New Mac Products 7th August

kvfb97 said:
nearly posted the link by accident, but theres another shop online which has the same name as a big forest in brazil (i think) and they have the apple keyboard there! the old one! and its in stock...
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's my last resort if there's none in the shop tomorrow. More expensive though, hence checking other options :)

EDIT: and it's not a forest, it's a river... :p
 
lay-z-boy said:
Correct me if i'm wrong but the mac pro uses lga 771 W/S cpu's. ocuk only stock single cpu desktop lga 775 cpus?

Then there is the massive premium of fb-dimm....
Click to expand...

Does it? :confused:

I always thought it was LGA 775 as everyone else, shall research that one, can't be a £300 difference tho.


FB-DIMM, look at OcUK Prices, 2Gb OcUK (2x1Gb) = + 1gb from apple...

and then there isn't a DX10 graphics card when they have have been out for a month+ now...
 
AdWright said:
I don't post around here much any more, but have the admins slackened off on the moderation of illegal software discussion? All this banter about OSX86...
Click to expand...
You can talk about it, but you can't discuss HOW to do it AFAIK
 
Concorde Rules said:
Does it? :confused:

I always thought it was LGA 775 as everyone else, shall research that one, can't be a £300 difference tho.


FB-DIMM, look at OcUK Prices, 2Gb OcUK (2x1Gb) = + 1gb from apple...

and then there isn't a DX10 graphics card when they have have been out for a month+ now...
Click to expand...

Why would you need a DX10 card in OSX?

There is quite a premium for 771 cpu's, the dual socket boards are not exactly cheap either. (the mac pro board is very smart too with the pci-e lanes being adjustable).
 
lay-z-boy said:
Why would you need a DX10 card in OSX?

There is quite a premium for 771 cpu's, the dual socket boards are not exactly cheap either. (the mac pro board is very smart too with the pci-e lanes being adjustable).
Click to expand...

so when you boot into windows you can play games
 
daven1986 said:
so when you boot into windows you can play games
Click to expand...


What he said.

I have currently a PowerMac G4 which is 5 years old, been perfect! But now its far far far too slow to deal with 10mb RAW images from my 350D.

Im selling my PC but I play games so I need a graphics card to power the 2407.

A X1900XT is old tech, and I have a X1900XTX here which I can flash to use with OS X for free.

I must have a 8800GTX or a HD 2900XT when I buy.
 
Concorde Rules said:
Im selling my PC but I play games so I need a graphics card to power the 2407.
Click to expand...

What games will you be playing? ive got the bottom of the range 7300gt in my Macpro and it happily runs dual Dell 24¨ screens and I get a damn decent framerate when playing Eve-Online full screen on 1 of them.
 
Fstop11 said:
How does this iMac 2600 Pro HD perform up next to my PCI-E X1800XT 512

Thats my only concern with the iMac. It would become my only computer really so games could be an issue.
Click to expand...

Not nearly as good. Was looking at benchmarks yesterday for my housemate (he wants one of these new ones) and they're nothing special. The 1800XT will be still be quicker.
 
I'm going to hazard a guess and say the 2600 Pro is at least 2x slower than the X1800XT. Benchmarks for the X1600 Pro are 4 times slower than the X1800XT so it's a conservative guess.
 
The Apple 20in TFT to go with the Mini is still way too dear and not competitive now. I'd like to see that come down by at least another £150.

You can pick up a 20in Philips for £180 now.
 
DVD Cinema said:
The Apple 20in TFT to go with the Mini is still way too dear and not competitive now. I'd like to see that come down by at least another £150.

You can pick up a 20in Philips for £180 now.
Click to expand...
And you could get a 22in for around 200 now as well, even cheaper than that. Pity apple are so expensive when it comes to... erm... everything :(
 
ATi 2400 is low end, it is in the low end 20".

For the others, the 2600 is a mainstream part, and it has better HD playback than anything else on the market. It has more advanced silicon than the 2900, being on a lower nm process. ATi was too chicken to put their top card on the new process, so they experimented with the 2600. For once the iMac actually has a decent, recent card. Given the iMac is a consumer device, using laptop parts to keep the form factor sexy, the 2900 is too much of a stretch.

That the 2900 and 8800 are not options on the Mac Pro is risible however.
 
kvfb97 said:
And you could get a 22in for around 200 now as well, even cheaper than that. Pity apple are so expensive when it comes to... erm... everything :(
Click to expand...
I actually seriously considered the 20" display because the quality is awesome and I could have done with a FireWire hub. Main barrier to that wasn't really anything to do with the price, but the fact that the stands are crap - tilt only. I wasn't about to buy some nice Apple hardware and shove it on a couple of phone books to get it to a comfortable height :p
 
daven1986 said:
so when you boot into windows you can play games
Click to expand...

Do you really think apple care in the slightest about that?

x1900xt is good enough for osx, for now.

If you are buying an apple for windows, why not just get a dell workstation or build your own?
 
It's an odd one.

The Mac Pro is used for high end graphics so the argument about consoles killing the PC market for high end graphics cards doesn't work.
I would be more inclined to produce a high power 1/2/4 GPU based Mac Pro so that it can shift it's focus out to things such as medical imaging etc. Although nVidia would prefer you purchase their quad SLI box for workstations instead.

The rest of the Mac line does tend to see a gaming console impact..
 
I doubt we'll see the Mac Pro get any graphics updates until at least October.

I'm thinking they may release one to coincide with Leopard, but otherwise it could just get updated at Macworld San Fran in Jan 2008 :(

Nice tidbit I just found on the Gizmondo site (RE: iMacs)

The 20-inch and 24-inch screen have more differences than just size. The 20-incher has a slightly lower viewing angle and is less bright (160-degrees vs. 178-degrees; 290 nits vs 370 nits.) But the 20-inchers are more contrasty at 800:1, as opposed to the 24's 750:1.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NickK said:
It's an odd one.

The Mac Pro is used for high end graphics so the argument about consoles killing the PC market for high end graphics cards doesn't work.
I would be more inclined to produce a high power 1/2/4 GPU based Mac Pro so that it can shift it's focus out to things such as medical imaging etc. Although nVidia would prefer you purchase their quad SLI box for workstations instead.

The rest of the Mac line does tend to see a gaming console impact..
Click to expand...

medical imaging needs high powered graphics too

The only reason they're getting away with giving a £20 card as standard is because most pro companies that need graphics pay the £1000 for quadro fx
 
chex said:
medical imaging needs high powered graphics too

The only reason they're getting away with giving a £20 card as standard is because most pro companies that need graphics pay the £1000 for quadro fx
Click to expand...

Most pro's will use a windows machine with 2 fx5600's (8800gtx) in sli. I would know, my boss uses one :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom