Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

SassyPants · May 10, 2005, 05:46 PM

Frustration starting to set in. Powerbooks can't seem to take gaming very well...
PC based noteoboks perform MUCh better in games...and...its...depressing because Powerbooks rock at everythign else.

OMG IBM HURRY UP AND FINISH WITH THE G5 POWERBOOK FOR CHRISTS SAKE!!!

actually, i shoudl be swearing at Delphi because THEY are the ones working on teh cooling system...
maybe i should be swearing at my dad because he works for Delphi...

ibook_steve · May 10, 2005, 08:53 PM

First of all, neither IBM or Delphi make the Powerbook. Apple does. The delay is from IBM but only because of the processor. Second, if you want to game, get a desktop machine. Simple as that. Why complain about a machine that was not designed for high-end gaming?

Steve

osxisfun · May 10, 2005, 08:58 PM

just buy a nintendo for crisakes.

Scooterboy · May 10, 2005, 09:25 PM

I'm getting a little fed up with the standard, "get a console", or "get a desktop" responses to questions like SassyPant's. Why not tell him to get a PC? Why shoud Mac users who want to game on their PowerBooks be to told to also carry around an XBox or PS2 or PSP? PC users don't have to pack a console along with their laptop PC's just so they can play a game.

Playing games is a reasonable expectation of a $2500+ laptop. A computer at that price should do most any task well, and one very popular task is games. That's partly why the PowerBook was one of the first laptops to get the Radeon 9700 Mobility. Apple used to brag about how well the PowerBook played games, until PC laptop performance has surpassed the PowerBooks. Most high end PC laptops come with a faster CPU and more importantly, up to date GPU's such as ATi x300, x700, 9800, or nVidia GeForce6800GO.
If the GPU had been upgraded significantly, I'd consider upgrading to a new PowerBook, just so when I game it would be less frustrating.

Scooterboy · May 10, 2005, 09:41 PM

I would like to say that my PowerBook plays most games well, just not the newer games. Good thing I still like Jedi Outcast and Jedi Academy.

osxisfun · May 10, 2005, 09:44 PM

>. Why not tell him to get a PC?

He should if he wants to play games.

Face it. The mac game market 'ain't' there.

A g5 in a powerbook will not change things.

Its about market share. Potential customers. dev costs. Direct X 9.

maybe the mini will change this. But it will not change it in the next 12 months.

a g5 in a powerbook will not change the true market factors of the mac gaming market overnight.

Playing games is a reasonable expectation of a $2500+ PC laptop because the market is already there.

MacRules · May 10, 2005, 09:54 PM

I'm hoping the Core Video additions to Tiger will help improve gaming on the Mac.

Scooterboy · May 10, 2005, 10:10 PM

I know the Mac game market is limited, but there is a market. Otherwise, why would Blizzard be making PC/Mac compatible games? Why is Aspyr in business? Doom3 was out on Mac before it was out on consoles, and it was out on Mac the same day as it debuted for PC. There are enough new Mac games released per year to keep any gamer too busy playing and most of the titles are good ones.

SassyPants was complaining about the PowerBook's game performance. If Apple had upgraded the GPU, even as a BTO, there would be less to complain about. They could have at least included the 9700 Mobility Radeon 256 MB as a BTO. Twice the vram would be a boon for gamers and help Tiger's display performance all around.

osxisfun · May 10, 2005, 10:15 PM

>9700 Mobility Radeon 256 MB a

As long as it fits in a powerbook (height) I'm all for it. That way i will be able to drive the next monster size LCD coming down the pike.

Scooterboy · May 10, 2005, 10:23 PM

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_cont...ity9700&page=2

Scooterboy · May 10, 2005, 10:33 PM

Or how aboutMobility Radeon 9800 ? Maybe in the next PowerBook?

osxisfun · May 10, 2005, 10:40 PM

Here's something I found:

So Blockbuster is getting in on some PSP action, but it’s not movie rentals they’re after, it’s game rentals. They’re going to be offering UMD game rentals at all 4,400 of their nationwide outlets beginning May 17. This expands a strategy that is about getting deeper into the gaming end of things, following on the heels of the March launch of 450 store-in-store retail game outlets: Game Rush@Blockbuster. The standard rental fee of $6.99 covers seven days of rental, and there’s an “all you can eat” version for $19.99 per month, although it only covers a single game out at a time. The titles that’ll be first up on the rental shelves will be Twisted Metal, Untold Legends, and Need for Speed Underground Rivals.

