Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Captain Egotist · Feb 15, 2005, 03:26 PM

I have a quicksilver coming via fedex, dual 1.33ghz g4 and 1.5 gigs of ram.

What video card should I shove into into it?

It's been so long since I kept up on things.... last time I knew this stuff I thought the geforce3 was incredible.

Fill me in.

- Rob

yikes600 · Feb 15, 2005, 04:06 PM

The best card available for your 4X AGP slot is a Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB.

Captain Egotist · Feb 15, 2005, 04:33 PM

Some of them say G5 only... why? Would an 8x AGP 9800 Pro work ina 4x AGP machine?

gbafan · Feb 15, 2005, 05:01 PM

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
Some of them say G5 only... why? Would an 8x AGP 9800 Pro work ina 4x AGP machine?

No, the G5 only units are for.... G5s only

There is a standard Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB AGP 4x model; MSRP $249. That's the one you want. The other model has 256MB for VRAM and only supports AGP 8x.

Captain Egotist · Feb 15, 2005, 05:48 PM

Originally posted by gbafan:
No, the G5 only units are for.... G5s only

There is a standard Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB AGP 4x model; MSRP $249. That's the one you want. The other model has 256MB for VRAM and only supports AGP 8x.

Weird, so a 4x agp card works in a 4x and 2x agp slot... but an 8x only works in an 8x slot.

Where's the best place to score one of those cards? Macmall?

gbafan · Feb 16, 2005, 10:07 AM

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
Where's the best place to score one of those cards? Macmall?

OWC: http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/item/6048/ATI100435050/ ($245.99)

ATI: http://shop.ati.com/product.asp?sku=2393539 ($249.99) Use Promo Code 1010 and get 10% off at the ATI store making the card 224.10 w/ free ground shipping.

MacMall is charging $282.99...
http://www.macmall.com/macmall/shop/...pno~260126.asp

Captain Egotist · Feb 16, 2005, 11:42 AM

Thanks dude. Problem is I have a 20" ADC cinema display. I realize the BTO card doesn't support htat nifty ATi software... but I think I'm going to try for a BTO card sine I don't want to spend the extra $100 on the ADC/DVI convertor thing.

- Rob

yikes600 · Feb 16, 2005, 01:09 PM

There aren't any BTO/OEM Radeon 9800 cards with an ADC port that will work in a 4x AGP slot. The only Radeon 9800 for 4x AGP has DVI, VGA, and S-Video.

If you -really- don't want to use an adapter, you need to find a Radeon 9700 which has ADC and DVI. It's performance is nearly identical to a Radeon 9800 since it uses the same chipset. Good luck finding one -- it pops up on Ebay maybe once a month.

exca1ibur · Feb 16, 2005, 01:45 PM

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
Thanks dude. Problem is I have a 20" ADC cinema display. I realize the BTO card doesn't support htat nifty ATi software... but I think I'm going to try for a BTO card sine I don't want to spend the extra $100 on the ADC/DVI convertor thing.

- Rob

Ati Displays 4.2.2 supports ALL Radeon products even OEMs now. Has since 4.4 I think it was. Check the read me hardware requirements here.

READ ME

gbafan · Feb 16, 2005, 04:27 PM

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
Thanks dude. Problem is I have a 20" ADC cinema display. I realize the BTO card doesn't support htat nifty ATi software... but I think I'm going to try for a BTO card sine I don't want to spend the extra $100 on the ADC/DVI convertor thing.

- Rob

Huh? You're stuck with ADC and the limited amount of cards that support it unless you drop that dinosaur like it is

Captain Egotist · Feb 16, 2005, 07:54 PM

But it's a 20" LCD yo! You want me to get rid of THAT?!?!?! COME ON! I suppose you want me to send it to you for proper disposal eh?

- Rob

PS: So I have to get a DVI-ADC adaptor eh? Lame.

gbafan · Feb 16, 2005, 08:05 PM

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
But it's a 20" LCD yo! You want me to get rid of THAT?!?!?! COME ON! I suppose you want me to send it to you for proper disposal eh?

