I just get the impression they are concentrating on gaming.
What are your thoughts?~
This is not bashing, just a thought
What are your thoughts?~
This is not bashing, just a thought
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.
Is it me or is Apples computers are being targeted more at gamers???!
- Thread starter MatLane
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No Mac is aimed at Gaming. At All.
Funny you should say that Tallest, i was looking at building a Gaming PC for ~£600, but then i also want a Mac Pro, so was considering saving for the Mac Pro, i doubt i will, as then my MBP would be pretty much useless.
Funny you should say that Tallest, i was looking at building a Gaming PC for ~£600, but then i also want a Mac Pro, so was considering saving for the Mac Pro, i doubt i will, as then my MBP would be pretty much useless.
Pods are getting games, Macs? I dont think so. Anyone remember a game called Unreal Tournament 3? suppose to be out for mac in 07,then,08 now its 09.
the iMac's cards are NOT terrible outside of the low end 9400M.
Price:Value wise the iMac is not worth it for a gamer, but the GT120 isn't that bad. it's a rebranded 8600M GT, right? that's enough to run COD4 at great framerates.
I don't understand where tech folks get the idea that in order for a computer to be even considered for gaming it needs something of the 9800/4870 caliber. for an enthusiast i'd say the 9600M GT is "nice". anything above that is "nicer" or "ok now your serious".
Bottom line: i wouldn't tell anyone to get an iMac for gaming, but that doesn't mean it can't game.
answering the OP:
I wouldn't say they've started gearing to gamers as much as they aren't giving them the cold shoulder completely anymore. i think Apple has realized how big that market is, and as such isn't ignoring them as much.
Fact is, the 8600 GT is considered to be a very very weak card. It wasn't even a great card when it came out (3% better than the 7600 GT, the card it was supposed to replace), and now it's almost 2 years old already! Technology has advanced quite a bit since then and there are better cards to buy for gamers. The 9600M GT is similar to the 8600 GT so I doubt there's much to be said.
The low end cards the average gamer these days on a desktop would be the 9600 GSO/9600 GT (take note that the desktop 9600 GT is twice as powerful as the mobile 9600M GT), or ATI's 4650/4670. Nvidia's 8800/9800/GTX 260 or ATI's 4830/4850/4870 would be considered middle-range these days.
The low end cards the average gamer these days on a desktop would be the 9600 GSO/9600 GT (take note that the desktop 9600 GT is twice as powerful as the mobile 9600M GT), or ATI's 4650/4670. Nvidia's 8800/9800/GTX 260 or ATI's 4830/4850/4870 would be considered middle-range these days.
It's you. If they were targeted at gaming, they'd come with better graphics hardware AND Windows pre-installed.
Apple would go bankrupt, simply because that's an admission that the competitor is better.
No, if they cared about gaming, they'd come with "better" hardware and use some of their 30 billion to buy Transgaming, kill off Cider, and use their people to write games natively.
The arent aimed at gamers. If you get the iMac with the 4850 or Mac Pro with the '70 then yes, they are good gaming machines but you can buy a better, dedicated gaming rig for far less.
I think they'll start working on gaming if about 30%ish computer users will be on mac (and thats unlikely to happen in the next 50 years)
Valve wanted $1,000,000 to do the porting and Apple said no.
Try again in five years, I guess.
Macs will never be aimed at gaming.
If you want a gaming, build your own PC for $700 that will blow any $3,000 Mac Pro in gaming out of the water.
If you want a gaming, build your own PC for $700 that will blow any $3,000 Mac Pro in gaming out of the water.
If they are targeting gamers, it is because they are trying to address the complaints that they've had for a long time.
But do I think they are? No they are not. But more graphics-capability is good for any reason.
But do I think they are? No they are not. But more graphics-capability is good for any reason.
Annoyances
An iMac with a 4850 and a 3.06 GHz processor and 8 GB ram would be a perfectly good rig. Yes, you could build one cheeper, but it's not as though it can't play games.
Apple released a single processor machine with a perfectly good card the 4870... Because it's no $749 all the people screaming for apple to make a non-work station desktop are still pissed off. For some reason everyone on this site won't be happy until there is a sub $1000 single processor, SLI/Crossfire, E-SATA, BlueRay rig. And even then they'll be all pissed off because it has 4 Firewire 3200 ports instead of 4 Firewire 800 ports. I'm annoyed to no end by the complaining.
If you want OS-X and you get either a 4850 or a 4870 in one configuration or another, yes you're paying a bit more than building one yourself, but it's still a Mac and there isn't a game it couldn't play.
If the MacPro had a GMA950 without PCI-E slots and was $7200.00 you'd have reason to complain and call it not capable of gaming... For now other than price, I truly think the excuses need to end.
An iMac with a 4850 and a 3.06 GHz processor and 8 GB ram would be a perfectly good rig. Yes, you could build one cheeper, but it's not as though it can't play games.
Apple released a single processor machine with a perfectly good card the 4870... Because it's no $749 all the people screaming for apple to make a non-work station desktop are still pissed off. For some reason everyone on this site won't be happy until there is a sub $1000 single processor, SLI/Crossfire, E-SATA, BlueRay rig. And even then they'll be all pissed off because it has 4 Firewire 3200 ports instead of 4 Firewire 800 ports. I'm annoyed to no end by the complaining.
If you want OS-X and you get either a 4850 or a 4870 in one configuration or another, yes you're paying a bit more than building one yourself, but it's still a Mac and there isn't a game it couldn't play.
If the MacPro had a GMA950 without PCI-E slots and was $7200.00 you'd have reason to complain and call it not capable of gaming... For now other than price, I truly think the excuses need to end.
Unfortunately, you need to spend at least $3000 (Australian $) to get a semi-decent graphics card (the 4850 in the iMac, which is actually a laptop card), or at least $5000 to get a Mac Pro with the 4870. The GT 120/130 chips are mid range cards of NVIDIA's previous generation of chips.
To get a decent graphics card in a Mac, you need to spend twice what you would on a Windows computer.
To get a decent graphics card in a Mac, you need to spend twice what you would on a Windows computer.
if you Honestly think apple is targeted to Games you are either Really high or havent looked at any other computers.
you can build a desktop at half the cost of mac pro and be the best computer on earth.
you can build a desktop at half the cost of mac pro and be the best computer on earth.
The people here are such Mac-gaming-haters, you'd have no chance around here with comments like that.
Wrong. Best computer is never a "gaming rig". Games are considered low-end crap when you see what scientists do with computers. Even the best gaming rig would melt with really advanced simulations and computations. Macs aren't for gaming (waste of time imho, go read a book or play real games) but usually workstation class.