Poll: Would You Appeal an Gamer Mac based on nMP?

[jblagden]

You see, Soma for me is a game which barely tackles my hardware. Im talking about serious gaming with 144 hz displays, GSync or FreeSync in 2560x1440 or 3840x2160. Nothing a Mac could offer. OSX is not a good option for gaming at all.

Then why are you in a Mac forum?

 

[jblagden]

This is getting into xmac type territory. There has always been some desire for a headless consumer focused mac like the mac pro without using xeon cpus and ECC memory. Certainly games would benefit from this type of config but there aren't many good reasons for Apple to sell such a computer. Apple has never cared much about games, so why would they design a computer for people to boot in windows to play games. They are also competing against commodity components. PC gamers are already a subset of total gamers that includes consoles. Those that do game on the PC would be unlikely to buy an Apple machine for $2000 to $2500 when they could get it for $1000 to $1500.

Apple considers the iMac the computer to fill this niche. Unfortunately for gamers they are limited to GPUs with about 125 W of power compared to newer cards with 250-300 W and about twice as much performance.

That said, I would love to see the form factor that Apple could come up with a skylake based 4 core cpu and a fury type GPU. You could pack a lot of power in to a really compact design that could be cooled efficiently.

My biggest problem with the iMac is that the CPU and GPU can't be replaced or upgraded individually, which is bad economically and ecologically.

 

[jblagden]

I own a nMP L'13 I tested personally few nVidia GPU on an Pcie cage connected thru Thunderbolt to one of my nMP Tb2 ports I expected it to work just slower (tb2=pcie 2 on 4 lines, tb3 will only twice that (Pcie 2 / x8), still far away Pcie 3 / x4. The only thing I got was kernel panics, Thunderbolt doesn't support some of the Pcie gpu signal due incompatibility with tb2 intrinsic plug n play nature, I don't know if the issue could be solved afterwards (either on tb2 with improved drivers or on tb3 with improved signaling or both), there still an important bottleneck to overcome, is that tb2 delivers just 1/4 of the bandwidth as a single pcie2 x/16 slot, not to say that pcie3 is much faster an deeper integrated to the pch (platform chipset).

Whatever, not the first time the idea come and go, Sony was the first on one vaio Yo offer an external gpu on Thunderbolt (they didn't name it as tb, but use tb chipset), was successful only as nightly.

I guess you didn't edit the kext files or use automate-eGPU.sh

 

[Mago]

I guess you didn't edit the kext files or use automate-eGPU.sh

I didn't trick it, was just trying and was an very early attempt by curiosity since I got the cage for other purposes and didn't try again.

This maybe properly supported on the TB3 equipped Mac next to be released this year.

 

[jblagden]

There won't be a gaming Mac for a very simple reason: gaming hardware is a niche market, and, the Mac Pro aside, Apple doesn't do niche markets. If you add total 2014 profits from both Asus and MSI you get what apple made in 6 days, and that's assuming that 100% of their profits came from gaming hardware, which is, obviously, wrong. I'm pretty sure if you added together all of the gaming profits from every gaming hardware company, and included all the CPUs and GPUs bought by gamers, you'd get, maybe, a month of Apple's profits.

The old Apple almost died more than once because it was a niche company, and those of us who remember the bad days when Jobs was at NeXT know that Apple survived by the skin of its teeth and the dedication of its users. I don't think we will ever see Apple's management put it into such a position ever again. We may all have out problems with the way Apple is doing business now, but you can't argue with the financial health of the company.

That aside, gaming on the Mac also gives a real chicken or egg scenario. Let's say Apple introduces the gMac tomorrow: i7, 970/R290, good cooling and no thermal throttling. What would you play on it? Of all the games I play, only X-Plane is cross platform. There's no Project Cars, no Fallout 4, and no GTAV. Apple would need to convince the publishers there are enough gMacs out there for their ports to. But, for people to buy them, they'd need a large library of games, which takes us back to convincing the publishers to buy them, and on and on.

Oh, and the iMac is terrible bang for buck. It thermal throttles almost immediately.
[doublepost=1453581385][/doublepost]

No they won't: no one builds a gaming machine with workstation parts. The current sweet spot for 1080 gaming is an i5 and a 970/R290. For 1440 you just need a better GPU. 4K is still a bit of a stretch without going SLI 990s. You don't need to pay out for workstation parts, and I doubt you ever will. And you only need an i7 if you're running one of the few games which really benefits from HT.

Niche markets. That's what the nMP and the 12 inch MacBook are.

 

[jblagden]

Niche markets. That's what the nMP and the 12 inch MacBook are.

And in terms of games, there are actually a lot of good games on OS X. Just because you don't play them doesn't mean they don't exist.

 

[dpny]

Niche markets. That's what the nMP and the 12 inch MacBook are.

The nMP is definitely a niche market. The 12-inch MacBook is just Apple's low end laptop.

 

[merlinmage]

Then why are you in a Mac forum?

Because I use Macs for creative work?!

