User Name
Password
AppleNova Forums » Speculation and Rumors »

Upcoming Video Cards


Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
Upcoming Video Cards
Page 1 of 2 [1] 2  Next Thread Tools
Xaqtly
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2007-03-20, 12:42

The last rumor I heard was that Apple was working with ATi to bring the next gen card (x2800 I think?) to the upcoming Mac Pros, including Crossover. If it's true, that would make the Mac Pro a really good gaming machine under Boot Camp, and even for Mac games, maybe like UT 3 when that gets ported over. Or Prey. Are there any other rumors about possible upcoming video options?
  quote
washington mac user
can't read
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
 
2007-03-20, 14:40

well I'll add on to yours. The one ATI is supposedly working on a special edition for Apple's Mac Pro. Another rumor is that ATI respun all their graphics cards so they are all 65nm now. Here is a video from CeBit of someone using an R600 that wasn't supposed to. (from theInquirer)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=EJ6aMxPh6k0
  quote
Anthem
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
 
2007-03-20, 16:36

ATI's at 65nm but AMD's only at 90? How bizarre.

ATI might be about to respin their cards, but I can't imagine it's already been done.
  quote
beardedmacuser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: eastmidlandshire
 
2007-03-20, 17:10

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthem View Post
ATI's at 65nm but AMD's only at 90?
They're getting there...

AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+ EE (65nm) review.
  quote
washington mac user
can't read
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
 
2007-04-13, 21:10

ATI's R600 will own....

According to Daily Tech

http://www.dailytech.com/ATI+Release...ticle6903c.htm

Quote:
320-stream processors, named ATI Radeon HD 2900

AMD has named the rest of its upcoming ATI Radeon DirectX 10 product lineup. The new DirectX 10 product family received the ATI Radeon HD 2000-series moniker. For the new product generation, AMD has tagged HD to the product name to designate the entire lineup’s Avivo HD technology. AMD has also removed the X-prefix on its product models.

At the top of the DirectX 10 chain, is the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT. The AMD ATI Radeon HD 2900-series features 320 stream processors, over twice as many as NVIDIA’s GeForce 8800 GTX. AMD couples the 320 stream processors with a 512-bit memory interface with eight channels. CrossFire support is now natively supported by the AMD ATI Radeon HD 2900-series; the external CrossFire dongle is a thing of the past.

The R600-based ATI Radeon HD 2900-series products also support 128-bit HDR rendering. AMD has also upped the ante on anti-aliasing support. The ATI Radeon HD 2900-series supports up to 24x anti-aliasing. NVIDIA’s GeForce 8800-series only supports up to 16x anti-aliasing. AMD’s ATI Radeon HD 2900-series also possesses physics processing.

New to the ATI Radeon HD 2900-series are integrated HDMI output capabilities with 5.1 surround sound. However, early images of AMD’s OEM R600 reveal dual dual-link DVI outputs, rendering the audio functions useless.

AMD’s RV630-based products will carry the ATI Radeon HD 2600 moniker with Pro and XT models. The value-targeted RV610-based products will carry the ATI Radeon HD 2400 name with Pro and XT models as well.

The entire AMD ATI Radeon HD 2000-family features the latest Avivo HD technology. AMD’s upgraded Avivo with a new Universal Video Decoder, also known as UVD, and the new Advanced Video Processor, or AVP. UVD previously made its debut in the OEM-exclusive RV550 GPU core. UVD provides hardware acceleration of H.264 and VC-1 high definition video formats used by Blu-ray and HD DVD. The AVP allows the GPU to apply hardware acceleration and video processing functions while keeping power consumption low.

Expect AMD to launch the ATI Radeon HD 2000-family in the upcoming weeks, if AMD doesn’t push back the launch dates further.
I can't wait!

Apple should refresh their ACD's for this card...

If its 5.1 surround sound, does that mean its HDMI 1.3? or am I off?
  quote
Ryan
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Promise Land of Trustafarians
 
2007-04-13, 23:21

Quote:
Originally Posted by washington mac user View Post
If its 5.1 surround sound, does that mean its HDMI 1.3?
Not necessarily. HDMI has been able to carry 5.1 surround for a while, well before 1.3. Even 1.0 could carry surround sound. What 1.3 brings you is the ability to pass Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD over HDMI to the receiver for it to decode.

