Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

tiger · Jun 28, 2007, 01:22 AM

Do you think we will ever get a customizable computer that can be called a "gaming" computer? Most people just want to play a game once in a while with good graphics but the mac mini is dead, the iMac has terribly under-clocked graphics unless you're willing to spend 2 grand on a laptop hanging on a stand. The MacBook pro is is severely under-clocked and cuts performance by nearly half! and moving on... the MacBooks, we all know they perform terribly. All that is left is the Mac Pro, but with that price tag I'd expect better graphics than the outdated x1900 with heating problems. Now that EA and other companies are beginning to develop for the mac, I wonder if apple will wake up and start putting high end graphics on their computer like they did in the 90s. The iBook, which is the old equivalent of the MacBook had cutting edge graphics when it was released, same with mostly every apple computer and at affordable prices. Apple's sitting on over $12 Billion cash stockpile and they can't put a decent card in their computers non "PRO" computers and don't even offer a middle option.. such as a tower with a decent processor but good graphics.

exca1ibur · Jun 28, 2007, 01:54 AM

It will NEVER happen.

Third parties could have made nVidia cards in the late 90's when the GF3 came out. Current nVidia makers could have drivers written for existing cards now since the line up is all Intel, but... I don't ever see it happening. Everyone is going to play it safe, instead of taking the risk. It's a HUGE market but, they are totally focused on everything but, gaming and always have been.

P · Jun 28, 2007, 05:01 AM

It's not a huge market. It's small and it's shrinking, because of the high prices for good GPUs. The casual gaming market is what's growing.

I don't understand what you mean with that it used to be. Apple used to put ATi Rage boards into its machines all the way through the nineties - not until 2001 did the Powermacs get a real GPU (Geforce2 or Radeon) and the consumer models followed after that. The Rage and Rage128 models were hardly "cutting edge" at anything, even if Jobs did talk them up a bit at the time - they were yesterday's GMA950. nVidia and 3dfx did make third-party boards available, but they were expensive and had very limited support. Today is a big improvement, as you can at least get an iMac with a capable midrange board like the 7600GT. And before you bring up the 6400s and 6500s from the pre-Jobs era, go check what they cost

And to answer the original question: not the way you mean. I think that they will let us configure the iMacs and MBPs to a greater extent with other GPUs, similar to the current 24"er, but they will not move to PCIe boards.

exca1ibur · Jun 28, 2007, 10:47 AM

The gaming market in general IS huge. The 'Mac gaming' market is non-existent. Mac and gaming are words that should never be put together in my view. Since he was talking about a 'gaming computer' and MacPro, that usually is something high-end not casual gaming.

tiger · Jun 28, 2007, 12:25 PM

The original iBooks came out with the fastest graphics in the market for a laptop, then apple stopped doing that in following generations. I wasn't talking about extreme gaming, just casual gaming that doesn't lag or get under 40 fps, a decent card like making a 7600 and if you want to go higher its an upgrade. Also the 8600M in the mbps is under-clocked and it is also slower than the 7900 which is an older card. The macbooks should get at least an ati or nvidia integrated card. GMA gets about 5 frames ATI and NVIDIA shared graphics get 14+ frames, its a step up.

P · Jun 28, 2007, 05:20 PM

The iBooks launched with a Rage Mobility. That wasn't even ATi's best laptop chip - it wasn't even the best chip in a Mac laptop (the Powerbooks had a Rage Pro LT, which is a step up). It was very far from a cutting edge chip. Apple has always skimped on the GPU in its consumer machines, but they used to brag about not skimping more than they did. I guess you fell for it. Recently they have improved in the iMacs - they moved from GF 2 MX/4 MX/5200 level to the X1600/7600 level, or from low-end to mid-range. The Macbooks have moved downrange though.

Apple gets great deals from Intel at the moment - the oncost for adding a 7200 or something to the iBook is just not justified by the fps increase. We'll have to hope that they get the X3100 drivers working right eventually and that Apple upgrades to that at least.

The market for separate GPUs is actually smaller than you'd think - PC gaming is on its way down, and consoles on the way up. It is a very vocal minority though.

