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.
2008 iMac 2600 vs. 8800....?!?!?!
- Thread starter ww3proggy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree completely. The 8800 should then beat the 2600 in the Apple app video encoding but whether it will do so by the double performance advantage it has in Windows gaming remains entirely to be seen.
As you mentioned, it also remains to be seen when/if these driver updates will occur. It took Apple 3 months to issue the GPU firmware updates for the ATI HD2600 XTs in the mid-2007 iMacs to address very widespread freezing problems and that was obviously a far more critical situation.
There are no guarantees this will be "fixed" in the 10.5.3 update or even any evidence to that effect. Anything can happen but I would not hold your breath.
Would this update be free?
I'm a relative Mac noobie though I've used them at college computer rooms.
Incremental OS updates like 10.5.2 to 10.5.3 are free.
It's when that first or second digit changes (and the code name - like Tiger to Leopard) that you have to fork over the cash again.
Why don't you add something valuable then??
Or you just wanna preach too now?
Besides a valid point is a valid point. If you don't want to hear it than what's your point in being here?? Carebearing??
Now you need to quote yourself to feel better?
You read a thread with valid points and then you see people posting same stupid stuff all over and over again you start to loose sympathy as they prove they just come here to whine instead of even try to understand what's the fuss all about.
I don't need people to like me. As far as I am right is all I need as in the end it's not me who's unhappy with it's iMac.
If you just like to be unhappy then be my guest but make sure you don't drag others to the bottom with your imaginary theories.
Mass confusion sucks as people suffer cause of missinformation. If you want to be creditable - post facts. So simple.
It looks like the list of issues addressed in the 10.5.3 update has been released... I haven't really gotten the chance to scan it yet, but I'm sure it will shed some light for those concerned about a graphics update.
https://www.macrumors.com/c.php?u=http://apcmag.com/os_x_1053_about_to_hit.htm&t=1211901601
https://www.macrumors.com/c.php?u=http://apcmag.com/os_x_1053_about_to_hit.htm&t=1211901601
hi to everyone,
this is my first post in this forum - but i am reading it since a couple of weeks...i am thinking about bying a 24" imac in the next days. i am from germany ... so please take that into account while reading my posts ... english ist not my mother-language.. i have to say sorry if it's not as perfect as yours ...
so .. i want to share my experience concerning the graphic cards "8800 and2600" ....
i have read the benchmarks and i was wondering about the fact, that the 2600 outperforms the 8800 for example in iMovie so much ...
it is not only a small gap ... not a thing you can accept (today)...
i thought that the testers made some mistakes or it was a poor machine ... thats the reason why i tried it by my own .. and thats what i want to share with you ...
yesterday i was in chicago (today back in germany)and i had the chance to play with the 2.8 and the 3.06 machine ... they were located one to each other ... perfect for some personal "benchmarks"....
at first: VanNess is absolutely right (he -by the way- made the best and most helpful posts in this thread ... and one more "by the way": D4F made the worst ... evertime i read his posts, i am thinking about 2 things: 1. how old is he? 2. why is there no mod out here who can "fix" this D4F-bug ... and its for sure a bug not a feature ;-) ... sorry to say that - but his posts kill every serious discussion about real facts - in a childish way)
in fact the imac with the 2600er ATI is much smoother than the 8800 ... try it while using widgets or the magnetizing function of the dock ... you really can see a difference ... also while opening the documents from the dock ... its not as rough as on the 8800 imac.
the next thing i tried:
i opened (as the only application) imovie on both machines ... created a new project on both .. and then i started simultanually to import a movie with high res. the same file, both from the HDD. it was impressive ... i showed it to the apple staff and they were wondering, too .... i had no stopwatch with me, but i checked it on my clock and lets say +- a few seconds ... the 2600 with the 2.8GHz was nearly two times faster ... not only a few seconds ... not only one minute .. much faster ... unbelievable.
also while creating the thumbnails (not displaying them - only creating) ... the 2600 nearly doubles the speed of the process... also you could read it (time remaining:4 minutes ... in comparison to 1 to 2 minutes on the 2600 ... finally more 2 minutes not only 1 as sometimes predicted ... but: really fast)
so .. in fact .. the benchmarks made before were true ... there was no mistake or something other ...
