[crooner]

Apple has released an updated list of Core Image compatible graphics cards and it's a short one:

? ATI Mobility Radeon 9700
? ATI Radeon 9600 XT, 9800 XT, X800 XT
? nVidia GeForce FX Go 5200
? nVidia GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
? nVidia GeForce 6800 Ultra DDL, 6800 GT DDL

The question begs; will anyone be buying a new card to take advantage of Core Image? Which one will you get?



I suppose this question is aimed more at G4 owners.

[powertrippin]

I'm looking to snag a 9600XT and overclock the bejesus out of it.

[waxcrash]

My main machine is an Power Mac with a GigaDesigns Dual 1.4 GHz 2MB L3 Cache (7455), 1GB RAM, and a Radeon 9000. I will upgrade to Tiger on the 29th and see how it handles. I see myself buying a Radeon 9800 Pro eventually.

[naphtali]

Ohno! The Mobility 9600 is not on the list now :/

[angelmb]

I think my ATI 9000 is going to be more than enough for what I really need.

[CIA]

I have a 64mb OEM GeForce3,, is it a no go?

[Eug Wanker]

Arggh!!! The Mobility 9600 DOES support Core Image's GPU acceleration. So does the desktop 9600 Pro.

The 9000 does not, and neither does the GeForce 3, but there is CPU (Altivec) fallback. How well that works I dunno.

[Kenneth]

MAD SCIENCE: FireGL X3 Converted To A
Radeon X800 for G4 Power Macs

If you own a G4 Power Mac with a 2X or 4X AGP slot, your best option is the Radeon 9800 Pro Mac Edition (128MB). Buy.com has it for $225 net after $15 off Coupon applied. Check also with Other World Computing or Small Dog Electronics or the ATI Online Store.


For G4 Cube owners, I recommend the Radeon 9000 AGP card with 128MB of VRAM being sold by Other World Computing. If you can find a GeForce 3, it runs even faster -- but the fan makes it noisier.

Really.. GeForce 3 > Radeon 9000?

[Lateralus]

Originally Posted by Kenneth

MAD SCIENCE: FireGL X3 Converted To A
Radeon X800 for G4 Power Macs



Really.. GeForce 3 > Radeon 9000?

Barely.

[CIA]

Whats the difference between the 9600 Pro and the 9600 XT? OWC has the 9600 pro 64MB edition for $119, is this a core image compatible card?

[Lateralus]

Yes, it is compatible.

Only real difference is the clock speed of the GPU. And of course, more memory.

[AlphaQuam]

So... which would be considered better: the 9800 XT or the 9800 Pro SE (256MB)? I can find the 9800 Pro SE locally for a nice price but haven't seen the XT around (can't find info on ATI's Mac page, either). Does it only come on new Macs... such that I wouldn't be able to order it separately?

[Luca Rescigno]

The 9800XT is an OEM-only card; that is, it was only available as a build-to-order option with a PowerMac. You can't buy it separately. Supply may be short since Apple is no longer even offering it as an option for the PowerMacs.

That said, the 9800XT is the faster card. They have the same 256 MB of VRAM, but the 9800XT runs at a higher clock speed than the 9800 Pro SE (which is just a standard 9800 Pro with 256 MB of RAM and an AGP Pro interface for the G5s). There won't be a huge difference and you'd probably pay a lot more for the 9800XT, so it would probably be a better deal to get the 9800 Pro SE instead.

[AlphaQuam]

Hey thanks for the quick reply! Am I correct in assuming that the 9800 Pro SE should support Core Image without a problem then?

[CIA]

Originally Posted by AlphaQuam

Hey thanks for the quick reply! Am I correct in assuming that the 9800 Pro SE should support Core Image without a problem then?

Well, I'd assume that if the 9600's are OK, then anything after that should be as well (AGP only of course)


This begs my question. I have a Quicksilver Dual 800, with an Apple OEM 64MB Geforce3 card. Apparently this is a rare card as well, and still fetches a fair price on eBay as it's good for cubes. Think I should sell the Geforce3, and put to money towards a 64MB 9600 pro? Or go all out and grab a 9800 pro? I don't game with this machine really, (It's a dual 800, nothing modern plays well) so this upgrade would be strickly to enhance core-image. I do a lot of video production on this machine, FCP-HD, LiveType, Motion, ETC.
I know the CPU will hold me back over the card for most games....

[Eug Wanker]

Can a 9600 Pro even run a G4? The 9800 Pro can, but aren't the 9600 cards G5 only?

[Lateralus]

They need to be modified.

[d0ubled0wn]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Arggh!!! The Mobility 9600 DOES support Core Image's GPU acceleration. So does the desktop 9600 Pro.

Why do you say this? Those two aren't on Apple's list of Core Image capable video cards.

Well this stinks. I bought a 9800 Pro a few months back and it's no longer Core Image capable!

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by d0ubled0wn

Why do you say this? Those two aren't on Apple's list of Core Image capable video cards.

Well this stinks. I bought a 9800 Pro a few months back and it's no longer Core Image capable!

Yes it is. Core Image needs Shader 2.0 capabilities. The 9600 series and the 9800 Pro support that. The latter very snappily too. Apple just doesn't list the GPUs it's not currently selling.

[d0ubled0wn]

Ever the vessel of arcane Mac knowledge, thanks for the explanation Eug. I feel much relieved now.

[Kenneth]

For ADC display owners, like me.. I need to buy the $99 Apple DVI to ADC Display Adapter for those ATI retail card (e.g. Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB, G4)

[jock]

I can confirm that the 9600 M does work with CI Eug is correct

[Link]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Can a 9600 Pro even run a G4? The 9800 Pro can, but aren't the 9600 cards G5 only?

Taping 2 pins off on the ADC connector with some magic tape is all you have to do. I have a 9600XT running nicely here (but the ADC connector isn't powered due to a different location of header)

[ajprice]

My current card in my G4 is a GForce2MX Twinview 64Mb (the computers original card), I don't want to spend loads of money on a card, the G4 is 4 years old now. Would this cheap FX5200 be made to work in a G4? What would it take if it is possible, because if it involves a soldering iron I'll forget the idea right now! If it needed 'flashing', what does that actually mean? What do you do to a card to 'flash' it?

[naphtali]

Thanks for the reassurance, Eug! Sorry to make you Arrgh.. Was genuinely disappointed

[jamil5454]

I'm not sure if the 9800 pro SE Mac card differs from the PC card, but if they're the same (which I'm assuming), then the 9800 pro SE is a card you don't want. The 9800 pro SE is basically a castrated 9800 pro, with only 4 pixel pipelines instead of 8. The 9600XT performs relatively on par with the 9800 pro SE. At least this is with the PC version. If I am wrong in assuming that the Mac and PC versions are the same, then someone correct me.

[UnixMac]

From all that I've been told a 9600 and above with 64MB or more is CE capable. For example my PB with a 9700 will work just fine.

So I'm sure the 9800 is good, just cause it's not listed.. they're just trying to push the newer more expensive X800 is all.

[Socially Awkward Solo]

So the 9600 PRO came with the original Dual G5's right? OR was there a non-pro 9600?

On anther note, how will one be able to tell if your card is working like it should and not handing it off the the CPU. Remember the way to tell with QE is if your cursor has a drop shadow?

[MORT A POTTY]

Originally Posted by jamil5454

I'm not sure if the 9800 pro SE Mac card differs from the PC card, but if they're the same (which I'm assuming), then the 9800 pro SE is a card you don't want. The 9800 pro SE is basically a castrated 9800 pro, with only 4 pixel pipelines instead of 8. The 9600XT performs relatively on par with the 9800 pro SE. At least this is with the PC version. If I am wrong in assuming that the Mac and PC versions are the same, then someone correct me.

no, this is definitely not true of the Mac cards.

on the PC side, you are absolutely correct though.

[Luca Rescigno]

Actually, there's no such thing as a 9800 Pro SE on the PC side of things. There's a 9800SE, which sucks ass, and a 9800 Pro EZ, which is also pretty bad (9800 Pro with a 128-bit memory bus instead of 256-bit).

