I can say that the 680mx fusion equipped iMac doesn't play guild wars 2 in beta mac client very well. Though I heard that the gw2 client is built off an emulator so go figure. I haven't tried gaming in windows yet but I can tell that my iMac is not as powerful as my windows desktop that has a gtx 660 ti
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.
680MX Benchmarks please
- Thread starter tacokisses
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you have not tried gaming in Windows how can you say it does not perform well??? You are right that the 660ti is more powerful then a stock 680mx but with light overclocking it performs just as well.
Wait, what? That's ridiculous.Testing now
----------
Won't let me install lol
It's fore Windows XP, that's why LOL
Parallels is NOT a replacement for Boot Camp. Yes, Parallels can play SOME games pretty well (Torchlight 2 being one example), but some games cause the whole OS to crash, for one thing, and... yeah. Just use Boot Camp if you're even the slightest bit serious about gaming on your iMac.
Hi guys, Ive just ordered my 27" iMac
3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz
8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB
1TB Serial ATA Drive @ 7200 rpm
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5
Should I upgrade my ram to 16gb? Would it improve gaming performance? Im a novice on all this stuff but thought most games wont use the extra ram. Is there any upgrades that will further improve gaming performance?
Thank you kind sirs (and jams)
3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz
8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB
1TB Serial ATA Drive @ 7200 rpm
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5
Should I upgrade my ram to 16gb? Would it improve gaming performance? Im a novice on all this stuff but thought most games wont use the extra ram. Is there any upgrades that will further improve gaming performance?
Thank you kind sirs (and jams)
exactly. People don't realize its the ram of the graphics card that impacts gaming, not really the ram on the computer itself. a 2gb graphics card will handle pushing the pixels of the 2550x1440 display.
Thanks for the link. Here's the English link as well http://www.nvidia.com/object/notebook-win8-win7-64bit-314.14-beta-driver.html
Thanks both of you for posting. I'm curious as to how these benchmark, but I'm guessing it's the same as the previous drivers we've been using.
the official WHQL driver also lists the 680MX now, as I noticed yesterday. The performance with that driver is outstanding as it is, if they can improve it even more I won't be sad, but what we're getting is already plenty.
The 680MX has superseded all my personal gaming expectations, and I haven't touched my consoles at all for gaming, which will soon change for 2 exclusive titles. But I think I will do all my gaming on the iMac after that, until Infinium's Phantom goes into mass production and blows all other platforms out of the mud.
The 680MX has superseded all my personal gaming expectations, and I haven't touched my consoles at all for gaming, which will soon change for 2 exclusive titles. But I think I will do all my gaming on the iMac after that, until Infinium's Phantom goes into mass production and blows all other platforms out of the mud.
For gamers (and overclockers) I would recommend disabling CPU turbo boost in Windows 7. This gives almost the same performance in games, but with 10C+ lower CPU temps.. Some massive online games need a lot of CPU power, but in most games the difference should be neglible. I can now also get a higher stable overclock (without random reboots) than before. Before I also used vsync because otherwise the iMac would become very hot, but now I can keep managable temperatures even in newer games like Crysis 3.
Last edited:
Please ignore his ignorance, he doesn't have a clue about what he is talking about. 680mx is a lot more powerful than 660ti.
Check this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkaZGTqqII0
He can't get more than 30 fps at 1080p, yet I manage 30+ (up to 42) running 2560x1440 with a bit of overclock.
1080p for me on Crysis 3 is 60+ 24/7 without ANY overclock.
Please ignore his ignorance, he doesn't have a clue about what he is talking about. 680mx is a lot more powerful than 660ti.
Check this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkaZGTqqII0
He can't get more than 30 fps at 1080p, yet I manage 30+ (up to 42) running 2560x1440 with a bit of overclock.
1080p for me on Crysis 3 is 60+ 24/7 without ANY overclock.
60fps in Crysis 3 at 1080p? Do you have all the graphics settings turned off?! I can't get even close to that, and I have the i7/680.
I concur, i cant get 60fps at 1080p either. Its closer to 45fps and that is with a 200 core and 300 mem overclock.
Boy... Tomb Raider totally pwns the iMac, especially with TresFX enabled.
Oh really? Any more details?
[/COLOR]
Avoid using graphics settings at "very high" in Crysis 3. The difference between "high" and "very high" is minimal to my eyes, except for an obvious improvement in shadows quality.
Avoid using graphics settings at "very high" in Crysis 3. The difference between "high" and "very high" is minimal to my eyes, except for an obvious improvement in shadows quality.
Last edited:
Can't maintain 60fps with TresFX on, at even 1600x900 res, no AA, graphics settings on "normal."
Turning TresFX off seems to be the best way to boost fps huuugely.
Looks like a driver issue with Nvidia cards
http://www.tbreak.com/features/tomb-raiders-tressfx-performance-amd-vs-nvidia
What is your performance like on 1440p and high settings, without TressFX?
----------
Please ignore his ignorance, he doesn't have a clue about what he is talking about. 680mx is a lot more powerful than 660ti.
Check this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkaZGTqqII0
He can't get more than 30 fps at 1080p, yet I manage 30+ (up to 42) running 2560x1440 with a bit of overclock.
1080p for me on Crysis 3 is 60+ 24/7 without ANY overclock.
he is playing with Very High settings and seems to average somewhere in the 40s?
The consumer/gamer-oriented Kepler cards are not especially strong in the compute area, which may contribute to the poor performance w.r.t. TressFX.