This is quite incredible, Vista Rocks!! =p

[dollystereo]

Look at this graph, we must have new drivers!!!

http://www.barefeats.com/imacal3.html

123fps in Quake 4 is A LOT!!!
Please AMD, make us new MacOSX drivers, to be able to get half the speed of Vista.

 

[Virgil-TB2]

Look at this graph, we must have new drivers!!!

http://www.barefeats.com/imacal3.html

123fps in Quake 4 is A LOT!!!
Please AMD, make us new MacOSX drivers, to be able to get half the speed of Vista.

Isn't this just because Mac has better support for OpenGL?
Seems to me the same graphs are reversed when the games are using that DirectX crap.

This allows: "iMac runs games better than Windows itself!"
and: "The new iMac still only has half the speed of a budget PC!"

to both be true. At least when it comes to gaming.

The thing that pops into my head when I hear these things however is always:
"Why do we judge computer performance based on the habits a tiny subset of computer users who's main goal is mental masturbation?"

 

[BlackMax]

The thing that pops into my head when I hear these things however is always:
"Why do we judge computer performance based on the habits a tiny subset of computer users who's main goal is mental masturbation?"

Not sure where you pull you numbers from, but the billion dollar computer gaming industry and even a poll on this forum (https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/340844/) would debate your statement above.

dollystereo is just excited about the latest 3D video performance results he found for the new iMac. Perfectly understandable. At least he is not insulting and condescending.

Oh, and people use 3D gaming benchmarks as a reliable indicator of a computer's performance capability because it is something everyone can directly relate to in the REAL world. As opposed to benchmarks such as SpeedMark, PC Mark, CPU Dhrystone, CPU Whetstone, etc.

 

[Santa Rosa]

"Why do we judge computer performance based on the habits a tiny subset of computer users who's main goal is mental masturbation?"

Thats some deep thinking.

Those graphs IMHO dont really tell you much and are nothing to get excited over.

 

[dollystereo]

Isn't this just because Mac has better support for OpenGL?
Seems to me the same graphs are reversed when the games are using that DirectX crap.

This allows: "iMac runs games better than Windows itself!"
and: "The new iMac still only has half the speed of a budget PC!"

to both be true. At least when it comes to gaming.

The thing that pops into my head when I hear these things however is always:
"Why do we judge computer performance based on the habits a tiny subset of computer users who's main goal is mental masturbation?"

I dont really play with my computer, but seing the potential capabilities of the Radeon HD 2600, is what am excited about. I currently have a Mac Pro, and I need a good card to work in motion, so I expect apple to offer me something soon, and if they offer something around HD2 series, I hope we get better drivers. Because the card can handle.
In fact, games reflect very well the power of the computer in terms of graphic capabilities, Quake 4 is a demanding OPEN GL app. I do some Maya working, so it will help a lot.
And gaming is important for "normal" people who have computer for media entertaiment propouse, like my 14 years old brother who will like to play SCII, and Q4, and the price range of the imac is very good.
So in fact, the future performing of the new beautiful imac is REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME AND OTHER PEOPLE HERE. (they have numerous threads about the HD2 cards and the new imac gaming performance)
So when I read this, I found it really useful!!