The real power of the mac pro will shine shortly

[bbplayer5]

With games like Unreal Tourny 2007 coming out, and the new ATI video cards in the near future, the mac pro is going to become an insane system.

Why? Simple... Games coming out in the very near future are multithreaded. Unreal2007 is going to run incredibly in bootcamp on an 8core mac pro with an ati video card. Currently any resolution around 1920x1200 on up is 99% video card. The unreal engine uses multi threading, and is bringing back the importance of the CPU in gaming. The more I think about it, the more I cant wait for my mac pro!!

 

[PCtoMac-change]

Don't think it's going to be able to take advantage of 8 cores...Quad, yes it will, but PC gamers(the main market) don't even have them yet.

 

[CanadaRAM]

The real power of the mac pro will shine shortly

Darn it.. I was hoping it would shine for a good long time. Oh well...

 

[Azurael]

The Mac Pro may have a lot of CPU horsepower but consider the fact that most games targeted at desktop computers will be single-threaded at the moment or at best heavily optimised for dual-CPU/core machines. Writing applications that effectively utilise large numbers of CPUs is hard work and not worth the effort for developers of games targetting systems that at the moment are unlikely to have two CPUs, let alone more. Also consider the fact that the top GPU option for the Mac Pro is now a generation old and no support very near future for G80/R600 options graphics wise. Add to that the very high latency, slow-clocked (compared to PC2-800 and PC2-1066 DIMMs commonplace in high-end PCs) FB-DIMMs and the fact that OS X's OpenGL layer and graphics drivers are currently slower than Windows' (though obviously Boot Camp comes in handy here) and you'll see what I mean.

Sure, UT2007 will be fast at high resolutions with all the settings turned up on the Pro, but don't expect it not to be severely beaten in benchmarks by Windows machines costing half as much. It's no slant against the Mac Pro. It's just that it's a workstation, not a gaming PC. The Mac Pro already shines in the apps it was designed for, like Audio, Graphics and Video production apps and high-intensity scientific computing. In those markets, it offers a much better price/performance ratio than most of its competitors, but if you want to play games, you'd be best off to build a PC or buy a console, or at least wait for a better MXM graphics card for the 24" iMac

 

[Grenadier]

The Mac Pro may have a lot of CPU horsepower but consider the fact that most games targeted at desktop computers will be single-threaded at the moment or at best heavily optimised for dual-CPU/core machines. Writing applications that effectively utilise large numbers of CPUs is hard work and not worth the effort for developers of games targetting systems that at the moment are unlikely to have two CPUs, let alone more. Also consider the fact that the top GPU option for the Mac Pro is now a generation old and no support very near future for G80/R600 options graphics wise. Add to that the very high latency, slow-clocked (compared to PC2-800 and PC2-1066 DIMMs commonplace in high-end PCs) FB-DIMMs and the fact that OS X's OpenGL layer and graphics drivers are currently slower than Windows' (though obviously Boot Camp comes in handy here) and you'll see what I mean.

Sure, UT2007 will be fast at high resolutions with all the settings turned up on the Pro, but don't expect it not to be severely beaten in benchmarks by Windows machines costing half as much. It's no slant against the Mac Pro. It's just that it's a workstation, not a gaming PC. The Mac Pro already shines in the apps it was designed for, like Audio, Graphics and Video production apps and high-intensity scientific computing. In those markets, it offers a much better price/performance ratio than most of its competitors, but if you want to play games, you'd be best off to build a PC or buy a console, or at least wait for a better MXM graphics card for the 24" iMac

I would actually severely debate quite a few of your points.

a.Multi-threading-
More and more games are actually starting to incorparate multithreading. Hell, upcoming game Alan Wake will have support for quad core.
I would expect to in the next 9 months see a steady rise in the amount of games taking advantage of more than 2 Cores.

b.GPUs-
Actually, on the contrary, we are talking about Apples top of the line machine - we can expect GPU updates on a reasonable basis.
Infact, Im pretty much expecting a GPU update to the Mac Pro tomorrow.
I am almost certain we will see a new (High end) GPU by (LATEST) WWDC - we dont want CS3 not being taken advantage full of, do we

You must also remember that you do not have to wait for Apple to unveil a 8800GTS/GTX or R600 - since almost all of us are gaming under Bootcamp, you have the option of buying any GPU you wish, and just putting it in when you wish to play under Windows
I know its not convenient, but it Apple wont offer it, one has to improvize.


c.RAM-
I agree that the FB-DIMMs are not ideal for gaming, but you know what ? It could be much worse. 667MHz isnt the end of the world, and lets be honest, the difference between 667MHz and 800MHz is usually negligable, only under the rarest circumanstances providing a boost of over 15FPS.



I hear many people slating the Mac Pro that it isnt a gaming machine, its for work, and etc.
The fact is, the Mac Pro is actually both.
It is the ultimate machine for working on, but I sure as hell tell you, its no damn slacker when it comes to games.
Kit yourself with a 2.66GHz, 4GB of RAM, a X1900 (Or anything else Apple will offer other than the Quadro or 7300) and you shall be kicking some backsides !
Sure, it will come out more expensive than a PC equivilant, but I for one, dont care. OSX for work, XP for the games (Or Vista for DX10) !



Like the original post stated, UT3 will harness the true potential of the MP.

 

[spyderracer393]

I would actually severely debate quite a few of your points.

a.Multi-threading-
More and more games are actually starting to incorparate multithreading. Hell, upcoming game Alan Wake will have support for quad core.
I would expect to in the next 9 months see a steady rise in the amount of games taking advantage of more than 2 Cores.

b.GPUs-
Actually, on the contrary, we are talking about Apples top of the line machine - we can expect GPU updates on a reasonable basis.
Infact, Im pretty much expecting a GPU update to the Mac Pro tomorrow.
I am almost certain we will see a new (High end) GPU by (LATEST) WWDC - we dont want CS3 not being taken advantage full of, do we

You must also remember that you do not have to wait for Apple to unveil a 8800GTS/GTX or R600 - since almost all of us are gaming under Bootcamp, you have the option of buying any GPU you wish, and just putting it in when you wish to play under Windows
I know its not convenient, but it Apple wont offer it, one has to improvize.


c.RAM-
I agree that the FB-DIMMs are not ideal for gaming, but you know what ? It could be much worse. 667MHz isnt the end of the world, and lets be honest, the difference between 667MHz and 800MHz is usually negligable, only under the rarest circumanstances providing a boost of over 15FPS.



I hear many people slating the Mac Pro that it isnt a gaming machine, its for work, and etc.
The fact is, the Mac Pro is actually both.
It is the ultimate machine for working on, but I sure as hell tell you, its no damn slacker when it comes to games.
Kit yourself with a 2.66GHz, 4GB of RAM, a X1900 (Or anything else Apple will offer other than the Quadro or 7300) and you shall be kicking some backsides !
Sure, it will come out more expensive than a PC equivilant, but I for one, dont care. OSX for work, XP for the games (Or Vista for DX10) !



Like the original post stated, UT3 will harness the true potential of the MP.

I'm not a gamer in the least...but I can tell that when you said, "we dont want CS3 not being taken advantage full of, do we ," you were completely off, CS3, CS2, CS, and any other Photoshop version doesn't at all rely on the graphics card - it relys on the CPU.

On another note, I don't know if you were serious when you said you expect Apple to announce a new graphics card for the TOTL (top of the line) Mac Pro tomorrow, but Apple (and most companies) don't generally release products on a Sunday.

 

[Azurael]

I don't doubt R600 will reach the Mac Pro; after all, it was an OEM card made for Apple of which photos were originally leaked. They're probably tweaking the drivers at Apple Campus right now, and I imagine the new G80-based Quadro line will probably reach the Pro too, it's just a question of when... Add to that the fact that as much as developers can play with settings which take full advantage of high end hardware, it's always going to be a toy until that kind of hardware power becomes mainstream. Games still have to be able to run on single-core systems with mind-range DX9 GPUs because that's what most customers have right now.

