PCs Offer 'Better Gaming Experience Than 100% of Mac Laptops,' Intel Claims in Ongoing Anti-Apple Campaign

[chucker23n1]

There are approximately 1.5 billion PC gamers in the world

48% of global gamers are PC gamers, that's 1.5 billion PC gamers

DFC Intelligence: 3.1 billion gamers worldwide, 48% of them are PC gamers -- meaning there are over 1.5 billion PC gamers.

www.tweaktown.com

PC gaming is only 3 points off consoles in that chart. That doesn't make PC gaming a "niche market". Playing games at high resolutions isn't a mindset most PC gamers have either. The most popular resolution for PC gamers on Steam is 1080p.

Which makes the kind of high-end gaming Intel touts here a niche.

 

[Art Mark]

Buy an Xbox or PlayStation. PC gaming is a lot like keeping a horse and wagon around in 1930. Gaming on PC’s, I would argue, is more niche (by numbers) than the Mac.

 

[diamond.g]

Lets see a breakdown of games. I bet you Minecraft is at the top, along with the old Counter Strike and eSport titles. Consider this from Apple's perspective. Is there any PC game that is a MUST HAVE that is not available on any console? And does that said game require a $500 GPU alone to be able to play it well? The higher the components, the more niche the PC gaming market gets. You said yourself, 1080p is the most popular. Well my GTX 1080 handles that no problems on some relatively new games too with medium settings. So why should Apple compete with the NVIDIA 30 series type of computers?

PC gaming itself might not be truly niche, but high end RTX 3080 gaming certainly IS niche. There are no killer titles that require that and if you have 1080p only its way overkill.

I mean you can pose the question a different way, is there any game that isn't the best version when played on PC?

Why shouldn't Apple want to point to it's hardware and say the best place to play game XYZ is on our hardware?

 

[TopherMan12]

Lets see a breakdown of games. I bet you Minecraft is at the top, along with the old Counter Strike and eSport titles. Consider this from Apple's perspective. Is there any PC game that is a MUST HAVE that is not available on any console? And does that said game require a $500 GPU alone to be able to play it well? The higher the components, the more niche the PC gaming market gets. You said yourself, 1080p is the most popular. Well my GTX 1080 handles that no problems on some relatively new games too with medium settings. So why should Apple compete with the NVIDIA 30 series type of computers?

PC gaming itself might not be truly niche, but high end RTX 3080 gaming certainly IS niche. There are no killer titles that require that and if you have 1080p only its way overkill.

Right. I'm talking about mainstream PC gaming. The high-end crowd that are spending thousands of dollars to maintain a PC at high rez and high frame rates is definitely not mainstream. The most popular GPU on Steam right now is the GTX 1060.

https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam

I agree the high-end gaming market isn't something Apple should be targeting. That would be a fruitless endeavor. Having said that, eGPU support for M1 Macs wouldn't be a bad thing.

I mean you can pose the question a different way, is there any game that isn't the best version when played on PC?

Why shouldn't Apple want to point to it's hardware and say the best place to play game XYZ is on our hardware?

There have been plenty of bad ports to PC and are better on console. So yes, PC's have more options for high end gaming, but obviously that is not across the board. The most popular PC GPU on Steam (GTX 1060) doesn't hold a candle to PS5 and XSX consoles in terms of raw power. Generally speaking, the latest consoles would probably be ranked among the RTX 2000 series of GPUs.

 

[Ethosik]

I mean you can pose the question a different way, is there any game that isn't the best version when played on PC?

Why shouldn't Apple want to point to it's hardware and say the best place to play game XYZ is on our hardware?

Best versions are actually console most of the time. PC ports are typically an afterthought, with bugs, no widescreen support, locked FPS and more issues that make people not recommend the game. I don't think Apple could help with "console development and optimization first, PC port a secondary priority" development cycle.

 

[laptech]

I believe Intel are hitting back at Apple because if memory serves me right. when the M1 came out, Apple made claims that the M1 out performed many Intel based desktop PC's. Apple used an M1 laptop and compared it's single core output to that of signle core output on some Intel based CPU's and the Apple M1 came out on top.

Apple have had every opportunity over the years to build dedicated gaming machines, it's just that they are not interested. Yes Apple has hardware that is capable of running many AAA games but what games are out there is more to do with game developers than it is Apple.

I am curious to know though. With all the tech websites and social media sites dedicated to everything Apple, has anyone, with the Apple hardware that is available, tried to build a dedicated gaming machine (not a hackingtosh) to see how it compares against an intel machine of similar matching hardware.?

 

[Ethosik]

Right. I'm talking about mainstream PC gaming. The high-end crowd that are spending thousands of dollars to maintain a PC at high rez and high frame rates is definitely not mainstream. The most popular GPU on Steam right now is the GTX 1060.

https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam

I agree the high-end gaming market isn't something Apple should be targeting. That would be a fruitless endeavor. Having said that, eGPU support for M1 Macs wouldn't be a bad thing.

