PDA

View Full Version : high end mac - choice of video


elvis
03-20-2003, 05:36 AM
in another few months (possibly sooner) our graphics department will probably expand which will result in the purchase of a new mac. currently (not including my own personal iMac sitting beisde my PC on my desk) there is only one Mac in the office: a dual G4 PowerPC 1GHz, 1.5GB PC133 SD-RAM with a Geforce4MX video card running OSX 10.2.4.

this thing performs great in it's intended applications (photoshop, indesign, illustrator, acrobat [yes, we have an adobe agreement :)]). as i've mentioned before, the work we do is very resource consuming. we regularly print out very high res ISO A1 and A0 (and double A0) boards and posters for people like olympic committees which need to be of the best quality (technologically speaking... not trying to blow my own horn here or anything).

obviously the next mac will be a high-end G4 once again. whatever's fastest and maxxed out with ram.

anyways, long story short: what's the best video card for the mac platform? the new G4's come with the choice of radeon 9700's or geforce4ti's, both with 128MB of video ram. what's the driver quality like for each? are there any benchmarks around comparing these two cards in high-end macs? most benchmarks you google for these days compare various macs at different clockspeeds, or compare single to dual processing. there's very few that compare something like different video cards in 3D or 2D/Quartz Extreme for that matter.

anyone got some first-hand experience on direct comparisons, or know of a good website that does?

dmeyer
03-20-2003, 05:49 AM
www.xlr8yourmac.com is probably the best place to look...although I dont know if they've tested these two cards head to head.

elvis
03-20-2003, 06:27 AM
i checked the video card database earlier:
http://forums.xlr8yourmac.com/fpsdb/fpsdb.lasso

but there's not even a mention of 9700's on mac. plus the most recent mac in the databases is the old 1.25GHz model.

doesn't seem to be a terribly large amount of compares out there.

rocarpen
03-20-2003, 07:21 AM
I'd say go with the Radeon, but you'll definitely want to hunt down some good comparisons.

Rumor is OS X 10.3 will feature support for high-end cards such as the Quadros and Fire GL's. If you're doing heavy-duty 3D work, you'll want to upgrade to one of those line-ups when 10.3 is released (September?). That's all rumours though, so take that all with a grain of salt.

ages
03-20-2003, 12:37 PM
Radeons are the best, 8500 is faster than the 9000 card.
Nvidia Ti is crappy for 2d, all nvidia cards have 2d bugs.

If u can order the 1.42DP with a 9700 card and apple will get it to u. Last time a vid card was delayed apple shipped teh macs with the nearest speed card and sent in the mail the ordered card and let the consumers keep the other card for free.

Dispite what others say, macs are very capable in the DV and 3d market. These days ppl dismiss ease of use and enjoyment of applications/intergration for high mhz numbers.

I use DP Xenon compaq 2.5 / quattro 4 2 gig ram system at work.
Home DP 1.25 1.25 ram. ATI 9000 card.

Mac is far more enjoyable, pc is great for gaming and 3d to be fair, but windows is unenjoyable.

CgFX
03-20-2003, 04:39 PM
Originally posted by ages
Nvidia Ti is crappy for 2d, all nvidia cards have 2d bugs.

Could you expand on that or offer some sort of reference?

Nearly 70% of the PC market and most of the new Apple models would argue with you on this. The apple cards are the same chips and a majority of the driver is the same code. If there are problems, there is a good chance it is as much apple's issue as it is nvidia's but I suspect there are not issues to the degree you imply.

GregHess
03-20-2003, 04:46 PM
elvis,

You might want to mention to your department about apple's upcoming decision on their next generation cpu cores. It might be worth waiting an extra month or two, if you could get a mac with faster then pc performance :). The decision should be sometime in April. (Either AMD or IBM..ignore the ZDnet article, its bogus)

I disagree with ages over the nvidia ti bugs. I've seen nothing but problems with all manner of radeon cards in 3d and seen no differences in 2D. (I am of course now only using DVI-I outputs).

dmeyer
03-20-2003, 04:53 PM
Maya on the Mac:

ATi chip in my powerbook = buggy, artifacting, marker menu's act funny

Ti4600 in my home mac = solid, non-buggy, fast...(and now cheaper than 9700)

Greg: Dvorak strikes again! He and Tom should hang out.:beer:

GregHess
03-20-2003, 05:10 PM
Dvorak strikes again! He and Tom should hang out.

