correct me if I'm wrong but the 4850 has 800 pipelines and a 256 mb bus width as apposed to the 400 pipelines and 128 mb bus width in the 5750?
step backwards in terms of graphics?
step backwards in terms of graphics?
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.
5750 slower than 4850?
- Thread starter iSpoody 1243
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
5750 features GDDR5-- which, clock for clock, is roughly twice as fast as GDDR3. So in other words, the GDDR5 vram cancels out the 128bit bus (hypothetically)
There was also an article a couple months ago that said apple hogged up all the 5750s with 720 pipelines, hinting that they are using the desktop 5750s in the new iMacs. Rather it is underclocked or not is yet to be determined. If its is underclocked, expect performance to be around mobility 5850/5870. If it is default clocked, it will be-- well, a desktop 5750
Depends on the clock speeds as it's likely underclocked desktop version. It's nice upgrade because of the VRAM but otherwise it ain't that huge upgrade
Double the vram alone won't help most features in games all that much, it's all up to the memory bandwidth of the specific card, and 5750 is limited to 128bit bus. However, having a considerably larger vram buffer will help with things like higher textures--especially with the higher resolution the 27inch iMac has.
i highly doubt that apple would replace the 4850 with a slower 5750. we won't know till we get our paws on some hard facts, but my guess is that the 5750 will be slightly faster.
^^ a few years back Apple replaced the Radeon x1600 with the HD2400, a slower card although technically capable of DX10 (which it ran very poorly). If the 5750 is a mobility version then it'll probably be slower, if it's the desktop then it will be a bit faster but hardly earth shatteringly so.
Ok, let's say it is faster than the 4850 (by a fair amount). Since the video is a daughter card on the high-end 27 models do you think we'll see someone offering to sell or even exchange/upgrade the daughter card in the last gen iMacs?
Unlikely. Such upgrade would cost hundreds and the 5750 isn't that much faster. You're better off selling your current and buy a new one
The 5750 should run a bit cooler than the 4850. I really want to see some benchmarks. They're shipping today so it shouldn't be long.
If it's the desktop version which has NOT been underclocked, it will be hotter as 5750 has TDP of 86W while mobility 4850 has TDP of ~55W. If it's underclocked like most of us are expecting, then only Steve knows how hot it really is
Curious, how do we know if we are getting an underclocked desktop 5750 or the mobile 5750?
Mobility 5750 has 400 stream processors while desktop 5750 has 720. Someone just have to install Windows and download GPU-Z and it will show the accurate specs including clock speeds etc
Apple basically has always under-clocked GPUs on the iMacs/Notebooks. Oh, and ouch on only a 5750 for the 27" resolution.
As an AIO, iMacs can't cater to every demographic. The 5750 desktop, even when under-clocked, is enough for most consumers needs. Moderate to extreme gamers will be left in the dark, but did we ever expect anything else?
No, not from Apple; Just thought they would of opted for something with more to it than a 5750. Can't imagine how many threads we're going to get from people buying the 27" iMac going "omgz why cant steam gamez run on my iMac at 2560x1440 with everything set to high settinz!!"
From the sounds of it...the new GPU would have to be underclocked otherwise the heat could damage the iMac?
How much difference would the underclocked GPU vs last gen's 4850 really make in gaming?
Thats the million dollar question, and we won't know until someone gets on in their hands and runs some benchmarks.
The X1600 was replaced by both the HD2400 (which was slower) and the HD2600 (which was faster). Actually, the HD2400 also replaced the GMA950 in the edu model (the lowest end iMac in the white iMac era) so it could still be considered an upgrade in performance.
The one thing I always try to remember when evaluating new iMac hardware is Apple is only concerned with performance up to the point it does not violate a particular thermal envelope. Once the envelope is broken other components tend to have shorter lifespans. Which in turn increases the load on Apples support structure. Will the "high-end" offering on the latest iMac smash any records? No. Will it perform well for 97% of its' intended audience? Assuredly and it should do so for years to come.