Mac Pro 2013 Gaming?

[pscl]

Pretty much agreed. No one is saying a nMP is better than a 2014-spec custom gaming box, but the fact the nMP does both workstation and game-station quite well is the icing on the cake.

is this worth 3400-3800$?

better get a gaming rig and a monitor with dual hdmi, plug my rmbp in and the gaming pc... and then switch on the fly... in this way i dont have to shut down my mac just because i want to play games and can keep work/office things up, while i switch to my gaming rig.

and..

if i spend 4000$ on a nMP i want it to play ALL GAMES in NATIVE RESOLUTION with ULTRA DETAILS under win 8 with 100fps! actually... i think the nMP won`t do this. and this for 4000$? this is insane.

----------

Personally I think over 3000€ for gaming rig of the spec offered by the Mac Pro is too much. It doesn't perform that great if the Anand review is anything to go by. I'm using a DIY PC (i7 3770k + GTX 780) as my desktop - the major components excluding the extra SSD's and RAM that I use for VM's can be bought for around £1000-£1200. It's a great all-rounder and does play games at 1440p very well.

Don't get me wrong I'd love a Mac as I prefer OS X to Windows any day of the week, and I do expect to pay a bit more for the privilege. I don't expect to pay 3 x the price for the same performance though. It just doesn't seem worth the investment to me. If Apple were to offer a 'Mac' with a similar form factor to the nMP that contained an i7 and a single fast graphics card with a starting price of around £1500-£2000 I'd buy it yesterday. I really don't see why Apple won't make this as potential buyers won't buy either the mini or the iMac and can't justify the price of the nMP - I would have to spend around £6-7k for a spec similar to my PC if I took external storage into account.. We build PC's or Hackintoshes instead because Apple's product line is too thin.

i totally agree to you. exactly my thoughts.

 

[Anim]

if i spend 4000$ on a nMP i want it to play ALL GAMES in NATIVE RESOLUTION with ULTRA DETAILS under win 8 with 100fps! actually... i think the nMP won`t do this. and this for 4000$? this is insane.

So all Games
4K resolution (I assume)
Ultra Details
100+ fps

Got it. This will do it for the next several years.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-001-8P&groupid=43&catid=2474

Its a bargain at just $15593.38

Oh forgot monitors, just the one 4k native sir?. Thats another $3376

Your total price is a measly $18,969.38

Here is a video of Crisis 3 with 4 titans just to wet your appetite:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OvuGCIIaeg

Oh, you said 100 fps. Sorry, can only have 30fps due to native 4k res and monitors not really supporting it. Some may go to 60Hz so 60fps.

Or you can be realistic and re-read the entire post you started, there is lots of information about the nMP used as a gaming machine and after much debate what we conclude.

 

[pscl]

So all Games
4K resolution (I assume)
Ultra Details
100+ fps

Got it. This will do it for the next several years.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-001-8P&groupid=43&catid=2474

Its a bargain at just $15593.38

Oh forgot monitors, just the one 4k native sir?. Thats another $3376

Your total price is a measly $18,969.38

Here is a video of Crisis 3 with 4 titans just to wet your appetite:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OvuGCIIaeg

Oh, you said 100 fps. Sorry, can only have 30fps due to native 4k res and monitors not really supporting it. Some may go to 60Hz so 60fps.

Or you can be realistic and re-read the entire post you started, there is lots of information about the nMP used as a gaming machine and after much debate what we conclude.

haha. no, i mean 1440p.
your post is just an overreaction.

 

[Anim]

haha. no, i mean 1440p.
your post is just an overreaction.

Yeah I know, My pain killers were wearing off (torn ligaments in my foot)

 

[derbothaus]

is this worth 3400-3800$?

