Nvidia = bye bye?

[mark28]

Mac Pro has an all ATI line up now for high-end performance.
iMac is all ATI now.
ATI drivers are much better than Nvidia drivers in OSX.

So it's only a matter of time for Macbook Pro to also get ATI GPU's?

The new ATI 6000 series are coming this year already with Nvidia still failing with their Fermi cards. Nvidia with their Fermi cards can't even compete against the 5000 series, so no chance they'll be able to compete against the 6000 series.

I think the new 15/17 inch MBP with Sandy Bridge CPU will ship with an ATI 6000 series GPU.

The 13 inch MBP will probbly get AMD fusion probably then. The integrated GPU is insanely powerfull, much faster than the 320m. I can see an AMD/ATI happening for the 13 inch. Unless they want to stick with crappy Intel integrated graphics

 

[MacModMachine]

Mac Pro has an all ATI line up now for high-end performance.
iMac is all ATI now.
ATI drivers are much better than Nvidia drivers in OSX.

So it's only a matter of time for Macbook Pro to also get ATI GPU's?

The new ATI 6000 series are coming this year already with Nvidia still failing with their Fermi cards. Nvidia with their Fermi cards can't even compete against the 5000 series, so no chance they'll be able to compete against the 6000 series.

I think the new 15/17 inch MBP with Sandy Bridge CPU will ship with an ATI 6000 series GPU.

The 13 inch MBP will probbly get AMD fusion probably then. The integrated GPU is insanely powerfull, much faster than the 320m. I can see an AMD/ATI happening for the 13 inch. Unless they want to stick with crappy Intel integrated graphics

where did you get that info?

AMD fusion is faster then 320M ?

how was that benchmarked?

 

[mark28]

where did you get that info?

AMD fusion is faster then 320M ?

how was that benchmarked?

The specs of the ATI integrated GPU indicate that it should in range of the ATI 56xx. So it's a really powerfull integrated GPU

We'll have to wait for benchmarks, but it looks it will be the most powerfull integrated GPU on the market once ATI will ship these CPU's.

 

[Xombie11]

I must disagree about ATI drivers being better.

Serious gamers will run bootcamp on their Macs, so OS X graphics drivers are null and void. ATI still hasn't perfected GPU switching, unlike Nvidia.

ATI updates their drivers (for Windows) twice a year, after new hardware releases. Nvidia updates their drivers once a month, with significant speed increases for recently released games. Who is to say that won't carry over into OS X, especially after this? In general, Nvidia drivers are far superior to ATI ones.

 

[DesmoPilot]

Serious gamers will run bootcamp on their Macs

Serious gamers wouldn't buy a Mac.

Nvidia with their Fermi cards can't even compete against the 5000 series,

Wrong. nVidia's GTX 470 is faster than a 5850, GTX 480 is faster than a 5870. SLI GTX 460s are easily the best value out there at the moment.

 

[mark28]

Serious gamers wouldn't buy a Mac.



Wrong. nVidia's GTX 470 is faster than a 5850, GTX 480 is faster than a 5870. SLI GTX 460s are easily the best value out there at the moment.

A GTX 480 costs the same as a ATI 5970 And the GTX 480 and 470 heat up too much and require too much power. So the GTX 480 and 470 are no competition at all.

The only card from Nvidia that is interesting is the GTX 460. But then again, ATI start to drop their prices.

And ATI has got really huge profit margins. They can sell ATI 5850 against the price of a GTX 460 if they want too, since the ATI 5850 originally had the same price of what the GTX 460 costs now, which they obviously increased due to a lack of competition.

 

[apolloa]

Mac Pro has an all ATI line up now for high-end performance.
iMac is all ATI now.
ATI drivers are much better than Nvidia drivers in OSX.

So it's only a matter of time for Macbook Pro to also get ATI GPU's?

The new ATI 6000 series are coming this year already with Nvidia still failing with their Fermi cards. Nvidia with their Fermi cards can't even compete against the 5000 series, so no chance they'll be able to compete against the 6000 series.

I think the new 15/17 inch MBP with Sandy Bridge CPU will ship with an ATI 6000 series GPU.

The 13 inch MBP will probbly get AMD fusion probably then. The integrated GPU is insanely powerfull, much faster than the 320m. I can see an AMD/ATI happening for the 13 inch. Unless they want to stick with crappy Intel integrated graphics

The ONLY way that the 15 and 17" models will ever get an ATI chip is if they can work as smoothly as the Nvidia chips do at switching between the GPU's depending on the work load. And you can take that as a FACT. Apple have not spent money to develop there own software and system for the switching and then go and blag about battery life to throw it away for a different GPU make.
And ATI is not faster then Nvidia, I've seen so many tests and they are very close, no way can ATI 'wipe the floor' with Nvidia.
Sandy Bridge should provide a good legal way out of the mess Intel and Nvidia have got themselves into, they need to for the case of both company's and I would also much prefer to see an Intel CPU in my Mac then an AMD.

