Intel iMacs: X1600 GPU is a Mobility chip

HiRez

macrumors 603
Original poster
Jan 6, 2004
5,850
1,811
Western US
Looks like Apple is in fact using the Mobility version of the X1600 in the new iMacs. Bummer. Compare the actual shot of the guts of the iMac (thanks, kodawarisan!):


to the ATI product shot of the X1600 Mobility:


Same chip (looking at the components around the chip). For comparison, here's an ATI product shot of the desktop X1600 chip:


I understand why they would use a Mobility chip with the iMac's space considerations, but I think it's a bit deceptive of Apple, as they specifically say "X1600 Mobility" in their specs for the MacBook Pro, but only say "X1600" in their iMac specs, which might lead one to believe the iMac uses a full desktop X1600.
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,085
290
Indianapolis
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2632

Compare this to the desktop version(s) of the proposed X1600 and we see much lower clocks. The X1600 XT was announced at launch to have 590MHz core and 1.38GHz memory clock speeds and 256MB of RAM. The MRX1600 is closer in implementation to the potential X1600 Pro, which might have 500MHz core and 780MHz memory clocks. The other major downgrade the mobile that mid-range part gets is in memory size to 128MB. The coolness factor comes in when you realize that ATI can pack the GPU and all of its RAM on a 46mm X 46mm square package.
As of right now, HD quality H.264 decompression takes up too much processing power to run smoothly on a PC, but with the MRX1600, ATI is promising HD video decoding in graphics hardware. This is good news, but unfortunately, neither ATI nor NVIDIA have released a driver that supports it. We feel that it's a little premature to list something as a "feature" before it's actually supported, but hopefully, we'll see these drivers sooner rather than later.
 

Nermal

Moderator
Staff member
Dec 7, 2002
18,778
1,243
New Zealand
I had trouble getting onto Kodawarisan's site, so have a mirror. As for the GPU itself, it's a shame that the pic is blurry - I'm trying to make out all the text. Done a few Google searches for the parts I can read, but have found nothing helpful yet.
 

ksgant

macrumors 6502a
Jan 12, 2006
622
106
Chicago
I still find this hard to believe. Are both x1600 chips PCIe because Apple is claiming that the iMac one is PCIe. Or is this just standard now in both desktops and laptops?

So basically the new Intel iMacs are just laptops with big screens?

And honestly, does it matter to anyone here?

There's an interesting editorial by David Lazarus in the San Francisco Chronicle about what people are thinking about Intel inside of Macs. Here's a few blurbs from that:

"It's a computer, for goodness sake, a plastic box that does lots of really cool things. Does it matter any longer how it does them?

Who cares if the box has bits and pieces made by Intel or IBM or Samsung or any one of thousands of other electronics manufacturers?

Reality check: You pick up a phone and you get a dial tone. Do you honestly care how this happens?

Even more miraculous, you place a bag of kernels in a microwave oven and you get popcorn, without any visible heat source. Can you even begin to understand the physics of that? Do you really want to?

A computer's no different."


He went on to interview random people walking the street and inside of Macworld to see if they care what is inside of a computer and the usual answer was "no, as long as it works and does what I want".

Read about that here.
 

iMeowbot

macrumors G3
Aug 30, 2003
8,634
0
ksgant said:
I still find this hard to believe. Are both x1600 chips PCIe
Yes.

The logo on the chip does look like the Mobility Radeon one. While fuzzy, it does look like two lines of text there.
 

Blue Velvet

Moderator emeritus
Jul 4, 2004
21,920
170
ksgant said:
And honestly, does it matter to anyone here?

Obviously, yes... This is a computer forum, what do you expect?

To ask whether it matters to anyone is futile — like farting against thunder.
 

BakedBeans

macrumors 68040
May 6, 2004
3,054
0
What's Your Favorite Posish
IF they are using mobility chips in the desktop they are being snakey about it - which is worse than actually just putting it in and telling us about it.






it clearly differentiates between the two models on the site - in more than one place
 

homerjward

macrumors 68030
May 11, 2004
2,745
0
fig tree
does anyone know conclusively that the mobility is worse in anything other than clock speed? this isn't necessarily a bad thing; apple would have down-clocked the card if they used a desktop chip.


or am i just an idiot?
 

erickg

macrumors 6502
Nov 4, 2004
327
0
iMeowbot said:
Yes.

The logo on the chip does look like the Mobility Radeon one. While fuzzy, it does look like two lines of text there.
Don't really even need to see the logo, judging from the little metal thingies (for lack of a more technical term :) ) it's definitely the mobility version.
 

iMeowbot

macrumors G3
Aug 30, 2003
8,634
0
erickg said:
Don't really even need to see the logo, judging from the little metal thingies (for lack of a more technical term :) ) it's definitely the mobility version.
Those do match, but components on boards can move over revisions.
 

HiRez

macrumors 603
Original poster
Jan 6, 2004
5,850
1,811
Western US
Nermal said:
As for the GPU itself, it's a shame that the pic is blurry - I'm trying to make out all the text.
I can't read the reverse text under the ATI logo (that might be in Japanese or other Asian language), but I think the rest reads:

216PLAKA24FG
N32440.00
0552AAY
TAIWAN

I can't find anything via Google either though.
 

shanmui1

macrumors member
Nov 12, 2005
50
0
Hongkong, China
note that the x1600 mobility is the slowest of all the x1600s. The fastest is x1600 XT 256mb, which loses to the Geforce 6800 GS 256mb in it's price range and class. http://www.guru3d.com has some benchmarks comparing the two. Guess the 128 bit memory interface is a problem for the x1600 XT, despite it's fast clock.

To top off you only get 128mb ram in the 17 inch iMac.
 

odedia

macrumors 65816
Nov 24, 2005
1,019
116
The thing that puzzles me is, what would they do such a thing? I'm pretty darn sure that the mobility version is much more expensive then the desktop version, due to the heat control it needs. Why would apple put something more expensive and then hide it?
 

MRU

Suspended
Aug 23, 2005
25,318
8,813
Other
odedia said:
The thing that puzzles me is, what would they do such a thing? I'm pretty darn sure that the mobility version is much more expensive then the desktop version, due to the heat control it needs. Why would apple put something more expensive and then hide it?
Because the hardware differences between the imac & macbook are very minimal, in fact they are probably identical and it was cheaper to buy bucket loads of 1 chipset than it was to order 50/50 ratio....

Tried sharpening the image in photoshop. Helped a little. So I took the mobilty logo and decreased it size.res and put it over the other image at 50% opacity and it pretty much looked identical. Not very scientific, but it does indeed look like the chip is the same.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.