Yes. If you need more than 4 cores to do your OS X work then it is perfect (and the only option). I get paid well for my work so no big deal and I can write it off. I also have MacBooks but they are for portable work NOT for OS X desktop replacements. I can't do my work nor do I want to do it on Windows. I have hand built plenty of game rigs and I enjoy them and they are cheaper obviously (even though it gets beaten to death by kids as a news flash) It is as it has always been, an entry Mac Pro is not the best deal to distinguish the line and not really the point of a Mac Pro at all but a form factor decision made by the purchaser. Maybe they like better quality screens than Apple delivers? Who knows?

 

[Radiating]

This is total nonsense. Mac Pro is a workstation computer. Sure, its good at gaming, but a faster dedicated gaming machine can be build at a lesser price. I am too lazy to throw a build together, so just look here: http://toptengamer.hubpages.com/hub/Best-2-000-Gaming-PC-Desktop

Its a $2000 build which will as fast or faster than your 3,999.00 Mac Pro

Actually the Mac Pro benchmarks with 35% higher frame rates than the computer you posted. You would need to spend at least $460 more to match it.

So you'd be at $2460.

Also I said that the Mac Pro was the least expensive computer to own in it's class, not to buy. The distinction is that it costs less over time.

Mac computers depreciate right around 20% per refresh cycle, while PC desktops and components depreciate right around 50%.

So from a financial perspective, your $2500 DIY computer would depreciate at 160% the dollar amount of a $3999 Mac Pro. You could actually buy a $6200 Mac Pro and you would break even compared to a $2500 DIY PC. This is not an opinion or a hunch, but fact based on research into the last 3 generations of used Mac Pro sales, and current resale values for PC components.

The Mac Pro is much cheaper to own than a PC of even half the cost, which is why my entire office runs on Macs running windows, which has saved tons of money for my company.

 

[Anim]

which is why my entire office runs on Macs running windows, which has saved tons of money for my company.

I like the way you think!

 

[superdx]

If OSX natively supported Crossfire/SLI, this argument would be moot. Dual GPUs running games in OSX would beat the pants off everything but the latest GTX Titan OC board running water cooling (in OSX).

Hopefully this is a software task that Apple is working on since the Anandtech review clearly showed driver support in Windows.

 

[motegi]

plug my rMBP in

Problem is, for me even the top-spec rMBP has not got enough power for my work. This way I can have my work computer kick-ass and also game for the (seldom) times I want to play something.

Also, the shutting down work thing is a plus for me - keeps me working when I'm busy!

Plus, you cant depreciate a 'gaming' computer for business...

 

[leman]

Actually the Mac Pro benchmarks with 35% higher frame rates than the computer you posted. You would need to spend at least $460 more to match it.

Well, check out the Anandtech benchmarks. The MP benchmarks clearly UNDER a single 780 Ti in every game they tested - and even if you reduce the 780's score by 10% to account for the faster CPU they used in the PC it still beats the CF D700 in most of the benchmarks. And a SLI GTX 770 beats a 780 Ti.

I am more then willing to admit that I am wrong, you will have to show me some benchmarks though.

Mac computers depreciate right around 20% per refresh cycle, while PC desktops and components depreciate right around 50%.

So from a financial perspective, your $2500 DIY computer would depreciate at 160% the dollar amount of a $3999 Mac Pro. You could actually buy a $6200 Mac Pro and you would break even compared to a $2500 DIY PC. This is not an opinion or a hunch, but fact based on research into the last 3 generations of used Mac Pro sales, and current resale values for PC components.

Ah, but this is exactly the flaw of your argument. Sure, the gaming PC depreciates much faster. But you are confused how these machines are typically used - they are not meant to be sold, they are meant to be upgraded. Say I build a decent gaming PC using a 780 Ti - it will be on par or faster than a MP right now, while costing around $2000. After two years its performance does not satisfy my extreme gaming needs anymore. Now, if I sell these machines, it might indeed be that the Mac Pro route actually leaves me with more money. But - and here is a crucial bit, I don't have to sell my gaming PC - I just need to get another 780 Ti (which by the time will be quite cheap) to get a gaming machine that is good to go for another two years. With a Mac Pro, I'd need to get an entirely new machine every 2 years.

In the end, the cost of ownership might be comparable (although I am still sure that the DYI route will be cheaper), but the MP route leaves you with less money in the bank at all times.

The Mac Pro is much cheaper to own than a PC of even half the cost, which is why my entire office runs on Macs running windows, which has saved tons of money for my company.

An office PC has a totally different usage characteristics than a gaming PC. An office PC usually runs until its dead as the performance is a secondary concern. With extreme gaming, performance is first and foremost concern.

 

[[G5]Hydra]

Well, check out the Anandtech benchmarks. The MP benchmarks clearly UNDER a single 780 Ti in every game they tested - and even if you reduce the 780's score by 10% to account for the faster CPU they used in the PC it still beats the CF D700 in most of the benchmarks. And a SLI GTX 770 beats a 780 Ti.

Actually Anand said:

Keep in mind that the comparison cards are all run on our 2014 GPU testbed, which is a 6-core Ivy Bridge E (i7-4960X) running at 4.2GHz. In other words, the other cards will have a definite CPU performance advantage (20 - 30% depending on the number of active cores).

One problem is that they are using an overclocked beast of a CPU in the test rig and the 12 core MP is by far the worst single threaded performer in the MP lineup @ 2.7 GHz and Turbo up to 3.5 GHz. That chip is really about embarrassing parallel CPU loads as it should be but it should be avoided if you can't saturate it, especially for the price. The quad and hex models base speeds are the same or better than the 12ers turbo and turbo up to 3.9 GHz themselves.

Look I'm not saying that the new MP is a fantastic gaming rig, and most people here aren't either, what I am saying is that if you are already buying one for other purposes it makes a pretty darn good gaming rig instead of having to go and put together one on the side. The i7-4960X and 780Ti Anand used would cost around $1800 for those two components alone! To get comparable performance out of a decidedly non-gaming rig is good enough for most people. Not to mention that most 12 core MP's are going to likely be used by institutional users and the pro-sumers or one man shops are likely to stick to the quad and hex core models which are the ones people most likely will try to game on the side with. They also coincidentally should put up mildly better fps in games with the better single threaded performance to boot .

 

[leman]

One problem is that they are using an overclocked beast of a CPU in the test rig and the 12 core MP is by far the worst single threaded performer in the MP lineup @ 2.7 GHz and Turbo up to 3.5 GHz.

Yep, thats 30% of CPU performance, but how much of it matter for games? For example, look at the benchmarks below to compare the impact of the CPU in non-GPU limited scenarios (comparably low resolution). You will see that the 4960x isn't that much faster in gaming (and the difference it makes will get even smaller in GPU-limited situation like high-res gaming):

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7255/intel-core-i7-4960x-ivy-bridge-e-review/5

If I were to build a extreme gaming rig, I'd go for a i5 CPU and a beefy GPU setup - nowadays even the midrange CPUs have more then enough power for games.

Look I'm not saying that the new MP is a fantastic gaming rig, and most people here aren't either, what I am saying is that if you are already buying one for other purposes it makes a pretty darn good gaming rig instead of having to go and put together one on the side.

Oh, you are absolutely right! There is no doubt about that (and it is a fantastic gaming rig actually). I was simply arguing with Radiating here who seems to claim that the Mac Pro is the nonplus ultra purchase specifically for gaming.

 

[slughead]

One problem is that they are using an overclocked beast of a CPU in the test rig and the 12 core MP is by far the worst single threaded performer in the MP lineup @ 2.7 GHz and Turbo up to 3.5 GHz. That chip is really about embarrassing parallel CPU loads as it should be but it should be avoided if you can't saturate it, especially for the price. The quad and hex models base speeds are the same or better than the 12ers turbo and turbo up to 3.9 GHz themselves.

