Oh I fully agree with you on that. The OP would not need the 4500 but for your needs it would have been the proper choice in the Mac Pro for an all in one solution instead of separately spending probably 12k or more on 3 seperate systems.
Tom
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac Pro Playing games with Bootcamp vs High End PC
- Thread starter Neonguy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh I fully agree with you on that. The OP would not need the 4500 but for your needs it would have been the proper choice in the Mac Pro for an all in one solution instead of separately spending probably 12k or more on 3 seperate systems.
Tom
I place the order for the ATI X1900XT yesturday. I choose next day which is cheap but still have to pay the tax. It show deliver on Nov.3 - 6. And I should get it Nov.6. It show it not shipping yet. I hope I don't have those problem where the card is high demand and it take forever to ship. I don't expect it to play like the Alienware gaming PC because it is not, but hoping I get smoother frame rate.
As I wait for my ATI Card, I have a problem when I play Games with Bootcamp the volumes is still playing on my Mac Pro. I have a Sounstick II plug in but it now coming out both speaker. How do I disable the built in Mac Pro speaker so it only come out of my external speaker? I thought Bootcamp 1.1.1 Beta fix this issue?
As I wait for my ATI Card, I have a problem when I play Games with Bootcamp the volumes is still playing on my Mac Pro. I have a Sounstick II plug in but it now coming out both speaker. How do I disable the built in Mac Pro speaker so it only come out of my external speaker? I thought Bootcamp 1.1.1 Beta fix this issue?
In the past Xeon(netburst) days I would have wholeheartedly agreed with you on that statement but with the Core 2 based Xeons of the Mac Pro the only real drawback would be the FB-Dimms but we are not talking about a major speed loss or in the case of games FPS loss.
When looking at reviews of the new kentsfield processors in sandra cpu and arithmetic scores are identical to what you will get when testing the Mac Pro under bootcamp.
So what makes this setup not particularly ideal as a gaming setup? I can think of only 2 real reasons.
1) Lack of EAX or something similar for gaming sound. (Likely to be resolved by some hardware manufacturer as PCI-E is catching on)
2) Lack of SLI or Crossfire. SLI can be achieved in windows now with hacked drivers using NVIDIA cards with a bridge. Crossfire is not likely to happen.
So based on those do you think that having Crossfire or SLI will make or break a gaming machine? Also do you think that not having a soundcard like an Audigy will make the machine undesireable for gaming? Because firewire sound devices do exist for windows and do work quite well. And is the 5 – 10 FPS average loss due to FB-DIMMS kill it’s possibilities as a gaming machine? I think that Apple has come up with a damn good solution in the Mac Pro for the people that want a good Windows Gaming system and a OSX machine.
Tom
Yes Mac Pro is a fine gaming platform but its too expensive, every GB of memory costs 200$ (in a 2x512mb configuration, the price goes up as density goes up) there are no available graphics cards (although not much of a problem, you can still get any card to use on WindowsXP).
A Mac Pro with a 2.66 GHz processor, a X1900XT and 2GB of RAM (4x512MB) will run you over 3000$ so overall as a whole workstation\gaming platform its an incredible deal especially considering you get OSX and WinXP but from a gaming perspective alone, Mac Pro is overpriced but it will scale nicely into the future, games and everything is taking a turn toward multi core processing (more than just 2).
Oh yeah about the FB-DIMM penalty its not such a big deal, especially when running in Quad Channel.
I think that is all he was sying
A Mac Pro with a 2.66 GHz processor, a X1900XT and 2GB of RAM (4x512MB) will run you over 3000$ so overall as a whole workstation\gaming platform its an incredible deal especially considering you get OSX and WinXP but from a gaming perspective alone, Mac Pro is overpriced but it will scale nicely into the future, games and everything is taking a turn toward multi core processing (more than just 2).
Oh yeah about the FB-DIMM penalty its not such a big deal, especially when running in Quad Channel.
I think that is all he was sying
Ummm... your all forgetting something very very important you need the graphics cards drivers for windows and yes you can use the mac pro for gaming that ati card is very powerful and could run any game with ease. Ill bet you friend dos'nt even use half the power of his graphics card these cards are more powerful than you think.
So try getting the drivers for that card in windows that could be your problem.
So try getting the drivers for that card in windows that could be your problem.
That depends if you use educational discount! I got mine with that configuration for 2600.
Can I use any PCI Graphic Card for Windows XP? Since it use the same PCI slot as windows. And I can just download the Driver for Windows. I tend not to do 3D, Rendering and play game on Mac OS X. Wonder if it even possible since it a not Mac Compatible card. Currently only Apple sell the high end Graphic Card but it very overprice.
