Driving Sim game on MacBook Pro v PC or Upgrade GPU on Mac Pro classic 5.1?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Melbourne Park, Apr 26, 2018.

  1. Melbourne Park macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    #1
    My main Macs are a MacPro twin CPU 5.1 2012, and a MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 4 core with a 500Gb drive and a Radeon Pro 560 Type: GPU with :
    4GB of ram:
    Radeon Pro 560:
    Chipset Model: Radeon Pro 560
    Type: GPU
    Bus: PCIe
    PCIe Lane Width: x8
    VRAM (Total): 4096 MB
    Vendor: ATI (0x1002)
    Device ID: 0x67ef
    Revision ID: 0x00c0
    ROM Revision: 113-C980AJ-927
    Automatic Graphics Switching: Supported
    gMux Version: 4.0.29 [3.2.8]
    EFI Driver Version: 01.00.927
    Metal: Supported

    Many people put GPUs into their MacPros like an nVidia 1070 etc, but this process seems fraught with issues.

    Many more people buy a PC and have a fast graphics card in it, with few Gaming issues besides having a billion choices, and a various reliability issues I assume.

    I only want to have some fun running a Windoze driving Sim game.

    How quick would the MacPro operate at in a Sim game compared to a MacPro with a pretty difficult to operate GPU card like an nVidia GTX 1070 Founders edition or a GTX 970?
     
  2. Samuelsan2001, Apr 27, 2018
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2018

    Samuelsan2001 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    #2
    No one can answer this question you haven’t told us the game, every game works differently with different graphics cards and operating systems. Just look up the tech spec requirements of the game and if your computers can run it download it and play it. It’s not rocket science it sounds casual so you won’t care to much about ultra settings or milliseconds in online gaming you should be fine. No reason not to just stick an AMD card in your Mac Pro if you do need a graphics upgrade though. Are they quite as good as some of the Nvidia cards?? no they aren’t but the vega 64 is the 6th fastest card you can buy in most benchmarks and anything faster are all 1080 variants or the Titan.
     
  3. leman macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #3
    The Radeon Pro 560 is basically equivalent (or slightly faster than) to Nvidia GTX 960M. So check some benchmarks for your game and then you should be able to decide whether its enough power for you or not.
     
  4. Melbourne Park thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    #4
    Oh wow that fast ... its actually possible to connect a GPU via the Thunderbolt connection to the Powerbook and get full GPU performance, but I think the cost of the GPU dock is as much as a Pc!!!

    I have checked Assetto Corsa and many people run it with 680 cards on 4 threaded CPUs. They also run 1080 cards though ... mostly because they want all the driving sim graphic features, and mainly because they want to watch it all on 4K monitors.

    I intent to watch it on a 50" Plasma, and being in Australia my frame rate is 25 or 50, so, it might cope alright. Probably worth putting windows on and trying it. Not sure if a Mac TV and my WiFI would cope though ... I guess they should for the quality of the TV. If not, would have do go the HDMI route, which would mean buying a costly Thunderbolt to HDMI adapter.
     
  5. leman macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #5
    I would say that its too fast, its lower range as far as gaming laptops go, but its enough to play most games unless your demands are high. So far, I haven't found a single game that the 460 Pro couldn't handle.
     
  6. 2IS macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2011
    #6
    AC is not terribly demanding by PC gaming standards. Honestly if you want to game, windows is the way to go. It’s the main reason my desktop is a custom windows build
     
  7. Melbourne Park thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    #7
    Yes, I certainly agree. But I have wondered whether to buy a PC or a PS4. I intend getting the PS4. But if I can run some driving sims on Windows on my notebook, well great. I have a 2010 5.1 MacPro too, with win10 on it, but I am unsure about the difficulty of better cards for that. Its confusing for me. A faster card that would run a PC game well, despite the bottlenecks in Apples old memory etc on the MacPro 5.1 classic, and also do video stuff, might appeal as having another computer in my office would not very good. Hackintosh actually appeals though for all that ...
     
  8. Melbourne Park, May 1, 2018
    Last edited: May 1, 2018

    Melbourne Park thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    #9
    Well ... to buy a GTX 1070 card in Australia, costs $US 463 - or more. To buy an external box to run the same performance card at 1531 Gaming sped and 1721 boost, with a 450Watt power supply, various output ports as well i.e.:

    "Gigabyte AORUS GTX 1070 Gaming Box, includes GV-N1070IXOC-8GD Graphics Card, 450W 80 Plus Gold Power Supply, 1x Thunderbolt 3.0, 3x USB3.0, 1x QC3.0, RGB Fusion, 1531 Gaming, 1721 boost":

    costs $US599.

    There's a low end one too, a RX580, for $US368
    Gigabyte RX 580 Aorus 8GB Graphics Card, Gaming Mode: 1340 Mhz , $US 367.60

    And a higher end 1080 for $US689
    Gigabyte AORUS GTX 1080 Gaming Box, Thunderbolt 3, 3xUSB3.0, RGB Fusion, Boost: Gaming Mode: 1733 MHz/ Base: 1607 MHz, Boost: OC Mode: 1771 MHz/ Base: 1632 MHz , $US688.64

    So for $160, one can get both a 1070 card and the equivalence of a computer. Note though: there's a 10% loss in GPU performance evidently due to the Thunderbolt 3 connection.

    But I cannot get a PC for $160. Let alone one with a four core i7. And with a keyboard and track pad. And a (small) monitor. OK some hate the keyboard, but hey, this might even work. I guess I should add the cost of a Thunderbolt to HDMI or USB converter to be more accurate ...

    These game box things have several video outlets too including a single HDMI for each, plus a fast charge USB outlet, plus three USB 3 outlets. Not sure what those USB outlets would do though ...

    Of course, I have no idea if this card would be compatible with Mac OS!!!
     

Share This Page