Mac Pro Gaming

[Tanax]

External graphics via TB would be expensive no? Wouldn't also be taking a performance hit because of the limited bandwidth via TB versus PCI, unless TB 2 changes all that.

Currently, it's not very cheap - no. But prices of TB accessories are expected to fall once more and more companies starts delivering products with TB.

Some user posted here on MacRumors that he tried a GTX Titan in external case and only saw a slight performance-loss.

 

[theSeb]

Some user posted here on MacRumors that he tried a GTX Titan in external case and only saw a slight performance-loss.

And we know he was lying when questioned further on this. Proper tests show that even a mid range GPU is impacted when running via TB versus native PCIe


This is how bs rumours start.

 

[Wardenski]

Mac Pro should be capable of gaming assuming ordinary GPUs are available. Its value obviously depends on how much it will cost but I find it hard to believe it will be good value for gaming relative to a gaming PC.

I am assuming that the new Mac Pro will use custom GPUs to match the thermal core design, so I can't imagine it being a good investment just for gaming purposes.

 

[Tanax]

And we know he was lying when questioned further on this. Proper tests show that even a mid range GPU is impacted when running via TB versus native PCIe


This is how bs rumours start.

I see.
Well, this is MacRumors so of course there will be bad rumors as well

 

[Shivetya]

For me it will all depend on how they price it. Considering its diminutive size and how it is all integrated with no real options to support it really should be cheaper than the current Mac Pro. However being Apple they are going to exploit their market for whats it worth. Looking at that Mac Mini Server edition and its price it makes me cringe at what Apple might price this at. I mean, if they will charge 1k for that little piece of crap you just know this puppy will be near 4k

 

[ElderBrE]

For me it will all depend on how they price it. Considering its diminutive size and how it is all integrated with no real options to support it really should be cheaper than the current Mac Pro. However being Apple they are going to exploit their market for whats it worth. Looking at that Mac Mini Server edition and its price it makes me cringe at what Apple might price this at. I mean, if they will charge 1k for that little piece of crap you just know this puppy will be near 4k

Now we price computers on the weight?

...

 

[derbothaus]

Currently, it's not very cheap - no. But prices of TB accessories are expected to fall once more and more companies starts delivering products with TB.

I keep hearing this. Back when v.1 came out. Analysts still refer to Thunderbolt as DOA tech. The price has to reduce before users will adopt en masse. The price can't drop until users adopt en masse. I see a problem. It may iron itself out but someone will have to take the loss initially.

 

[WMD]

Whatever card it is (I still think it's a W9000, not an S10000, but it doesn't really matter) it's still basically a rebranded enthusiast level consumer card, that probably cost around 1 grand. Yes, the Fire Pro version has a 200% mark-up, but we have no idea how much of that will flow through to Apple's asking price for the system. It could probably be anywhere between around $800 a card (because Apple buys in bulk) anywhere to over $2000 (because Apple advertises them as Fire Pros).

Apple has a history of charging pro prices for workstation graphics; the last time they offered a Quadro in the Mac Pro (or was it the G5?), it was something like $1500 extra. So we could still be looking at a $6k price tag for the machine as advertised so far. For a lower-end setup, I think they'll still use a FirePro card, given the emphasis on "workstation" graphics. So it'll probably be a $500 rebranded low-end Radeon.

Given all this...Mac Pro for gaming? Not worth the money.

 

[derbothaus]

Apple has a history of charging pro prices for workstation graphics; the last time they offered a Quadro in the Mac Pro (or was it the G5?), it was something like $1500 extra. So we could still be looking at a $6k price tag for the machine as advertised so far. For a lower-end setup, I think they'll still use a FirePro card, given the emphasis on "workstation" graphics. So it'll probably be a $500 rebranded low-end Radeon.

Given all this...Mac Pro for gaming? Not worth the money.

If that is all you do with the Mac Pro, I agree. If you want only 1 big box in your house that does everything and boots everything and is relatively fast then Mac Pro with one of the more powerful GPU upgrades can easily fit the bill. If all you need is a game box and are OK with Windows then, yes, ridiculously expensive.

What looks really bad is the new Quadro k5000. Literally the same part at OWC and B&H is $1799.00. Apple store will sell it to you for $2499.99. Isn't even a rebrand for Apple.

 

[QuantumLo0p]

Actually, tomshardware did ask (and answer) this question - though from the Windows perspective:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/workstation-graphics-card-gaming,3425.html

Quote from the article:
"Case in point: The FirePro W9000 nearly manages to keep up with AMD's Radeon HD 7970."​

Basically one W9000 is actually slightly slower than a GTX680. So it depends a lot on how well Apple implements it's dual GPU optimizations. And I don't even want to think about micro stuttering problems on the Mac Pro with dual GPUs. Even in the windows drivers (which see much more optimization than the OS X drivers) dual GPU gaming has its issues.

Basically a W9000 should be equal to a HD7970 performance wise. The benefit of a dual GPU config depends a lot on the GPU driver optimizations.

I can't quote benchmarks atm but I seem to remember the 680 was a little faster than the 7970 for gaming but the 7970 was significantly faster then the 680 for CAD/CAM/CAE work. On the order of 2X? Obviously leaving the Titan and the 7XX series out of any comparison. I would love to have a Titan but realistically will probably look for a second 680 for SLI.

 

[MacsRgr8]

If that is all you do with the Mac Pro, I agree. If you want only 1 big box in your house that does everything and boots everything and is relatively fast then Mac Pro with one of the more powerful GPU upgrades can easily fit the bill. If all you need is a game box and are OK with Windows then, yes, ridiculously expensive.

What looks really bad is the new Quadro k5000. Literally the same part at OWC and B&H is $1799.00. Apple store will sell it to you for $2499.99. Isn't even a rebrand for Apple.

Exactly.
I don't want an iMac and a gaming PC or a Mac mini and a gaming PC.
I just want one Mac that can (with or without Boot Camping) do everything, including gaming: Mac Pro.

I surely hope that Apple will make a "Prosumer" Mac Pro: medium range Xeon E5 (less Cores, higher clock), with single high-end gaming GPU.
That would suite me lovely.

 

[tomvos]

For a lower-end setup, I think they'll still use a FirePro card, given the emphasis on "workstation" graphics. So it'll probably be a $500 rebranded low-end Radeon.

I hope this will not come to the fruition. While there may be a few users who want their GPU and drivers to be certified for some applications, there are even more who could not care less.

With the old Mac Pro I guess that only a one digit percent number of all machines are equipped with professional brand GPUs (like the Quadros). Why should anyone at Apple come to the conclusion that everybody should use professional brand GPUs? And how was it possible that up to now most of us can work without professional brand GPUs?

Putting only FirePro branded GPUs—which come with a heavy price tag—into the new Mac Pro increases the base price with no real benefit. Perhaps this is OK for the high end configurations, but forcing down this across the whole line even to the low- to mid-end GPUs will surely make many users think twice about buying one of the new Mac Pros.

At least for me, I would not drop 500 $ on an dual GPU option which is 3-5 times slower than my GTX680.

 

[WMD]

I hope this will not come to the fruition. While there may be a few users who want their GPU and drivers to be certified for some applications, there are even more who could not care less.

I would tend to agree, personally... I'm just basing my prediction on what was said during the keynote. There's a good chance it won't happen, though: even back when Apple did offer a Quadro card, it was an extra-cost option on top of a regular card.

 

[davidb367]

Think long term...

In 2 or 3 years, those graphics cards will not be top of the line. You'll have no readily accessible or replaceable options. I tried to make my MacPro 1,1 into a multi purpose computer and it didn't work out so well. I had to build a PC for gaming.

You'd come out ahead by building a gaming PC and use the leftover money for GPU upgrades in a few years.

 

[MagicThief83]

Sadly, I feel the new Mac Pro may not be as versatile as one would hope. As quoted directly from the Mac Pro web site, "Engineered around workstation graphics with dual GPUs." Now is Apple using the terms "workstation" and "desktop" interchangeably? Could by workstation, they also mean standard desktop GPUs we see today (i.e., GTX 700s, Radeon 7000s, etc.)? Or are they strictly referring to "Workstation" GPUs i.e., Firepro, Quadro, etc. If the latter is true, I believe I may be better off going the Hackintosh route, thereby being able to experience the best of both worlds - raw performance in both OSX and Windows for gaming. I have a GTX 770 just staring at me, waiting to be used, all I need is a nice PC to build it into. I fear the Mac Pro may not allow for customization of GPUs

 

[Erasmus]

Sadly, I feel the new Mac Pro may not be as versatile as one would hope. As quoted directly from the Mac Pro web site, "Engineered around workstation graphics with dual GPUs." Now is Apple using the terms "workstation" and "desktop" interchangeably? Could by workstation, they also mean standard desktop GPUs we see today (i.e., GTX 700s, Radeon 7000s, etc.)? Or are they strictly referring to "Workstation" GPUs i.e., Firepro, Quadro, etc. If the latter is true, I believe I may be better off going the Hackintosh route, thereby being able to experience the best of both worlds - raw performance in both OSX and Windows for gaming. I have a GTX 770 just staring at me, waiting to be used, all I need is a nice PC to build it into. I fear the Mac Pro may not allow for customization of GPUs

I don't think "Engineered around workstation graphics with dual GPUs" really means anything. Really, it's a good thing, because it means the computer has been DESIGNED to accommodate a 130W CPU, and 2x 275W GPUs, therefore will run extra quiet (and maybe able to be overclocked considerably) if you choose to put in less power hungry components. It would seem crazy for Apple to ONLY offer high-tier workstation GPUs, when it would be so easy for them to just offer a few more cards, and expand their market by a huge margin.

I think it's pretty clear that any GPUs that ARE available for it are going to be specially constructed for the new MP, so, if you have a GTX770, you can probably forget about using it in a new MP. Probably best to either build a gaming PC for it, or buy a Mac Mini, and a TB external PCI case for the GPU.

 

[thekev]

If Apple puts consumer/game GPUs in the Mac Pro, then I'm definitely getting one, because I love the form factor. What do you guys think are the chances we'll see options for standard/game GPUs?

Firepro options sell as low as $200 or so retail. Lower end versions are more likely than the use of radeon cards here. Much of it (sometimes all) comes down to drivers.

If that is all you do with the Mac Pro, I agree. If you want only 1 big box in your house that does everything and boots everything and is relatively fast then Mac Pro with one of the more powerful GPU upgrades can easily fit the bill. If all you need is a game box and are OK with Windows then, yes, ridiculously expensive.

What looks really bad is the new Quadro k5000. Literally the same part at OWC and B&H is $1799.00. Apple store will sell it to you for $2499.99. Isn't even a rebrand for Apple.

It may have been announced at $2500 initially. Apple always seems to go by list pricing at launch no matter what. They continued to ask $1200 on the Quadro 4000 even though it dropped below $800 elsewhere.

 

[MagicThief83]

I don't think "Engineered around workstation graphics with dual GPUs" really means anything. Really, it's a good thing, because it means the computer has been DESIGNED to accommodate a 130W CPU, and 2x 275W GPUs, therefore will run extra quiet (and maybe able to be overclocked considerably) if you choose to put in less power hungry components. It would seem crazy for Apple to ONLY offer high-tier workstation GPUs, when it would be so easy for them to just offer a few more cards, and expand their market by a huge margin.

I think it's pretty clear that any GPUs that ARE available for it are going to be specially constructed for the new MP, so, if you have a GTX770, you can probably forget about using it in a new MP. Probably best to either build a gaming PC for it, or buy a Mac Mini, and a TB external PCI case for the GPU.

What I meant by me having a GTX 770 was that I don't think Apple will allow us through their store upon purchase, to configure the Mac Pro with standard to mid-range GPUs available on the market today, and that they will only allow the Mac Pro to be configured with workstation graphics. Therefore, maybe I'm better off just holding on to my GTX 770 and building a custom machine with it, instead of returning it to Newegg.