Nope, not possible (sorta). I don't feel like getting technical but you just can't download a driver and it will just work.
Here is a binary that emulates loading the EFI drivers for any NVIDIA card. http://omni.starchaser.org/titan/
You can return that x1900 btw
You can return that x1900 btw
Well, arent you very helpful. Are you saying I don't know anything about Computer or anything? My question was plain and simple the NVidia 7300 Graphic Card I got picture qaulity was bad so was thinking if it's the Graphic Card or Mac playing PC Games with Bootcamp is like that. I alway been playing Games on PC. If getting the ATI Card would actually make the pictures qaulity pictures better. Since it's a $400 investment, so I wanted to make sure before making the purchase.
The X1900 card will be fine.
I only play WoW on my Mac Pro games-wise, but I play it on a 30" ACD with the X1900 card and oh my god is it good! Everything on full, frame rates up to and over 100, maximum 30" ACD resolution. Silky smooth.
Basically the base Mac Pro is not a gaming machine, it comes with a simple card suitable for most workstation usage. You bought the wrong graphics card, but now you've ordered the right one. Everything will be rosey, so chill, sit back, and revel in the thought that your Mac Pro looks a zillion times nicer than any Alienware PC ever will.
Edit: I just wanted to add that I play in OS X. I believe that if I were to play in BootCamp, from what I have heard, the frame rates would be even better. Not that I could possibly need them any better.
I only play WoW on my Mac Pro games-wise, but I play it on a 30" ACD with the X1900 card and oh my god is it good! Everything on full, frame rates up to and over 100, maximum 30" ACD resolution. Silky smooth.
Basically the base Mac Pro is not a gaming machine, it comes with a simple card suitable for most workstation usage. You bought the wrong graphics card, but now you've ordered the right one. Everything will be rosey, so chill, sit back, and revel in the thought that your Mac Pro looks a zillion times nicer than any Alienware PC ever will.
Edit: I just wanted to add that I play in OS X. I believe that if I were to play in BootCamp, from what I have heard, the frame rates would be even better. Not that I could possibly need them any better.
In terms of systems requirements that's a little like saying "Well I only go to Walmart two blocks away in my Neon but it's great" in reply to a thread asking about a high-performance car.
It depends on your sense of decor. The XPS 700 is IMO equal to, or better than, the Mac Pro with it's aggressive slanted aspect.
First time ordering ATI Card anyway. As you can see I'm an NVidia Fanboy. NVidia Graphic was excellent in every games I play. So I like it a lot. This of course was on my PC which is sold already. I was a bit suprise when I find NVidia Graphic Card that come with the Mac Pro that graphic wasn't very good with game. I thought it was just my Mac, but find out if I turn everything to max setting it slow down. Since everyone tell me the ATI X1900 XT is so good I may as well get it. That will stop my friend from making fun of me using a Mac. He laugh very hard when my Mac Pro died on me. But that another story because I got a replacement from Apple after 1 months. Talk about slow time and bad services from Apple.
Thanks for everyone help, I think I made a good decision in purchasing this Graphic Card even though it so god damn expensive!
Thanks for everyone help, I think I made a good decision in purchasing this Graphic Card even though it so god damn expensive!
The Ati is a stellar card.
I've just been playing the new Dark Messiah game.
I'm at 1680x1050
Everything on Max
AA at 8x (overkill at that resolution I know)
Antristropic Filtering at 16 x
HDR lighting etc....
And it's as smooth as a baby's bum. Amazing.
Just hope Crysis looks as good
I've just been playing the new Dark Messiah game.
I'm at 1680x1050
Everything on Max
AA at 8x (overkill at that resolution I know)
Antristropic Filtering at 16 x
HDR lighting etc....
And it's as smooth as a baby's bum. Amazing.
Just hope Crysis looks as good
Thats a great price, in fact as far as prebuilts go, and I've said this a million times, an Apple is the only thing I'll ever buy. Nothing beats building your own though (at least in the high end consumer market), I can't imagine myself buying a Dell for gaming *shivers*.
I find most people who say this are those who have only built their rigs piecemeal as budgets allow. There are distinct advantages to buying a prebuilt high-performance rig if you want to play games, not babying a patched-together rig. I've done it all and if I wanted an entertainment system, I'd buy it pre-built. If I was stretched for cash - sure, I'd do it myself. The exception is the case where you are going for an extreme system (as I did with a multi-Opteron rig a while back which is sadly now outperformed by my 5160-based machines) but 90+% of the people who dismiss prebuilds never go this far.
