Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Enthusiast Zone > Gaming > G5 only games

G5 only games
Thread Tools
poulh
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: New York, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 11:00 AM
 
Not that G5 sales will be hurting right off the bat, but...

what if apple ported a few games and used the compiler to make them only work on a G5. They could bundle this game w/ the purchase of a G5.

I was thinking this would be a good business idea for games like unreal 2k4, etc. Games that are sluggish on current macs.

osnews has a similar article, but thier way would put 3rd party porting houses out of buisiness. This would just be a way to sell more g5's.
     
DBvader
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 01:14 PM
 
gamers dont buy G5s, so it wont really help sales at all. wasting all that money on the development will do nothing to motivate sales...so dont hold your breath
"Take a little dope...and walk out in the air"
     
Adam Betts
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North Hollywood, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 01:24 PM
 
Originally posted by DBvader:
gamers dont buy G5s, so it wont really help sales at all. wasting all that money on the development will do nothing to motivate sales...so dont hold your breath
Horseshit. Gamers usually buy latest hardware to play games smoothly
     
DBvader
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 02:37 PM
 
yeah. and those gamers get PCs. only a complete and utter retard would get G5 to game on. even if it ran games well (thanks to crappy porting, a OS seemingly unfriendly to games, and pos driveres they dont), few releases exist to warrant a 2-3000 dollar purchase (especially when comparable PCs cost well under 1000 dollars)

so its really not horseshit at all.

if a chunk of apples 3 percent marketshare were gamers, then i think we would see more initiatives by apple to get the gaming going. but, its not.
"Take a little dope...and walk out in the air"
     
Leonard
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 02:45 PM
 
Man, there's alot of retards out there then. Thanks for calling me one.

And by the way, I'll never buy a PC for gaming.
Mac Pro Dual 3.0 Dual-Core
MacBook Pro
     
littlegreenspud
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Sunny Isle of Wight
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 02:52 PM
 
Oh well, that make me a retard as well

I thought that I felt different today, now I know why...
     
Adam Betts
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North Hollywood, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 02:56 PM
 
Originally posted by DBvader:
yeah. and those gamers get PCs. only a complete and utter retard would get G5 to game on. even if it ran games well (thanks to crappy porting, a OS seemingly unfriendly to games, and pos driveres they dont), few releases exist to warrant a 2-3000 dollar purchase (especially when comparable PCs cost well under 1000 dollars)

so its really not horseshit at all.

if a chunk of apples 3 percent marketshare were gamers, then i think we would see more initiatives by apple to get the gaming going. but, its not.
     
superfula
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 03:12 PM
 
Originally posted by DBvader:
yeah. and those gamers get PCs. only a complete and utter retard would get G5 to game on. even if it ran games well (thanks to crappy porting, a OS seemingly unfriendly to games, and pos driveres they dont), few releases exist to warrant a 2-3000 dollar purchase (especially when comparable PCs cost well under 1000 dollars)

so its really not horseshit at all.

if a chunk of apples 3 percent marketshare were gamers, then i think we would see more initiatives by apple to get the gaming going. but, its not.
Great points, and I agree. If ANYONE buys a Mac, and playing games on it is their main reason for getting it, they are idiots. Games and Macs don't mesh. OSX is a terrible os to game on.

If you want to play games, get a pc. Or a console.
     
Brad Oliver
Aspyr Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Glendale, AZ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 03:45 PM
 
Originally posted by littlegreenspud:
Oh well, that make me a retard as well
I must be one of the biggest retards around - I actively develop games for OSX!
Brad Oliver
bradman AT pobox DOT com
     
BZ
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 04:37 PM
 
Just for kicks I did up an AlienWare top of the line gaming machine with a 20" monitor against Apple's 2 x 2.0 Ghz G5.

The difference was only about $500-$600 and I am betting the G5 will kick its butt.

BZ
     
Chemmy
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Boston, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 05:12 PM
 
Originally posted by BZ:
I am betting the G5 will kick its butt.
Not at playing Battlefield 1942.

1.25ghz 15" PowerBook
     
xyber233
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Chicago
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 05:38 PM
 
Heh, add me to the retard list.
     
OwlBoy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 05:59 PM
 
Me too!

-Owl
     
Adam Betts
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North Hollywood, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 06:39 PM
 
Originally posted by Chemmy:
Not at playing Battlefield 1942.
Who need Battlefield 1942 if we have American Army now?
     
a2daj
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Edmonds, WA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 06:48 PM
 
I are retarded then. I buy faster or upgrade Macs so I can get better performance on my games. I'd spend more money replacing my software library with PC apps than I would spending on the PC. And I wouldn't half ass it if I built a gaming PC. I'd get the top of the line everything so it would last longer. But since those PCs don't run Mac OS, I won't be buying one.
     
DBvader
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 06:56 PM
 
i stand by my statment, it would be counterproductive to get a mac only for gaming.

"The difference was only about $500-$600 and I am betting the G5 will kick its butt."

i sincerely doubt that, OS X is notorious for slow gaming performance, video card drivers are ppor, and porting is bad as well.

on a PC, the game is running on the platform it was developed for with all sorts of optimizations and standardized tools to help framerates. that is why i think the gaming PCs will destroy the G5 (In Gaming Performance). i think that many people around here think that becuase the macs are faster in program x (caugh...photoshop...caugh), they are automatically faster in everything.