only one time i recognized the 8800 outperforming the 2600 was in idvd .. i created a project with the rotating thing in it .. i dropped the same high res video to the rotating part .. and with the 2600 it was not really fluently while rotating with the video in it ... the 8800 was better but also not really fluently ... but you can see a difference between both machines ...
so my result:
i think the 2600er is a much better (today) all-in-one solution which makes much more fun for standard users ... except when you are a gamer ...
the 8800er is for true the better and more powerful hardware ... but not with the current drivers ... and who knows if it's only the driver for the card ... in my opinion the difference was too big to be solved by drivers only ... but its a kind of hope and crossing fingers ... but no one really knows ...
sorry once again for my bad english
but i only want to share my experience with you and to bring this discussion back to a helpful level ... like VanNess tried ... hopefully not destroyed again by Mr. childish I-know-everything-better ;-)
this is my first post in this forum - but i am reading it since a couple of weeks...i am thinking about bying a 24" imac in the next days. i am from germany ... so please take that into account while reading my posts ... english ist not my mother-language.. i have to say sorry if it's not as perfect as yours ...
so .. i want to share my experience concerning the graphic cards "8800 and2600" ....
i have read the benchmarks and i was wondering about the fact, that the 2600 outperforms the 8800 for example in iMovie so much ...
it is not only a small gap ... not a thing you can accept (today)...
i thought that the testers made some mistakes or it was a poor machine ... thats the reason why i tried it by my own .. and thats what i want to share with you ...
yesterday i was in chicago (today back in germany)and i had the chance to play with the 2.8 and the 3.06 machine ... they were located one to each other ... perfect for some personal "benchmarks"....
at first: VanNess is absolutely right (he -by the way- made the best and most helpful posts in this thread ... and one more "by the way": D4F made the worst ... evertime i read his posts, i am thinking about 2 things: 1. how old is he? 2. why is there no mod out here who can "fix" this D4F-bug ... and its for sure a bug not a feature ;-) ... sorry to say that - but his posts kill every serious discussion about real facts - in a childish way)
in fact the imac with the 2600er ATI is much smoother than the 8800 ... try it while using widgets or the magnetizing function of the dock ... you really can see a difference ... also while opening the documents from the dock ... its not as rough as on the 8800 imac.
the next thing i tried:
i opened (as the only application) imovie on both machines ... created a new project on both .. and then i started simultanually to import a movie with high res. the same file, both from the HDD. it was impressive ... i showed it to the apple staff and they were wondering, too .... i had no stopwatch with me, but i checked it on my clock and lets say +- a few seconds ... the 2600 with the 2.8GHz was nearly two times faster ... not only a few seconds ... not only one minute .. much faster ... unbelievable.
also while creating the thumbnails (not displaying them - only creating) ... the 2600 nearly doubles the speed of the process... also you could read it (time remaining:4 minutes ... in comparison to 1 to 2 minutes on the 2600 ... finally more 2 minutes not only 1 as sometimes predicted ... but: really fast)
so .. in fact .. the benchmarks made before were true ... there was no mistake or something other ...
only one time i recognized the 8800 outperforming the 2600 was in idvd .. i created a project with the rotating thing in it .. i dropped the same high res video to the rotating part .. and with the 2600 it was not really fluently while rotating with the video in it ... the 8800 was better but also not really fluently ... but you can see a difference between both machines ...
so my result:
i think the 2600er is a much better (today) all-in-one solution which makes much more fun for standard users ... except when you are a gamer ...
the 8800er is for true the better and more powerful hardware ... but not with the current drivers ... and who knows if it's only the driver for the card ... in my opinion the difference was too big to be solved by drivers only ... but its a kind of hope and crossing fingers ... but no one really knows ...
sorry once again for my bad english
but i only want to share my experience with you and to bring this discussion back to a helpful level ... like VanNess tried ... hopefully not destroyed again by Mr. childish I-know-everything-better ;-)
Well... I guess you had to go personal and brag about me going personal.
Awesome example...
Anyway. Again you posted comparision about simply one side. One of a million out there. And again you wrote that 8800 is overall worse - quote:except you are a gamer
Please tell me how can you keep a discussion at constructive level when you see the same false statement written on SAME post numerous times??
I mean what blocks people minds in this case rofl. This is so amusing that we at work here just can't stop laughing.
