Thinking of going iMac 27", several questions

[MythicFrost]

Hi,

I have several questions and would appreciate any help.

My first question is, what will the 4850M GPU be capable of? Say in terms of playing Crysis: Warhead and BFBC2?
My current system is a 08 Mac Pro Octo @ 3.0GHz, 18GB 800MHz RAM, GTX 285, and Intel X25-M G2 SSD, 1920x1200 res on a 23" ACD.

How comparable is the 4850M 512MB to the GTX 285 1GB? Could I play Crysis on medium settings w/ no AA @ 2560x1440?

My second question is, how easily can I install an Intel X25-M G2 SSD? Also will I be able to take the iMac into the store and get them to install the SSD?
My third question is, will I notice much of an improvement over my current system. The iMac has faster RAM, and newer Core i7 processors @ 2.8GHz that turbo up to 3.46GHz.

My fourth question is, when using Parallels 5 Desktop for Mac and configuring a VM I can choose how many processor cores I dedicate to the VM, will it show up as 8 or only 4?

Thanks

 

[Hellhammer]

Here are some gaming benchmarks at 2560x1440, no Crysis though. You might be able to play it at medium settings though but GTX 285 will run circles over mobile 4850.

Installing SSD is possible but not very easy. Scroll iMac forum a little bit and you'll find threads about it. I doubt they can replace it in store because it needs and adapter etc.

Not sure does Parallels support Hyper-Threading

 

[MythicFrost]

Thanks for your reply, what would you guess? GTX 285 = 4x the frame rate of 4850M?
Yeah, it seems I need to pull the glass off and replace the HD with a SSD.

I'm trying to figure out if Parallels supports hyper threading atm.
Also, does anyone know if my current system will be faster than the 27" iMac? not including game performance (IE the graphics card).

 

[Hellhammer]

Thanks for your reply, what would you guess? GTX 285 = 4x the frame rate of 4850M?
Yeah, it seems I need to pull the glass off and replace the HD with a SSD.

I'm trying to figure out if Parallels supports hyper threading atm.
Also, does anyone know if my current system will be faster than the 27" iMac? not including game performance (IE the graphics card).

8-core Mac Pro is way faster than quad core iMac. A lot more RAM and better CPUs etc..

I Googled Parallels and HT but didn't got 100% sure answer but I think it does

 

[MythicFrost]

8-core Mac Pro is way faster than quad core iMac. A lot more RAM and better CPUs etc..

Well, my Mac Pro is the previous to the current Nehalem Mac Pros. Will my Mac Pro really be faster? It's using an older processor and slower RAM?

I Googled Parallels and HT but didn't got 100% sure answer but I think it does

Me too, hard to find info about it.

 

[Hellhammer]

Well, my Mac Pro is the previous to the current Nehalem Mac Pros. Will my Mac Pro really be faster? It's using an older processor and slower RAM?

It'll still easily outperform any iMac. Though Nehalem is ~20% faster than CPUs used in your MP, it still has 8 cores and clock speed of 3GHz while iMac has 4 cores and clock speed of 2.8GHz. If you're using an app that supports Hyper-Threading, then iMac comes close to your MP but it's still faster.

RAM speed doesn't affect that much really.. DDR3 1067MHz gives only less than 10% better performance in real world than DDR2

 

[wessew]

Take a look at these comparisons.

http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/mac-benchmarks/

 

[Transporteur]

If you're using an app that supports Hyper-Threading, then iMac comes close to your MP but it's still faster.

HT can increase the performance by 10-15% not more.
If your are running multithreaded apps, the 8 core Mac Pro runs circles around the iMac, it doesn't even come close!
The 3GHz octad Pro (2008) is approximately 100% faster in multithreaded apps than the i7 iMac!

Geekbench is no a very good indicator for real world performance, on the contrary, it pretty much sucks!

Both VMWare and Paralles support multicore CPUs and it doesn't matter if these cores are real (in case of the Mac Pro) or virtual (HT). The software itself can't recognise that.
If you're doing heavy VM stuff, keep the Mac Pro. It is significantly faster for such applications that an iMac since it has 8 real cores, instead of 4 real and 4 fake ones.

 

[All Taken]

See the guide in my signature.

 

[Badger^2]

So you are going to sell you current system to get a 27" i7 iMac?

Seems kinda like a "side step"?

I would skip it.

For you waiting for the new MPs seems like a better option.

 

[MythicFrost]

All right, thanks guys. Appreciate the feedback, I think I'll stick with my MP.

 

[Xtremehkr]

Fu*k, there is so much interest in gaming on the iMac, you would think that Apple could make an iMacG with a top of the line graphics ensemble.

 

[Badger^2]

Fu*k, there is so much interest in gaming on the iMac, you would think that Apple could make an iMacG with a top of the line graphics ensemble.

Problem was that in September of 2009 the mobile 5XXX cards werent available, so there was no way to get them into the current iMac.

the 4850/4870 was the fastest ATI chip you could get.

Assuming that late this year when the iMacs are updated they will get the 5XXX series cards instead.

No doubt the 5XXX card will be faster, but how much might be debatable?

I just google 5850 vs 4850 and the first test shows 5-10 fps increases? meh.

 

[Hellhammer]

Problem was that in September of 2009 the mobile 5XXX cards werent available, so there was no way to get them into the current iMac.

the 4850/4870 was the fastest ATI chip you could get.

Assuming that late this year when the iMacs are updated they will get the 5XXX series cards instead.

No doubt the 5XXX card will be faster, but how much might be debatable?

I just google 5850 vs 4850 and the first test shows 5-10 fps increases? meh.

I just checked some benchmarks of 4850 and 5850 and 4850 actually performs better than 5850... Mobile 4850 is just underclocked desktop 4850 so might be because of that.