Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
We don't know for sure yet. My guess is that the iMac may be a little better for gaming, given that the 780M is similar to a GTX 680, which is a bit better than a 7970 (the nMP with the D700 [best option] will likely be about as good as a single underclocked 7970 in terms of gaming). Let me reiterate though: We don't know for sure.

I don't know where people get FUD like this.

A single google search gives you

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+780M

780M is below 7950 which is below 660Ti, which is below GTX580 which is below GTX760, which is below 7970.

7970 is 20% faster than 780M.

And GTX 680 is 34% faster than 780M.
 
I don't know where people get FUD like this.

A single google search gives you

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+780M

780M is below 7950 which is below 660Ti, which is below GTX580 which is below GTX760, which is below 7970.

7970 is 20% faster than 780M.

And GTX 680 is 34% faster than 780M.

Thanks for clearing that up. I heard it from MVC but didn't look it up myself.

Looks like, for as outdated as the D700 is, the iMac is even worse :rolleyes:

Best gaming mac appears to be Cheese-grater 5,1 hexcore with an aftermarket video card.

----------

Given that the R9 290 AMD cards have done away with the physical Crossfire bridge and started passing the card communication through the PCI-e bus, isn't it a logical assumption to make that the nMP could have done the same thing?

The 290x is Hawaii, AFAIK only Hawaii can CF without the bridge.
 
Any spec of the new mac pro will suffice for gaming.

The ones that need those strong cards that are in video editing or 3d modeling won't even think twice about spending that additional 1000$.

Anyone else should ask themselves if it isn't cheaper to get a seperate gaming pc for that extra money.

I assure you, you will get a very, very decent gaming machine for that amount of cash.

What most people that start these gaming threads should ask themselves is:
1) are you a hardcore gamer, do you really need to game on a mac
2) what is the purpose of your mac machine
3) if you don't need it for work that brings in money to your bank account, should you really consider buying it over other mac options
4) are the graphics options really designed for gaming (remember that in the new mac pro, only one gpu is available for gaming as most of the games are not designed for using both of them, so in order to get the best performance option, you'll need to pay for another gpu that might just sit there doing nothing, is that really worth the pricetag)
 
Thanks for clearing that up. I heard it from MVC but didn't look it up myself.

Looks like, for as outdated as the D700 is, the iMac is even worse :rolleyes:

I wouldn't call 7970 outdated. R9 280 is a rebranding of 7970 and it's a quite decent gaming card. The only better AMD offering is 290. So the new Mac Pro comes with a card more or less equivalent to the second fastest AMD gaming card. Usually with the old Mac Pro's, when they were released, they had GPU's much more outdated than what D700 is today, so this is still Apple's best offering to date I think.
 
I am very skeptical that Mac game developers looking at the sales of these Mac Pros aren't going to at least consider very seriously supporting both GPUs.

Apple used to have a Games Evangelist that acted as both a marketing and technical liaison between the company and gaming publishers to ensure that developers were getting all the help and advice they needed to make their games run great on the Mac. What happened to this position? There's no way we'd be having this discussion unless they canned it.

Remember this guy?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgKPPCCKNVc
 
Last edited:
I am very skeptical that Mac game developers looking at the sales of these Mac Pros aren't going to at least consider very seriously supporting both GPUs.

Without crossfire (highly unlikely), I doubt dual card support will become prevalent. You're also making a huge assumption about how many units will sell, and how many will be to people who want to game. Using multiple video cards at the same time without having the crossfire bridge (or a Hawaii-based card which does not require it) is a huge software undertaking. I highly doubt game developers will support it.

Even with the incredible sales of the iMac, we haven't seen nearly the graphics driver support as we do for Windows nor the number of games.

Things are better than ever for gaming on the Mac, but OS X is still G*d-awful for gaming.
 
Last edited:
Any spec of the new mac pro will suffice for gaming.

The ones that need those strong cards that are in video editing or 3d modeling won't even think twice about spending that additional 1000$.

Anyone else should ask themselves if it isn't cheaper to get a seperate gaming pc for that extra money.

I assure you, you will get a very, very decent gaming machine for that amount of cash.

What most people that start these gaming threads should ask themselves is:
1) are you a hardcore gamer, do you really need to game on a mac
2) what is the purpose of your mac machine
3) if you don't need it for work that brings in money to your bank account, should you really consider buying it over other mac options
4) are the graphics options really designed for gaming (remember that in the new mac pro, only one gpu is available for gaming as most of the games are not designed for using both of them, so in order to get the best performance option, you'll need to pay for another gpu that might just sit there doing nothing, is that really worth the pricetag)

I agree - $1000 will get you a superb PC gaming rig. We went up to the equivalent of $1500 here in the UK (bearing in mind everything is more expensive here) and got a top-of-the-range gaming rig with dual video cards. The thing is AMAZING.