Last edited by Ryan : 2007-04-14 at 19:41.
  quote
Schnauzer
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Arizona
 
2007-04-14, 01:01

Crossover?!?!? DO you mean Crossfire?
  quote
Graphguy
can't type
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
 
2007-04-20, 19:35

No, an X2800 won't make a mac a great gaming machine, and there's no real need for Macs to get the 8800 or X2800 graphics card.

The biggest advantage of the new generation of graphicscards, is that they support Microsofts new Direct X standard, which will make for some amazing 3D graphics in games.

(OS X uses an open graphics API, but since it's not compatible with Direct X, and Direct X offers really big advantages over the competing standard, it won't make any sense financially for companies to develop games for macs)

You need Vista to use the new Direct X, and from what I know, it's not that stable when it's running under OS X.
So basically you need to buy an Imac or Mac pro, PLUS Vista, which really doesn't make sense for a consumer, when a Windows gaming-box with an 8800 series card will cost like half of that.

The great advantage with the new graphics card is that they support the new direct X, but speedwise the old 1800 and 7800 cards aren't that much slower. So it won't make that much of a difference for mac-owners to stick to the older cards.
  quote
Kraetos
Lovable Bastard
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Boston-ish
 
2007-04-20, 20:42

Sure it would. Many of the best games have Mac ports these days. And there's nothing keeping you from booting into Vista, either.

Now sure, you can build a rig for less, but if you're looking to outright purchase a high end powerhouse, the Mac Pro is competitively priced.

And suggesting that a Vista is a good gaming OS is just plain wrong. The graphics drivers aren't completely ironed out yet. DX10 doesn't do you any good if the driver is stuttering. Not to mention there are very few DX10 games right now. Talk to me in six months, after we see solid drivers, Vista SP1, and some more DX10 games. But right now, stick with XP.

Furthermore, DX10 isn't the only reason to upgrade to these cards. The 8800 series is a powerhouse, regardless of the graphics API. The 8800GTX signifigantly outperforms the 7950GTX even in DirectX 9 testing. Even the 8800GTS is a hair superior. Point is, these are great cards, whether you're on DX9, DX10, or OpenGL.

If you're serious about gaming, yes, you'll build your own rig. But that doesn't make an X2800-equipped Mac Pro a bad gaming machine, just an expensive one.

Logic, logic, logic. Logic is the beginning of wisdom, Valeris, not the end.
  quote
Graphguy
can't type
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
 
2007-04-20, 23:02

Oh year, I was talking about the near future, not right now. Today's games run fine on a 7600/7800, spending money on an 2800 or 8800 would really be overkill. Unless Leopard or an update to Leopard will somehow make use of their number-crunching power for something else than 3D graphics. Using it like a coprocessor of some sorts.

And as for games being ported in the future, well lot's of games get ported now, but I'm not sure that will be the case if/when DX10 becomes popular, in a year or so... It would be too much work to rewrite the game from DX10 for a relatively limited userbase.
And most 3D intensive games will probably be using DX10 in the near future.

And come on, besides dedicated Mac gamers who allready have a Mac, who in their right mind would consider getting a Mac, and then spending 3-400 dollars on getting Vista?
  quote
Kraetos
Lovable Bastard
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Boston-ish
 
2007-04-21, 09:58

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graphguy View Post
And as for games being ported in the future, well lot's of games get ported now, but I'm not sure that will be the case if/when DX10 becomes popular, in a year or so... It would be too much work to rewrite the game from DX10 for a relatively limited userbase.
And most 3D intensive games will probably be using DX10 in the near future.?
Of course, the Mac userbase is growing rapidly. And Mac users are more likely to purchase third party software.

Furthermore, technologies like Cider ensure that Mac gaming will only become more and more prominent.

What Windows advocates always forget about the Mac population is that Mac users are, by definition, a more saavy subset of computer users, which is why it's almost always worth porting software to Mac OS X. The 6%* of computer users who use Macs isn't simply any 6%, its a 6% who have decided they want their computer to be better than the average computer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graphguy View Post
And come on, besides dedicated Mac gamers who allready have a Mac, who in their right mind would consider getting a Mac, and then spending 3-400 dollars on getting Vista?
Someone who wants one computer to run both OSes. With a PC, this is impossible. With a Mac, its simple.

