Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Well, the Nvidia GPU's have some hardware changes to allow them to use the auto switching, so I still don't think the ATI's could do it otherwise they would.
And I shall just post some video proof of that guy above testing both the cards and the same software stating the temperatures:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQLRP24rKhk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eras9dtIuUE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqBjfbHRCXw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIj_Ob_qlsI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa_QAgMetG0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ii90EQF6CmA

So I'll believe all of that thanks.

Did you also notice the insane performance difference? Also, the GTX 480 gets noticeably hotter when it really comes under stress. I'd like to know what fan settings are used as well. btw, the GTX 480 produces far more ambient heat in the case (due to the massive external metal heatsink). Sorry, 5970 allows far more versatility, performance, features and overclockability. Apple will avoid the 480 like the plague.
 
Apple will avoid the 480 like the plague.
You may well be right about that very particular point. A 470 (needing just 2 6pins) would require less re-engineering. I would expect to see either that or a Quadro analog out the door first (Remember we got the Quadro 4800 Mac ed first, followed by the 285). But with so many Macs using Nvidia (like all the new macbook pros) it is hard to imagine Nvidia cards not featuring somewhere with the next Pro. But I would not bet on the 480 either.
 
Did you also notice the insane performance difference? Also, the GTX 480 gets noticeably hotter when it really comes under stress. I'd like to know what fan settings are used as well. btw, the GTX 480 produces far more ambient heat in the case (due to the massive external metal heatsink). Sorry, 5970 allows far more versatility, performance, features and overclockability. Apple will avoid the 480 like the plague.

The amount of fanboyism and slanted (or completely wrong) facts over a few video cards is ridiculous. This isn't directed specifically at you, but this whole thread.

Unlike probably the majority of people reading this, I do have both a 480 and 5970. Actually they're in SLI and Crossfire modes.

The heat issues and fan issues are completely overblown. Yes, the 480 is hotter under idle, but under load, they are about the same. The same thing with the noise of the fans. Actually, the 5970's are louder under load.

As for versatility? Honestly, what are most people going to be using them as outside of graphics cards? In terms of cost, I realize that outside of the US, the 5970 is about the same as the 480, but in the US, the 480 is more comparable to the 5870.

As for speed, yes, a single 5970 is faster than a 480. But that should be expected with a multi gpu vs single gpu setup. Under sli & crossfire, it varies depending upon the application.

But overall, I notice that the 480 sli setup is faster overall in the minimum frames per second, which is what I care most about. Honestly, I'm not going to notice, and I doubt anyone of you would either, the difference between 200 and 170 fps. In fact, unless you have expensive monitors (or still using CRT), you're probably limited by your monitor on what you can see. But for the few games which stress the cards, they're slow and choppy to begin with, but I feel the 480's give an overall smoother feel due to a higher minimum frame rate. If you're dropping into sub 24 fps consistantly, having 19 fps vs 11 fps is very noticeable.

As for what Apple would decide to do, I guess if they had to choose one to give to their Mac Pro users, I guess it would be the 5970. You don't have to worry about PhysX on the Mac, and with no SLI nor Crossfire, it's obvious that the 5970 is faster and draws less power. Personally though, I can't see how either card will ever make it into the Mac Pro.
 
Did you also notice the insane performance difference? Also, the GTX 480 gets noticeably hotter when it really comes under stress. I'd like to know what fan settings are used as well. btw, the GTX 480 produces far more ambient heat in the case (due to the massive external metal heatsink). Sorry, 5970 allows far more versatility, performance, features and overclockability. Apple will avoid the 480 like the plague.

Yes I did see the performance difference, I won't post the dual and tri SLI 480 tests the guy did!! :D

And looking at those videos the 480 had the exact same temps at the 5970.
However, it's all moot as you'll never see either card in a Mac, you'll be lucky for a Mac version of the 4840 or similar low end.
What I guess all teh peeps here want is a half decent mid range card and possibly Quadro or Firepro card options?? Seeing as the Mac Pro IS a dual Xeon workstation after all......
 
I have a 5970 sitting in my machine that I've spent hours accommadating in order to fit into the case. Lets just say as soon as the 480 arrives at my local shop(delayed shipping here) I'm taking my 5970 back and going back to Nvidia.

