X1600 vs 2400 XT.

Discussion in 'iMac' started by airjuggernaut, Dec 20, 2007.

  1. airjuggernaut macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    #1
    I was just wondering. Which video card is better?
    I've heard that the X1600(White imacs and MBP) out performs the 2400(New iMac). Is this true? and if it is, is it because of more "mature" drivers on the X1600?
     
  2. Techguy172 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Location:
    Ontario Canada
    #2
    I think it's more powerful because of drivers but it's still a good card for games that aren't too demanding.
     
  3. MrT8064 macrumors 6502a

    MrT8064

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    I have both a 256mb X1600 and a new iMac, the iMac is much much much better!

    the macbook pro has 2gb or ram and the iMac has just 1, the iMac is still far far better,

    its possible that it is the cooling of the iMac which is better, but for games the iMac is amazing
     
  4. airjuggernaut thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    #4
    So buying a Macbook Pro with the x1600 would be a step down from my Current iMac?
     
  5. AlexisV macrumors 68000

    AlexisV

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2007
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    #5
    Better for what? Neither the x1600 and 2400 are stellar for gaming.
     
  6. airjuggernaut thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    #6
    Well, I know that, but between them, which one would be slightly better.

    I don't need to have TOP of the line.
    As long as it runs Counter Strike and WoW.
    I just want to know, which one runs those games better.
     
  7. MrT8064 macrumors 6502a

    MrT8064

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #7
    Using Battlefield 2 - the iMac is defiantly better.
     
  8. Muncher macrumors 65816

    Muncher

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #8
    Both are decent, I think. Looking them up I get conflicting results. I DO think the 2400xt may be slightly better, but it all depends on where you look. If they are equal, 2400xt is more future-proof, being the newer card. Do you really need a new computer?

    If you've got the money, get the next imac up, the one with the 2600xt. You won't be disappointed (I hope - otherwise, don't get a mac :D).
     
  9. airjuggernaut thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    #9
    Oh :p
    I'm not dissapointed with the 2400XT, its a HUGE step up from my PC.
    I was actually just considering returning my iMac and getting a Pre-Santa Rosa Used MBP, but I just wanted to know if the X1600 is decent enough.
     
  10. psonice macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2005
    #10
    I'm not so sure the 2400 would be faster than a 1600. The 1600 was a mid-range card, with reasonably good mid-range performance. The 2400 is a low-end card with low-end performance, although it is newer.

    If you really want to play games on it, an upgrade to the 2600 would be totally worth it, as it's massively faster than the 2400.
     
  11. Gabriel Cazali macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Location:
    Guatemala
    #11
    using the imac 24" alu, 2.4 with Need for speed pro street
    with all the full graphics---------------looks awesome! love it
     

Share This Page