- Rob

PS: So I have to get a DVI-ADC adaptor eh? Lame.

LOL! I don't want it; sell it? Yeah probably not the best option.

I'd just plunk down the $100 and get the adapter and you won't have this problem in the future. Consider it an investment in the display so when you do want to sell it you can say "Hey, it works with DVI!!"

Captain Egotist · Feb 20, 2005, 12:27 PM

Ouch, no kidding about that 9700 being hard to find. WTF? I'd rather get the 9700 just to avoid having to spend $100 on that stupid DVI-ADC adaptor....

Anyone have any hookups?

- Rob

Mafia · Feb 20, 2005, 12:55 PM

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
Ouch, no kidding about that 9700 being hard to find. WTF? I'd rather get the 9700 just to avoid having to spend $100 on that stupid DVI-ADC adaptor....

Anyone have any hookups?

- Rob

i searched long and hard and found no 9700 mac editions. and no such luck. suck it up, imo.

Captain Egotist · Feb 20, 2005, 03:50 PM

They did make some though.

Cadaver · Feb 21, 2005, 12:52 AM

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
They did make some though.

The Radeon 9700 Pros were available for a short time as OEM cards on certain BTO PowerMac MDDs. They're pretty hard to find these days.

For the original poster's QuickSilver: you could also consider a modified Radeon 9600 Pro (64MB VRAM) pulled from a G5 (not sure if the 128MB Radeon 9600 XTs can be modified - anyone know?). A couple of carefully placed pieces of tape to block off a few select pins on the connector edge, and you've got yourself a working 9600 Pro in the QuickSilver's 4x AGP slot. Plus, the 9600 Pro's are fanless for quiet operation. Since games on G4s tend to be processor/bus limited anyway, the 9600 Pro should perform reasonably well.

The ADC connector on the 9600, however, will NOT supply power to the display in a G4 (since the power connector is in a different place on the G5s; the power connector wont line up without serious soldering skill). You still have full access to the DVI port and the ADC port if you use an ADC-to-D or ADC-to-VGA connector.

OWC I believe sells pre-modded cards with a warranty. Might save you a few bucks as compared to a Radeon 9800 that you could put towards the $99 DVI-to-ADC adapter box.

You might also want to consider the OEM nVidia 4600Ti's. These dual head 128MB cards will work just fine in the QuickSilver (ADC connector and all). While not exactly as fast as a Radeon 9800 Pro, they still perform pretty well in G4-class machines.

Captain Egotist · Feb 21, 2005, 01:42 AM

Would the 128 meg Geforce 4 titanium be better than a geforce 5200?

Just wondering....

- Rob

yikes600 · Feb 21, 2005, 02:47 AM

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
Would the 128 meg Geforce 4 titanium be better than a geforce 5200?

Easily. Hell, even the 128MB version of the 5200 doesn't come close to a GeForce4 Ti.
Here's benchmarks:
http://techreport.com/etc/2004q3/doo...w/index.x?pg=3

Notice how a modest card like the 9600 does over DOUBLE the framerates of the weak 5200.

Cadaver · Feb 21, 2005, 07:54 AM

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
Would the 128 meg Geforce 4 titanium be better than a geforce 5200?

Just wondering....

- Rob

The GeForce 4 Ti is still a great card. Roughly equal in game performance to a Radeon 9600 Pro with the exception of some advanced pixel shader functions that many (most?) games don't even use anyway.

If you want native ADC compatibility, and you can find a reasonably priced GF4Ti online, that may be your best bet. You may find the GF4Ti commanding a premium price however because of this.

Captain Egotist · Feb 21, 2005, 11:16 AM

Thanks for the information so far.... right now I'm still undecided, but I've narrowed it down to 2 cards:

1. Geforce 4 titanium 128 meg
2. That modded Radeon 9600 Pro 64meg

Here's the thing. I have a pretty big monitor (20" cinema), and I'd like to play full res. Is the extra 64 megs of memory in the geforce 4ti going to help a lot at high res? Or will the faster chipset of the 9600 be a better choice?

- Rob

P · Feb 21, 2005, 04:40 PM

Originally posted by yikes600:
Easily. Hell, even the 128MB version of the 5200 doesn't come close to a GeForce4 Ti.
Here's benchmarks:
http://techreport.com/etc/2004q3/doo...w/index.x?pg=3

Notice how a modest card like the 9600 does over DOUBLE the framerates of the weak 5200.

Good thing the 5200 is not available for Mac, then... The only board available for Mac from that generation is the 5200 Ultra, which is up to three times as fast as the regular 5200 in synthetic benchmarks (3 times the memory bandwidth). Don't get them mixed up just because nVidia can't name their boards worth damn.

In general, the 4200 will inch out the 5200U unless you start using FSAA or some of the flashier shader features - the 5200U might win those, but neither is playable at those framerates. The 4400 or higher are linearly faster than the 4200. Note however that the early word on Core Image was that it would not support the Geforce4 Ti, but would support the 5200s. Right now it's not clear what it will support, as Apple pulled the compability list, but while 5200 support is guranteed, Geforce 4 Ti is unlikely at this point. The 5200s actually have a more capable GPU than the Geforce4 Tis, but are hobbled by their memory interface. My advice would be to get a Radeon 9600, which has both the memory interface and the powerful GPU at a decent price.

Cadaver · Feb 21, 2005, 04:57 PM

Ah, yes. Tiger's Core Video support is something important to think about.
Definately full support for the Radeon 9600 Pro; degree of support for the GF4Ti is unknown.

Captain Egotist · Feb 21, 2005, 05:13 PM

But the 9600 only has 64 megs of ram.... would that make games unplayable at high resolutions?

- Rob

yikes600 · Feb 21, 2005, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by P:
Good thing the 5200 is not available for Mac, then. The only board available for Mac from that generation is the 5200 Ultra, which is up to three times as fast as the regular 5200

Did you bother going to the link I posted? The card they tested WAS the 5200 Ultra... and it got killed.

Captain Egotist · Feb 22, 2005, 03:17 PM

Anybody?

128 meg Geforce4 Ti VS 64 meg Radeon 9600....

which one would be better for higher res gaming?

P · Feb 22, 2005, 03:27 PM

Originally posted by yikes600:
Did you bother going to the link I posted? The card they tested WAS the 5200 Ultra... and it got killed.

Yes, I bothered. You said that the "modest" Radeon 9600 was twice the speed of the 5200. That goes only if you compare with the regular 5200. Compare with the 5200U, and you get closer to a third faster for the 9600. That's as it should be, btw - the 9600 series is quite a bit more expensive than the 5200U (or were, they're both last generation by now). The interesting part about tests like this is that nVidia's last-generation midrange board, the Geforce4 Ti 4200, still performs rather well while ATi's high-end from that generation, the 8500, is unplayable at anything over 640*480.

At the end of the day, the 5200U, the 4200 and the Radeon 9550 are playable at 800*600/medium quality. That's actually OK, I saw early tests where you had to drop to 640*480 to get playable rates. The 9600 is a better board all around and will likely be playable for one more generation than the 4200 and the 5200U.

yikes600 · 04:00 PM

My mistake. I see the 9600 doubled the framerates of the 5200 but not the 5200 Ultra. I consider all those cards in the review very modest by today's standards... after all, its a review of "mid range, low-end, and vintage" graphics cards. The 5200/5200 Ultra are just exceptionally slow compared to the rest of them.

Captain Egotist · Feb 22, 2005, 07:40 PM

I feel that its really great that you guys are bickering about things... BUT HOW ABOUT ANSWERING THE QUESTION I"VE ASKED LIKE FOUR TIMES NOW!??!?!