Hmm I'm not sure I understand you well but as far as consumer builds go (not dual xeon builds which actually building your own comes pretty close to the price of a Mac Pro with similar specs) even if I had like 6000$ to blow on a system, I'd still build it myself, heck for 6000$ you can get vapor phase cooling! (a good one at that), you still get a better deal and you get other advantages like separate warranties for every component, overclocking options, unlimited upgreadability (unlike Dell who uses tons of propietary parts and voids your warranty if you do anything beyond adding a hdd or card)
If you are buying a workstation, prebuilt (I suggest Mac Pro) is the best way to go but my point is, if you want something to use in your house (for example encoding or editing video for personal uses or the most demanding non-work related chore of them all, gaming) at ALL pricepoints (minus less than $500) building your own will get you a better system with a few other advantages as well.
One thing you need to remember games made today are not multi CPU or core aware and can not take advantage of 2 cores. They can only use one core. AMD even public stated that there dual core CPU are poor for gaming than there single core counter part and the reasons for this is the fact that games are currently not code I a way that can take advantage of it. Hell very few programs are made that way. I expect it to be another few years before it becomes a standard to do that.
Also you are comparing it to a High-End gaming PC and well Macs can not compete in that area as it stands. For Gaming PC is king and will be that way for a while. Because the gaming needs of the computer are upgraded first and foremost. Apple does not do that in their computers because it would cripple them in a lot of other ways and make them less useful as a desktop computer for that type of use. Gaming PCs are not looking to do workstation work, they are going Gaming only and Apple does not seem to have any plans to go that way so until they do Apple can not compete against Gaming PC for Gaming purposes. I would like to add that I think it would be a bad idea for Apple to try to competed in that market.
Also you are comparing it to a High-End gaming PC and well Macs can not compete in that area as it stands. For Gaming PC is king and will be that way for a while. Because the gaming needs of the computer are upgraded first and foremost. Apple does not do that in their computers because it would cripple them in a lot of other ways and make them less useful as a desktop computer for that type of use. Gaming PCs are not looking to do workstation work, they are going Gaming only and Apple does not seem to have any plans to go that way so until they do Apple can not compete against Gaming PC for Gaming purposes. I would like to add that I think it would be a bad idea for Apple to try to competed in that market.
People are making it sound like the Mac Pro is a mediocre gaming machine. That is complete crap. My Mac Pro 2.66 with an X1900 XT runs BF2, Far Cry, FEAR, all those intense games absolutely spectacularly.
When people criticize the Mac Pro as a gaming machine, it's not because it's somehow bad at it, but because you could get the same kind of performance for much less with a non-workstation gaming PC.
Also, people exaggerate the performance drop between the Xeon using FB-DIMM and the Core 2 Duo using normal DDR2 RAM. It's not like comparing an Apple II to a Cray at all.
Here's why: games these days are very much GPU-bound, meaning that there is increasing stress on the GPU and relatively less on the GPU. What this means is that any disadvantage the CPU and RAM may have to the non-Xeon counterparts is anulled by the fact that most new games coming out are bottlenecked by the GPU.
The bottom line is that all current games, such as Battlefield 2 and Half-Life 2, run amazingly on the Mac Pro. Don't let anybody confuse you on this point. It really comes down to how much money you want to waste on power that won't be reflected in games as much as in professional creative/scientific work.
When people criticize the Mac Pro as a gaming machine, it's not because it's somehow bad at it, but because you could get the same kind of performance for much less with a non-workstation gaming PC.
Also, people exaggerate the performance drop between the Xeon using FB-DIMM and the Core 2 Duo using normal DDR2 RAM. It's not like comparing an Apple II to a Cray at all.
Here's why: games these days are very much GPU-bound, meaning that there is increasing stress on the GPU and relatively less on the GPU. What this means is that any disadvantage the CPU and RAM may have to the non-Xeon counterparts is anulled by the fact that most new games coming out are bottlenecked by the GPU.
The bottom line is that all current games, such as Battlefield 2 and Half-Life 2, run amazingly on the Mac Pro. Don't let anybody confuse you on this point. It really comes down to how much money you want to waste on power that won't be reflected in games as much as in professional creative/scientific work.
Exactly!! Anyone know of any game that does run spectacularly? I would love to know. The Mac Pro is a hell of a gaming system.
LOL I disagree with that. I think you are still in your justifying stage hehehe just busting man.