This is my 3rd card, the first one's fan squeaked constantly, the second one had a fan that never moved AT ALL. This third one has a working fan but the display drivers would fail a couple times a day even just browing the net. Game drivers are a joke.

Some may say I should of just gotten a 5870 but I have two friends that got those cards, the first one has swapped 4 of them only to be given a full refund at the end and had to find something else. The second friend has swapped 2 cards.

I agree ati offers the best deal now, but I have decided to go back to nvidia.


BehindTimes said:
As for versatility? Honestly, what are most people going to be using them as outside of graphics cards? In terms of cost, I realize that outside of the US, the 5970 is about the same as the 480, but in the US, the 480 is more comparable to the 5870.

The price here in NZ is also comparable to the 5870.
 
A minor point but for anyone else getting one of these up under Bootcamp, my system is behaving much better with new drivers. Nvidia have released 197.75 for the 480 and this together with 197.45 for the 285 has eliminated a couple of annoying niggles, such as Windows thinking there is a new device there every time I boot. OpenGL benchmark is now running, though I have not got a sensible comparison with the OSX side as the OSX stuff is not quite there with 3.0 year, whereas under Windows the default tests start at 3.0. I also had nearly 150 Gflops from some double precision CUDA work, i.e. > 2.5x the speed of the 285.
 
A minor point but for anyone else getting one of these up under Bootcamp, my system is behaving much better with new drivers. Nvidia have released 197.75 for the 480 and this together with 197.45 for the 285 has eliminated a couple of annoying niggles, such as Windows thinking there is a new device there every time I boot. OpenGL benchmark is now running, though I have not got a sensible comparison with the OSX side as the OSX stuff is not quite there with 3.0 year, whereas under Windows the default tests start at 3.0. I also had nearly 150 Gflops from some double precision CUDA work, i.e. > 2.5x the speed of the 285.

Hi 10THzMAc, thanks for your work and sharing with us here. I use my 2008 MacPro 8 core for folding@home under Windows7 bootcamp. I have reached a point whereby I am thinking of selling the mac, or to get more performance from it, install a GTX470. I like the idea of running a seperate power supply, however two things that I am unsure of.

1. You mentioned about doing some sort of short on the motherboard to get it recognised? 2. How do you switch on your external PSU. Do you have a switch, or are you creating a short again to power the psu?

It may be that I just give up the Mac and get a newer Core i7 and fold on that. However the dual xeon in my view is still an awesome beast.

Thanks,
casw1000
fold4life.com
 
1. You mentioned about doing some sort of short on the motherboard to get it recognised? 2. How do you switch on your external PSU. Do you have a switch, or are you creating a short again to power the psu?
With a 470 there is less of an imperative to use an external PSU as depending on what your boot card is you might find it easy to power internally. E.g. 120 (Zero extra power)+470 (2 x6-pin) might be OK off motherboard, 8800+470 probably OK routing a third 6-pin from optical. If you do NOT try to inject the 470 under OS X it should not crash it due to driver absence. (My system is littered with injectors from netkas and Corevidia to manage a PC 285 as well so it is a bit of a mess)

If you do follow my external PSU route note that I am NOT shorting the motherboard! I am just joining two connectors on the main output of the PSU to fool it into thinking it is attached to something. Green and black are joined by a paper clip on my system, pins 14 and 15 are sometimes referred to. There are several web refs, e.g.

http://www.duxcw.com/faq/ps/ps4.htm

The PSU has a big switch on it - it is the one that would stick out the back of a PC as the main on-off switch.
 
With a 470 there is less of an imperative to use an external PSU as depending on what your boot card is you might find it easy to power internally. E.g. 120 (Zero extra power)+470 (2 x6-pin) might be OK off motherboard, 8800+470 probably OK routing a third 6-pin from optical. If you do NOT try to inject the 470 under OS X it should not crash it due to driver absence. (My system is littered with injectors from netkas and Corevidia to manage a PC 285 as well so it is a bit of a mess)

If you do follow my external PSU route note that I am NOT shorting the motherboard! I am just joining two connectors on the main output of the PSU to fool it into thinking it is attached to something. Green and black are joined by a paper clip on my system, pins 14 and 15 are sometimes referred to. There are several web refs, e.g.

http://www.duxcw.com/faq/ps/ps4.htm

The PSU has a big switch on it - it is the one that would stick out the back of a PC as the main on-off switch.