The 9600 only had 64 megs of ram. The GeForce4ti has 128.

Which one will be better for high res gaming?

emark · Feb 23, 2005, 06:11 PM

I have the GeForce4Ti. If you go to Barefeats.com you will see that it is neck and neck with the Radeon 9800 at 1024x768, but gets walloped at higher resolutions...

However, one advantage is that it is supported (and is THE fastest card under OS 9) whereas the Radeon 9800 isn't supported except for basic calls, putting the burden on the processor. To some, this may still be an issue if you have old games you still desire to play. If you spend your time exclusively in X, the 9800 is the way to go.

Good luck

emark · Feb 23, 2005, 06:17 PM

aaahhh, to the big point. I too have a quicksilver, but dual 800. all but about 4 maps on UT 04 turn out great frame rates for me...there are a few sections of a few maps (4-5) where performance drops into the teens...when I hit really, really big spaces with water and alot of natural shapes, vs. the smaller maps in industrial/man-made looking environments...

I am convinced that the machine's limitation is the processor, not the video card...

UT04 uses ONE of a dual processor (like many games), passing off only sound to the second card which is a miniscule burden...

I just can't justify a single CPU upgrade just to game, and don't want to lay out the $$ for a dual fast enough to make a difference that is worthwhile...just biding my time on a new machine pending acceptance to a graduate program...or should I say, pending rejection and keeping working...

again, good luck

Captain Egotist · Feb 23, 2005, 07:30 PM

Scored a geforce 4 titanium today on ebay for $145 with free shipping. Not bad, not a great price either, but seems to be decent. I'll sell my current card to make up some of the dough.

- Rob

PS: I'll review it when I get it. The ADC was the selling point for me.

Cadaver · Feb 24, 2005, 02:15 AM

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
Scored a geforce 4 titanium today on ebay for $145 with free shipping. Not bad, not a great price either, but seems to be decent. I'll sell my current card to make up some of the dough.

- Rob

PS: I'll review it when I get it. The ADC was the selling point for me.

Its a fine card. Enjoy.

Captain Egotist · Feb 24, 2005, 10:31 AM

Originally posted by Cadaver:
Its a fine card. Enjoy.

I hope it works out well. I'm just worried about the high res, and if it'll keep up with my processors.

P · Feb 24, 2005, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
I feel that its really great that you guys are bickering about things... BUT HOW ABOUT ANSWERING THE QUESTION I"VE ASKED LIKE FOUR TIMES NOW!??!?!

The 9600 only had 64 megs of ram. The GeForce4ti has 128.

Which one will be better for high res gaming?

We're not bickering, we're having a friendly discussion. I did answer your question in my first post, see the last sentence. Also, you didn't make it very easy by not mentioning which version of the GF4 Ti you were considering - 4200, 4400, 4600 or 4800.

Captain Egotist · Feb 24, 2005, 04:45 PM

Originally posted by P:
We're not bickering, we're having a friendly discussion. I did answer your question in my first post, see the last sentence. Also, you didn't make it very easy by not mentioning which version of the GF4 Ti you were considering - 4200, 4400, 4600 or 4800.

Considering this is a mac forum, there is only one.

- Rob

Captain Egotist · Feb 25, 2005, 01:04 PM

Video card came today... installed it... artifacting EVERYWHERE, all over the desktop, nothing was moving smoothly, totally horrible.

Does the geforce 4 titanium require SPECIAL drivers? Or are they built into OSX? Is this a bad card?

Please help!

emark · Feb 25, 2005, 02:02 PM

but it sounds as if you need the right drivers.

there shouldn't be any of the problems you describe...I have the same in my dual 800 and there are no problems.

NOTE: this is an APPLE OEM part--NVidia may have made the part, but it was sold as an Apple part for upgrade at time of purchase, or as aftermarket by Apple. Apple has a download for 9 and for X. get them, then run software update to make sure you have the latest stuff installed.

