Sidebar Sidebar
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?

bigbeeftomatoes said:
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.
Click to expand...

Buskins said:
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
Click to expand...

I setup up dual boot for my MacBook Pro just to see how it would do with running Skyrim. It only has the integrated HD4000 graphics card, but it seems to do fine running on medium/high settings.

With that in mind, just because I have it setup for that doesn't mean I use it for that. I use an older Windows 7 desktop with an upgraded discrete graphics card to play Skyrim. It just works better, and really if you use your PC for gaming primarily, you would be better off with a custom gaming Windows PC than the iMac.
 
512mb of DDR with the exception of the highest end that starts at 1gb? You gotta be kidding! Just with that, even if you have the hottest GPU money can buy, forget running high texture games. LOL!!!
IMO the only one worth considering for the gaming crowd is the high end BTO 680MX with 2gb DDR, but that is going to cost you an arm and a leg!!!
 
Comparison of GPUs between new mac and old mac (mini, iMacs & integrated)

and

Tech comparison of the same cards.

What I see is that this is certainly a great batch of iMacs. The mac mini not having a discreet GPU anymore is more troublesome has the HD4000 is obviously laking still (next year maybe with Haswell).

Lets hope the options aren't too expensive (happy RAM is still user serviceable).
December feels so far still ^^.

Wondering though if the iMac can be mounted on other stand like the previous ones.
 
MacAlien said:
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.
Click to expand...

Good thing for soon to be 27" owners the 21" buyers will be guinea pigs!:)
 
To be honest, I'd have preferred the top end AMD HD 7970M which in tests out performed its NVIDEA counterpart in games and CAD - whilst overall the NVIDEA is viewed as a superior GPU, its price is horrific and for the iMac, the AMD would have been the more price competitive option.

Further comparisons can be found on the following link:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-GeForce-GTX-680M-vs-Radeon-HD-7970M.77110.0.html

AMD all the way I'm afraid and Apple think we are all part of the 1%, the BTO option for the 27in iMac will be horrific with both the new hybrid HDD solution and solid GPU and i7 upgrade - just hope the RAM can be upgraded.
 
chiguy20002 said:
I setup up dual boot for my MacBook Pro just to see how it would do with running Skyrim. It only has the integrated HD4000 graphics card, but it seems to do fine running on medium/high settings.

With that in mind, just because I have it setup for that doesn't mean I use it for that. I use an older Windows 7 desktop with an upgraded discrete graphics card to play Skyrim. It just works better, and really if you use your PC for gaming primarily, you would be better off with a custom gaming Windows PC than the iMac.
Click to expand...

I had the same problem and I was sick of waiting for the iMac, so I went for a high end Dell XPS 8500 tower with a radeon 7870 GPU with 2gb DDR5. Skyrim flies on this thing and it only set me back 1 grand. Have a 2011 13" MBP with a 256gb SSD for the mac platform so right now I'm a really happy camper!
 
prism said:
I had the same problem and I was sick of waiting for the iMac, so I went for a high end Dell XPS 8500 tower with a radeon 7870 GPU with 2gb DDR5. Skyrim flies on this thing and it only set me back 1 grand. Have a 2011 13" MBP with a 256gb SSD for the mac platform so right now I'm a really happy camper!
Click to expand...

I do want to upgrade the Windows 7 desktop PC. I would just get a fairly high end Windows 7 desktop PC for gaming and keep my MBP for everything else. Best of both worlds for me!
 
I am really impressed with these new iMacs... twice as thin and yet no sacrifice in processing power! The top-end iMac with the 680M will be a beast for sure. Curious about pricing though ^^
 
OK new to macs this will be my first purchase, will the base 27" model be able to run GTA, COD games of the like?
 
Torrijos said:
Comparison of GPUs between new mac and old mac (mini, iMacs & integrated)

and

Tech comparison of the same cards.

What I see is that this is certainly a great batch of iMacs. The mac mini not having a discreet GPU anymore is more troublesome has the HD4000 is obviously laking still (next year maybe with Haswell).

Lets hope the options aren't too expensive (happy RAM is still user serviceable).
December feels so far still ^^.

Wondering though if the iMac can be mounted on other stand like the previous ones.
Click to expand...