Thanks for clearing up how you are connecting your PSU, that makes more sense. I think I could get away with my 8800GT, 1x spare + 2molex into 6pin PCI-e. Thanks for your help.

casw1000
 
nVidia, burning tomorrow's homes.
 

Attachments

  • 1271899641404.jpg
    1271899641404.jpg
    305.4 KB · Views: 153
Well, my computer hasn't melted. My face hasn't melted and my house has not burnt down. The fire alarms did go off but that was the toast, not the GTX 480. Meanwhile, for those of you more interested in facts than ranting, here are some bootcamp shots from my not-yet-melted Mac285+PC480 Mac Pro 08 rig. Those of you interested in CUDA can see easily the differences in config from the device query, and the speed increase on a default multi GPU code in the Nvidia example set. I will post a shot for the double precision enhancement later.
 

Attachments

  • devicequery.jpg
    devicequery.jpg
    141.9 KB · Views: 194
  • mcmgpu.jpg
    mcmgpu.jpg
    50.9 KB · Views: 156
Hi casw1000,
I've just arrived at the same point as you
and I'm no more satisfied with my currently installed ATI card HD4870.
I have bad OpenGL support for After Effects and also
no CUDA support for new rendering engines such as "Octane", etc.

Does anyone have a recommendation for me?

Should I buy now a, still very expensive (450,- €), GTX 285 MacEdition ?
Or wait, perhaps until a 480 comes out for Mac?
Btw. I'm tired of "flashing" PC cards and "pulling" cables
Or should I just buy a new PC?
because I work anyway with Win 7 on my MacPro (8x 3,2Ghz/20mb RAM)

10ThzMac, how satisfied are you with the GTX 285 alone?

thanks for suggestions
mike
 
No, And No. :)

Hey, thanks for posting such an interesting thread but i will have to say, this will probably never happen until sjobs drops power saving+ makes a better cooling system. Though i love amd gpus better for many obvious reasons, i do not mind nvidia gpus right until the gtx 295 but after that.. fail. First of all, which company makes a gpu that is so frigin hot, is buggy, consumes so much power and has only a little bit more frps than a 5870 or competitorS? doesent seem so practical.. even the gtx 480M sucks. 100 WATTS? come on nvidia. the 5870 consumes wayyy less power than the gtx and so as the 5970 DUAL gpu. since the gtx 480 is stil only a single gpu, what will happen when it goes against the amd 2X 95 w 5970? i bet it will be a mess. and since apple:apple: power consumption strategies and intel hates nvidia and you will obviously see, it will not happen. to me, the 5850-5870 desktop versions are the most likely right now. GTX 480 is a fail. nvidia 2009-2010 is a failure. i would get lower performing components just as long as they are cool, perform and make my bills look good :) decide yourself. remember, i dont hate nvidia.
 
...
Should I buy now a, still very expensive (450,- €), GTX 285 MacEdition ?
Or wait, perhaps until a 480 comes out for Mac?
Btw. I'm tired of "flashing" PC cards and "pulling" cables
Or should I just buy a new PC?
because I work anyway with Win 7 on my MacPro (8x 3,2Ghz/20mb RAM)

10ThzMac, how satisfied are you with the GTX 285 alone?
I was and am very satisfied with the GTX 285. It has been running in my 08 Pro since it was launched and until recently served as boot card alongside an injected PC 285 (also ext powered), that I have recently replaced by my experimental 480.

I should say that my main interest is in CUDA/OpenCL programming so many of the considerations that worry others do not really apply to me. But it rather strikes me that power users might well be expected do use some, er, power, so many of the comments on this thread are irrelevant to me.

The only caution I would express wrt 285 is for you to check that any specialized high end ($$$) commercial CUDA aware apps you use are not locked to the Quadro 4800. I saw a post elsewhere that indicated that this has happened for at least one application. All my CUDA apps run well on both (and indeed faster on the 285, which has more cores clocked faster) and on the 480 under Windows.

I would not hold your breath for a Mac ed 480. I would bet on a Quadro type card first - after all we got the 4800 before the 285. As has been pointed out elsewhere - we really need a Pro with better cooling and a good supply of 6- and 8-pin PCI power outputs, as well as software drivers and EFI ROM, before these Fermi cards are truly practical in a Mac Pro.

