Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Probability of Mac Pro Video Card refresh?

slughead said:
the X1900 XT has been discontinued by ATI because it's a POS
Click to expand...

It was anything but a POS. It's the ATI HD range that was an utter disaster. It got raped as soon as AA/AF was enabled when it was trying to compete with the 8800's.

flappo said:
http://www.nvidia.com/page/8800_tech_specs.html

High Speed Interfaces
: Designed for PCI Express® x16

sorted
Click to expand...



October or November the NVIDIA 9800GTX's are coming!

Will be twice as powerful as a 8800Ultra

The card will cost:
-The 9800GTX for 549$>649$
-The 9800GTS for 399$>449$


November release date

http://www.xbitlabs.com/discussion/3953.html

- 65nm process technology at TSMC.
- Over one billion transistors.
- Second Generation Unified Shader Architecture.
- Double precsion support (FP64).
- GPGPU native.
- Over one TeraFLOPS of shader processing power.
- MADD+ADD configuration for the shader untis (2+1 FLOPS=3 FLOPS per ALU)
- Fully Scalar design.
- 512-bit memory interface.
- 1024MB GDDR4 graphics memory.
- DirectX 10.1 support.
- OpenGL 3.0 Support.
- eDRAM die for "FREE 4xAA".
- built in Audio Chip.
- built in tesselation unit (in the graphics core"
- Improved AA and AF quality levels
Click to expand...

How accurate that is, I do not know. Knowing NVIDIA they'll want a card out for before Christmas.



Also: PCI Express 3.0 specifications detailed

"We're barely starting to get our hands on motherboards with PCI-Express 2.0 and already the PCI-SIG (Special Interest Group) has announced that the specifications of PCIe 3.0 will see the standard reach a bit rate of 8GT/s.

Through careful analysis of the feasibility of scaling the PCIe interconnect bandwidth, the PCI-SIG has come to the conclusion that 8GT/s can be manufactured in mainstream silicon process technology, and can be deployed with existing low-cost materials and infrastructure, while maintaining full mechanical compatibility and with negligible impact to the PCIe protocol stack.

Although not numerically double the current 5GT/s of PCI-Express 2.0, the 8GT/s bit rate represents a doubling of the delivered bandwidth by removing the requirement for the 8b/10b encoding scheme supported in prior versions of PCIe architecture, which imposed a 20 percent overhead on the raw bit rate.

With bit rate out of the way PCI-SIG is saying that there is still a lot more to do and that the final PCI-Express 3.0 specifications will be ready by late 2009 with boards supporting it planned to arrive in 2010. Back to the 'old' 2.0 folks."
Click to expand...

http://www.tcmagazine.info/comments.php?shownews=15682&catid=6
http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.p...pci_express_30_bit_rate_for_products_in_2010/
 
Topper said:
How can Apple make a professional computer and put such crappy cards in it?!😡
Click to expand...

Maximize profit by screwing the customer, of course.

And if you don't believe me, I've got a 500 gig hard drive to sell you at the bargain price of $320.00
 
Topper said:
That really is bad and hard to believe.
How can Apple make a professional computer and put such crappy cards in it?!😡
Click to expand...

I think it's important to point out here that the Mac Pro you're complaining about doesn't need a better video card for virtually any other type of application...so if you're buying it solely to play Prey or Doom 3 then yes, it's a disappointing spec - get the X1900XT. Otherwise it's a fantastic machine.

As you pointed out it's a "professional computer", not a gaming PC. Of course, With the X1900XT it performs better than most gaming PCs.
 
vicious7 said:
I am definitely one of many who are disappointed that the MP was not updated today. I told my guys to suffer through another couple of months while we wait for the new tech to be released. I need 4 of these buggers...🙁
Click to expand...

Do "your guys" know "my guys" cuz "their guys" want to kick "those guys" all over 49th street..... LOL You sound like you run a sweat shop buddy.. give us all a break and try to hold off on buying the 4 you need.. I'm sure Madison Ave will wait for you.. twit.
 
