http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=857&model2=778&chart=275

i use the interactive benchmarks at toms, im not sure if the other site was using the up to date drivers, the first wave of ati drivers for the x2900 were terible and the new ones boosted performance 5-15%.

Errr... no... I really don't think so. Macs are pretty bad for gaming since they're like a whole other platform. Some games can be installed on both pc and mac whereas some need a specific version for mac. So don't be hoping for a vista specific game to work on mac.

At least I think it's that way...

Mochyc

thats why he asked if it will work with bootcamp....so he can boot vista and play using that, correct?

depends on what mac you are getting, if it isnt a pro or an imac with a good graphics card forget about it, most macs come with a intel 950 express chipset and it is a PoS, if you were to upgrade to a macbook pro or an imac you would be able to play newer games at moderate resolutions (at best).

and just wondering, what software does your mac have that a PC cant for graphic work?

yes, it definatley sounds like a PSU issue then

not nessecarally, with a card that has a 128 bit bus, it will have trouble utilizing the extra memory, esspecially with a core speed being the limiting factor for a 8600, for example a 8500gt with 512 gets slain by a 8600 with 256, go with the 256 version, its more then enough, but if dx10 isnt important as i said above the1950pro is your best bang for your buck, its cheaper and faster then a 8600.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=725&model2=855&chart=296

you can play with what game its benching and the settings, but you will always see the 1950 ahead of the 8600.

agreed, the only reason i would have recomended the sager was for the quad, without it i would recomend the alien with better graphics cards.

hmmm, the sager also has the ability for dual 8700s, and the quad, and that further supports my reasoning for purchasing it, im not sure how much better the 8800 is over the 8700, but for my purposes the sager probably suits them better (if you dont mind carrying that beast around). the q6600 has potential for almost double the processing power of the E series, and the graphics card isnt a huge differance, both dx10, both are able to have an SLI setup.

depends, curently games cant utilize all four cores of the q6600, but they will be able to soon, one example is crysis, it will be compltely optomized for multi-core processors, but on the other hand, going with the sli 8800 you will be able to run DX10 games maxxed out no problem, so it is difficult to say.

but i did just take a look at the sager, and couldnt find an option for the q6600.

i would personally go for the one with the quad if i could, because games will be able to utilize all of them, and i also do video editing/rendering and it greatly helps with that. but for stricktly gaming, the dual 8800 is probably a better choice.

cheers.

[QUOTE="PWN-Schubie"][QUOTE="Latina_Chlck"]

[QUOTE="rockstar2006"]it looks crap evan on full wack with my 8800, and the game it self is ballsLatina_Chlck

You are expecting too much from that card. What res are you playing on?

are you crazy, stalker is not very graphics intensive, compared to bioshock and WiC that i can play maxxed out with the same card, expecting to much out of the card? hardly

An 8600 GT can also max out Bioshock

so you further provemy point?

bioshock is a much more stressful game then stalker, and yet you say he is expecting to much of a 8800 trying to run stalker, then say that an 8600 can max out bioshock, hence a 8800 easily maxxing out stalker. Ireally dont know what you are getting at.