Welp. until they get those cards in the PB.

PSP. mobile. rent the games you want. smaller than the pb. here today.

Scooterboy · May 10, 2005, 11:02 PM

My housemate has a PSP. It's cool. It's like a portable Playstation. Very much a portable console. One more thing to carry with my PowerBook. But then again, I could buy a notebook with today's GPU and not carry around an extra gaming platform.
Or keep the PowerBook and buy an Alienware PC. Either way, a PC company ends up getting my money instead of Apple. Is this a common scenario?

a2daj · May 11, 2005, 12:44 AM

The system bus is another bottleneck in the Powerbooks that keep them from performing better in games. You can throw the fastest GPU you want in the current PowerBook architecture and it won't be pushed nearly as hard as it could be since it can only be fed so much data at a time.

Scooterboy · May 11, 2005, 12:49 AM

So it's the G4 with it's bus limitation that's the problem? But wouldn't more vram help? How can Apple get a faster bus into the PowerBook? Isn't the G4 already on its max bus speed (167MHz)?

SassyPants · May 11, 2005, 07:04 AM

IF you look at it, 167 MHz bus, in today's PC notebooks is laughable. The G4 has all these limitations that somehow limit its performance, which is why i'm complaining because performance wise, i'll have to admit that powerbooks can't compare to PC notebooks. Frustrates me because this is the reason why i'm not switching over to mac from the pc world...:-\

a2daj · May 11, 2005, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by Scooterboy

So it's the G4 with it's bus limitation that's the problem? But wouldn't more vram help? How can Apple get a faster bus into the PowerBook? Isn't the G4 already on its max bus speed (167MHz)?

More VRAM won't help a whole lot. That's just going to be helpful for storing texture and vertex data among other things. The video card still has to be told what to process and those instructions are going to come from the CPU across the system bus. Technically, one could write a demo that would run alright, even with a limited bus, but when you start adding in game logic, physics, audio, etc, then things start getting a little cramped on the bus even with games off loading more work to the GPUs.

If you want to see how much the system bus can affect game performance, OWC has a bunch of benchmarks in systems with 100 MHz and 133 MHz system busses.

If the G4 and the PowerBooks could handle DDR on the system bus, that would help easy the bottleneck. Yes, some PBs can use DDR RAM, but the system bus with G4s cannot, so much of the advantages of DDR are lost in G4s.

Keath Milligan · May 11, 2005, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by Scooterboy

I would like to say that my PowerBook plays most games well, just not the newer games. Good thing I still like Jedi Outcast and Jedi Academy.

This has been my experience as well. I play Neverwinter Nights on my 15" PowerBook and it works great (once you tweak the settings a bit). World of Warcraft on the otherhand is pretty choppy, even though it plays fine on PCs that are actually much slower than my PowerBook.

Scooterboy · May 11, 2005, 06:45 PM

Halo played surprisingly well, even with high settings. Sure, there's some stammering in outdoor scenes, but for those I turn down the vid settings a little.

By the sound of it, Apple really needs to ditch the G4. I always wondered why the bus speeds were so slow, but now I see it's because Motorola didn't see the need for bus speeds to scale much higher than they are. But now, the newer generation GPU's require a much faster bus? So as long as the PowerBook is stuck on the G4, it's also stuck with previous generation GPU's? Do I have that right?

ibook_steve · May 11, 2005, 08:25 PM

Originally Posted by Scooterboy

Halo played surprisingly well, even with high settings. Sure, there's some stammering in outdoor scenes, but for those I turn down the vid settings a little.

By the sound of it, Apple really needs to ditch the G4. I always wondered why the bus speeds were so slow, but now I see it's because Motorola didn't see the need for bus speeds to scale much higher than they are. But now, the newer generation GPU's require a much faster bus? So as long as the PowerBook is stuck on the G4, it's also stuck with previous generation GPU's? Do I have that right?

