Is next MP likely to be a gaming giant?

[nanofrog]

The Mac Pro, by definition, is not a gaming computer.

No, its a workstation. But it can double as a gaming system if desired (i.e. independent pro that likes to game in their spare time). It won't be the fastest gaming system out there, but it can do it (and has been done by other MR members).

I look at it this way; it's cheaper to get a copy of Windows and a decent card than to get a new system (PC) just to game with.

But it may also be cheaper to get a console, depending on the specific card/s desired combined with the cost of a Windows license (assuming the user is actually willing to consider this route).

 

[Icaras]

I look at it this way; it's cheaper to get a copy of Windows and a decent card than to get a new system (PC) just to game with.

Yes, I agree with this. I do not want the hassle of maintaining two systems, nor the clutter, space, extra peripherals, and heat and energy generated that the second machine will take.

Once I get a Mac Pro, I definitely intend to double it as a PC gaming system.

You could always go the console route, but some games (i.e: WoW) can simply not be had on a console. Personally I enjoy both console and PC gaming alike, and have always found a good balance of options having both platforms.

 

[nanofrog]

You could always go the console route, but some games (i.e: WoW) can simply not be had on a console. Personally I enjoy both console and PC gaming alike, and have always found a good balance of options having both platforms.

You'd pony up the cash for a Windows license and a decent graphic card just to play WOW? ADDICT!

 

[TheStrudel]

No, it was a decent card that was crippled by having half as much memory as it's supposed to, and it was/is extremely overpriced even at launch time, PLUS you have to buy an adapter to use a second display because they put the retardport on there.

From what I understand of the benchmarks, the memory didn't make that much of a difference. Also, the mini display port will actually become increasingly standard as time goes on (see Eyefinity-6 and Samsung's display built for it), so that won't be such a huge issue. If you have a recent monitor, it'll have Display Port and that's a cheap cable adaptor, so I'm not so fussed about that at this point.

Should  launch a 5870, it'll be $400, not $600 - what they do is sell it at the MSRP at the time of the card's launch, because  does not adjust prices.

PC 5870s are still selling at MSRP, so if  launched one now, it'd actually probably sell at the same price.

But since the new Mac Pros don't seem to be dropping soon, you can count on either a 5890 or 5870 price drop to occur before the new MP's release.

It's a pity, because if it launched right now, it would actually have GPU parity with PCs.

Of course, that doesn't address 's severe OpenGL deficiencies. That's a software fix long overdue.

And speaking of graphics technology and OS X, when can we get proper 10-bit display handling?

 

[Icaras]

You'd pony up the cash for a Windows license and a decent graphic card just to play WOW? ADDICT!

No no lol, I personally do not play WoW. I am merely speaking for the WoW player in general who works with Macs, and making an example of a game that is only available on PC/Mac and not on console.

And also, WoW is available for Mac OS X, so no Windows license or partition required. And WoW is hardly the game to push your system. This game can be played with the 9400M I'm sure.

Given all this, I still think it is more financially sound to simply use the Mac Pro for gaming needs rather than go through the time and hassle to get another PC machine. But I know many hardcore gamers will surely disagree with me on this. Personally, I prefer consolidating my work and games onto one machine with the least amount of minimal tech and finances.

 

[nanofrog]

Given all this, I still think it is more financially sound to simply use the Mac Pro for gaming needs rather than go through the time and hassle to get another PC machine. But I know many hardcore gamers will surely disagree with me on this. Personally, I prefer consolidating my work and games onto one machine with the least amount of minimal tech and finances.

I was having a bit of fun with you is all (couldn't resist it actually).

But like you, it makes better sense financially to either use the MP or a console (depending on the person's acceptable compromises, as there's bound to be games desired that aren't capable of being played on all formats).

So it comes down to what that person is willing to sacrifice to reduce system costs, or if they're willing to put up the funds that would allow them to play anything, no matter the format (covers all bases; Mac, PC and console/s).

 

[2contagious]

I doubt it, Apple's strategy doesn't gel with what PC gamers want.

unless they make a smaller, cheaper gaming mac
http://www.9to5mac.com/New-mac-0439703467

 

[HSJR]

I am using my MP for gaming at win7, games run great at very high resolution, but I do not call it gaming GIANT! because apple is not updating its GPU in regular basis (this is one reason; there are too many other reasons to be honest). I do not recommend MP for gaming; buy PC and save $$$; if you like Mac; just buy MBP and don't waste money on MP.
Last, I hate gaming on console because you can not add Mods. Mods can make games more challenging or fun by adding new customs. Therefore I like playing games on PC more than console.

 

[Cougarcat]

unless they make a smaller, cheaper gaming mac
http://www.9to5mac.com/New-mac-0439703467

Ha, I like how that post started out. I definitely did get emotional. That's exactly what I want Apple to make.

