Future Rosetta + Future Intel Mac + current Mac Games?

Discussion in 'Games' started by shanmui1, Nov 20, 2005.

  1. shanmui1 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Location:
    Hongkong, China
    #1
    i know Rosetta emulates a G3 and I'm wondering about our current Mac games. Assuming we get very fast Intels, how might a PPC title like UT2004 play under that? I know a G3 can run that game. But I'm hoping Rosetta, as far as games go, will not be like Virtual PC.

    Any thoughts?
     
  2. hvfsl macrumors 68000

    hvfsl

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2001
    Location:
    London, UK
    #2
    I expect they will run better if you get a Windows game and play it using something like WineX.

    Rosetta is meant to be able to run programs at upto 70% to the of the speed they would run on an equiverlent PPC Mac. But this may varry depending on the game.
     
  3. kainjow Moderator emeritus

    kainjow

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2000
    #3
    I wouldn't use Rosetta to play games, or anything complex like that. It'll probably be pretty slow, although it would be much better then using Virtual PC. Virtual PC emulates everything all the time, Rosetta caches what it emulates so it doesn't have to emulate it again (i.e. drawing a red square in the game.. it'll store that x86 instruction so next time it draws a red square it does it natively and doesn't' have to convert from PPC to x86).
     
  4. N10248 macrumors 6502a

    N10248

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    Location:
    Essex, U.K.
    #4
    maybe a few games will use the same method as is being used on the xbox 360 - a recompiled for intel binary of the game executable released free for download which would still use the same cd or dvd, just a new .app file.

    bye
     
  5. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #5
    Yes, for all those dual Mac OS/Windows games it would probably be better to use one of these compatibility layers instead and run the Windows version.

    Heck even a Windows Virtual Machine would be running Windows a lot faster than any emulated PPC code.

    Can't really say Virtual PC would be VPC as we know it today, since it wouldn't be a fully emulated computer (creating a full PC in software) -- but just a virtual machine (running windows in a partition/window.)
     
  6. paddy macrumors 6502a

    paddy

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2005
    Location:
    TN
    #6
    does anyone know if most future PC games will work on macs using the new intel chips?
     
  7. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #7
    There's no REAL indication that a new MacTel will run Windows (as a run-time thingy) or Dual-Boot. REAL indication. Plenty of rumors.

    So I don't think anyone knows yet. Don't forget, a PC game requires more than just an x86 chip.
     
  8. GFLPraxis macrumors 604

    GFLPraxis

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    #8
    Apple has said they won't block a user from installing Windows.

    Several people with dev kits have installed Windows on them and dual booted them.

    And people have already gotten WINE running on Mac OS X, it just won't run x86 binaries, but it can run PowerPC recompiled Windows binaries.

    In fact...

    http://www.codeweavers.com/about/general/press/?id=20050622

    CodeWeavers announced that they will support CrossOver Office on Mac OS X.
     
  9. jxself macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    #9
    They would still need to be compiled specifcially for the Mac OS, although the change should be easier for developers to create versions for both Windows and the Mac.
     
  10. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #10
    Yeah.. but none of that is a REAL indication of what will happen on a MacTel. Just inuendo for the moment. Nothing more than speculation.

    I'd be thrilled if something like darWINE would allow me to run-time Windows apps. That would be a Very Good Thing™ for Apple, IMO (and my chosen profession). I'd greatly prefer that over an actual dual-boot, but I'll take a dual-boot as minimum.

    However, you cannot install OS X on an NTFS drive, nor Windows on an HFS+ drive. So how will this be solved? Will I need multiple hard drives? Rumor.
     
  11. GFLPraxis macrumors 604

    GFLPraxis

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    #11
    No, just partition it with one NTFS and one HFS+. I have a similar setup with Linux.
     
  12. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #12
    Ah.. well.. yes.. I discounted partitions because I hate them. Either way, it'll have to be on separate logical disks.
     
  13. shanmui1 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Location:
    Hongkong, China
    #13
    If we dual boot, where will we get all the hardware drivers for, say, windowsXP running on intel iMac?
     
  14. kainjow Moderator emeritus

    kainjow

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2000
    #14
    What do you mean?

    Windows XP already has SATA/ATA/USB/FireWire/etc etc drivers - practically every generic hardware that you can imagine. If OSx86 works on generic PCs already, I'd imagine that Windows XP would work on x86 Macs perfectly fine.
     
