Jotaro Okamoto
Registered User
Join date: 30 Jun 2006
Posts: 2
|
08-11-2006 08:24
I'd like to know what kind of speed/frames per second I could expect from one of the current Intel based iMacs. Will it run well with the default graphic settings? Will it run better under Windows XP via Bootcamp? The company I work for is considering purchasing one (or two) of these iMacs, and they need to be good enough for the people using them to develop Second Life content (among other things). Right now we have an older G5 iMac with Nvidia 5200 graphics card, and it's great for graphic design/web design/etc... but Second Life performance is pretty disappointing. Thanks for any information and opinions. 
|
Kumi Kuhr
Registered User
Join date: 9 Jul 2005
Posts: 43
|
they run SL super nice
08-11-2006 09:48
that said, fps depends on many things -- where you are, what you're wearing, Draw distance etc etc
Put in max vRam, and 2 GIG min RAM and it runs great.
_____________________
avid explorer, gregarious loner
|
Dani Frua
Bilingual Mac/Win
Join date: 9 Nov 2005
Posts: 65
|
08-11-2006 09:52
a few months ago someone very talented compared sl in bootcamp and native on the macbook pro. She posted the results here and and they came out virtually the same fps-wise
|
Shirley Marquez
Ethical SLut
Join date: 28 Oct 2005
Posts: 788
|
Not that new cheap iMac for the education market though...
08-11-2006 18:21
Apple recently announced a new lower-priced iMac as a replacement for the eMac. Unlike the other iMac models, it doesn't have Radeon X1600 graphics; it uses the integrated Intel 950, just like the new Mac Mini and the MacBook -- and like those systems, it is a MUCH worse performer in Second Life.
|
Nigel Newbold
Registered User
Join date: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 7
|
08-18-2006 02:17
I've only been an SLer for 4 days so really I have nothing to compare against but my 1.83Ghz dual core MBP runs it fine. I haven't changed any settings so I guess I'm running on default.
|