NVIDIA Quadro delivers NVIDIA Fermi architecture to Apple Mac Pro users

NVIDIA announced today the expansion of its award-winning line of NVIDIA Quadro professional graphics solutions to the Mac platform, bringing the computational and visualization breakthroughs enabled by NVIDIA Fermi architecture to Mac Pro users.

For professional users operating on Mac OS X Snow Leopard, this means the wait is over. The NVIDIA Quadro 4000 graphics processing unit (GPU) for Mac is optimized to accelerate workflows and drive a range of top professional applications.

The high-end NVIDIA Quadro 4000 GPU for Mac, with 256 NVIDIA CUDA processing cores and 2GB of fast GDDR5 memory, delivers exceptional graphics performance across a broad range of design, animation and video applications. With new NVIDIA Scalable Geometry Engine technology, the Quadro 4000 for Mac can process up to 890 million triangles per second, enabling professionals to design, iterate and deliver higher quality results in less time.

The Quadro 4000 GPU for Mac also provides additional display flexibility through a DisplayPort and a DVI-I (Dual Link) connector built into its bracket, and a 3D stereo bracket for optimal stereo connection to the system. A DisplayPort to mini-DisplayPort cable is also included to enable mini-DisplayPort only Apple displays. Additionally, users can enable up to four high resolution displays from a single Mac Pro using dual NVIDIA Quadro 4000 for Mac boards.

The NVIDIA Quadro 4000 GPU for Mac enables dramatic increases in computing performance. Minimum system requirements include Mac OS X v10.6.5 or later with MacPro3,1 (early 2008), MacPro4,1 (early 2009), or MacPro5,1 (mid-2010). The Quadro 4000 processing unit for Mac is designed, built and supported by NVIDIA to provide best in class performance, reliability, compatibility and stability with professional Mac applications. NVIDIA and its ISV partners believe it’s the right choice in providing the dependability that video production and graphics professionals require.

The Quadro 4000 GPU for Mac (US$1,199) is available this month at Apple.com, select Apple resellers and system integrators, and from authorized distribution partners including: PNY Technologies in the Americas and Europe, ELSA in Japan, and Leadtek in Asia Pacific.

More info here.

Source: NVIDIA


  1. Articles about high-end graphics cards for the Mac makes me think about Open Computing Language (OpenCL). Is that being implemented by software developers? Does anyone have any practical experience with the performance impacts of an OpenCL-enabled application?

    Back in the PowerPC days some versions of the PPC CPU included Altivec 128 bit vector coprocessor functionality. For some applications, such as selected Photoshop filters, Altivec could increase performance by more than an order of magnitude. I can only speculate that modern GPUs could really rock the house in terms of performance for applicable code.

    This is essentially the approach that is being used for the latest supercomputers. It would be great if Apple would push for Mac apps to be in the forefront of OpenCL adoption.

  2. What I don’t understand is why, if you can install drives and PCI-e expansion cards from practically any manufacturer – with competitive pricing to match, yet for graphics boards, a duopoly is allowed to exist – with the resulting extortionate pricing.
    Isn’t there a law in place which prosecutes this type of anti-competitive behaviour?

  3. I only wish that scientific computing (quantum chemistry and the like) would make use of all this computing power: these cards could do the job of a slew of processors and now have the required precision to be useful.

  4. I can only say that these cards are only as good as there drivers. Lost so folks purchased Quadro cards for the Mac Pro in the past, only to see meager if any performance benefit form there gaming counter parts. Why pay 3 time the price for something that might not deliver?

  5. @Mac-nugget.
    Why create a desktop computer that might not work?
    Why create a colorful computer that people might not buy?
    Why get rid of floppy drives that people might still want to buy?
    Why create an angle poise computer that might not look like a beige box?
    Why spend $400 million on flash memory when others will not contemplate the demise of disc drives?
    Why create an MP3 player when other MP3 makers think they have the market stitched up?
    Why create the iPhone when no PC guys are going to come in and challenge the telco’s?
    Why create the iPad when clearly netbooks are not making money?
    Why create object oriented software when other software is working well enough?
    Why build a massive data center when hard drives and external drives are getting bigger?

    Why not rephrase your question?

  6. This is the card that I would buy if I knew that it would be properly supported by nvidia. Has anyone seen all the bitching regarding bad drivers/updates for the last Quadros in the nvidia forums? I’ll tell you this much, it’s not like OSX is on top of their priority list. Profoundly pisses me off.

  7. @Crabapple
    You don’t get it. Quadro cards have been available for the Mac Pro, since it’s inception. The drivers suck though. So in other words, hardware will only be as good and the software that drives it. Key word “Drivers”.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.