ATI 3450 & 3650 early review, future imac GPU?

[fblack]

It looks like ATI is releasing the new radeon 3450 & 3650 GPUs. As these will replace the 2400 and 2600 GPUs, its a possibility that we may see them in the next imac release. As gamers we may want to keep an eye out for reviews detailing their performance.

For all you Crysis and COD4 fans this website seems to have gotten an early review out the gate:

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/652/1/

 

[Eidorian]

It's possible for an upgrade but you're not going to see a significant performance increase over the older R/RV6xx cards.

55nm makes for cooler cards at their stock clock speeds.

 

[fblack]

It's possible for an upgrade but you're not going to see a significant performance increase over the older R/RV6xx cards.

55nm makes for cooler cards at their stock clock speeds.

It seems that way. The only thing different seems to be support for DirectX 10.1, PCI-Express 2.0, and ATI PowerPlay. Oh, and the price is cheaper too which I fear may be to attractive to SJ.

 

[gpapava]

WOw these 2 cards really suck...
Lets hope wont choose these cards for the next upgrade.

6.5 frames at 1280x1024 on bioshock for the 3450...we need some decent GPUs for the $ imacs cost

 

[lucky3killer]

WOw these 2 cards really suck...
Lets hope wont choose these cards for the next upgrade.

6.5 frames at 1280x1024 on bioshock for the 3450...we need some decent GPUs for the $ imacs cost

It's probably bad driver, plus 3450 isn't for gamers, it usually more popular for HD video or graphic design, games need be 3600 or 3800.

Without doubt, Apple would pick it for iMac because of 55 nm and cheaper than GeForce.

If you don't like it then get Mac Pro or MacBook Pro.

 

[Eidorian]

If you are a gamer I wouldn't buy anything less then a nVidia 8800 GS or an ATi Radeon 3850. Both hover around $160 - 180 and offer good bang for buck.

The 24xx/34xx Series are designed for HTPC applications since they're usually fanless and have UVD decoding.

 

[gpapava]

It's probably bad driver, plus 3450 isn't for gamers, it usually more popular for HD video or graphic design, games need be 3600 or 3800.

Without doubt, Apple would pick it for iMac because of 55 nm and cheaper than GeForce.

If you don't like it then get Mac Pro or MacBook Pro.

So it seems allright to you for macbook pro to have better gpu than the imac?
I am not a hardcore gamer but i just dont want the cheapest and crapiest gpus on my new imac. Lets say u build a new pc for home use and stuff and u are not a hardcore gamer but you play some games for fun sometimes, would you ever choose these 2 cards for your system? I guess not.

And this statement "If you don't like it then get Mac Pro or MacBook Pro" is totally wrong ofcourse.
I just want decent gpus on the imacs is it so hard for apple to do it?

 

[socamx]

Apple will do whatever makes the most financial sense, as well as the best compromise between heat/power and performance. I can see them putting the low end 3470 in the low end iMac, much like they have the 2400XT in the current low end. They'll most likely put the 3850 in the medium-high.

If you're buying an iMac for 'hard core' gaming you need to reconsider your thought process. The iMac is good for casual gaming and will play most (current) games at medium settings at a lower resolution perfectly fine.

The main people who buy iMacs don't care about playing games at 2048x1536 with max settings, 8x MSAA and 16x AF. I'd go so far to say most people buying iMacs don't really care about gaming.

So I don't see what the big deal would be if Apple used these cards. I think they're pretty damn good for the price and how much heat they produce.

 

[diamond.g]

The main people who buy Macs don't care about playing games at 2048x1536 with max settings, 8x MSAA and 16x AF. I'd go so far to say most people buying Macs don't really care about gaming.

*fixed*

 

[socamx]

*fixed*

God one of you people...

Guess I shouldn't feed a troll.

 

[gpapava]

I don't care about playing games at 2048x1536 with max settings, 8x MSAA and 16x AF either. I have to argue about your point that most people buying Macs don't really care about gaming. I know a lot of ppl, friends of mine etc that want to buy/switch to mac and they dont do it because of that.

My point is that the ATI 3470 is a low end entry level gpu, right? So i guess it fits in the entry level mac which i think is mac mini.

On the imacs put a middle ranged gpu like 3850 or 3870 that can actually play the current games fine, and by fine i dont mean 2048x1536 with max settings, 8x MSAA and 16x AF.

I love and i just have more expectations if u know what i mean.
Cheers

 

[diamond.g]

God one of you people...

Guess I shouldn't feed a troll.

Sigh, it was a joke. I mean isn't that the main argument when someone complains about the lack of top end cards in any Mac produced? I have seen my fair share of people here tell other people that they should either build a gaming PC or buy a PS3 or 360. Seems like a crappy compromise to make. Or how people have to boot into Windows to even play any of the most recent games. I thought the purpose of buying a Mac was to get away from the Windows monopoly?

 

[fblack]

If you are a gamer I wouldn't buy anything less then a nVidia 8800 GS or an ATi Radeon 3850. Both hover around $160 - 180 and offer good bang for buck.

Everything I've read says the 3850 gives very good performance for its price.

Apple will do whatever makes the most financial sense, as well as the best compromise between heat/power and performance. I can see them putting the low end 3470 in the low end iMac, much like they have the 2400XT in the current low end. They'll most likely put the 3850 in the medium-high.

If they do just upgrade to the new series, I agree we will be seeing a 3400 in the low end imac. However, I can see them sticking a 3650 in the mid to high end imac with maybe a 3850 as a BTO. After all they did stick a 2600XT in the new MacPros which is a cheap card, not a mid-range 3800 series.

I have seen my fair share of people here tell other people that they should either build a gaming PC or buy a PS3 or 360. Seems like a crappy compromise to make. Or how people have to boot into Windows to even play any of the most recent games. I thought the purpose of buying a Mac was to get away from the Windows monopoly?

I think its a lousy compromise too. I shouldn't need 2-3 extra pieces of hardware and their accessories to play a game. Unfortunately it seems apple may have decided to only support casual gaming (i.e. peggle) at this time. This is different than say a casual gamer like me who buys only a few but graphic intensive titles a year.

More reviews should be coming in soon. Wired has posted a very short review on these cards:

The 3650 wades through Oblivion at ultra-high settings (with antialiasing turned off, at 1650x1050), averaging 38 frames per second outdoors. Team Fortress II was similarly graceful, putting out 50 FPS with settings set to High throughout (with no antialiasing, and 4x anisotropic filtering). It even managed a 19fps average in S.T.A.L.K.E.R. at the highest settings, enough to get through the game, if not with much poke...

...if you want to game and can't part with more than $100, the 3650 gets the job done. Simple decisions, easily made: but if you're the regretful type, wait for Nvidia's 9500 GT before making up your mind.

http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/01/tested-sub-100.html