And the M1 GPU is about the same as a GTX 1050, M1X might be equivalent to a 1060.

 

[Ethosik]

There have been plenty of bad ports to PC and are better on console. So yes, PC's have more options for high end gaming, but obviously that is not across the board. The most popular PC GPU on Steam (GTX 1060) doesn't hold a candle to PS5 and XSX consoles in terms of raw power. Generally speaking, the latest consoles would probably be ranked among the RTX 2000 series of GPUs.

Exactly this. I have had some bad PC ports in the past and had to get the 1080 at the time to match what the consoles were able to do as many developers do not properly optimize or priorities the PC port. And I don't think Apple can do anything to help. Heck if the PC market with the best hardware available for gaming struggles with poor PC ports, what can Apple do there? Its not like Apple can change the development ideas of an entire company by both being such low marketshare and now having the x86 -> arm barrier coming from console games to macOS.

 

[TopherMan12]

And the M1 GPU is about the same as a GTX 1050, M1X might be equivalent to a 1060.

Yep. What is really going to be telling is if/when one of these game developers decide to create a native port of their game for the Mxx Macs. Then we can see real world benchmarks. Think that would be fascinating.

 

[diamond.g]

Right. I'm talking about mainstream PC gaming. The high-end crowd that are spending thousands of dollars to maintain a PC at high rez and high frame rates is definitely not mainstream. The most popular GPU on Steam right now is the GTX 1060.

https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam

I agree the high-end gaming market isn't something Apple should be targeting. That would be a fruitless endeavor. Having said that, eGPU support for M1 Macs wouldn't be a bad thing.



There have been plenty of bad ports to PC and are better on console. So yes, PC's have more options for high end gaming, but obviously that is not across the board. The most popular PC GPU on Steam (GTX 1060) doesn't hold a candle to PS5 and XSX consoles in terms of raw power. Generally speaking, the latest consoles would probably be ranked among the RTX 2000 series of GPUs.

Pretty common GPU in a laptop (notice steam doesn't break down desktop vs laptop and the 1060 is named the same between the two).

 

[Naraxus]

Gamers don't buy Macs for gaming. A pointless discussion for now.

That may change going forward, though.

That will never change and you know it. Apple has never gotten gaming and never will, and any serious gamer stays as far away from Apple as possible.

 

[Zdigital2015]

I mean you can pose the question a different way, is there any game that isn't the best version when played on PC?

Why shouldn't Apple want to point to it's hardware and say the best place to play game XYZ is on our hardware?

Because it doesn’t really matter to the average end user and to the only people that care (hardcore gamers), the Mac could be the best gaming computer in the universe and they are still
going to buy/build their own PC and then claim it’s faster, better, cheaper. They roll their own for a reason, and Apple is hated, reviled and denigrated at almost any opportunity.

The PC gamer market is not a demographic Apple needs to address because they lost it so long ago they will never get it back.

 

[TopherMan12]

Pretty common GPU in a laptop (notice steam doesn't break down desktop vs laptop and the 1060 is named the same between the two).

A GTX 1060 in a laptop is no different than a GTX 1060 in a desktop. Typically Nvidia tweaks the name of their mobile GPUs with an M suffix or "max-q". Example, RTX 2070 Super Max-Q

https://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDI...-Max-Q-GPU-Benchmarks-and-Specs.459209.0.html

 

[blazerunner]

The Mac could be the best gaming computer in the universe and they are still going to buy/build their own PC and then claim it’s faster, better, cheaper. They roll their own for a reason, and Apple is hated, reviled and denigrated at almost any opportunity.

That's because a custom built PC vs any Mac that doesn't cost $10,000 or more runs CIRCLES around them. They ARE faster, cheaper and better in many ways (gaming for sure). Having built a Hackintosh 6 years ago, I can easily say this is 100% true. The bang for the buck from this has been incredible and with a 5700 XT now sitting inside it, it's going to last me a good while longer. You CANNOT do that with any Mac (forget about the Mac Pro, it's an insane rip off).

 

[diamond.g]

A GTX 1060 in a laptop is no different than a GTX 1060 in a desktop. Typically Nvidia tweaks the name of their mobile GPUs with an M suffix or "max-q". Example, RTX 2070 Super Max-Q

https://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDI...-Max-Q-GPU-Benchmarks-and-Specs.459209.0.html

I hate tracking nvidia's dies. Yes some 1060's are the same as the desktop (gp106-400). There is also GP104-150, GP106-300/350/410. All show as 1060's with varying core configs.

 

[blazerunner]

Right. I'm talking about mainstream PC gaming. The high-end crowd that are spending thousands of dollars to maintain a PC at high rez and high frame rates is definitely not mainstream. The most popular GPU on Steam right now is the GTX 1060.