Right now I would wait to see what if anything WWDC brings this week on the Pro front.
 
.. even the gtx 480M sucks.
To quote you, no, No, NO!!! The 480M is a VERY exciting development for me as it brings to a laptop the full power of (double precision) scientific computing. MacBookPro users might have the "latest" 330M chip, but this is in reality a weak GPU. It only has 48 cores against the 128 in the GTX 285M in my latest portable and the 352 in the 480M, which also allows DP computation.

What I really want to know is if anyone has loaded a Tesla C2050 into a Mac Pro, at least under Bootcamp - if you have please post some DP CUDA results, even if it is just nbody under double prec. (Or if you have a 480M laptop already, likewise).
 
To quote you, no, No, NO!!! The 480M is a VERY exciting development for me as it brings to a laptop the full power of (double precision) scientific computing. MacBookPro users might have the "latest" 330M chip, but this is in reality a weak GPU. It only has 48 cores against the 128 in the GTX 285M in my latest portable and the 352 in the 480M, which also allows DP computation.

What I really want to know is if anyone has loaded a Tesla C2050 into a Mac Pro, at least under Bootcamp - if you have please post some DP CUDA results, even if it is just nbody under double prec. (Or if you have a 480M laptop already, likewise).

its fine though it is revolutionary in terms of speed, the 480m is very not thought fo and nvidia thinks a super battery can be created to give a gtx a 6 hout battery life. for those that plug in their ac core to their laptop so they can game but also wheen portable, they plug it in, what is a purpose of a laptop then when it consumes hell a lot of power? to me, its not acceptable to keep on pluugging in your laptop, ergonomics count.
 
....to me, its not acceptable to keep on pluugging in your laptop, ergonomics count.
Sure, but others have different priorities. The longest I need a battery to last is 2H, in the case of a longer lecture or seminar, and I work plugged in most of the time. The gripe I have with Apple is their refusal to even give users a *choice* if they wish to trade battery life for power. Not only do they refuse to offer an option of a decent mobile GPU in the MBP, the same attitude cripples their CPU options, which stop at the i7 that isn't a proper i7, with only 2 cores. Why they cannot offer an option of a proper i7-720, when many Windows mfrs offer 720, 820, 920 choices is a mystery to me, and that's why I have bought, through gritted teeth, a Windows laptop with an i7-720 and GTX 285M. The current Mac Pro architecture is correspondingly crippled with a small number of PCI slots and 2 6-pin PCI power outputs. And this is from the company pushing OpenCL and GrandCentral! After that ghastly WWDC keynote with Steve ranting on about yet another fashion accessory instead of a decent new Mac Pro I think I have run out of patience with them on the desktop front as well.

Anyway - here is the promised shot of nbody in benchmark mode doing double precision arithmetic with 50000 bodies - the GTX 480 is about 160% faster than the 285, and I am told there is another factor 3 in the Tesla C20 cards. If I turn off -fp64 the 480 does about 700 against the 285's 500.
 

Attachments

  • dpnbodycompare.jpg
    dpnbodycompare.jpg
    101.5 KB · Views: 143
Sure, but others have different priorities. The longest I need a battery to last is 2H, in the case of a longer lecture or seminar, and I work plugged in most of the time. The gripe I have with Apple is their refusal to even give users a *choice* if they wish to trade battery life for power. Not only do they refuse to offer an option of a decent mobile GPU in the MBP, the same attitude cripples their CPU options, which stop at the i7 that isn't a proper i7, with only 2 cores. Why they cannot offer an option of a proper i7-720, when many Windows mfrs offer 720, 820, 920 choices is a mystery to me, and that's why I have bought, through gritted teeth, a Windows laptop with an i7-720 and GTX 285M. The current Mac Pro architecture is correspondingly crippled with a small number of PCI slots and 2 6-pin PCI power outputs. And this is from the company pushing OpenCL and GrandCentral! After that ghastly WWDC keynote with Steve ranting on about yet another fashion accessory instead of a decent new Mac Pro I think I have run out of patience with them on the desktop front as well.