[d.fine]

How come there's no mention of the 9600XT Mac edition on Ati's website? Where can one find some info on this card?

[MORT A POTTY]

Originally Posted by Luca Rescigno

Actually, there's no such thing as a 9800 Pro SE on the PC side of things. There's a 9800SE, which sucks ass, and a 9800 Pro EZ, which is also pretty bad (9800 Pro with a 128-bit memory bus instead of 256-bit).

yeah, but you know what he meant.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Socially Awkward Solo

So the 9600 PRO came with the original Dual G5's right?

Yes, but only the high end model. It was a BTO for the low end models, which came with the 5200U.

OR was there a non-pro 9600?

There's a non-Pro 9600, but not on Macs.

If TS is right, at the low end it sounds like Apple is replacing the 5200U with the 9600. (They're both low end, but the non-Pro 9600 is still better than the 5200U.)

As for the high end, the 9650 appears to be RV351, which is the replacement for the 9600 Pro. That's actually slower than the current 9600 XT, but supposedly it's a heluvalot cheaper. That would be OK, if Apple drops the price of the top of the line Power Mac. (The 9650 is still a lot faster than the 9600 non-Pro.)

On anther note, how will one be able to tell if your card is working like it should and not handing it off the the CPU.

Quartz Debug?

I wonder if the ripple effect with Dashboard will become jumpy (or disappear altogether) with a non-CI GPU.

[a2daj]

Originally Posted by jamil5454

I'm not sure if the 9800 pro SE Mac card differs from the PC card, but if they're the same (which I'm assuming), then the 9800 pro SE is a card you don't want. The 9800 pro SE is basically a castrated 9800 pro, with only 4 pixel pipelines instead of 8. The 9600XT performs relatively on par with the 9800 pro SE. At least this is with the PC version. If I am wrong in assuming that the Mac and PC versions are the same, then someone correct me.

That's one of the reasons I don't like refereing to the 9800 Pro Mac Special Edition as 9800 Pro SE, it only leads to confusion as the SE designation on the PC side means a crippled 9800 Pro, while SE on the Mac side actually stands for Special Edition. Using 9800 Pro MSE for the short hand form would probably clear up some of the misunderstandings Maybe they should have referred to the 9800 Pro MSE as 9800 Pro G5, but then Apple probably would have been after them for using "G5"

[Luca Rescigno]

And all of this discussion summarizes one idea perfectly - ATI should f*cking learn how to name their video cards better. Jesus H. CHRIST it's been an ongoing confusion-fest for ages. Apple ditched their retarded naming scheme in 1997 when they discontinued the 8600/9600 line, but ATI has just kept it going, and nVidia's doing the same thing.

[Amacapart]

"I have a Quicksilver Dual 800, with an Apple OEM 64MB Geforce3 card............ I do a lot of video production on this machine, FCP-HD, LiveType, Motion, ETC."

Very odd since Motion will neither install or run on that card.

You could get $200 + on Ebay for an ADC GF3, enough to get a 98oo Pro retail card.

I'd do it.

[CIA]

True, Motion does not run on this card. A fact I discovered when I got my 30 day free trial in the mail and it was a no go. I was spitting out pro-app when I typed, and motion falls into that category. But, the Apple Motion specs page does give insight into the cards themselves. i.e. � ATI Radeon 9800 XT (R360)� ATI Radeon 9800 Pro (R350) etc....

Actually, on further inspection, the cards required to use Motion also seem to be what's required for core image. Guess you need shader 2.0 support for motion.

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Yes it is. Core Image needs Shader 2.0 capabilities. The 9600 series and the 9800 Pro support that. The latter very snappily too. Apple just doesn't list the GPUs it's not currently selling.

Here is a little link comparing most of the video cards out for macs.
It links to a PDF, and it's intended for cube owners to see what will work for them in a cube. But the card specs are all listed, and you can see what has shader 2.0 support etc.... So you can get a sense of what is core image compatible or not.