Lord Blackadder said:
I think it's important to point out here that the Mac Pro you're complaining about doesn't need a better video card for virtually any other type of application.
Click to expand...

I disagree with you on that.
I do a lot of batch HD video editing with Compressor using Sheer and 8-bit and 10-bit uncompressed codecs.
If I had to rely on the Mac Pro's GeForce 7300 GT, I'd have to wait all day and night for it to finish the job.
My G5's X800 XT card is 3 times (2.99 to be exact) more powerful than the 7300 GT.
The X1900 XT is better (1.3 times more powerful than my X800 XT) but still nothing to write home about.
IMHO, The Mac Pro is indeed a fantastic machine but with poor video cards.
Even the quadro card should be updated.
 
newportmac said:
Do "your guys" know "my guys" cuz "their guys" want to kick "those guys" all over 49th street..... LOL You sound like you run a sweat shop buddy.. give us all a break and try to hold off on buying the 4 you need.. I'm sure Madison Ave will wait for you.. twit.
Click to expand...

Never argue with an idiot. They'll just bring you down to their level and then beat you with experience.
 
Topper said:
I disagree with you on that.
Click to expand...

I was hoping you weren't a video editor when I posted that...😱

You're absolutely correct, but the Mac Pro was designed for you. Obviously the base GPU is not suitable but there are two BTO cards available that are.

On the other hand, the "gamer" crowd doesn't want to pay what the Mac Pro costs, and 3D gaming as a hobby implies regular and frequent updates to hardware to squeeze that last handful of FPS out of a game.

Apple does a good job providing professionals with a computer, but are not really interested in a specialized gaming machine that they would have to update at least twice per year to keep up with the rest of the gaming industry.

BTW, I also agree that it's time to update the Quadro - and offer one of the bigger FireGL cards as well.
 
Lord Blackadder said:
Obviously the base GPU is not suitable but there are two BTO cards available that are.
Click to expand...

My G5 has died on me a couple times (logic board) so right then and there I want to go out and get a Mac Pro with the X1900 XT.
But I'm going to wait for the next generation Mac Pro to see what that brings.
 
Probably not a bad idea - I would wait till the next crop of GPUs arrive (shouldn't be too long) unless you really need a new machine pronto.
 
vohdoun said:
It was anything but a POS. It's the ATI HD range that was an utter disaster. It got raped as soon as AA/AF was enabled when it was trying to compete with the 8800's.





October or November the NVIDIA 9800GTX's are coming!



How accurate that is, I do not know. Knowing NVIDIA they'll want a card out for before Christmas.



Also: PCI Express 3.0 specifications detailed



http://www.tcmagazine.info/comments.php?shownews=15682&catid=6
http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.p...pci_express_30_bit_rate_for_products_in_2010/
Click to expand...




If NVIDIA are about ready to release a new powerful card,then you can almost guarantee Apple will put the previous version wihich PCs have moved on from in the Mac Pros.....🙄...really annoys me.


I want a decent card which can handle nice fast Open gl screen re draw when modelling and texturing,but not a highest end Quadro which costs the earth and under perfoms compared to the PC version.


There is no way your average PC gamer etc is going to buy a Mac until they get the choice of the cards at the same time as everyone else or close to.



I really dont think Apple are going to change this policy either as they do the same thing every year,year after year.
 
Mac Kiwi said:
<snip>

I really dont think Apple are going to change this policy either as they do the same thing every year,year after year.
Click to expand...

Why do you think that is? I'm new to Apple so I'm trying to understand the company's motivations when it comes to their products. I would think, coming from a business perspective, that they would want to maintain the consumer's perception of Apple providing top-of-the-line products to professionals. That would, arguably, include the latest and greatest in new tech and not just stunning design.