I just can't believe that guy. There wasn't even a shred of half truth in the entire article. Not only was it completely false, but he even made it worst by some of his accusations.

I mean itanium? Give me a break. If you wanted a mac with dual itanium's, the system would cost well into the 20,000 USD. Who the hell is gonna buy that. Just do a search on pricewatch for itanium. Each freaking CPU can be anywhere from 2700 USD to almost 6700 USD. FOR THE CPU'S!!!!!

The truth of the matter is apple's been both talking with AMD and IBM for the past few months, and they're been tested models with both chips.

It'll just come down to apple's decision on which one they pick.

I figure it'll be IBM, just so they won't be using a mainstream pc CPU. The 1.8's seem about equiv to a 2.6 P4...and will scale to 2.5 by early next year. Either way, it'll give an absolutely massive performance boost to apple's line. Though I'd really like a Athlon-64 Titanium notebook hehe.

elvis
03-20-2003, 10:43 PM
Originally posted by ages
Nvidia Ti is crappy for 2d, all nvidia cards have 2d bugs.

Mac is far more enjoyable, pc is great for gaming and 3d to be fair, but windows is unenjoyable.
this kind of post was not at all what i hoped to get out of this. this is not a PC vs Mac war, nor is it a "throw random statements around" war.

i'm looking for a direct comparison between the two cards on identical hardware with a variety of test software.

greg: i think you're right. waiting for the new "G5" or whatever will either mean getting some slightly better technology, or getting the G4's cheaper when the inevitable price-drop hits. still curious all the same to see how the above mentioned cards perform on mac, and if their performance is similar in direct comparison to the PC platform.

PlanetMongo
03-21-2003, 03:25 AM
Originally posted by GregHess
Dvorak strikes again! He and Tom should hang out.


I figure it'll be IBM, just so they won't be using a mainstream pc CPU. The 1.8's seem about equiv to a 2.6 P4...and will scale to 2.5 by early next year. Either way, it'll give an absolutely massive performance boost to apple's line. Though I'd really like a Athlon-64 Titanium notebook hehe.

I would go with PPC970, as well. It would be a huge burden on their developers to say "Okay, we got you to switch to OS X, now port everything over to x86-64..." Which, if the application is coded right, isn't too bad (the software my company produces cross-compiles for solaris64, solaris32, solarisIntel, and a myriad of others with just a few changes in the makefile). I'd hope they go with IBM's, but then again, I'll be happy with EITHER. :)

Meshbuilder
03-21-2003, 11:49 AM
Hi Elivis..
The problem is that Ati has not released the radeon 9700 for Mac.. So no one knows how good it is.. On PC the Radeon 9700 is much faster graphic card than the GForce Ti 4600.

I use the 4600 Ti card on Mac and the only bug I know of is some refresh problems in Photoshop when working with text..

GregHess
03-21-2003, 01:00 PM
On PC the Radeon 9700 is much faster graphic card than the GForce Ti 4600.

Just because a card is faster, doesn't mean its the best solution. As noted in many threads, the 9700 pro has a wide variety of problems in a variety of 3d applications. Its a great card for games, but depending on your app of choice, it may be best avoided.

elvis
03-22-2003, 03:32 AM
Originally posted by Meshbuilder
Hi Elvis..
The problem is that Ati has not released the radeon 9700 for Mac.. So no one knows how good it is..
i've noticed on both the US and Australian apple shop websites they mention that apple is having problems shipping G4's with 9700's in them. i wonder if this is a chip/card shortage problem at apples end? i know 9700's have been in very short supply in general here in australia for over a month now.

greg: i think the mac will be used very little for 3D development. it's primarily our 2D editing and compsitioning environment for the whole gamut of adobe applications. however i know the main mac user is doing a maya course soon, so i'd like to keep the possibility open for 3D on that machine.

as has been mentioned above, rumours abound that the "G5" and OSX 10.3 will include support for professional 3D cards (quadro's and firegl's in particular), which means i might just play the waiting game.

CGTalk Moderation
01-14-2006, 05:00 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.