The ATI HD 5750 in the iMac is a mobility 5850.

[barefeats]

thanks for that depressing realisation that my 2009 iMac has SIGNIFICANTLY been outdated

Take heart. After installing the OS X update on the the 2010 iMac Core i7, I cloned its HDD to an external HDD. Then I booted the 2009 iMac Core i7 with that drive.

Portal at 2560x1400 "High" with 4X MSAA
2009 iMac Core i7 Before = 19 fps
2009 iMac Core i7 with Cloned Drive = 42 fps
2010 iMac Core i7 = 59 fps

ETQW 2560x1400 "High" with 4X MSAA
2009 iMac Core i7 Before = 29 fps
2009 iMac Core i7 with Cloned Drive = 44 fps
2010 iMac Core i7 = 48 fps

And X-Plane 2560x1400 "High" with 2X MSAA
2009 iMac Core i7 Before = 80 fps
2009 iMac Core i7 with Cloned Drive = 114 fps
2010 iMac Core i7 = 128 fps

WoW went from 42 fps to 49 fps on the 2009 (vs 52 fps on 2010)
Team Fortress went from 29 fps to 44 fps on the 2009 (vs 44 fps on 2010)

These numbers confirm to me that the newer drivers account for part of the gains. The 2010 iMac Core i7 is still faster, though not as dramatically.

 

[frega]

CUDA cores are still better than Stream cores AFAIK so the amount of them doesn't immediately tell the performance. I don't know how much faster, maybe Eidorian does. He seems to know stuff like this

Desktop 5850 has only 1440 Stream cores though. The cores aren't everything, mobility versions are heavily underclocked so the clock speed is fairly important. Unless Apple adds support for CrossFire, it would be useless to have dual GPUs and I doubt it.

Well, I can dream. Crossfire is what I meant with dual m GPUs.

Another question, if I overclock it on Windows, does it stay if I switch back to OSX?

 

[G-Force]

Thanks for the tests Barefeats. I hope Apple will include the new drivers in 10.6.5 for us 4850 users.

 

[geoelectric]

Take heart. After installing the OS X update on the the 2010 iMac Core i7, I cloned its HDD to an external HDD. Then I booted the 2009 iMac Core i7 with that drive.

Portal at 2560x1400 "High" with 4X MSAA
2009 iMac Core i7 Before = 19 fps
2009 iMac Core i7 with Cloned Drive = 42 fps
2010 iMac Core i7 = 59 fps

ETQW 2560x1400 "High" with 4X MSAA
2009 iMac Core i7 Before = 29 fps
2009 iMac Core i7 with Cloned Drive = 44 fps
2010 iMac Core i7 = 48 fps

And X-Plane 2560x1400 "High" with 2X MSAA
2009 iMac Core i7 Before = 80 fps
2009 iMac Core i7 with Cloned Drive = 114 fps
2010 iMac Core i7 = 128 fps

WoW went from 42 fps to 49 fps on the 2009 (vs 52 fps on 2010)
Team Fortress went from 29 fps to 44 fps on the 2009 (vs 44 fps on 2010)

These numbers confirm to me that the newer drivers account for part of the gains. The 2010 iMac Core i7 is still faster, though not as dramatically.

That's terrific news, and thanks for that. My 2009 is likely going to my parents for Xmas to make room for a 2010 for me (I'm not above gifting hand-me-downs when they're high-end hand-me-downs . Still, it's nice to know that the gap won't be that large in the meantime once driver updates are released.

Also nice to get some level of empirical confirmation that ATI performance really can be significantly raised with different drivers and that Apple likely has improvements in the pipeline.

 

[DoFoT9]

Take heart. After installing the OS X update on the the 2010 iMac Core i7, I cloned its HDD to an external HDD. Then I booted the 2009 iMac Core i7 with that drive.

These numbers confirm to me that the newer drivers account for part of the gains. The 2010 iMac Core i7 is still faster, though not as dramatically.

OH MY! that is terrific news! did you notice any stability issues?

i think that we may expect some changes in 10.6.5 for the 4850 GPUs if they include these updated drivers. not bad.

you have restored some of my faith, thanks very much.

 

[barefeats]

OH MY! that is terrific news! did you notice any stability issues?

i think that we may expect some changes in 10.6.5 for the 4850 GPUs if they include these updated drivers. not bad.

you have restored some of my faith, thanks very much.

No stability issues.

You're welcome.

 

[627874654]

I'm wondering if it's possible to play Mafia II, which is available on 24 Aug.

 

[Sir.Jonas]

Hi all,

I just ordered mine.

27' / 2.93ght / 16gb Ram / 1TB + 256GB SSD and the famous "5750 HD"

It's will be my first mac.

Before I used to work and play (Almost World in Conflict) with my PC.

Sorry for my English, I usually speak French and German.

Cheers

Jonas

 

[Will : Hi !]

Thanks for taking the time to run some new tests.