The Dual 1.42 couldnt measure up to PCs a thiurd of the cost, and that is why any gamer buying a mac JUST for gaming is not making the right decision.

when i got my mac, i knew i was going to only play limited releases, and all the titles that i played/wanted had or were being in the process of being ported. unfortunately, as i soon found out, few of these games ran well on my machine (Dual 867/9000/1 GB RAM). Even the cheapest of PCs are capable of pushing framerates well beyond mine.
"Take a little dope...and walk out in the air"
     
DBvader
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 06:57 PM
 
"Who need Battlefield 1942 if we have American Army now?"

yeah, and Quake 3!

"I are retarded then. I buy faster or upgrade Macs so I can get better performance on my games. I'd spend more money replacing my software library with PC apps than I would spending on the PC. And I wouldn't half ass it if I built a gaming PC. I'd get the top of the line everything so it would last longer. But since those PCs don't run Mac OS, I won't be buying one."

you can get the fastest available mac right now (the dual 1.42) and it would be easily outperformed by a sub 600 dollar PC. so i guess if your buying a mac only for gaming, then its pretty retarded. i dont know how the G5 performs, i hope its well, and i also hope it sells well. good sales translates into cheaper computers later down the line (i hope ) also, software on the PC is easily piratable, so you can run more than quake 3, warcraft 3, and UT 2K3.

"And by the way, I'll never buy a PC for gaming"

well, that either means that you dont game enough to warrant purchase, youre not willing to have PCs laying around for specific purposes, or your willing to pay a lot more for a whole lot less. the mac os is beautiful, and much better than windows. but that doesnt mean that macs have anywhere near comparable performance.
( Last edited by DBvader; Jul 17, 2003 at 07:15 PM. )
"Take a little dope...and walk out in the air"
     
a2daj
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Edmonds, WA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 07:35 PM
 
Originally posted by DBvader:
"Who need Battlefield 1942 if we have American Army now?"

yeah, and Quake 3!

"I are retarded then. I buy faster or upgrade Macs so I can get better performance on my games. I'd spend more money replacing my software library with PC apps than I would spending on the PC. And I wouldn't half ass it if I built a gaming PC. I'd get the top of the line everything so it would last longer. But since those PCs don't run Mac OS, I won't be buying one."

you can get the fastest available mac right now (the dual 1.42) and it would be easily outperformed by a sub 600 dollar PC. so i guess if your buying a mac only for gaming, then its pretty retarded. i dont know how the G5 performs, i hope its well, and i also hope it sells well. good sales translates into cheaper computers later down the line (i hope ) also, software on the PC is easily piratable, so you can run more than quake 3, warcraft 3, and UT 2K3.

"And by the way, I'll never buy a PC for gaming"

well, that either means that you dont game enough to warrant purchase, youre not willing to have PCs laying around for specific purposes, or your willing to pay a lot more for a whole lot less. the mac os is beautiful, and much better than windows. but that doesnt mean that macs have anywhere near comparable performance.
I'm not going to go pirate software just to save a buck. To even suggest that is retarded even if it's PC software. In fact, it's more retarded than people buying Macs for gaming.
My Mac does more than just play games. But I updated or get newer ones to improve performance in games. Why waste space having an extra PC just for gaming? If I buy something just for gaming, it'll be a console, of which I already have the big three so I have no need for PC that's just going to collect dust so I'll be going with option B, not willing to have a crappy windows PC lying around.

I never said anything about comparable performance so your point is moot as far as my gaming decisions go.
     
DBvader
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2003, 08:15 PM
 
a2daj, its almost like youre neglecting what im saying...i said that if you use your mac for other things beyond gaming, its a sound decision (I have a mac, and i use it for gaming).but to buy a mac soley as a gaming machine, especially considering hoe much faster/cheaper PCs are, is just a complete waste

i said it was retarded to buy a mac just for gaming. i think ive clearly said why. youre not willing to rebuy or pirate software (even if you dont rebuy what you ahve, there are so many more games on the PC, that you wont even have to play those games you ahve), but you have no problem spending significantly more money on significantly slower hardware? most of the mac games that are out now (Ut2K3, sim city, etc) are significantly cheaper on the PC! so youre willing to pay more for less, wait longer for half assed ports, and then pay more for them?

also, to that alienware guy: alienware is known to overcharge for hardware. dell and gateway have nice gaming rigs that are significantly cheaper than similarly equipped macs. and building your PC is a great way to get a fast computer for cheap.

if you look at my statement, i said gamers dont get G5s. professionals, who may want to game in their free time may, but not gamers. a real gamer wouldnt spend twice or three times the amount of cash on a platform that is significantly slower, lacks positional sound support, etc, and has a significantly smaller library.
( Last edited by DBvader; Jul 17, 2003 at 08:22 PM. )
"Take a little dope...and walk out in the air"
     
icruise
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Illinois
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 18, 2003, 12:35 AM
 
Nobody will buy a G5 only for games (in the same sense that people have PCs that they ONLY use for games). This is partially due to the expense of the G5, but also because you can do so much more with it. But it makes perfect sense for game playing to be one of your main reasons for getting a G5.

That said, the idea of making G5-only games is not a good one, unless the games had some killer feature that could only be handled by a G5.
     
