For gaming, is 395X worth it?

[Serban]

You know that the GTX 980 for notebooks has a way higher TDP than the graphics now, do you, Serban?

that not stops apple to clock it a little bit down and with a superb cooling system that nvidia is suppose to do...i don't see any problem there
imac has almost the same space in the back like an alienware 17" laptop that will come with 980m or 990m upgrade

 

[Serban]

Also that there's no guarantee, or even a vague rumour, that apple are going to nvidia next year. Or ever. Their next big step is to add AMD CPU's instead of intel, so it's much more likely they are going to get a good (cheap) deal on going all in on CPU and GPU contracts.

A better thing to say might be to get this years model, because it'll be the last intel chip (unless you like AMD cpus)

not a chance for 2016...maybe from 2017 or 2018

 

[Serban]

i hope for a little design change to put a 27" imac in even compact form and less weight to be even more portable..
the 21.5" you already can travel with it in a medium to large bag

 

[MandiMac]

that not stops apple to clock it a little bit down and with a superb cooling system that nvidia is suppose to do...i don't see any problem there
imac has almost the same space in the back like an alienware 17" laptop that will come with 980m or 990m upgrade

Apple has a 125 watts restriction for their GPU. If they had not, nothing would stop them to put better GPUs in the current iMac. And if you clock the GTX 980 for notebooks down that far, there won't be much difference, if any.
Furthermore, NVIDIA's cards don't support 5K. Just look at the official spec pages.

 

[stevierg]

Apple has a 125 watts restriction for their GPU. If they had not, nothing would stop them to put better GPUs in the current iMac. And if you clock the GTX 980 for notebooks down that far, there won't be much difference, if any.
Furthermore, NVIDIA's cards don't support 5K. Just look at the official spec pages.

Where did you get the 125 watt limitation from?

 

[MandiMac]

Where did you get the 125 watt limitation from?

Just a little research. It's no hard limitation, more like a figure the Apple engineers stick to.

680MX: 100-122 watts TDP.
780M: Same.
M295X: Same.

Again: If they could put a hungrier graphics solution in there, they would do it. Because with it there'd come: more thermal boundaries, more of "my fan is spinning up is this OK" - "OF COURSE THIS IS OK A FAN IS SUPPOSED TO DO JUST THAT MORON", more energy - dare I say - wasted because almost no one of the iMac buyers would actually use that regularly. Don't forget Apple makes products for the 90 percent of us, and clearly 90 percent don't post in forums and/or are heavy gamers that see differences between 30 and 60 FPS.

 

[jerwin]

I am hoping to play Fallout 4 (coming out next month), Metal Gear Solid V, Shadow of Mordor, Witcher 3.

For Fallout 4, Minimum system specs are listed as "NVIDIA GTX 550 Ti 2GB/AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB or equivalent" and Recommended specs at "NVIDIA GTX 780 3GB/AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB or equivalent"

Those are pretty hefty minima.

A r9 m290x (mobile) has 1280 shaders clocked at 975 Mhz
HD 7870 (desktop) has 1280 shaders clocked at 1000 Mhz.-- they both use a Pitcairn XT chip.

So you'd be looking at a r9 m395 or (preferably) r9 m395x just to get the minimum spec. The recommended AMD card has 2816 shaders clocked at 1 Ghz...

I don't think the iMac (particularly the souped up version that you'd almost have to get) offers a lot of value for what you have in mind.

 

[Tanax]

Those are pretty hefty minima.

A r9 m290x (mobile) has 1280 shaders clocked at 975 Mhz
HD 7870 (desktop) has 1280 shaders clocked at 1000 Mhz.-- they both use a Pitcairn XT chip.

So you'd be looking at a r9 m395 or (preferably) r9 m395x just to get the minimum spec. The recommended AMD card has 2816 shaders clocked at 1 Ghz...

I don't think the iMac (particularly the souped up version that you'd almost have to get) offers a lot of value for what you have in mind.

Agreed. For anything more than light to medium gaming needs, getting a gaming PC will be the only choice.

 

[Palar]

Hello, I've had the i7 m395x iMac for a few days now and so far I've only tested two games, World of warcraft and Heroes of Newerth.

In world of warcraft I managed to obtain a constant 60fps in Stormshield with 5k resolution and half of the settings on ultra (had to turn down some settings like shadows/SSAO/sunshafts/lighting and outline mode because the graphics card were especially weak against those). In arena I could almost have everything on ultra 5k res because of the few numbers of players moving around.