The D700 performed exactly as Anand expected given that it's an underclocked 7970. It did about 12-20% lower than the XFire 280X and it's about 12-30% lower clock. In other words, that processor thing is probably moot. It performed as well as it possibly could have IMO--which is to say, pretty darn well.

The 7970 is a 2 year old card (Jan 2012), the 780Ti just came out. There's no shame in this performance, as it's still a pretty good card--Midrange, but good.

Personally, I'm really sensitive to microstutter so I don't run SLI or XFire. That's why when I was researching parts for my gaming PC I didn't go with SLI or XFire, just a single superclocked GTX780 (Ti wasn't out yet). For most people this is a great machine for gaming though.

Look I'm not saying that the new MP is a fantastic gaming rig, and most people here aren't either, what I am saying is that if you are already buying one for other purposes it makes a pretty darn good gaming rig [...]

I would tend to agree. Though over time I believe the gaming rig will have a higher value as you can upgrade the GPU and leave the CPU. Instead of buying another $4,000-7,000 iTube (and being a slave to Apple's crappy update cycle), you can pay $500-700 for the latest GPU which will mop the floor with it. If you're willing to stick with it for 4-5 years until you update your Mac Pro, then it again makes little difference.

 

[Anim]

The D700 performed exactly as Anand expected given that it's an underclocked 7970.

Agreed, It does seem to have mostly the same spec as the 7970 (except for 6GB). We also get x 2 of them though so that gives us a big boost where Crossfire and/or Direct Compute is concerned. And yeah I agree crossfire has a bad history with frame pacing, stuttering etc. I have my fingers crossed here haha.

Our clan plays mostly FPS so...

COD Ghosts (flakey on most high end systems, runs better on mid range)
Black Ops 1 (should run fine)
Battlefield 4 (a good test of GPU processing)
Borderlands 2 (i just keep playing this, love it)

Titanfall when it comes out.

On another note, If you are interested in the Direct Compute side of these graphic cards for gaming then this article is a great read. The last page is quite good and what I have been predicting for a good while now.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/directcompute-opencl-gpu-acceleration,3146.html

Anim

 

[Radiating]

Well, check out the Anandtech benchmarks. The MP benchmarks clearly UNDER a single 780 Ti in every game they tested - and even if you reduce the 780's score by 10% to account for the faster CPU they used in the PC it still beats the CF D700 in most of the benchmarks. And a SLI GTX 770 beats a 780 Ti.

I am more then willing to admit that I am wrong, you will have to show me some benchmarks though.

Actually you're right, the 2x 770 setup will be somewhat faster. The Mac Pro is equivalent to a 2x 760 setup, so I assumed that for $2000 we were talking a single card. Dual cards would be 14% faster than the Mac Pro, which would be superior to the single 780ti setup that we were comparing earlier.

Ah, but this is exactly the flaw of your argument. Sure, the gaming PC depreciates much faster. But you are confused how these machines are typically used - they are not meant to be sold, they are meant to be upgraded. Say I build a decent gaming PC using a 780 Ti - it will be on par or faster than a MP right now, while costing around $2000. After two years its performance does not satisfy my extreme gaming needs anymore. Now, if I sell these machines, it might indeed be that the Mac Pro route actually leaves me with more money. But - and here is a crucial bit, I don't have to sell my gaming PC - I just need to get another 780 Ti (which by the time will be quite cheap) to get a gaming machine that is good to go for another two years. With a Mac Pro, I'd need to get an entirely new machine every 2 years.

In the end, the cost of ownership might be comparable (although I am still sure that the DYI route will be cheaper), but the MP route leaves you with less money in the bank at all times.



An office PC has a totally different usage characteristics than a gaming PC. An office PC usually runs until its dead as the performance is a secondary concern. With extreme gaming, performance is first and foremost concern.

