Mac Pro and 8800GTX

[aiongiant]

as for as i know the 8800 and the 7300 will not play together!

there have been ppl using the x1900 and the 7300 togehter but like sun baked said theres some conflict

the main reason i think the 8800 won't play with the 7300 is power consumtion maybe? it's grabbing too much power off the pci slots?
or theres a conflict with hardware address and stuff
not including the fact that OSX doesnt' evne support the 8800

 

[trainguy77]

the main reason i think the 8800 won't play with the 7300 is power consumtion maybe? it's grabbing too much power off the pci slots?
or theres a conflict with hardware address and stuff
not including the fact that OSX doesnt' evne support the 8800

I don't think power supply is a problem at all. As you can run two x1900s just fine! Also it is a 12amp power supply at 120 volts.......Unless the power problem is mother board related. But I doubt that as two x1900s run just fine.

 

[aiongiant]

i'm not sure what it is exactly but i think nvidia said it grabs up to 180watts
either way ithe 1k power supply should take it
what i'm refereing to is grabbing too much power maybe from the pci express slot itself?
not sure

but it could also be a IRQ conflict?

 

[PatrikP]

I'm glad I'm not the only one asking these questions. Lack of 8800 support and me wanting to use my computer also to play games are the only reasons I havent bought MacPro till now.

Anyway, you make me feel optimistic again, guys 🙂

I want to ask tho:
- do you think ati x1900xt will handle WoW even in 2560x1600? I'd like to upgrade my monitor aswell.
- any predictions about when we could see upgrade of macpro?

 

[jchahn]

You know, I've given this same issue alot of thought (I don't currently own a Mac but I am highly considering it). I am also a gamer.

I have come to realize that Mac moves at the same pace as the software, whereas PCs are ahead of the software.

Example: Someone with enough money can build a system with 2 geforce 8800s in SLI and a quad core processor, 8+ GB of memory, and as much HDD space as they could want. This is the dream gaming machine right now, and there is nothing that will take advantage of it. It is alot of unused horsepower right now. There aren't any games that would push 2 8800s to the max, and most games don't even take advantage of dual core processors, let alone quad core.

The point I'm getting at is that you may not be able to get the absolute pinnacle (video card wise) in a mac that PC has to offer, but as long as you can run the software you want to run, what difference does it make what hardware you are running? Another example: ATI's latest and greatest video card is the XT1950 and the most you can get in a mac is the XT1900.

As a PC gamer I've had "upgrade-itis" as long as I've been playing PC games: always wanting the latest and greatest hardware that a PC has to offer. With Mac the approach is totally different. With Mac it is about what hardware will run the current software smoothly. It's not about what hardware gets 150fps instead of 120fps. Isn't that what really matters anyway? As long as the software is playable and smooth and enjoyable, does it really matter what the hardware is? These are questions I've actually asked myself. Mac has a totally different way of doing things. Do I prefer their way or the PC way?

When you make a decision to purchase a Mac, you are basically endorsing the Mac way of doing things; the Mac pace of upgrading. More and more I'm thinking that I like their way.

It boils down to this: Mac is a computer company and in order to stay in business they have to remain competitive. To me, competitive doesn't necessarily mean offering equivalent hardware. To me, competitive means the ability to play the same software (in the case of games) or similar software with similar performance. Whether that is the same hardware or not is more less irrelevent.

 

[jchahn]

Edit

 

[Lord Blackadder]

at the same pace as the software, whereas PCs are ahead of the software.

Example: Someone with enough money can build a system with 2 geforce 8800s in SLI and a quad core processor, 8+ GB of memory, and as much HDD space as they could want. This is the dream gaming machine right now, and there is nothing that will take advantage of it. It is alot of unused horsepower right now. There aren't any games that would push 2 8800s to the max, and most games don't even take advantage of dual core processors, let alone quad core.