No, you don't. The CPU and main bus speed have absolutely nothing to do with which GPU you can use. The main chipset is what determines this. The current chipset in the Powerbooks only supports up to 4x AGP. Wait until a chipset supports PCI Express (differential signalled PCI bus) to see speed gains between the system and the GPU. As games advance, there is much more reliance on the GPU than the CPU, so a fast interface to the GPU will work wonders. Going to G5 really won't have that much affect on games. It will have some affect but not as much as you would think. The GPU is the key.

Steve

SassyPants · May 11, 2005, 09:42 PM

well, from how i see it, even if you hvae a fast GPU, the information is still being bottlenecked by the Bus speed. IMO, the Bus has got to be improved.

Scooterboy · May 11, 2005, 09:58 PM

Why hasn't Apple even implemented an 8x AGP bus on the PowerBook. I can almost understand them not using PCIe as PCIe PC notebooks are only starting to ship in volume. Does Apple have to wait until it's old technology before they implement it into a PowerBook? Or is it CPU dependent and are Apple's hands tied. Personally, I think Apple has figured that since the PowerBooks are selling, why put any more expense into them than they have to.

I unerstand that, but when it's time for me to upgrade, I'll buy a PC if the PowerBook's performance isn't competitive.

Pierre B. · May 12, 2005, 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by ibook_steve

No, you don't. The CPU and main bus speed have absolutely nothing to do with which GPU you can use.

Actually yes, (s)he have it right in some sense. With the limited G4 bus, it makes little sense to use a faster interface, just because the CPU cannot saturate the GPU. It is not impossible, but it is impractical. I don't think Apple will change this without a better CPU in place (at least a 7448, or better a 8641D variant).

Lesterm10 · May 12, 2005, 01:58 PM

Well, if you want to play games get a PC, if you want productivity, stick with a powerbook. I have a gaming PC, and it plays games greatly and I got a powerbook, because I wanted the great functionality of editing videos and presentations that Mac's have long been reknowned for. So when I got my powerbook, I wasn't expecting to play games, that's why I got a PC, because the software library of games for Mac's suck... it's like a ratio of 1/100 for every game out on a Mac, there's 100 of them out for the PC... so if you're going to play games, get a freakin PC laptop, Desktop, console whatever. And you look at the economics of the distributers of Graphics cards and games. The market share of Apple computer though it has gained in recent years, still pales in comparison to windows no matter how "much better APPLE is." So drivers and support for Mac's are less for their graphics cards because their R and D budgets are going to the PC side since more money is to be gained. I wish there was a better/higher graphics card for the Powerbooks, because they are so capable but Apple likes to do go through development alone or with a few partners where as the PC world has many partners for distribution with a faster rate of producing new CPU's and graphics card.

SassyPants · May 13, 2005, 10:10 PM

If only i had enough money to have both a good PC notebook and a powerbook...

*sigh*

Scooterboy · May 16, 2005, 11:20 PM

So the cost of Apple ownership, for those who want to game on their laptop computer, must include a PC? So the PowerBook is only a "productivity" machine. Only for cog in the wheel types? How dull. Powerbooks should be good for both work and entertainment, given their cost. Nearly 3 grand for a productivity laptop, and another 2 grand for a PC for the fun stuff? What's that, $5,000? You can do both on just the PC. Maybe not effortlessly as on the Mac, but the PC can do both. If Apple really wants to increase market share, it's products will have to do both at least as well as PC's. There are plenty of games out for Mac, more than I can buy, sitting on the shelves at the Apple Store. The PowerBook should be able to run all of those games well. It can't, due to its outdated hardware. I shouldn't have to buy two computers, just so I can use OS X and play games.

osxisfun · May 17, 2005, 12:29 AM

> It can't, due to its outdated hardware.

Direct X being the defacto standard in pc game making is probably more of a factor then anything else.

the HW would come after that IMO.

the state of game performance is not a binary -> if G5 weeee or if 256vram weeee its alot more multi faceted than that.

urrl78 · 07:53 AM

I don't see a humongus difference of the 128 VRAM over the 64 MB GPU, although it is better to get the 128 because there can be noticible differences in games like HALO.

http://www.barefeats.com/pb12.html

Can't help but wonder if the bus is choking the 128; seems like it should have done better.

