Parallels for Gaming on M1 Pro and Max?

[miamialley]

Right click on the app launcher icon in Finder, get info and check "Scale to fit below built-in camera"

I don't have the new MBP yet, but I didn't think that would work if you are in Parallels.

 

[Jeff Kirvin]

I don't have the new MBP yet, but I didn't think that would work if you are in Parallels.

Well, no, probably not, but he was talking about WoW, which is Apple Silicon native, so there's no need to run it in Parallels.

 

[gtg465x]

The good news is that computers are getting smaller and smaller, so, if you don't want to sacrifice your Mac workflow but still want full performance gaming (with eGPU support to boot), you can buy a handheld x64 PC. The most popular models currently are the GPD computers, which can fit on the palm of your hand. Then, you can just either connect them through a USB cable or a wireless setup.

All that being said, there are a few obvious drawbacks to this approach:

• It's pricy.
• Although GPD is very small, it's yet another device you have to carry.
• Depending on your workflow, GPD makes your Mac device pointless. If you just play Windows games and use Office, why would you need the Mac device at all? It would end up being an extra monitor more than anything.

If all you need are light Windows applications, you can get instead a compute stick, which is a full-blown computer fit into an HDMI stick. But even premium devices currently come only with 4GB RAM, so gaming is not really viable (compare that to GPD series, which can run even AAA games).

So with GPDs, I assume you have to have an eGPU as well, because the GPU in those tiny devices must suck unless you’re gaming on its tiny, low res screen, right?

 

[gtg465x]

He didn't say that you can't, he just said that you shouldn't expect too much. He was right. The gaming performance is far below expectations. Lots of people (including me) expected about 3080 performance on the M1 Max and about 3050 performance on the M1 Pro. Now we got 3060 performance on the $3000 machine and 1060 performance on the $2000 machine.

Yes, you can game on all of them, but you're paying double compared to a windows machine... and you have to tinker with Parallels and Crossover, if you want to have access to more than a handful of AAA games. Yikes.

It would only be yikes if you bought a Mac specifically for gaming, which I don’t think anyone does. People buy Macs for a plethora of reasons, and would probably still buy Macs even if they were completely incapable of gaming. The ability for Macs to play games is just a bonus so that you don’t have to buy a PC as well and can do everything on one computer. The comparison isn’t Mac vs PC, it’s Mac vs Mac + PC.

 

[tmoerel]

I came to see if someone would say this. Only had to scroll to the first comment!

Someone people really want to make sure you know you *can't* game on these machines...despite whether or not you can.

I never said you can't game on these machines. But they are not designed for gaming and Apple does not seem to care about gaming. So don't complain if your games run like poo!

 

[miamialley]

I never said you can't game on these machines. But they are not designed for gaming and Apple does not seem to care about gaming. So don't complain if your games run like poo!

I don’t think some of you guys are paying attention to how they are performing. And the games aren’t even FOR those computers.

 

[haruhiko]

x86 yes, but 64 bit apps don't run.

This speaks a lot about Windows. ??

 

[Spidder]

It would only be yikes if you bought a Mac specifically for gaming, which I don’t think anyone does.

No one in their right mind does this, but I would've dropped the $1000 M1 Max upgrade just for gaming, if that would've gotten me real 3080 performance and the chance to throw out my gaming desktop. Now I'm getting a MBA + PS5 or a base 14 inch + PS5. Have to visit the Apple store in the next weeks to make this decision.

 

[fenderbass146]

This speaks a lot about Windows. ??

I was wrong, this was the case at one point, but it's changed now it seems. As soon as Windows says they will make ARM Windows available on a permenent basis instead of just beta and developer access I'd get a M based computer. Till then I can't rely on something Microsoft might pull the cord on at any minute.

 

[AgentMcGeek]

I was gonna upgrade my 2016 MBP 13 for work in any case, but I went for the Max chip because I’ll be occasionally gaming on it.

 

[rukarmr]

Will I see a significant improvement playing a game on the Parallels Pro Edition which allows up to 128GB ram and 32 vCPUs instead of the Parallels Standard Edition which allows 8GB RAM and 4 vCPUs?

Thanks in advance.

 

[chfilm]

so very kind of you! I do have a page there (new for this) for beer change! LOL

Here's the link and I really appreciate the gesture but please do not feel obliged to: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/macgaming

If you have any other games you want me to test, let me know. I'll test everything I can. Buying these laptops are a hell of a financial commitment. It makes me happy to be able to do this and help others make their decision on buying the laptop that best suits them.

Is there any way to play the new age of empires on these machines?

 

[Spidder]

Will I see a significant improvement playing a game on the Parallels Pro Edition which allows up to 128GB ram and 32 vCPUs instead of the Parallels Standard Edition which allows 8GB RAM and 4 vCPUs?

Thanks in advance.

If you have a config that has more than 16 GB of Ram and more than 8 CPU cores, then yes.

 

[rukarmr]

If you have a config that has more than 16 GB of Ram and more than 8 CPU cores, then yes.

Thank you for your reply.

I have an M1 PRO 10-Core CPU 16-Core GPU and 32Gb RAM.
So I am not sure which Parallels version I should take, the Standard or Pro version.

The standard version is good in that it is not a subscription model but I can't configure more than 8Gb ram and 4VcPUs in the virtual machine.
Pro version I can configure a better virtual machine, but it requires a subscription model that I would like to avoid unless the performance is completely different.