What? LOL. This is such an exaggeration. Let's break down the costs;
CPU: $550 (AMD 5900X) or $540 (Intel 11900k) both TOP of the line
GPU: $700 (RTX 3080)
PSU: $120 (650w)
Motherboard: $200
RAM: $100 (16GB)
Case: $150
Cooler: $200 (Corsair Watercooing)
Storage: $100 (Samsung 1tb NVME SSD)

Total's roughly $2,100 and this basically gets you as good a desktop as you can possibly get, otherwise, you're moving into RTX 3090 / 6900 XT territory and Threadripper. And if you did that, you'd basically have a PC that essentially smokes the Mac Pro for a fraction of the price.

But, I haven't factored in the cost of a monitor (and there's so many to choose from), me personally I like the Acer Predator XB271HU (2560x1440 @ 144hz, IPS) for roughly $400. Plus mouse and keyboard... again, a ton to choose from. So, lets say roughly $2,500.

So what do you get hardware wise from Apple for 2 grand? A slower processor, higher resolution monitor but smaller screen with a low refresh rate, Mac OS, small form factor, SLOW GPU.... and this is a big one: no upgrade path.

It's funny how you think people spend thousands on PCs when people also spends thousands on Macs. Have you forgotten how much the Mac Pro costs? It's starting price is $6,000 LMAO.

 

[Ishayu]

Buy an Xbox or PlayStation. PC gaming is a lot like keeping a horse and wagon around in 1930. Gaming on PC’s, I would argue, is more niche (by numbers) than the Mac.

We know from publically available statistics that this is wrong.

Steam is larger than the entire macOS platform. They have 120 million monthly active users, macOS is suspected to have around 100 million users in total.

 

[panjandrum]

Regardless of how you feel about Macs and Windows machines (and, I would argue, if you feel extremely strongly about this you are being a fanboy and should step back and feel that strongly about something more important than a *product choice*) this is an argument that was settled ages ago in favor of Windows. There are reasons for this beyond simple market share; like Microsoft pushing Direct-X when it appeared Open GL would become popular (and thus allow easier cross-platform creation of games), but in the end, in today's world, the reality is that if you are anything other than a casual gamer you want a Windows box (or a console, depending on your preference and the specific games you wish to play), not a Mac.

The M1 has really impressive performance however, especially considering the power and heat . It's really *decent* - which is something we haven't seen a very long time in the consumer-line of Mac computers. You had to really spend big $$$ to get a Mac capable of decent gaming (in Bootcamp). Now Apple is making hardware that can game reasonably well at a reasonable price and that's what's got Intel worried I think. On the other hand, you don't *really* have the option to do it easily except with Mac-ported titles, so until that whole situation solidifies we don't know where we are at in terms of Mac gaming. Best case scenario is Microsoft releasing a version of Windows for ARM for the general public and Apple writing to drivers necessary to support it under Bootcamp again.

Obviously I've been here in the Mac world a very long time now, but once Apple stopped building the old MacPro I gave up gaming on Mac and simply built a gaming PC. Nothing else made sense at all considering my gaming needs. Had Apple continued to build a computer I wanted at a price-point I considered acceptable I probably would have upgraded my tired old MacPros with newer models and put in good GPUs and continued to game in Bootcamp, but Apple *did* stop building anything remotely appropriate for hard-core gamer needs ages ago now (unless you consider the new vastly overpriced MacPro, which I exclude due to the price-point).

I run a Pimax 5K+, dedicated racing SIM FFB hardware, and that kind of thing. So I have to push absurd resolutions and absurd minimum frame rates with the massive overhead of VR. It's so, so far outside of what you can possibly do on any Mac (again, with the *possible* exception of the overpriced new MacPro running Bootcamp) that it's like comparing a Nintendo Switch to a PS5. Yeah, they are both *fun* and they both play some great, interesting and worthwhile games, but the level of ultimate capability is vastly different.

Over the holiday weekend I managed to snag a Ryzen 9 5900x at MSRP (thank you Micro Center) along with a liquid cooler for it plus a new gaming motherboard and ram for just over $1000 total to upgrade my machine. Once you have a good ATX case and power-supply, plus your drives, it's really not that much $ to keep a game machine upgraded; you can incrementally upgrade only those components you actually need. This is my first major overhaul in 4 years. I dropped in a GPU a while back (2080 Super) for a reasonable price. You sure would not want to have to buy a GPU right now though! Dang miners!

But I go to my Macs for *anything* productivity based. Absolutely anything. Period. Windows, even Windows 10, remains far too fragile for me to consider using it for anything important.

 

[2010mini]

A Mac might be *decent* (and I use that term very loosely) at some titles, but will never be able to measure up to a dedicated gaming rig when it comes to raw performance and other metrics.

which PC can measure up to a dedicated gaming rig?