MindFad
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 18, 2003, 12:57 AM
 
I'll be getting my G5 for Photoshop, Maya, and ... *gasp!* ... games!
     
alex_kac
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Central Texas
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 18, 2003, 02:03 AM
 
Originally posted by superfula:
Great points, and I agree. If ANYONE buys a Mac, and playing games on it is their main reason for getting it, they are idiots. Games and Macs don't mesh. OSX is a terrible os to game on.

If you want to play games, get a pc. Or a console.
What a load of BS. OS X is a GREAT OS to game on. The issue has been the hardware and lack of fully optimized drivers by the ATI and NVIdias. However, that's been changing for awhile and current drivers are pretty good.
     
DrBoar
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Stockholm Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 18, 2003, 03:41 AM
 
We are alredy close to "G5 only games" in a sense. Several levels of SOF II is severy CPU limited on a dual 1.42 G4, it also appears that UT2003 can stutter on a leading edge G4. If we assume that the G4 will not improve much, say stay at 2 GHz or below then I am sure that within a year games like DOOM III and games based on the new Unreal/UT engine will enter slide show mode on G4s and G3s.

Regarding Apple having games for "free" bundled with the G5. Apple would have to be very careful to pick the right games. If every G3 and G4 would have been shipped with a free copy of Quake III it would have affected the sales of UT. Bundling games might not be such a killer as with browsers or office applications but Apple still have to think twise.

But Apple shoud give developer and "porters" all the support they need. The G5 is very important here. Imagine a PC game that need at least a 1.5 GHz P4 to run well and that the game can not be made SMP and need a lot of FPU power. On the PC side every current CPU would run it and also high end computers that is one or two years old would run the game. For a Mac port it starts with a small market share and then it would exclude everything but the high end G4 towers and they would be marginal at best.

The best thing Apple could do for gaming is to get good harware into the mass market models. That is G5 and good cards in the iMac (and eMac). In the mean time they could have games ported that are less hardware demanding, like flight sims
take a look at http://www.microsoft.com/games/combatfs/
Even the latest version runs well on a 700 MHz P III and there is no other FS ot there, not since Hellcats
     
theory
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 18, 2003, 06:18 AM
 
I agree that any one who buys a mac for just
playing games is a retard because you get
better performance and games and a cheaper
price. If you run war 3 on a mac and a pc
and a mac can you tell the diffrence. No and
yes.

No because looks identical. Yes because
you pay more for the mac and it runs slower
even on better hardware.

Having said that few people buy macs or
any other computer for gameing. They would
also use it for e-mail, chat, surfing, music,
movies. etc. I think these are pretty standard
things every one does with there computers.
     
Leonard
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 18, 2003, 11:33 AM
 
Originally posted by DBvader:
on a PC, the game is running on the platform it was developed for with all sorts of optimizations and standardized tools to help framerates. that is why i think the gaming PCs will destroy the G5 (In Gaming Performance). i think that many people around here think that becuase the macs are faster in program x (caugh...photoshop...caugh), they are automatically faster in everything.
While this statement may still be true for the time being, it may become a thing of the past. Games are now starting to be developed for the consoles and ported to the PC as well. Halo is a prime example of this.

Also, optimizations in the game are done on both PCs and Macs. There's lots of PC ports that have been optimized for the Mac.
Mac Pro Dual 3.0 Dual-Core
MacBook Pro
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 18, 2003, 01:02 PM
 
The best thing Apple could do to augment our software base is a) grow the marketshare and b) take one out of MS' playbook and acquire software houses. There's no time like the present for Apple to get really aggressive in terms of growth.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
DBvader
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 18, 2003, 01:47 PM
 
ah, finally less apple centric reponses. i agree with you big mac, but realistically, i dont think apple cares much about gamers...and should they? gamers represent a small percent of their market (though many play games on the mac, few are hardcore mac gamers...as i said before most gamers have PCs), and therefore wouldnt justify the purchase of devs. Warcraft Three is a great example of a mac game. it actually runs decently enough on my Dual 867 at 1280X1024 with everything on high. when i switched, i knew it would be a bit slower, but for OSX, id be willing to sacrifice a little speed. PCs, though, at 2.4 and up GhZ, seem to run thsi gamea lot smoother, but like i said the performance is decent. games like MOH, tohugh only run at around 40-50 FPS (and way less on single player mode), when cheap PCs (>500 dollars) pop out 100 FPS with higher settings and resolutions! i think a lot of it has to do with the OS, becuase how else would you explain the difference in performance for OS 9 and X games?
"Take a little dope...and walk out in the air"
     
Johnny_B
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 22, 2003, 05:32 AM
 
I am a retard, and I proud of it. You will never find me playing on a Windows machine !! I abandoned M$ years ago.
Mac Pro 2 x 2.8 GHz Quad-Core, Nvidia GeForce 8800GT
     
DBvader
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 22, 2003, 12:50 PM
 
thats great. you must have a pretty happy life if youre settling for sub par performance, paying more for it, and then feeling special because of it.

