Can the current 5k macs handle heavy graphics video and games at high res?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by AlexGraphicD, Apr 16, 2016.

Tags:
  1. AlexGraphicD macrumors regular

    AlexGraphicD

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2015
    Location:
    New York
    #1
    Can the current 5k macs handle heavy graphics video and games at high res besides displaying high res photos without zooming in?
    I hear that you can't do much with the current specs especially with the base model gpu some people say it isn't capable of pushing smoothly all that 5k pixels in the screen.
    I mean, what the heck? Why even bother making a 5k base model if it is gonna be laggy when displaying the screen pixels?
     
  2. jonen560ti macrumors member

    jonen560ti

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2015
    #2
    No. not at all, triple AAA games will be a slide show if you try to run them at 5K resolution. you will have to compromise greatly on the resolution going down to 1080p or even 720p.
     
  3. AlexGraphicD thread starter macrumors regular

    AlexGraphicD

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2015
    Location:
    New York
    #3
    Then what's the point of making a 5k machine and not be able to handle heavy graphics?
     
  4. jonen560ti macrumors member

    jonen560ti

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2015
    #4
    well, you can still edit photos and video at 5K. however, when rendering 3D graphics, the workload increases by orders of magnitude when going from 1080p to 5K. at least 4 times more demanding. frame rates can drop from 60(great) to 15(slideshow). no single graphics card can deal with 5K on modern games, its simply too many pixels to deal with and games demand high framerates for playability. unlike computer aided design where 15fps would be fine
     
  5. imacken macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    #5
    I run games at 2560x1440 quite happily on high settings on my 395X i7 4.0GHz late 15 iMac.
     
  6. Pakaku macrumors 68000

    Pakaku

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    #6
    If you're in the market for games, you shouldn't be looking at Macs in the first place.
     
  7. cynics macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #7
    You need to have realistic expectations. Editing 4K video and high res photo editing the 5k iMac excels at.

    Gaming is a difference story. An nVidia Titan X will struggle with 4K gaming (depending on the game) so you can't expect a mobile chip to be able to game at 5k.

    Drop the res to 1440 or 1080 and it does pretty well.
     
  8. \-V-/ Suspended

    \-V-/

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    #8
    The 5K iMac has a mid-range, laptop GPU. So no.
     
  9. AlexGraphicD thread starter macrumors regular

    AlexGraphicD

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2015
    Location:
    New York
    #9
    Thank you for your insightful replies. Ok I don't play games but even for the high res video how does the base model compare to? Is everything smooth or laggy?
    --- Post Merged, Apr 16, 2016 ---
    But that's what I don't get. Why put a mid range gpu in a 5k machine to begin with?
     
  10. \-V-/, Apr 16, 2016
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2016

    \-V-/ Suspended

    \-V-/

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    #10
    Because Apple is ridiculous. Even on their laptops, you can't even get a dedicated GPU until you get the most expensive 15 inch for 2500 bucks. And even that comes with a mid-range GPU. Their pursuit of thinness and their greediness leaves out options for more graphically intensive options.
     
  11. AlexGraphicD thread starter macrumors regular

    AlexGraphicD

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2015
    Location:
    New York
    #11
    This should have been the first reply really.;)
     
  12. DontGetTheCheese macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2015
    #12
    I'm not really sure I get the point of 5K either. Hey, I have this wonderful monitor, with a relatively average GPU, that turns into a brick if anything at all goes wrong unless you buy insurance, isn't it great?

    I've tried, and I guess since I still read this forum, maybe I'm still trying, but I just can't get there.
     
  13. m7ammed macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    #13
    If you edit photos, and 4k video then you can view thole image/video on screen and still have space left for tools and side bars. Plus it looks great.
     
  14. imacken macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    #14
    Depends what you want to believe really. I do wonder about comments on these forums a lot of the time.
     
  15. \-V-/ Suspended

    \-V-/

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    #15
    It's not a matter of believing ... these are the facts.
     
  16. Fancuku macrumors 6502a

    Fancuku

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2015
    Location:
    PA, USA
    #16
    Because it's Apple. All show, no go.
     
