[Luca Rescigno]

Apple has made the nVidia GeForce 6800GT DDL a new BTO option on PowerMacs. It's a $100 cheaper option than the 6800 Ultra and represents an excellent value - the PC version of this card generally sells for around $400, but it only has one DVI and one VGA output. So $400 over the GeForce FX5200 is a great deal. The video card itself is almost the same as the 6800 Ultra, it just runs at a lower clock speed. Here's what Apple says about the card:

Availability Note: The NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT DDL graphics card is currently more readily available than the NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra DDL graphics card. Customers may wish to take into account longer delivery times for the Ultra DDL card and consider the NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT DDL card if CTO orders are needed sooner. The GT DDL card enjoys a $100 savings, as well, over the Ultra DDL card.

[Commodus]

I agree that it's a better deal than the Ultra: probably 95% of the performance (sometimes more) and all of the feature set, but $100 less. I'd rather spend the extra for a 6800 GT than to get a 9800 XT.

[Lateralus]

Good job ATI. Just sit back and let Apple move towards nVidia for mid-range and high-end GPUs. Don't bother releasing a Mac version of your latest cards.

*Sigh*

[jamil5454]

Maybe ATI is accepting deafeat on OpenGL platforms.

[Commodus]

Hey, ATI does have a Mac version of the X800 series in development; they showed it running at one expo! It's just a question of whether it becomes a retail card or a BTO option with the next revision.

[Big Mac]

Originally posted by Commodus:
Hey, ATI does have a Mac version of the X800 series in development; they showed it running at one expo! It's just a question of whether it becomes a retail card or a BTO option with the next revision.

Some people are terrifically impatient.

[Cadaver]

I'd like to see some speed comparisons between the 6800GT and 6800 Ultra. Should be interesting to see, especially with the new nvidia drivers that are reportedly in the 10.3.6 update.

[Turnpike]

my only real planned upgrade for this machine right now is a new graphics card... can't wait to see some tests/comparisons here.

[Luca Rescigno]

Well, the 6800GT uses a 350/1000 MHz clock (core and memory), while the 6800 Ultra uses a 400/1100 MHz clock. Otherwise they're identical. From what I've seen, the 6800 Ultra basically gives a few extra frames per second over the GT - not a revolutionary improvement by any means, but if you want ultimate performance than the Ultra is the way to go.

[rhogue islander]

The PC versions of the 6800 GT generally overclock to Ultra speeds with little or no hassle. I have mine running at 402/1.08 reliably in my Athlon 64 rig.

Maybe someone will write a nice little overclocking utility for nvidia cards under OS X like Thomas Perrier did for Ati cards.

[michaelb]

Originally posted by Lateralus:
Good job ATI. Just sit back and let Apple move towards nVidia for mid-range and high-end GPUs. Don't bother releasing a Mac version of your latest cards.

*Sigh*

I wouldn't have a problem with this. I've always liked nVidia more for both PCs and Macs.

With ATI, all I'll say is that any manufacturer who puts more effort into optimizing its drivers for DirectX (thus locking people into Windows for high graphics performance) than it does for OpenGL (a more open standard also available on Linux and Mac as well) probably deserves less of Apple's and our support.

Competition is good though.

[jcadam]

I'd like to see the 6600GT released for the Mac as well.

Right now we don't have a good choice for a mid-range card.

The 9800 is still priced as a high-end card and it's a generation behind.
The 9600, while decent when it was released, is now obsolete also.
Then there's the GeForce FX 5200, a POS that does not belong in PowerMacs.

[Simon]

Originally posted by jcadam:
Then there's the GeForce FX 5200, a POS that does not belong in PowerMacs.

That's true, but then again Apple is using the FX 5200 Ultra in PowerMacs and iMacs.

I'm not trying to nitpick here, but these two GPUs really shouldn't be mixed up. There has been so much bloodshed in this forum just because of this. Of course the 5200 Ultra is a crappy GPU (at least for those who really care about their GPUs), but nevertheless it's vastly superior to the older 5200.

[UnixMac]

Originally posted by Simon:
That's true, but then again Apple is using the FX 5200 Ultra in PowerMacs and iMacs.

I'm not trying to nitpick here, but these two GPUs really shouldn't be mixed up. There has been so much bloodshed in this forum just because of this. Of course the 5200 Ultra is a scrappy GPU (at least for those who really care about their GPUs), but nevertheless it's vastly superior to the older 5200.