This is true, but I've run the break down for replacing components as well:



$3999 Mac Pro 1 hardware cycle depreciation: $850
$2200 Gaming PC 1 hardware Cycle depreciation: $1100
$3000 Alienware Aurora 1 hardware cycle depreciation: $1500
$2200 Gaming PC Replace Just Processor Mobo & Video Card after HW cycle: $925

Now if you plan to only upgrade the video cards, then I would agree that is the cheapest route, but if you plan to use the computer for anything else, ie to do work on, then you will need to upgrade the CPU and mobo.

So in the end the argument comes down to this:

If you need to just game it might be slightly cheaper to go with a DIY gaming PC, which is a good angle you brought up on the issue.

If you need a computer to act both as a CPU workstation and a gaming PC then the Mac Pro offers the best value over time, even if you will only run windows on it.

 

[superdx]

A used Mac Pro will always have a higher value even on a 2nd hand market. You can still sell a 4,1 or 5,1 Mac Pro for over a grand.

I'm not sure anyone would buy a used custom built gaming PC. It would have no value at all.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

A used Mac Pro will always have a higher value even on a 2nd hand market. You can still sell a 4,1 or 5,1 Mac Pro for over a grand.

I'm not sure anyone would buy a used custom built gaming PC. It would have no value at all.

In Ireland, you can get them at over 2 grand for a 4.1, and 5.1.
My machine in my signature was valued at €3.4k on Mac2Sell in Ireland.

A lot of 1.1, 2.1, and 3.1 are over a grand here if they're in good condition.

 

[unfragile]

In Ireland, you can get them at over 2 grand for a 4.1, and 5.1.
My machine in my signature was valued at €3.4k on Mac2Sell in Ireland.

A lot of 1.1, 2.1, and 3.1 are over a grand here if they're in good condition.

I have sold my Mac Pro early 2008 2x2.8GHz for €1500 March 2013.
I've bought it for €2.220. It was a good deal.

 

[nathan43082]

24 bits at 192kHz is unnecessary to achieve audiophile quality. In fact, it might shock you to know that 16 bits at 44.1 kHz is sufficient for 99% of listeners (except for those with the most golden ears, who benefit from the slight bump to 48 kHz). The bigger problem you run into is using a high-enough-quality D/A converter. I use a Lavry DA10 myself.

If that all seems absurd, I suggest you give this a read...

http://xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

 

[N19h7m4r3]

I have sold my Mac Pro early 2008 2x2.8GHz for €1500 March 2013.
I've bought it for €2.220. It was a good deal.

Very nice!

I'm contemplating either selling my current now, or waiting until the nMP becomes more available as I don't want much downtime between the two.

 

[unfragile]

Very nice!

I'm contemplating either selling my current now, or waiting until the nMP becomes more available as I don't want much downtime between the two.

This MacPro or better ones are still a good business in Europe, Apple stop selling it since February 18 2013 (I think).

Some post Houses are looking for it to buy, instead upgrading to the new MacPro.

 

[koban4max]

whoever is going to buy nMP for gaming..so be it...go get it..it's your money.

 

[HurryKayne]

Buying a new Mac Pro for gaming is beyond idiotic. The GPUs found in the Mac Pro aren't focused or even oriented for gaming. They are for heavy number crunching and other sort of animation.

Besides, like many have said, you can buy/build a even better Gaming computer by using simple consumer oriented parts found in regular PCs.

Or just get a Steam machine,but Mac its not for gaming .
A quad mini / MacBook Pro beside a Steam machine could be more than enough for me.

 

[motegi]

You're all correct. a nMP isn't for gaming - it's a mac for professionals doing work. But it's good that its ALSO for gaming

 

[Sun Baked]

You're all correct. a nMP isn't for gaming - it's a mac for professionals doing work. But it's good that its ALSO for gaming

Those scientific and video geek computers make great gaming rigs.

Now we just have to get the NSA to let us see if their computers are as good for gaming as the rest.