Gaming MacBook Rumored coming 2016

[Dirtyharry50]

It's already happening. Dell has had an Alienware that has an external graphics card for a few months, and the new Razer Blade Stealth uses Thunderbolt 3 to power an external graphics card case (you bring your own card), and it isn't the last system at CES that will have a feature like that. A machine the size of an 11" Macbook Air with the capability to drive a 4k monitor for games. What's not to love?

Oh, I did not say it is not happening. I am well aware that it is although I'd not seen the stuff you point out here which looks cool. The thing is, my point still stands I believe that this is not likely to have a big impact (and I was thinking of Mac users by the way) because of cost primarily. A Mac is already expensive machine to begin with. If gaming is a big focus for someone, going the route of a thunderbold 3 connected GPU enclosure starts getting into a lot of money versus the alternatives somebody might consider right now already.

Sure, there is an audience for this stuff and probably enough of it will sell at fat profit margins for vendors to provide it but will it be a common solution? I doubt that very much unless prices fall dramatically and maybe they will over time but that remains to be seen. I know it is true any new electronics advance is always most expensive for the early adopters, etc.

For my money, a Mac that is purchased for my computing needs and can do some gaming along with a console will get the job done in a way that is fun for me and will cost me substantially less money than other alternatives I might choose including a thunderbolt 3 external GPU. So again, my point is this is not likely to have a big impact on Mac gamers but I would not argue with you about them being a thing people use in enough numbers for them to be made and sold.
[doublepost=1452148673][/doublepost]

External upgradeable GPUs on Mac ? I'm sure we can all agree by now that apple would never officially support such a thing. So, in the best case, we are talking about a problematic solution. And still most AAA titles will not get released for OS X, and still bootcamp will be the only option.

Nailed it.
[doublepost=1452148944][/doublepost]

What are you basing that on? External GPUs weren't a good solution in the past because no external bus provided both the speed necessary to get maximum performance out of them AND a way to gracefully disconnect them without shutting down everytime. Thunderbolt 3 solves both those problems, and it's a natively supported feature of the interface. To think that it wouldn't be supported at all, especially given the pro implications makes no sense at all.

I think you are not considering OS X driver support for a multitude of GPUs from both Nvidia and AMD in this scenario which Apple certainly is not going to support in OS X. It's possible I guess that like Nvidia has graciously done primarily for certain Mac Pro owners with the web driver (and the beta driver for certain other Macs with it) they could provide OS X drivers for all their cards but will they and will AMD do that for the number of people who are going to spend the kind of money it takes to setup a thunderbolt 3 external solution for a Mac? I have trouble seeing the same rosy picture you do there.

 

[Ferazel]

This sounds like it would be their top end MBP, currently priced at about $2500.
Link Sept 2015 quote:
Yiba reported that the MacBook 2016 will only boast a bigger RAM and have the same specs as the 2015 version. However, Australianetworknews news reported that the new Apple laptop will be packaged for gamers as it will include the new Nvidia GeForce GTX950 with 2GB RAM. They also said that it will be powered by the new OX X El Capitan and will be powered by the Intel Skylake-U chipset.

If that is the specs for the new MacBook that's a good spec. However, I highly suspect that going into Apple's low-end machine unless Apple has given up on integrated graphics for their entire line. If this is meant to be used in the MBP, the specs are better, but not amazing. Apple needs to give up on their hopes that Intel GPUs are going to cut it for the majority of their line. It's fine for the low-end, but needs to be available without spending $2500 on a computer. It needs to be available on the 13" MBP and the iMac.

 

[EdwardSmith36]

Why should we call it as rumor? If they really want to bring gaming mac in 2016, they will surely launch.

 

[Janichsan]

This sounds like it would be their top end MBP, currently priced at about $2500.
Link Sept 2015 quote:
Yiba reported that the MacBook 2016 will only boast a bigger RAM and have the same specs as the 2015 version. However, Australianetworknews news reported that the new Apple laptop will be packaged for gamers as it will include the new Nvidia GeForce GTX950 with 2GB RAM. They also said that it will be powered by the new OX X El Capitan and will be powered by the Intel Skylake-U chipset.

This is all very jumbled: when they talk about the "Macbook", they mean the Macbook with no suffix, i.e. the ultra-low powered, ultra-thin device for Starbucks hipsters. The Nvidia GTX 950 is mentioned pretty much out of context of any Macbook model line, but presumably meant for the Macbook Pro – but it's very unlikely Apple will use it in the light of them having switched all their model lines to AMD GPUs. And the Skylake-U is assumed to be used in the Macbook Air.