I am a big Apple fan, and I totally drink their cool-aid, but I have to say that it's totally disgraceful that Apple sell PM's with the 5200. Even the lowly single 1.8 should come with the ATI 9600 as the base card. For God's sake, the iMac has a 5200, and the iMac community is bitching ad nauseam about it..

There three cards on the PM should be

Bottom - ATI 9600
Mid - ATI 9800
Top - Nv 6800 (GT)

I can see how this may necessitate a bump in price of not more than 5%, which I'm sure the average PM buyer would not flinch at.. (but I could be wrong).

Plus, you could always have the option to "customize" a lower version of any of these machine for price credit. Kinda like taking the HD down from 250 to 160 or something.

If Apple doesn't take GPU's seriously and 3D graphics seriously, then neither will 3D app developers take Apple seriously.

[NordicMan]

Think Apple reads these boards? Tell that right to Apple, about the graphics cards.

Since you fellows are discussing this, perhaps you may help one who does not know.

Why does a card like the 'oxygen' card from 3D labs, containing 512MB not make it to the Mac, if it aims at the workstation/science platform, as a BTO?

Or, if Apple is aiming at the gaming market somewhat, why use the 5200 ultra in their premier machines(G5s), not the 9600?

[UnixMac]

Originally posted by NordicMan:
Think Apple reads these boards? Tell that right to Apple, about the graphics cards.

Since you fellows are discussing this, perhaps you may help one who does not know.

Why does a card like the 'oxygen' card from 3D labs, containing 512MB not make it to the Mac, if it aims at the workstation/science platform, as a BTO?

Or, if Apple is aiming at the gaming market somewhat, why use the 5200 ultra in their premier machines(G5s), not the 9600?

Sure, I tell Apple, more than you can imagine... And yes, Apple has people who's full time job is keeping up with these boards... Haven't you ever seen the "removed at the request of Apple legal" messages before?

Also, I agree that Apple needs to get "workstation" type cards for this platform to be taken seriously.

PC has access to FireGL or Nvidia Quadro.. and we should too.

It's not like were asking for a Sun XVR-4000 ( http://www.sun.com/desktop/products/graphics/xvr4000/ ) at $29,995 a pop! (being sarcastic..)

These are cards that cost a hair more than the current top of the line but allow for a better handling of large 3D models.

[NordicMan]

Thanks for the return. No, I have not seen the phrase "removed.." I just started reading the MacNN boards.

I wasn't meaning it personally about telling Apple, just generally. It has been some time since I fed back to Apple. I know they do seek out people's thoughts now and then, have been contacted. It has been a while since I got a new Mac, am looking at the PowerMacs now.

At times I see what hardware is available in the larger computer world, and I noticed that while they are known for gaming machines, alienware has this Roswell work station, and that company boasts that all of their workstations carry the Fire GL as a basic card. It stuck in me, that a gaming platform, or at least that is what they advertise themselves as, would have this as a workstation, and the Mac options are for what are more commonly gaming cards in the pc world, not so much workstation type hardware. Gamers will be building the PCI-extreme, or express type machines in this next year, with that graphics card option. Supposedly, there may be a trend away from Open GL, toward the other kind of graphics, like pcs use, which will not augur well for the Mac, at least for gaming, although perhaps this is just speculation. All the more reason for Apple to turn to seeking out the finer graphics cards for work, if that develops. They should also seek the gaming kind of cards, as they have been. One would think with greater perfomance of the PCI-e, that those kind of cards for the scientific/modeling community will also develop.

It just registers and bothers in the heart that this is so, as all that I have are Macs.

Apple should hear about this, as an order for a thousand or so should be some kind of motivation to a hardware company. I know software companies consider orders for say 100 or so copies would consider it motivation to produce a product. I am thinking of graphics companies.

So I will raise one additional voice about this to Apple.

[bradleykavin]

i think its bs that they sell the imac g5 with the 5200..if anything the 1.6 imac g5 should come with 5200 and then the 1.8 should come with ati 9600 atleast..you cant upgrade those gpus so its not fair to people that expect it to play games for two years..i have a powermac dual 1.8 rev b and im buying the 6800 gt because the 5200 is beginningt o lag

[UnixMac]

Originally posted by NordicMan:
Thanks for the return. No, I have not seen the phrase "removed.." I just started reading the MacNN boards.

I wasn't meaning it personally about telling Apple, just generally. It has been some time since I fed back to Apple. I know they do seek out people's thoughts now and then, have been contacted. It has been a while since I got a new Mac, am looking at the PowerMacs now.

