I agree with Strider. Running Doom 3 on Tiger takes a huge leap in FPS on Power Mac G5 with a 9800 256mb SE card.

It's also better on my partner's imac G5. Not so on our Powerbook 1.5 G4.

So I guess it's down to Tiger making 64 bit calculations on G5s.

Nice to see some real life tests, not fake claims. ;)

Guess you need a G5 or modern GPU to see some benefits. I either didn't see any improvement or I saw lost fps in games. UT2k4 benched 2-3fps slower. Halo benched about a half a frame slower.

If you are technically-minded, head on over to Arstechnica and review John Siracusa's VERY in-depth and well-written piece about Tiger. I think you will find the exposition of the new graphics architecture to be extremely promising. This is just the kind of end-result that the "cool low-level stuff" results in.

Oh, and I have zero game issues on my dual 2.5 g5 with 6800 ultra ;) Runs... like... butta! (WoW in a window, while emailing, while chatting, while ripping, while downloading, while coding, while surfing, while folding... nary a ripple in sight, baby!)

What Mac are you using? Specs?

Cool, now we can expect "less dismal" Doom 3 performance in Tiger! It's a shame that, given the same video hardware, you still can't come anywhere close to what they get on the PC.
I'm real happy for those that own a DP2.5 G5 and either an x800 or 6800, though.

bubs

Haven't played a game on my Mac for a while, but I got
Tiger over the weekend and it runs great on my G4. Im getting much better performance then 10.3.9. Also dashboard surprised me as well.

i'd have to totally agree with this news item. Halo for me seems a little better but nothing to write home about. But Doom3 as improved a heck of a lot! I'm getting over 53fps in the timedemo and general framerates within the game itself around often up2 60fps (the max). Some of the busier fighting scenes under panther clogged the G5 down to around 25fps, but i almost never get below 40fps. Well happy!