For the Web designers/creatives out there - GPU for my needs....

[SaSaSushi]

What is Apples history on NVidia driver updates? Have they improved the 7300, 7600 and 5600 driver performance after release or has it remained static for the most part?

I get the impression that most of those the happiest to have the 8800M GTS option are those who seek to use the iMacs as gaming machines. They would presumably most often do so in Bootcamp and I assume they could use nVidia Windows drivers.

I use the latest ATI Catalyst drivers for my HD2600 via Mobility Modder.

I plan on ordering a new iMac this week and have been trying to decide which video card would be the best long term investment.

My main interest is in basic desktop performance and pro-apps. I expect to keep the Mac for at least 3 years. The extra cost of the card is not an issue. I have no interest in gaming at all. I looked at Barefeats results. Based on them, I leaned toward a ATI 2600 and 3.06Ghz BTO. However, some of the talk around here is that Apple will eventually update the NVidia drivers for better performance.

If you are into pro apps and have zero interest in gaming how is it a tough decision? The ATI seems to me to be the card for you. Just think of it being cheaper as an added bonus even though that's not a criterion in your decision.

As has been asked before in this thread why spend extra for a card you don't need?

So is Apple committed to NVidia or ATI or both? Did they release models with the 8800 to gain some sales to hardcore gamers who run Windows primarily or are they planning on a shift away from ATI? In other words as long as it works for games leave it alone.

The former seems much more likely to me. If they were planning to switch away from ATI completely why would they still offer their cards in 3 of the 4 iMacs?

I started checking the Mac Pro forum for 8800 issues to get an idea what the performance and support is like with a similar card from Apple over a longer time period. It seems that they are also waiting on driver updates and have been waiting for a while now. Performance has been mixed. Seems gamers are happy, but desktop performance has been less then the ATI 1900. Though many don't expect their 1900's to last due to overheating issues. Basically repeating the results of BareFeats benchmarks in experiences.

Yeah, I thought the Mac Pro 8800 thing was pretty much common knowledge. The nVidia Core Image/Core Video performance disparity with ATI is not a new issue that came along with these iMac revisions. I don't know why the iMac owners who went with the 8800 are expecting such quick and effective driver updates to come along. There is a history here.

Another thought has been long term health of the iMac with a 3.06Ghz processor AND the added heat from the 8800. The 1900 is a good example of a problem with heat in the Mac Pro. Will we start seeing prematurely failed iMacs as a result down the road? I prefer to have reliability over cutting edge speed. The 3.06 alone or 8800 alone might not be a bad combination, but together will they have cause long term heat issues? Don't know.

Only time will tell. I don't think that should concern you if you plan on purchasing Applecare, and I highly recommend you do so no matter which iMac you decide on.

 

[gehrbox]

If you are into pro apps and have zero interest in gaming how is it a tough decision? The ATI seems to me to be the card for you. Just think of it being cheaper as an added bonus even though that's not a criterion in your decision.

Tough because I would like to get the latest and greatest for the long haul. I would like to believe that Apple is planning on fixing the NVidia shortcomings in 10.5.3, which would make the decision to by the 8800 a wise choice. Which is the reason for this post. The otherside of it is even if they made a driver that picked up the 20% + drop compared to the 7600 in Pro-apps performance will it turn out that the extra wattage of the 3.06Ghz CPU combined with the 8800 heat cause erratic behavior over time as the heat soak takes its toll. Could be that Apple made sure there was plenty of cooling available for the new configuration, but past history says form over function in Apple hardware. Perfect example - Mighty Mouse. If you have any flesh near the left side of the mouse when you try to right click you get a left click...but it looks nice and simple.

 

[notguiltystyle]

The otherside of it is even if they made a driver that picked up the 20% + drop compared to the 7600 in Pro-apps performance will it turn out that the extra wattage of the 3.06Ghz CPU combined with the 8800 heat cause erratic behavior over time as the heat soak takes its toll. Could be that Apple made sure there was plenty of cooling available for the new configuration, but past history says form over function in Apple hardware.

It has already been reported on these forms that the 8800 runs much hotter that the 2600 after a good gaming sesion (Iv even read that someone said that they could not touch the top of there Imacs after gaming, how true that is I dont know! lol). What im trying to say, is can they really make the card run any faster without generating more heat? who knows? Whatever you choose just make sure to follow the advice of the previous form writer (dont forget to get Applecare), then you know your machine will be fine for the 3 years that you mentioned

 

[bunsco]

Thanx guys.

Sounds like the consensus is that the nVidia performs better in the Bootcamp environment Is that overall or just when gaming? and if so - would that apply to parallels and VMWare too as I will probably be using VisualStudio 2008 quite a lot.



and another thing - does the GPU have any baring on video performance when watching movies?


The more I think about it - I can see periods where i MAY use programs such as Premier, a decent sound program, after effects (less so) and maybe a basic 3d program (probably nothing much beyond the basics) but only occasionally.

I wonder if the 8800GS is really THAT bad compared to the ATI - is the difference in performance enough to kinda feel cheated?

 

[Goldenbear]

Thanx guys.

Sounds like the consensus is that the nVidia performs better in the Bootcamp environment Is that overall or just when gaming? and if so - would that apply to parallels and VMWare too as I will probably be using VisualStudio 2008 quite a lot...

Mainly affects programs that use OpenGL. Outside of a few (relatively speaking) games and even fewer CAD packages, you'll be hard pressed to find a lot of software that uses OpenGL.

So are you planning on mainly running Windows on your iMac?

...and another thing - does the GPU have any baring on video performance when watching movies?...

No.

...The more I think about it - I can see periods where i MAY use programs such as Premier, a decent sound program, after effects (less so) and maybe a basic 3d program (probably nothing much beyond the basics) but only occasionally...

So how many of these programs use OpenGL? Not all 3D packages use OpenGL, btw.

...I wonder if the 8800GS is really THAT bad compared to the ATI - is the difference in performance enough to kinda feel cheated?

Did you look at the links someone posted of benchmarks? 40% faster isn't anything to sneeze at. This means future driver tweaks will have to almost double the performance of the 8800GS (for Core Image) just to catch up to where the ATI is right now. Unless you're using a lot of software that uses OpenGL, I just don't see any rational reason to go with the 8800GS, let alone pay more money to do so.

The 8800GS/driver combo works better than the ATI for OpenGL tasks. Despite what most people think, for most every-day tasks, this has absolutely no bearing on performance. Even the majority of "graphics" programs make no use of OpenGL.

Right now, the ATI cards (and drivers) work much better for Core Image functions, which also includes a lot of general Finder operations. So, the entire computing experience is faster with the ATI cards.

If you're the type of person that just needs to have the latest and greatest, then go ahead and spend the extra money on the 8800GS. Just know that you're pay extra money for a slower computing experience.

 

[bunsco]

Mainly affects programs that use OpenGL. Outside of a few (relatively speaking) games and even fewer CAD packages, you'll be hard pressed to find a lot of software that uses OpenGL.

So are you planning on mainly running Windows on your iMac?



No.



So how many of these programs use OpenGL? Not all 3D packages use OpenGL, btw.





Did you look at the links someone posted of benchmarks? 40% faster isn't anything to sneeze at. This means future driver tweaks will have to almost double the performance of the 8800GS (for Core Image) just to catch up to where the ATI is right now. Unless you're using a lot of software that uses OpenGL, I just don't see any rational reason to go with the 8800GS, let alone pay more money to do so.

The 8800GS/driver combo works better than the ATI for OpenGL tasks. Despite what most people think, for most every-day tasks, this has absolutely no bearing on performance. Even the majority of "graphics" programs make no use of OpenGL.

Right now, the ATI cards (and drivers) work much better for Core Image functions, which also includes a lot of general Finder operations. So, the entire computing experience is faster with the ATI cards.

If you're the type of person that just needs to have the latest and greatest, then go ahead and spend the extra money on the 8800GS. Just know that you're pay extra money for a slower computing experience.

thanx GB.

It hard to say if i'll be using Windows more than the mac as i work MUCH faster on the mac.

Its just that a lot of my job related workflow will involve VirtualStudio as I working with a bunch of Techies that use it, so i'm kinda forced to learn it to a decent standard.

Obviously ill be doing cross browser testing so the mac has to be at hand at a moments notice.

If i can help it i'll work mainly in Dreamweaver then Import into VS when needed (thats until im proficient in VS)