At times I see what hardware is available in the larger computer world, and I noticed that while they are known for gaming machines, alienware has this Roswell work station, and that company boasts that all of their workstations carry the Fire GL as a basic card. It stuck in me, that a gaming platform, or at least that is what they advertise themselves as, would have this as a workstation, and the Mac options are for what are more commonly gaming cards in the pc world, not so much workstation type hardware. Gamers will be building the PCI-extreme, or express type machines in this next year, with that graphics card option. Supposedly, there may be a trend away from Open GL, toward the other kind of graphics, like pcs use, which will not augur well for the Mac, at least for gaming, although perhaps this is just speculation. All the more reason for Apple to turn to seeking out the finer graphics cards for work, if that develops. They should also seek the gaming kind of cards, as they have been. One would think with greater perfomance of the PCI-e, that those kind of cards for the scientific/modeling community will also develop.

It just registers and bothers in the heart that this is so, as all that I have are Macs.

Apple should hear about this, as an order for a thousand or so should be some kind of motivation to a hardware company. I know software companies consider orders for say 100 or so copies would consider it motivation to produce a product. I am thinking of graphics companies.

So I will raise one additional voice about this to Apple.

No problem, I didn't think you were being crass... I wish more people would use the www.apple.com/feedback link however rather than just bitch to each other.

[NordicMan]

This is an informative thread, for me. I am wondering if there is a difference between the Apple 6800 GT, and any other 6800 GT(Why if there is?). The other thing that I wonder, is how might I buy a 6800 GT and put it into the dual 2Ghz that I am getting now? Is there anything that one should know before going about trying to do such a thing? Is it just BTO? I first thought that I would get a 9600 GT, anyway, to replace the 5200. Apple would not do this on a refurbished G5, put in another card.

[macaddict0001]

Your probably thinking of a 9600 xt because a 9600 gt doesn't exist,the graphics card in your computer is good value for the noney but if you need something better the 6800 gt is a very good choice.

[Big Mac]

Originally posted by UnixMac:
Sure, I tell Apple, more than you can imagine... And yes, Apple has people who's full time job is keeping up with these boards... Haven't you ever seen the "removed at the request of Apple legal" messages before?

Also, I agree that Apple needs to get "workstation" type cards for this platform to be taken seriously.

PC has access to FireGL or Nvidia Quadro.. and we should too.

It's not like were asking for a Sun XVR-4000 ( http://www.sun.com/desktop/products/graphics/xvr4000/ ) at $29,995 a pop! (being sarcastic..)

These are cards that cost a hair more than the current top of the line but allow for a better handling of large 3D models.

If Apple had higher market share, we would have a wider range of card options. The Mac market is too small to support so much choice.

[roders]

Okay I've watche this thread develop and have a few nuggest of information to give myself.
On the topic of high end Pro graphics cards on the Mac (Quadro, FireGL, Wildcat etc) of course the availability of thes on our platform would be a bouns, but maybe not as big as one as people think.
It's been a year or two since I was fully uptodate with Pro graphics on the PC side, but in the past it has been the Pro drivers NOT the cards that have the extra functionality/Features for apps such as 3DSMax, Maya etc.
To this end I have heard of people who hack the Pro drivers to work with consumer cards.
Why do ATI/Nvidia/3Dlabs etc sell Pro Graphics cards that are techincaly similar if not the same as there consumer offerings with only the Pro drivers unlocking the extra features, for a LOT more money? The answers in (or more pricesly at the end of) the quesion I've justed asked, Money.
I have heard in the past that Apple includes these Pro level driver features for 3D app's as standard in OSX.
Also the Pro drivers on the PC side are supposed to have been "officialy certified" for use with the big name 3D app's, maybe this makes these ro drivers more stable, maybe it makes no difference, who knows.

[UnixMac]

Originally posted by NordicMan:
This is an informative thread, for me. I am wondering if there is a difference between the Apple 6800 GT, and any other 6800 GT(Why if there is?). The other thing that I wonder, is how might I buy a 6800 GT and put it into the dual 2Ghz that I am getting now? Is there anything that one should know before going about trying to do such a thing? Is it just BTO? I first thought that I would get a 9600 GT, anyway, to replace the 5200. Apple would not do this on a refurbished G5, put in another card.

IF you mean the PC 6800GT and the Mac 6800GT, I think their the same.

As for getting on put into your Mac, after the fact... the only thing you need to BE CAREFUL of is that you make sure the drivers are installed into your OS prior to installing the card. This would be in OS X .3.6 or if you added the drivers to OS X.3.5.