 

[300D]

No, its a workstation.

Which is a name for "PRO". Try to get your arguments right.

 

[Hellhammer]

Which is a name for "PRO". Try to get your arguments right.

PRO has been so badly abused by Apple so it has nothing to do with workstations anymore. Or would you call 13" MBP a workstation?

 

[300D]

That doesn't change the definition of the word. Your "argument" is pointless.

 

[Hellhammer]

That doesn't change the definition of the word. Your "argument" is pointless.

For Apple products it does. A product doesn't have to be "pro" and meant for professionals anymore to get those three letters. It's just a marketing trick. Mac Pro is workstation and meant for professionals, no argument on that

 

[nanofrog]

For Apple products it does. A product doesn't have to be "pro" and meant for professionals anymore to get those three letters. It's just a marketing trick. Mac Pro is workstation and meant for professionals, no argument on that

Exactly.

They've used PRO on the workstation long enough, it's become a designation that means workstation. But now, they're slapping it on consumer products (laptops), which is nothing more than a marketing gimick. Thus destroying the meaning and subsequent trust of their user base = joke.

 

[Pressure]

Compared to the average PC gaming rig - not a chance

Every Mac Pro or iMac with a Geforce 8800 GT, Radeon HD 4850 or Radeon HD 4870 is already much more powerful than the average gaming PC.

 

[Fiete5401]

They've used PRO on the workstation long enough, it's become a designation that means workstation. But now, they're slapping it on consumer products (laptops), which is nothing more than a marketing gimick. Thus destroying the meaning and subsequent trust of their user base = joke.

Ok, we all agree that the Mac Pro is not really a "pro"-machine.
But what kind of features would make the MP a real pro-workstation again?
Latest processor technologies? Hardware raid? Lightpeak? BluRay? SSD-options? More RAM-slots? Pro-graphics?

 

[Hellhammer]

Every Mac Pro or iMac with a Geforce 8800 GT, Radeon HD 4850 or Radeon HD 4870 is already much more powerful than the average gaming PC.

Mac Pro is also 2000$ more...

Ok, we all agree that the Mac Pro is not really a "pro"-machine.
But what kind of features would make the MP a real pro-workstation again?
Latest processor technologies? Hardware raid? Lightpeak? BluRay? SSD-options? More RAM-slots? Pro-graphics?

It is a pro machine, no doubt on that. We were talking about Apple's abuse of "pro" word as they stick it in every product. We just want Apple to update it on time, not when the new tech is already around the corner.

 

[Pressure]

Mac Pro is also 2000$ more...

So?

The iMac is reasonably priced as well.

 

[Icaras]

I was having a bit of fun with you is all (couldn't resist it actually).

But like you, it makes better sense financially to either use the MP or a console (depending on the person's acceptable compromises, as there's bound to be games desired that aren't capable of being played on all formats).

So it comes down to what that person is willing to sacrifice to reduce system costs, or if they're willing to put up the funds that would allow them to play anything, no matter the format (covers all bases; Mac, PC and console/s).

Hah, oops, my sarcasm rader must have not been working yesterday.

Yea, the extra PC thing for gaming is definitely not my priority. I'm not lusting for benchmark bragging rights or blistering framerates, just so as long as I can enjoy the games at reasonable settings when I'm not working, I will most definitely be content with the Mac Pro in that regard.

 

[phaedarus]

Hands up anyone for those who want to buy a OSX port that:

1) Is poorly optimized for OpenGL wherein it will take a considerably more powerful Mac to get equivalent performance on a lower spec'd PC;

2) Won't include game editors which are Windows based only; discounting products from Blizzard of course;

3) Will have flaky MP FPS rates or denied access due to incompatible mods or Win-biased anti-cheat programs such as Punkbuster;

4) Includes sub-standard technical support as a result of fewer staff available to service OSX users;

5) Are simply non-existent because the game directors do not like Macs or feels the studio's efforts on such an endeavor would be wasted for the expected return.

As much as I'm all for having the Mac achieve parity with PC gaming, I also know that it's a fantasy and will remain so.

It just doesn't make sense for most companies to deal with yet another graphics API in addition to incurring support costs for a platform with such a minuscule userbase.

Take heart though. Steve Jobs does want Apple customers to be able to fulfill their gaming appetites - he just wants you to buy an iPhone/iPod and visit the App store in order to do it!

I've said it before and I'll say it again; the best approach to address the gaming needs of Mac users is to support a broadband streaming paradigm where platform requirements are irrelevant.

 

[nanofrog]

But what kind of features would make the MP a real pro-workstation again?
Latest processor technologies? Hardware raid? Lightpeak? BluRay? SSD-options? More RAM-slots? Pro-graphics?