But you're right. Mac users won't spend $300 for Vista. They'll spend $110. And like I said, gamers aren't really considering Vista yet. It's simply not ready. At the moment, XP is a better OS.

*This number is probably higher, but I just went off the last quarterly sales number I could remember.

Logic, logic, logic. Logic is the beginning of wisdom, Valeris, not the end.

Last edited by Kraetos : 2007-04-21 at 11:17. Reason: Posts merged
  quote
washington mac user
can't read
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
 
2007-04-24, 05:42

here are some links I found online about the R600:

http://hdtvsg.blogspot.com/

http://www.ocworkbench.com/news/news.php

  quote
washington mac user
can't read
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
 
2007-04-24, 13:42

update:

http://dailytech.com/ATI+Radeon+HD+2...rticle7043.htm


Workstation: Maximum Quality, 1280x1024
Game
AMD ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT
NVIDIA Quadro FX 5500
Cadalyst C2006
314
243
Autodesk 3ds Max v8 OpenGL
129
101
Autodesk 3ds Max v8 D3D
342
242
Catia 02
56.73
44.87
Maya 02
224.59
142.18
  quote
Akeron
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
 
2007-04-25, 15:06

OK! so...

What can I do if I got a MacPro and i want to play ageofconan (DX10 capable game) in october. And i wanna use the new ATI 2900 or the Nvidia 8800?
It will run in Vista right? but what happens when i reboot in OSX? Is there a way to get the card working on both systems? or do I have to wait for them to release OSX drivers? I got 2 HDs in there, one OSX one XP. The next one will be Vista. So far the Mac Pro has been very good to me even though i got only a gig of ram and the stock 7300... Even EQ2 ran well.

Any help is greatly appreciated.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2007-04-25, 16:43

No, its not that easy. The Mac video cards still have a different firmware installed. Retail PC cards have a BIOS, which means they will not work with your Mac without flashing drivers, which at this point do not exist.
  quote
Akeron
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
 
2007-04-25, 16:47

So best bet is to hope they release drivers for a Card that has DX10 for Vista? Like if 2900 is cross platform? 2% chance of that happening maybe?
  quote
Windowsrookie
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Minnesota
Send a message via AIM to Windowsrookie Send a message via MSN to Windowsrookie Send a message via Yahoo to Windowsrookie  
2007-04-25, 16:55

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akeron View Post
So best bet is to hope they release drivers for a Card that has DX10 for Vista? Like if 2900 is cross platform? 2% chance of that happening maybe?
They will never release drivers. They will use one of the new cards, but it will not be available for purchase separately, only on new systems.
  quote
Kraetos
Lovable Bastard
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Boston-ish
 
2007-04-25, 16:56

As long as the video card is EFI compatible, it will work with the Mac Pro in OS X.

If it's EFI compatible, its BIOS compatible too, through whatever voodoo EFI performs when in Windows.

Long story short: you can only buy Mac video cards. A Mac video card will work in Windows. A Windows video card will not work in OS X.

Logic, logic, logic. Logic is the beginning of wisdom, Valeris, not the end.
  quote
Akeron
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
 
2007-04-25, 22:11

so if i really really really wanna play in Vista DX10 on my mac pro can i switch cards every time? or can i install 2? or if i install 2 will OSX go crazy with th DX10 one in there? anyone tried this? and if cards are switched will i be able to get to the OS selecton screen?
  quote
Windowsrookie
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Minnesota
Send a message via AIM to Windowsrookie Send a message via MSN to Windowsrookie Send a message via Yahoo to Windowsrookie  
2007-04-25, 22:19

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akeron View Post
so if i really really really wanna play in Vista DX10 on my mac pro can i switch cards every time? or can i install 2? or if i install 2 will OSX go crazy with th DX10 one in there? anyone tried this? and if cards are switched will i be able to get to the OS selecton screen?
1. Please try to use correct spelling and punctuation.

2. Why do you want to play Direct X 10 games in Vista so bad? I'm sure most games will be DX 9 compatible for a while longer, And graphics cards currently have horrible Vista drivers.

3. You can't just go out and buy New graphics cards for Macs. It's just not how it works.

4. Switching cards every time you boot into Vista (if it even works) would not only be a major pain in the ass, but would also damage the cards/Mac Pro itself. They just aren't designed to be plugged in and out constantly.


  quote
Kraetos
Lovable Bastard
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Boston-ish
 
2007-04-26, 08:19

There's obviously a little miscommunication going on here, and I apoligize for that. Allow me to try and outline the mechanics behind Mac video cards as straightforwardly as I possibly can.