 

[wazgilbert]

I guess it depends if you want to use a Mac for your main machine and play games aswell, or use a Mac as a gaming rig.

I used to play WoW and a coupla racing games on a pitiful PC with a 128mb geforce graphics and junked it because it could only do 25fps on WoW. I then despaired at the thought of (re)building yet another PC, so I bought the alu 24" iMac and it blew my socks off, still wouldn't do 'ultra' settings, but then it was ok.

6 years later - whether I would really be into games again - anything I play that I could touch now, on Steam or app store, would be flying on the current CTO iMac, or smoked by this Pro, in contrast to my current iMac

I just want to see the price tag!

 

[Tesselator]

What do you guys think are the chances we'll see options for standard/game GPUs?

Really hard to speculate on this point - at least for me.

If they were using standard PCIe cards I would say the chances were extremely high but they aren't. They're using some kind of proprietary design. Who's making these cards is a huge part of the question for me? Is this an Apple custom order to ATI? Is this form-factor going to start becoming available for non-Apple systems? Is it costing more or less to manufacture and purchase cards in this form? (personally I think it looks like the unit price will be a lot less!!! 25 to 30% less). How many more MacPro systems can be sold if something like GTX 670 or 770 cards were to be used - i.e.. is it worth the time and effort?

And so on and so forth. It's just a very difficult question. Many may speculate but no one not working for Apple, NVidia, or ATI would be able to be accurate in doing so. So the odds of someone guessing right are 50/50.

 

[MagicThief83]

At this point, I'm just tired of basing my purchasing decisions around what Apple may or may not do. Before the iMacs were refreshed, I whored this site obsessively every day until their release and for what? As much as I look forward to the Mac Pro and am extremely excited about what features it may bring, I just don't want to do the same thing again. I'm going to build a custom PC with an amazing graphics card and then Hackintosh it, and I'll still have my real Mac on the side, it just won't be a Mac Pro.

 

[Cubemmal]

At this point, I'm just tired of basing my purchasing decisions around what Apple may or may not do ... I'm going to build a custom PC with an amazing graphics card and then Hackintosh it, and I'll still have my real Mac on the side, it just won't be a Mac Pro.

Yeah I really went around on this question. I want a new machine that is super fast for software development and can give me 30 FPS in most games plus X-plane. I don't game a lot but still want it to be enjoyable when I do.

A pure gaming rig is the best choice, but that requires money and more importantly space and adds clutter. I'd much prefer putting that money into a high end Mac that does double (or triple) duty. Less clutter, space and a better machine.

At any rate the new Pro looks like it will fill that need, assuming its not too expensive.

 

[tevion5]

Lol, I love Macs as well. That's part of what's deterring me from building a stand-alone Windows gaming rig. Despite the form, the new Mac Pro is sure to be a powerhouse. I hate it when people make it seem like getting a Mac Pro for gaming is such a bad idea. These machine sure do have targeted demographics, but what matters is it's your money buying it, therefore how you utilize it is your prerogative.

What I'm doing is getting an old broken Power Mac G5, ripping its guts out an slipping in a PC inside it with an ATX motherboard. To a non fanatic it looks like a Mac Pro. Nobody will ever know!

 

[Kobalt60]

Exactly.
I don't want an iMac and a gaming PC or a Mac mini and a gaming PC.
I just want one Mac that can (with or without Boot Camping) do everything, including gaming: Mac Pro.

I surely hope that Apple will make a "Prosumer" Mac Pro: medium range Xeon E5 (less Cores, higher clock), with single high-end gaming GPU.
That would suite me lovely.

Yes, this is what I want, as well. Then, my iMac could be retired, gracefully.

 

[MagicThief83]

I went the hackintosh route and I don't regret it one bit; have a powerful Mac and kick ass gaming machine. The new Mac Pro will be ridiculously over priced for decent specs and will probably feature underwhelming workstation graphics in base and lower end configurations. I still have a MBA but right now, the hackintosh takes the crown and does everything I want it to and much more.