 

[macpot]

Thank you for your reply.

I have an M1 PRO 10-Core CPU 16-Core GPU and 32Gb RAM.
So I am not sure which Parallels version I should take, the Standard or Pro version.

The standard version is good in that it is not a subscription model but I can't configure more than 8Gb ram and 4VcPUs in the virtual machine.
Pro version I can configure a better virtual machine, but it requires a subscription model that I would like to avoid unless the performance is completely different.

Parallels hasn't had any real competitor in the past few years, so they just do whatever they want...
even the standard version requires you to create a Parallels account!

I suggest to use the trial and wait 2-3 weeks for Black Friday deals, they usually have a good discount every year.

Personally I plan to use Parallels for games with Low to Mid requirement games, and Crossover for higher-requirement games.

Apparently Parallels (even the Pro version) isn't that good with very demanding games, but Crossover does better.

 

[Spidder]

A trial would be my suggesting as well. Here's a 6 step program on how to do it:

1. Download Pro Edition trial

2. Create a 4vCPUs and 8GB Ram VM, install all the games and apps etc. and give this VM the name "Standard Edition".

3. Then you copy&paste the entire VM, give the new VM more vCPUs and Ram and name it "Pro Edition".

4. Test/benchmark your games and apps on both VMs and decide for yourself if the subscription for the Pro Edition is worth it.

5.???

6. Profit

 

[Rafterman]

A trial would be my suggesting as well. Here's a 6 step program on how to do it:

1. Download Pro Edition trial

2. Create a 4vCPUs and 8GB Ram VM, install all the games and apps etc. and give this VM the name "Standard Edition".

3. Then you copy&paste the entire VM, give the new VM more vCPUs and Ram and name it "Pro Edition".

4. Test/benchmark your games and apps on both VMs and decide for yourself if the subscription for the Pro Edition is worth it.

5.???

6. Profit

 

[Admiralbison]

Apples idea of Mac gaming is to make it easy to port iPad games over, not windows/directx ones, and unfortunately that really limits titles. This is only the latest in a long story of abandonment...the biggest clue was when they dropped OpenGL. Metal is impressive as hell, but the economics just aren't there for that level of port for aaa title games that need highly optimized graphics.

Yep, Apple thinks mobile, cloud and Apple Arcade will do and sell that to Mac gamers hard instead.
which really shows Apple can’t do AAA gaming.

’It will take more than Apple just optimizing Metal there‘s a whole level of relationship with the games industry that Apple clearly has no idea or go about creating.

The only way things will ever change is if Apple employed people in the AAA games industry who actually know and have experience and lead a dedicated AAA games division within Apple.

They can throw Apple’s notion of gaming in the garbage and start all over.
-form relations with devs, studios and publishers
-create the necessary tools and support software for quick porting
-work with Parallels to give them deeper access to the GPUs for Virtual machine
-have a one way Influence in Apple to make future chips have a ”gaming mode”

‘’whatever it takes these game gurus and leads can do make Macs also an actual gaming platform.

so when buying a high end laptop you are assured the complete computer experience - work and play.

 

[Rafterman]

Parallels hasn't had any real competitor in the past few years, so they just do whatever they want...
even the standard version requires you to create a Parallels account!

I suggest to use the trial and wait 2-3 weeks for Black Friday deals, they usually have a good discount every year.

Personally I plan to use Parallels for games with Low to Mid requirement games, and Crossover for higher-requirement games.

Apparently Parallels (even the Pro version) isn't that good with very demanding games, but Crossover does better.

vmware Fusion competes quite well. And they don't Big Brother you on licenses.

 

[AgentMcGeek]

VMware does not support Apple Silicon chips, they say.

 

[MallardDuck]

VMware does not support Apple Silicon chips, they say.

Not quite, let's be more precise.

They absolutely support legally running any operating system on the M1 ARM chips. However, microsoft has not licensed Windows 11 ARM for any platform other than their OEM systems. Since there is no way to legally run it on a Mac, VMWare can't install it to build VMWare tools, drivers, or other supporting software. They have a very large windows virtualization business on intel, and aren't going to risk that relationship. Parallels on the other hand, basically will go out of business without windows virtualization on mac, so they are willing to take the risk.

 

[Rafterman]

VMware does not support Apple Silicon chips, they say.

They released a preview version of vmware a little while ago. But the only Windows 11 ARM I could find is a VHDX and vmware only does ISOs. (Parallels can do VHDX's, though during install, it would not see a network connection, though my network is fine. So I couldn't install it omn Paralles either.)

 

[AdAstra]

Apple Silicon caught Parallels and VMware by surprise, so they first came up with an experimental Apple Silicon version. Then, they fleshed it out and released a version with better performance.

I think that's what you are talking about.

I find it hard to believe a company that has been engineering VM software for Apple computers was caught by surprise...Apple Silicon was not exactly a state secret.

 

[AgentMcGeek]

They set the field years ago by deprecating 32 bit apps and OpenGL/CL.

 

[Jára Tyky]

I find it hard to believe a company that has been engineering VM software for Apple computers was caught by surprise...Apple Silicon was not exactly a state secret.

Do u really think that Paralells is such a big company that Apple will inform them about innovations? ??‍♂️