i think a lot of the problem stems from responses like the above one. i would wager that a large percentage of people who have admitted to being retarded havent used PCs lately, and have no idea about th speed differences that exist between the platforms. its not limited to gaming, where my Dual G4 runs rames ay 40 FPS, my PC (costing a quarter of price of the G4), blasts through it at over 100 FPS at higher resolutions. Apple users seem eager to settle for horrible perfornace at low resolutions. i tihnk people's judgements are clouded by apple 'marketing,' and they think if a G4 is faster for PS, it must be faster for aeverything. the sad truth is that PC hardware has grown much more cosntantly than Apple's. where apple has jumps ever few years (G3, G4, G5), the PC has a fairly steady increase in speed. PC software, consequently, is far more optimized for different CP extensions. antoher poster above said that there have been many optimized mac releases, and i cant think of one. the best playing game i have seen on the mac is quake 3, which actually works just as fast as my PC...too bad all the quake 3 based games, MOH, JK, Wolf, etc run at a third or half of the speed of my PC running at higher res with more options on. I think the people who are proud of their mac gaming purchses should go to their nearest friends house with a computer >2 GHz, and experience what true speed is. not just in games, but also in ui responsivness, etc...
"Take a little dope...and walk out in the air"
     
MindFad
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 22, 2003, 12:58 PM
 
The G5 is here, and the G5 is not made by Motorola. Things will probably go a little differently with IBM. Performance is not in such contrast anymore. I'll worry if we only make it to 2.1 GHz in two years. Haha.













*secretly knocks on desk*
     
Froggysan
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 22, 2003, 03:02 PM
 
The fact that apple said when they released the G5 at WWDC that in 6 to 8 months the processor speeds will have increased by over 50%...

So that means a 2.0GHz chip would be a 3.0GHz chip.....




Now on to the issue of gaming... Macs are decent for gaming... My mac has run every game, short of UT2K3, (view other thread) without an issue and ran it very very well.


Let's compare some machines and prices:


ALIENWARE BOX: PRICE: $3,155

Intel� Pentium� 4 Processor 3.2GHz 800MHz FSB w/ 512KB Cache & HyperThreading
1GB DDR SDRAM PC-3200 - 2 x 512MB Module
Microsoft Internet Keyboard
Microsoft IntelliMouse Explorer 3.0
160GB Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 Serial ATA - RAID 0
ATI RADEON� 9800 PRO 256MB 8x AGP w/DVI & S-Video
Creative Sound Blaster� Audigy 2 Platinum
Microsoft� Windows� XP Professional
Intel� Desktop Board D875PBZ - Intel 875P Motherboard



APPLE G5: 2999.99

Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5
1GHz frontside bus
512K L2 cache/processor
512MB DDR400 128-bit SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA
SuperDrive DVD-RW
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro 64MB DDR video memory
Mac OS 10.2 Jaguar





With a slight exception to the RAM and the VIDEO card the systems are pretty much the same... oh... and I forgot.... the dual 64-bit processors on the G5... Might give it a bit of an advantage... no?



The big thing is, software doesn't need to be rewritten for the the G5, just recompiled with the new GCC. They already have patches for Photoshop, Illustrator, Finalcut, Dreamweaver, Flash et cetera.. It just modifies a few small lines of the code and the programs run on the 64bit processor.



The main reason Mac isn't that great for gaming is because of the wait. If you want to play UT2K3 or GTA3, you best do it on a PC just because the games will be out 6 or 8 months before they will be on the Mac. Aside from blizzard, most companies go back and do the Mac version later.



Now I suppose I need to be added to the Retard list aswell, as I game on my Mac. I quite enjoy it... I just hate the waiting part.


The performace on the Dual G5s has increased hugely... Finally Apple has got a third party to do the testing, so I am more likely to believe their results. And the price has dropped huge... The price for the Dual G5 is cheaper than what I paid for my Dual G4 1.0GHz less than a year ago... like $300 - $450 less...


So improved performace, lowered price, and included cheese grater... what more can you ask for?
     
istallion
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 22, 2003, 06:15 PM
 
Originally posted by Froggysan:

Let's compare some machines and prices:


ALIENWARE BOX: PRICE: $3,155

Intel� Pentium� 4 Processor 3.2GHz 800MHz FSB w/ 512KB Cache & HyperThreading
1GB DDR SDRAM PC-3200 - 2 x 512MB Module
Microsoft Internet Keyboard
Microsoft IntelliMouse Explorer 3.0
160GB Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 Serial ATA - RAID 0
ATI RADEON� 9800 PRO 256MB 8x AGP w/DVI & S-Video
Creative Sound Blaster� Audigy 2 Platinum
Microsoft� Windows� XP Professional
Intel� Desktop Board D875PBZ - Intel 875P Motherboard



APPLE G5: 2999.99

Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5
1GHz frontside bus
512K L2 cache/processor
512MB DDR400 128-bit SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA
SuperDrive DVD-RW
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro 64MB DDR video memory
Mac OS 10.2 Jaguar





With a slight exception to the RAM and the VIDEO card the systems are pretty much the same... oh... and I forgot.... the dual 64-bit processors on the G5... Might give it a bit of an advantage... no?
This comparison is a joke right?

First, Alienware hand builds their systems and provides performance tests for each system - renowned for being about the most expensive OEM out there. Not to mention, you added a SATA RAID system, a video card that costs $400 more than the 9600, the audio connector bay + remote control, and twice the RAM, as well as XP Pro, which 95% of gamers don't need. The dual G5 has good value, especially compared to the single G5 models, but outclassed and overpriced for gaming.

No games benefit from 64bit CPU's, and most games don't benefit from SMP. What apple needs to do is get something besides that slow GCC out to developers.
     
