“When I got my Dual Quad-core 2.8GHz Mac Pro running Mac OS X 10.5.2 with the upgraded graphics card, an Nvidia GeForce 8800 GT, I was disappointed in its graphics performance relative to my former MacBook Pro with slower graphics, an Nvidia GeForce 8600M GT. But I was hopeful that the subsequent update of Mac OS X would improve the Mac Pro’s graphics performance but it did not happen with 10.5.3 nor with 10.5.4,” Bill Fox reports for Macs Only!
“Apple released Mac OS X 10.5.5 on Monday, 9/15, with new graphics drivers so my hope of improved performance was again renewed. I installed Mac OS X 10.5.5 on a number of Macs: Mac Pro, MacBook Air, iMac Core 2 Duo, PowerMac G4 Cube and PowerBook G4,” Fox reports.
“Curiously, Mac OS X 10.5.5 is not only overall no faster than 10.5.3, it may be even slower for some graphics tasks,” Fox reports.
Full article, with benchmarks results of Mac OS X 10.5.5 vs 10.5.3 here.
OK, so which iMac is better? The 24-inch: 2.8GHz with the ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO (256MB memory) or the
24-inch: 3.06GHz with the NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS (512MB memory) ???
I have updated all three of our Macs to 10.5.5 with no problems.
All is well.
Anybody notice that speed is barely mentioned in marketing pieces now? It’s because the hardware is far faster than anybody needs most of the time.
Oh, and if you’re such a gamer that you care about refresh rates, get a life.
So what you’re saying is it is acceptable for me to wait hours to watch a show on AppleTV that I recorded on my computer.
My 3.06 ghz Intel iMac can convert a 2 hour HD program captured via eyeTV to mp4 in about 2.5 hours. Until a consumer Mac can do this in about 5 minutes, then speed is an issue.
I know, you’re going to tell me that I should just download the program on iTunes and watch it instantly. What if they don’t offer that program on iTunes?
I’ve always said: don’t offer me a machine that is 10% faster than last year’s model; I want one that is 10 TIMES faster!
10.5.5 finally broke my Knight’s of the Old Republic. 🙁 Ran fine under 10.5.4.
One test doesn’t mean anything. Inconclusive FUD.
“well, i guess we’re going to get a taste of what its like to be Windows users….”
Because Windows users get presented with slower graphics drivers every month? What world to you live in?
Windows graphics card vendors vendors work hard to squeeze out a few percent of performance on new releases. For the Mac I guess you get sloppy seconds, once it works, they’re done.
Duh. Two sets of code:
1. PPC OSX
2. Intel Windows
In that list do you see anywhere an entry for Intel OSX? If not, then there’s no code optimized for Intel OSX. Which version runs on OSX? The PPC version, which is clearly not optimized for Intel.
MW: next “time” don’t waste our “time”
@Seconds
The loathsome truth is that your not far off the mark. How can we get card manufacturers to do the same for the Mac? It’s an excellent question that is beginning to beg an answer. It used to be that the answer was that, not enough Mac games or gamers, and this is still comparatively true, but in fact, there are exponentially more Mac games and Mac gamers than there were ten years ago, and I think there’s enough money in them there hills to justify faster and more complete driver and firmware development for video cards for the Macintosh platform.
Oh, and one more thing: I’m curious to about the possibility that, since the Mac now runs on Intel, if less development is required to get a “working” video card to the end user, and that in turn reinforces the lack of motivation for developers. Ironically, “It’s good enough”, is a mantra that video card makers are careful not to add to the existing mediocrity of the MS platform, but at the same time, push it on the Macintosh platform.