  15. dubbz macrumors 68020

    dubbz

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    Alta, Norway
    #15
    Interesting example there...

    I whouldn't be suprised if one of their devs actually made and released a x86 OS X binary for UT2004, allowing you to run the game natively on a new x86 Mac.
    It's one of the rather few games that actually have a 64-bit version for Windows x64.
    I've gotten the impression that it's fairly easy to port.

    Not saying that it will happen, just that I whouldn't be suprised if it did.
     
  16. GFLPraxis macrumors 604

    GFLPraxis

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    #16
    Well, unless the Intel Macs still have specialized graphics cards instead of using the normal PC ones. But I'm sure someone will make a driver.

    Other than that, it should work fine. Most of the hardware Apple uses is standard.
     
  17. shanmui1 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Location:
    Hongkong, China
    #17
    yup that was what I meant. if we're getting Intel Macs, naturally I'm interested in playing some games. lol. I was just afraid that if we get a good graphics card, something that is, or will be currently midrange on the PC side, we can't install the drivers from Nvidia or ATI after installing Windows XP and dual booting.

    I was a bit disappointed in the new iMac's x600. Thats a bit low end on the PC side. But then it might leave room for Apple to make a bigger splash with the new iMac's, if they are coming out next January....
     
  18. Eric5h5 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    #18
    That's exactly what VPC does. Rosetta is basically a JIT emulator (somewhat fancier, but basically JIT), and VPC is a JIT emulator too. If you think VPC is slow now, imagine what it would be like if it really DID emulate "everything all the time". It does store recently-emulated code as native code. That's what JIT emulators do. The difference is that only program code will have to be emulated with Rosetta, while OS calls will be native. With VPC, OS calls have to be emulated too. But don't expect anything like 70% speeds out of Rosetta. Especially with games, where you're spending a lot of time with program code and little time with OS calls, I'd say 30% is more realistic, though that's enough for older games (assuming a high-end x86 chip).

    --Eric
     
  19. Eric5h5 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    #19
    It's already happened. Though 64-bit has nothing whatsoever to do with it.

    --Eric
     
  20. alec macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Location:
    Washington DC
    #20
    about all this emulation stuff: interesting. talking to one of the aspyr coders over at a civilization forum, he predicted rosetta wouldn't be amazing but if speed chips/memory were decent, they would still run mac coded games pretty well (aka civilization 3). but civ 3 is not that graphic intensive which may be the real issue.
     
  21. Nermal Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #21
    I was under the impression that the Mac partition table was a completely different format from the PC one, which would prevent NTFS and HFS+ from coexisting.
     
  22. mikeandbecka macrumors newbie

    mikeandbecka

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    Location:
    Southern CA
    #22
    Running x86 programs (windows) in Mac os x86?

    Does anyone know if we will be able to run windows programs native in the new Mac os for intel?

    Reason I ask is that my wife hates windows and loves the mac os, however she is a finanacial advisor and all of her software is windows only. She would really like to run the system inside of the mac os instead of a dual boot system... would this be a possible reality for intel macs?

    She has a dell that she rarely uses and imulates windows on her powerbook with vpc... but even that is a bit too slow for her financial calculations that she needs.

    Ok, any light on this subject would be quite nice!
     
  23. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #23
    Forum search...this has been debated to death. The basic answers are that no, it will probably not be able to do this out of the box, but:

    1) It will probably be easy to dual-boot a machine with Windows and MacOS (one running at a time)

    2) Emulators like VPC will be a *lot* faster than they are now, and will offer pretty high levels of compatibility.

    3) Compatibility layers like WINE will probably also work. Just as WINE provides near native speeds on top of Linux, it will probably also do so on top of MacOS, but just like on top of Linux, it will probably be limited in what it can run, to some extent.
     
  24. Nermal Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #24
    Ran into the same problem here. My mum's an adviser, and she wanted a laptop. I tried to talk her into my iBook, but Visual Elk refused to run, despite the fact that it's Web-based :(
     
  25. dubbz macrumors 68020

    dubbz

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    Alta, Norway
    #25
    Nice. Didn't know that.

    And the Windows x64 example was just to show that they've ported it even though few use it now, and I figured it's probably fairly portable then. The 64-bit part was just an example/irrelevant.
     

Share This Page