Froggysan
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 22, 2003, 07:09 PM
 
Actually yes... I was joking about the specs.. I have a very high respect for Alienware systems... Those things are top notch gaming machines...



What I wasn't joking about was the fact that the G5s have come down in price overall... That going from 32Bit to 64bit processors isn't a big of a deal as some people make it out to be... And that gaming isn't a horrible thing on the Mac... you just have to wait for the software...
     
Brad Oliver
Aspyr Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Glendale, AZ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 22, 2003, 08:24 PM
 
Originally posted by istallion:
What apple needs to do is get something besides that slow GCC out to developers.
It's called CodeWarrior, and most developers already use it.
Brad Oliver
bradman AT pobox DOT com
     
DBvader
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 22, 2003, 08:49 PM
 
" Now on to the issue of gaming... Macs are decent for gaming... My mac has run every game, short of UT2K3, (view other thread) without an issue and ran it very very well."

my Dual 867 is a fairly fast mac that is only a year old, and it runs UT2K3 at 1024 X 768 with medium settings at ~30 FPS (a little less)

my 2000+ cost 600 dollars to amke, is 6 months older than my mac (at least), and runs the game at 50-60 FPS with everything on higher levels @1280 X 1024.

that is why i would say that macs are not decent for gaming. other games are playable, but dont compre in terms of performance. MOH runs at 50 FPS less than my PC, War 3 runs well, but doesnt have the speed of animation and cant hold its own in large battles. the list really goes on. PCs are so rediculously fast and have such optmized software that comparing the two platforms (for games) is pointless.

alienware is notoriously expensive. and i think that higher end systems, like the G5, are only a little over priced (if they were 3-500 dollars less, they would be quite comparable and worthwhile machines for everything but games(not like they arent already, but you know what i mean). its the imacs, emacs, ibooks, etc that are rediculously overpriced and underpowered...not only for games...but for everything.

im helping a friend chose between a 1.8 GHz G5 and a 3.2 P4. my friend will use student ADC (and same himself a few hundred dolars), so the machines are VERY simlilarly priced. the mac wouldnt be worth it at the std price, becuase the PC would be MUCH cheaper, but ADC is awesome. for around 2K, you can get a 3.2/512/160 GB/ATI 9800/DVD RW or a 1.8/512/160/ATI 9600.
so far i have recommended the mac in every isntance but gaming, telling him that the mac just couldnt hold up to such a powerful PC (or even a much less powerful PC). i warned him about the sad state of mac gaming, and how porting is poorly done and very delayed, etc. he still may go for the mac, becuase he really only wants to play blizz games and doom 3. i think that for everything else, macs are fantastic, but for games they are seriously lacking...its sad that people arent vocal about the sucking, maybe apple would do something about it. i remember when people were saying UT runs smooth (and then said it ran at 25 FPS) at lower resolutions (800X 600), and were completely content. when PCs, similarly priced or even much cheaper, were running it at blazing framerates, supersmoothly with everything on high at 1280X1024.
"Take a little dope...and walk out in the air"
     
gizzard
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 22, 2003, 09:41 PM
 
Somehow, I doubt that you know how a 1.8 GHz G5 performs in games.
     
DBvader
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 22, 2003, 11:27 PM
 
no, but i do know that the mac has serious flaws gaming wise. OSX doesnt utilize all of its resources so that other proceses are maintained, video card drivers are poor, and porting is worse. and on top of all of that a poor library (which what i mostly warned my friend about), thats not growing at a very accereated pace.
"Take a little dope...and walk out in the air"
     
Leonard
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 23, 2003, 10:47 AM
 
Originally posted by DBvader:
i think a lot of the problem stems from responses like the above one. i would wager that a large percentage of people who have admitted to being retarded havent used PCs lately, and have no idea about th speed differences that exist between the platforms.
Here you go assuming stuff and making a complete ASS of yourself (hey you insulted me first). I happen to use both PCs and Macs, in fact I probably use a PC more, since that's what I use at work for my company. Of course I have no choice at work, I have to use a PC there. I am well aware of the current speed of PCs. I also happen to be the PC guru (man that's ironic) in my section at work and buy all the PCs and laptops in our section. I've installed optical drives, HDs, memory, etc. on PCs. I'd still by a Mac over a PC at home because I prefer the Mac for many reasons. If I was ever given a PC at home, I'd probably sell it, and use the proceeds to buy a new Mac. I don't see any problem with gaming on the Mac, other than the wait for a game to be ported. Then again, I probably don't buy more than five gamees per year. I seem to get addicted to the multiplayer games and play them for a fairly long time.
Mac Pro Dual 3.0 Dual-Core
MacBook Pro
     
Froggysan
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 23, 2003, 11:18 AM
 
I agree... No one really knows what the G5 is going to perform like, as we haven't had the chance to test it.



The 1.6 and the 1.8GHz G5s are a little overpriced... Infact the DP 2.0GHz is the best deal of them all.


I paid about $4400 CAN for my Dual 1.0GHz... a year ago now.... The Dual G5 2.0GHz is only $4200 CAN... They have lowered in price over all.. but if you want a really good mac pick up the Dual 2.0...


The iMacs, iBooks et cetera are by far waaaaay over priced... and way underprefromed... The real gems are in the Desktop systems.




