Is it possible to run Halo on a G3 PowerMac blue and white, if say, I upgraded my video card to a 9200 radeon with 128mb vram, the ram to 896mb, and upgraded the g3 to a 1ghz?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Halo on a G3?
- Thread starter torchwood04
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
kk, thanks for your quick response. am a bit disappointed, but it's okay. The only reason why I ask is because someone apparently got it running on an iBook g3 900...
i've tried this exact same thing a few years ago, but i think the card was a radeon 7000 in a B&W G3.
As i remember it played but with no textures just the terrain was visible but all grey and just some slight shading.
that said it didnt crash and the framerate wasn't too badeither, but as no level objects could be seen its was not playable at all, and all this was just running around on my own on an empty multiplayer level.
As i remember it played but with no textures just the terrain was visible but all grey and just some slight shading.
that said it didnt crash and the framerate wasn't too badeither, but as no level objects could be seen its was not playable at all, and all this was just running around on my own on an empty multiplayer level.
I don't have access to the b&w right now, that's why I'm asking... thanks though
edit: Ah, I see, I won't bother then, I doubt the 9200 would make a difference..
edit: Ah, I see, I won't bother then, I doubt the 9200 would make a difference..
Sure, it ran on my iBook G3 pretty well.
Halo isn't a very intensive game... it doesn't need a whole lot to run.
I think it will run considering it ran very well on a Mac mini G4 with a 32MB video card. It had 512 RAM and Radeon 9200 32Mb. The video card and ram are the main factor in gaming and your G3 beats that Mac mini
Really, on one of the mini's, but the mini, even though it has Nvidia now instead of GMA 950, it's still shared memory...
The 9400M isn't too bad of a card. It shouldn't be considered if you are a hardcore gamer, but if you just like to game occasionally or play older games (like Halo), than it isn't too bad.
Well, doesn't the G5 play more 'hard-core' games than the new mini, or are they about the same in abilities?
I'd say it's a tossup, the Mac Mini plays more games, since a lot of the newer games either come out for Windows which you can run on it since it's Intel, and the ports that come to Mac are Intel only, but the games the G5 can run natively would probably run better depending on the graphics card it has or if it is Quad Core, the dual core G5s the Mac Mini would smoke.
The Mac Mini makes the most sense in your situation.
The Mac Mini makes the most sense in your situation.
I think I'll stick with the G5 because of upgradeability (SP?), plus I can upgrade to USB 3.0 when it comes out, hopefully.. Plus, I plan on playing some other more recent games like Prey... It's not just Halo I'm concerned about.. Also CoD 2 and The Sims 2...
Suit yourself. The Mac Mini, for only a couple more hundred, is going to run circles around any G5 besides the Quad Cores, are smaller, are more future proof, can run any of those games you mentioned, and not to mention come with a full 1 year warranty.
I know this thread is pretty much "Done" but I just want to chime in and say, if you haven't already purchased, to please consider the Mini.
You're really limiting yourself with a PPC processor nowadays.
New software, even Mac native software, is slowly but surely going to be produced solely for x86 CPUs (Intel). Hell, there is even a very strong indication that OSX 10.6 is going to be x86 only.
The G5 is a nice machine, but unless you're getting it substantially cheaper than the Mini (which doesn't seem likely) I don't think it's a good choice. The Mini is going to offer better performance in almost every aspect (Hard drive is slower... but just get an external FW800 if that concerns you).
The Mini consumes less power and takes up less space... quieter...
There are so many reasons to pick the Mini over the G5. The *only* reason I could see going with the G5 is if you absolutely need the extra hard drive and optical bays for what you do. USB 3.0 doesn't seem that critical when the Mini has FW800, but what do I know? And who knows if anyone will even make a compatible USB 3.0 PCI card for the G5.
I just don't want you to kick yourself later on when you realize that the PPC architecture is dead on OSX.
You're really limiting yourself with a PPC processor nowadays.
New software, even Mac native software, is slowly but surely going to be produced solely for x86 CPUs (Intel). Hell, there is even a very strong indication that OSX 10.6 is going to be x86 only.
The G5 is a nice machine, but unless you're getting it substantially cheaper than the Mini (which doesn't seem likely) I don't think it's a good choice. The Mini is going to offer better performance in almost every aspect (Hard drive is slower... but just get an external FW800 if that concerns you).
The Mini consumes less power and takes up less space... quieter...
There are so many reasons to pick the Mini over the G5. The *only* reason I could see going with the G5 is if you absolutely need the extra hard drive and optical bays for what you do. USB 3.0 doesn't seem that critical when the Mini has FW800, but what do I know? And who knows if anyone will even make a compatible USB 3.0 PCI card for the G5.
I just don't want you to kick yourself later on when you realize that the PPC architecture is dead on OSX.
Okay, I think I might lean in toward the mini, the biggest gripe about the G5 is well, it's power consumption.. Plus, I'd miss some intel only apps too, like Picasa, and OSX 10.6..