I know you must be quite busy right now, but if you do find yourself with too much times on your hands, it wouldn't hurt to run the other (i.e. non-AA) tests with the new drivers, as well as checking what improvement the new drivers give on the Mac Pro w/4870

 

[314631]

OH MY! that is terrific news! did you notice any stability issues?

i think that we may expect some changes in 10.6.5 for the 4850 GPUs if they include these updated drivers. not bad.

you have restored some of my faith, thanks very much.

Why would they update the drivers for the old 4850s? I think Apple will be quite happy for these benchmark numbers old vs new to exist for as long as possible. We have seen how they are marketing this refresh after all. Hilarious that it's mostly all software-based performance driven gains.

It doesn't bother me because I'm not a gamer. But I hope gamers have the opportunity to get drivers outside of Apple. Otherwise expect to be shafted.

 

[G-Force]

Well, the drivers already work on the 4xxx series so I guess they will be included in 10.6.5. The performance with AA turned on is unacceptable with the current drivers.

 

[Eidorian]

CUDA cores are still better than Stream cores AFAIK so the amount of them doesn't immediately tell the performance. I don't know how much faster, maybe Eidorian does. He seems to know stuff like this

Desktop 5850 has only 1440 Stream cores though. The cores aren't everything, mobility versions are heavily underclocked so the clock speed is fairly important. Unless Apple adds support for CrossFire, it would be useless to have dual GPUs and I doubt it.

Divide ATI's shaders by 5 for a direct comparison.

The only other major difference is that nVidia has higher shader clocks compared to the core speed. On ATI it's 600-800 MHz while on nVidia it's 1,000 - 1,500 MHz.

Take heart. After installing the OS X update on the the 2010 iMac Core i7, I cloned its HDD to an external HDD. Then I booted the 2009 iMac Core i7 with that drive.

Portal at 2560x1400 "High" with 4X MSAA
2009 iMac Core i7 Before = 19 fps
2009 iMac Core i7 with Cloned Drive = 42 fps
2010 iMac Core i7 = 59 fps

ETQW 2560x1400 "High" with 4X MSAA
2009 iMac Core i7 Before = 29 fps
2009 iMac Core i7 with Cloned Drive = 44 fps
2010 iMac Core i7 = 48 fps

And X-Plane 2560x1400 "High" with 2X MSAA
2009 iMac Core i7 Before = 80 fps
2009 iMac Core i7 with Cloned Drive = 114 fps
2010 iMac Core i7 = 128 fps

WoW went from 42 fps to 49 fps on the 2009 (vs 52 fps on 2010)
Team Fortress went from 29 fps to 44 fps on the 2009 (vs 44 fps on 2010)

These numbers confirm to me that the newer drivers account for part of the gains. The 2010 iMac Core i7 is still faster, though not as dramatically.

That's much more in line with my expectations.

 

[barefeats]

Thanks for taking the time to run some new tests.

I know you must be quite busy right now, but if you do find yourself with too much times on your hands, it wouldn't hurt to run the other (i.e. non-AA) tests with the new drivers, as well as checking what improvement the new drivers give on the Mac Pro w/4870

I was up early this morning to start working on that. So far I've seen a small bump with Team Fortress and WoW. A big bump with X-Plane and ETQW. More details later today...

 

[Will : Hi !]

I was up early this morning to start working on that. So far I've seen a small bump with Team Fortress and WoW. A big bump with X-Plane and ETQW. More details later today...

Cool - thanks.

 

[DoFoT9]

Why would they update the drivers for the old 4850s? I think Apple will be quite happy for these benchmark numbers old vs new to exist for as long as possible. We have seen how they are marketing this refresh after all. Hilarious that it's mostly all software-based performance driven gains.

It doesn't bother me because I'm not a gamer. But I hope gamers have the opportunity to get drivers outside of Apple. Otherwise expect to be shafted.

i would be bothered because it still effects everybody - who wants an unoptimised computer?

 

[hedgehogmac]

Take heart. After installing the OS X update on the the 2010 iMac Core i7, I cloned its HDD to an external HDD. Then I booted the 2009 iMac Core i7 with that drive.

Portal at 2560x1400 "High" with 4X MSAA
2009 iMac Core i7 Before = 19 fps
2009 iMac Core i7 with Cloned Drive = 42 fps
2010 iMac Core i7 = 59 fps

ETQW 2560x1400 "High" with 4X MSAA
2009 iMac Core i7 Before = 29 fps
2009 iMac Core i7 with Cloned Drive = 44 fps
2010 iMac Core i7 = 48 fps

And X-Plane 2560x1400 "High" with 2X MSAA
2009 iMac Core i7 Before = 80 fps
2009 iMac Core i7 with Cloned Drive = 114 fps
2010 iMac Core i7 = 128 fps

WoW went from 42 fps to 49 fps on the 2009 (vs 52 fps on 2010)
Team Fortress went from 29 fps to 44 fps on the 2009 (vs 44 fps on 2010)

These numbers confirm to me that the newer drivers account for part of the gains. The 2010 iMac Core i7 is still faster, though not as dramatically.