Bingo. A Mac Pro with an X1900XT and the appropriate amount of RAM can play ANY game at ANY resolution...if you want to get silly you can pick hole in that argument but only the most bleeding edge mine's-bigger-than-yours hardware freak could be dissatisfied with the Mac Pro's gaming potential in any OS.

Yes, an 8800 can push a ludicrous number of FPS in any given game as opposed to the merely ridiculous number of FPS the X1900XT manages, but (and this is subjective) it is an irrelevant difference right now.

With that being said, I hope Apple jumps on the GeForce 8 (and for that matter the ATI R600) bandwagon sooner rather than later. When that happens, the 8800 series cards will be flashable to a Mac-only card and possibly as a dual-platform card as well.

But at the moment there's no need to worry about the GeForce 8 unless you know how to write ROMs from scratch with no prior knowledge of the hardware.🙄

 

[psingh01]

Bingo. A Mac Pro with an X1900XT and the appropriate amount of RAM can play ANY game at ANY resolution...if you want to get silly you can pick hole in that argument but only the most bleeding edge mine's-bigger-than-yours hardware freak could be dissatisfied with the Mac Pro's gaming potential in any OS.

Yes, an 8800 can push a ludicrous number of FPS in any given game as opposed to the merely ridiculous number of FPS the X1900XT manages, but (and this is subjective) it is an irrelevant difference right now.

With that being said, I hope Apple jumps on the GeForce 8 (and for that matter the ATI R600) bandwagon sooner rather than later. When that happens, the 8800 series cards will be flashable to a Mac-only card and possibly as a dual-platform card as well.

But at the moment there's no need to worry about the GeForce 8 unless you know how to write ROMs from scratch with no prior knowledge of the hardware.🙄

This should be looked at from a developers POV as well. How can such kick ass games be created if the developers can't get the machines to create the games with. No wonder Mac gaming is non-existant. I don't need Apple telling me that I can't use all that power, give me the power and I'll do something useful with it. Otherwise I'll do what I did before, build myself a PC with what I need so I can do what I want.

Add to that, I think Apple is really blowing it with Intel. What was the point of making all the fuss about Motorola and IBM not geting the PPC out fast enough when Intel has had quad-core CPUs for months and Apple is still on its same old slow ass schedule for releasing updates. Might as well go back to the PPC....

 

[cynerjist]

Add to that, I think Apple is really blowing it with Intel. What was the point of making all the fuss about Motorola and IBM not geting the PPC out fast enough when Intel has had quad-core CPUs for months and Apple is still on its same old slow ass schedule for releasing updates. Might as well go back to the PPC....

I understand some of your frustration, but this is over-doing it a bit. PPC development was lagging much farther behind than the few month wait some members are enduring for an octo-core done right.

I have complained about the vid cards, myself. But the posters above have it right. I think Apple is "splitting the difference" so to speak between the Apple of old and your typical PC manufacturer that rushes to market the same week a new component becomes available. They will introduce new hardware faster than they used to, but they will still package several upgrades (CPU, chipset, vid cards) together when they do it.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Apple's holistic apporach to computer design means that they'll seldom be the first to market with the hottest components. And there are a number of things I don't like about the hardware specs they choose. If you look back through my posts, you'll see that I'm constantly complaining about Apple's lack of interest in gaming and particularly video cards. For example,

- the 20" iMac should be able to be configured with a 7600GT like the 24"

- the 7600GT should be offered as a "mid level" card in the Mac Pro

- the MacBooks and Mini should get a Radeon X1300

- the Mac Pro's X1900XT be bumped to the slightly more powerful X1950XT

- all video cards sold with the Mac Pro should be available a la carte at a reasonable price from the Apple Store, authorized Apple Specialists or their internet based bretheren, instead of only beinbg available as uber-expensive replacement parts.

- Apple should introduce new video cards on a schedule more in line with the PC world - it doesn't have to be simultaneous, but 4-6 months is a long wait for a video card that needs only ROM/EFI development to make it a "Mac Edition".

