UPDATE: The "8800 GS" has been confirmed to be a 8800M GTS. According to various review benchmarks, it's *the* top-of-the-line graphics you can get for a single card, only to be beaten by the 8800M GTX. (SLI modes with 2 or more cards don't count. 
) The 8800M came out last November, so while yes it is 'old', the 9800M is nowhere close to being out. Unlike the desktop 9600 series which is on parity with the 8800, the notebook 9650M is based on the 8700M.
-----------
There's two variants of the 8800 GS: There's the desktop version, and then there's the mobile version, however it was renamed to the 8700M.
First of all, the desktop variant of the 8800 GS only comes in 384MB VRAM. Since it's has 512MB, if it uses the desktop kind, it's definitely an underclocked card. Which one, I don't know. I'm betting it's an underclocked 9600GT since they're much cheaper and more available than the 8800GT. Not to mention the 9600GT is a little bet better when it comes to GPU heat, power saving, etc.
Why did Apple change the name? Probably because it's significantly underclocked to the point where it's nowhere near as powerful as the card it actually is. Apple has done the same multiple times, including the 2400 "pro" that's actually "XT" in the lower end iMacs (that're still available).
If it's actually the 8700M, then things are a little different. First the 8700M allows 512MB of VRAM of GDDR3. If I were a betting man, I'd put a lot more money on it being this. It has a lower heat profile and fits better with Apple's MXM upgrade style. I highly doubt they'd especially engineer (or pay Nvidia to engineer) a desktop card for the MXM port used for the built-in screen. Most of Apple's actual components have been off-the-shelf pieces. However, the 24" requirement is the only thing that's blocking me from saying 100% it's the mobile chip.
At this time, there's not enough information to tell until someone goes and buys one today. However, either the desktop or mobile kinds absolutely SMOKE the 2600s by a long shot. If you play Team Fortress 2, the upcoming Spore, or any other "lower end - for everybody" games, you'll be good to go at full size 1920x1200 and maybe even 2xAA. If you want to play Crysis or UT3 with full effects, then I'm going to pull a fanboy and ask why are you looking at a Mac? Particularity the all-in-one with mobile components.
(A lot of posts I've seen are people wanting an even better GPU upgrade. I doubt we're going to get another upgrade between now and Nehalem. Especially if the Montevina chipset is actually in the new iMacs as I've heard. We're running on 8-9 month upgrades for the iMac. I highly doubt we're going to bump those 2600s. Mom and Pop don't really care about what video card they have, so long as CoverFlow works nice and fast.)
For full disclosure, I get payed this week and I plan on buying the highest end iMac.
) The 8800M came out last November, so while yes it is 'old', the 9800M is nowhere close to being out. Unlike the desktop 9600 series which is on parity with the 8800, the notebook 9650M is based on the 8700M.-----------
There's two variants of the 8800 GS: There's the desktop version, and then there's the mobile version, however it was renamed to the 8700M.
First of all, the desktop variant of the 8800 GS only comes in 384MB VRAM. Since it's has 512MB, if it uses the desktop kind, it's definitely an underclocked card. Which one, I don't know. I'm betting it's an underclocked 9600GT since they're much cheaper and more available than the 8800GT. Not to mention the 9600GT is a little bet better when it comes to GPU heat, power saving, etc.
Why did Apple change the name? Probably because it's significantly underclocked to the point where it's nowhere near as powerful as the card it actually is. Apple has done the same multiple times, including the 2400 "pro" that's actually "XT" in the lower end iMacs (that're still available).
If it's actually the 8700M, then things are a little different. First the 8700M allows 512MB of VRAM of GDDR3. If I were a betting man, I'd put a lot more money on it being this. It has a lower heat profile and fits better with Apple's MXM upgrade style. I highly doubt they'd especially engineer (or pay Nvidia to engineer) a desktop card for the MXM port used for the built-in screen. Most of Apple's actual components have been off-the-shelf pieces. However, the 24" requirement is the only thing that's blocking me from saying 100% it's the mobile chip.
At this time, there's not enough information to tell until someone goes and buys one today. However, either the desktop or mobile kinds absolutely SMOKE the 2600s by a long shot. If you play Team Fortress 2, the upcoming Spore, or any other "lower end - for everybody" games, you'll be good to go at full size 1920x1200 and maybe even 2xAA. If you want to play Crysis or UT3 with full effects, then I'm going to pull a fanboy and ask why are you looking at a Mac? Particularity the all-in-one with mobile components.
(A lot of posts I've seen are people wanting an even better GPU upgrade. I doubt we're going to get another upgrade between now and Nehalem. Especially if the Montevina chipset is actually in the new iMacs as I've heard. We're running on 8-9 month upgrades for the iMac. I highly doubt we're going to bump those 2600s. Mom and Pop don't really care about what video card they have, so long as CoverFlow works nice and fast.
)For full disclosure, I get payed this week and I plan on buying the highest end iMac.