Anyway, I wish I could believe in Apple releasing a gaming capable laptop, but I can't. Their negligence of OpenGL in favour of an iOS compatibility API apparently primarily designed for energy efficiency and not performance, and the unfortunately very believable speculations that the next Macbook Pro will be even slimmer and hence unsuitable for high-performance GPUs that produce a lot of heat, make it quite likely that the upcoming MBPs will be even less gaming capable than the current ones.

 

[Huntn]

If that is the specs for the new MacBook that's a good spec. However, I highly suspect that going into Apple's low-end machine unless Apple has given up on integrated graphics for their entire line. If this is meant to be used in the MBP, the specs are better, but not amazing. Apple needs to give up on their hopes that Intel GPUs are going to cut it for the majority of their line. It's fine for the low-end, but needs to be available without spending $2500 on a computer. It needs to be available on the 13" MBP and the iMac.

This is all very jumbled: when they talk about the "Macbook", they mean the Macbook with no suffix, i.e. the ultra-low powered, ultra-thin device for Starbucks hipsters. The Nvidia GTX 950 is mentioned pretty much out of context of any Macbook model line, but presumably meant for the Macbook Pro – but it's very unlikely Apple will use it in the light of them having switched all their model lines to AMD GPUs. And the Skylake-U is assumed to be used in the Macbook Air.

Anyway, I wish I could believe in Apple releasing a gaming capable laptop, but I can't. Their negligence of OpenGL in favour of an iOS compatibility API apparently primarily designed for energy efficiency and not performance, and the unfortunately very believable speculations that the next Macbook Pro will be even slimmer and hence unsuitable for high-performance GPUs that produce a lot of heat, make it quite likely that the upcoming MBPs will be even less gaming capable than the current ones.

I'm in wait and see mode.

 

[MichalM.Mac]

but it's very unlikely Apple will use it in the light of them having switched all their model lines to AMD GPUs. And the Skylake-U is assumed to be used in the Macbook Air.

They can alway switch back to NVIDIA. They did it many times in the past

 

[Janichsan]

They can alway switch back to NVIDIA. They did it many times in the past

Sure. But normally not before having stuck to the same GPU manufacturer for two or three years.

 

[fuchsdh]

Thunderbolt eGPU solutions exist today and they also work with Macs. But its not plug and play. (yet)

The question is really whether eGPUs will work well enough and become widely adopted enough that devs sit up and notice. I know that I'd definitely be interested in a fairly seamless solution like what Razer just demoed—no muss or external power I have to run to a PCIe expansion chassis.

Ultimately, gaming on the Mac is in many ways better than it ever has been, but it's reached the wall of where it can go. Part of that is Apple's reticence to do more to support gaming, which I think ultimately comes down to the fact that no one in the executive leadership is a gamer (the initial design of Game Center speaks to how out of touch they are in those regards.) Secondly, gaming itself is such a fragmented market that even if Apple strongly pushed gaming (which mostly would be adding CrossFire support, timelier updates to OpenGL, and offering SKU options oriented towards gamers, even if that was just a PCIe solution) there's a pretty hard limit on who's going to go for it. You're not going to get the guy building his custom computer to become an Apple customer, so why try and chase him?

For me, I'll look into the eGPU solution in a few years when it's time to upgrade, but in the meantime I can play the games I want to play on a Mac well enough (RTS, MOBA, emulators), and I have my console for the experience I prefer for many games.

 

[antonis]

You're not going to get the guy building his custom computer to become an Apple customer, so why try and chase him?

Indeed you can't. But you can chase towards the opposite direction; the mac user that will end up building a gaming PC or buying a console.

 

[fuchsdh]

Indeed you can't. But you can chase towards the opposite direction; the mac user that will end up building a gaming PC or buying a console.

Indeed, but I think the "problem" insofar as incentives, is that this "chase" doesn't really hurt Apple. If I wanted to save a bit of money in exchange for some hassles but also a single platform I'd switch to PC whole-hog. But an XB1 + my Mac is cheaper than maintaining a separate gaming rig, especially as I vastly prefer Mac OS X to Windows 7, 8, or 10. The calculus might change in a few years, for sure, but right now it's still tilted towards keeping the Mac (and if eGPUs work that'll probably keep it tilted for me.)

Much as I hate the "if Jobs was alive" canards, I do think that part of the reason for the dumping of GPUs is not just space-saving and the increasing quality of iGPUs but also Cook's method of supply chains. Fewer SKUs on the less popular products, while options explode for the iPad and iPhone.

 

[rampancy]

Indeed you can't. But you can chase towards the opposite direction; the mac user that will end up building a gaming PC or buying a console.

So what's the problem with that? Even if people buy a console or buy/build a Windows PC to fulfill their gaming needs, if they're still Mac or iOS users, they're still going to buy an iPad and/or Mac if that's the platform they prefer to fulfill the majority of their computing needs. If they decide to leave the Apple ecosystem because it doesn't cater to their exact needs, then OS X or iOS probably wasn't for them in the first place, and likely never will be.

That's ultimately the problem I see with a lot of discussion about gaming on the Mac. People seem to still think that it's a zero-sum game where, if Apple doesn't try to be like Dell or Alienware or Razer (or whoever company they hold up as being the one true company for gaming on personal computers), they're doomed, or Mac gaming is doomed. It's not, and it hasn't been that way for a very, very long time.

 

[1000]

The concept of a 'Gaming MacBook' is stillborn. OSX is a lousy platform for gaming, and it's very unlikely that Apple are going to pitch a MacBook as a gaming machine that can dual-boot Windows 10 to tap into the Windows catalog of games etc as it runs the risk that they will lose users to Windows. No way it's going to happen. It is far more likely they will continue to sell mass-market puss-box games for the new ATV.

1000

 

[antonis]

So what's the problem with that? Even if people buy a console or buy/build a Windows PC to fulfill their gaming needs, if they're still Mac or iOS users, they're still going to buy an iPad and/or Mac if that's the platform they prefer to fulfill the majority of their computing needs. If they decide to leave the Apple ecosystem because it doesn't cater to their exact needs, then OS X or iOS probably wasn't for them in the first place, and likely never will be.

That's ultimately the problem I see with a lot of discussion about gaming on the Mac. People seem to still think that it's a zero-sum game where, if Apple doesn't try to be like Dell or Alienware or Razer (or whoever company they hold up as being the one true company for gaming on personal computers), they're doomed, or Mac gaming is doomed. It's not, and it hasn't been that way for a very, very long time.

There is no 'one true company' for gaming, it's the platform and the decisions behind it. Mac and PC gaming are night and day - let's not pretend this is not true. It is said over and over here, that even if apple creates the h/w, it will still lack the s/w and vise versa. You can't just make a gaming computer by shoving a super strong gpu inside (although apple, to add insult to the injury, is even doing the opposite of that). It's the s/w, the OS, the API, the drivers lifecycle and their optimization etc etc.

Mac's marketshare would be higher if Apple would even care about this target group. People, with exceptions of course, don't like owning 2 computers and split their usage time between them, if they can do differently. So anyone who cares about top-notch gaming will have to buy a PC or a console. People who can live without OS X for all the rest, will eventually move out (I know I can't, so I have to maintain 2 computers). So they are losing potential users and AAA gaming is still a bleeding factor to Apple's marketshare.

Apple as a company is definitely not doomed, quite the opposite. But I honestly don't care about that, these are good news for shareholders and their fat wallets. Apple as a computer manufacturer, though...it's another story. Apple is moving towards where the money is, of course, and by looking to their annual revenue reports, it is clear why they care so much about iOS. If Macs hold something less than 10% of the computer market, Macs also hold a small part inside Apple's own revenues.

 

[Dirtyharry50]

Macs are fine as one component of an overall entertainment setup in my opinion. I never considered my Windows computer in the past to be principally a gaming machine either. I think of consoles in that way where it is their primary function. A computer's primary function is not typically in the majority of cases to play games on the thing even though there are computers available that focus on that aspect of use, they represent a small minority of total installed base including in the Windows world - by far.

I can play tons of stuff on my iMac for now and in the future my next Mac, either one of the notebooks or maybe even a mini will be great primarily as my computer and secondarily the thing will still be great for a ton of minimally all the older classic titles in my collection, particularly old Windows games that often work well with Wineskin or have source ports or whatever. So there's lots of options for gaming on Mac as I see it. It just depends on what you want. For me, for AAA XBox One is the way to go but of course that's just one of a variety of added options too. Pick your favorite be it a different console or a Windows box dedicated to gaming. It's very easy to setup shared data for browsing bookmarks, notes (Evernote for example), etc. so two systems or a system with bootcamp can coexist nicely with your OS X setup.

The recurring issue I see play out over and over in various discussions is some people wishing for something that does not exist and is not going to exist anytime soon if ever which is for parity between OS X and Windows in terms of computer gaming. So, deal with it. Establish the best solution that provides what you want for your computing and gaming needs. There is no single hardware option that delivers it all under the sun. Period. Windows boxes do not either. Nothing does this.

I think people need to stop wishing Apple would build gaming computers like Alienware or something. If you want one of those, go buy one. Complaining about what Apple sells is not going to get you where you want to be. Doing something about it that works for you will though. I am a big fan of mixing and matching to come up with a total solution that meets all my needs and then some. This does not have to cost a great deal of money either versus trying to own one system tricked out to do it all. For example, once you take AAA gaming out of the Mac equation you can look at far less expensive Macs with an eye focused on your computing needs and still get some gaming out of the thing too. With the money saved, you can add whatever other option or options you like to balance things out. Ultimately another win here is the longevity of the Mac you buy at least doubles compared to if you wanted to game on the thing as primary use because you no longer need to care about how current the GPU is. It'll always be able to handle older favorites. Heck, I am enjoying the first Starcraft game currently running with Wineskin (perfectly) and next up will be Planescape Torment finally, which also runs perfectly with Wineskin. I do have a bootcamp partition but I like to skip that when I can without significant compromise.

 

[antonis]

An example of one of the things Apple lacks in order to even thinking of approaching the triple-A gaming seriously, worth 1000 words, so here it is:

Yesterday, nVidia released another driver update for their GPUs. Here's the key points of this update (copy-pasting from their release notes):

Game Ready
Learn more about how to get the optimal experience for Rise of the Tomb Raider and Tom Clancy's The Division (Beta)

and...

Gaming Technology
Beta support on GeForce GTX GPUs for external graphics over Thunderbolt 3

There's a gaming support, right there. Optimized drivers to squeeze every single bit for newly released or upcoming AAA titles, and a beta (but nonetheless official) support for the upcoming new tech of external GPUs based on TB3. These guys are not kidding and I'd bet AMD will also go that way (if they are not already there - not sure since I don't currently use an AMD gpu).

 

[Dirtyharry50]

I'll be playing Rise of the Tomb Raider on Xbox One and maybe Tom Clancy's Division and they'll both be a no compromises experience without me needing to care about GPUs, driver updates or anything else.

 

[antonis]

I'll be playing Rise of the Tomb Raider on Xbox One and maybe Tom Clancy's Division and they'll both be a no compromises experience without me needing to care about GPUs, driver updates or anything else.

And it will be great of course.
I'll admit, though, it brings a warm feeling seeing that my gpu's manufacturer is constantly proactively tuning his s/w in order for me to have the best possible experience.

 

[Huntn]

I'll be playing Rise of the Tomb Raider on Xbox One and maybe Tom Clancy's Division and they'll both be a no compromises experience without me needing to care about GPUs, driver updates or anything else.

Xbox One or PlayStation 4, if you had to choose? I was originally drawn to XBox because of Halo, but my preferred gaming option is PC. Since I built a PC in 2013, I've not touched my Xbox 360 and much prefer Steam to Microsoft as a game provider, but acknowledge the economy of a console. My recent video card upgrade cost the same as a Xbox.

There's a good chance when my MBP finally dies, I'll abandon serious mobile gaming, but not all mobile gaming, for a MacBook Air.

 

[venom600]

Xbox One or PlayStation 4, if you had to choose? I was originally drawn to XBox because of Halo, but my preferred gaming option is PC. Since I built a PC in 2013, I've not touched my Xbox 360 and much prefer Steam to Microsoft as a game provider, but acknowledge the economy of a console. My recent video card upgrade cost the same as a Xbox.

There's a good chance when my MBP finally dies, I'll abandon serious mobile gaming, but not all mobile gaming, for a MacBook Air.

I had a PS4 on day one and love it to death. The dearth of good racing games forced me (I was forced!) to buy an Xbox One to play Forza 6 over the holidays. I paid a little over $120 for it after trade-ins, discounts, and free stuff thrown in.

Playing the same games (NBA 2k16 and Star Wars: Battlefront), the PS4 is noticeably better looking. I love that the Xbox has the ability to pass through my TiVo so that I don't lose and input to it either. Point is, choose the one that is on sale at the time you want to buy it and you will be in good shape.

 

[Huntn]

I had a PS4 on day one and love it to death. The dearth of good racing games forced me (I was forced!) to buy an Xbox One to play Forza 6 over the holidays. I paid a little over $120 for it after trade-ins, discounts, and free stuff thrown in.

Playing the same games (NBA 2k16 and Star Wars: Battlefront), the PS4 is noticeably better looking. I love that the Xbox has the ability to pass through my TiVo so that I don't lose and input to it either. Point is, choose the one that is on sale at the time you want to buy it and you will be in good shape.

What did you trade in, your PS4?

 

[Dirtyharry50]

Xbox One or PlayStation 4, if you had to choose? I was originally drawn to XBox because of Halo, but my preferred gaming option is PC. Since I built a PC in 2013, I've not touched my Xbox 360 and much prefer Steam to Microsoft as a game provider, but acknowledge the economy of a console. My recent video card upgrade cost the same as a Xbox.

There's a good chance when my MBP finally dies, I'll abandon serious mobile gaming, but not all mobile gaming, for a MacBook Air.

XBox One Elite Edition - first console with a hybrid drive for improved performance. Awesome customizable controller too. Growing list of good 360 compatible titles with new ones coming each month. XBox Live Gold for excellent multiplayer along with 2 free XBox One titles and 2 360 titles that are compatible with XBox One. It's pure win all the way.

Of course, if I had the time (and the money) having a PS4 as well for its exclusives would be cool too. The Halo series and some others were a big draw for me when comparing the two and having to choose one or the other.

 

[saturnotaku]

XBox One Elite Edition - first console with a hybrid drive for improved performance. Awesome customizable controller too. Growing list of good 360 compatible titles with new ones coming each month. XBox Live Gold for excellent multiplayer along with 2 free XBox One titles and 2 360 titles that are compatible with XBox One. It's pure win all the way.

Of course, if I had the time (and the money) having a PS4 as well for its exclusives would be cool too. The Halo series and some others were a big draw for me when comparing the two and having to choose one or the other.

Even though the PS4 is decisively winning the sales war this generation, I personally would take an Xbox One. After what I think was a pretty disastrous launch, Microsoft has really turned the system around and is doing some great things with it. The Elite controller looks really cool, and I hope they continue to add backward compatible games well into the future, at least more than they did with original Xbox titles on the 360.

Of course, since I just bought myself a pretty monster gaming laptop, I have even less reason to buy an Xbox One.

 

[kaltsasa]

XBox One Elite Edition - first console with a hybrid drive for improved performance. Awesome customizable controller too. Growing list of good 360 compatible titles with new ones coming each month. XBox Live Gold for excellent multiplayer along with 2 free XBox One titles and 2 360 titles that are compatible with XBox One. It's pure win all the way.

Of course, if I had the time (and the money) having a PS4 as well for its exclusives would be cool too. The Halo series and some others were a big draw for me when comparing the two and having to choose one or the other.

Plus I have an xBone and I'm kind of a big deal.
.
.
.
.
To my cat.

 

[antonis]

Growing list of good 360 compatible titles with new ones coming each month.

That is interesting. XBox One can play 360's titles ? Is this featured out of the box (e.g. you can use the 360's DVDs right away), or should they get re-written first ?

Also, has Sony does the same with PS4 ? I remember PS3 was not compatible (intentionally) with PS2.

 

[Janichsan]

I'll be playing Rise of the Tomb Raider on Xbox One and maybe Tom Clancy's Division and they'll both be a no compromises experience …

Actually, there are and will be compromises on the Xbox One, regarding resolution, framerate and general image quality. It's too early to say how the PC version of The Division will turn out, but RoTT already looks better on PC.
[doublepost=1454056420][/doublepost]

That is interesting. XBox One can play 360's titles ? Is this featured out of the box (e.g. you can use the 360's DVDs right away), or should they get re-written first ?

Also, has Sony does the same with PS4 ? I remember PS3 was not compatible (intentionally) with PS2.

Each Xbox 360 game has to be specifically made compatible (probably a wrapper or something) - but it's also not a complete rewrite. You can't just stick in every 360 disc and play it.

The PS4 has no backward compatibility whatsoever. Allegedly, it's too complicated, and given the odd CPU the PS3 had, which is probably difficult to emulate, there's some credence to it. The PS3 originally had backwards compatibility to the PS2 with a dedicated chip, but they left it out in later versions for cost reasons.