You need atleast OS X.3.5 for the 6800 eitherway, and most importantly, the CD's that shipped with your Dual 2.0 (which are probably 10.3.4 or older) will not boot anylonger whith this card installed.. you'll get a Kernel Panic if you try.

Other than that, the 6800 should be no problem to switch to. Apple sells them for $499 for the GT and $599 for the Ultra.

[UnixMac]

Originally posted by macaddict0001:
Your probably thinking of a 9600 xt because a 9600 gt doesn't exist,the graphics card in your computer is good value for the noney but if you need something better the 6800 gt is a very good choice.

Are you related to the Magazine btw? 100th issue out now.

Just curious.

[macaddict0001]

no i just thought it was a cool name.

[Rev-O]

Originally posted by UnixMac:
IF you mean the PC 6800GT and the Mac 6800GT, I think their the same.

As for getting on put into your Mac, after the fact... the only thing you need to BE CAREFUL of is that you make sure the drivers are installed into your OS prior to installing the card. This would be in OS X .3.6 or if you added the drivers to OS X.3.5.

You need atleast OS X.3.5 for the 6800 eitherway, and most importantly, the CD's that shipped with your Dual 2.0 (which are probably 10.3.4 or older) will not boot anylonger whith this card installed.. you'll get a Kernel Panic if you try.

Other than that, the 6800 should be no problem to switch to. Apple sells them for $499 for the GT and $599 for the Ultra.

Was no big for me, except me being impatient and all. Insert CD that comes with the 6800 GT or Ultra, load on drivers. Power down G5, unpluggy, yank out the old gpu and slam in the new one, closer up the G5 and power it up. G2g.

I got my 6800 Ultra home and immediately slapped it in my G5 and started unpacking my 30", giggling like a school girl... and then realized I hadn't loaded the 6800 drivers. So I had to put the old video card back in to power up the G5 so I could load the drivers. Then swap gpu's and fire up the mother of all displays.

[sodamnregistered2]

Part of the reason to complain about things in a forum like this is to get everything out in the open, so people know what they are dealing with. One of the things I hate most about Apple is how they practice a hush-hush policy towards criticism. Was there anything more useless than Apple giving their products 5 stars or whatever in that rating scheme?

I'm on some BMW forums, and we love our cars, but we don't hesitate to get critical. It improves the breed and ownership experience. Got a flat spot at the top of the rev range of your S52 engine? Try an M50 intake manifold. See, the engine had a weakness, and the people have a solution. If you were gonna buy a BMW with an S52 engine, you'd know they have a flat spot at the top of the rev range BEFORE you bought the car. Maybe it's worth the extra money to get an S54 engine. This makes everyone wiser and smarter regarding the product.

If all we did was sit in the forums and heap praise on BMW, that would be so totally useless. You want to see some stink, you should hear us all going off on how ugly the new "Bangle" designed BMWs are.

====

That said, I do some 3d and basically, Apple is not all that strong in the 3d field. Apple has failed to make the G5 a true workstation type product. Even Dell and HP make workstations with workstation level video cards. I did a model of the Anaheim convention center and I had to start doing things like putting lights on a layer and turning that layer off so I could manipulate my model. Since Apple remains essentially a closed hardware system, it's not like I can go buy a good OpenGL card and just pop it in there.

Apple still lags in games, not just in video cards, but in game software releases which still lag the PC world by a fair amount.

I'm sure soon, Apple will make a new G5 entry and it will have better expandability and offer good video cards, but they are really style over substance still in a lot of ways. Only two hard drives? Only one 5 1/4 drive mount? Only a smattering of serious video cards? The case for the G5 is huge, and the price tag is not that small either. Make the pro machines pro, I've always maintained that position.

[NordicMan]

Yes, I was fuddled up on the 9600.


Thank you kindly, Mr. UnixMac, for the information, I needed that. Yes, I meant between the pc 6800 and the Mac. I will see which version of OS X is on the Mac when it comes.

If Apple ordered more graphics cards, or more potent cards, then we would have a larger portion of the higher end graphics market. If the G5 is Apple's premier desktop machine, it should have a more potent graphics card. Some years ago, when I queried various makers about graphics cards, and their availability for the Mac(like the FireGL), they said they were happy to hear of interest on Mac owners parts.

Also, if stronger cards were put in standard models, or available for BTO in the 'consumer' machines, for gamers, then we would also have a larger market share, even if those consumer machines are not so fast as the G5s. It just would provide more sales for the higher models of the graphics card makers, which one would think would engender them toward Apple.