In Hereos of Newerth it was even better than that. 5k resolution with ultra on butter smooth 60fps. I couldn't believe my eyes until the game crashed... and it crashed again... so I turned the settings down to high and I didn't receive a weird instant crash like on ultra.

and of course, the fan was barely audible with in-game sounds being muted. The fans were like a soft whisper.

I have officially been spoiled... Full HD looks blurry and dull

 

[gian8989]

Hello, I've had the i7 m395x iMac for a few days now and so far I've only tested two games, World of warcraft and Heroes of Newerth.

In world of warcraft I managed to obtain a constant 60fps in Stormshield with 5k resolution and half of the settings on ultra (had to turn down some settings like shadows/SSAO/sunshafts/lighting and outline mode because the graphics card were especially weak against those). In arena I could almost have everything on ultra 5k res because of the few numbers of players moving around.

In Hereos of Newerth it was even better than that. 5k resolution with ultra on butter smooth 60fps. I couldn't believe my eyes until the game crashed... and it crashed again... so I turned the settings down to high and I didn't receive a weird instant crash like on ultra.

and of course, the fan was barely audible with in-game sounds being muted. The fans were like a soft whisper.

I have officially been spoiled... Full HD looks blurry and dull

I don't know if you are using bootcamp or not.
If you do can you try some benchmarks of ffXIV (link) on 1440 and 1080 with this settings?
From all the results that people are posting on the forum I don't understand if it is possible to play or not on this card with high settings (m395x).
thank you.

If we want to compare cards on gaming experience I think we should choose 2/3 games to do benchmark with, and use same settings. This way we can probably understand the differences between m380/m390/m395/m395x .

 

[Palar]

I don't know if you are using bootcamp or not.
If you do can you try some benchmarks of ffXIV (link) on 1440 and 1080 with this settings?
From all the results that people are posting on the forum I don't understand if it is possible to play or not on this card with high settings (m395x).
thank you.

If we want to compare cards on gaming experience I think we should choose 2/3 games to do benchmark with, and use same settings. This way we can probably understand the differences between m380/m390/m395/m395x .

I'm not using bootcamp but I can surely try it out, although it's gonna take me like a day because I'm a snail.

 

[shaunp]

I plan on getting an iMac for audio production, so I will be getting the i7 CPU, but the GPU is meaningless for audio. However, I also want to be able to play modern games at the best possible settings for as many years as possible. Using the iMac would be cheaper than building a separate gaming rig, assuming the iMac can handle it. How much of a difference will the 395X make over the 395 for gaming? My original thought was to go all out since the computer is so expensive anyway, but if I'm not going to be able to play modern games on high settings with over 30 FPS even with the 395X, I'd rather just save $250, take the standard 395 GPU, and build a gaming PC separate.

Any thoughts on this?

Why do you specifically need a Mac for audio production, is there an application that you need that is only available on the Mac? If not then save yourself a ton of cash and just get a good PC that can do gaming and the audio stuff. I wouldn't consider an iMac for gaming as the GPU is limiting for a gaming platform. It may play some titles okay today, others will be slower and will have the fans running at maximum speed (i.e. very noisy) but if you plan on keeping this a while the biggest issue is that you can't upgrade the GPU later. With a PC you could buy a modest spec PC and upgrade the GPU as you need to, keeping the same PC for several years. Many iMac users will defend what they have, but the Mac has never been a great gaming platform.

I have a nMP (6-core, D700's) and an old PC (i7 3770k, GTX 780) and I always play games on the PC. Native games on the Mac (Bioshock Infinity) are noticeably slower than they are on the PC at the same resolution (1440p) and I've not seen any improvement by running in bootcamp - with the games I play (Bioshock, Fallout 3/NLV, Skyrim). Others may have had better success with the games they play

The other option is get the iMac or all your every day stuff and then get an xbox? I do think you'd have to be mental to spend around £2000 on a gaming platform that you can't upgrade though.

 

[gian8989]

I'm not using bootcamp but I can surely try it out, although it's gonna take me like a day because I'm a snail.

lol np.
I was just thinking that with a specific game to test and with same settings (this is probably the most important thing) we can finally answer to 1 of the to universe unsolved mysteries.
I don't think anyone think of 5k gaming but not been able to play at 1080 (or 1440) on such a pricey computer is strange.