  17. Malus120 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    #17
    No offense but there's this magical thing called a search button. Given that this seems to be a recurring topic you could've saved everyone the time by using it. But I digress you got me to reply.

    As has been pointed out numerous times in numerous threads, there isn't really any (single) GPU on the market that can consistently run AAA games at "5k60 with max settings." It sucks but that's reality, and while there are some GPU's that come close, most of them certainly aren't GPU's that would fit in the iMac's current (or even previous) form factor. What you're asking for is a fundamental redesign of the iMac, that would likely add more than just "a bit" of thickness to the machine. While that would certainly make some people happy, I doubt the majority of consumers would see it as a plus.

    For all of you who think that Apple is "being cheap" by putting mobile GPUs in the iMacs, have you LOOKED at the list price for a high end (or even "mid range" mobile GPU before? It's an order of magnitude higher than the price for an equivalent desktop GPU. While Apple certainly isn't paying list price, I can guarantee you they don't use them because they are "cheap." If by some miracle Apple could just shove an existing standard graphics board in there without compromising the design, I guarantee you they would.

    If you can't see the utility of a machine that features a screen with a higher resolution than the GPU can push for AAA games, you're probably on the wrong forum. Furthermore, it boggles the mind that you can't see past your own use case. As others have pointed out its a great machine for working with photos and video, but apparently if you can't game in 5K its worthless...

    Seriously, you just go buy a PC or a hackintosh and be happy. Come back in another year or two of node shrinks and increases in GPU power and we'll be at the point where you can game at reasonable settings at native resolution.
     
  18. \-V-/ Suspended

    \-V-/

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    #18
    They're using them because they're cheap. Please stop apologizing for Apple.
     
  19. AlexGraphicD thread starter macrumors regular

    AlexGraphicD

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2015
    Location:
    New York
    #19
    I stopped being a gamer many years ago :)
    I'm just talking if editing photos and video is a smooth process without any noticeable lag especially with the base model. That's all.
     
  20. Malus120 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    #20
    Apologizing for Apple. Yeah Ok. Whatever dude. I wish they'd kept using Nvidia as much as the next person who happens to game on a Mac, but apparently I'm an Apple apologist for pointing out:
    1. Physics (smaller chassis necessitates compromises) (can't just stick a high end "desktop" graphics card in an iMac form factor)
    2. That mobile graphics chips aren't cheap relative to their desktop counterparts (again just look up those list prices).

    But yeah, I'm totally an Apple apologist because I call BS on people like you who make unrealistic and unsubstantiated claims about how Apple designs it's iMacs. You know what, I'd love it if Apple made the mythical xMac, but until they do we're just going to have to live with compromises. Sorry pal that's life.

    Great! In that case, aside from the embarrassment that is a 5200RPM HDD in a $1799 machine (bad penny pinching, Apple, BAD) I think you'll find its more than capable. Which isn't to say that if you're going to spend that much anyway you shouldn't spring for the $1999 model or even the $2299 model (you really should), just that it's certainly not lacking in CPU/GPU grunt for the price and will perform just fine for non gaming tasks.
     
  21. cynics macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #21
    Edits 4K (in FCPX) very smooth. What else could you ask for?
     
  22. AlexGraphicD thread starter macrumors regular

    AlexGraphicD

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2015
    Location:
    New York
    #22
    Even with the base model?
    That's good, while I am not an expert with components tech specs, I have heard a lot of complaints that the current gpu on the iMacs "can't push all those pixels in the screen" or something in that vain.
     
  23. chaosbunny macrumors 68000

    chaosbunny

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Location:
    down to earth, far away from any clouds
    #23
    I would not buy an iMac for anything demanding. When under load it will overheat and throttle down. Happens in games or longer cpu/gpu heavy operations, like rendering longer 4k videos for example. The problem with iMacs is that they are a laptop on a stick. They don't offer the advantage of a laptop: mobility. And they don't offer the advantages of a desktop: upgradeability and speed. And their mirror screen is awful for anything where accurate colors are important.

    iMacs are for looks, watching online videos and social media activities.
     
  24. AlexGraphicD thread starter macrumors regular

    AlexGraphicD

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2015
    Location:
    New York
    #24
    Agreed on all your points. It is strange though despite the mirror screen the iMacs are being used traditionally by professional designers that color accuracy is a very important aspect to them.
     
  25. Malus120 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    #25
    Ok. We get it. You love the Mac Pro. So do I. That said…

    Your arguments against the iMac really don't hold water, and the amount of condescension is just flat out rude. A laptop on a stick. Really?

    The iMac currently offers Intel’s BEST mainstream CPU (the 6700K) which provides the highest SUSTAINED single threaded / 4 core performance you can find on a Mac (period) and rivals the best (non overclocked) single threaded / 4 core performance you can find on a PC (given that it uses the same chip this isn’t surprising). No Mac Pro even comes close, and yes this matters when even a majority of pro apps (outside of video encoding) struggle to utilize more than four cores. Hell, the iMac’s CPU is so much faster per core that it gives 6 core Mac Pro’s a run for their money even in apps that can efficiently use more than four threads.

    As for the screen, you’re right, its certainly not a matte screen, and yet professionals around the world somehow find a way to make it work. It’s called calibration and understanding you’re working on a glossy screen. By the way, has it ever crossed your mind that if you’re a photographer or videographer, the final destination for the majority of you’re work is likely to be viewing on some form of glossy screen? Please note, I’m not knocking matte displays here, they certainly have their advantages and their place, but pretending that a professional needs one to get real work done is just silly.

    As for the throttling, yes, it CAN be an issue, and no the current iMac thermal profile is not ideal for high spec components.That said, this ONLY applies if you run a full spec CTO 2014/2015 Retina iMac at full (simultaneous) CPU/GPU load, and even then it’s not the end of the world. The GPU in particular will throttle, and the CPU may have to dial back to stock speeds (4Ghz vs 4.2Ghz/4.4Ghz Turbo), but its not like we’re talking about the machine suddenly becoming unusable or even slow (on the contrary its still very fast). Of course its all about what you need, and if the throttling issues mean that the iMac doesn't meet those needs, or engender concerns about longevity, then you should indeed buy something else. That said, given that this isn’t even an issue on non CTO configs, which have plenty of thermal headroom compared to the top spec machines, I fail to see how this is even relevant to the OP’s post.

    The Mac Pro is a great machine, but its not a solution for everyone, not even all professionals. While you can certainly argue that someone who is thinking about a top of the line CTO Retina iMac should also consider a (“New”) Mac Pro (if they can afford to spring for the 6 core model with D700s) (as they’re pushing into the same price bracket), that is a ridiculous suggestion for someone looking at a lower level or mid tier Retina iMac, as the difference in price is huge. This is even true at the high end if you factor in the cost of a decent 4k or 5k monitor, which to be fair, you should. While the delta in performance (compared to a base nMP) is minimal. While the calculus in favor of the lower end nMP will (hopefully) improve assuming its actually updated this year, the iMac will remain an attractive choice for a wide range of people not just those looking to browse social media on an $1800+ computer.

    If you’re arguing people (or businesses) should consider the “Old” Mac Pro, I’d have to disagree in the majority of cases. Yes you can build yourself a very capable machine for a reasonable price if you’re willing to shop around the used market and then get your hands dirty working to tweak and upgrade the machine. That said your starting point is tech from 2009-2010, so it’s going to require a lot of tweaking (likely the replacement of almost every major user serviceable component and then some, plus the filling of every PCIe slot), just to get a machine with a very unbalanced performance profile (relatively slow single threaded performance, potentially very fast heavily multi-threaded CPU performance, and potentially blazing fast GPU performance). Oh, and as Apple doesn’t even sell refurbished models anymore you’re completely forgoing a warranty. IMO, at that point its better just to build a hackintosh, as otherwise you’re basically going through a similar amount of work for less performance, and only slightly better (OS) support.
     

Share This Page