If only there was a Thunderbolt hub/switch available. Ideally, I'd have my Mac and my PC under the same desk, and switch between them, with them both using my Thunderbolt display. But as far as I can see, nobody has managed to make a hub that allows that (i.e., multiple computers running through a single display/keyboard/mouse, selected with a switcher). I've used plenty of switchers, but I guess Thunderbolt doesn't support any of that.
 
Without crossfire (highly unlikely), I doubt dual card support will become prevalent. You're also making a huge assumption about how many units will sell, and how many will be to people who want to game. Using multiple video cards at the same time without having the crossfire bridge (or a Hawaii-based card which does not require it) is a huge software undertaking. I highly doubt game developers will support it.

Even with the incredible sales of the iMac, we haven't seen nearly the graphics driver support as we do for Windows nor the number of games.

Things are better than ever for gaming on the Mac, but OS X is still G*d-awful for gaming.

"Huge assumption?" Orders are backed up for two months!

Even if only a fraction of those orders were gamers and even then only as a secondary use for the machine, that's a big market. Dual GPUs are standard going forward, so years from now the market will be even bigger. People who want an xMac in the future will be able to buy an older Mac Pro equipped with dual FirePro's and use it for fun.

Worst case scenario is they decide any serious gamer will go into bootcamp, and maybe that will be the case in the near term, but long term that's not going to make good business sense. The Mac Pro is the future for the Mac creative and entertainment enthusiast, who likes choosing their display configuration and plugging a lot of other devices into their computer, a role which the Mac Mini has had to fill for years.

Well I'm ready to move beyond the Mini and have been for a while. Not that the Mini is all bad. I'm using an early 2009 plastic model right now and can still do a ton of modern stuff with it, like edit and watch 1080p, but I can't even play old games on it. The Mini is in this very narrow gaming valley where the games that would run well on the hardware don't because they don't support the updated OS and games that do support the updated OS don't support the old hardware. That's just plain sad, man! Time to remedy that.

So the Mac Pro is our solution, whether we like it or not, but what's not to like? The price is high but so is the value. Long term it's a bargain. Really the only thing not to like is the thought that Crossfire won't be supported and that OpenCL support is currently limited, but support generally comes when there's a large enough market to demand that support, and the nMP is selling out. I have very little worry.

As the nMPs age they'll become xMacs, just like when iPhone models age they become mid-level iPhones. Apple will keep selling them as fast as they can make them. I'd buy one right now but I'd have to wait two months anyway. I'm no pro but I am an enthusiast with the foreknowledge that I will be an enthusiast for years to come. The Mac Pro looks like something that I will use for many many years to come.
 
Well the Verge review is up! AMD's 7950 is near useless at Bioshock Infinite.

The new MP can run it at 4k, with FPS drops, but at 1440 it runs well. Something the AMD 7950 couldn't do, due to rubbish drivers.

Gaming was mostly a solid experience – at 3840 x 2160 and on the highest possible settings, Bioshock Infinite dropped a few frames, but I played comfortably with a gorgeous 2560 x 1440 picture and high settings.

For early drivers, and optimisations still to come I'm interested in what happens for others.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/12/23/5234574/apple-mac-pro-review-2013
 
Last edited:
"Huge assumption?" Orders are backed up for two months!

Even if only a fraction of those orders were gamers and even then only as a secondary use for the machine, that's a big market.

The fact that the orders are backed up only tells us one thing: that demand exceeds supply. If Apple sold 1,000 Mac Pros but was only able to manufacture 500 per month, we'd still see substantial shipping delays but the absolute sales numbers wouldn't actually be impressive. It seems likely that they're reasonably popular for a $3,000+ machine, but there's no way to know at this point.
 
Again...

The best Mac gaming rig is a hackintosh with an i7 and a GTX780, or similar video card.

IF you want to do other work on the system, then that might not be the best choice...
 
So does the Mac Pro support crossfire in bootcamp or not? This is the biggest question.

If yes then it's the fastest mass produced windows gaming rig on the planet. If not, then it's just another computer...
 
Without crossfire (highly unlikely), I doubt dual card support will become prevalent.

OS X has APIs for using OpenGL off several CPUs at once.

It will be interesting to see if game developers start to take advantage of these APIs.

At the very least developers should be able to do things like throw their OpenCL physics stuff at the second GPU.

So does the Mac Pro support crossfire in bootcamp or not? This is the biggest question.

If yes then it's the fastest mass produced windows gaming rig on the planet. If not, then it's just another computer...

I've heard yes but have not seen a verification.
 
"Huge assumption?" Orders are backed up for two months!

Even if only a fraction of those orders were gamers and even then only as a secondary use for the machine, that's a big market. Dual GPUs are standard going forward, so years from now the market will be even bigger. People who want an xMac in the future will be able to buy an older Mac Pro equipped with dual FirePro's and use it for fun.