I'm not saying that Apple's pro machines are horribly deficient, but there seems to be a consensus that it could/should be better.
 
vicious7 said:
Why do you think that is? I'm new to Apple so I'm trying to understand the company's motivations when it comes to their products. I would think, coming from a business perspective, that they would want to maintain the consumer's perception of Apple providing top-of-the-line products to professionals. That would, arguably, include the latest and greatest in new tech and not just stunning design.

I'm not saying that Apple's pro machines are horribly deficient, but there seems to be a consensus that it could/should be better.
Click to expand...


I think the cards are where they make quite some profit,but theres also the drivers which have to be coded to work on Macs,and I am guessing but I think,maybe graphics cards for Apple equals a bit of a money pit,if they were to include more up to date top of the line cards.


My only beef with the Mac Pros is the graphics cards as I know the model coming should be dual quad across the board with new internals.
 
Mac Kiwi said:
I know the model coming should be dual quad across the board with new internals.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that leave a considerable gap between the iMac and Mac Pro? Also, if they're trying to appeal to gamers (at all), I'd think that a low-end Mac Pro with great graphics would be better than an octo-core with great graphics... and more in the consumer's price-frame.
 
termina3 said:
Wouldn't that leave a considerable gap between the iMac and Mac Pro? Also, if they're trying to appeal to gamers (at all), I'd think that a low-end Mac Pro with great graphics would be better than an octo-core with great graphics... and more in the consumer's price-frame.
Click to expand...

I don't think Apples intention is to appeal to gamers. They could have a quad core low end option for the Mac Pro. The Mac Pro as a gaming machine is rather mediocre regardless of graphics due to games no taking advantage of multiple core and the memory latency.

I also think Apple would be looking to make a gap in their product lines. Look at the MB and MBP right now. And the Mini and iMac. They are rather different products. Apple loves to make sure their lines are differentiated.
 
suneohair said:
I don't think Apples intention is to appeal to gamers.
Click to expand...

Am I the only one who payed attention to the WWDC 2007 keynote? Steve Jobs, an EA executive, and John Carmack (ID Software) all talked about gaming on a Mac and their recommitment to Mac Gaming. Steve Jobs said he wanted to appeal to gamers, if this is true he needs to provide recent (e.g. not two year old GPUs) to Macs.

Here's an excerpt from the transcript from WWDC 2007:
10:10AM - "Next up, got some great news about games: EA, number one publisher of games, is coming back to Mac in a BIG way." Bing Gordon, CCO and co-founder of EA is on stage. "Thank you Steve! I have two teenage daughters... they live on a MacBook. Our CTO lives on a Mac. We're seeing technologies move to Mac... what do they all want (in addition to a new Cinema display?)" Laughter. "They want to see games... we're going to rectify that." New games for Mac: C&C3, Battlefield 2142, NFS Carbon, and in July, Harry Potter (Phoenix). "He needs a wand, unlike Steve Jobs who just uses his imagination." Demo of Harry Potter on a Mac. Looks pretty good!

10:12AM - "Steve is going to wave his hand and candles will float in this room..." Laughter. Starting in August when the new sports year begins they're launching Madden and Tiger Woods 08. "Steve, keep up the wizardry. Thanks so much."

10:13AM - Steve's back on. "So that's great news from EA. We've also got some intriguing news..." iD software logo comes up. John Carmack is premiering something here!

10:14AM - "So the last couple of years at iD we've been working in secrecy on next-gen tech and a game for it... this is the first time we're showing anything we've done on it publicly." iD Tech 5... "What we've got here is the entire world with unique textures, 20GB of textures covering this track. They can go in and look at the world and, say, change the color of the mountaintop, or carve their name into the rock. They can change as much as they want on surfaces with no impact on the game."