The 8600M in the MBP is the best current-gen mobile chip on the market - that the last-gen high-end is faster is a problem, but they're also more expensive and use a lot more power. The underclock, if there is one, is only in software - the GPU clocks up and down on the fly, and that seems to be disabled under OS X at the moment. The driver may not be done yet - after all, it took nVidia months to get the Vista drivers out.

tiger · Jun 28, 2007, 11:03 PM

Originally Posted by P

Recently they have improved in the iMacs - they moved from GF 2 MX/4 MX/5200 level to the X1600/7600 level, or from low-end to mid-range. The Macbooks have moved downrange though.

This is what I was referring to, the even the extremely slow G4s in comparison to the current offerings were much faster in graphics even though they were mediocre and under-clocked. In the late 90s when apple introduced the iBook it may not have had cutting edge graphics but it could be used for gaming with good performance and the powerbooks even better. Apple has since turned away from quality and turned to quantity, there's nothing that differentiates it from other pc makers except that they have a tendency cripple their computers. I have a feeling that verizon would have been a great partner with apple given that they are already into the system crippling business.

Originally Posted by P

The 8600M in the MBP is the best current-gen mobile chip on the market - that the last-gen high-end is faster is a problem, but they're also more expensive and use a lot more power. The underclock, if there is one, is only in software - the GPU clocks up and down on the fly, and that seems to be disabled under OS X at the moment. The driver may not be done yet - after all, it took nVidia months to get the Vista drivers out.

The MacBook pros are nice but I can hardly justify paying $2500 just to get mediocre frame rates and most people aren't willing to pay 3 grand for a tower who's graphics have been unchanged for around a year.

P · Jun 29, 2007, 07:50 AM

High-end gaming has become more and more about graphics - it used to be that only shooters required a powerful new GPU, but now even strategy games like Civ are unplayable on the basic GMA 950. That's sad, but not really Apple's fault. Apple's shipping more or less the quality they always did, or slightly better in the case of the iMac, but game developers have begun requiring more. There is no longer a "basic" mode that always works on any reasonably modern computer, like there used to be.

tiger · Jun 29, 2007, 08:30 PM

Exactly, I can't even play Age of Empires 3 on the MacBook, which i play once in a while which bothers me. I don't need 150 frames like shooter games, just make it work. Ok see, I have access to a Mac Pro which is not for playing just work, but seriously a 1500 dollar laptop should be able to play a simple strategy game which it can't. Should have gone pro, only 1700 with EDU discount. I'll probably pick one up later on, perhaps in a real revision. I don't like the current enclosure although I do like the fact that they finally took that annoying disproportion off the screen where the built in isight is.

the_glassman · Jul 2, 2007, 11:13 AM

Mac Gaming Computer = Oxymoron
No such thing exist. The closest you will get is a $4,000 tower with a long in the tooth overpriced graphics card. My suggestion would to be purchase a Xbox 360 or gaming PC.

KisforKennedy · Jul 2, 2007, 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by tiger

Do you think we will ever get a customizable computer that can be called a "gaming" computer? Most people just want to play a game once in a while with good graphics but the mac mini is dead, the iMac has terribly under-clocked graphics unless you're willing to spend 2 grand on a laptop hanging on a stand. The MacBook pro is is severely under-clocked and cuts performance by nearly half! and moving on... the MacBooks, we all know they perform terribly. All that is left is the Mac Pro, but with that price tag I'd expect better graphics than the outdated x1900 with heating problems. Now that EA and other companies are beginning to develop for the mac, I wonder if apple will wake up and start putting high end graphics on their computer like they did in the 90s. The iBook, which is the old equivalent of the MacBook had cutting edge graphics when it was released, same with mostly every apple computer and at affordable prices. Apple's sitting on over $12 Billion cash stockpile and they can't put a decent card in their computers non "PRO" computers and don't even offer a middle option.. such as a tower with a decent processor but good graphics.

Yep. It's called the iMac with 7600GT. It's the only consumer level mac to have a decent GPU. It really stinks. If they made a mac mini with a NORMAL hard drive, it'd be bigger, but it'd also be cheaper. If it had a NORMAL optical drive, it'd be bigger, but it'd be cheaper. And also, they'd have room to throw a GPU slot onto the motrherboard, which would be the ultimate mac gaming platform: Cheap, fairly small, and completley customizable. Unfortunately, they won't do this, because it would cannibalize the sales of everything else.