And the 480 is cheaper then the 5970 so please stop stating it isn't. I just did a quick look at one computer store and the cheapest 480 is around £140 LESS then the cheapest 5970.

 

[Aegelward]

At least ATI's mobile chipsets have advanced.

nVidia just seems to be squeezing die shrinks and clock speeds out of, what seems to be the same core architecture since the 8600s.

Could be nice seeing a 5650M or 5670M in a MBP, and ATI should have their graphics switching out by the next revision...

 

[MacModMachine]

At least ATI's mobile chipsets have advanced.

nVidia just seems to be squeezing die shrinks and clock speeds out of, what seems to be the same core architecture since the 8600s.

Could be nice seeing a 5650M or 5670M in a MBP, and ATI should have their graphics switching out by the next revision...

lets see the power consumption on these ATI chipsets, oh...and you need a AMD chip too im guessing ?

so sacrifice CPU majorly for a better GPU?

 

[mark28]

The ONLY way that the 15 and 17" models will ever get an ATI chip is if they can work as smoothly as the Nvidia chips do at switching between the GPU's depending on the work load. And you can take that as a FACT. Apple have not spent money to develop there own software and system for the switching and then go and blag about battery life to throw it away for a different GPU make.
And ATI is not faster then Nvidia, I've seen so many tests and they are very close, no way can ATI 'wipe the floor' with Nvidia.
Sandy Bridge should provide a good legal way out of the mess Intel and Nvidia have got themselves into, they need to for the case of both company's and I would also much prefer to see an Intel CPU in my Mac then an AMD.

Let's take a look at the best laptop GPU's. Sure, the GTX 480m is faster than the ATI 5870m, but let's look at the power usage and heat

5870m runs at 50 watt
480M runs at 100 watt.

 

[aiqw9182]

The ONLY way that the 15 and 17" models will ever get an ATI chip is if they can work as smoothly as the Nvidia chips do at switching between the GPU's depending on the work load. And you can take that as a FACT. Apple have not spent money to develop there own software and system for the switching and then go and blag about battery life to throw it away for a different GPU make.

Uhh, they already have spent money to develop their own software for GPU switching. They are not using NVIDIA's Optimus technology. That MacBook Pro you own? The switching is all done via software that could be translated to an ATI GPU with no effort.

 

[mark28]

lets see the power consumption on these ATI chipsets, oh...and you need a AMD chip too im guessing ?

so sacrifice CPU majorly for a better GPU?

What makes you think C2D is faster than the new AMD cpu's?

Apple sacrifed CPU this update by not choosing core i5 in their 13 inch MBP, they can do it again next update with Nvidia not allowed making integrated GPU's.

edit: I personally wouldn't go for a 13 inch MBP with AMD, just like I refused to buy a C2D 13 inch MBP this update. But I think this is what will happen. Unless Apple really wants to settle with Sandy Bridge i7 and it's crappy Intel integrated GPU

 

[DesmoPilot]

A GTX 480 costs the same as a ATI 5970 And the GTX 480 and 470 heat up too much and require too much power. So the GTX 480 and 470 are no competition at all.

No competition? You do not know what know what you're talking about. GTX 480s on newegg can be had for $449US, cheapest 5970 is $649US (That's a $200 difference). You must have no actual experience experience with the cards and just go along with the wrong popular consensus. In a case with decent airflow (which anyone actually owning one of these cards will have) the GTX 400 cards don't run that much hotter than any other top-tier nVidia card of its day really. Power consumption, yes, is a bit much, but anyone owning these cards will certainly have the proper PSU.

The only card from Nvidia that is interesting is the GTX 460. But then again, ATI start to drop their prices.

Have yet to see a price drop on any current generation ATI hardware.

 

[MacModMachine]

What makes you think C2D is faster than the new AMD cpu's?

Apple sacrifed CPU this update by not choosing core i5 in their 13 inch MBP, they can do it again next update with Nvidia not allowed making integrated GPU's.

edit: I personally wouldn't go for a 13 inch MBP with AMD, just like I refused to buy a C2D 13 inch MBP this update. But I think this is what will happen. Unless Apple really wants to settle with Sandy Bridge i7 and it's crappy Intel integrated GPU

what ?


Core i5 and what gpu in the 13" ?......well?

c2d and 320M is a great combo compared to a i5 and intel integrated....

i suppose ATI chipset would be good but what amd cpu again is comparable to i5?


AMD cpu's are plain garbage in comparison

 

[mark28]

No competition? You do not know what know what you're talking about. GTX 480s on newegg can be had for $449US, cheapest 5970 is $649US (That's a $200 difference). You must have no actual experience experience with the cards and just go along with the wrong popular consensus. In a case with decent airflow (which anyone actually owning one of these cards will have) the GTX 400 cards don't run that much hotter than any other top-tier nVidia card of its day really. Power consumption, yes, is a bit much, but anyone owning these cards will certainly have the proper PSU.




Have yet to see a price drop on any current generation ATI hardware.

In the UK for example, cost range depending on manufacturer.