You can't just use any video card with a Mac. A video card relies heavily on interacting with the firmware of any computer. Almost every PC built today uses BIOS as firmware. PowerPC Macs use Open Firmware. Intel Macs use EFI.

Furthermore, a graphics card also relies heavily on software drivers. Drivers must be written for specific operating systems, which further adds to the difficulty (impossibility, really) of using a PC video card with a Mac.

The driver is where the graphics API support comes from. When something is labeled as a DirectX 9 or 10 card, that means that the drivers have the ability to utilize the GPU with said graphics API. The X series of GPUs from ATi and the FX, 6xxx, and 7xxx series from nVidia have been DX9 cards. The current 8xxx series from nVidia and the upcoming X2xxx series from ATi are DX10 cards.

Drivers are a little different on the Mac side of things. DirectX doesn't exist for Mac, the graphics API Macs (and most non-Windows OSes, for that matter) use is called OpenGL.

Few video cards have the ability to utilize EFI or Open Firmware and have Mac drivers available. The cards that do are labeled "Mac editions." The only standalone cards that are currently being produced with Mac editions are the nVidia GeForce 7300 GT, the ATi Radeon X1900XT, and the nVidia Quadro FX 4500. The Intel GMA 950, the GeForce 7600, and the Radeon Mobility X1600 are also being produced with Mac Editions right now, but you can't buy them as standalone cards.

Historically, there have been Mac editions of the Radeon 9600, 9700, and 9800 (mobility or otherwise), and the GeForce FX 5200, and 6600. This is by no means a comprehensive list, just a few examples.

To summarize: Mac support for a GPU has two parts to it: EFI/Open Firmware support on the hardware side of things, and a driver written for OS X and OpenGL on the software side.

Now, we have a basic understanding what makes a Mac GPU a Mac GPU. Let's now discuss what happens when you boot your Mac into Windows via Boot Camp.

One of the key features of EFI is it's ability to emulate BIOS. When you install the firmware that comes wth Boot Camp (assuming it isn't already installed), you are giving your EFI the ability to pretend its a BIOS. This is what allows Windows to boot up on your Mac - just about all the other hardware in your Intel Mac of the same variety of that found in a Wintel box. (Although, your Mac probably has more powerful hardware than the average Wintel box) Therefore, Windows feels right at home. It has a BIOS, an Intel CPU, Hard Drives, RAM, the whole nine yards. It's as happy as Windows can be.

But another thing happens when you tell your EFI to be BIOS. The GPU ALSO now thinks it's on BIOS. We're now halfway there to making your Mac GPU (temporarily) think its now a Windows GPU. The other half of the equation is drivers. Since there are Windows drivers for just about every GPU ever made, all you do is navigate to your GPU manufacturers website, and download the relevant drivers.

Ta Da! Your "Mac edition" GPU now thinks it's a Windows GPU, complete with BIOS and Windows (i.e. DirectX) drivers. If you had a Mac edition of a GeForce 8xxx card, or a Radeon X2xxx card, you would also have DX10 support in Windows, because the card can handle it, and the drivers would be installed.

The most obvious shortcoming with using a Mac as a gaming machine is the lack of GPUs available and the delay with which they are produced. Sure, you COULD throw a Windows GPU in your Mac Pro, but you would only be able to see anything while in Windows! An idea I once toyed with involved using a monitor with two DVI inputs, and a Mac Pro with a Windows and a Mac card installed. What would happen is Windows would see both cards, allowing me to use the more powerful one. The Mac would only see one card, but thats no big loss. I eventually decided (among other reasons) that it was easier to have a less powerful Mac (my new MacBook Pro) and to just build myself a gaming rig.

I hope this clarifies the nuances of the differences between Mac GPUs, Windows GPUs, and what Boot Camp is actually doing to your Mac. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask. I might be wrong about a few details, I mostly went from memory, so don't be surprised if chucker swoops in with some corrections.

And, one more thing: Windowsrookie is right - please use proper punctuation, spelling, and grammar. It is considered respectful to others to take the minimal amount time and effort to make your posts legible. We have no responsibility to read your posts, we do it because we enjoy the discussion. But if your lack of proper language detracts from the discussion, you will find that many people simply decide not to read your posts, whether it be because they don't wish to decypher your writing, or they are offended by your lack of respect.

