APPLE Graphic Cards

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
tomwaddle

tomwaddle

Distinguished
Mar 28, 2006
235
0
18,680
I don't own an Apple or know much about em. Why is it when I go to build one, whether a MAC or their workstation, everything is only 256mb? You can only get 512 cards if you go with the workstation and throw in 4 512mb cards.
How come on the PC side we side 512 and up for graphic cards and Apple cards don't seem to be as high?
 
because macs can play about 6 games. Therefore the cards arent really that important and are probably crappy ones that are focused on graphics, but not game graphics...if you get me.
 
Who buys a Mac to game? No one smart. Why would you need that much graphics memory if you aren't gaming? You really don't.

That's my take on it anyway.
 
Well beyond the PC-centric remarks above, the main reason is the target markets.

The mainstream Apple user is fine with 128-256MB of graphic memory, they do basic 3D and that's about it.
Then the workstation cards get you into the pro realm, you can put a single X1900XT 512MB in a MAC-Pro or a Qaudro 512MB as well.

These are for serious 3D rendering and for massive texture files (for both 2D and 3D).

So the market is pretty split, and for most casual users, 256MB will be more than enough (since as already pounded home in the posts above, MACs aren't really for gaming), and for those who are proffesionals they do have the options that are available to them, but the number of apps that even strain the 256MB available on most cards is rather limited (like Montion) and for those even usually 512MB is more than enough.

For the PC side there are alot of apps in both Windows and Linux garb that could pound a 1-2GB card into submission, and that's really where that type of work resides. While Apple is good for the pro-sumer, especially for Video and Audio editing, the 3D animation world is still primarily a PC workstation market, and so that's where most of the large memory cards are targeted.

If Apple could sell enough to justify an SKU I don't doubt they'd be more than willing to charge the usual MAC-markup on any card out there 512MB and above.

So, even though their cards are not for gaming, they are more for video editing? Even at lower memory sizes?
Click to expand...

Yeah, for the majorty of video editing memory size isn't that great an impact (beyond the amount needed to store the image to send out the TMDSs [64MB is more than fine for most except the 30" may need 128]), only a few select programs, like MOTION, even show a 128v256 difference.
 
They are as much for gaming as they are for video editing. The best things you can do on a mac is download Itunes and goof around with fireworks/photoshop.
 
apples suck nothing to interpret
Click to expand...


Apple actually does Not suck. Their over the top in almost every category, obviously one of their downsides is in the gaming department, and that is ok. Not many games have been released for Mac as their are for PC. Plus, Macs are not Virus hords unlike us PC/Windows users.

Don't hate too much, remember, Most of the games made, and even the movies you seen are made through Macs. 😀
 
Don't hate too much, remember, Most of the games made, and even the movies you seen are made through Macs. 😀
Click to expand...

While I agree with the rest you said, that part isn't the case.

More proffesional movies are made on PCs including renderfarms (alot of AMDs sold there) than on Macs.

Macs are for the pro-sumer, and low level proffesional. they are very competant, but rarely were macs ever the main computer for movies, they've pretty much always been the realm of dedicated systems, be they as small as AVID boxes or renderfarms.

The only area MAC has an iron grip is in desktop publishing.

MACs are great for alot of people, but the myth that they are the heart and sould of major movies and games is an urban myth. They are the heart and soul of the indie flick and maybe you tube (although really not enough people own a Mac to supply all of the content on YouTube. :wink:

Oh yeah BTW, while I agree the security in general is better on a MAC, half of that is simply by being a small percentage of the user market, who cares about spreading something to less than 5% of users in the world when you have the chance to affect almost every computer user on the planet? This cartoon sums up my feeling about the MAC false sense of security (heck most PC security problems are generated by st00pid users, *click me e-mail*, ummm... Okay! :roll: );

20060513vn0.jpg


http://ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20060513
 
I personally have a macbook pro and love it. I use it for video editing(final cut Pro)/photoshop and have boot camp in case I ever feel the need to play a game. It'll handle most stuff on high-medium @1680x1050 no AA or AF though.

on another note, there are a number of companies who do the actual editing on macpros and have giant render farms of opterons running Linux with xserves for storage.
http://www.apple.com/pro/profiles/southpark/index2.html

speaks for itself
 
http://www.apple.com/pro/profiles/southpark/index2.html

speaks for itself
Click to expand...

Yeah if you think that Southpark is 'quality graphics'. :roll:

Seriously, have you ever even watched SoutPark?
What major 3D strain is going on there BTW?

I'm sure you and others think it's a huge amount of grunt work being done on macs, but very little of 3D is done on a mac, it's almost all 2D Final Cut stuff, nothing you need graphics power for.

Alot of companies do storyboarding and even artwork on MACs, but the final product is rarely on a MAC for feature films, and next to no 3D effect is from a MAC.

And mostof the larger studio edits aren't done on MACs either, many aren't even digital edits anyways. So this myth that most use MACs is just that. And SouthPark does little to dispell that.
 
Don't hate too much, remember, Most of the games made, and even the movies you seen are made through Macs. 😀
Click to expand...

While I agree with the rest you said, that part isn't the case.

More proffesional movies are made on PCs including renderfarms (alot of AMDs sold there) than on Macs.

Macs are for the pro-sumer, and low level proffesional. they are very competant, but rarely were macs ever the main computer for movies, they've pretty much always been the realm of dedicated systems, be they as small as AVID boxes or renderfarms.

The only area MAC has an iron grip is in desktop publishing.

MACs are great for alot of people, but the myth that they are the heart and sould of major movies and games is an urban myth. They are the heart and soul of the indie flick and maybe you tube (although really not enough people own a Mac to supply all of the content on YouTube. :wink:

Oh yeah BTW, while I agree the security in general is better on a MAC, half of that is simply by being a small percentage of the user market, who cares about spreading something to less than 5% of users in the world when you have the chance to affect almost every computer user on the planet? This cartoon sums up my feeling about the MAC false sense of security (heck most PC security problems are generated by st00pid users, *click me e-mail*, ummm... Okay! :roll: );

20060513vn0.jpg


http://ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20060513


Really? I always came to think that some of the more hightech video editing such as CGI came from or used mostly on Macs part. Editing I knew for a fact was on Macs part. Hmmm, interesting, and I do see your point on the whole Youtube spam of PC Vs Mac. Honestly, I think its just a load of BS. Its all about marketing, and getting your voice and product out there. They question the Mac and the PC sometimes the wrong way and in the wrong perspective.


Why can't we just all get along?! :x

But again, thanks for the clear up GrapeApe.
 
Well pro 3D graphics are done primarily on dedicated solutions, primarily Windows and Linux. The smaller the scale the more M$ the larger the scale the more Linux

And they also require the software, which still is more Win2K and Linux centric than even ready for MAC. For example most of Autodesk's software like Maya isn't even available in 64bit on MACs, same with alot of pro 3D apps, which favour Windows and Linux. Alot of Adobe stuff is only now getting OSX ports to bring it near the same speed.

The true pro editing isn't on a 'PC' or a MAC it's dedicated machines.
Alot of the smaller films are edited on MACs, but that would abe a MAC over PC win, whichis different than all movies are created on MACs.
And games, really it's the art department that is packed with macs, everything else is PCs, and then it's all compiled outside of the MAC realm. Some granted will use macs, but they are rare.

and really like I said, it's not MAC vs PC other than we think even a giant Linux render farm is in the 'PC' camp. No one uses what could be classesd as a personal computer for the high end either. They're usually giant SGI creations made of AMD chips in the past and more and more intel nowadays.

Overall, it's just apet peeve, because people think that the truely awesome stuff like Lord of the Rings or King Kong are on MACs, which ignorares the wicked software and hardware that does make them. Alot of good stuff like 'Waking Life' etc, are on MACs, but the biggest thing a MAC sees in film production is a CELL animated movie, nothing hugely 3D like Spiderman or Pirates. Both have their place, and MACs are very competant at what they do great. Too often people just try to give them credit for stuff they don't do.

BTW as an occasional MAC user, I find it funny how last year Apple fans were making fun of Vista delays, and this year PC fans can make fun of Leopard's delays. A little balance in the force. :twisted:

BTW, I'd still prefer OSX as an option for my laptop (I'd go out and buy it tonight for dual but) than have to get an APPLE and give everything else up just to put M$ on an Apple. I prefer hardware selection and software agnosticism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom