Why Apple is breaking my heart.

[Huntn]

I'm a little bewildered at what you guys are fussing about. My 2007 circa MBP played The Witcher, Crysis, and WoW, acceptably. It fulfilled my gaming needs. Nope not the fastest (shrug). My 2011 MBP is playing SWTOR just fine and I assume it will handle any game released in the next couple of years. I'm thrilled with it and I'm thrilled that Windows is not my primary OS. Case closed.

 

[Mr.C]

I'm a little bewildered at what you guys are fussing about. My 2007 circa MBP played The Witcher, Crysis, and WoW, acceptably. It fulfilled my gaming needs. Nope not the fastest (shrug). My 2011 MBP is playing SWTOR just fine and I assume it will handle any game released in the next couple of years. I'm thrilled with it and I'm thrilled that Windows is not my primary OS. Case closed.

The thing is I don't want to buy another laptop. I have a MacBook Air which is light and thin as well as an iPad. I don't need a big heavy laptop which I have to take when I travel. I also don't want an iMac as I don't have room for or need a display. Plus the display is built in so I can't sell it and when I decide to upgrade I have to upgrade the whole thing. I have a Mac Mini but it only has 256 MB of VRAM.

What I want is a standard desktop that I can use with a display of my choosing and has a standard desk top level GPU and not comprising of laptop components including the GPU. Unfortunately Apple doesn't cater for people like me. I was planning on installing Windows 7 under Bootcamp on my Mini but having realised that 256 MB of VRAM may not be enough now and very likely not in the long term. I may have to upgrade my 3 year old Windows XP desktop which I haven't turned on since Nov 2009 or build a brand new PC neither of which I'm keen on doing.

 

[gregorsamsa]

I'm a little bewildered at what you guys are fussing about. My 2007 circa MBP played The Witcher, Crysis, and WoW, acceptably. It fulfilled my gaming needs. Nope not the fastest (shrug). My 2011 MBP is playing SWTOR just fine and I assume it will handle any game released in the next couple of years. I'm thrilled with it and I'm thrilled that Windows is not my primary OS. Case closed.

That's great & obviously the best solution for some! However, the gist here seems to be that for some non-casual gamers, rather than buy an expensive, high-end Mac for both serious work & more demanding gaming, if you can get your serious work done on a lower-specced Mac, maybe far better to get that, then buy (or build) a gaming PC. With PCs being upgradable & then also needing to use your Mac's hardware much less (note, I'm talking about non-casual gamers), it probably works out cheaper in the long run

I tend to agree with that view, be it based on my personal experience. My iMac's logic board fried after 2 years 10 months (not guaranteed as I expected an expensive desktop to last longer). Yes, my fault for not buying the guarantee.

That I was doing a lot of gaming on my iMac is probably besides the point, & maybe I was just unlucky with it going when it did, but I'd never make that mistake again. I now accept that for most of my serious needs a lower-end Mac is fine (I prefer OS X to W7), but PCs are better for gaming.

 

[Huntn]

That's great & obviously the best solution for some! However, the gist here seems to be that for some non-casual gamers, rather than buy an expensive, high-end Mac for both serious work & more demanding gaming, if you can get your serious work done on a lower-specced Mac, maybe far better to get that, then buy (or build) a gaming PC. With PCs being upgradable & then also needing to use your Mac's hardware much less (note, I'm talking about non-casual gamers), it probably works out cheaper in the long run

I tend to agree with that view, be it based on my personal experience. My iMac's logic board fried after 2 years 10 months (not guaranteed as I expected an expensive desktop to last longer). Yes, my fault for not buying the guarantee.

That I was doing a lot of gaming on my iMac is probably besides the point, & maybe I was just unlucky with it going when it did, but I'd never make that mistake again. I now accept that for most of my serious needs a lower-end Mac is fine (I prefer OS X to W7), but PCs are better for gaming.

I would never advocate buying a high end Mac *just* for gaming unless money is no object. Before Bootcamp, I had a gaming PC desktop. I was not going to miss out. But when I traveled (a lot), I missed out. As I've said before now I've got one laptop that meets all my needs.

 

[Killery96]

Their stupidity and ignorance? WTF are you going on about? What does reliability have to do with mobile versus desktop GPUs?

Your friend has a 450m. M as in MOBILE. Try running a real game on the thing in high resolution with the detail settings way up and watch it crumble. Take a real desktop with a high-end desktop GPU with something like SLI and it'll be 4x-8x faster frame rates. Instead of getting 15fps, you'll get 120fps. Two years later and Apple's new mobile GPU (which you will have to trade in your entire computer to get) will then be getting 25-30fps on the same game, while the previous desktop is still getting 120fps and newer cards are doing 240fps. But two years later newer games will be out with even steeper requirements, putting even the newest mobile GPU into obsolete territory once again.

The bottom line is if you enjoy playing two year old games or newer games at very low detail/resolution settings, you won't mind a Mac for gaming. If you are using a PC with a mobile card, you aren't much better off than the Mac (but most games will still run faster since OSX games are usually very un-optimized as are their drivers).

One game example doesn't constitute the scope of gaming you will find out there. There are plenty of cutting edge (and yes sometimes poorly programmed) games that are barely smooth even on the best hardware. Those games will be completely unplayable on mobile hardware.

Hey, I love my MBP, but it's no gaming rig. Being able to play some games is not the same thing.

I can play all games. Most of the new, poorly coded ones like Metro 2033, and the new and flashy ones like Crysis 2 demand low graphics. If I said something about reliability or something, I wasn't making any sense, you're right. I try to look at computers, however, in a light that doesn't demand clock speed and FPS. I'm saying that Macs have no problems gaming (and the GTS 450m handles starcraft 2 at ultra 1600x900, with rare hiccups for a laptop). The Mac Gamers forum was not started by people who bought macs for gaming. So people who come here to insult apple computers for their less-than-gamingextremeheavydutyhardcoretothemax-hardware, are slightly missing the point here. This computer has the convenience of working, almost undyingly. I agree with you from experience that Windows 7 is better for gaming. It seems to be THE TRUTH. Ultimately what I'm trying to convey here is that it's annoying when people say that Apple is Breaking Their Heart when they don't go out of their way to make a computer with hardware to satisfy plenty of people (they use great processors, beautiful screens, a pretty good webcam, a nice keyboard, and plenty of nice touches to the OS. So in addition to having a good computer, which most apple consumers WANT, rather than PC gamers who want a good GRAPHICS CARD and FPS that would dazzle a hummingbird, the potential to boot into W7 as well as play pretty much any (even modern era like Metro 2033 and Crysis 2) video games, despite their graphics settings, is a fine deal. It has long been clarified that Apple computers aren't geared towards the 'gaming audience', as that audience tends not only to 'shut up and play games and glaze their eyes', but also brag about games and FPS, and pretend they know something about how modern technology functions.

----------

Get a secondhand Mac Pro or a gaming PC, both will be about the same price. Any old PC graphics card should work in the Mac Pro in Boot Camp.

GLHF finding drivers? I dunno. But I agree, installing a GTX 285 in a Mac Pro would make it workable for most modern day video games...

 

[JackAxe]

Allow me to clarify. I have no headaches when running MacOS. I can't say that with Windows, even Windows7. I came off a trip today to my home network and had to futz with Windows to get it online. It irritates the hell out of me.

It hates you. I honestly can't relate. Maybe because I keep my PC hard wired?

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

I can play all games.

Some of us are simply saying we prefer NOT to play games at low detail and low resolution settings just to get them to not jerk all over the place. Macs aren't the best option for that sort of thing. But there is no rule that says it has to be that way. That is what is breaking some people's hearts. There is no technical reason why a Mac couldn't be designed to handle a high-end desktop card and/or things like SLI or get more/better driver updates.

Apple is no longer a 3rd rate azz-backwards company so that sort of excuse is wearing pretty darn thin for some of us (it's the one we got a decade ago when Apple was just this poor little company that almost went out of business and can't afford to do everything well, so gaming had to suffer).

Some of us realize that's just a crock in 2011 and there is no reason what-so-ever why Apple couldn't put out a gaming oriented rig. IT doesn't have to be traditional. It could be a snazzy spaceship case or something equally ridiculous looking, so long as it has a removable slot for the GPU and adequate cooling. That's not really asking all that much. Apple could easily make an iMac where the the removable GPU is the in base of the unit with its own cooling while the rest of the Mac is in the back of the monitor as usual. This would solve all issues in this regard and still look like an iMac. I mean who says the monitor stand part of the computer has to be tiny and thin? I'd prefer something sturdier and harder to knock over, personally.

Thunderfart means you might soon be able to add this kind of functionality to newer Macs soon anyway. I'd love to have a quad Mac-Mini with an external GPU that could handle big time gaming and still maintain a small profile or a MBP that turns into a gaming rig when I dock it at home.

 

[ActionableMango]

Maybe someone can give me some perspective here.

Combining the requirement for a high-end Windows gaming environment into the Mac lineup just does not work from a financial standpoint, unless you happen to have a Mac Pro for other reasons.

Keep the MBA. Build a gaming PC for $700. Get a non-Apple monitor to share between the two.

Now you can do Windows gaming, OS X for everything else, and all for less than the cost of your proposed iMac/MP solutions. As a bonus, in the future, it will be simple to upgrade your gaming PC by dropping a new GPU into it every couple of years.

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

It's not like heat, space or battery life is a problem with the mini. They could have given the option of serious graphics option like in the iMac surely.

Heat and space are a huge issue on a computer as small as the Mini. The only reason Apple had the space for the discrete GPU on the Mini is because they removed the optical drive.

The price is ever increasing.

I think you mean ever-decreasing. Look at the cost of the first iMac vs the current iMac, and take into account what you get with it, and take into account inflation. The current iMac is a much better deal than the first iMac was. The further back in time you go, the more expensive Macs get. Right now Macs are cheaper than they've ever been.

 

[lewdvig]

I just traded my MBP 15" 6750 for an 11" i5 and a gaming notebook.

Gaming on the Mac = too many compromises. If I am going to use BC I might as well get a burly PC and an Air or iPad. I want to game in OS X but games like Rage get cancelled and many of the ports are terrible. Thank goodness for Feral.

The flood of good games on the Mac that I was hoping for last year never came.

That said, I am looking forward to completing some indie games on the MBA like Braid, Trine and Torchlight. Hopefully a Mac version of Rock of Ages is released some day.

 

[ActionableMango]

The further back in time you go, the more expensive Macs get. Right now Macs are cheaper than they've ever been.

Your blanket statement is only correct if you cherry-pick models. Here are some examples to the contrary:

Power/Pro
First PowerMac G4 (1999) $1600
First PowerMac G5 (2003) $2000
First Mac Pro (2006) $2200
Current Mac Pro (2011) $2500

Power/Pro inflation adjusted:
First PowerMac G4 (1999) $2073
First PowerMac G5 (2003) $2364
First Mac Pro (2006) $2375
Current Mac Pro (2011) $2500

Mini:
2005 Mac Mini $500
2011 Mac Mini $600

Mini inflation adjusted:
2005 Mac Mini $578
2011 Mac Mini $600

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

Your blanket statement is only correct if you cherry-pick models.

You make a good point, but you also cherry-picked models to make your point.

It's a general trend I'm referring to, it was never intended to be an absolute statement of all Macs. I am fully aware that it does not apply equally to all Macs.

 

[AAPLaday]

If we could get the graphics card from the top end 27", remove the dvd drive to allow cooling, and put it in the 21" (even as a BTO option) then this would go a long way to satisfying my needs. I refuse to be forced to buy a 27" as its far too big. Plus i dont see the point in having a huge screen and then be forced to turn down the resolution in games.

 

[Mr.C]

I think it's come to the point for me where I'm either going to upgrade my existing 3 year old PC or buy a brand new one. However it's probably going to have to wait until next year as I've already spent a lot of money this year including buying the new Mini. I may just go and install Windows under Bootcamp in the mean time so I can play SWTOR And PC only games in the mean time. Obviously not all new games will run as some require and will require a minimum of 512 MB of VRAM.

 

[iCole]

Ffs, buy an xbox.

 

[AAPLaday]

I think it's come to the point for me where I'm either going to upgrade my existing 3 year old PC or buy a brand new one. However it's probably going to have to wait until next year as I've already spent a lot of money this year including buying the new Mini. I may just go and install Windows under Bootcamp in the mean time so I can play SWTOR And PC only games in the mean time. Obviously not all new games will run as some require and will require a minimum of 512 MB of VRAM.

Been looking at this deal. It runs out today but it seems to be great for the price. It would tear through most things with ease. I would probably end up putting a 6970 in it though.

http://www.cyberpowersystem.co.uk/system/weekly_sales_III/

 

[0098386]

If we could get the graphics card from the top end 27", remove the dvd drive to allow cooling, and put it in the 21" (even as a BTO option) then this would go a long way to satisfying my needs. I refuse to be forced to buy a 27" as its far too big. Plus i dont see the point in having a huge screen and then be forced to turn down the resolution in games.

As an owner of the top-end 27" iMac, you don't have to turn the resolution down. The only game I have that is playing at anything less than native res was Crysis.

Team Fortress 2, Street Fighter 4 AE, Crysis 2, Deus Ex HR, Duke Nukem Forever, Portal 2, Just Cause 2... All native res with their settings on high-max (sometimes I take the AA off though to get 60fps).

It's a very powerful machine.

 

[AAPLaday]

As an owner of the top-end 27" iMac, you don't have to turn the resolution down. The only game I have that is playing at anything less than native res was Crysis.

Team Fortress 2, Street Fighter 4 AE, Crysis 2, Deus Ex HR, Duke Nukem Forever, Portal 2, Just Cause 2... All native res with their settings on high-max (sometimes I take the AA off though to get 60fps).

It's a very powerful machine.

Sounds beter than i thought then. But id still have to pass. I dont have the room for a 27" monitor and for the price of the top iMac i can get a refurb Air and a very good Gaming PC.

 

[Mr.C]

Been looking at this deal. It runs out today but it seems to be great for the price. It would tear through most things with ease. I would probably end up putting a 6970 in it though.

http://www.cyberpowersystem.co.uk/system/weekly_sales_III/

In all honesty all those options are mind boggling to me. Whilst I'm not a novice when it comes to PC components I'm not an expert either. I also don't want to pay silly money for a PC gaming rig as it's not my main source of gaming. I tend to spend more time on the consoles. I would like a gaming PC that will play all of the current and upcoming games at the highest or close to highest settings and last for at least a couple of years.

My current PC which I've not actually turned on since November2009 is 3 years old. I don't remember the actual components but it has an AMD motherboard and CPU, I believe 2 GB of RAM and an Nvidia graphics card with 256 MB of VRAM. It also has a 320 GB 7200 RPM hard drive, 2 dual layer DVD re-writable drives and a Sound Blaster X-Fi sound card. I could upgrade the motherboard, CPU, RAM and graphics card and keep everything else. The components should all still be good. I've also got an OEM version of Windows 7 that I am planning to install on my Mini using Bootcamp.

I'm not sure if upgrading my current PC is going to be significantly cheaper the just buying a brand new setup. I guess I have to determine my budget and go from there. I'm a bit out of the loop when it comes to PC components though. I think I should get 8 GB of RAM, a 2 GB graphics card and an Intel quad core i7 CPU. I probably need to do some research.

 

[AAPLaday]

An Intel i5 2500k processor will be fine for gaming, no need to go for the i7.

 

[gregorsamsa]

An Intel i5 2500k processor will be fine for gaming, no need to go for the i7.

IMO, so will 4GB RAM & any fairly recent high-end graphics card with 1GB VRAM (rather than 8GB RAM & 2GB VRAM respectively).

Some of the best value graphics cards are probably those that were cutting-edge (or close to it) last year, but have since reduced in price as they've been superseded by more powerful cards this year.

 

[Mr.C]

An Intel i5 2500k processor will be fine for gaming, no need to go for the i7.

IMO, so will 4GB RAM & any fairly recent high-end graphics card with 1GB VRAM (rather than 8GB RAM & 2GB VRAM respectively).

Some of the best value graphics cards are probably those that were cutting-edge (or close to it) last year, but have since reduced in price as they've been superseded by more powerful cards this year.

I hear what you guys are saying and those are specifications I have considered. I guess my main concern is making the system specifications last as long as possible before having to upgrade again. I suspect my choices are influenced by all the PC games running on top specification gaming rigs at Gamescom. I played quite a few of them and they looked and played awesome.

Whilst I don't want to go overboard with the components especially things like water cooled systems, high end power supplies and multiple high powered fans I would like the core components to be fairly high spec so there is no issue with running games at their highest level for at least a couple of years.

 

[SlickShoes]

I hear what you guys are saying and those are specifications I have considered. I guess my main concern is making the system specifications last as long as possible before having to upgrade again. I suspect my choices are influenced by all the PC games running on top specification gaming rigs at Gamescom. I played quite a few of them and they looked and played awesome.

Whilst I don't want to go overboard with the components especially things like water cooled systems, high end power supplies and multiple high powered fans I would like the core components to be fairly high spec so there is no issue with running games at their highest level for at least a couple of years.

I think your best bet is to let us know what your budget is for a PC and im sure people will help you out. I haven't bought a PC for about 8 years now but i still go on component websites all the time and build the best one i can for a set budget. That sounds pretty sad haha but yeah if you want to let us know what you are willing to spend im sure myself and others can help you out.

 

[miles01110]

The sob story in the OP is a non-starter. If you want to run high-end games on a budget, you will not be on a Mac. Period.

 

[0098386]

An Intel i5 2500k processor will be fine for gaming, no need to go for the i7.

Yeah. I've never seen any difference in games on my i7 desktop PC or my i5 iMac (PC is using a 6950 updated to 6970). I imagine i7's shine in more demanding situations like video editing and developing.