PDA

View Full Version : Is a 1.6GHZ G5 processor good for games?


dlisle20
Jan 15, 2005, 08:57 AM
Im thinking of getting a 1.6GHZ G5 eMac when it comes out, and I really just want it to play games on it because my powerbook is not too good at it. Would it be better to get that or a 3.2GHZ AMD Athalon? cheers :)

1GHZ PowerBook g4 17" 512RAM

northen
Jan 15, 2005, 08:59 AM
If you want to play the majority out of games out there, buy the Athlon 3200+ (note, it's not 3.2 GHz, rather 2.something)

The primary purpose of Mac's aren't gaming, anyhow. You will also find that games depend a lot on the graphics card, especially nowadays with fragment programs (pixel/vertex shaders), where many graphics processing functions are being done by ALU's on the graphics card itself instead on the processor.

dlisle20
Jan 15, 2005, 09:03 AM
But 1.6GHZ is still pretty fast though ain't it?

grapes911
Jan 15, 2005, 09:06 AM
But 1.6GHZ is still pretty fast though ain't it?

It would, but you could get a much better video card in a pc than in an emac. Plus there are many more games for the pc. Don't think I'm knocking mac gaming, but if you are purly looking for a gaming machine I recomend a pc.

dlisle20
Jan 15, 2005, 09:09 AM
It would, but you could get a much better video card in a pc than in an emac. Plus there are many more games for the pc. Don't think I'm knocking mac gaming, but if you are purly looking for a gaming machine I recomend a pc.


Ah, so video cards do make games run faster....

Littleodie914
Jan 15, 2005, 09:46 AM
Ah, so video cards do make games run faster....Ya, they're the major factor in determining how a game will run, usually. If you have any other questions, you prolly oughta get 'em in quick. After this little romp (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=105196), I can't imagine your account will be valid for much longer.