Why complain about Mac Vid Cards?

[Wild-Bill]

The real question is whether Apple will update the imacs with improved gpus or will they do as they have done in the past and keep the same weak to mediocre graphics for longer than is necessary.

If history is any indication, I would say the latter.......bolded for your pleasure. It's Apple's trademark move.

Now that Apple is on the Intel platform, there really is no excuse for them to do this. And it's not a hardware issue either, as there are no "Mac specific" video cards anymore - only firmware.

 

[anonymous161]

Apples choices have always been on the cheap and week side. Like the last version of the 12" powerbook that i own, it won't play videos or movies from the iTunes store.

 

[flopticalcube]

If history is any indication, I would say the latter.......bolded for your pleasure. It's Apple's trademark move.

Now that Apple is on the Intel platform, there really is no excuse for them to do this. And it's not a hardware issue either, as there are no "Mac specific" video cards anymore - only firmware.

And it looks like Apple is beginning to see what customized firmware on a video card can really do when it doesn't work right.

 

[fblack]

If history is any indication, I would say the latter.......bolded for your pleasure. It's Apple's trademark move.

bolded LOL

Yea the G4 powerbooks come to mind, I waited for ever to see an update to cpu-remember 1.67 to...1.67? Then there was the GPU. The Radeon 9700 was in the powerbooks for something like 2 years. But going back to the main question: Why complain about Mac Vid cards? Like you said history. Perhaps with their new found solvency along with the Intel chips Apple will be a little more flexible. It would be nice if they chart out a new history, but only time will tell...

 

[slimflem]

thanks for summing it up better than i could

after all apple could easily offer more frequent updates on their computers especially with the current speed of updates

i simply don't get it why a 999 buck PC should be able to put a mac pro in base configuration (how much is that ? 2300 ? 2400 ?) to shame in terms of performance
in the past there was the excuse "but one is x86 and the other is powerpc you can't compare" .. now you can .. and i'm still told to buy a second computer which i, as a customer (i have a mac mini btw), don't get.. after all i currently have 2 computers: a PC for gaming and printing and a mac for the rest.. and believe it or not it's totally annoying and space wasting

paying 100-200 premium ok i could live with that .. but paying thousands is something completely different
i have a 22" LCD screen ... so i have to choose between mac mini and mac pro in the apple line up.. so i'm stuck with either laptop parts or paying through the nose for a machine aimed at photoshop

Mac Pro machines are not marketed towards gamers and it is not the intent of Apple to produce this type of machine. The Mac Pro is a professional workstation and is marketed as such. It is basically a server in a high-end desktop case...to put it simply. FB-DIMM timings are not what you want for gaming either. Nor do you really want ECC ram such as the Mac Pro has. Operating system aside, whether your are using OS X or Windows on this hardware, it is not built to be a bad ass gaming system. It is intended for professionals that want stability and and reliability. If you choose to run Windows on this machine rather than OS X, that is your choice. Apple knows what they are doing in providing their UNIX-based professional workstation. If you want gaming, then build a Windows machine and stop complaining that the Mac Pro is under powered because it is not by any means.

 

[contoursvt]

I'm sure Maya and lightwave would never benefit from a faster GPU. They are not professional applications either and probably not suited for a workstation

 

[Roderick Usher]

Apple's video card choices suck, plain and simple. Not only are the video cards in the iMacs underpowered, they have been isolated as the main reason for the freezing issue. I think the MBP got a decent break with the 8600gt, but it is by no means a screamer. The mini has older-than-dirt integrated GMA950, and the Mac Pro's video cards are almost three years old in some cases.

The base video card in the Mac Pro (nVidia 7300GT) is 17 months old and pathetically underpowered. It's like putting a 2-cylinder engine in a Mustang.

The x1900xt in the Mac Pro will be three years old this coming January. Some people had to have their cards replaced due to artifacting. Apple had Foxconn produce a revision 2 of the card that supposedly cut down on the artifacting.

The Quadro FX 4500 is about two and a half years old (July 05) and has been superseded by several generations of professional-level graphics.

Apple prefers cards that are quiet, and in doing so have and will regularly de-tune the cards to lower clock speeds so that fan speed can be kept to a minimum. Apple never takes into account graphics performance, or anything related to gaming, because quite frankly, His Steveness doesn't want you playing games on your Mac. He wants you to make edible garbage with iMovie 08 and post it to YouTube.

Pouring salt in the wound, Apple charges outrageous prices for these video cards, when you build-to-order. Want to add a second 7300GT to your Mac Pro?? It will cost you $150.00, when it can be purchased RETAIL for $50.00 or less. How about the x1900xt?? $400.00 for that card, where (if you can even find it anymore) it costs $150 or less. Consider this: an nVidia 8800GTS that would literally spank the x1800xt costs about $250.00. So for an extra $150.00 you can have a three year old card.

They could have done so much better on the video card options in the iMac, but they wanted high margins and low noise. And they could have at least updated the Mac Pro's at least ONCE since its inception a year and three months ago. The Mac Pro has been virtually untouched since its inception.

Apple has no grasp of video card technology, given their long history of poorly-performing and absurdly expensive graphics card choices.

Well said. The graphics gap between Macs and PCs is the elephant in the room that few people seem to want to acknowledge, an embarrassment that's often swept under the rug with some of the most absurd and tortured reasoning I've ever seen. I'm of the view that true advocates of the Mac platform should be up in arms about this, screaming about it, regardless of whether they themselves are directly affected by it.

 

[Freyqq]

here is the argument:

mac laptops are respectable. 8600GT is one of the best cards you can get atm on a laptop. Macbook not having a card is understandable for its target audience and price.

desktops are slow for what you pay

mac pro- the radeon 1950xt or w/e they sell is a 2-3 y/o card that you can buy for a little over $100 retail. Apple sells it for $500 and it remains to be the best card you can buy for any mac. Meanwhile back in the present, 8800GT goes for about 250 and it can run circles around the 1950xt. Kinda sad..don't you think considering your buying a 3k thing here?

i can understand the mac mini not having a card b\c its a small machine. Fine.

i can understand the imac's card b\c its an all-in-one. To keep the thing "aesthetically pleasing," its something you have to deal with.

then i insert my - give us a midrange tower - argument and..yea

 

[illicium]

I'm of the view that true advocates of the Mac platform should be up in arms about this, screaming about it, regardless of whether they themselves are directly affected by it.

Wait, what?? Why do you feel that I, as an advocate of the Mac platform, should fight a battle that I am not interested in??? Should I fight for the Jeep Wrangler to have heated seats even tho I live in Texas?? No, because I have better things to do with my time than fight SOMEONE ELSE'S battles. That's retarded to expect someone who isn't impacted in the least by the "lack of graphics power" to take time out of their busy days to be "up in arms" about something "they themselves aren't directly affected by".

 

[Roderick Usher]

Wait, what?? Why do you feel that I, as an advocate of the Mac platform, should fight a battle that I am not interested in??? Should I fight for the Jeep Wrangler to have heated seats even tho I live in Texas?? No, because I have better things to do with my time than fight SOMEONE ELSE'S battles. That's retarded to expect someone who isn't impacted in the least by the "lack of graphics power" to take time out of their busy days to be "up in arms" about something "they themselves aren't directly affected by".

Anyone interested in the preserving and improving the overall health of the Mac - an advocate in the truest sense of the word - should participate in this, and strongly. The graphics problem isn't something whose effects are confined to just one small subset of users. As other posts have already shown, it has significant consequences for the Mac platform as a whole. Those who take their role beyond that of the typical consumer, as many Mac users do, owe it to both themselves and the user community to be aware of and speak out on this issue.