Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What is the EXACT graphic cards used in the new imac?
- Thread starter gagaliya
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
what on earth is a 680MX?
at least it's a gtx...if the performance is on par with the standard gtx 680m i will be happy.
Judging by Nvidea's previous MX series graphics cards, it will be better than the 680m (not necessarily by a whole lot). I don't know for sure though, because there is no info.
what on earth is a 680MX?
at least it's a gtx...if the performance is on par with the standard gtx 680m i will be happy.
Seems to be a new unreleased chip. According to this thread:
http://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?23782-Coming-Soon-G75VX
The 750mX should be around 17% faster than 750m. So maybe were getting a faster chip than the 680m!!!
Did a quick notebookreview look-up. Compared ultra score for StarCraft II:
6970m = 63 fps
680m = 84 fps
Apple claims the 680mx is about 60% faster then the 6970m, so the 680mx should offer about 20% more performance over the 680m.
6970m = 63 fps
680m = 84 fps
Apple claims the 680mx is about 60% faster then the 6970m, so the 680mx should offer about 20% more performance over the 680m.
Would the higher end card be able to run a game like Skyrim well? I'm not worried about being able to play many games, but it'd be nice to know whether upgrading is worth it or not.
Doesn't spit on me, since I was planning on maxing out the GPU on the 27" if they offered around a 680M
The 6970M is STILL better than all of the other All-In-Ones out there, even ones that were released in Spring 2012. Besides, wasn't the 6970M the 27" high-end option? I thought the 21's came with something less in 2011.
Just bugger off. Apple has always used "crappy" cards in there "low-end"
----------
I'm guessing 150-200. But for that money you might be getting a under clocked 680.
I'm just excited for the GTX 680MX if it's anything like the other MX series (it should also be the fastest Nvidia notebook GPU).
"660m+22% = 6970m (the current top model)"
I was mostly referring to this line. Overall a disappointment though IMO. Like I said, the iMac is a product for style freaks with fat wallets anyway. It's always been a disappointment, at least without a headless (and competent) mid-level desktop option.
While I don't know much about the cheapest model's graphic card, the next one up will run a game like WoW, SC2 and such pretty well. It's just that low end model that makes me /facepalm since the 650M should've been the starting chip imo. Will have to wait to see the benchmarks on these iMacs vs. other computers. Heating seems like it'll be a really bad issue as well. Maybe there's something about the new iMacs that'll prevent this...which Apple's never addressed to speak of in the past with their desktops.
I love how so many people justify this. As if a DESKTOP COMPUTER in the 21st century shouldn't be able to play games at high FPS.
According to notebookcheck, all the new graphics chips are faster than those in 2011 iMacs.
For the 21 models Gt640m and Gt650m are faster than last year's radeon 6750m and 6770m.
Also for the 27 models Gtx 660m is faster than radeon 6770m and Gtx675mx and 680mx are faster than radeon 6970 with 1 or 2 gb memory.
I am leaning towards the 27 model with 675 card , i5. Still waiting for the price of the storage options...
For the 21 models Gt640m and Gt650m are faster than last year's radeon 6750m and 6770m.
Also for the 27 models Gtx 660m is faster than radeon 6770m and Gtx675mx and 680mx are faster than radeon 6970 with 1 or 2 gb memory.
I am leaning towards the 27 model with 675 card , i5. Still waiting for the price of the storage options...
GPU options are horrible on the standard models.
Why 5400 rpm drives on the 21.5 inchers? Why does the base 27 incher with the gtx 660m only have 512 MB Vram? On a 1400p display? They are deliberately shafting the consumer here as 512 MB is simply not enough for the display or the gpu. Let alone the 21.5 inch models. Hell, even the 675mx does not have enough vram (needs more than 1 GB, its about as fast as the 560 TI--which has major problems in games like skyrim)
Someone please tell me what the point of making a desktop so thin is?
Plus we dont know if the imac gpu's will be underclocked. The 680m uses more power than the 6970m and the computer is thinner as well.
Why 5400 rpm drives on the 21.5 inchers? Why does the base 27 incher with the gtx 660m only have 512 MB Vram? On a 1400p display? They are deliberately shafting the consumer here as 512 MB is simply not enough for the display or the gpu. Let alone the 21.5 inch models. Hell, even the 675mx does not have enough vram (needs more than 1 GB, its about as fast as the 560 TI--which has major problems in games like skyrim)
Someone please tell me what the point of making a desktop so thin is?
Plus we dont know if the imac gpu's will be underclocked. The 680m uses more power than the 6970m and the computer is thinner as well.
i just don't use it for that. I work on it. Not justifying it. I never gamed on a Mac. And i'm working on macs for over 15 years now. They just don't focus on pc games. At all. It's a bit better now, but if you really like pc gaming, you are SOOOOO much better off with a custom made pc.
It's not the iMac. It's the AIO concept you should be criticising. I guess I'm one of those freaks ... just like many others.
Like I said, without a competent (not Mac Mini) headless mid-level desktop option, I think it's silly.
----------
Interesting, since they don't even make computers for people like you anymore, people that "work" on their machines. They make family and personal devices now. Time for them to target their real audience: everyone.
I really like my MacBook Pro. I can use it to dual boot into Windows and do some gaming. Even though I have set that up, I don't find myself booting into Windows to do so. I use my MacBook Pro for everything but gaming.
Really, if you are into gaming you would definitely be better off with a custom Windows gaming PC, especially if that is what you will primarily be using it for. It doe not make any sense to get an iMac for gaming (or Mac mini or MacBook), because that is not what it is designed for, it seems.
Am I the only one thinking a game like Skyrim + the new thinness of the iMac = furnace. Put some dough behind the screen, play for an hour, then eat the freshly baked bread you've just made
Lol. Friend of mine said the same earlier when it was announced. Pondering how long it'll be before you shoot something on the screen then watch your computer itself blow up instead.