How does... [graphics card comparison]

[TSE]

... the 2600 HD Pro in the iMac compare to the 8600M GT used in the previous MacBook Pros?

 

[Jack Flash]

... the 2600 HD Pro in the iMac compare to the 8600M GT used in the previous MacBook Pros?

Well, I might seem to be a biased source... but notebookcheck.net isn't.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-8600M-GT.3986.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mobility-Radeon-HD-2600-XT.3770.0.html

Mobility 2600 XT is a faster chip overall.

 

[TSE]

is the 2600 XT the same card as the 2600 Pro?

 

[Jack Flash]

is the 2600 XT the same card as the 2600 Pro?

The 2600 Pro that is in the iMac is actually a Mobility 2600 XT. It is underclocked in OS X to 2600 Pro speeds.

 

[definitive]

The 2600 Pro that is in the iMac is actually a Mobility 2600 XT. It is underclocked in OS X to 2600 Pro speeds.

op, what the poster here is trying to say is that it's slower than an actual xt.

 

[Jack Flash]

op, what the poster here is trying to say is that it's slower than an actual xt.

What I'm saying is that it is a 2600 XT. In OS X it will run at 2600 Pro speeds, in Windows it will run at 2600 XT speeds. It's a matter of drivers.

 

[definitive]

What I'm saying is that it is a 2600 XT. In OS X it will run at 2600 Pro speeds, in Windows it will run at 2600 XT speeds. It's a matter of drivers.

woah, no need to get mad with the bold tags there. i'm just saying that a 8600gt is faster than an underclocked 2600xt which runs at speeds of a 2600pro.

 

[Jack Flash]

woah, no need to get mad with the bold tags there. i'm just saying that a 8600gt is faster than an underclocked 2600xt which runs at speeds of a 2600pro.

Somewhat debatable. A recent update to address the graphical corruption the 8600M chips were facing Apple seems to have downclocked performance.