I wouldn't go that far. They are generally one generation older. For aesthetic reasons, they often use mobile variants of video cards which themselves tend to be a few months behind the desktop PC versions.You got that right! they have like no customization at all for video cards! the cards the "so called best Mac ever" has are very, very outdated and bad compared to PCs
you answered your own question. Macs can certainly play games, even new ones but afar superior PC can be made for much less.You got that right! they have like no customization at all for video cards! the cards the "so called best Mac ever" has are very, very outdated and bad compared to PCs
It is for me, because I prefer the Mac OS. So I play what games I can and the rest can go rot as far as I'm concerned.
I do not know and want to find out.
Firebolt059 said:You got that right
Hmmm, both phenomenally influential, phenomenally rich and they don't spend their lives playing games. Sounds like I'll be better off without games.Self Build a gaming PC.
Much, mcuh better value for money than any Mac.
If Steve played games then maybe it would be different, Bill's not a a gamer either - but at least he realised there was big money in gaming.
When the Powermac G5 came out, I got the beefiest graphics card and got Mac versions of some of my games I had played using my PC. The PC had a good graphics card in it's day but it was 3 years older. The PowerMac G5 pwnd my PC. I even loaded my Virtual PC images to a ram disk for Windows 98 and was able to run traditional Windows software fast enough to get rid of the PC.