I was quite excited about the Mac Mini until I checked the new specs and noticed no discrete GPU - basically Intel HD4000 just does not cut it full stop.

With regards iMac GPU's, Apple has done us all a great disservice by moving from AMD back to NVIDEA, as you say, the NVIDEA update will knock us back much, much more than upgrading to a i7 chip, the link I provided earlier states their is a US$300 price difference between the toped AMD GPU and the NVIDEA chip - thats a huge increase in price for not much better performance - indeed, in games, the AMD outperformed the NVIDEA mobile GTX680.

So, as I've been saying for a while, Apple is now only interested in the top 1% market segment, i.e., those that purchase designer cloths and handbags.

Still, what's in vogue one day in the fashion industry soon becomes passé, its just a great shame Apple has forgotten its longterm consumer-base in favour of the 1%.

As for me, I'll forgo this latest version of the iMac and Mac Mini and wait until Haswell arrives - God knows what issues the new iMac is going to have with its LCD screens - just hope the fools screaming out for 4K LCD panel finally understand that given the trajectory of the iMac you'll never be able to fit a decent enough GPU in their to drive the pixels, never mind enable us to play games on on do CAD.

Apple: ALL FORM AND LITTLE SUBSTANCE - see Mac Mini, See iPad Mini, see iMac!!!!!!!
 
bugbear99 said:
640m+22% = 650m
650m+11% = 660m
660m+22% = 6970m (the current top model)
680m is about 6970x2

its a terrible mistake
Click to expand...

Based on the list above how would they compare to the 9400m in my late 2009 iMac. Thinking of upgrading it before the AppleCare runs out.
 
sammyQc said:
The BTO GeForce GTX 680MX is not too shabby giving the benchmark of the 680M, I guess MX will have higher mhz.
Review of this high-end GPU for mobile gaming:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5914/nvidia-geforce-gtx-680m-kepler-gk104-goes-mobile
Click to expand...

Its a great GPU actually. There are only two issues. 1) the native resolution on the 27" will kill frame rates, best to play at 1080p 2) By the time the 27" lands on peoples desks, the 700 series Kepler II GPUs will be only 4 or 5 months away.
 
bobright said:
OK new to macs this will be my first purchase, will the base 27" model be able to run GTA, COD games of the like?
Click to expand...

Simplistically speaking, the base 27" (660M, 512KB) will be able to run them at medium settings, the top 27" (675MX, 1GB) will be able to run them at high settings, and if you built-to-order the best available (680MX, 2GB) you will be able to run them at ultra settings.
 
flopticalcube said:
Its a great GPU actually. There are only two issues. 1) the native resolution on the 27" will kill frame rates, best to play at 1080p 2) By the time the 27" lands on peoples desks, the 700 series Kepler II GPUs will be only 4 or 5 months away.
Click to expand...

Better off just dialling down the settings if needed. Playing at a non-native resolution will always look worse.

FWIW though, the 680MX will be able to handle 1440p with moderate AA settings (you can get away with less as 27" 1440p is relatively high DPI) and play any modern game with no problems. Benchmarks are showing 90FPS+ at 900p in BF3 with this card on lesser CPUs.
 
forty2j said:
Simplistically speaking, the base 27" (660M, 512KB) will be able to run them at medium settings, the top 27" (675MX, 1GB) will be able to run them at high settings, and if you built-to-order the best available (680MX, 2GB) you will be able to run them at ultra settings.
Click to expand...

Yeah but dont forget the puny GDDR will choke any potential on the 660m and even the 675mx. Realistically, its the highest end BTO 680MX that will really impress.
 
forty2j said:
Simplistically speaking, the base 27" (660M, 512KB) will be able to run them at medium settings, the top 27" (675MX, 1GB) will be able to run them at high settings, and if you built-to-order the best available (680MX, 2GB) you will be able to run them at ultra settings.
Click to expand...
I am not into gaming a whole lot but might occasionally want to play one on the iMac, will they look decent at medium settings? Is it different if the game is something like Angry Birds would those run at full settings?
 
flopticalcube said:
Apple has a history of calling a GPU one thing when, in fact, it is something else. Its probably an OC'd 680M in this case but it could be an OC'd 675MX.
Click to expand...

These cards are proper Kepler GPUs, the only drawback is that the 700m series are not far away from being released.
 
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