I aswell am a Mac and PC guru... so to speak... I've done hardware and software support for both platforms for the last 2 or 3 years... For several different places. I've had my current PC for a year now, and had to reinstall the OS 3 times just because it went tits up on me. Even running Windows XP I've had it crash on me more times than I can count on my fingers and toes... But my Mac has crashed once... due to some nasty HP scanner drivers...



Despite the fact that my Mac is slower than my PC... and that I did pay about $1200 CAN more for my Mac... I can honestly say my Mac is much more stable... It's built like a brick shithouse...



With regard to the speed differences and not using a PC... Not only do I own an old PII 450... a P4 1.8GHz... but I work on a P4 2.1GHz a work... I think I have a pretty good idea of how the speeds are...


I know my Mac is slower than my PC... but I don't really care... It runs everything I've thrown at it... Inlcuding UT2K3 now... which was a problem with having the Demo installed at the same time... Stupid MacSoft has the Support files in the same directory for both the Demo and the Full Version... which kinda messes things up....



Most of the PC users who hate Macs spent most or all of their time running OS 9.... The true understanding of versitility of running OS X is where the Mac is great...




As for video card drivers being poor? What do you mean? The GeForce cards... and the ATI Raedon cards work flawlessly on my Mac and every other Mac I've seen... In fact I have two ATI Raedon's installed right now...


ATI Raedon 9000, and a PCI ATI Raedon 7500... I do have to say three 19" monitors is a really nice treat to sit down at...
     
Maneki Neko
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Alaska
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 23, 2003, 12:24 PM
 
Originally posted by Froggysan:
Let's compare some machines and prices:


ALIENWARE BOX: PRICE: $3,155

Intel� Pentium� 4 Processor 3.2GHz 800MHz FSB w/ 512KB Cache & HyperThreading
1GB DDR SDRAM PC-3200 - 2 x 512MB Module
Microsoft Internet Keyboard
Microsoft IntelliMouse Explorer 3.0
160GB Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 Serial ATA - RAID 0
ATI RADEON� 9800 PRO 256MB 8x AGP w/DVI & S-Video
Creative Sound Blaster� Audigy 2 Platinum
Microsoft� Windows� XP Professional
Intel� Desktop Board D875PBZ - Intel 875P Motherboard
This exact configuration could be built for roughly $2000 if you don't go through Alienware though. You won't get the wacky looking case, but otherwise, same components.

And really, that's the beauty of the PC for gaming. You can assemble one from whatever parts you want (motherboard, CPU, video card, sound card, etc), at whatever price point you want.

I really do enjoy my Macs, and use them for almost everything BUT gaming.
     
kelesh
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: boston, ma
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 23, 2003, 12:31 PM
 
Originally posted by Froggysan:
I aswell am a Mac and PC guru... so to speak... I've done hardware and software support for both platforms for the last 2 or 3 years... For several different places. I've had my current PC for a year now, and had to reinstall the OS 3 times just because it went tits up on me. Even running Windows XP I've had it crash on me more times than I can count on my fingers and toes... But my Mac has crashed once... due to some nasty HP scanner drivers...
What kind of PC guru are you if you can't even run WinXP without crashes? I've only had 1 crash on Winxp in over a year. I have not had to reinstall and it is running great. Winxp is super stable and has tons of support for it.


I know my Mac is slower than my PC... but I don't really care... It runs everything I've thrown at it...
Try throwing counterstrike (most popular online game) at it.




As for video card drivers being poor? What do you mean? The GeForce cards... and the ATI Raedon cards work flawlessly on my Mac and every other Mac I've seen...
Ok, you have no idea what you're talking about. The drivers suck because they are poorly optimized and do not have many options. Games do not run as well as they should on the hardware. For example, Windows drivers for Geforce 4's improved with newer versions such that games could run 30% faster on the same hardware. These kind of driver optimizations are nowhere to be found on macs. Stability is not *ALL* there is to good video drivers.


ATI Raedon 9000, and a PCI ATI Raedon 7500... I do have to say three 19" monitors is a really nice treat to sit down at...
Indeed! I started out with 3 crts, and eventually made my way to 3 Dell LCD's, though now i'm down to 2(one got fried by my ps2 vga adapter). As soon as widescreen lcd's are cheaper i'm going to get 2 of them and call it a day.
     
tie
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 23, 2003, 12:43 PM
 
Back on topic.. There is no point to making games G5-only. It just limits the Mac market even further. Why would game companies give up the revenue from selling to the iMac-owners (even if the iMacs aren't really fast enough)? Why would Apple deliberately split the platform? G5s don't need games to sell.

Especially when it is trivial to optimize for the G5, and also for the G4 or whatever. E.g., different binaries, same package.
     
Froggysan
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 23, 2003, 01:42 PM
 
Last time I checked... Counterstrike/Half-Life didn't have a Mac version... no?



Weather you get 100 fps or 30fps doesn't really matter.... The fact that your eye can only pick out about 30fps is what matters....

So what if you have a beefed up Machine that can run UT2K3 at 232fps.... You'll never be able to tell the difference between the two...



As for video cards... You physically install the card... punch in the latest drivers... and presto... you have a video card... Have you got any evidence to support your argument that the PC drivers make the same card run 30% faster?


Secondly... How fast a game runs doesn't just depend on the videocard you have... it depends on the processor as well.... So if you compare a P4 2.4GHz with a ATI Raedon 9000 to a G4 933MHz with an ATI Raedon 9000 chances are it is going to be faster on the PC... but not necessarily because of the video card...




