You don't need an "Nvidia-class" GPU - both AMD and Intel have some GPUs more than capable of running most games smoothly, and without the increased cost, power draw, or melting power connector issues as Nvidia cards.
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.
In 3 years, 50% of all computers capable of playing AAA games will be Macs
- Thread starter senttoschool
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You don't need an "Nvidia-class" GPU - both AMD and Intel have some GPUs more than capable of running most games smoothly, and without the increased cost, power draw, or melting power connector issues as Nvidia cards.
Every game can run smoothly if you are willing to lower resolution and settings.
Not on every device and not every game. Sometimes they won't even boot if the CPU/GPU are missing a required feature.
You’re all right in different ways. ✅
- @dmccloud is correct that AMD (RDNA2/3) and Intel (Arc) have solid GPUs today that can handle most modern titles just fine & no longer a world where Nvidia is the only real option.
- @diamond.g also makes a fair point that “smooth” is relative and lowering resolution/graphics settings is still the most reliable way to extend hardware life.
- And @salamanderjuice isn’t wrong either ass some games do hard-stop if the GPU doesn’t support a required feature set (e.g., DirectX 12 Ultimate, ray tracing extensions or certain shader models).
I don't consider Intel a viable alternative, especially for someone who's just looking to game and not mess with their system. They've had some really big issues with drivers and game compatibility is still an issue. Plus I really don't trust Intel, their financial woes are such that they've been cutting projects, products and people. While they have said they're committed to GPUs, we don't know if they're going to be curtailing R&D, support, general spending or cancelling it outright all in the name of saving the company.
As it stands right now, their best option is the B580 which is comparable to the RTX 4060. Why pay around 300 dollars for a B580
When you can but a current generation RTX 5060 GPUs?
The B580 is the better card for the money. The extra 4GB VRAM and higher memory bandwidth makes it a lot better than the 8GB 4060/5060 especially if you want to game at 1440p and in many situations.
Intel Arc drivers have improved a lot since launch. It would be helpful if people stopped spreading FUD. We need a 3rd GPU company.
ITs not fud Its Intel's track record.
That's where I disagree, there's virtually no upsides with intel, and few downsides with Nvdia - they also have the the 5060 TI which has more vram for between 50 to 100 dollars more then a B580 - the vram advantage is largely mitigated in that aspect. Don't forget about ray tracing, and how much better RT is on RTX cards.
There's bugs on Nvidia drivers too!
$50-100 is a lot! Especially on a budget build where these cards end up. Could easily be 10% of the budget or more.
There's many situations where the Intel card is better. The 5060 is a 8x PCIe 5.0 card and loses a ton of performance on PCIe 4.0 boards because of it. The VRAM is limiting.
The difference is that nvidia is the market leader and they most likely won't lose sales, where as Intel is trying to convince the gpu buying market to take a chance on them. So far the roll out and continued issues has not instilled a lot of confidence - at least that's my opinion.
If you're looking to spend 600 dollars for a gaming PC, yes, its a lot. If you're looking to spend 1200, then adding 10% for a nvidia card over an intel card, its well worth it, as you get the increased ray tracing performance, compatibility and stability.
And yet its faster then the B580 card particularly in ray tracing.
No question, and many people have called out nvidia over that. They're basically taking a page out of apple's playbook by having a base model that has too little ram, so you have to go with the -ti model. With that said, I still think the B580 has more downsides against nvidia's 5060 card and if you need more vram, the bump up to the 5060-ti isn't horribly painful.
There's an easy answer to why someone would buy a B580 over those 5060s, and it is staring us right in the face. All of those 5060s are the 8GB variant. There are games currently on the market that will not run at all on 8GB videocards, so those 12GB B580s would be the bare minimum to run those titles at 1080p, with 16GB being preferred. Nvidia even admitted 8GB is sometimes not enough VRAM two years ago when they announced the 4060 and 4060Ti. The recent Indiana Jones game is a prime example of system requirements starting to outpace the rate of spec bumping from GPU manufacturers, and Nvidia has been the largest supplier of 8GB cards even with the 50xx series. Not everyone cares about raytracing or maximizing framerates, so those B580s would hit a sweet spot in terms of performance to price. Nvidia is pricing themselves out of the broader consumer market, which leaves plenty of room for AMD and Intel to take market share in the low to upper-midrange segments of the GPU market.
But I have no faith in Intel to continue any project or product line right now given their recent track record.
Last edited:
Consider the age and financial constraints of those who do that. ;-)
Why would there be so many gaming laptops in every line-up from all the brands and ODMs if that was true?
I think you're making an assumption that doesn't mirror reality. The fact that so many computer makers offer gaming laptops and have done so for many years indicates that there's money to be made for this type of computer.
Personally, I did this, I opted for a gaming laptop over a gaming pc for a number of reasons and I was happy with the decision. I eventually built my own PC, but that was due to the change requirements that decreased the need for a mobile device.
Most college kids have laptops for their studies but also want to play AAA games.
I really hope M5 makes Apples gaming performance more competitive with the current xx60-tier stuff.
I do expect Apple to improve GPU performance, there was some rumors where they'd basically decouple the GPU,so at the time of purchase you can select more GPU cores if you need and/or changes to the unified memory.
We'll see if either one of those comes to fruition.
I'd say probably a 15-30%ish boost over an M4, similar to the other generations.
That said, these boosts are starting to add up. Be interested in seeing a M4 or M5 against a 2060.
It isn't 100% clear to me how they rate these, but notebookcheck has a list of GPU's sorted by performance.
Mobile Graphics Cards - Benchmark List
Sort and filter through all currently available mobile graphics cards by performance or specification.
www.notebookcheck.net
My M4 Max Studio with 32 GPU cores and that's equivalent to a RTX 4070 desktop GPU and some chatter lines up to a 4080 mobile version. I'm not sure if that's true (the 4080 mobile) but overall I'm very happy with my Studio's gaming performance.
Was talking about the base chips, the ones that sell the most. Those need to step their game up.
It is kind of disappointing that the M4 Max isn't faster for the price. But that is likely the PC gamer in me speaking as opposed to the macOS user I am.
I won't disagree, my initial process was to buy the M4 Mini - base model for 450 dollars. I sprang for the M4 Pro, for the higher core counts, and I was really disappointed in the performance. FPS was horrendous, i was disappointed, I got the studio and I've been incredibly pleased, but I agree with your point.
I got sucked into apple's hype of how well their GPUs are and boom - I find that's not the case. I think from my googling, the M4 Pro model is about the same of a 30 series GPU and that's just inexcusable in 2025 where there's two newer generations of Nvidia GPUs.
I prefer the MacOS for my everyday computing, and anticipate I’ll be buying a new MacBook in the near future, but it will be for bills and the meager level of productivity I’m into, documents, records, writing, and such, but never for gaming not as the landscape is and will be for the foreseeable future.