New I-Mac Question (Video Card)

[24usedtorock]

Hi,

I am buying either the 2.93 or 3.0GHZ I-Mac.

I will use it for business purposes, web, and some gaming (WoW).

Since the 4850 ATI seems to be encountering massive issues, would I notice any drop in quality upgrading to the Nvidia 130 512MB card? It'd be an extra $50 for the ATI which obviously has a ton of issues.

I guess my question is, is this ATI simply a faster card for the Photoshop type users, or would WoW players really notice much more quality?

 

[HazRutter]

I cant really answer the question but I can tell you that I think buying the iMacs you have suggested would be more than enough for your needs. Perhaps get a cheaper iMac?

 

[Hellhammer]

2.93GHz iMac with GT130 runs WoW all settings at high. Of course if you can wait for Apple to do something for freezings because Apple has to act rapidly for freezings, customers are complaining

 

[Gregintosh]

I don't believe WoW has very high system requirements as from what I hear many people are able to run it just fine on even the old macbooks with GMA950.

I think the GT130 should be more than enough if you want to "future proof" a bit to ensure that you can run the latest updates to WoW even a year or two from now.

I would recommend getting the 2.93 and upgrading the video card to the GT130. That's probably be the most sensible option and the machine will be good enough to handle what you want.

Personally, I'd spend the $50 savings from upgrading to the [what appears to be] faulty 4850 on a wireless keyboard and mouse upgrade. That setup would be totally sweet. If you're on WiFi at home, all you'd need is the power cable.

 

[24usedtorock]

Thanks for the replies.

In those long 4850 problem threads, some people were pinning the blame on Wifi or fan issues, while the 4850 might be running hot (one theory), is it 100% that these issues are solely related to the ATI card and the excessive freezing are most certainly not occurring in the high tier nvidia machines?

 

[maverick72]

4850 imac here.

I wouldn't even think to run WoW with a gt130 if your doing some 25 man's or bg's (native resolution of course).

If your only doing some questing or 5 man's or running at "only" high settings then you would be good... for now.

 

[24usedtorock]

I wouldn't even think to run WoW with a gt130 if your doing some 25 man's or bg's (native resolution of course).

So the ATI 4850 does blow away the 130 for gaming?

I just wasn't sure if I should equate the extra price with necessarily better games performance, especially WoW, or just in general a better graphics card for perhaps the video/design editing oriented.

But, seeing as how there are extreme performance issues w/ the better ATI card, I wouldn't feel comfortable making the order now.

 

[itommyboy]

4850 imac here.

I wouldn't even think to run WoW with a gt130 if your doing some 25 man's or bg's (native resolution of course).

If your only doing some questing or 5 man's or running at "only" high settings then you would be good... for now.

Don't listen to Maverick. As you will find from any WoW player with The GT 130 iMac it laughs at WoW including 25 mans and BG's as well as runs most any/all games old or current very very well with great detail. What I wouldn't think of is buying a card that brings your entire iMac to a freezing halt. Any of the of the GT 130 units will be more than enough for what you are going to use it for. Let us know when you pull the trigger!

* Edited to add that if you are not worried about possibly having to haggle with returns, repairs or wait out a true fix for the 4850 - it is indeed the fastest gpu option out there for iMacs *

 

[definitive]

if you can't compare the two side by side, then you really don't know what you'll be missing. if you do have the two side by side, then you'll clearly see that the 4850 is a better performer.

 

[24usedtorock]

if you can't compare the two side by side, then you really don't know what you'll be missing. if you do have the two side by side, then you'll clearly see that the 4850 is a better performer.

Yes I see the Apple site runs a comparison via these games, but not WoW...

 

[Tallest Skil]

Yes I see the Apple site runs a comparison via these games, but not WoW...

Perhaps because it's a five year old game and even the iPhone can run it, meaning that putting a benchmark for it on a new computer would be laughable?

 

[maverick72]

@tallest Skil

WoW is a 5 years old game but Wotlk is not. They have added multiple graphic updates even in the last patch 3.1 ... you now have Ultra settings.

Sorry to disapoint the ones that didn't get the 4850 but it IS the fastest option right now. The gt130 is not even close. Check the bench thread before saying false FACTS.

 

[24usedtorock]

Perhaps because it's a five year old game and even the iPhone can run it, meaning that putting a benchmark for it on a new computer would be laughable?

Maybe so but still interested to compare some kind of benchmark or FPS chart, but have been unable to find any.

 

[Animalk]

Perhaps because it's a five year old game and even the iPhone can run it, meaning that putting a benchmark for it on a new computer would be laughable?

Wow can max out the beefiest of machines in crowded northrend areas. The choke point on most systems is the Memory bus. Even the Mac Pro is far from invulnerable to this.

And WoW does not run on the iphone. It is simply video being streamed to the iphone with a custom ui that is hooked up to interface with WoW running on a remote server.

Not only this, but at every expansion, you can expect on average a 30% increase graphical and computational load. To say it is a 5 year old game technically is completely wrong.