.13.png


The fans hasn't moved from its usual speed and the GPU temperatures have not moved.
 
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