In your face numbers seem to be totally disregarded and the only way this post is heading is to proove that the 2600 is a better card besides games which is a huge understatement.
And sorry man. Your discussion was not brought to a helpful level as you generalized the 8800 performance in a very narrow way that is far from the truth. Again.
i mean... rofl!
I think it's time we got back to the topic at hand in this thread. Following the barefeats benchmark, I'm sure there are a lot of people googling this topic. Let's try to preserve the integrity of the macrumors community, and provide some useful information to those who might be seeking it.
While I don't agree with the tone in which much of the information was presented, I think we have to acknowledge the useful information that D4F has provided; Namely, that his 3.06 iMac w/ 8800 GS is performing very well in applications which make use of OpenGL. This leads him to suggest that the 8800 GS option on the iMac should be seriously considered, not only just by gamers, but also users who rely on OpenGL.
Likewise, many have suggested that poor performance in Core Image/Core Animation/Core Video applications might be related to immature video card drivers. Most agree that the driver will be updated by Apple, but some disagree as to the timeline (some posters have pointed to issues with video cards in the past, and the length of time Apple took to resolve those issues).
However, I think it is fairly conclusive that the card's general performance will improve, seeing as the performance does not currently represent the physical capabilities of the card.
Judging from the posts that have been made so far, unless new information is presented, all that remains to be discussed is if the probability/possibility of a fix from apple is enough to justify the purchase. In the end I think it comes down to personal preference.
My 2 cents: I am treating the issue as I do the prospect of an update to the product line. Wait if you can, buy if you can't wait. I would highly recommend that anyone purchasing a 24" iMac seriously consider the 8800 GS, unless a) Your use of the computer requires the absolute fastest performance from day 1, and you don't rely heavily on OpenGL, or b) You'd rather save the money, and don't mind sacrificing the potential performance benefits (and/or potential resale value).
While I don't agree with the tone in which much of the information was presented, I think we have to acknowledge the useful information that D4F has provided; Namely, that his 3.06 iMac w/ 8800 GS is performing very well in applications which make use of OpenGL. This leads him to suggest that the 8800 GS option on the iMac should be seriously considered, not only just by gamers, but also users who rely on OpenGL.
Likewise, many have suggested that poor performance in Core Image/Core Animation/Core Video applications might be related to immature video card drivers. Most agree that the driver will be updated by Apple, but some disagree as to the timeline (some posters have pointed to issues with video cards in the past, and the length of time Apple took to resolve those issues).
However, I think it is fairly conclusive that the card's general performance will improve, seeing as the performance does not currently represent the physical capabilities of the card.
Judging from the posts that have been made so far, unless new information is presented, all that remains to be discussed is if the probability/possibility of a fix from apple is enough to justify the purchase. In the end I think it comes down to personal preference.
My 2 cents: I am treating the issue as I do the prospect of an update to the product line. Wait if you can, buy if you can't wait. I would highly recommend that anyone purchasing a 24" iMac seriously consider the 8800 GS, unless a) Your use of the computer requires the absolute fastest performance from day 1, and you don't rely heavily on OpenGL, or b) You'd rather save the money, and don't mind sacrificing the potential performance benefits (and/or potential resale value).
very well said, and a good summary. I'm sure some ppl (like myself) will read this thread and start worrying they just "wasted" over $100 upgrading a card that performs worse than the original. But I do think it will eventually perform better in the long run.
Just to name a few that might mean something:
Graphics driver performance fix
Graphics corruption issue resolved
Fix to CoreAnimation
Fix to CoreImage and NSBitmapImageRep
Fix to CoreGraphics and system-modal dialogs
Forums are based on contribution from a wide variety of people & opinions. If you don't agree with one then so be it. Your opinion will differ to others, accept it and don't take it so personally. Your fiction is somebody's fact, argue the point as you have but leave the personal insults out of the fray. Back to the matter at hand.
This is Apple's advertising....
"option to upgrade to the most powerful graphics ever available in an iMac. With the NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS and 512MB of dedicated video memory, this 24-inch iMac configuration reaches a whole new, blow-you-away level of detail and realism in games, three-dimensional graphics, high-resolution photos, and high-definition video."
It is simply not true based on,
a) barefeats
b) my own experience with a couple of os x games
c) my own experience in video editing
d) other peoples and my own in the overall visual performance of 10.5.2
Apple should not release a product in it's infancy when drivers are so under matured.