For now I have a little 10.6" screen Sony T250 with a 400 Mhz serial bus. With only shared memory and a 1.2 Ghz Centrino I was pleased it played the first part of the Half Life 2 demo as smooth as butter, though part 2 was choppy. I game with it usually with the kids, downloading tons of free nastalgic Sega ROMs like Ghouls 'n Ghosts, Streets of Rage, Road Rash, even Michael Jackson's Moonwalker. Very amusing. I can even use two Gravis Gamepads so two can play at the same time in co-op games like Streets of Rage.

http://www.romnation.net/srv/roms/genesis/m.html

Like someone said, my 17" seems to lonely these days waiting for the real work.

jlhopwo · May 17, 2005, 09:26 AM

I am using my 1.67 Ultimate to play World of Warcraft. It works fine. But this isn't a Sager super-duper $3,600 + built-for-gaming laptop, so I'm not expecting miracles. It does what I want it to do as far as WoW is concerned. I use my desktop for high-end gaming (HL2, CS:Source, Doom3, etc.)

skelotar · May 17, 2005, 10:22 AM

Sounds like there's a lot of whining about not being able to play games? Instead of sitting around and crying about it, why don't we start a petition? I'm sure apple would take a serious look at the situation.

20 - 45 year old men whining about not being able to play games on their professional-level laptop.

Not to say that you shouldn't. But seriously. Xbox / PS2 are all out gaming machines. On my system, I don't want a one stop shop. I want a computer for doing real work and a gaming machine to play games. Simple as that.

Pierre B. · May 17, 2005, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by skelotar

Sounds like there's a lot of whining about not being able to play games? Instead of sitting around and crying about it, why don't we start a petition? I'm sure apple would take a serious look at the situation.

I am not sure if you are serious about that. But if so, do you think that Apple has some secret systems sitting somewhere in the campus, waiting a petition to be delivered? No, we are where we are since Apple has nothing better right now. When and once they have, they will immediately release it.

20 - 45 year old men whining about not being able to play games on their professional-level laptop.
Not to say that you shouldn't. But seriously. Xbox / PS2 are all out gaming machines. On my system, I don't want a one stop shop. I want a computer for doing real work and a gaming machine to play games. Simple as that.

For most people the problem is not exactly if you can play games or not. Just being able to play recent games is a good measure of how efficient and powerful the platfrom is (both hardware- and software-wise). And as we speak, the once Powerbooks are not so much... Power.

And then there are people that really enjoy playing games in their Powerbooks. What is wrong with that?

skelotar · May 17, 2005, 11:19 AM

<quote>I am not sure if you are serious about that. But if so...</quote>
You're right, I was being sarcastic

.. Apple could care less about the small minority of apple users that want to play games.

Nothing is wrong with people wanting to play games on their powerbooks. But this is the wrong place to whine about it, because nothing is going to get done on this forum. Yes, I know apple may read this, but this thread is more of a rant than anything else.

Apple knows thier powerbooks aren't leading the industry in computing power. We all know it. Ok.. so if you don't like it, or can't accept it, get a pc and be happy.

powerbooks suck at games now and forever more

(until the hardware is updated and more developers relase games for our platform)

we're beating the decaying remains of a dead horse.

Randman · May 17, 2005, 11:24 AM

My PB plays games just fine when I'm in the mod and don't want to fire up the XBox.

Scooterboy · May 17, 2005, 07:25 PM

XBox, PS2, I can't carry around a TV with me, and I don't want to game on a tiny screen (PSP).
Apple has only doubled the PowerBook's system bus speeds since 1998. 82 MHz in 1998. 167 MHz in 2005. Bandwidth doesn't matter. Graphics performance doesn't matter. Oh well, back to the spreadsheet. Glad I have so much "power".

osxisfun · May 17, 2005, 10:47 PM

me too my pb 1.67 rocks. with tiger the ui and all around apps are about as fast as my dual g5 2.0.

it looks like a new nintendo and xbox and ps3 were just announced.