Interesting, so if I can get someone with a new 2010 imac to let me clone their drive to an external drive (with superduper for example) I can then boot from the external drive anytime I want to play games and get the better performance from my imac 4850 with the new drivers as you showed above. Is that correct and is it that simple?? thanks

 

[314631]

i would be bothered because it still effects everybody - who wants an unoptimised computer?

The computer is really only unoptimised if you are a gamer. I am completely certain that, if new drivers are made available by Apple, most of us will never be able to tell the difference.

 

[DoFoT9]

The computer is really only unoptimised if you are a gamer. I am completely certain that, if new drivers are made available by Apple, most of us will never be able to tell the difference.

certain bugs will become present, CS5 can use some GPU cycles and these drivers are likely effecting the performance of this program as well as others.

not that i can see the differences - but i SURE do want the best performance for my computer, don't you?

*tries to think of car analogy*

 

[314631]

certain bugs will become present, CS5 can use some GPU cycles and these drivers are likely effecting the performance of this program as well as others.

not that i can see the differences - but i SURE do want the best performance for my computer, don't you?

*tries to think of car analogy*

It's probably a marginal performance hit in applications like the CS5 suite.

I stopped caring about getting every bit of performance out of my machine when I switched to Mac. I no longer shop for the fastest processors or the best graphics card options. I don't get excited by performance benchmarks much anymore. I really believe if this stuff is important to you then the Mac is a poor choice.

 

[DoFoT9]

It's probably a marginal performance hit in applications like the CS5 suite.

I stopped caring about getting every bit of performance out of my machine when I switched to Mac. I no longer shop for the fastest processors or the best graphics card options. I don't get excited by performance benchmarks much anymore. I really believe if this stuff is important to you then the Mac is a poor choice.

dont be ridiculous. you cannot say what i should expect (or what i shouldnt expect heh). i have been a mac user ALL my life. i dont ask for the highest performance for games as i seldom game myself. however i do demand A LOT from my machines. having and using 12GB RAM for various tasks on the computer at the same time speaks for itself, and even the GPU can effect the performance of the machine when this comes into play. sure, i wont notice that TINY difference in performance for applications - but the drivers are there and already writte for the computers.. so i expect them to be released.

if not, i might ask Mr BareFeats to upload them somewhere

 

[TMRaven]

It's probably a marginal performance hit in applications like the CS5 suite.

I stopped caring about getting every bit of performance out of my machine when I switched to Mac. I no longer shop for the fastest processors or the best graphics card options. I don't get excited by performance benchmarks much anymore. I really believe if this stuff is important to you then the Mac is a poor choice.

Can't really speak for all of us tho. I personally like the form factor of the iMacs, and of course OSX itself. I find osx much more enjoyable to do everyday things on, including adobe cs, web browsing, IMing and other tasks. As a gamer, I don't care for having 100fps while playing crysis maxed, but I do want a system that will do a good job of playing all the modern games with no slowdowns.

A lot of people on the forum have been especially peeved at the lackluster performance of their favorite games on osx, and those benchmarks really show the performance difference. If you look at the sheer amount of starcraft2 topics alone, you'd probably get a good sense of how bad people would feel that they can't play their favorite game under osx in fullest details without it lagging real bad.


On another note, I just now overclocked my mobility 4850 to desktop standards in Windows. It was a very painless process, and through a very particular fraps fps test while running a sped up sc2 replay from my player cam, I have gained 20% fps for a 20% clock increase. (2560x1440 resolution and all settings maxed-- went from 28fps average to 35fps average.) I upped the optical drive fan in smc fan control under osx, and the result of overclocking was that my now desktop 4850 gpu never went above 63c while doing the benchmarks. I'll do some more long term playing sessions with it tonight, to see if the temp ever gets higher.

With all that said, the overclocking potential of mobility 5850 makes me salivate.

 

[DoFoT9]

A lot of people on the forum have been especially peeved at the lackluster performance of their favorite games on osx, and those benchmarks really show the performance difference.

true, but you cant exactly blame apple for that can you - the game companies are just as much to blame

With all that said, the overclocking potential of mobility 5850 makes me salivate.

im waiting to see some results will be exciting!

 

[jpjandrade]

true, but you cant exactly blame apple for that can you - the game companies are just as much to blame

Not true. OpenGL is today at version 4.1, while Apple only implemented until 2.something. The game companies can't optimize the game with really old APIs.

 

[barefeats]

Interesting, so if I can get someone with a new 2010 imac to let me clone their drive to an external drive (with superduper for example) I can then boot from the external drive anytime I want to play games and get the better performance from my imac 4850 with the new drivers as you showed above. Is that correct and is it that simple?? thanks

Yes.

 

[DoFoT9]

Not true. OpenGL is today at version 4.1, while Apple only implemented until 2.something. The game companies can't optimize the game with really old APIs.

2.something eh? bit dissapointing.