You are absolutely right here.
BUT you got to remember that a coin has two sides and generalization based on only one of it's sides will never be complete.
If somebody shows you the other side of the moon do not act like it doesn't exist ONLY cause you didn't see it as you're proving your ignorance towards the whole subject.
The rest of your post is pretty much valid but without the other side it will never be complete.
And this is my point from the start of this conversation.
Where did godspeed generalize? He made a perfectly valid and logical argument and then listed four specific points to back it up.
Even when and if Apple addresses the performance problems with the nVidia 8800 his comments will remain absolutely correct and on target.
No one is spiting you your opinion. It's your delivery that needs work and your tendency to make personal attacks and flame bait.
We can disagree peacefully at Macrumors. Folks who are not capable of grasping that concept don't generally stay around too long.
The "increased resale value" argument is a strange one to me. How is it valid when you have an "increased purchase price" to begin with?
Do you expect to recoup more than the $150 extra you pay to begin with when it comes time to sell used? That's a stretch. I think you can expect an equal percentage of value to the purchase price.
"Over $100" is correct but "$150" is more descriptive.
It's not a competition. I find it interesting how this thread basically has turned into some 2600 -v- 8800 pissing match.
The point is if you're paying $150 more and Apple is advertising it as a lightning fast deluxe GPU option it should already be the fastest at everything it does.
I'm not making apologies for Apple on this one.
When I saw the 8800 option I figured it was a no brainer. If you have the money get the 8800 and 3.06Ghz. If money is tight get the 8800 with the 2.8Ghz.
Turns out that the decision is not so clear cut. Adobe's recent report that it will be using the GPU to offload work from the CPU adds more to consider. Will the 10.5.3 graphic fixes apply to the 2600, the 8800 or both? Beats me. Does it mean the 8800 will spank the 2600 in all 2D facets as well as 3D if new drivers do cure the performance issues? Not necessarily. Will the 8800 create long term issues on iMacs due to the excess heat they create? Hell if I know.
Is it any wonder why there is so much debate over this issue? Buy for today and get stuck with todays technology. Buy for tomorrow and hope that Apple offered the 8800 for the long term support of NVidia and not just trying to attract a few gamers to the Mac.
I chose the 3.06Ghz with a 2600. I will be living with my choice for years. Considering that my wife is using my old 17" G4 iMac as her main computer I'm not worried. It runs Leopard a tad slow, but it runs reliably and is all she needs. I also have a 350Mhz iMac running Tiger and a couple of Mac se/30's that work fine. I figure I could do a lot worse... I GAVE my 2.66Ghz Vista computer with NVidia 8600 card that I built last summer to my son. His only condition in accepting it was that I remove Vista ad install XP instead
His only condition in accepting it was that I remove Vista ad install XP instead
Not to drag this topic off course any more than it already has, but I've found Vista post SP 1 to be a great OS; preferable to XP, given you have the hardware to run it. I've had more issues concerning stability with Leopard than I have with my Vista installation.
UPDATE: I spent the last 25 minutes on the phone with Apple support discussing the issue. Although the gentleman that I spoke with was very nice he was not very helpful. He agreed that this didn't sound right and he would be disappointed as well (duh) but didn't have a fix for me. I am currently on hold with customer service to find out what they can do for me (be it a return of my BTO or what). I'll keep people updated.
D4F - there is no need for you to reply to this. Thanks.
D4F - there is no need for you to reply to this. Thanks.
Exactly in his first post in this discussion.
^^Wow that's some 'perfectly valid' argument there...
Interested to see OpenGL test in Cinebench 10 using Windows??
Oh well since my theories are so out of space and do not fit the 'wise part' of the community that joined this topic let me add some numbers...
I did this test two weeks ago for one of the Cinema 4D communities as some people were wondering Mac or Win / nVidia or 2600.
That is using XP PRO 32bit and I heard that Vista numbers are even lower.
Graphics Card : NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS OpenGL Engine
Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 6211 CB-GFX
****************************************************
Graphics Card : ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO OpenGL Engine
Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 5665 CB-GFX
****************************************************
Oh WOW... It's soooo much faster on windoze...
Now you can continue with your quest to show the world how anti social I am while continuously avoiding real performance numbers.