Logic, logic, logic. Logic is the beginning of wisdom, Valeris, not the end.

Last edited by Kraetos : 2007-04-26 at 13:18.
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2007-04-26, 08:55

Looks like DailyTech is bad-mouthing the 2900 XTX pretty severely now...
  quote
washington mac user
can't read
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
 
2007-04-26, 12:45

not the HD 2900XT. The HD 2900XTX that they reviewed isnt the final silicon version because the final one is coming out in June. The cards they are launching in Africa in May are in the same family meaning they are lauching the HD 2900XT, HD 2600XT, HD 2400XT and the Pro versions of the bottom two. Those aren't the final clocks either for the XTX, just a sample. Plus ATi is launching new drivers when they launch the cards. Remember ATi releases new drivers every month. On top of that they were using an nforce mobo and using DirectX 9 games... This card was made for DirectX 10. I want to see DX 10 comparisons! but there are no games that use DirectX 10. Also according to Fudzilla, the 2900XTX and 8800 Ultra are about the same for 3dmark06. I am confused why they didn't put any other specs up like those but instead just used games...
  quote
Akeron
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
 
2007-04-26, 13:50

Kraetos: wow, thats exactly what I needed to know.

As far as the grammar/spelling/punct I thought it was ok-ish, English not being my first language and all. Sorry
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2007-04-26, 14:29

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraetos View Post
I might be wrong about a few details, I mostly went from memory, so don't be surprised if chucker swoops in with some corrections.
Not so much corrections as expansions.

Basically, in order for software to communicate with hardware, there are typically four layers to go through: the hardware's firmware, the interconnect, the computer's firmware, and the driver. Schematically, it looks roughly like this:

Piece of Hardware (e.g., printer, graphics card, hard drive) <-> Firmware on it <-> interconnect (e.g., ATA, PCI, USB) <-> computer's firmware <-> driver <-> operating system <-> software.

[I left out stuff such as the chipset.]

For example, for your text editor to print something, it first needs to ask the operating system (typically abstracted through another layer: an API, or Application Programming Interface) what printer to use. The data is then output to the driver for that printer. The driver will know how to talk to the printer's firmware, which in turn will take care of instruction the printer to actually spit out pages, but the driver also needs the operating system's help to get across the computer firmware as well as the interconnect.

Now, you may think: why does it matter to the printer what the computer firmware is like? And you'd be right: it doesn't. Most kind of hardware that will run on a generic Windows PC will also run on a Mac, be it a PowerPC Mac (with OpenFirmware) or an Intel Mac (with EFI). They don't directly interface with the computer firmware at all; the OS and the chipset take care of abstracting that.

So why is this any different for graphics cards?

There's two interrelated reasons for this. First, graphics cards manufacturers can still afford to use proprietary, largely unpublished and frequently changing interfaces for their graphics cards. Meaning, the firmware they place on them is mostly a black box to a third-party developers, such as our open source friends over at Linux, FreeBSD and so on. Just about any 3D feature requires a graphics chipset-specific driver, and requires reverse engineering to figure out unless the manufacturer is so kind as to provide a driver themselves, which then is typically closed-source, and the cause of heated arguments over whether that violates Linux's license.

Whereas, on the other hand, most of the functionality of a printer, or an external hard drive, or other such devices, are either simple enough to figure out, or even completely generic and/or published in specifications. Just about any external hard drive that has a USB port, for instance, simply supports the USB Mass Storage Protocol. There, that's it. You write one driver for the OS, and any drive will do. With graphics cards, not so.

There is generic functionality provided by graphics cards, but, aside from being limited, it is computer-firmware-specific. BIOS-based computers have their generic interface, OpenFirmware-based ones have a different one, and yet another is provided by EFI ones. These interfaces also offer different degrees of features. BIOS is still stuck with a low resolution at a mere 256 different colors, for instance; this is why, on a typical PC, throughout most of the booting, you'll see a rather fuzzy, low-resolution, arguably ugly screen, either with text or with some pixelated graphics. In the cases of OpenFirmware and EFI, you'll see things at full resolution, because those firmware specifications are actually so clever that the graphics card can supply them with information on what it can do. Think about it as a driver built straight into the firmware. It won't do 3D graphics, but it will provide a perfectly fine picture even in the absence of any operating system or even any bootable volume to be seen.