WindowsXP is too damn bloated... Depending on the machine your running on it can be smooth sailing... or rough waters...

The P4 1.7GHz hasn't had that many problems with XP at all.... But the PII 450 has had the world of problems... not really speed issues... but just stability issues...





As for the G5 only games... If something is optimized and compiled with the right coding... it will work on a G5... or a G4....

If I am correct, the programs just need to be recompiled... With the newest GCC. Which ads or modifies a few lines of code which allow the software to interface at a faster speed with a 64bit processor... however, if the 64 bit processor is not present than it just runs at 32bit...


if (processor == 64bits) {

interface = 64 bit processing

else

interface = 32 bit processing

end if

}


Now granted the above not real code.. it's the basic concept behind the one or two lines that update software for G5s...


Now maybe I've been completely miss informed... Who knows...
     
benb
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Far from the internet.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 23, 2003, 01:51 PM
 
Originally posted by Froggysan:
Weather you get 100 fps or 30fps doesn't really matter.... The fact that your eye can only pick out about 30fps is what matters....

So what if you have a beefed up Machine that can run UT2K3 at 232fps.... You'll never be able to tell the difference between the two...
I am so sick of hearing this. You can most definitely tell a difference between 30 and 80 fps. Easily. Not only in the oveall smoothness, but also in the fact that if you can only run UT2K3 at 30 fps, you will not run UT2K4. At all. And the eye can see the differece. Its amazing.


As for video cards... You physically install the card... punch in the latest drivers... and presto... you have a video card... Have you got any evidence to support your argument that the PC drivers make the same card run 30% faster?
Yes. It is a known fact. Amazingly, ATI and nVidia work actively to resolve issues with games, and to provide speed boosts to games, such as UT2K3. Because speed sells. The Catalyst 2.4 brought a 30% speedup to UT2K3
     
kelesh
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: boston, ma
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 23, 2003, 03:06 PM
 
these days processors don't matter too much in terms of gaming. A 1.4 ghz athlon only gets a few fps lower than a 2.6ghz athlonxp+. Perhaps games like halflife 2 and doom3 will make the cpu more important.
     
Vash
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 23, 2003, 03:18 PM
 
Maybe when processor speeds are as high or higher than 1.5ghz the speed does not matter. But put ut2k3 on a 867mhz quicksilver - the highest fps you will get is 22, (I have one for proof) no matter what graphics chip and no matter how low you set the settings in the game. But with a dual 1.25ghz G4 it's all about the video card. Froggysan I would love to see you play Quake 3 at 30fps - it is almost impossible. I think the max fps your eye can truly notice is about 50-70. It is also true that the same video cards will work far better in PCs than macs. The companies optimize their drivers constantly, unlike Apple. I agree with tie about the G5 only games as well.
Revenge is a meal best served cold.
     
DBvader
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 23, 2003, 11:02 PM
 
"these days processors don't matter too much in terms of gaming. A 1.4 ghz athlon only gets a few fps lower than a 2.6ghz athlonxp+. Perhaps games like halflife 2 and doom3 will make the cpu more important."

well, before the G5, i think that processors (especially bus speeds) were real bottleknecks. witht the 800 + MhZ bus in the G5, its more capable of providing a better gaming expereince. despite that, dont think these changes could overcome the level of optimization and standardizations that are seen in PC games.

" Now on to the issue of gaming... Macs are decent for gaming... My mac has run every game, short of UT2K3, (view other thread) without an issue and ran it very very well."

there is no doubt that macs can run agmes, but running it well is purely subjective. imo, if a machine that costs a thid of the price of mine can run game x at up to twice the speed, at hiher resolution with more graphical options, then my mac really isnt running the game well. and that is what i see with my mac.

" Here you go assuming stuff and making a complete ASS of yourself (hey you insulted me first). I happen to use both PCs and Macs, in fact I probably use a PC more, since that's what I use at work for my company. Of course I have no choice at work, I have to use a PC there. I am well aware of the current speed of PCs. I also happen to be the PC guru (man that's ironic) in my section at work and buy all the PCs and laptops in our section. I've installed optical drives, HDs, memory, etc. on PCs. I'd still by a Mac over a PC at home because I prefer the Mac for many reasons. If I was ever given a PC at home, I'd probably sell it, and use the proceeds to buy a new Mac. I don't see any problem with gaming on the Mac, other than the wait for a game to be ported. Then again, I probably don't buy more than five gamees per year. I seem to get addicted to the multiplayer games and play them for a fairly long time."

first of all, im sorry if my assumptions are wrong. im sure there are mac users on these baords that are aware of how much faster PCs are. But i still think that a large majority of mac users arent aware of the difference. I also wouldnt want a PC as my home machine, becuase after years on them, im tired of the inconsistensies. i just wish that what makes my mac a better machine than my PC (os, features, etc) werent at the espense of performance and price.

" The 1.6 and the 1.8GHz G5s are a little overpriced... Infact the DP 2.0GHz is the best deal of them all."

every mac is overpriced. but with student ADC, things get evened out a bit more. im helpinh a friend chose between a 3.2 P4 and a 1.8 G5, after ADC they are similarly priced, though the P4 does have a better video card and a blsiteringly fast processor.