And while what you say about multi-core/cpu support in upcoming games is certainly true, remember that there's a big difference between just multithreading (i.e. handing off menial tasks like sound processing as second threads) and properly harnessing the power of multi-core systems and being aware of their foibles (limited L2 cache space per CPU in the case of the lower end 2MB Core 2s, slow bus access with increased cores per CPU, lack of automatic cache coherency between all or some of the cores with non-shared cache designs in systems with separate CPUs, or like AMD's X2s and quad core Intel chips.)

Even the console studios with massive development budgets and a very specific hardware design to code for are having trouble effectively utilising the potential CPU power of platforms like the PS3 and 360 right now. Considering the fact that Windows/Mac game developers/porting studios typically have much tighter deadlines and significantly lower budgets than their console brethren (with the possible exception of big name games/franchises like DOOM) and you've got a recipe for disappointment with hardware like the Mac Pro...

My SLI 7800GTX desktop PC with 2GB of PC2-6400 an E4300 overclocked to 3GHz cost about a quarter of what the cheapest Mac Pro configuration does, but I don't doubt that it would leave it in the dust in most modern games under Windows still. Don't mistake me though; the Mac is clearly a better machine for most tasks and I'd rather have it any day if I could afford it

 

[dartzorichalcos]

If this is the power of PowerMac G5, then I don't know what to say about the Mac Pro.

 

[Nugget]

On another note, I don't know if you were serious when you said you expect Apple to announce a new graphics card for the TOTL (top of the line) Mac Pro tomorrow, but Apple (and most companies) don't generally release products on a Sunday.

I'm not convinced it will include new graphics cards, but Apple is certainly announcing something tomorrow.

 

[spyderracer393]

I'm not convinced it will include new graphics cards, but Apple is certainly announcing something tomorrow.

Oh man, I completely forgot NAB was tomorrow! Sorry for being a smartass although I do doubt there will be a new graphics card - I imagine updated MBPs though

 

[Azurael]

Santa Rosa MBP + Quadro FX 5600 (G80) BTO for Mac Pro maybe?

 

[Kosh66]

The Mac Pro may have a lot of CPU horsepower but consider the fact that most games targeted at desktop computers will be single-threaded at the moment or at best heavily optimised for dual-CPU/core machines. Writing applications that effectively utilise large numbers of CPUs is hard work and not worth the effort for developers of games targetting systems that at the moment are unlikely to have two CPUs, let alone more.

Since you're probably not a gamer I'll forgive you for not knowing, but the Unreal 3 engine (the heart of Unreal Tournament 3), which has existed for at least a year now, is multithreaded and will take advantage of multi-cores and multi-processors, although it's probably unlikely to take full advantage of 8 cores. http://www.insidemacgames.com/news/story.php?ID=11005 It is also a heavily licensed gaming engine.

As well, alot of Mac games like Doom III have ventured into being SMP aware.

 

[Grenadier]

Oh man, I completely forgot NAB was tomorrow! Sorry for being a smartass although I do doubt there will be a new graphics card - I imagine updated MBPs though

I don't doubt R600 will reach the Mac Pro; after all, it was an OEM card made for Apple of which photos were originally leaked. They're probably tweaking the drivers at Apple Campus right now, and I imagine the new G80-based Quadro line will probably reach the Pro too, it's just a question of when... Add to that the fact that as much as developers can play with settings which take full advantage of high end hardware, it's always going to be a toy until that kind of hardware power becomes mainstream. Games still have to be able to run on single-core systems with mind-range DX9 GPUs because that's what most customers have right now.

That is true, but one must remember - overkill isnt a bad thing
With games like Oblivion, which came out some time ago, and still even the most juicy PCs struggle to cope with at high resolutions, im sure the Mac Pro power will not go to waste.

Even the console studios with massive development budgets and a very specific hardware design to code for are having trouble effectively utilising the potential CPU power of platforms like the PS3 and 360 right now. Considering the fact that Windows/Mac game developers/porting studios typically have much tighter deadlines and significantly lower budgets than their console brethren (with the possible exception of big name games/franchises like DOOM) and you've got a recipe for disappointment with hardware like the Mac Pro...

I shall not disagree, but more and more games are coming out which demand a lot of power. Also, new franchaises are being formed.
A small example is Company of Heroes, Alan Wake and Bioshock-
all of these games, while not sequels, are going to/already demand a lot of bleeding from your machine (To run at high settings).

My SLI 7800GTX desktop PC with 2GB of PC2-6400 an E4300 overclocked to 3GHz cost about a quarter of what the cheapest Mac Pro configuration does, but I don't doubt that it would leave it in the dust in most modern games under Windows still. Don't mistake me though; the Mac is clearly a better machine for most tasks and I'd rather have it any day if I could afford it

And ofcourse that is the largest problem with the iMac - its pretty useless for gaming, unless you want to play the latest games on low quality with 30FPS after 9 months - a measly 7600GT is not exactly top of the line anymore.


The MP is meant to be a professional workstation, but because Apple wont make it any less than impossible to change the GPU and CPU in the iMac, it means it becomes rubbish (In the gaming department) rather rapidly, so gamers are forced to retreat to the heavily priced Mac Pro, simply because they need to be able to have a decent GPU inside.

I pray the day comes when the iMac has a PCI-E x16 slot.

 

[Lord Flashheart]

And ofcourse that is the largest problem with the iMac - its pretty useless for gaming, unless you want to play the latest games on low quality with 30FPS after 9 months - a measly 7600GT is not exactly top of the line anymore.


The MP is meant to be a professional workstation, but because Apple wont make it any less than impossible to change the GPU and CPU in the iMac, it means it becomes rubbish (In the gaming department) rather rapidly, so gamers are forced to retreat to the heavily priced Mac Pro, simply because they need to be able to have a decent GPU inside.

I pray the day comes when the iMac has a PCI-E x16 slot.

I agree, that is the problem with Macs right now. I will be getting a Mac Pro at some point. I am waiting for a GPU upgrade. I do not want yo own 2 machines, 1 for gaming and 1 for everything else.

 

[Mr. MacBook]

Yeah... but Mac Pro is kinda overkill, dontcha think?

I bet unreal tournament 2007 will get smooth framerates on MacBook Pro or iMacs, i dont see the difference in 100 FPS and 40FPS tbh, if its playable, its playable. I dont have to know my opponents are finisished before they do, quoted from intel's core2extreme.

 

[Grenadier]

Yeah... but Mac Pro is kinda overkill, dontcha think?

I bet unreal tournament 2007 will get smooth framerates on MacBook Pro or iMacs, i dont see the difference in 100 FPS and 40FPS tbh, if its playable, its playable. I dont have to know my opponents are finisished before they do, quoted from intel's core2extreme.

Hehehehehehe

Im the same - 100FPS and 40FPS looks very similar to me.
I agree that the MP is overkill, but what else can one do ?
You just have to embrace the price, and embrace the overkill :-/

I agree, that is the problem with Macs right now. I will be getting a Mac Pro at some point. I am waiting for a GPU upgrade. I do not want yo own 2 machines, 1 for gaming and 1 for everything else.

Same with me - I just dont have the space for two machines. And besides, even if I did, I dont want the clutter of two machines.

 

[bbplayer5]

what makes me happy is that im paying for a mac pro, yes.. but with this video card it really becomes a powerhouse. Ram speeds dont mean jack when running 1920x1200, ive tested it. At that res, its ALL video card.

OSX is priceless, and im willing to pay for a mac just to use it. Its the best OS ever created imo.

I might be a little bias though since im an apple technician.