That is the other problem: because people obviously expect something to show up on their screens very early on in the boot process, the computer's firmware needs to be intimately familiar with at least some basic commands it can send to the graphics card. That's obviously different from a printer, where that isn't necessary.

Now here's the weird part: BIOS is really ancient technology, and Intel has been trying to replace it for over a decade now. This has been working to an extent in the server market, but not at all for desktops, until Apple came along. They didn't exactly want to move from OpenFirmware to something lesser (i.e., BIOS), nor did they want to needlessly stick around with something that had fading support (OpenFirmware), so the obvious choice was to go with EFI. Further, Microsoft, too, is technically behind EFI, kindasortamaybe, but they aren't too keen on putting too many development resources into making Windows work with it when no major hardware vendor other than Apple wants to support it. And for most consumers, the differences aren't (especially not yet) visible enough, so they won't back such developments either. At best, they'll be amazed that, when they boot up a Mac at an Apple Store, it instantly has a full resolution, whereas just about any other machine strangely enough can't do that. Probably though, they won't even notice or care.

So for graphics card manufacturers, moving to EFI isn't an option. Offering both BIOS and EFI versions isn't either, for the most part; the market of computers that have replaceable graphics cards and an EFI firmware is small (hint: the Mac Pro is just about the only machine). A while ago, back when we were still on PowerPC-based Macs, ATi showed us another alternative: a hybrid firmware. Whatever the reason, they only did so with one card. Perhaps it could only be done with BIOS+OpenFirmware and not with BIOS+EFI; perhaps they felt the additional R&D wasn't worth it; perhaps they're just stupid.

But for now, I'm afraid your graphics cards choices are very limited, because Apple made a call to use something modern, and everyone else sticks with the old.
  quote
Akeron
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
 
2007-04-26, 14:45

well... I came to the right forum for once in my life

Thanks a lot guys, really appreciate your time and effort to explain things you may feel are common knowledge.
  quote
Kraetos
Lovable Bastard
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Boston-ish
 
2007-04-26, 15:31

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akeron View Post
Kraetos: wow, thats exactly what I needed to know.

As far as the grammar/spelling/punct I thought it was ok-ish, English not being my first language and all. Sorry
You're very welcome.

And that's okay, certainly you made the effort. Many don't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chucker View Post
Not so much corrections as expansions.
See? chucker always has my back. He'd be a great wingman

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akeron View Post
well... I came to the right forum for once in my life

Thanks a lot guys, really appreciate your time and effort to explain things you may feel are common knowledge.
No problem. AN is a great place.

And don't feel bad, this stuff isn't common knowledge, either. chucker and I are about as nerdy as they come, as are a lot of people around here.

Logic, logic, logic. Logic is the beginning of wisdom, Valeris, not the end.

Last edited by Kraetos : 2007-04-26 at 15:47.
  quote
washington mac user
can't read
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
 
2007-04-30, 23:40



hmm interesting...

[edit] apparently the R600 NDA was pushed up to May 2nd so look around the internet to find the latest benchmarks this wednesday

Last edited by washington mac user : 2007-04-30 at 23:54.
  quote
washington mac user
can't read
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
 
2007-05-02, 21:52

maybe not....

Oh yea how did BarracksSi get banned? I must have missed it. Same with Suddoo?

But yea I guess rumor cites were wrong about the NDA being moved up but nVidia announced the 8800 Ultra today for a whopping $829 which is basically just an overclocked 8800GTX.
  quote
washington mac user
can't read
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
 
2007-05-02, 23:22

some slides from Tunisia



















  quote
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Page 1 of 2 [1] 2  Next

Post Reply

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Video cards zebrahead090 Purchasing Advice 1 2007-01-23 04:11
Mac Pro and Alternative Video Cards ROFISH Apple Products 9 2006-08-13 17:16
Multiple video cards in G5 Dug-OH Genius Bar 2 2006-03-14 15:34
Mac Mini: Most Wanted New Features fxer Speculation and Rumors 111 2005-10-05 10:34
For Sale: 2 ATI Video Cards Blueflame General Discussion 0 2005-01-05 23:46


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:17.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2024, AppleNova