Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Gaming - 21" vs 27" 2011 iMac

B

Blake1

macrumors member
Original poster
Feb 17, 2011
43
0
So I've waited for the new iMacs to come out so I can buy one, and they are now here. I always figured the 27" would be the best for gaming, but I have read that the larger screen size can bog down Frames per second because the resolution is much higher.

I am curious what the opinion between the two models are. Taking into account that they can have whatever upgrade for each. This may have an obvious answer, but I just wanted to check. Thanks.
 
alust2013

alust2013

macrumors 601
Feb 6, 2010
4,779
2
On the fence
If you want to game, the 27" 3.1 i5 (or with the i7 option) would be the best. The 6970m is a beast of a card, regardless of it being mobile, so I'd say that's your best bet. From what I have read, it will game pretty darn well, and even if it won't do at full res for some really intense games (I saw someone post Portal 2 at max settings, AA and res with 40-60 FPS), drop it to 1080p, and you won't have any issues at all.
 
Lord Appleseed

Lord Appleseed

macrumors 6502a
Nov 7, 2010
682
37
Apple Manor
alust2013 said:
If you want to game, the 27" 3.1 i5 (or with the i7 option) would be the best. The 6970m is a beast of a card, regardless of it being mobile, so I'd say that's your best bet. From what I have read, it will game pretty darn well, and even if it won't do at full res for some really intense games (I saw someone post Portal 2 at max settings, AA and res with 40-60 FPS), drop it to 1080p, and you won't have any issues at all.
Click to expand...

^This

Damn, as soon as I get mine i will make a video of Crysis 2 and later this Month of The Witcher 2, both with max. Resolution and playable graphic settings.
 
QCassidy352

QCassidy352

macrumors G5
Mar 20, 2003
12,028
6,036
Bay Area
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Since the high end 21.5 has the same card as the base 27, it's pretty easy to predict the former will have higher fps if they are both set to native res. But the graphics on the high end 27" are enough of an improvement that they should more than make up for the higher res.
 
Icaras

Icaras

macrumors 603
Mar 18, 2008
6,344
3,393
Thanks for this thread. I've been wondering the same.

If we stick with the high end 21.5" vs. base 27", it would be safe to assume, as xjosh mentions, that the 21.5" would outperform the 27", due to the differences of native resolutions between the two, correct?

I think this is important to note, since this is a $200 difference.
 
X

xjosh

macrumors regular
Jan 7, 2011
102
2
Denmark
Icaras said:
Thanks for this thread. I've been wondering the same.

If we stick with the high end 21.5" vs. base 27", it would be safe to assume, as xjosh mentions, that the 21.5" would outperform the 27", due to the differences of native resolutions between the two, correct?

I think this is important to note, since this is a $200 difference.
Click to expand...

Yes but the 27' screen is also nice for other things, but i'll like to see some bencmarks between them.

But what about looking for the base 21,5 iMac?

The 6770 anit so much better than the 6750.
 
QCassidy352

QCassidy352

macrumors G5
Mar 20, 2003
12,028
6,036
Bay Area
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Icaras said:
Thanks for this thread. I've been wondering the same.

If we stick with the high end 21.5" vs. base 27", it would be safe to assume, as xjosh mentions, that the 21.5" would outperform the 27", due to the differences of native resolutions between the two, correct?

I think this is important to note, since this is a $200 difference.
Click to expand...

Yes, though you could always set the 27" to the res of the 21.5", and then they'd be the same. I personally think that looks fine, but I know many disagree.
 
frocco

frocco

macrumors 6502
Jan 27, 2009
494
43
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

How does the 6970 compare to a Dell that has a 5770 card?
 
B

Blake1

macrumors member
Original poster
Feb 17, 2011
43
0
QCassidy352 said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)



Yes, though you could always set the 27" to the res of the 21.5", and then they'd be the same. I personally think that looks fine, but I know many disagree.
Click to expand...

I assume some would dissagree because it would be more "pixellated", right? Could you reduce the display size to match the 21.5" display? Does that make sense? May seem like an odd question but why not?
 
alust2013

alust2013

macrumors 601
Feb 6, 2010
4,779
2
On the fence
Blake1 said:
I assume some would dissagree because it would be more "pixellated", right? Could you reduce the display size to match the 21.5" display? Does that make sense? May seem like an odd question but why not?
Click to expand...

Ish. Games are a little different, as you set the res from within the game, and actually look decent at lower than native most of the time
 
D

dh2005

macrumors 6502a
Jan 25, 2010
907
0
Aww, come on, dude... those numbers are good. How much better can you do in this form factor?
 
Icaras

Icaras

macrumors 603
Mar 18, 2008
6,344
3,393
sinser said:
Personally I would never, ever play a game at non native resolution.
I suspect that a high end 21.5 would handle games better than the high end 27" version. Of course at native resolution.
Haven't found any proper benchmark only this rough test http://www.tested.com/news/the-gaming-capabilities-of-the-new-imacs-gpus/2267/. Doesn't look that great....
Click to expand...

Great find and great read! Thank you very much for posting that...

I've been leaning toward the high end 21.5" from the beginning, so looks like I'm sticking to my plan so far...
 
B

Blake1

macrumors member
Original poster
Feb 17, 2011
43
0
alust2013 said:
Ish. Games are a little different, as you set the res from within the game, and actually look decent at lower than native most of the time
Click to expand...

Makes sense. I was just wondering if there was a setting in the OS or third party software that would do that. Im sure most people wouldnt even bother with that so it wouldn't surprise me if there wasn't.

I have never played games on a 27" screen, so to me it seems almost to big, and if a 21.5" performs better than i would more inclined to get a 21.5. Unless I could reduce display size on the 27" and get great game performance, and use the plus size screen and other hardware upgrades for other task's such as photo and video editing.
 
B

Blake1

macrumors member
Original poster
Feb 17, 2011
43
0
sinser said:
Personally I would never, ever play a game at non native resolution.
I suspect that a high end 21.5 would handle games better than the high end 27" version. Of course at native resolution.
Haven't found any proper benchmark only this rough test http://www.tested.com/news/the-gaming-capabilities-of-the-new-imacs-gpus/2267/. Doesn't look that great....
Click to expand...

Very helpful link, thanks. I would be interested to see what the results were at the native resolution. Although, I have to imagine that even at the 1920x1080 resolution, games would still look pretty solid on a 27" screen. Its hard for me to really know, because I haven't ever seen it. 27" seems pretty large to me. But for someone who is use to console gaming, I might be really impressed with that resolution on that size of monitor.

Just curious, why wouldn't you ever play a game on the non native resolution of the monitor?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom