quadro

[Dr.Pants]

Well, its not like it won't run games (since we got back on this tangent), but it would only run slightly better then the GeForce equivalent. In this case, one of the 200-series cards.... Hopefully Apple doesn't make a huge EFI file for the card so we can flash out 200-series cards

 

[d525125]

A Quadro and a 295 would definitely need external power, but it is easy to do.

Can u point me to a reference on what supplies work and how to do? Thanks

Also assume same arrangement would work for 4870 for OSX and 295 for Bootcamp?

 

[nanofrog]

Can u point me to a reference on what supplies work and how to do? Thanks

Also assume same arrangement would work for 4870 for OSX and 295 for Bootcamp?

There may be another option as to the PSU. A few companies make internal models that install in a 5.25" bay.

VisionTek has one, as do a few others.

If you decide to use an external unit, here's a How To on it).

Hope this helps.

 

[10THzMac]

Can u point me to a reference on what supplies work and how to do? Thanks

Also assume same arrangement would work for 4870 for OSX and 295 for Bootcamp?

nanofrog's suggestion is very useful. I have a completely external cheap ATX supply from my local PC store. It says HiPoint on the box and I asked for the cheapest thing that has 2 6-pin connectors. I run it with the pins shorted as per nanofrog's link.

With an eye on the future and possibly trying a 295, I have just got a ToughPower 1000W supply with several 6- and 8-pin connectors. This is totally over the top for a single card, but will run a 295 and if I build a hackintosh later it will power several cards.

The main thing, if you want a 295, is to get a supply with one of the newer 8-pin supplies. AFAIK, all the other GTX 200 series need at most 2 6-pin.

The 4870 is an official Apple Mac Pro design so should use up at most two (i.e. all) of the built in connectors - your external PSU will take care of the 295.

 

[shinchook]

Iphone does games better than the "big guys" do

I've posted here before about my issue with apple and their video card selections and would like to take this opportunity to bring it up again.

I don't understand why apple doesn't get more into the game market. I know so many people that love apple and have multiple OS X computers but still have to hold on to their Windows computer to play games. Now, I do understand that it isn't entirely Apple's fault and there is a lack of game developers willing to port games over to macs. But I was thinking, is there a possibility that they won't because of a lack of gaming hardware on Apple's part.

I do enjoy playing games on my Mac Pro. Of course I have windows installed so I can play most of the games I enjoy. The problem that I'm running into is the lack of a good mid or high end gaming video card. I have the 512 GT8800 but it just isn't cutting it. A nice 1GB high end video card would make me cream my pants. The only option I have for an upgrade is a $1800 card that isn't really made for gaming. I can build a gaming windows box for less than that. I know that I could swap my video card every time I boot into windows but I don't feel that this should be the case (plus I'm a bit lazy). All I'm saying is that for the money I spent on the computer I should be able to upgrade it effectively less than a year later to keep up with what I like to use the computer for.

The computer is great for my graphic programs and 3d apps but sometimes I want to blow off some steam and get my game on.

 

[Pressure]

I've posted here before about my issue with apple and their video card selections and would like to take this opportunity to bring it up again.

I don't understand why apple doesn't get more into the game market. I know so many people that love apple and have multiple OS X computers but still have to hold on to their Windows computer to play games. Now, I do understand that it isn't entirely Apple's fault and there is a lack of game developers willing to port games over to macs. But I was thinking, is there a possibility that they won't because of a lack of gaming hardware on Apple's part.

I do enjoy playing games on my Mac Pro. Of course I have windows installed so I can play most of the games I enjoy. The problem that I'm running into is the lack of a good mid or high end gaming video card. I have the 512 GT8800 but it just isn't cutting it. A nice 1GB high end video card would make me cream my pants. The only option I have for an upgrade is a $1800 card that isn't really made for gaming. I can build a gaming windows box for less than that. I know that I could swap my video card every time I boot into windows but I don't feel that this should be the case (plus I'm a bit lazy). All I'm saying is that for the money I spent on the computer I should be able to upgrade it effectively less than a year later to keep up with what I like to use the computer for.

The computer is great for my graphic programs and 3d apps but sometimes I want to blow off some steam and get my game on.

Or you could get the Radeon HD 4870 which is more than decent. It is the fastest graphic card ever on a Mac after all

 

[Umbongo]

I've posted here before about my issue with apple and their video card selections and would like to take this opportunity to bring it up again.

I don't understand why apple doesn't get more into the game market.

Apple offer systems that can play every game out there. The only thing that offers significant increased performance over the 4870 is multiple cards and that would require a lot of effort from Apple to cater to a tiny, tiny market.

Granted Apple could have offered a card with more memory, but most of their customers wouldn't use it and it keeps costs down for everyone.

Basically there is no real market for Apple to bother.

 

[10THzMac]

Granted Apple could have offered a card with more memory, but most of their customers wouldn't use it and it keeps costs down for everyone.

Basically there is no real market for Apple to bother.

There are a growing number of CUDA programmers who cannot use ATI cards. More importantly for the market, if Apple wants GPU acceleration to come to the masses, they need to provide more affordable options. Maybe OpenCL will use the 4870/maybe not, but there are plenty Mac Pro owners who will shell out today for a GTX-200 series NVIDIA card but never for a Quadro. I just hope it gets sorted out soon.

 

[shinchook]

There are a growing number of CUDA programmers who cannot use ATI cards. More importantly for the market, if Apple wants GPU acceleration to come to the masses, they need to provide more affordable options. Maybe OpenCL will use the 4870/maybe not, but there are plenty Mac Pro owners who will shell out today for a GTX-200 series NVIDIA card but never for a Quadro. I just hope it gets sorted out soon.

I'm with you. As I did shell out the extra money to the 512 video card because I wanted the performance, I will never pay for the Quadro. The card isn't geared towards gamers anyway and I'm not a doctor who needs to use that 3D function. Anyway, I would pay more money to get a card that is a major increase in power but I wouldn't pay for an increase that I probably wouldn't notice (aka the 512 card that apple just released).

Maybe I'm the only computer art person who likes his Macs and gaming at the same time and can't afford to buy another windows computer.

 

[10THzMac]

While I am still fuming about the non-existent Mac version of the GTX series, I have calmed down after reading this comparison of a 280 vs the PC 4800 Quadro on tomshardware:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/quadro-fx-4800,2258-10.html

It seems the performance on certain high end apps of the quadro is massively better, and there is spectacularly good support from NVIDIA, including custom problem solving. If that has all translated to the Mac the price begins to make more sense, though the absence of the 275/285 etc still does not (IMHO).

 

[Umbongo]

While I am still fuming about the non-existent Mac version of the GTX series, I have calmed down after reading this comparison of a 280 vs the PC 4800 Quadro on tomshardware:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/quadro-fx-4800,2258-10.html

It seems the performance on certain high end apps of the quadro is massively better, and there is spectacularly good support from NVIDIA, including custom problem solving. If that has all translated to the Mac the price begins to make more sense, though the absence of the 275/285 etc still does not (IMHO).

The 4800 and 280 use the same chip, but Quadro drivers are heavily optimised for other OSes. In the past they haven't been on OSX like they are for others. Now, if you want the Quadro power for Windows and just a powerful graphics card for OSX then it's a great choice. If you want it soley for OSX then it will depend on whether OSX gets such optimised drivers or not. Which seems unlikely.

 

[Topper]

Granted Apple could have offered a card with more memory

That would be a very big plus for me.
I would really love to have a 4870 1GB card or a HD 4890 or a HD 4870 X2.
Snow Leopard or 10.5.7?

 

[ArkaPro]

Quadro FX4800 OSX86 VERSION!

OK - So after a lot of research I came to the conclusion that I want to buy an Quadro FX4800 Card
Tried to find it in OSX86 HCL table - no luck..

I use mainly Premiere Pro, After effects CS4 on Vista 64bit but want to use it on my new i7 OSX86 rig that I'm installing!

Question time!

1. will it work right out of the box?
2. Do I need to ROM flash it or something?
3. If I will flash it will Leopard recognize it immediately?
4. Will I still be able to use the Card on my Vista 64 OS? (Very important!)


Also I was thinking of buying the QUADRO CX (for adobe CS4) which is the same card but with the RapiHD Encoder included.
Is it possible to run in on OSX86.
I heard that there is a MAC version too so maybe it will also be possible to hack it? if so same questions as above.

thank ppl!

also thank you aqua-mac I read a lot of your threads!