 

[Melodeath]

Those are pretty hefty minima.

A r9 m290x (mobile) has 1280 shaders clocked at 975 Mhz
HD 7870 (desktop) has 1280 shaders clocked at 1000 Mhz.-- they both use a Pitcairn XT chip.

So you'd be looking at a r9 m395 or (preferably) r9 m395x just to get the minimum spec. The recommended AMD card has 2816 shaders clocked at 1 Ghz...

I don't think the iMac (particularly the souped up version that you'd almost have to get) offers a lot of value for what you have in mind.

Thanks you for that comparison. I didn't realize the iMac GPU upgrade would just get me to minimum.

Why do you specifically need a Mac for audio production, is there an application that you need that is only available on the Mac? If not then save yourself a ton of cash and just get a good PC that can do gaming and the audio stuff. I wouldn't consider an iMac for gaming as the GPU is limiting for a gaming platform. It may play some titles okay today, others will be slower and will have the fans running at maximum speed (i.e. very noisy) but if you plan on keeping this a while the biggest issue is that you can't upgrade the GPU later. With a PC you could buy a modest spec PC and upgrade the GPU as you need to, keeping the same PC for several years. Many iMac users will defend what they have, but the Mac has never been a great gaming platform.

I have a nMP (6-core, D700's) and an old PC (i7 3770k, GTX 780) and I always play games on the PC. Native games on the Mac (Bioshock Infinity) are noticeably slower than they are on the PC at the same resolution (1440p) and I've not seen any improvement by running in bootcamp - with the games I play (Bioshock, Fallout 3/NLV, Skyrim). Others may have had better success with the games they play

The other option is get the iMac or all your every day stuff and then get an xbox? I do think you'd have to be mental to spend around £2000 on a gaming platform that you can't upgrade though.

I don't "need" a mac for audio production, but it is preferable. I want to get a new audio interface that is for Thunderbolt Macs only, and I sort of like OS X. I'm looking forward to using iMessages on the computer for the first time (bc I never upgraded past 10.6.8 with my current MBP)

 

[seekersu]

Following the question, I also want to know if the iMac can stand the temperature for long time when gaming? I plan to buy a new iMac 5K (i7 6700K + M395X) for family photo editing. I also play games but usually don't ask for ultra setting (COH2, Witcher 3, Total war, Metal Gear, Sin the the solar Empire...) I read some posts here showing the iMac may reach 9x-10x degree when gaming. If iMac maintains such temperature for several hours, will it shorten its life?? I can only turn lower the air condition and put a big fan near by desk XD, but nothing more I can do to help it

 

[jerwin]

Thanks you for that comparison. I didn't realize the iMac GPU upgrade would just get me to minimum.

There's a possibility that the minimum (on a m395) is worth playing, and the m395x would allow you to use the higher resolution textures, which would be a dramatic change, but is it worth a $250? Probably not.

 

[ohsnaphappy]

Bare Feats put the 395x up against the 295x and Mac Pro. The 395x is just a tiny bit better and runs just as hot.

http://barefeats.com/imac5k13.html

 

[AlifTheUnseen]

Following the question, I also want to know if the iMac can stand the temperature for long time when gaming? <snip> I read some posts here showing the iMac may reach 9x-10x degree when gaming. If iMac maintains such temperature for several hours, will it shorten its life?? I can only turn lower the air condition and put a big fan near by desk XD, but nothing more I can do to help it

Here is what forum member MacVidCards had to say concerning this:

"On the other hand, 100C for a GPU is a guaranteed short life. No ifs, ands, or buts. I have been dealing with GPUs for more than 10 years. The ones that run hot, die early. That simple. GTX470 and GTX480 ran in the 90C range. And after a year or so they started dropping like flies. Same with 7950/70 from AMD. Ran hot, dying young. (Ask my e-waste guy, he's hauled away many of both)

So whatever you call the clock behavior, those 5K iMacs are running too hot. Apple didn't re-write the laws of physics. Their reality distortion field can't do that. And even with a fan blowing heat away, there is radiated heat soaking into the PCB and directly into the back of that 5K panel. I would expect that eventually the area over the GPU will show a color change as the plastics get cooked to a golden brown.

If I had one, I would figure out how to allow that fan to hit 2,700 rpm and turn up the volume on something else to cover the noise.

And I would DEFINITELY buy Applecare."