• Get the newer processors in the systems (W3680 and 56xx)

• Additional RAM slots (6 per CPU, which puts it on equal footing with competitors systems)

• Hardware RAID on the main board (good for running a mirror for the OS without consuming bandwidth allocated by the ICH in the chipset)
• More PCIe slots

• Professional graphics cards would also put it on equal footing (though there's less software support on the OS X side). But if Apple were willing to provide such support, software vendors should be willing to do it, and likely a card vendor would as well (usually agreements between the OS, graphics card and software vendors are created). In fact, the Quadro FX4800 already exists in a Mac edition, but I've no idea if it's been successful or not, given the spotty cooperation between various vendors.

• BluRay really just needs support in OS X (and it has to be licensed from Sony), but it would be nice. There are graphics professionals that have indicated they've a need for it (currently possible under Windows or Linux on the existing hardware)

• eSATA port (nice for backup solutions)

• Standard 3yr Onsite warranty - none of this haul it in to the nearest Apple Store crap

• USB3 isn't critical IMO, but could be a value-added feature for some users

SSD is possible via 3rd party solutions, and is cheaper that way. Granted, some will pay for it on a CTO, as it gives a single point of contact in warranty situations.

LightPeak isn't possible yet (current status = Evaluation). The 2011 systems OTOH, Yes.

Yea, the extra PC thing for gaming is definitely not my priority. I'm not lusting for benchmark bragging rights or blistering framerates, just so as long as I can enjoy the games at reasonable settings when I'm not working, I will most definitely be content with the Mac Pro in that regard.

Sounds like a logical way to approach it IMO (possible with a single system, and saves $$$ too).

 

[DesmoPilot]

The iMac is reasonably priced as well.

lol?

 

[Icaras]

PRO has been so badly abused by Apple so it has nothing to do with workstations anymore. Or would you call 13" MBP a workstation?

Exactly.

They've used PRO on the workstation long enough, it's become a designation that means workstation. But now, they're slapping it on consumer products (laptops), which is nothing more than a marketing gimick. Thus destroying the meaning and subsequent trust of their user base = joke.

I don't know. I sorta disagree with you guys. I own a 13" MBP, now watch as I shamelessly defend my purchase. I definitely agree that the 13" is not a workstation, but I still believe that the 13" MBP has pro features that set itself apart from the Macbook.

For one, the firewire port allows me to run my firewire audio device for my work, something I can't do with the Macbook or the Air, for that matter. Also, the ability to expand the RAM to 8 GB also allows me to work seriously in Logic Studio. Again, I cannot really hope to achieve this with the Macbook.

It may not have discreet graphics, but as my example points out, not every pro user is in the graphics or animation field.

As for the desktop line, the biggest differences are expandability, the massive cap on RAM, and incredible number of cores that it can go up to.
You can almost compare the differences between the quad Mac Pro/i7 iMac to the Macbook/13" MBP.

There are just certain options that are retained (quad MP: expandibility and 13"MBP: firewire and RAM) that seem valuable to me from a "pro" line perspective.

I don't know. Just my two cents and from my experience with the 13" MBP.

 

[Pressure]

Hands up anyone for those who want to buy a OSX port that:

1) Is poorly optimized for OpenGL wherein it will take a considerably more powerful Mac to get equivalent performance on a lower spec'd PC;

2) Won't include game editors which are Windows based only; discounting products from Blizzard of course;

3) Will have flaky MP FPS rates or denied access due to incompatible mods or Win-biased anti-cheat programs such as Punkbuster;

4) Includes sub-standard technical support as a result of fewer staff available to service OSX users;

5) Are simply non-existent because the game directors do not like Macs or feels the studio's efforts on such an endeavor would be wasted for the expected return.

As much as I'm all for having the Mac achieve parity with PC gaming, I also know that it's a fantasy and will remain so.

lol?

You both do realize we are discussing the merits of the next Mac Pro being a better Mac for gaming.

And that is exactly what it will become.

The topic is not how cheaper "my-own-custom-build-PC" is.

 

[apolloa]

PRO has been so badly abused by Apple so it has nothing to do with workstations anymore. Or would you call 13" MBP a workstation?

In my eyes the laptop Pro's should be designed to be able to run Apples Pro apps like Final Cut etc. But that's it, the other Pro options are the specs and casing so in that case it's just branding.

As for the Mac Pro, it IS a pro machine due to the hardware, Xeon CPU's are not consumer grade products are are designed for professional applications and are only sold by manufacturers in servers or workstations. Not consumer products. Not to mention the max memory a Mac Pro can take.

But they are more then up to the task of gaming of course. The next one will be a gaming giant with the processor, but I won't even guess at the graphics. However the idea of using Steam or Mac games natively and/ or bootcamp is great as said one system for all applications.
In fact IMO a Mac Pro with a separate drive for Windows and games makes great sense.