10:16AM - "We're going to be showing on a Mac, PC, PS3, and Xbox at E3, we'll have another Mac announcement at E3." That was it? It was neat, but not really an "announcement."​
(source: http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/11/steve-jobs-live-from-wwdc-2007/)

Then there's this article asking WTf happened: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2145462,00.asp

So my question to Apple: "if you're newly recomitted to Mac Gaming, how are we going to play them on antiquated video cards?"
 
cgc said:
So my question to Apple: "if you're newly recomitted to Mac Gaming, how are we going to play them on antiquated video cards?"
Click to expand...

IMO, if Apple were really committed to games, they would make a bto iMac edition a game machine.
But look at the latest iMacs. Those cards are completely worthless for gaming.
That's why most Mac gamers either look to the Mac Pro with it's X1900 XT or
they have a PC on the side.
Obviously the Mac Pro with a X1900 XT is not a gaming machine either.
At the very least Apple could put a high-end consumer card in the Mac Pro.
And I think the next generation Mac Pro may have a high-end consumer video card but I've been disappointed before and I am ready to be disappointed again.
My conclusion is Apple is not committed to gaming.
 
Access to better GPUs is very important, but developing a better game library on the Mac is even more critical. In order for the Mac to truly become a viable competitor to Windows in the PC gaming world Apple needs to find a way to double or triple the number of top titles released for OS X each year. Those numbers can't be handled by the existing porting houses, so the Apple needs to get more developers committed to OS X releases.
 
I think the iMac update and the Mac Mini "refresh" *cough* joke *cough* are clear as to Apples intentions.

The EA and id thing is relevant for sure. But Apple never said "We are going to put the fastest cards in our machines so you can play games at insane resolutions!" They simply said games are coming from these folks.

Apple is not going for gamers. Is it a selling point? Oh yeah, but they are not putting cards in these machines to provide an awesome gaming experience. From what is available on the Mac platform now makes that quite evident.
 
suneohair said:
Apple is not going for gamers. Is it a selling point? Oh yeah, but they are not putting cards in these machines to provide an awesome gaming experience. From what is available on the Mac platform now makes that quite evident.
Click to expand...

I was thinking that six years ago, and as much as I hate to say this, give it time: Apple has had all their attention focused on the Intel transition and Leopard over the past couple years (not to mention the iPhone!). I think the next couple years will see an increase of attention to gaming by Apple. With any luck, we will see more games released each year and *maybe* some hardware that focuses more on game performance.
 
Lord Blackadder said:
Access to better GPUs is very important, but developing a better game library on the Mac is even more critical. In order for the Mac to truly become a viable competitor to Windows in the PC gaming world Apple needs to find a way to double or triple the number of top titles released for OS X each year. Those numbers can't be handled by the existing porting houses, so the Apple needs to get more developers committed to OS X releases.
Click to expand...

To be truthful, if I were a game publisher I wouldn't waste my time coding a game to Mac OS X.
Why? There is no Mac computer that is dedicated to games.
The Mac Pro is close but (as you say) it is not intended to be a gaming computer.
It's not a big deal to me as I play one game and one game only.

The game that I play they are trying to code to multi-core computers but it is a lot more difficult than people realize.
I was just reading about the MS staff that are working on Microsoft Flight Simulator, they too are having a rough time trying to code to multi-core via Vista.

Anyway, I'll use the Mac Pro for video and image editing and 3d rendering and (whispering) I'll use it for my one game.

Lord Blackadder said:
I was thinking that six years ago, and as much as I hate to say this, give it time: Apple has had all their attention focused on the Intel transition and Leopard over the past couple years (not to mention the iPhone!). I think the next couple years will see an increase of attention to gaming by Apple. With any luck, we will see more games released each year and *maybe* some hardware that focuses more on game performance.
Click to expand...

I think there are enough Mac users interested in gaming to make it worth while.
Which kind of contradicts what I say above. My excuse is I am tired.
There are quite a few Mac users that have PCs just for gaming.
And Apple's computer market share is rising so again more gamers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back