I'm going to be ordering my new iMac within the next couple days but need a little advice first. Obviously, the 4850 is more powerful, but if these two cards had the exact same specs, would ATI or nVidia be the better choice? Which company is Apple leaning towards, which company produces better Mac drivers, how will OpenCL play into this, etc. Any information is greatly appreciated!
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.
GeForce GT 130 vs Radeon HD 4850
- Thread starter open0source
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple recently seems to prefer Nvidia, however traditionally ATI cards' drivers have been much better as ATI actually writes them while Apple has recently written the Nvidia drivers. I presume both cards will be able to use Open CL, but then again no one knows that for sure, but there is no reason why they wouldn't. It's important to note though that CTOing an iMac with the Radeon 4850 bumps the shipping time to 4-6 weeks presumably because of either production issues or because it requires 10.5.7 like the 4870 in the Mac Pro.
Yes. 3870 is more powerful than an 8800 GT... 8800 GS was only about 2/3 as powerful as an 8800 GT.
4850 will be quite a bit faster. I think the Nvidia GT 130 will be about equal to the 8800 GS.
Definitely get the ATI card. Better drivers and a faster card. The GT120 is a 9500M GT, and GT130 is a 9600M GSO (I think.)
And presumably clocked higher than the Macbook Pro's underclocked GPU's because of less thermal constraints.
thx for your quick answer to my question, finally i would like to ask you if you think that is possible to upgrade my 8800gs card for this new one?
Are you totally sure? I tell you because my imac comes initially with the ati 2600, and i upgraded for my current video card. Obviously, all this i did it with an official apple store.
Is there any limitation in the hardware or incompatibility of the early 2008 imac?
We'll See.....
I bought a 3.06 imac almost 2 weeks ago that was stock with the 2 gigs of ram and the 500 gig hard drive and the 8800 gt. Exchanged it this morning for the new model with the the GT 130. So far the only game I play consistently is WOW and I know that while it is a game that can run on pretty much anything, after the LK expansion it did get choppy in certain areas with everything maxed out. I did notice a pretty significant increase in graphic performance with the new machine. I've heard that WOW is more processor and RAM dependent than video but can't honestly comment on that. So far though for an even swap, the extra 2 gigs of ram and extra 500 gigs on the hard drive was well worth it
I bought a 3.06 imac almost 2 weeks ago that was stock with the 2 gigs of ram and the 500 gig hard drive and the 8800 gt. Exchanged it this morning for the new model with the the GT 130. So far the only game I play consistently is WOW and I know that while it is a game that can run on pretty much anything, after the LK expansion it did get choppy in certain areas with everything maxed out. I did notice a pretty significant increase in graphic performance with the new machine. I've heard that WOW is more processor and RAM dependent than video but can't honestly comment on that. So far though for an even swap, the extra 2 gigs of ram and extra 500 gigs on the hard drive was well worth it
GeForce Gt 130 is still the 8800Gs
According to a new article on Barefeats.com the Gt 130 is the Nvidia 8800Gs.
So those of you who have been posting that you have gotten better results with the Gt 130 then on the 8800 gs iMac, may be suffering from "car-wash" syndrome (When you feel that your car drives better after you get it washed).
According to a new article on Barefeats.com the Gt 130 is the Nvidia 8800Gs.
So those of you who have been posting that you have gotten better results with the Gt 130 then on the 8800 gs iMac, may be suffering from "car-wash" syndrome (When you feel that your car drives better after you get it washed).
couldnt it just be that the old rigs just have normal slowdown from software clutter and they actually do notice a better performance because the machine is running better just from not having much installed on it?
its not necessarily that theyre lying
Keep in mind that there are usually mobility versions of the cards which have around a 25% performance drop to reduce heat and power consumption. Apple never labels their cards "mobility" even when that's usually what is in the iMac line.
A desktop 4850 would be better than a 8800 GS, but a MOBILITY 4850 would be around the same performance as a non-mobility 8800 GS. The GT 130 is basically a MOBILITY 8800 GS. Thus, the mobility 4850 would be better than a GT 130 by about 30%.
A desktop 4850 would be better than a 8800 GS, but a MOBILITY 4850 would be around the same performance as a non-mobility 8800 GS. The GT 130 is basically a MOBILITY 8800 GS. Thus, the mobility 4850 would be better than a GT 130 by about 30%.
Just nitpicking here but even 25% less out of the 4850 should still be ahead of the 8800GS desktop by a good amount.
Anyone faced with this question should just check these benchmarks:
Source: http://www.apple.com/imac/features.html click "View iMac Performance Graphics Chart"
However, what we really need is Barefeats to do their benchmarks.
Source: http://www.apple.com/imac/features.html click "View iMac Performance Graphics Chart"
However, what we really need is Barefeats to do their benchmarks.
I would agree with you if you were not forgetting the simple fact that the new DDR3 1066 Mhz RAM on the latest iMacs alone would help produce a better gaming experience. The new iMacs with the Gt 130's will (and do) run a bit better/nicer/smoother/faster than the previous model with the gs 8800, hands down. Is the older 8800 GS and the newer Gt 130 virtually the same? It would seem so (in this case/discussion of Apple iMacs) but you will indeed see better performance out of the new machines based on the upgraded RAM alone.
If both are indeed mobile parts, then expect the 4850 to be 25 to upwards of 40-50% faster than the GT130 if the desktop comparisons are valid
No way - no how - is the mobile 4850 is even remotely close to 50% faster than the mobile gt130. Day to day use 30% maybe - gaming/graphic intense apps 20% better at best.
Anyone faced with this question should just check these benchmarks:
Source: http://www.apple.com/imac/features.html click "View iMac Performance Graphics Chart"
However, what we really need is Barefeats to do their benchmarks.
they compare it at different cpu speed.
gt130 is g94 based card, so it's renamed 9600gt, not 9600gso(gt was a bit faster than gso tho)