Despite all these complaints, I still think that, overall, Apple is doing a better job now than at any time in its history with video card availability etc., and I still feel that there's no need for the 8800 *this instant*. As to the game development thing, there is something to that but many games are not developed on the most insane hardware because most people don't own said hardware. Software companies are more concerned with getting games to work on run-of-the-mill hardware to maximize sales volume.

Right now, if you are a bleeding-edge gamer that MUST have the ABSOLUTE BEST hardware whether you really need it or not, there's only one way - newegg.com. Go there, build a liquid-cooled OC'd Core 2 Extreme machine with SLI'd 8800s, RAID 0 Raptors and fantastically overpriced Corsair 1337 h4x0r5 DDR RAM (with flashing LEDs built in), and have a ball. But 90% of the people out there playing games don't use that kind of hardware, and the Mac Pro is much, much better than the average PC out there. Multicore CPUs are still largely irrelevant now for gaming, so the bottom line is still effeciency, clock speed and power consumption.

 

[jchahn]

I don't understand why Nvidia and ATI don't just take it upon themselves to offer Mac and Windows firmware updates and drivers on their websites; that way anyone could take any of their cards and swap back and forth between Mac and Windows. Since macs use a standard run of the mill pci-express slot the video card manufacturers could take upon themselves to offer 3rd party upgrade options. I don't think they need Macs permission for that, do they?

I think that if Macs start becoming hugely popular because of the boot camp and parallels stuff, the video card manufacturers will start doing exactly that. I think if there is a big enough market for it the video card manufacturers will take it upon themselves to make Mac firmware and drivers for all of their cards so people can switch back and forth.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

The answer is extremely simple - ATI and Nvidia are lacking two things they need to ramp up development of GPUs for the Mac: potential volume and more interest from Apple.

Apple has actually made a lot of progress over the last ten years with games. These days they are sure to offer at least a couple gameworthy cards at any given moment, and (importantly) there is usually one good example each available from Nvidia and ATI.

We need more volume, bottom line. We're moving in the right direction - more Macs get sold every quarter than ever before, and about half of the new Macs purchased are being bought by "switchers". Hopefully, at some point Mac sales, Boot Camp and general interest in Apple will lend critical mass to the high-end gaming-on-the-Mac interest to the point that Apple spends more time tweaking Nvidia drivers on the Mac (ATI does their own, and they are very well done).

Also, I'd like to see (barring Apple's making cards available a la carte as I mentioned earlier) a third party card manufacturer like BFG, XFX, PowerColor or others release a line of cards for the Mac Pro, ranging from budget cards to compete with Apple's 7300 series all the way up to the lates gaming models.

 

[Meemoo]

I don't understand why Nvidia and ATI don't just take it upon themselves to offer Mac and Windows firmware updates and drivers on their websites; that way anyone could take any of their cards and swap back and forth between Mac and Windows. Since macs use a standard run of the mill pci-express slot the video card manufacturers could take upon themselves to offer 3rd party upgrade options. I don't think they need Macs permission for that, do they?

I think that if Macs start becoming hugely popular because of the boot camp and parallels stuff, the video card manufacturers will start doing exactly that. I think if there is a big enough market for it the video card manufacturers will take it upon themselves to make Mac firmware and drivers for all of their cards so people can switch back and forth.

No kidding, how hard would it be to develop drivers for most of there cards, slap a mac logo on the box and hey if they sell 1000 of them fantastic.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

No kidding, how hard would it be to develop drivers for most of there cards, slap a mac logo on the box and hey if they sell 1000 of them fantastic.

ATI already does drivers for its "Mac Edition" cards, so it has no excuse for not making more available.

But Apple writes all the Nvidia drivers, and comissions the manufacturing of the cards, so you'll never see retail Nvidia cards until there is a drastic change and a third party starts doing all the development.

 

[digicidal]

Missing the point...