GTX 480 costs: £349.99 - £778.06

ATI 5970 costs: £429.99 - £730.71

So they are pretty similiar priced in the UK

Price drop have a lagged affect. The GTX 460 is a new card, so it will take a bit of time for it to take affect.

what ?


Core i5 and what gpu in the 13" ?......well?

c2d and 320M is a great combo compared to a i5 and intel integrated....

i suppose ATI chipset would be good but what amd cpu again is comparable to i5?


AMD cpu's are plain garbage in comparison

It's a problem Apple has to face.

13 MBP Sandy Bridge i3/i5 with Intel integrated GPU or 13 MBP AMD fusion CPU with ATI integrated GPU.

Difficult choice ( I assume next year C2D won't be avaliable anymore )

 

[aiqw9182]

what ?


Core i5 and what gpu in the 13" ?......well?

c2d and 320M is a great combo compared to a i5 and intel integrated....

i suppose ATI chipset would be good but what amd cpu again is comparable to i5?


AMD cpu's are plain garbage in comparison

Might want to look at AMD's 2011 roadmap, it's looking very impressive. Intel isn't exactly playing nice with anyone at the moment, NVIDIA or Apple so switching to AMD for some products isn't as farfetched are you are making it out to be.

Apple is in a hole right now with Intel's graphics. They aren't going to be sticking with Core 2 Duo's in 2011. Right now AMD's Llano Fusion is probably looking mighty fine to Apple.

 

[MacModMachine]

Might want to look at AMD's 2011 roadmap, it's looking very impressive. Intel isn't exactly playing nice with anyone at the moment, NVIDIA or Apple so switching to AMD for some products isn't as farfetched are you are making it out to be.

Apple is in a hole right now with Intel's graphics. They aren't going to be sticking with Core 2 Duo's in 2011. Right now AMD's Llano Fusion is probably looking mighty fine to Apple.

yah....i love AMD's future roadmaps...there always promising...yet always fall short.

im not at all saying apple will not switch to AMD, but AMD would have to come out with ALOT better CPU's, there 6 core cannot even match the i7's performance....its a goddamn joke.

 

[Xombie11]

AMD still makes CPUs? Haha.

 

[aiqw9182]

yah....i love AMD's future roadmaps...there always promising...yet always fall short.

im not at all saying apple will not switch to AMD, but AMD would have to come out with ALOT better CPU's, there 6 core cannot even match the i7's performance....its a goddamn joke.

Bulldozer. Google it. While you're at it, Google "is a lot two words?".

 

[iMacmatician]

yah....i love AMD's future roadmaps...there always promising...yet always fall short.

im not at all saying apple will not switch to AMD, but AMD would have to come out with ALOT better CPU's, there 6 core cannot even match the i7's performance....its a goddamn joke.

Fusion.

 

[DesmoPilot]

AMD still makes CPUs? Haha.

Yes they do, and they have the budget market under complete control. Phenom II X4s and X6s are simply great.

 

[panzer06]

I still despise nVidia over the whole 8400/8600 GPU issue. Really bad form and pathetic how long they took to agree to reimburse their OEM partners.

That said, gaming drivers are currently more stable from nvidia. ATI reference drivers are not the most consistent out there.

Regardless, I prefer ATI. I bought this 24" iMac used to get the 4850 with the 1920x1200 display. It works great (though it puts off plenty of heat).

Apple's on an ATI roll right now. Give it a few years and perhaps that will change.

Cheers,

 

[apolloa]

Let's take a look at the best laptop GPU's. Sure, the GTX 480m is faster than the ATI 5870m, but let's look at the power usage and heat

5870m runs at 50 watt
480M runs at 100 watt.

So what's your point? Since when do you think Apple are ever going to put either of those chips in any of their laptops?

Uhh, they already have spent money to develop their own software for GPU switching. They are not using NVIDIA's Optimus technology. That MacBook Pro you own? The switching is all done via software that could be translated to an ATI GPU with no effort.

Really? I don't think so, sure they developed there software for it but lets not forget all Nvidia GPU's have some hardware built into the chips to enable the graphics switching. If was simply 'software' driven then it would have been done 2 years ago. And if it's so easy why hasn't ATI launched anything itself? In fact what is stopping Dell or HP from making there own software to work with any ATI GPU?

In the UK for example, cost range depending on manufacturer.

GTX 480 costs: £349.99 - £778.06

ATI 5970 costs: £429.99 - £730.71

Some people are mad enough to think a £80 difference is rather big consider it's a massive chunk of the overall cost

 

[aiqw9182]

Really? I don't think so, sure they developed there software for it but lets not forget all Nvidia GPU's have some hardware built into the chips to enable the graphics switching. If was simply 'software' driven then it would have been done 2 years ago. And if it's so easy why hasn't ATI launched anything itself? In fact what is stopping Dell or HP from making there own software to work with any ATI GPU?:

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/inside-apples-automatic-gpu-switching.ars

Might want to do some research before you make such outlandish claims.

 

[Rithem]

I can only hope. I love ATI and AMD.