I hope this would work vs. re-installing the OS... I wonder if re-running the 10.3.8 update would see the card and add what you need?

I am guessing, did you replace and ATI card? since the drivers (I think) are unified, the Nvidia ones are probably not on your system...??

good luck

emark · Feb 25, 2005, 02:08 PM

UT04 released an update a few days ago and removed the bottleneck on those pesky 4-5 maps where things just went into the crapper for me.

True, my 800 mhz processor is the big bottleneck, but the game is smooth and fun, with rates from mid 20s to mid 60s on smaller maps with less natural/irregular shapes.

Good luck and post back what happens.

roders · Feb 25, 2005, 02:29 PM

All the drivers should be present in the OS; sorry mate but I reckon ur Gf4Ti is knakered.

P.S does the fan on it work?
I've heard of these failing (they're fairly easy to replace) and thus overheating the GPU, and causing screen atrifacts like the ones you desribe.

Captain Egotist · Feb 25, 2005, 03:44 PM

Originally posted by roders:
All the drivers should be present in the OS; sorry mate but I reckon ur Gf4Ti is knakered.

I think so to. This sucks.

P.S does the fan on it work?
I've heard of these failing (they're fairly easy to replace) and thus overheating the GPU, and causing screen atrifacts like the ones you desribe.

yeah. Checked that already, it's working fine. The heatsink gets pretty hot, even if I'm not doing anything graphically intensive. Also, for a previous question, my previos card was a geforce4mx, so I think it should already have the correct drivers. Right? The video card did not come with a CD, so I'm not sure if there is any software required to support it, but I doubt it.

Here's a few pics:

Sucks. This guy better get me a different card or I'm going to be PISSED.

- Rob

roders · Feb 26, 2005, 05:50 AM

Wow, that looks bad, not very sure if it looks like the kind of artifacting your get from an over heating GPU or Vram; more like broken ones.

The easiest way to tell for 100% deffinet if it's the card would be to try it in another Mac (if u can).

Is the cards fan hooked up and working properly, and is it seated properly in the AGP slot.

macaddict0001 · Feb 26, 2005, 03:21 PM

It is definitely overheating because heatsinks are not supposed to be hot, they are supposed to feel room temperature. Have you checked to see what its clocked at. maybe its been oc'd.

emark · Feb 26, 2005, 06:18 PM

sorry to hear of the continued trouble, stopped back specifically hoping for a happy ending. (No, I won't make a "happy ending" joke that struck me after writing that...)

Don't know if you have a partition or bootable 9 disk there, or if you'd either install 9 on your disk or can, even better, install X fresh to another partition, but that would be the best test if you can't get to another machine to try it. BTW, 9 does for sure have a driver to download from Apple, I may have mispoke on the X part...

Hope to hear good news.

good luck

Captain Egotist · Feb 27, 2005, 10:59 AM

I tried it in 2 other macs, same results. The card is screwed.... already have a refund, just need to send it back.

emark · Feb 27, 2005, 01:19 PM

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
I tried it in 2 other macs, same results. The card is screwed.... already have a refund, just need to send it back.

thank goodness the guy was upfront on the refund...better luck with replacement...

hey, BTW, where did you find that background pic? neat.

Captain Egotist · Feb 28, 2005, 07:20 PM

Well, I got the money back, but he sent me an email saying that he doesn't want the card if it doesn't work.

So... now I have this 'free' geforce4 titanium that's flaking out. ???

Any ideas on how to fix it? The fan is working.... so I don't htink it's a cooling issue.

Anyone have any ideas?

- Rob

macaddict0001 · Feb 28, 2005, 09:45 PM

try underclocking it, because these are overheating symptoms

Captain Egotist · Mar 1, 2005, 12:35 AM

How?

roders · Mar 1, 2005, 03:25 PM

You can't, at least not on the Mac.

Captain Egotist · Mar 1, 2005, 04:10 PM

Originally posted by roders:
You can't, at least not on the Mac.

Then how would it be overclocked?

- Rob