[mdawson]

Apple purchases GPUs from ATI and NVIDIA. Apple then either incorporates those GPUs directly into logic board designs or sub-contracts another manufacturer to build the daughter cards or full-size PCIe cards that various Macs will use.

[mdawson]

Macs have used PCI, AGP and PCIe standards since they dropped NuBus back in the mid-1990s. Having the same connection technology does not make graphics cards cross-platform. Apple writes the drivers for the graphics cards used in Macs, as the graphics card manufacturers pretty much do not bother to do so. The market for standalone Mac graphics cards is much smaller than that for Wintel PCs and Apple does not have the resources to create drivers for every graphics card that hits the market, particularly when the card OEMs do not bother to include cross-platform firmware in the first place.

[phatslacker]

yeah too bad they don't work on Macs

[Speed_Racer]

HyperMactive said:

And here I thought when Apple joined the rest of the world with the same graphic card connectors and Intel-based motherboards that we'd just be able to pick up a standard-issue video card off the shelf, plug it in, and go. Silly me. Nope, we still have Mac versions of these cards that come with a hearty price increase. Lame.

It might help some people. Specifically people who build their own Hackintoshes. Now that Radeon 48xx drivers are incorporated into 10.5.7, those guys should be able to just drop a PC-standard 4870 card into their machines and have a fairly high-end video card (by Mac standards). Only genuine Macs check to see if the cards have EFI-compatible firmware as Apple's cards do. What such builders would do with it, I don't know, since 3D games like first person shooters and role-playing games are pretty rare on the Mac. Seems like it'd be a waste of a couple of hundred bucks.

[ChrisLJ]

"You'd be wrong."

Thanks for clarifying that Mr. Personality.

[ChrisLJ]

Thanks mdawson, for the info, and for not acting conceited.

[Peter Cohen]

ChrisLJ said:

Thanks for clarifying that Mr. Personality.

You're welcome, Mr. "I'll make a presumption based on a picture I saw."

[HyperMactive]

Aye, Mr. Cohen (of Macworld) appears a bit irritable in this thread. Perhaps its his unhappiness (shared by all) with the continuing obsolescence (combined with excessive pricing) of Apple's graphics processor offerings.

We always end up with 6-12 month old video technology while paying premium, cutting-edge pricing. The graphics processing situation has always been one of my biggest gripes about Apple. Despite Mr. Cohen's faux implication that it's no big deal.

[Peter Cohen]

DogHouseDub said:

Mass production versus limited run...it's all about volume, right?

It's about a few things, but yeah, the major difference is that this will be sold in very small quantities compared to those PC-compatible cards, yet still requires unique engineering to work in its target environment.

[Peter Cohen]

I made my peace with the way that Apple's graphics hardware is managed a long time ago. Apple builds Macs to its own specifications, even now that it uses Intel processors, and doesn't seem to really give much of a damn how PC's run.

[Grapho]

I will wait anxiously to see how this card performs with Luxology's modo before opening my wallet.

[Biallystock]

[quote name='Peter Cohen']
>

ChrisLJ said:

> Although these versions of the HD4870 have two DVI ports and no mini DisplayPort, they are available for under $200.

They're also not manufactured by Apple.

Yes, Apple makes its own video cards -- well, more to the point, it has them manufactured by a subcontractor, much in the same way that it has all of its computers made -- but the point remains the same. Apple isn't able to provide the same economy of scale that other manufacturers will, so the price is higher.

Please explain how, now the Mac is basically a PC, Apple has managed to make PC Graphics Cards incompatible?

Is it their last hold out on deliberate incompatibilities to prevent cloning?

[WilfredLaurier]

Well ATI has lowered the MSRP for the 512MB 4870 to $149. I hope whatever Apple's doing is worth $200, since it's more than the original card from ATI is worth.

[DocNo]

Biallystock said:

Please explain how

It's embarrassing that it needs to be explained, but since you asked....

>now the Mac is basically a PC

Mac's are NOT "basically" a PC - they are Mac's.

I can't believe I needed to state the obvious, but evidently it needed to be done.

>Apple has managed to make PC Graphics Cards incompatible?

Apple didn't make PC graphics cards incompatible with Mac's - PC graphics cards are inherently incompatible with Mac's. Stop attributing conspiracy and malice where none exists

Hardware, in and of it's self isn't very useful. What makes hardware really interesting is when you interface it to software. To do that, it takes drivers. Also, Mac's use EFI for booting, whilst most PC's still use the ancient BIOS methods for booting - this requires different firmware on the card as well. So now I suppose it's Apple's fault that PC vendors have once again taken the path of least resistance and are still using 20 year old boot strapping procedures?

Some people have been successful at flashing Windows PC oriented video cards with EFI compatible firmware to allow the Mac to boot with them, and then since the graphic chipsets match the drivers that Apple builds into the OS the cards have worked. But alas, that won't get you support for a GPU that Apple hasn't coded into the OS - i.e. the latest and greatest GPU's.

I was hoping with snow leopard Apple would step it up with GPU compatibility - then again, snow leopard isn't out yet so I guess it isn't fair to judge them for it just yet. But I do agree with the overall sentiments in this thread that I'm really underwhelmed by Apple's GPU offerings across the board for their "desktop" Macs :(