What is the desktop equivalent of the iMacs 750m

[MartinAppleGuy]

What is the desktop equivalent to the GT 750m w/ 1GB of GDDR5 VRAM? Almost every comparison site uses the GDDR3 version so I'm finding it had to tell.

And could you answer with the Nvidia desktop GPU. I read that the GDDR5 750m is almost on par with a 670m, but what about a desktop GPU?

 

[flopticalcube]

What is the desktop equivalent to the GT 750m w/ 1GB of GDDR5 VRAM? Almost every comparison site uses the GDDR3 version so I'm finding it had to tell.

And could you answer with the Nvidia desktop GPU. I read that the GDDR5 750m is almost on par with a 670m, but what about a desktop GPU?

Below a 550ti. http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-750M.90245.0.html

 

[yjchua95]

What is the desktop equivalent to the GT 750m w/ 1GB of GDDR5 VRAM? Almost every comparison site uses the GDDR3 version so I'm finding it had to tell.

And could you answer with the Nvidia desktop GPU. I read that the GDDR5 750m is almost on par with a 670m, but what about a desktop GPU?

It's better than a GTX660M and slightly below the GT755M.

Both are available in GDDR5 flavors only.

I normally use the 755M's results and reduce the figures by around 5%

 

[Rud3Bwoy]

how about a 780m 4gb?

 

[flopticalcube]

how about a 780m 4gb?

Its a higher clocked 680MX so somewhere just below a 660 Ti.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-780M.88993.0.html

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

Below a 550ti. http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-750M.90245.0.html

They use the DDR3 version though. I'm talking about the GDDR5 version the iMac has. Hardly any sites use the GDDR5 version.

 

[yjchua95]

They use the DDR3 version though. I'm talking about the GDDR5 version the iMac has. Hardly any sites use the GDDR5 version.

Use the GT 755M's benchmarks and reduce it by around 5%.

The 755M is GDDR5-only.

The 750M and 755M (both GDDR5) are almost identical.

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

Use the GT 755M's benchmarks and reduce it by around 5%.

The 755M is GDDR5-only.

The 750M and 755M (both GDDR5) are almost identical.

So what would the 755m's desktop equivalent be?

 

[yjchua95]

So what would the 755m's desktop equivalent be?

The GeForce GTX 460 768MB, or Radeon R7 250.

Source - notebookcheck

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

The GeForce GTX 460 768MB, or Radeon R7 250.

Source - notebookcheck

I still feel that it would outperform when it real world tests (gaming fps)...

My guess would be just bellow a GTX 750/650.

 

[yjchua95]

I still feel that it would outperform when it real world tests (gaming fps)...

My guess would be just bellow a GTX 750/650.

I doubt that.

The R7 250 is a low-end GDDR5 desktop card, bringing it on par with mid-range notebook GPUs like the GT 755M.

Look up Notebookcheck's statement on the R7 250.

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

I doubt that.

The R7 250 is a low-end GDDR5 desktop card, bringing it on par with mid-range notebook GPUs like the GT 755M.

Look up Notebookcheck's statement on the R7 250.

I only said what I said above because I am amazed at how well the 750m holds up. It's no 780m, but playing X-Plane 10 at 1080p with 4X AA, 4X AF, textures at very high or extreme, every box checked apart from HDR, I achieve a low of 45fps and a high of around 90fps (not including those moments where you are up in the sky at cruising alt. and you get over 150fps).

 

[flopticalcube]

I still feel that it would outperform when it real world tests (gaming fps)...

My guess would be just bellow a GTX 750/650.

Look at other comparison sites like GPUboss and you will see that the Mac version of the 750M is neck and neck with the 550 Ti.

 

[mikeo007]

According to this chart, about the same neighbourhood as the GTS 450. I didn't realize that mobile cards were this weak; I always assumed they were similar in performance to their desktop namesakes. In reality, they're more comparable to a mid-range desktop card from ~4 years ago.

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

According to this chart, about the same neighbourhood as the GTS 450. I didn't realize that mobile cards were this weak; I always assumed they were similar in performance to their desktop namesakes. In reality, they're more comparable to a mid-range desktop card from ~4 years ago.

That is for the DDR3 version. The GDDR5 version in all Macs is much faster. As someone above said, it is better to use the 755m for reference as they are really identical and the 755m only comes in GDDR5.

 

[flopticalcube]

According to this chart, about the same neighbourhood as the GTS 450. I didn't realize that mobile cards were this weak; I always assumed they were similar in performance to their desktop namesakes. In reality, they're more comparable to a mid-range desktop card from ~4 years ago.

They are all based off desktop chips these days with the voltage lowered and the clocks dropped. A 770M, for example, is the same chip used in the 660 desktop (GK106/960 cores) just lower speed. Mobile variants compensate in a small way by usually having more VRAM.

 

[mikeo007]

That is for the DDR3 version. The GDDR5 version in all Macs is much faster. As someone above said, it is better to use the 755m for reference as they are really identical and the 755m only comes in GDDR5.

Fair enough, but still not much better. The 755 is right in line with the 5770 which I currently have in my 4 year old "gaming" PC. Still disappointingly weak (for me anyway) considering that I thought these gpus performed closer to their desktop counterparts.

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

Fair enough, but still not much better. The 755 is right in line with the 5770 which I currently have in my 4 year old "gaming" PC. Still disappointingly weak (for me anyway) considering that I thought these gpus performed closer to their desktop counterparts.

Well could you try the X-Plane demo and see if it gets the same fps. I will give you the settings.

 

[mikeo007]

Well could you try the X-Plane demo and see if it gets the same fps. I will give you the settings.

Sure, what settings should I use?

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

Sure, what settings should I use?

Very high texture detail, 1080p, 4X AA, 4X AF, traffic set to Chicago , shadows set to overlay, all boxes ticked apart from show dear and birds on nice days and HDR. Set trees to lots and set building to lots. I get around 45fps when sitting in the 3D cockpit of the 747 at Seattle International Airport during the day with clouds set to 50%.

 

[simsaladimbamba]

I am currently downloading the latest X-Plane demo and am wondering why the installer makes the Menu Bar disappear. Does anyone know?


I just wanted to try it and give some test results for the GTX 670 I have in my Hackintosh.

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

I am currently downloading the latest X-Plane demo and am wondering why the installer makes the Menu Bar disappear. Does anyone know?


I just wanted to try it and give some test results for the GTX 670 I have in my Hackintosh.

Thats normal, if you go to the settings and tick the box next to resolution when it is installed, it will run full screen.

 

[simsaladimbamba]

These are my results:

Settings

CPU and GPU usage

Two Screenshots, first standard airport probably, second chosen upon restart of the application

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

These are my results:

Settings

Image​

CPU and GPU usage

Image​

Two Screenshots, first standard airport probably, second chosen upon restart of the application

Image​

Image​

Right, so you are getting slightly lower FPS than my 750m (you are using the 2.5d cockpit though). Try the same config in a 747 (found in the mega planes folder I believe) then hover your mouse to get the top bar up during gameplay, and click view, then 3D cockpit. Then go to display and set the Lateral Field of View to around 0.850. Tell me what you get then. I get 45 when sitting on the runway in these settings.

Is this a driver issue for the GTX 670 in OS X? What is your CPU/RAM config?

 

[simsaladimbamba]

Is this a driver issue for the GTX 670 in OS X? What is your CPU/RAM config?

I don't know, if it is a driver issue, but I have the i7 3770K quad core CPU and 32 GB RAM.