(Source: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...and-performance.1815601/page-39#post-21187605 )

 

[AlexisV]

I think I'll trust a few hundred Apple and AMD engineers over a bloke on a forum who has been 'dealing with GPUs for 10 years' (whatever that means).

I'm guessing they do a bit of testing to avoid losing millions of dollars in 12 months when all the computers they've sold melt. Applecare is redundant in the UK anyway because legislation covers you for 6 years.

 

[shaunp]

Thanks you for that comparison. I didn't realize the iMac GPU upgrade would just get me to minimum.



I don't "need" a mac for audio production, but it is preferable. I want to get a new audio interface that is for Thunderbolt Macs only, and I sort of like OS X. I'm looking forward to using iMessages on the computer for the first time (bc I never upgraded past 10.6.8 with my current MBP)

Sounds like a good enough reason - the new audio interface. I'd still stick with a separate gaming PC or an xbox for the gaming.

 

[stevierg]

Just a little research. It's no hard limitation, more like a figure the Apple engineers stick to.

680MX: 100-122 watts TDP.
780M: Same.
M295X: Same.

Again: If they could put a hungrier graphics solution in there, they would do it. Because with it there'd come: more thermal boundaries, more of "my fan is spinning up is this OK" - "OF COURSE THIS IS OK A FAN IS SUPPOSED TO DO JUST THAT MORON", more energy - dare I say - wasted because almost no one of the iMac buyers would actually use that regularly. Don't forget Apple makes products for the 90 percent of us, and clearly 90 percent don't post in forums and/or are heavy gamers that see differences between 30 and 60 FPS.

Pretty sure the wattage is by design of the GPU's not at the restriction of Apple.

Apple are using laptop quality GPUs only so they can keep cooling and form factor down to a minimum. If they wanted they could easily put a high spec nvidia 970 TI in the machines, but then you're going to have to make some huge design decisions just to fit a bulky desktop GPU.

I'm on my hackintosh right now, running a GTX 780 TI and it's working fine for all mac games and crazy performance. I'm replacing the machine with the 5k iMac on Monday and I'm going to miss the performance. I'll probably just end up running Steam OS on the hackintosh and then Steam Stream the games to the iMac if I want any real performance.

I'll still play some games on the iMac, but don't kid yourself that the the iMacs are gaming machines, they barely cope. You'll probably get a better overall experience with a PS4 for comparison.

 

[seekersu]

Here is what forum member MacVidCards had to say concerning this:

"On the other hand, 100C for a GPU is a guaranteed short life. No ifs, ands, or buts. I have been dealing with GPUs for more than 10 years. The ones that run hot, die early. That simple. GTX470 and GTX480 ran in the 90C range. And after a year or so they started dropping like flies. Same with 7950/70 from AMD. Ran hot, dying young. (Ask my e-waste guy, he's hauled away many of both)

And I would DEFINITELY buy Applecare."

(Source: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...and-performance.1815601/page-39#post-21187605 )

That's what I am worry about...
Especially the Apple care I can buy is only 3 years.

I hope to use this iMac for at least 5 years. Especially It's very difficult to replace GPU/MB myself.

A warranted cover for 6 years is wonderful for this situation, but seems not available to me.
Or We can buy apple care for iMac 5K for more than 3 years??

 

[theosg]

I think I'll trust a few hundred Apple and AMD engineers over a bloke on a forum who has been 'dealing with GPUs for 10 years' (whatever that means).

I'm guessing they do a bit of testing to avoid losing millions of dollars in 12 months when all the computers they've sold melt.

Not saying you shouldn't trust Apple over randoms on forums, but:
Apple only needs to keep the iMac from melting for the 3 years Applecare lasts for most of its customers.
Statistically, not a high percentage in the UK... many more in North America.

It would be Lots easier to trust Apple all the way implicitly if they had Fixed the dang temp issue with this refresh.
I'm not saying they don't care and haven't tried. Just that continued reports of high temps are concerning indication that they haven't fully addressed an issue that risks longevity of a large investment for their faithful customers!

I agree with the sentiment that Apple should let up on obsession with thin to achieve a bit more room for cooling and performance.

 

[wubsylol]

The M395X is great for gaming and even better great for heating a small apartment.

 

[Redface]

Some of the people here with m395x said in games it doesn't go above 100 degrees and the fans are quiet. Which is MUCH better than last year, even if the performance is mostly the same. Were they just lucky and some iMacs are faulty? Or perhaps it's a bootcamp issue?