Just to make things clear (8800GS verus GT130)

Discussion in 'iMac' started by Styxie, Mar 15, 2009.

?

8800 GS versus GT 130

  1. The 8800GS is SIGNIFICANTLY faster than the GT130

    1 vote(s)
    4.3%
  2. The GT130 is SIGNIFICANTLY faster than the 8800GS

    8 vote(s)
    34.8%
  3. They're about the same, dude!

    14 vote(s)
    60.9%
  1. Styxie macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Location:
    Holland
    #1
    I hear a lot of talk lately. Some guys say the 8800GS of the previous iMac whoops the GT130's ass up and down. Others say the GT130's superior pipelins and whatnot obliterate the 8800GS. And this will probably happen in this thread also, that's just fine. Anyway, can we all conclude that the 8800GS and the GT130 are kinda the same perfomance wise? They're not exactly the same, so in some games the 8800GS will be faster, and in other games the GT130 will win. I'll actually make a poll, that'll be good.
    If anyone has some real hard data, please post that in here. Thanks

    - Styxie
     
  2. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #2
    GT130 (aka 9800M GTS) is faster, but we're not talking about HUGE differences, maybe 10-20%.
     
  3. Gioman macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Sweden
    #3
    They should be very similar, and even if one is better, it wont be MUCH better.

    The question is if the Ultra high-end card, ATI 4850, will be MUCH better than the two.
     
  4. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #4
    It won't. It'll be the mobility version which has scored quite similar in benchmark tests.

    Don't say "it much better. look at Apple's site". It costs only 50€ more so we are talking about 5-10% better than GT130
     
  5. Gioman macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Sweden
    #5
    Apple's site shows it is 30% better, which in my book isnt "MUCH BETTER". In any case, for €50 (€45 with my student discount), maybe it might be worth it.
     
  6. b.rangelov macrumors newbie

    b.rangelov

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2009
    Location:
    Leipzig
    #6
    http://www.macworld.com/article/139350/2009/03/imacs_2009_benchmarks.html
     
  7. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #7
    We have to till 4850 ships. Then we get the real benchmarks, because it's likely that it's overclocked mobility version.

    We'll see...
     
  8. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #8
    I don't get the correlation between the two. What Apple charges for a component depends on the bulk discount they get from the manufacturer and is not necessarily tied to performance.

    Speaking of what Apple would charge for a BTO option, anti-glare (matte) screen for the new 17" MBP is just $50, but some would say it's 200% better than glossy.
     
  9. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #9
    It's not about the cost of components, it's about power. And for MBP screen BTO, it's about your opinion. Someone can say that glossy is 200% better. But it's not the same in components, it's not about opinions, it's about numbers.

    I'm just mad because I couldn't wait 6 weeks and went for GT130 :D I've been happy with it.
     
  10. Touchy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Location:
    Cape Breton
    #10
    Can a "130" if purchased now, be replaced with a "4850" at a later date? I ask this as I need to replace my PC desktop NOW and want an iMac but don't think I can wait the extra month (the time I see quoted in some of the threads).
     
  11. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #11
    If you are very good with electronics, maybe then. It's not like replacing a normal GPU for desktop, iMac still uses laptop parts mainly. GT130 is enough, there isn't a huge difference
     
  12. L0s7man macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2009
    #12
    Can't imagine any manufacturer overclocking GPUs. That'd be crazy. Underclocking, yes, but overclocking?

    My bet would be desktop / underclocked desktop GPU.
     
  13. nick9191 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Britain
    #13
    If the mobility chip is for a laptop, and Apple puts one into a iMac which is a much roomier enclosure, they can get away with OCing it a tad.
     
  14. GamaFu macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    #14
    I highly doubt it can be replaced. You can't go to the store and buy a over the shelf video card to replace it. Apple doesn't sell standalone graphic card for iMacs, only for Mac Pro. Strictly speaking, in this case, there's no graphic card in iMac, only graphic chip and vram soldered on logicboard like the way it is for all laptops. If you take a look at ifixit's "iMac 20" First Look", you will notice iMac isn't designed in a way that user can easily upgrade it or replace the defect part themselves.
     
  15. JordanNZ macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Location:
    Auckland, New Zealand
    #15
    Really?... Because I was under the impression that the mobility version was pretty much an underclocked desktop part anyway...
     
  16. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #16
    Signs point to the GT130 being the 9800M GS or some G94/9600GT spin off. Mobile components from ATI tend to be power optimized and lower clocked versions of their desktop counterparts. Apple doesn't have any problems clocking them down beyond that either.
     
  17. kabunaru Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    #17
    There is so many names for video cards now that I do not care any more. :p
     
  18. cold macrumors newbie

    cold

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    #18
    Overclocking GPUs is nothing new. And it is done by many manufacturers. Just google for a graphic card and put an "OC" at the end and you'll see what I'm talking about.

    And I bet there is no way the ATI 4850 in the iMac will be a desktop card. If so, they could easilly put a desktop CPU (the new Intel low energy Quads for an example) in it. It's theoretically impossible to put such a high end* desktop GPU as the ATI 4850 in an iMac. Just look at some pictures of the card. It is as thick as the iMac itself.

    *I correct myself: the 4850 is actually not a high end card. But comparing it to the GT 120 or the 9400 M it is. :)
     
  19. Kerem72 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2009
    #19
    Something about GT 130

    According to xbitlabs.com: Nvidia’s GeForce GT 130 will be powered by the G94 that is also available on GeForce 9600 GT.

    Am i wrong or does GT 130 support 3D Vision?
     
  20. JordanNZ macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Location:
    Auckland, New Zealand
    #20

    The retail GT130 for pcs is NOT the same card that is in the iMac... The iMac GPU looks like it's a 9800 mobility variant.
     

Share This Page