 

[jblagden]

I didn't trick it, was just trying and was an very early attempt by curiosity since I got the cage for other purposes and didn't try again.

This maybe properly supported on the TB3 equipped Mac next to be released this year.

Even if it isn't properly supported it'll be better than Thunderbolt 1 and 2 since it won't need as much compression.

 

[jblagden]

Because I use Macs for creative work?!

Then why are you complaining that OS X is terrible for gaming?

 

[Daisy81]

Good to see ya on this forum again 666 .

P.S. It is not about Mac platform itself, rather whole desktop PC market. It already started: http://www.anandtech.com/show/9877/...-motherboards-for-intel-xeon-e3-v5-processors
and will only grow. Workstation chips have higher price margins and thats how OEM's can mitigate declining desktop market as a whole and higher silicon wafer costs at the same time.

Those are the latest in extreme motherboards. They are not specifically xeon motherboards. They support eons. No one will use the Xeons o them though because they are not unlocked.

This is no different then the X99 boards being able to use Xeons.

This is in no way a indication that the mid range Z series boards are going anywhere.

 

[koyoot]

If you take analogy literally, problems appear.

Argue with that to death, I do not have to convince anyone to my words.

 

[Daisy81]

If you take analogy literally, problems appear.

Argue with that to death, I do not have to convince anyone to my words.

No sir you where being literal. You don't get to back track because you where proven to be talking about things in which you know nothing about.

You don't know anything about hardware. You did a quick search and found a gaming board for high end Core i7 processors support Xeons. News flash Xeons are never going to be a gaming processor but for several generations they have supported the same socket as Core i7 Extreme processors..

They are pointless in single socket systems. They have very little to offer compared to the price of a i7 Extreme in a single socket system. The point of the Xeon now as it always has been is for multi socket systems. If you want a Xeon system that is not the type of board to pick. You pick a board that focuses on stability, survivability, having two or more sockets and above all no over clocking.

 

[koyoot]

And how can I argue if someone knows better than me what I meant?

Like I have said, I do not have the need to prove anything to you, or anyone.

 

[Daisy81]

And how can I argue if someone knows better than me what I meant?

Like I have said, I do not have the need to prove anything to you, or anyone.

You where flat out saying gaming PCs will be workstations and you pointed at high end machines as proof claiming the mid range is going away. Quoted again below for effect. You make wild sweeping claims and are making yourself look uninformed.

Good to see ya on this forum again 666 .

P.S. It is not about Mac platform itself, rather whole desktop PC market. It already started: http://www.anandtech.com/show/9877/...-motherboards-for-intel-xeon-e3-v5-processors
and will only grow. Workstation chips have higher price margins and thats how OEM's can mitigate declining desktop market as a whole and higher silicon wafer costs at the same time.

 

[koyoot]

God help me...

Yes, that is what I meant. Workstation parts will be the only way to build current form of gaming PC. Why? Because for "Most" uses OEMS will go for NUC type, or, low power computers. With desktop/mobile parts. Kaby Lake already will bring 35W CPU with EDRAM, and we know how powerful is Iris Pro currently, in even 15W CPUs. If you will want higher performance - Workstation Parts, or external GPUs connected to whatever you have. For 1080p there will be no need for more power than iGPU. CannonLake GPU alongside 4, 6 and 8 core variants as mainstream is rumored to bring performance of GTX970 levels. 1440p. The problem is that most of CPUs with Iris Pro will be BGA only. Why? Because OEMs will be able to get revenue more. They can sell you entire ecosystem, not only parts. Start looking what is happening on market as a WHOLE, not bits and pieces.

Destop will die, in current form. Workstation Parts will be the ONLY way you will be able to make PC like it is in current form.

 

[h9826790]

If fact, some of my friends (in Taiwan) they already start to have their PC with Xeon, but normal gaming mobo, which means single CPU and non ECC RAM. I didn't ask them why, but that's what they have now.

 

[dpny]

If fact, some of my friends (in Taiwan) they already start to have their PC with Xeon, but normal gaming mobo, which means single CPU and non ECC RAM. I didn't ask them why, but that's what they have now.

The lower end Xeons are essentially i7s without integrated graphics. You can get 4 cores + HT and save a few bucks.

 

[Mago]

If fact, some of my friends (in Taiwan) they already start to have their PC with Xeon, but normal gaming mobo, which means single CPU and non ECC RAM. I didn't ask them why, but that's what they have now.

Before Skylake you can install Xeon almost on any mobo with compatible socket despite not having a xeon specific chipset or ECC ram, and actually those Xeon albeit not overclockable, are way cheaper than i7 and last longer at same IPS, this is due i7 have more demand which rises its price, this is no more since from skylake you need an xeon specific chipset to install a xeon cpu.

 

[RC Mike]

My biggest problem with the iMac is that the CPU and GPU can't be replaced or upgraded individually, which is bad economically and ecologically.

Ecologically? That's rich. When was the last time you sent a modern computer to a landfill? No one is foolish or isolated enough to do that. Computers get sold in the secondary markets or passed on to family members, repurposed in the home, etc.

