NVIDIA Geforce 9400M vs. ATI Radeon HD 2400XT?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by macstatic, Mar 5, 2009.

  1. macstatic macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    #1
    How does the NVIDIA Geforce 9400M (in the new 20" iMac) compare to the ATI Radeon HD 2400XT (which is used in the previous version 20" iMac)?
    Can it do more (especially in consideration of the upcoming Snow Leopard) or won't the average Joe feel any difference?

    I'm trying to decide on getting the new (but much more expensive, at least here) model or the previous 20" model at the old price.
     
  2. macstatic thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    #2
    Nobody?
    Strange that there aren't any benchmarks around for this as it's probably a pretty common question now that OpenCL in Snow Leopard is an issue.
     
  3. J&JPolangin macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2008
    Location:
    Thule GL @ the TOW
    #3
    ...I'm looking for the same info and its hard to find...
     
  4. nick9191 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Britain
    #4
    Hardware wise, the 9400M is better even despite being onboard, but Nvidia's Mac OS X drivers are crap compared to ATI's, so I'd bet on the 2400XT to be honest.
     
  5. NRose8989 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2008
    #5
    True, even the 2600 pro beat the 8800GT in core image apps.
     
  6. J&JPolangin macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2008
    Location:
    Thule GL @ the TOW
    #6
    ...so is the previous gen 2.4 Ghz 20" iMac worth it for $979 NIB compared to the current gen 2.66 Ghz 20" iMac at $1179 - the extra $$ would go toward 4 GB of RAM and maybe a larger HDD?
     
  7. jincongz macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2008
    #7
  8. J&JPolangin macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2008
    Location:
    Thule GL @ the TOW
    #8
    ...thanks for that link, if I read it correctly the cards really seem pretty much the same and the differences in performance between the two computers probably come from the faster CPU vs the video cards?
     
  9. jincongz macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2008
  10. opeter macrumors 65816

    opeter

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2007
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    #11
    Because 34xx series = 2400 series.

    The only difference is:

    The AMD ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3470 is a faster clocked HD 3450 and therefore also produced in 55nm and with DirectX 10.1 support (the enhancements over the HD 2400 series).
     
  11. BlizzardBomb macrumors 68030

    BlizzardBomb

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Location:
    England
    #12
    It's hard to measure directly because the new iMac has several minor improvements over the old model e.g. faster low-end processor (2.66 GHz vs. 2.4 GHz), faster RAM and higher Hard Drive density.

    That said, Macworld places the total difference at under 10% and graphical difference at 10 - 20%. So I don't think the new model will be that much better in terms of Snow Leopard. That and the drivers for Radeons are a little bit better than the GeForce drivers at the moment.
     
  12. eXan macrumors 601

    eXan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Location:
    Russia
    #13
    In most cases the 2400 is slower, but you can get the previous gen 2.66 iMac which had Radeon 2600 and it beats the cr@p out of 9400.

    But this shouldn't concern you unless you play 3D games or use Motion/Aperture/Color.
     
  13. txnoob macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
  14. trip1ex macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    #15
    Macworld shows the 9400M ahead although I think the 9400M configs have a faster cpu in them. I'm sure one won't notice much of a difference between the two though.
     

Share This Page