Hi, I'm one of a slowly shrinking crowd of 1st generation (2006 release) Mac Pro users. In 2008, nVidia teamed up with Apple to release a long-awaited "gaming class" video card for the 2006 Mac Pro -- the first real alternative to the ATI Radeon x1900. The GeForce 8800 GT for Mac was considerably quieter than the x1900, and I've been using it ever since. That is, until yesterday, when (just in advance of Portal 2's release, no less) one of my newer 3D games (a Feral Interactive offering) "bricked" it. Blame Feral if you like, maybe Apple's engineers for some firmware flaw -- I can only speculate. The real problem is, what to replace it with, OR might the old Mac Pro finally be ready for retirement.
Like the good Apple customer that I am, I called up their sales team and asked them what to do. After consulting with the tech. deptartment, the sales rep. told me that the GeForce 8800 GT for Mac has been retired (Not entirely true since they're still available on backorder directly from nVidia), and suggested that I buy the "Radeon HD 5770 1GB-ZML" to replace it. So, fine, no big deal, well-used video card is fried, shell out a couple hundred bucks and buy a new one -- except for the time when ATI actually recalled one of my cards and replaced it for free, I've become pretty well accustomed to this pattern, extended warranties be damned.
But wait, hold everything. I thought the Radeon HD 5770 only works on newer Mac Pro's? It says so right there under specifications. So what is Apple selling me? I Googled the "ZML" part, hoping to uncover some firsthand accounts from other people in my position, but no luck so far.
Does anyone know what's going on here? Does the newer Radeon card run OK, but at some limited capacity on an older Pro machine? Could it possibly be that Apple is just feeding me a line, even after they confirmed my system's serial number, etc.? I doubt THAT, since they surely know I'll just return the thing if it doesn't work. I think the likeliest scenario is that the newer Radeon card IS fully backwards compatible with older Mac Pros, but isn't advertised as such, in order to maintain its image as a premium device, used exclusively on state-of-the-art machinery, not on some 6 year old clunker. This seems pretty far-fetched too, though. Why would ANY company voluntarily disguise backwards compatibility?
So there's my rant. Curious what anybody might think about that. Old "clunker" users unite! Or, if you'd like to cast your vote to say I should smarten up and quit coddling old machinery, I'd welcome that advice as well!
Thanks!
-chapinbk
Like the good Apple customer that I am, I called up their sales team and asked them what to do. After consulting with the tech. deptartment, the sales rep. told me that the GeForce 8800 GT for Mac has been retired (Not entirely true since they're still available on backorder directly from nVidia), and suggested that I buy the "Radeon HD 5770 1GB-ZML" to replace it. So, fine, no big deal, well-used video card is fried, shell out a couple hundred bucks and buy a new one -- except for the time when ATI actually recalled one of my cards and replaced it for free, I've become pretty well accustomed to this pattern, extended warranties be damned.
But wait, hold everything. I thought the Radeon HD 5770 only works on newer Mac Pro's? It says so right there under specifications. So what is Apple selling me? I Googled the "ZML" part, hoping to uncover some firsthand accounts from other people in my position, but no luck so far.
Does anyone know what's going on here? Does the newer Radeon card run OK, but at some limited capacity on an older Pro machine? Could it possibly be that Apple is just feeding me a line, even after they confirmed my system's serial number, etc.? I doubt THAT, since they surely know I'll just return the thing if it doesn't work. I think the likeliest scenario is that the newer Radeon card IS fully backwards compatible with older Mac Pros, but isn't advertised as such, in order to maintain its image as a premium device, used exclusively on state-of-the-art machinery, not on some 6 year old clunker. This seems pretty far-fetched too, though. Why would ANY company voluntarily disguise backwards compatibility?
So there's my rant. Curious what anybody might think about that. Old "clunker" users unite! Or, if you'd like to cast your vote to say I should smarten up and quit coddling old machinery, I'd welcome that advice as well!
Thanks!
-chapinbk