Anyway - here is the promised shot of nbody in benchmark mode doing double precision arithmetic with 50000 bodies - the GTX 480 is about 160% faster than the 285, and I am told there is another factor 3 in the Tesla C20 cards. If I turn off -fp64 the 480 does about 700 against the 285's 500.

true :) i think apple should broaden its options or make their laptops a little bit thicker so that heat can come out, a taller battery and better components.as the macbook pro is 1 inch thick, i think they hsould add another 5mm? would be better im not someone who expands etc. i just make sure i get the right model before i regret :) but then again, apple is the only one making macs ); asus should get rights to os x..
 
I forgot out the internal PSU options - thanks nanofrog. FYI here is how I have powered my rig. The Mac 285 is on the bottom and is taken its 2x6-pin power from the motherboard connectors at the top right. The 480 is on top and is being fed a 6- and 8-pin feed from the PSU (not shown) sitting on top of the case, via the big black and yellow cables. Hasn't melted yet.

You could route the external psu cables trough the mac pro cooling holes or the last pci bracket. That way you'll be able to close your mac pro case as well help to maintain the airflow inside the case.
 
I have just purchased a Palit GTX 480.

I have tried three different configs for the external power feeds:

1. 6-pin from motherboard, 8-pin from molex > 6-pin adapter to 6-pin > 8-pin adapter.
2. 6-pin from molex > 6-pin adapter, 8-pin from motherboard to 6-pin > 8-pin adapter.
3. 6-pin from motherboard, 8-pin from 2 x molex to 8-pin adapter

These all boot fine, but none cause the fan to spin up - this is worrying since it should spin up, even at idle. When I initially bought the card, I tried it and got the fan problem, took it back to the shop where they tried it on their rig and it worked fine. I got a replacement card anyway just in case and tried it, but the same problem, no fan spin up. Without the fan going, the card hits 110°C and shuts off.

I previously had a 4870x2 (now very glitchy and crashes starting any game) which was powered either using 1 or 2, I can't remember which, but know it was one of them. This setup was working fine, the 4870x2 would power up just fine with it's fan going. The 4870x2 has a higher power usage than the 480 which is confusing me as to why it's not spinning up the fans. My 8800GT also works just fine off the same slot.

Is anyone successfully powering the card off the internal power supply?
 
There are also small supplemental PSU's that fit in an optical bay (5.25" GPU PSU example). IIRC, they've been used successfully in MP's by other MR members.

So the thought is to blow heated air directly at the Mac Pro's main power supply ? That isn't going to increase the ambient temperature the power supply has to deal with?

Even if Apple's designers had though someone would stick a hard drive or something that would throw off 10's of W in the external drive bays, this is way past that. It is extremely unlikely even remotely tested something that is radiating waste heat that would correspond to 50% of the total power supply.

There are extremely few boxes out there with power supplies lined up serially in the air flow. In a tower case where the power supply is above the external bay slots this would be less destructive long term if manage to blow out the heat with the change thermals.
 
So the thought is to blow heated air directly at the Mac Pro's main power supply ? That isn't going to increase the ambient temperature the power supply has to deal with?

Even if Apple's designers had though someone would stick a hard drive or something that would throw off 10's of W in the external drive bays, this is way past that. It is extremely unlikely even remotely tested something that is radiating waste heat that would correspond to 50% of the total power supply.

There are extremely few boxes out there with power supplies lined up serially in the air flow. In a tower case where the power supply is above the external bay slots this would be less destructive long term if manage to blow out the heat with the change thermals.
The front fans won't Push air through a supplemental GPU power supply (as it's above the front fans, not behind them), but the exhaust fans will draw air through it (assuming it doesn't have it's own fans, and that linked does from what I can tell from the pics on newegg). Not as ideal (even with the pull fans, as they're small), but acceptable (and what it should have been designed for), unless the unit is so poorly designed, that's not even sufficent (i.e. anything in a 5.25" bay won't have fans pushing air through them, as the device will be at the absolute front of the case).

As per Apple's PSU, if it can't handle the heat increase of what's in the system, it's under cooled. Period. PCIe devices alone will heat the ambient temps of the input airflow, and change the cooling curves. This has to be considered (i.e. 75W* n slots at bare minimum, but better that it include thermals from multiple graphics cards, in this case, 2x would be realistic given the slot configuration, for cards that require additional power beyond the PCIe max power specification + 2x @ 75W to account for the total thermal imprint on ambient pushed through the system PSU, above the rest of the system, such as CPU's, logic board, and HDD's, since heat rises, and the PSU is at the top rear of the system).
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.