 

[TopherMan12]

What? LOL. This is such an exaggeration. Let's break down the costs;
CPU: $550 (AMD 5900X) or $540 (Intel 11900k) both TOP of the line
GPU: $700 (RTX 3080)
PSU: $120 (650w)
Motherboard: $200
RAM: $100 (16GB)
Case: $150
Cooler: $200 (Corsair Watercooing)
Storage: $100 (Samsung 1tb NVME SSD)

Total's roughly $2,100 and this basically gets you as good a desktop as you can possibly get, otherwise, you're moving into RTX 3090 / 6900 XT territory and Threadripper. And if you did that, you'd basically have a PC that essentially smokes the Mac Pro for a fraction of the price.

But, I haven't factored in the cost of a monitor (and there's so many to choose from), me personally I like the Acer Predator XB271HU (2560x1440 @ 144hz, IPS) for roughly $400. Plus mouse and keyboard... again, a ton to choose from. So, lets say roughly $2,500.

And? Where is the part where you show me that I was exaggerating? I mean....your own price list comes out to over two thousand dollars. And if you will reread what I said, I didn't even say "thousands" to build a high-end PC. I said thousands to "maintain". That is taking into account upgrades over the years as well.

So what do you get hardware wise from Apple for 2 grand? A slower processor, higher resolution monitor but smaller screen with a low refresh rate, Mac OS, small form factor, SLOW GPU.... and this is a big one: no upgrade path.

It's funny how you think people spend thousands on PCs when people also spends thousands on Macs. Have you forgotten how much the Mac Pro costs? It's starting price is $6,000 LMAO.

At no point did I make an argument that Macs will give you more for your money in hardware than a self-built PC.

 

[AlexisV]

All I'm reading here is that all those games would run miles better if they were coded for RISC instead of prehistoric Intel x86.

 

[AlexisV]

w

What? LOL. This is such an exaggeration. Let's break down the costs;
CPU: $550 (AMD 5900X) or $540 (Intel 11900k) both TOP of the line
GPU: $700 (RTX 3080)
PSU: $120 (650w)
Motherboard: $200
RAM: $100 (16GB)
Case: $150
Cooler: $200 (Corsair Watercooing)
Storage: $100 (Samsung 1tb NVME SSD)

Total's roughly $2,100 and this basically gets you as good a desktop as you can possibly get, otherwise, you're moving into RTX 3090 / 6900 XT territory and Threadripper. And if you did that, you'd basically have a PC that essentially smokes the Mac Pro for a fraction of the price.

But, I haven't factored in the cost of a monitor (and there's so many to choose from), me personally I like the Acer Predator XB271HU (2560x1440 @ 144hz, IPS) for roughly $400. Plus mouse and keyboard... again, a ton to choose from. So, lets say roughly $2,500.

So what do you get hardware wise from Apple for 2 grand? A slower processor, higher resolution monitor but smaller screen with a low refresh rate, Mac OS, small form factor, SLOW GPU.... and this is a big one: no upgrade path.

It's funny how you think people spend thousands on PCs when people also spends thousands on Macs. Have you forgotten how much the Mac Pro costs? It's starting price is $6,000 LMAO.

The idea is to sell the Mac, which holds its value, and buy a new one.
You have to upgrade the PC because you haven't really got much choice unless you just buy a second hand one every few years.

 

[AxiomaticRubric]

Pointless; every GPU in every mac is outdated trash that cant handle a steady framerate especially now that basically every mac comes with a high resolution display. Im not going to mention the Mac Pros because they're a major rip-off.

I'm sure Apple engineers could figure out how to optimize internally produced games across the product lines with the Metal 2 API. AAA titles don't necessarily need the latest & greatest graphics hardware anyway.

What really matters is engaging game play and intriguing stories. Games that have both are currently difficult to find on the App Store so there is a huge opportunity here for Apple should they choose to pursue it.

 

[blazerunner]

We know from publically available statistics that this is wrong.

Steam is larger than the entire macOS platform. They have 120 million monthly active users, macOS is suspected to have around 100 million users in total.

LOL, ouch.

This fact is confusing though. Why does half the population obsess over iPhones but have no desire to get a Mac? They speak so highly of iOS, spend thousands of dollars over the years just to have a shiny new iPhone but refuse to use Apple's best product; Mac OS.

WHY???

 

[diamond.g]

I'm sure Apple engineers could figure out how to optimize internally produced games across the product lines with the Metal 2 API. AAA titles don't necessarily need the latest & greatest graphics hardware anyway.

What really matters is engaging game play and intriguing stories. Games that have both are currently difficult to find on the App Store so there is a huge opportunity here for Apple should they choose to pursue it.

Like buying exclusive rights to Uncharted 4 (since Sony is already porting it).