The vast majority of computers sold never see upgrades. Upgrading is a niche market. People can say Apple feels this way or that way, or that it doesn't value this or that. Apple is a corporation driven by its bottom line. If there was money to be made in selling upgradeable computers, Apple would do it. The simple conclusion is that the R&D, marketing, sales channel, and support costs aren't offset enough by the amount of expected revenue from sales.

People turn these things into emotional arguments, when the truth is it comes down to money.

 

[Daisy81]

The lower end Xeons are essentially i7s without integrated graphics. You can get 4 cores + HT and save a few bucks.

This is what Core i7 Extreme processors are. The xeons cost more then the core i7 extreme processors and are typically slower. The only reason to get them is to go beyond 8 core. However why go beyond 8 cores on a board that only supports up to 64GB of RAM? Xeons are also locked. This means no overclocking so all of the overclocking features in the gaming boards go to waste using the Xeons instead of the Core i7 Extreme processors. The strength of the Xeon is you can have more then one. They are utterly wasted on single socket boards.
[doublepost=1454167353][/doublepost]

God help me...

Yes, that is what I meant. Workstation parts will be the only way to build current form of gaming PC. Why? Because for "Most" uses OEMS will go for NUC type, or, low power computers. With desktop/mobile parts. Kaby Lake already will bring 35W CPU with EDRAM, and we know how powerful is Iris Pro currently, in even 15W CPUs. If you will want higher performance - Workstation Parts, or external GPUs connected to whatever you have. For 1080p there will be no need for more power than iGPU. CannonLake GPU alongside 4, 6 and 8 core variants as mainstream is rumored to bring performance of GTX970 levels. 1440p. The problem is that most of CPUs with Iris Pro will be BGA only. Why? Because OEMs will be able to get revenue more. They can sell you entire ecosystem, not only parts. Start looking what is happening on market as a WHOLE, not bits and pieces.

Destop will die, in current form. Workstation Parts will be the ONLY way you will be able to make PC like it is in current form.

Again you don't know what you are talking about.

You point to a motherboard being used for building your own computer. You say because it supports xeons that gaming machines are going to be workstations. You make this wide assumption without looking at history. If you went back and looked you would see that this is simply the next generation high end gaming board that also happens to support Xeons of the same socket just like the previous generation and the generation before it.

This isn't new.

In terms of Xeons being workstations/gaming machines they date back a long time. Way back when there was a PC-DL dual Xeon overclocking gaming board back in the early 2000's for 533FSB Xeons. I had one of these machines and a work station using an iWill DP533 board. I can tell you first hand the ASUS board was fast but not a workstation. It was just not as stable or robust. The DP533 board was heavy duty, a real work horse. These machines didn't stop the 800MHz FSB P4 gaming machines from existing. Just at Z97 still exists along side X99.

 

[koyoot]

Do you understand what I am talking about, or do not? The only way to build CUSTOM built PC's will be workstation parts. Gaming motherboards - it was analogy.

You can argue about it to death, I am not interested to prove to you anything. But ask anyone who is working on silicon chips - they will tell you exactly what I am writing here.

I will ask you this: how common was that gaming motherboard was used to power Xeon CPU?

And how common will be in close future?

 

[Daisy81]

Do you understand what I am talking about, or do not? The only way to build CUSTOM built PC's will be workstation parts. Gaming motherboards - it was analogy.

You can argue about it to death, I am not interested to prove to you anything. But ask anyone who is working on silicon chips - they will tell you exactly what I am writing here.

I will ask you this: how common was that gaming motherboard was used to power Xeon CPU?

And how common will be in close future?

You did not make an analogy. You spoke from a point of authority with zero knowledge on the subject. Just admit it. You where wrong and don't know what you are talking about. Your claim is supposed to in some way make the nMP sound better then it is just like how you went on and on about how eGPU is the future of gaming.

I admit it sounds nice for implications of a ultra book being able to have better graphics when docked at the desk but it will never replace a gaming machine. The cheap PCs sold to consumers will always be cheap junk because it is a race to the bottom. Beyond that you don't know what you are talking about.

Those dual Xeon boards where not common.

The ASUS board was a enthusiest board. The iWill board was a straight up workstation board and cost $500 using processors that cost about $500 each.

They where for people back in the day that wanted multithreading in a day where processors where either single core or single core with hyper threading.

The point is there are different classes of machines. Workstation parts are never going to be gaming parts. Workstation parts focus on stability. Gaming parts favor speed over everything else. These are mutually exclusive.

 

[koyoot]

You did not make an analogy. You spoke from a point of authority with zero knowledge on the subject. Just admit it. You where wrong.

Nope I was not wrong, and I am not wrong. That is only your problem. Bye.

 

[Daisy81]

Nope I was not wrong, and I am not wrong. That is only your problem. Bye.

You are like talking to a brick wall. I'm going to add you to the ignore list. Anyone not wanting to be filled with incorrect information should disregard this guy.