[Catfish_Man]

Originally Posted by Socially Awkward Solo

So the 9600 PRO came with the original Dual G5's right? OR was there a non-pro 9600?

On anther note, how will one be able to tell if your card is working like it should and not handing it off the the CPU. Remember the way to tell with QE is if your cursor has a drop shadow?

If you have the developer tools (CHUD, specifically), open up Quartz Debug.

[Eriamjh]

If Core Image makes the OS seem faster, great.

If not having a Core Image compatible video card makes Tiger feel slower than Panther, then I'm not buying Tiger.

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

If Core Image makes the OS seem faster, great.

If not having a Core Image compatible video card makes Tiger feel slower than Panther, then I'm not buying Tiger.

I am willing to bet that the "3GHz PowerMac G5" you're waiting on will have just that... so I wouldn't worry too much about that... in the mean time, if that is indeed what you are waiting on, then don't invest in Tiger.. that's a good idea.

[bovie]

I think it is weird that the Geforce FX 5200go works but the Radeon mobility 9600 does not. I fell sorry to people that bought 15 and 17inch pb's a little over a year ago. They had 9600's and it is not CI supported but the 12in go 5200 is.

Why would apple do this.

[Link]

The MR9700 and 9600 are almost identical, I'd be surprised if they didn't work in tiger, especially since motion DOES support them..

[Catfish_Man]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

If Core Image makes the OS seem faster, great.

If not having a Core Image compatible video card makes Tiger feel slower than Panther, then I'm not buying Tiger.

As has been said many times on this forum and others, Tiger is faster than Panther, with or without Quartz 2D Extreme (Core Image won't change general speed either way. Q2DE is related in some ways, and will speed things up, but even without it most things will be faster in Tiger)

[jock]

Originally Posted by bovie

I think it is weird that the Geforce FX 5200go works but the Radeon mobility 9600 does not. I fell sorry to people that bought 15 and 17inch pb's a little over a year ago. They had 9600's and it is not CI supported but the 12in go 5200 is.

Why would apple do this.

See my earlier post

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

I wonder if the ripple effect with Dashboard will become jumpy (or disappear altogether) with a non-CI GPU.

disappear altogether

[bovie]

jock, so the 9600 mobility does work? Remember that mobility and desktop chips are not the exact same. Also why would apple not list it as supported?

Also, I am really mad at Apple to have the CI supported vid card list up before the mac mini release then, take it down for untill tiger is released then put it back up again. This is unfair maketing on their part. Not to say that microsoft has not done worse thing's but, this is just not right. I refuse to belive it was just an oversight by their part.

[Amacapart]

If you look at the "supported" list, it is all currently shipping cards, with the exception of the 9800 Xt which just stopped shipping.

This is standard Apple. Whatever hardware they have for sale is the "baddest, awesomest" stuff until they stop selling it, then it becomes something you need to update/upgrade. Everything from 9600 on up all run from same 9700 kext. There is no reason they wouldn't ALL be supported unless Apple places some arbitrary, artificial "block" on some. And if that happens you can be sure there will be a hack to fix it.

Pixel Shader 2.0 & FPU unit is what Tiger needs. All of the R300 family has them. You'll all be fine.

[jock]

Originally Posted by bovie

jock, so the 9600 mobility does work? Remember that mobility and desktop chips are not the exact same. Also why would apple not list it as supported?

Also, I am really mad at Apple to have the CI supported vid card list up before the mac mini release then, take it down for untill tiger is released then put it back up again. This is unfair maketing on their part. Not to say that microsoft has not done worse thing's but, this is just not right. I refuse to belive it was just an oversight by their part.

Yes the 9600M (RV350M10) does work, have a look in system profile under extensions under 10.3.9 before any mod thinks this is breaking an NDA.... and you'll see it actually uses the 9700.kext file, version 1.3.42.
Cheers

[bovie]

That is good news for 9600 Mobility People.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

For all of you with the rev A g5's I am "testing" the final Panther right now and you will be happy to know that CG works with the stock ATI 9600.