" I aswell am a Mac and PC guru... so to speak... I've done hardware and software support for both platforms for the last 2 or 3 years... For several different places. I've had my current PC for a year now, and had to reinstall the OS 3 times just because it went tits up on me. Even running Windows XP I've had it crash on me more times than I can count on my fingers and toes... But my Mac has crashed once... due to some nasty HP scanner drivers..."

ive used windows machines since i was a kid, and i have constructed many systems and messed around for years with the OS, etc. windows XP has a amazingly fast ui, but it also is prone to error messages, etc. my mac has frozen significantly less and given me generally less problems than my PC. and that is why im content with it for everything but gaming.

" Most of the PC users who hate Macs spent most or all of their time running OS 9.... The true understanding of versitility of running OS X is where the Mac is great..."

i agree with you there, PC users have the wrong idea about macs. it would be like thinking you know all about XP, becuase you used 95 back in the day.

i disagree with what you said about performance, though. my PC that cost more than a third of your machine, plows through games like Ut2L3 without looking back. and that is why this debate has even started. like i said earlier, its not IF it runs, its how well and with how many options on. and sadly, PCs not only run games much faster than macs way more expensive, but also do so at higher reses with more graphical options on.

" As for video card drivers being poor? What do you mean? The GeForce cards... and the ATI Raedon cards work flawlessly on my Mac and every other Mac I've seen... In fact I have two ATI Raedon's installed right now..."

sure they work, but they arent configured correctly to provide even near the gaming experience they do on the PC. i wasnt talking about the general workability, but rather the performance gains from the drivers.

" This exact configuration could be built for roughly $2000 if you don't go through Alienware though. You won't get the wacky looking case, but otherwise, same components."

yep, a bit less than 2K. the system i "built" for my friend h ad those very specs. the 1.8 G5 we were comparing it too was only a bit more than 2K after ADC (though you have to pay a 100 dollars to get in, and its not really representative of mac prices)

" Weather you get 100 fps or 30fps doesn't really matter.... The fact that your eye can only pick out about 30fps is what matters....

So what if you have a beefed up Machine that can run UT2K3 at 232fps.... You'll never be able to tell the difference between the two..."

thats absolutely untrue. you can notice framerate differences well into the 100-somes. i notice the speed difference between 50 FPS and 100 FPS in MOH on my mac and PC (running at higher res, with AA, and all graphics on high). i notice the 25 to 60 FPS between my mac and PC (again at higher res with way more options). the list goes on.

" As for video cards... You physically install the card... punch in the latest drivers... and presto... you have a video card... Have you got any evidence to support your argument that the PC drivers make the same card run 30% faster?"

wasnt my clain, but i is claim video cards have better drivers on the PC. and that is becuase you always see nvidia claiming this and that perfornace increase with every release of their det drivers. when have you seen that (or even driver relases for that matter) on the mac. also, similarly specd PC with the same cards will always outperform macs.

" Secondly... How fast a game runs doesn't just depend on the videocard you have... it depends on the processor as well.... So if you compare a P4 2.4GHz with a ATI Raedon 9000 to a G4 933MHz with an ATI Raedon 9000 chances are it is going to be faster on the PC... but not necessarily because of the video card..."

yeah, thats a huge part of the problem too. the CPU (before th G5s) were extreme bottleknecks to performance. but i think that every little small defect (cards, OS, etc) has a combined more important role in poor mac gaming.
"Take a little dope...and walk out in the air"
     
Melkor
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 24, 2003, 05:56 AM
 
Originally posted by DBvader:
on a PC, the game is running on the platform it was developed for with all sorts of optimizations and standardized tools to help framerates. that is why i think the gaming PCs will destroy the G5 (In Gaming Performance).
What kind of optimizations and standarized tools? I wonder about the origin of your knowledge concerning G5's gamingng performance. Did you already get one?
     
Melkor
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 24, 2003, 06:00 AM
 
Originally posted by DBvader:
every mac is overpriced.
Sorry, but thats nonsense again. The brand new G5 Macs aren't overpriced for sure.
     
DBvader
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 24, 2003, 11:55 AM
 
melkor, quake 3 arena is one the one optmized gamea on the mac platform. its over 5 years old. why are you using that as justification for whether how well/poorly a mac would game. my Dual G4 blazes through quake 3, like it was nothing, but every other game runs poorly. tell me, then, how the G5s abilities with a 5 year old game reflects on how well it can run modern games.

and no, the G5 ARENT decently priced.

you can get a 3.2 GhZ P8. 512 DDR., DVD Burner, ATI 9800, 160 GB, etc for less than 2000. and that would me significantly faster than the 1.6 and 1.8 (judging on apples own site comparing a Dualie to a 3.0) for everything, and MUCH faster for games.

ive said numerous times that i dont know how the G5 will perform but that, if the past shows anything its that porting, graphics card drivers, etc all contribute to poor gaming on the mac.

"What kind of optimizations and standarized tools? I wonder about the origin of your knowledge concerning G5's gamingng performance. Did you already get one?"

CPU extensions, driver optmizations, up to date openGL, direct X 9, etc. other then quake 3 (and after 5 years or so i might add) have you heard about Altivec or any other optimizations on the mac? the fact is a majority of the games are made on the PC, and are written to take advantage of the superfast architecture.
"Take a little dope...and walk out in the air"
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:33 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,