Worst case scenario is they decide any serious gamer will go into bootcamp, and maybe that will be the case in the near term, but long term that's not going to make good business sense. The Mac Pro is the future for the Mac creative and entertainment enthusiast, who likes choosing their display configuration and plugging a lot of other devices into their computer, a role which the Mac Mini has had to fill for years.

Well I'm ready to move beyond the Mini and have been for a while. Not that the Mini is all bad. I'm using an early 2009 plastic model right now and can still do a ton of modern stuff with it, like edit and watch 1080p, but I can't even play old games on it. The Mini is in this very narrow gaming valley where the games that would run well on the hardware don't because they don't support the updated OS and games that do support the updated OS don't support the old hardware. That's just plain sad, man! Time to remedy that.

So the Mac Pro is our solution, whether we like it or not, but what's not to like? The price is high but so is the value. Long term it's a bargain. Really the only thing not to like is the thought that Crossfire won't be supported and that OpenCL support is currently limited, but support generally comes when there's a large enough market to demand that support, and the nMP is selling out. I have very little worry.

As the nMPs age they'll become xMacs, just like when iPhone models age they become mid-level iPhones. Apple will keep selling them as fast as they can make them. I'd buy one right now but I'd have to wait two months anyway. I'm no pro but I am an enthusiast with the foreknowledge that I will be an enthusiast for years to come. The Mac Pro looks like something that I will use for many many years to come.


They could have sold 100 resulting in back orders being pushed back till February . Without having access to any numbers it's all just FUD and huge assumptions. For all intensive purposes soft launch might be dec, and proper launch in feb.

And "The Mac Pro is the future for the Mac creative and entertainment enthusiast" , ummm no. Year by year the company moves further away from mac to iPhone / iPad. Creating apps for the App Store does not require a Mac Pro
 
Here's a link that shows a few gaming benchmarks: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7603/mac-pro-review-late-2013/10

I highly recommend you check out the rest of that review too, it goes into great detail over several different applications.

Now, firstly, you're going to need to install Windows if you want any good gaming performance. Games for OS X have to be specifically written for Dual GPU support, while for Windows it's simply a matter of enabling CrossFire. Dual GPU support isn't always a sure thing either, as shown in Metro and Company of Heroes 2 benchmarks.

The FirePros do outperform most single GPU setups (which is to be expected). It will definitely run your games well. When the FirePros are used for rending and rely on the GPUs (e.g. editing in Final Cut Pro), those cards just sing.

That being said, I cannot state this enough though: If you are purchasing this computer simply for its gaming capabilities, you can find MUCH better value in building your own computer. Mac OS simply isn't designed well for gaming. That, and this is for all intents and purposes, a first generation Apple product. Like the rMBP and the iPad, support will most likely grow exponentially next generation. Once apps start taking advantage of the dual GPUs, I'm sure the Mac Pro will really start to shine. But it will take time.

In the end, it comes down to what you need right now. If you are working with lots of 4K film or apps that utilize the dual GPUs, then yes, the Mac Pro is most likely worth it, and yes it will perform well in gaming on Windows as an added bonus. Otherwise, you might wish to consider the alternatives. Keep in mind, if you still need to purchase peripherals, you will want to leave room in your budget for them (i.e. It would be pointless to spend $4500 on a computer, then having nothing to spend on a monitor, speakers, mouse, etc).

On a side note, the cards are under the AMD brand. The ATI name has been gone since 2010.
 
I know that Apple is touting its standard dual GPU, ATI's FirePro card. I know that these cards were not made with gaming in mind. But I do game occasionally and wouldn't mind running windows boot camp to play some games every now and then. Does anyone know what kind of performance gaming wise that the FirePro cards might compare to? Or will they just be miserable in that department? I figured that these cards are no slouches and will at least be able to handle some decent games, maybe not on high settings but normal settings. I am just really unfamiliar with workstation GPU's so when people say they are not meant for gaming, I don't know if they mean they're just not quite up with the performance of other gaming centric GPU's in that price range or if they are just terrible in that field.

Benk, I play on my original MP1,1 with a 4550. What I play is perfectly acceptable on it, mostly CS:GO, HL, WoW, etc. I'm sure there are games that won't work on it, but for my uses it's perfectly acceptable for part-time gaming.

I suspect that the D300 is going to be enough for my needs. Many games do *not* benefit from newer GPUs because they simply don't use those sorts of features. Newer games do, but much of that can be turned off in most cases.

The D300 will provide a massive upgrade compared to my machine, and he faster CPU and memory will have similar effects. So basically I expect the base model to be a very good part-time gamer.
 
Torchlite 1 runs at over 2200 fps when the 2 D300 are crossfired ;)

Even on GuildWars 2 I finally have even in high load scenarios as WvW battles at least 20 fps (was 1-3 fps on my 5870 ^^).

So totally useable for Bootcamp-gaming.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.