PS: High end graphics in the 90s? Surely you must be joking. The iBook has NEVER had a good GPU. Also, the iMac ALWAYS had a horrible graphics card. They finally decided the iMac would be a great gaming machine if offered with a better card (the 7600GT), so that's what I bought. It is THE ultimate mac gaming platform: Huge LCD, decent GPU, fast, portable, quiet, and capable of playing almost any modern game at ridiculous resolutions. It's not as hardcore as the MacPro, but it's a LOT less expensive, especialy when you price the MacPro with a 24" LCD.

KisforKennedy · Jul 2, 2007, 03:04 PM

Originally Posted by the_glassman

Mac Gaming Computer = Oxymoron
No such thing exist. The closest you will get is a $4,000 tower with a long in the tooth overpriced graphics card. My suggestion would to be purchase a Xbox 360 or gaming PC.

iMac 7600GT

24" LCD. Core 2 Duo @ 2.33 or 2.66ghz. 2 gigs of ram. 7600GT. Wireless. Quiet. Fast.

It plays PREY at 1920X1200 with everything up, it plays UT2004 at the same res with no problems ever, and it handles pretty much anything you can throw at it. Want even faster performance? Boot into windows. It's even faster.

All for under 2 G's.

Peter · Jul 2, 2007, 04:31 PM

yeah, but 6 months down the line..
7600GT isn't even DX10.

exca1ibur · Jul 2, 2007, 05:15 PM

and to upgrade the video card... another $2 G's...

KisforKennedy · Jul 2, 2007, 08:03 PM

Originally Posted by Peter

yeah, but 6 months down the line..
7600GT isn't even DX10.

That's okay. Buying a top of the line model has it's perks... it will hold it's resale value far better than any low end or midrange iMacs, so I'll just sell this one and buy the next one, for only a few hundred bucks.

KisforKennedy · Jul 2, 2007, 08:03 PM

Originally Posted by exca1ibur

and to upgrade the video card... another $2 G's...

Not necessarily. If apple sticks to the daughtercard GPU in the current 24" iMac, it would be as simple as just swapping to a new vid card.

exca1ibur · Jul 3, 2007, 01:06 AM

Kinda like the major support for the mezzanine slot on the original iMac? Thing is the opportunity for video cards has been there for a while now. We have had Intel chips for a while and PCIe slots even longer, yet no one has stepped up to create a third party video card. ATi pretty much is just creating OEM cards. Apple is the only one ever making nVidia cards and they are also OEM. The odds don't look good there. If they can't create standard third party PCIe cards, why would they create daughter video cards for an even smaller marketshare of machines?

P · Jul 3, 2007, 05:18 AM

Because all MBPs + all iMacs is a much bigger number than all Mac Pros.

No, I don't think it likely that it will happen either, but it's possible that one of the CPU upgrade companies will pick up the idea and run with it.

NobleMatt · Jul 3, 2007, 10:37 AM

i aint done much gaming on my mac yet, but did have windows on it at on point and ran games ok, i mean it wasnt out of this world but does it have to be, is all about playing the games, the current hardwear can support games at there factory settings, its only when u turn all the rendering to full ect that it will start to frame lag, im happy playing with lower settings, end of the day, same game, runs fine, just a little less eye candy.

(running imac 20" with 2.16 Ghz C2D, 2GB DDR 2 and the upgraded GPU (256 Radeon X1600))

exca1ibur · Jul 3, 2007, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by P

but it's possible that one of the CPU upgrade companies will pick up the idea and run with it.

As much as they overcharge for CPU upgrades, I don't think it will happen. The nice thing with Intel chips you no longer need a CPU company. You just buy the chip from newegg for an industry price. That part I like quite a bit.

KisforKennedy · Jul 3, 2007, 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by exca1ibur

Kinda like the major support for the mezzanine slot on the original iMac?

No, nothing like it actually. The mezzanine slot was a weird proprietary slot. The MXM slot on the iMac is used by many PC laptops, and even more computers in the future.

P · Jul 4, 2007, 09:19 AM

Originally Posted by exca1ibur

As much as they overcharge for CPU upgrades, I don't think it will happen. The nice thing with Intel chips you no longer need a CPU company. You just buy the chip from newegg for an industry price. That part I like quite a bit.

That's why they need a new angle. This is one possibility.