I agree with many of the "Mac-centric" viewpoints indicated on here however, I am stupified by apples lack of support for the 8800's as well on another front. The bottom line is that if you are asking $3K plus for a computer (regardless of PC/Mac designation) you are charging a premium for high-end technology. It confuses me that Apple would consider it a reasonable hardware path to release an 8-core XEON system that can only utilize an arguably mid-level video card.

Let's be reasonable here - I can think of only one computing arena that would truly "tax" a quad-core setup (aside from scientific)... and that's video/graphics rendering - which is why as gaming software becomes more robust - so do the GPUs required to display it smoothly. So to my way of thinking - Apple is saying "the Mac Pro - get it for video editing, or photoshop... use your PC for 3D & games". I mean - if you're just ripping MP3's and editing your myspace page... you can still do well with a G4 system.

Why take the time to offer the latest and greatest (and in all practicality higher-end than any normal gaming PC) CPUs - while going totally 'budget' in the other critical area of computing power. Not to mention the further confusion behind seeing the reason to offer that uber-high-end-Mac with a 30" display - and then couple a midrange card with it!?!

Here's the final part of my rant... everyone is talking like it's understandable that the driver release schedule is so slow - particularly as it pertains to NVidia - however, NVidia has numerous Linux drivers that are available for almost every card they have in production. With MacOS being a *nix variant now.. you can't tell me it's due to driver production - and the bios thing is something Apple put IN - it's something they could take OUT just as easily - the MacPro IS A PC - it's just that they 'tweaked' the bios so that you couldn't run an un-hacked version of their OS on a PC. Because if they didn't do that - no one would buy a Mac in the first place. We'd all run OSX on the latest PC hardware and Mac's would be a thing for the rich to display on a desk that wasn't used.

Until Apple changes their way of thinking - do like I did... buy a Mac Mini and 'pimp' it out with 2GB of RAM - and take the $2.7K you have left over to build a quad-core, 8GB, dual 8800GTX system with 1.5TB of SATA drives and play any PC game, run Maya at full speed on dual 24" displays, etc., etc...

Then when Apple decides to release something that can really be used for high-end content creation (and games of course) other than 2D and video - buy THAT Mac instead.

 

[sblasl]

Q & A with AMD's Arturo Wong Chujoy on Mac Graphics Cards

Mike over at xlr8yourmac.com has an intersting interview:

A few weeks ago I sent some questions about the present retail drought and future of ATI graphics cards for Macs to Arturo Wong Chujoy, GPG Desktop Product Marketing, Advanced Micro Devices Inc. I was hoping for something more definitive as far as future Mac retail offerings, but he does confirm the 9800 and X800 are EOL and also that the X1900 G5 edition is soon to be.


http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/feedback/2007_QandA_with_AMD.html#start

 

[ndriver182]

Mike over at xlr8yourmac.com has an intersting interview:

A few weeks ago I sent some questions about the present retail drought and future of ATI graphics cards for Macs to Arturo Wong Chujoy, GPG Desktop Product Marketing, Advanced Micro Devices Inc. I was hoping for something more definitive as far as future Mac retail offerings, but he does confirm the 9800 and X800 are EOL and also that the X1900 G5 edition is soon to be.


http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/feedback/2007_QandA_with_AMD.html#start

I read the article, but at the risk of sounding as dumb as a brick, can somebody explain this speculation a little more? 😕

 

[Macinposh]

I read the article, but at the risk of sounding as dumb as a brick, can somebody explain this speculation a little more? 😕

There is nothing to specualte abuout in that article.

Monkey just bangs the drum.


I havent read such a useless "interview" for a long time.
Jeebus, that Arturo Chicken Cungpo is a generic answering robot.

-"AMD will continuously look into opportunities that stay on the forefront of graphics performance and innovation."

-"Unfortunately, we don't have anything substantial to comment on at this time."

-"we're always looking into opportunities we can offer to our customers and AMD will continue to offer Apple products to meet their needs."